HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 03/04/1976JOHN FRANE
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1976
7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Sidney
Pauly, Joan Meyers and Tim Pierce
COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Harlan Perbix; Planner Dick Putnam; Finance
Directoi John Frane; Director of Community
Services Marty Jessen; Engineer Carl Jullie;
Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Robert H. Mason & Fraser School, Inc., request for PUD approva
l
,
rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval. Th
e
4 acre sits is located in the northeast corner of the intersection
of the East/West Parkway and Preserve Boulevard.
B. Edenvale 11th by Edenvale, Inc., request for rezoning to R1-13.5
with lot size variances and preliminary plat approval tor approxim
a
t
e
l
y
22 lots on 6 acres. The site is located north of the intersection
of Woodhill Trail and Edenvale Boulevard.
C. T.H. 5 and County Road 4 Planned Study Rezoning, consideratio
n
o
f
properties in the northeast, southeast and southwest quadrants o
f
t
h
e
4/5 intersection.
III. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Report of City Engineer
1. Approve Plans and Specifications and order advertisement for
bids for utilities and streets for areas F and G of The Preserve
Commercial Plan. I.C. 51-274 (Resolution No. 1097).
2. Receive petition for street and utility improvements for Red
Rock Hills 2nd Addition, I.C. 51-285 (Resolution No. 1082).
Pg.1912
Pg.1966
Pg.1988
Pg.1991
Pg.1993
3. Approve final plat of St. John's Wood 7th Addition (Resolution
N
o
.
1
0
9
6
)
.
P
g
.
2
0
0
0
IV. NEW BUSINESS
V. ADJOURNMENT,
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Approved
Monday, January 26, 1976
7:30 PM City Hell
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:Chairman Don Sorensen, Richard Lynch, Rod Sundstro
m
,
Bill Bearman, Sidney Pauly, Herb Fosnocht.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Norma Schee
STAFF PRESENT : Dick Putnam, Jean Johnson
I. MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 12, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
P.2,IV.C. 2P, should read- . . unanimous ballot for Mr. Fosnocht.
P.8, last P should read- 50 for the proposal, 107 against.
P.12, ADJOURNMENT: Fosnocht moved, Bearman seconded,
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to approve the minutes as written and correct
e
d
.
The minutes carried unanimously.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS.
A. Chairman Don Sorensen.
. Sorensen asked the staff to investigate the necessity of administering an
oath of office to the new members.
B. Council Representative Sidney Pauly.
Pauly reported the Council referred the item of small commercial outlets
to the Commission. She also stated that the council liaison would continue.
Motion: Fosnocht moved, Sundstrom seconded, to direct the staff to investi-
gate and report on small commercial outlets. The motion carried unanimously.
C. Others. none
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. Robert H. Mason & Fraser School Inc., request for rezoning from Rural to
Pm 6.5 . The 4 acre site is located in the northeast corner of the inter-
section of the East/West Parkway and Preserve Boulevard. A continued public
hearing.
Mr. Steven Naill, Director Residential Services Muriel Humphrey Residences,
read the January 21, 1976 letter to Mr. Putnam regarding statistics and facts
on the mentally retarded , crime and property devaluation.
Sorensen listed other input received todate as information from; the City o
f
Richfield, City of Bloomington, City of Coon Rapids, City of Victoria,
Kenney Realty, The Hope United Presbyterian Church , League of Woman Voters,
Mr- Rollins, Mrs.Maenke, ti Mr. Tonnemaker.
Mr. Phil Riveness stated almost all similar proposals have been reviewed by
the South Hennepin Human Services Council and that the Council voted unanimo
u
s
l
y
to recommend approval of the Fraser program in The Preserve.
Sorensen asked if the South Hennepin Human Services Council had' any
concerns regarding the project. Mr. Riveness responded that the only conce
r
n
was that the project may become a community within a community but they ha
v
e
strong faith that the Louise Whitbeck Fraser School will stress community
involvement. •
The planner reviewed the staff report dated January 22, 1976 and staff reco
m
-
mendations on the rezoning from Rural to P.M 6.5, replatting of L2, B8 Westw
i
n
d
s
and review of the proposal per Ordinance 289 and the State Law.
/94?
Planning Commission Minutes
-2- Jaginer1976
The planner stated that according to proposed state regulations Ed
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
is considered a 4th class city ( under 10,000 population ), which
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
retarded to not more than 5% of the total city population. A 3rd class city
would be restricted to retarded less than 10% of the city populat
i
o
n
a
n
d
n
o
t
closer than 3/4 mile from any existing or proposed facility .
Sundstrom asked if the 12 person home with 2 house parents is exp
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
?
Dr. Kowalcyzk responded it is experimental but based on studies o
f
m
e
n
t
a
l
l
y
retarded needs and the project in Victoria .
Bearman, referring to #5 on page 10 of the staff report, inquired
w
h
a
t
t
y
p
e
of input the homeowners association would have. The planner stat
e
d
t
h
e
HOA would not have voting power but would insure dialogue and c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
Lynch asked if any negative responses concerning crime, property de
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
,
etc., had been received. T 1 o. planner stated the city staff did not request
information and the information supplied was supplied by the Fraser
s
t
a
f
f
.
Mr. John Sekulla, Preserve resident, stated contrary to similaritie
s
b
e
i
n
g
made between the Michigan home and the MHR site, the Michigan home is
o
n
3
6
a
c
r
e
s
and not near single family. Mr. Jordan° disagreed saying the Michigan
home is on 6-10 acres. • .
Mr. John Davis, Preserve resident, inquired if any information had
b
e
e
n
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
regarding affects on property values. Sorensen : informed the aud
i
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
letters have been received from Kenney Realty in Richfield and fro
m
t
h
e
Cities of Victoria and Coon Rapids stating no devaluation of piope
r
t
y
h
a
s
been found for homes located near group homes. Sorensen then re
a
d
t
h
e
:letter from the mayor of Victoria dated January 23, 1976.
Mr. Leroy Wenzel, Preserve resident, said he is impressed with the
t
h
o
r
o
u
g
h
-
ness of documentation and concern for human rights that the commis
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
city are exhibiting.
Mr. Dave Anderson, Preserve resident , stated most of The Preserv
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
are not opposed to the Fraser project but are against the extent
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
.
John Nelson, President of the Preserve HOA, suggested approval be
g
i
v
e
n
t
o
one home and if it is determined that the project is successful
t
h
e
o
t
h
e
r
2 homes could be built.
Judy Schuck, 7286 Topview Road, stated she feels the proposal affec
t
s
all
of Eden Prairie and diversity of housing as outlined and adopted by th
e
C
i
t
y
in the Housing Task Force Report will make the City of Eden Prairie ri
c
h
e
r
.
Don Hess, The Preserve, stated The Preserve reviewed the proposal
i
n
d
e
p
t
h
a
n
d
believe it will be a service to The Preserve and the City. He adde
d
t
h
a
t
F
r
a
s
e
r
School graduates should have #1 priority in placement.
Rosemary Dysinger, Human Rights Commission Chairwoman, felt many c
i
t
i
z
e
n
s
within the City will work to make the program a success.
1913
approved Planning Commission Minutes -3-
Jan. 26, 1976
Don Mekeland asked if there existed an alternate site in The Preserve to
locate the homes. Sorensen responded that the City does not suggest sites
but reacts to applications made to the City.
Motion I
Lynch moved, Fosnocht seconded, to close the public hearing on the Fraser
School Incorporated/MHR . The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2
Lynch moved, Sundstrom seconded, to recommend approval of the MHR proposal for
rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 based upon a POD situation and the site plan
submitted in the MHR brochure. The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to recommend approval of the replat of Lot 8
Block 2 Westwinds to provide a .8 acre triangle , a .43 acre outlot for
pathway purposes, and a 2.34 acre development parcel. The motion carried
unanimously.
Motion 4
Bearman moved, Sundstrom seconded, recommend approval of the MHR proposed
by Fraser School and Robert Mason in concept because of the specialized, pro-
gram , experience of the Fraser School and MIR program, and unique site
features and location which allow clustering of 3 units on 1 site in The Preserve
based upon the following;
1. that the MHR concept request a variance of Subd. 5, item F of Ordinance
289 by allowing 3 structures within SOO feet of each other.
2. that no further group or family care homes should be permitted in
The Preserve Sector ( 11 ) until one of the following would occur;
a. that the total housing units in The Preserve Sector reach 1,000.
b. that family or group care homes be developed in at least six other
city sectors.
c. and that in no case may the family care home ratio exceed that
permitted in Ordinance 289 or State Regulations governing community
based residential services for the retarded or handicapped whichever
is more restrictive.
3. that the MHR proposal be developed in detail by Fraser School staff and
meet all requirements of Subd. S of Ordinance 289. The City staff shall
prepare an evaluation of the MIDI submission in conformance with
Ordinance 289. This report will be submitted to the City Council for its
review and approval with a copy to the President of the Preserve HOA.
4. that the City Council direct the Human Rights Commission to study and
recommend the structure and composition of the Community Based Services
Board as required by Ordinance 289.
5. that the MHR director of Residential Programs meet frequently with
representatives of the Preserve HOA to discuss and explain the program
development, discuss selection of house parents for the 3 homes and work-
out questions as they may arise.
6. and recommend to the City Council that the legality of #2 be investigated
and, if necessar Yxriteria be developed so as to protect the integrity o f
The Preserve and Ordinance 289.
The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 5
Fosnocht moved, Beaman seconded, to recommend that the City Council set
a public hearing at their earliest convenience. The motion carried unanimously.
Am/
approved
Planning Commission Minutes Jan. 12, 1976
VI. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS.
PUBLIC HEARINGS.
A. Robert H. Mason 6 Fraser School Inc., request for rezoning from Rural
to RN 6.5. The 4 acre site is located in the northeast corner of
the . intersection of the East/WEst Parkway and Preserve Boulevard.
Mr. Don Hess, The Preserve, stated The Preserve has a purchase option with
Mr. Mason and that it is proposed that approximately 1 acre will be
given to the homeowner's association for trail continuation purposes.
Dr. Kowalczyk read the program information provided in the brochure
under the headings; ' The Need ', The Plan', and i Rationale'.
Mr. Robbins, landscape architect,reviewed the site information. He
believed the site plan responds very well to the physical site and the
program proposed. He stated a trail connection would be made ( 5% grade )
to the trail along the northeast side of the site.
Mr. Jordan°, Board Member of the Fraser School, stated the program attempts
to achieve a program and a family atmosphere for young adults and adults
that are retarded. He stated that 12 or more in a home is more economical
and usually results in ,acquiring better house parents. He estimated the
house size at approximately 6,200 square feet with similar exteriors,
wheelchair accommodations, and the parents would have separate living
and bedroom areas. He stated the houses will retain the future
possibility of conversion to double units if desired. Mr. Jordan°
felt the retarded should not be confined to the 'city core' and they
have a right to a suburb and family atmosphere.
Mr. John Nelson, President of the Preserve HOA, informed the Commission
a poll of The Preserve residents had been taken , the results are as
follows;
for the proposal
indifferent
against
no response
50
107
s
121
191S
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -9- Jan. 12, 197
Mr. Nelson believed a larger percentage of the people would be for the
school if it was not as large as the proposal. He suggested building
1 unit now and phasing the remainder of the project.
Mr. John Sekulla, made the following overhead presentation;
A ACIIDA
tALICertmt To ?rfstett.400
RCQvcsr FoR PEZavYNO.
A: R£20AwN4.
. PLe CNAA‘C IN 0/T7
ORDINANCE NO Of
O. FRASER SCNCOL PROmorea. F44111,
ejovIONACAIT - ACTPAIII ProwsrANO
A CAIMEX CA GNo•AP N ame.5 WW1c#
110 1'0(5 —.All /HST IT VT/04 ,.
08)EGT/VI TO oNPIA/Awc/ CNAN&O
I eirwIt/ISN AZEL1.3LaT Fak ()wow&
INSTITeraw/5 le,771/N 14 -SIDDiTIAL
CoM/ANN IT if 5
A if AtLofvEp, TNIS CkPIA/Adri CANNo•E
VrotaD 11.A011"651• A PArrosmal MIPACT
Or 'SAUL Co4mvairte t C. 7711
prO55RNe.
CI?). orDwAoce /AP .21/5
fronts -TO /1-AtN‘W.SA" TT! A'Nwore
Or. realm:A/7s .PEA' AO•Ne ram. 4
TO (o2m04o) •
pr.Pott To eemuwAre /•/m/ww.•
NSTANIC RiSrimr/aw, WrwArAY
6,(401' Now St
G5eA/1 NO.ti SeAwm.s- A .1..ANS•O -12,
p ow sea ./A4/c1 mcee r/tAw yree
IP A rIng trc.r.og oFred gtsoz r
M A C.C.wAtow•il • orz•Sw1 6.- plAc,w 6.
14,1006 AletrArl./E 4TTEW7-44/ ow A/A.
6tatt 00.05 $
0456R/smug F.26NDTPI6 TAMA, CANNRAVAWNT
A tkoty - l'AREATs P/pf 5 1,4 164 444meg
- n14/67,11;0o PArewr-s ?dos .
1;41511,0,0440 - Ca notec of, 4uut A& AA
- 3/ 911(MITO Aoverf
-C FulL ra4 Atefors
• SOltrervit 010003
coocS
1•400 1
Atosoiste
0foa4 •r•fro ,OF
$.414,11.4 I
DA, Mectfir S •
AMP?' 11(0E5 s
0000 air,
\'"••n_.
SOSe r
'V-
AN * M3T/TVT10111
Cary OF EDEN TR4IRIF
mr vim tui.)..7$Y • 9'
0150 Do. U010 5.78 3i •
VAIIIAT Do WE wANr EDEN ProurtE
TO BE AhorED FOR?
UNIQUE PLAAI/VD
• RESIDE/1/7'/,IL
• COMA OVIT/E5
OR
THE C ./Ty FOR.
GROUP HOME
COMPLEY ES
( RESIDENTIAL ins; /Tor
REG4ugew0A7 sg5
S rot EPOW PRAllwe c.r2, 71A1M015-
1/1.00015m4 VOTE A.0,5r re cAmwes
ory tan.vgAr IA ally
&Soo , 111114e1 ANC WELWAE TO 5514,
TpAgif (MI etest4.A1) AS 1//zI AS
my afoot, wa -,t Aft ertrrt.Or &roc
Otrumtice 6.4ags Diirermm y.
3. TOf •Www&ECOF ONeol ilM/1/7 401 AApw
57(CAF/a Arm wtya TAG' r.m7 lours
Of 5154 rmabt ISo cerezwel2 ;vs
socrm:- 'WA/Arno w/ram TAO" 4RS4
All, rear 7aqs somzet se
ro •ASF TNE Eli OW PoIvt4 raw,
AIME _
3S st mats
4.0•°1.4t ,
TONS ?MCA' YE
pf, ef AAA ry el& P0X ,e/e)
•
-11?- gat,„•,
37:
1916
approved Planning Commission Minutes -10- Jan. 12, 1976
Tom Bartels, E.P. Community News, questioned where the 3% figure is from.
The planner said in Ordinance 289 the number of homes in a given sector of the
City is not to be more than 3% of the housing units in that sector.
Some Preserve residents felt it was due to the estimate that 3% of the
U.S. population is mentally retarded .
Mr. Fosnocht read from Ordinance 289 ;
"E. That the Family Care Home Ratio shall not exceed 3% of
the total dwelling units of the Neighborhood defined on
the Neighborhood Sector Map where the proposed Family
Care Home is to be located."
Bartel inquired if the City Attorney had submitted his opinion on the new
State Law concerning such homes and how it affects the City ordinance.
Mrs .Pauly responded the Human Rights Commission referred the question
to the City Attorney and no response has been received todate.
Dr. Kowalcyzk stated the retarded are instructed at an early age on
right and wrong and have enough ability to be self-responsible for their
actions.
Sorensen asked for the definition of mentally ill and mentally retarded.
Dr. Kowalcyzk stated a mentally ill individual is emotionally disturbed, .
has normal intelligence but reacts in socially unacceptable ways; and the
mentally retarded are slow learners with an impaired adaptability.
'M r. Bearman asked how frequently someone mentally retarded becomes
mentally ill. Dr. Kowalcyzk said such information could be provided.
Mrs. Pauly inquired as to the distance the homes would be from other
Preserve buildings. Mr. Robbins stated the home nearest to the Windslope
property would be 70 feet with a 12 foot grade.
Mr. White , a resident of The Preserve, stated he has heard the presen-
tation 3 times and he would like a guarantee that the residents of the
group homes would be Fraser School gr .-..ates • He added that he does
not share the concern of physical or sexual attacts from the Fraser
residents, but the mentally retarded may need protection from outsiders.
Kelly Davis, a Preserve resident, felt the homes would have adverse
ramifications on The Preserve's unique atmosphere.
Mr. Bill Spaniolo, a Preserve resident, believed the Fraser homes would
adversely affect his home investment.
Ron Ping, a Preserve resident, felt Ordinance 289 should be retained.
John Retterath did not feel the advantages of locating in The Preserve
stated in the Fraser brochure are valid because most of the uses are unavail
a
b
l
e
during most of the year.
191?
ppproved Planning Commission Minutes -11 -
Jan. 12, 1976
Mr. Nelson listed the following questions he Would like the Fr
a
s
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
representatives to answer;
1. what safeguards are provided to the Preserve that •
mentally ill will not be included in the future,
2. is it realistic that 1 couple can care for 12 mentally
retarded adults, and
3. why are 12 persons/home workable when most feel 6 or
less is more desirable.
Dave Anderson „ a resident of The Preserve, asked if anyone unde
r
2
1
would be admitted in the homes. Dr. Kowalcysk said those under 21 will
be discouraged because it is felt most parents can care for th
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
l
y
retarded up to the age of 21.
John Bergen felt Ordinance 289 should not be changed because
s
m
a
l
l
g
r
o
u
p
homes are preferred.
Jordano stated the State Law allows up to 16 persons per house.
MOtion:
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to continue the proposal to th
e
n
e
x
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Commission meeting for a staff report on the proposal taking into account the comments this evening. The motion carried 6:0:1 with Sorensen abstaining.
rsten:.man 6,10.44 MRS WPITH.1.14 FRA4tIR 4/1101, FIR4T FLOOR PM 4ECOLI D fLCOQ PIA UM wars CY. MU*"
LIVIN4 094 4 LIV1144 -094944 NtLSTER. EZDROOM 1111171M- ENTP.1 aza.erdarmsnlOoMa. unu. 1(11:-N32v, tAkiTER taitCO" sair at . .F I RST FLOOR PLAN v372 i.a.ar. • 4...as.6a. leCat4.4 L-) :.::r;-..f1-14 . /NUM 8E9Ra/A J ' i KiTtuA .t.:::;.671rilli------'.. C: iwt,1171"../1 L- -1.. ---/ - FAMILY 4-1 Pat• 1:21:1:Incv t.IVIN4 Vor-Cr Cr. ••••n 4Ee.OKID ?LOO PLA9 Y4--;•-•.Y MURIEL I.I0PAPIARf;/ V ma PIN 3.,..c.VAG.a4C —1191D+ Pia1Zi. II, Av.-V. PROPOSED REV 1S1N A?At.),TAkEKIF.s, 1- 25-7:2 ag MASCO, 1o4. — 14241 11,14. ELL'a 12 As te,7....1, AA a C.:
11 , lECtrit
.LAG( CI LAALS &
January 23, 1976
ICTORIA VILLAGE HALL
ICTORIA , MINN 55386
ELEPHONE 612.4.132363
.AYOR
Jerome Are,.
:MHO L
Kenneth Dittthelm
.Doneld Fuller
D. Richard Sodetbetg
Daniel Vetk
.LANNING COMMISSION
Bunt,. Chairmen
Dennis Gr olgpry
Marvin Hartman
Gerold Schati•g
Jean Strohm
'ARK AND RECREATION
:OMMITTEE
°tortes Hansen, Chisitrnan
Douglas Bleunwotik
Meth Hartmann
Mary Moore
Risyntend Netsrmann P.
Nancy Sehns
ATTORNEY
Robert Nicklaus
ENGINEER
LavItenc•
CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR
VitglMeHotris
A public hearing was held by the planning commission. Concerns,
such as the devaluation of surrounding property, the possibility for
the need of increased police protection, fire protection, etc.,
were raised. The end result was that the planning commission
recommended, and the City Council voted in favor of the project
which consisted of a planned unit development of three cottages with
a capacity of twelve residents plus a live in couple in each cottage.
Mr. Steve Maill
Fraser School
2400 W. 64th St.
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Maill:
In response to your request for information regarding group homes
for mentally retarded adults, I believe I can honestly make an evaluation
of the City of Victoria's experience with such facilities.
I believe it would be appropriate for me to give you a little background
as to the ramifications on the establishment of these facilities
in the city.
The land on which these facilities were to be located was zoned for
single family residences. It consisted of four acres, bordered on
the west side by eight acres of park land, on the north by about
fifteen new homes of high quality, and on the east and south by
agricultural land.
Now, after about five years, I believe an honest and fair evaluation
can be made. My observations would be these:
1. Property values have not declined. No homes have been
offered for sale due to the proximity of the cottages.
2. The need for providing more security is completely unfounded.
At no time have the services of the police been required by
problems created by residents of the cottages.
3. The project has been a asset to the city because of taxes
generated with few services required.
19,?1
.e Maill
4. The project has been an economic asset to the city and
community through purchases of groceries, materials,
services, salaries, etc.
5. A better understanding has been created in the community.
People understand that there is a difference between the
mentally retarded and the emotionally disturbed or the
criminally insane.
6. There may still be a few persons who would offer the same
objections as at the beginning of the project, but these
are no longer vocal in their objections.
About three years ago the corporation requested that an additional
cottage be built on the property. This request was denied on the
grounds that the original PUD was granted on the request of the
corporation for not more than three buildings of this type on the
available site. However, a permit for a rambler type home, housing
six residents, was given. This is now in full operation.
I hope that some of this may be of help to you. If there are any
questions, please feel free to call or write tm, and I shall be glad
to answer such questions if / am able to.
Sincerely,
//-l egtf
Jerome J. Atetz
Mayor
City of Victoria
JJA:vh
1922
WS' IC THERAPY. THEP/ 'OASIS OF LEARNING
2400 WEST 64th STREET
r_t_il:11()(11,
Lrf.77,7-f•77-711,7
• MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5E423
January 21, 1976
• 861-1688
Mr. Richard Putnam
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Dear Kr. Putnam:
Louise Whitbeck Fraser School, Inc. proposers of the
Muriel Humphrey Residences In Eden Prairie, has been
asked by the Eden Prairie Planning ceenissien to contac
t
people or aeencies who would srare statistics or facts
concereing mentally retarded people we.o are mentally
ill, crime and the mentally retarded people and propert
y
values in areas of similar existing residences.
Agencies such as Hennepin County Mental Health, State o
f
Minnesota, Technical Assistance Proaram e K.H. etc. fou
n
d
no statistics relating to people who are mentally reta
r
d
e
d
a
n
d
also mentally ill.
he question of mentally retarded people involved in
criminal activities was posed to such aeencies as the
F.B.I., University of Minnesota, Criminology and Socio
l
o
g
y
Departments and the associaticels of retarded citizens
,
e
t
c
.
and found no knowledge of involvement.
Property value in areas near group homes has been a ma
j
o
r
topic of concern in other communities as well as in E
d
e
n
Prairie. Due to this valid concern, William Kenny of
Kenny Realty, Inc., who did a property check around the
Outreach :ieme in Richfield was contacted, alao the Kinn.
Associttion of Retarded Citizens who has surveyed the
sureounding areas of two group hemes.
We have contacted six municipalities which have residen
c
e
s
for the retarded and asked for any information concerni
n
g
property value, crime or other possible problems having
t
o
do with the homes and their residents.
If any of these sources have not contacted us by this
d
a
t
e
we will prceent their replies as Soon rs possible.
Sincverly,
Mr. Steven Neill
(REIN/11 ,a DIRECTOR
L.. ;LA.,. I.
A I DAC. in,
Lon olle **M.-, I claw Selo..
fAutonl ifitontolbany iNhAti•net4
ntiacion,o4mAko rrAVICIS
1A. On: Itn
tot.A Aftia n n
DIRECTOR. tnur APT SI IMULATION SERVICES
Mos Nitoi.13 fiai
DIRECTOR. RESIDENTIAL Si: AWLS
Mc Maw.. e New
Ma Kampism
9A3 a
CONTACTS CONCERNING PEOPLE WHO ARE
MENTALLY RETARDED AND MENTALLY ILL
University of Minn. Sociology Dept. - no statistics
Henn. Co. Mental Health Dept. - no statistics
State of Minn. Tech. Assistance Project, MR - no st
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
•
Assoc. of Residences for the Retarded in Minn. (ARRM) -
no statistics
Minneapolis Ass9c. for Retarded Citizens (MARC) -
no statistics
Minn. Assoc. for Retarded Citizens (MinnARC) - no s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
Hopkins Schools (Loren Benson, PhD.)
What is mental retardation? The definition accepted
by the American Association of Mental Deficienty .(AMID)
is that mental retardation "refers to subaverage general
intellectual functioning which originates during the
developmental period and is associated with impairment
in adaptive behavior" (Heber, 1961, p.499). Thus a
person must meet three criteria in order to be considered
retarded:
1. Subaverage intellectual ionctioning, generally
determined on an individual intelligence test by
performance at least one standard deviation below
the mean.
2. en:set during the developmental period, that is,
anytime before the seventeenth year of life which
is regarded as the period during which intellectual
potential is determined.
3. Impairment in adaptive behavior. During preschool
years "adaptive behavior" refers predominantly to)
the rate of development of sensory motor skills,
for example, sitting up, walking and talking.
During school years, it refers basically to academic
achievement and, at the adult level, to the person's
social and economic adjustment. However, all three
factors--maturation, learning and social adjustment—
are considered important at every age as indices of
adaptive behavior.
Oucation of Exceutional Learners
Frank M. Hewett, Allyn and Bacon,
Boston, 1974.
What is emotional disturbance? The American Psychiatric Association
(1952) classifies mental illness into two malor categories:
1. Organic brain disorders
2. Tuncticnal disorders, including psychiatric, psycho-
physicologic and visceral, psychoneurotic, personality
(character), and transient situational personality dis-
orders.
Most persons are emotionally disturbed from time to time during the
course of growing up. Longitudinal studies reveal that a sur-
prising large number of so-called normal persons exhibit such dis-
turbed behaviors as fearfulness, destructiveness, and hyper-
activity. But most of these persons are never labeled "emotionally
disturbed" because their problem behavior is moderate in degree,
infrequent in occurrence, and not definitely patterned. Just when
a given person qualifies frit such a Label is often difficult to
determine and is related to the setting in which he is being observed
and the expectations of the observer.
Emotional disturbance is a transient phenomenon in the lives of
most persons so classified and that an orientation toward them as
"learners" on their way to improving their adjustment may be more
valid. Viewed in such a context, incidence -figures are largely
meaningless.
Education of Exceptional Lerareers
019141•149,4ett, Allyn and Bacon,
/92 5
CONTACTS MADE CONCERNING PROPERTY VAIUE,
CRIME AND FOLLCU-UP STUDIES ON MENTALLY RETARDED ADULTS
City of Richfield (Mayor Law)
City of Coon Rids (Assessor Gay Aldinger)
City of Coon Rapids (City Planner Allen Hamel)
City of Brooklyn Center (City Planner Blair Tranere)
Kenny Realty, Inc. (William Kenny)
Minneapolis Assoc. of Retarded Citizens (Glen Anderson)
City of Bloomington (Mayor Benidict)
City of Victoria (Mayor Aretz)
Coop. School Rehab. Center (CSRC) (Gary Simon)
Rope Presbyterian Church - Richfield (Dr. Dixon)
/42(..
Richfield Group Home
Real Estate Sales Survey
The Richfield group hope opened officially il July, 1 0 74. For
several ronths prior to this, battles raged between proponents
and opponents. Thus, it would be fair to say that neighbors were
aware of the existence or future existence of the group home in
the commgnity. So the wtrvey examines sales from April, 1974.
The wirv^y checks all saler since April in all contiguous blocks
of the group home's block. The average of the homes in the imme-
diate area was 130.5', of the assessed market value at the time
of sale. Of 111 homes in the immediate area, seven homes, in
additIo. . •- r. were sold (The rarl ,et, etc. of the
group home v .:1s not use .1 in computing figures.) One block was not
systematially inclpded, but sales were informally checked and
it was ascertainel that there was no significant difference in
the data for that Wock. No homes were sold for less than assessed
market vain-, and there was no concentaation of sales around the
group home.
Bronsticn Group Home .
Data was gathered on 17 prope ,ies closest to the group home. Tt
was felt that this neighborhood is characterized by The anonymity
of its residents and, therefore, it would be unlikely that any
sales motivated or affected by the presence of the group home
would go beyond those si,.!eyed. During the two years the home
had been in operation in the neighborhood, five properties had
been sold. Among these, the average sales price was 106.7% of
assessed market value. All homes but one were sold for more than •
assessed market value. The one that was sold for less was next
door to the group home, but the owner-occuppnd sold it to a con-
struction firm, which tore down the building, and build and apar-
tment t!:e site'. The formzr owner moved into the
apartment.
I92i
Multsplt .Venier
-,
.
...
,.
.
.:.31..—
..
)1
.:.-.„
....
--:
I
a 4.
1 I
KENNEY REALTY. INC.
614 WEST 54to STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55419 612.625.4466
January 20, 1976
Mr. Steve Neill
Fraser School, Inc.
2400 V. 64th Street
Richfield, Minnesota 554:*
Dear .hr. Naill,
Listed below are all the homes that have been sold within a couple of blocks
of the Outreach home at 7425 . 4th Avenue South:
Homes sold in 1 974
Address Askinn Sold Bedrooms Date ,- 7425 4th Avenue $44,500. 00,000. 6+ March 14, 1974
Homes sold in /975,
4th Avenue 37+9QP. 36,900. 3+ August 11, 1075
72 1 4 4th Avenue 58,900. 36,000. 3 July 14, 1 975
Subject Property
7 33f; ith Avenue 33,600. 31,900. 3 August 14, 1974
7412 5th Avenue 31,500. 31,500. 2. September 2, 1974
7543 4th Avenue 31,500. 30,000. 3 November 5, 1974
7324 4th Avenue 31000. 3 0 $500 - 3 January 23, 1974
7515 5tg Avenue 33,000. 31,000. 2. February 11, 1974
As yon can see the subject vas purchased for $4,500. less than it was on the
market for hut all the rest were purchased for less than 11 of asking price.
The Small number of 'ones that were sold in 1974 and 1975 indicates to me that
the neighbors are not all moving out and those that have sold have been getting
the "mar%et value or t'leir home. It annears that the homes in the area are
nnereei,tine at Vitt same rate as all other homes in Richfield.
iv emiertet:ce heen th.,t atter t.e neonle become ac^uainted with the homes,
suel as you ore arnnosiati, they are glad to have them apart of the neighborhood.
If I can he of any furtoer assistance, please call.
Yours truly
, ! ; , . < .•
Will iam T. Fenner, C.R.B.
President
YTE:cm
CRIMINAL ELMENT INVOLVING
PEOPLE WHO ARE MENTALLY RETARDED
A.R.R.M. (Association of Residences of the Retarded in Minnesota)
No knowledge of statistics.
ASSOCIATION OF RETARDED CITIZENS (Minn.)
No knowledge of statistics.
MINNEAPOLIS ASSOCIATION OF RETARDED CITIZENS
No knowledge of statistics.
F.B.I. (Claudia Neuberger)
No knowledge of statistics.
UNIVERSITY SOCIOLOGY DEPARTMENT
No knowledge of statistics.
UNIVERSITY CRIMINOLOGY DEPARTMENT
No knowledge of statistics.
MINNESOTA CENTER OF SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH
No research.
194
5700 portland avenue minnesota 55423 =.1
January 19, 1976
Mr. Dick Putman
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Putman:
Richfield was fortunate to be the fi
r
s
t
s
u
b
u
r
b
a
n
community to provide a residential h
o
m
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
mentally retarded in 1974. We prese
n
t
l
y
h
a
v
e
s
i
x
residents in addition to the couple
i
n
c
h
a
r
g
e
.
We in Richfield have had no complain
t
s
o
r
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
whatever with this home within our r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
r
e
a
.
Several months ago, I met a Richfie
l
d
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
l
i
v
i
n
g
within this same block who said "yo
u
o
n
t
h
e
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
made the right decision and I'm sor
r
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
w
a
y
I
responded in the council chamber the
e
v
e
n
i
n
g
y
o
u
h
e
l
d
a hearing". This has been the respon
s
e
f
r
o
m
s
o
m
a
n
y
.
I would certainly recommend to the s
t
a
f
f
,
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
officials, and residents of Eden Pra
i
r
i
e
t
o
g
e
t
b
e
-
hind this project and join other for
w
a
r
d
l
o
o
k
i
n
g
communities in this humanitarian pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
W
e
h
a
v
e
been looking to the past when we sho
u
l
d
b
e
l
o
o
k
i
n
g
forward. These people are human bei
n
g
s
,
t
h
i
n
k
h
o
w
fortunate we have been.
Sincexely,
ic A'%4
oren L. Law
Mayor
LLL/arl
cc: Steve Neill
19.79
-0 MUSIC THERAPY. THE {. JS BASIS OF LEARNING
.71
• FuklisA""SitI En"R" 1[............:4;:z.j.01. .. 2400 WEST 64th STREET • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55423 • 861-1688
Telephone Conversation (Steve Neill) with Blair
Tremgtzg (City Planner), Brooklyn Center (1-19-76).
. No letter due to communication problem.
Community Outreach ( 6 residents) was built in
open area surrounded by thirty single family lots.
Twenty three homes have been built (approximately
$40,000 range). There is no reason to believe other
lots won't sell.
There have been no social problems or crime. Two
residents were hit by a oar in one accident. Mr.
Tremiere said they were jay walking like others
do but they happened to be struck.
For any questions please call Blair Tremegm,
Brooklyn Center Offices - 561-5440
XECUTrve DIRECTOR
IN J owatty•
W 0 DAC,
106.46 MAO., I my* 5.00.1, We
OtniciOn. FROGI1AM st tartetS
A IN...
V. I DAC In
Looms INA...J*6 I e.oe
MatETOR. ',RANT AVON stRviets
Mn Doe.. NI Mewl.
I. IN • a.,
79,3o
DIRECTOR, RESIDER NAL SERVICES
sHaa. •
aaaam ttaavaaat
city of
coon rapids
January 15, 1976
Mr. Steve Neill
Fraser School
2400 West 64th Street
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr.
The City of Coon Rapids has two buildings housing mentally
handicapped adults located within it. Each of the build-
ings accommodates 12 mentally handicapped individuals.
The dwellings were approved for construction in October of
1972 and were occupied during the spring of 1973. Before
approval of the dwellings, the City of Coon Rapids Plan-
nidg Commission held a public hearing on the facilities,
at which time both opposition and support were expressed
for the dwellings. The major opposition came from sur-
roiinding residents who were concerned that the occupants
of the dwellings would have an adverse effect on their
children, crimes wodld be committed, and the neighborhood's
property values would be depreciated. After considering
these items, the Planning Commission and City Council both
approved of the Special Use Permit (see attached) for the
facilities. Since that time, the City has also approved
the construction of facilities.for an additional 34 inn-
tally handicapped individuals in a residential neighbor-
hood setting. These units have not yet been constructed.
The cit ,f - fJ1-1!, his cmperien:::e , •to complaints on
tho existing ,iwo,liligs for the Mentally handicapped. The
occupants have put no increased demands for specialized City
services and there are no known instances of crimes being
committed by the dwelling's occupants.
Overall, the dwellings and their occupants have been good
neighbors in the City. Because of our experience with the
existing dwellings, I Would have no major concerns in making
a favorable recommendation for he construction of additional
acilithl.s for mentally handicapped individuals on Scattered
sitos within Coon Rapids.
Sincerely yours,
Alan J. 11lmel
AJR:bk Director of Planning
Atch
1313 Coon Rapids Bookivard, Coon Rapids. Minnesota 55433
(6121755 2880
1931
city of
coon rapids
January 16, 1976
Steve Naill
Fraser School
2400 West 64th Street
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
RE: Community Living Property in Coon Rapids
Dear Mr. Naill:
1 have checked 28 properties immediately adjacent to or across the street from
Community Living, Inc. in our City. During the past three years only two of
the 28 properties have sold. The two properties that sold show no difference
In sales ratio as compared to those properties that sold further away from the
subject property. At the present time there appears to be no loss in value to
the abutting homes by way of market activity.
I have not heard of any complaints by the surrounding neighbors since the Corn.
munity Living building was built back in early 1974.
Attacl ,ed please FiNd a map showing the location of the Community Living Center
and the properties reviewed for market information.
Respectfully,
CS
Gaylord Aldinger
City Assessor
GA:ek
cc Alan Hamel
1313CoonRapidsBoulevarciCoonRapids,Minnesota 55433
(612)7552880
• /932
" r ,,4..i4fI IILT)! -; 2 ihe 4 7.3•11 :41 t. P:4 15 'crow I . I i '" '" • - 43- 0 r .7„, .reimyri $4 • sec. 16 ; I ft 114;4 Ire ek,
THE CITY OF COON RAPIDS
1313 COON RA PiDS BOULEVARD
COON RAPIDS. MINNESOTA 55433
612 755-2880
SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR COMMUNITY LIVING, INC.
Pursuant to a.resolution adopted by the Coon Rapids
City Council at a regular meeting on the 10th day of October,
1972, Community Living, Inc. is hereby granted a Special Use
Permit in order to construct and maintain a development for
mentally retarded adults on .ParCel 9000 of Section 16 located
on 109th Avenue N. W. within the City of Coon Rapids. Such permit
shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. A maximum ratio of one supervisory personnel
to six mentally retarded adults shall be main-
tained in each of the two proposed buildii1gs.
2. The development and maintenance of buildings,
1,arking and landscaping shall be in accordance
with the attached site plan dated October 17, 1972.
3. The development shall not provide medical treat-
ment as a primary function and shall comply with
the standards of the Minnesota Department of
a -
Public.11e-altfl -relating to residential facilities
housing adult retarded individuals.
TWIN CITIES FASTEST GROWING SUBURB
MANAGI R GOVERNMENT
ATTEST:
• t '
We hereby acknowledge receipt and hereby agree-to abide
by the terms of the herein.
ATTEST: COMMUNITY LIVING, INC.
• /936'
CITV OF COON RAPIDS
Donald E. Reis
Director of Community
Development
4. The development's operators shall be licensed
es- by the Minnesota Department of Public Malt.
S. Any and all mechanical equipment located on the
roofs of either or both of the buildings shall
be screened to adequately conceal such equipment
from adjoining property. .
6. This permit shall be binding upon any and all
officers and managing agents of Comnunity Living,
Inc., their successors and assigns.
The execution of this Permit by Community Living, Inc.
signifies receipt of this Special Use Permit granted by the
City Council and its agreement to abide by the terms herein.
PASTORS
ROBERT W. DICKSON D.D. N. ALLAN TALLEY RON LEE DAVIS
Vic pope Pniteb PrOutnian
A spiritual home for your family
januaty 19, .1916
Mk. Steve Waite
2400 west 64th St/met
Riahgetd, Minn. 55423
To Whom It May Coneetn:
I have, been asked by Mt. Steve Haat to
unite a tetteA o6 tecommendation teganding the
Gtoup Home iot Reaxded peopte hem in Rich‘ietd.
I have onty positive things to say about "Richetd
OutAeaeh" home. The teaidents have been otdetty
and have neva eavaed a Ut o conem to .the
neighbothood, so iat as I know.
We at Hope Chuteh have had them wokakip with uA
and they have been nothing but a delight to out
peopte.
highty tecommend aueh an endeavot to any
community inteAested in 6e/wing peopte in thia
way.
• Moat aincexely youm,
RobeAt W. Vichson
RWD:ih
"1)111.1. ilOPE": 2GI-7211 m 861-712 -- A 24-hour Telephone Ministry
65905 n 66
7155 PORTL AND • s 6.NoL SOO TM .69-2602 N.MAIEAP02.16. PRNA5E5OTA 56425
661P4AA4
ig5to
Cooperative School Rehabilieation Center
Secondary Programs for Mentally Retarded
Special Education Division-District 0287
Follow-Up 1975
Summary
The Cooperative School Rehabilitation Center for less able re:arded students In the 14 to 21
age ree•e has bean in operation for ten yeers. Pollee-up studies of former students have been
done several times in the pest, with the rest recent on hneing been completed in 1973. Be-
cause of the ten year anniversary a someehat lennthier queationneire was developed to tap in-
formation in three major areas: vocational outcome, independence of functieeine, and evalua-
tive ceeeeeets about the program.
Mailed questionnaires were sent to all parents of former students. 45 percent returned the
questionnaires with veeeble infornation. A sizeable nee!7er 'e received bee:, •ved-no
forwaedi•e eddreen". laspectioe of the two lists of kmer students - those who returned
data and those that did not - suegests that the data from the 45 percent is representative.
Phone calls will be made when poesible to at further information in the vocational sphere '
from non- respondents.
Analysis ef resposees revealed the followteg outcomes for C.S.R.C. graduates:
Outr--, Nueber Percentggs
Competitive Enployment
Sheltered Erloyeent
Work ;,etivity-Day Activity
At VOA.O.
In Training or Waiting for Training
56
16
28
15
120
47%
13
23
13
4
100%
47 percent of the former students are competitively eeployed at a median salary of $2.27
per hour. The salery range wee S1.15 to $4.20 an hour The average length of time on their
jobs wee 3/ years and they worted an average of 35 hours per week.
Three-querters of the former students were Very satisfied with their current vocational
situation, 22% were somewhat satisfied, and only 3% reported being dissatisfied. Comments
relating to dissatisfection renced from peoe eociel life to no benefits, personality
clashee, wretine rdvarcoment or veeredine, rei "werhe teo herd".
C.S.R.C. found jobr for 64% of the studente, while DVA was instrumental in locating jobs
for 13%, th ctrc or anut re : 121, ced ctiee coerce:: 11%.Zti..di'L SCUZeiLL. said they
were looiee coc e job.
There was a wide variety in the types of coepctitive employment listed. However, there has
not been reel) ehaaee ;a the nAjo nrcos of c:,a)vy-I -Ir frc ,1 our previous follov-ups. The
kreeat cei-eory ees dad r4 ,tcd, in ,ludeo diehuashing and bussin.
7aictory add nosubly valk accohn:,d foe 137, aid the ht e,101 occupations of orderly and
nurocz.al for ta;.. he reeafnee is oex:A .erd aa.tong janitorial, laundry, houeekeeping,
en4 eeeeeeeer.
13% of the for.y, !.tudelts w.re vothing as nheltered eeelovecia. Their salaries had some
varlati ,e1 .!Y7 to tI. pere rate n :ere of their eleploy:emL hut typically they earned about
$20 to $n per week. lie ti c ' 12Z rate of outcome for rheltered worhers has not cheneed
for aeveral years, thn p.rren': of students who are now Ia pork Aettvity sad Day Activity
enters his inereaeen *nfif(enile - from 13. in 1973 to 24% in 1975. Eleven students are
wait -.W, to hot into tialnine, tent of these are going into Work Activity Centers.
(OVER)
-
1975 Follow-Np
Because the school curriculum offers reading an
d
m
a
t
h
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
a
s
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
i
n
h
o
w
!flitch readiee and math was involved in the jobs of former students
.
4
%
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
m
u
c
h
r
a
e
a
d
i
n
g
was involved in their job, 26% said some, and 7
0
%
s
a
i
d
l
i
t
t
l
e
o
r
n
o
n
e
w
a
n
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
.
Y
e
e
a
r
d
i
n
g
math no one said much was involved, 25% said s
o
m
e
w
a
s
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
,
a
n
d
7
5
2
s
a
i
d
l
i
t
t
l
e
o
r
n
o
math was involved in their job.
Independence of functiening was the second cate
g
o
r
y
o
f
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
b
t
a
i
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
questionnaire. Only 3 of the former students h
a
v
e
m
a
r
r
i
e
d
.
O
v
e
r
t
h
r
e
e
-
q
u
a
r
t
e
r
s
a
r
e
r
e
-
se with :eir pareees. The neet east freqeently
r
e
e
e
t
i
o
n
e
d
l
i
v
i
n
g
a
r
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
w
a
s
1
4
2
in fester ex aroup hence, while 3% are living in
t
h
e
i
r
o
w
n
a
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
.
9
2
%
o
f
t
h
e
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
and 92% of 'le students are satisfied vith the l
i
v
i
n
g
s
r
r
a
n
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
c
i
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
o
s
e
who were dieeatisfied included siblir el friction, wanting to be on their own, and la
c
k
o
f
friends and eocial life.
Another questioa inquired about former students' c
a
p
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
i
n
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
o
f
m
o
n
e
y
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
.
15% had a cheing account. 317. a savings account, and 40% were ju
d
g
e
d
c
a
p
a
b
l
e
o
f
h
a
n
d
l
i
n
g
tbeir day to day budgeting. Not one student w
a
s
f
e
l
t
t
o
b
e
a
b
l
e
t
o
h
a
n
d
l
e
i
n
c
o
m
e
t
a
x
f
e
r
n
s
.
The most frequently mentioned activity in the ar
e
a
o
f
l
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
i
m
e
w
a
s
w
a
t
c
h
i
n
g
t
e
l
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
.
This was folloeed in desecuding order from mo
s
t
t
o
l
e
a
s
t
b
y
:
l
i
s
t
e
n
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
a
n
d
r
a
d
i
o
,
shopping, navies, sports, dancing, apd clubs-o
r
g
e
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
7
0
%
h
a
d
e
i
t
h
e
r
"
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
"
o
r
"some" contact with former clasemetes.
20% of the former students have participated in
v
o
t
i
n
g
.
O
n
l
y
6
f
o
r
m
e
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
h
a
v
e
o
b
t
a
i
n
e
d
their driver-a liceree.
A final question in this section asked for a judge
m
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
o
n
h
o
w
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
they felt their sons or daughters weee in their
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
g
.
2
0
%
w
e
r
e
r
a
t
e
d
a
s
being "very iudepeadont", 60% an needing some
h
e
l
p
,
a
n
d
2
0
7
.
a
s
n
e
e
d
i
n
g
a
g
r
e
a
t
d
e
a
l
o
f
h
e
l
p
.
The third and last major categoey of information
a
s
k
e
d
f
o
r
s
o
m
e
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
v
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
a
b
o
u
t
the CSRC progrem and staff. Neerly 70% rated their son or daughter's total experience at
CSRC as "very positivo". 29% f.,-?It it was okay and only 2% said they were disappointe
d
.
When asked wt had bcon must b..apiul to forrar students, pereeea'itiaa of the steel re
e
'
e
e
2
firet, speciiie job trainin second, and classroom experiences third. Nany patents chack
a
d
all three 7 the teachine staff highly, 19% felt they ware
s
a
t
i
s
-
factory, and no one perent said they were disappointed.
Other questio,ls artmpted to get parctIts s views on tha impact of different program area
s
.
The data '!fficult to anal-l'e hut there was a markcd trend toward ranking the practical
(lessee as hovIL; th.t grtnLest impact. Thus, Home Econ
a
H
e
s
and Independent Livine classes
were renked traor:;-ortation tr1oin cecond, and food service training third. Mueic
,
Art, Acadeu:os, .1 ..)noy wore ran!:cd in tho middle as far as their impact; while Induatrial
Trainine, xtd nmily Life were ren:.ed in the lover middle. It should be
noted that there ware many qualifications to res
p
o
n
s
e
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
a
r
e
a
.
1938
1975 Follow-Up
/age 2
Since the beginning there has been a staff of casemanagers to coordinate intake, make
educational plans, and provide counseline and job placement. 65% felt the services pro-
vided by their casemanager were very beneficial, 31% fairly helpful, and 4% not helpful.
Regarding specific services that stood out in the parent's minds, job placement and
counseling during crises siteations were frequently mentioned. 20% of the parents said
there was not sufficient communication between the school and pareuts. Their suggestions
for improvement included sere frequent notificatioe oi students' behavioral changes, being
more frank with the family, and maintaining contact and placement services after graduccion.
In surnary, the results of a mailed questionnaire to the parents of former students have
been presented. 47% of the atudents were found to be in Competitive Employment. There
has been c siimificant increase in the pereentege of students entering Work Activity and
Day Activity Centere. Many of the former students were handlireg sore aspacta of their
money eanageeent sueg as day to day budreting and had a savings account. Watching TV,
listening to the radio, end playing records were the most frequently mentioned leisure time
activities. The overall experience at CSRC, the total staff, and the casemenagement staff
were all given high marks in the evaluations of the parents.
Prepared by Jack rithian
* Special thanks to my daughter, Lauren Fithian, who spent many hours tabulating data
fron quest!ennalres.
* Also, thanks to thz csnc zrsoaa:lammerg taff and a credal reeeettee consisting of Judy
Siwon, Perry Johnrein, Pon fietr:_ck, Barbera Rahman, Dan Sullivan, Richard Henze, Kay
Kesel, and Wayne Lindskoog for their assistance in this follow-up project.
1989
o .3 1965 1966 25 1.31 2,725 98 80 68,125 2,450 2,000 4,450 1967 38 1.39 2,891 121 88 109,858 4,599 3,344 7,943 1968 55 1.64 3,411 205 118 187,605 11,275 6,490 17,765 1969 64 1.75 3,640 229 131 232,960 14,656 8,184 23,040 1970 75 1.83 3,806 272. 144 285,450 20,400 10,800 31,200 1971 86 2.01 4,180 334 167 359,480 28,724 14,362 43,086 1972 97 2.10 4,368 372 180 423,696 36,084 17,460 53,544 1973 109 2.20 4,575 410 195 498,675 44,690 21,255 63,945 1974 121 2.31 4,805 457 215 581,405 55,297 26,015 81,312 1975 135 2.40 4,992 486 227 673,920 65,610 30,645 96,255 * * 3,421,174 - 283,785 140,755 - .424,540 * MOM 1) The above chart has been computed according to 1974 state and federal tax schedules. 2) CSRC graduates pay approximately $100,000 in state and federal taxes annually. 3) CSRC graduates have earned approximately 3 1/2 million dollars. 4) Yes, vocational and special education pays.
1 he Preserve I lainetwavrs P.SSOcsat ton
(,--.'''
January 12, 1976
Members of Eden Prairie Planning Commission
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 •
RE: Petition and Requests (Robert H. Mason, Inc. & Fraser School, Inc.)
A Request For Rezoning.
Ladies & Gentlemen;
A Petition Ballot was sent to all residents of The Preserve (attached letter of
instruction nd sample ballot). The result of the count is attached. The
count was made by John Darling, Vice President of The Preserve Association
and Sandra C. SakeIla, a Preserve resident.
Very truly yours,
THE PRESERVE ASSOCIATION
•g
John F. Nelson
(f?"‘Prasident
JEN/cmil
Attachments
/91/
, 1:'
.4.0
PETITION BALLOT
Check the appropriate paragraph number. All ballots must be signed.
V 1. I am FOR the variance change that permits
the Fraser School to construct and occupy
three (3) homes in The Preserve.
2. I am INDIFFERENT to the above proposal. —
/65. 3. I am AGAINST the variance change that would
permit the Fraser School to construct and occupy
three (3) homes in The Preserve.
/21 V NO 1eeCtr-ONS6
Signature'- , 7%-e•-•
A4,470eaS
/91/2
The Preserve Homeowners Association
January 8, 1976
TO: ALL MEMBERS OF THE PRESERVE ASSOCIATION
RE: NOTICE OF PUBLIC }TEARING TO CONSIDER ROBERT H. MASON,
INC. ,S REQUEST FOR REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLATTING OF THE
BELOW DESCRIBED PROPERTY.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Eden Prairie Planning Commission
will meet in the Eden Prairie City Hall, 8950 Eden Prairie Road, at 7:30
P.M., on Monday, January 12, 1976, and will at said time and place
conduct a public hearing on Robert H. Mason, Inc. 'a request for a zoning
district change from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval of Lot 2,
Block 8, to provide an outlot for the Homeowner's Association trail system
and an outlot at the north end of Lot 2 to be included in the development of
Lot 1, Block 8. Said rezoning and platting to be for three (3) separate
structures for twelve residents plus house parents.
LOCATION: Within the Westwind Plat in The Preserve.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 2, Block 8, Westwind Plat, the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota
The Preserve Association, in response to the residents request at the
special meeting held January 7, 1976 at The Preserve Center concerning
the proposal of the Fraser School for the mentally retarded, is making
it possible for all residents to register their opinion regarding the proposed
variance as stated in the reference above. . .
Attached are two copies (one for husband and the other for wife) of three (3)
response ballots. The first response is a "yes" vote for approval of the
change. The second is a vote of "indifference" to the proposal. The third is
a "no" vote to the proposed change.
It is imperative that your response is registered at The Preserve Center
by Monday, January 12, 1076, prior to 4:00 P.M. The resulting tally will
be presented to the Eden Prairie Planning Commission on January 12, 1976
at the Eden Prairie City Hall, 8950 Eden Prairie Road, prior to 8:00 P. M.
NOTE: The hearing covering the Fraser School zoning request will not be
started until 9:00 F. M. or after. Please plan your time accordingly.
TITE PRESERVE ASSOCIATION
"41 , Z 47L,;-
,'o fn E. Darling /
Vice President /9 0
Il••••n •
PETITION BALLOT
Check the appropriate paragraph number. All ballots must be sig
n
e
d
.
1. I am FOR the variance change that permits
the Fraser School to construct and occupy
three (3) homes in The Preserve.
2. I an INDIFFERENT to the above proposal.
3. I am AGAINST the variance change that would
permit the Fraser School to construct and occupy
three (3) homes in The Preserve.
Signature
Address
PETITION BALLOT
Check the appropriate paragraph number. All ballots must be sig
n
e
d
.
1. I am FOR the variance change that permits
the Fraser School to construct and occupy
three (3) homes in The Preserve.
2. I am INDIFFERENT to the above proposal.
n•n•n3
3. I am AGAINST the variance change that would
permit the Fraser School to construct and
occupy three (3) homes in The Preserve.
Signature
Address
66AIDA
OBJCcr/oN TO P1c.6EP/4/6-
I ge(PCST FOR P6-2aviA(6-
A. RE2oiviA/6_
Pz.v.c 2ime46-E- IN airy
ORDINANcE No. ,D eg,
47. FR./46-Rloo4 PRomormG-
ENfracycl' 146/vr — 4CruAity PP.omor/No-
h CO A4 P16 X OF 6-RociP NoA46:7 WHich
IMPLIES /A/ST/TVT/O,V
71 ogiccr/oA/ 7o ORP/AmAkE
65"riRt1511 PZE -C;.)E/17- Poi8 8o/c.DiA/G.
11,1\57--Irar/o/vs 7(5I7(4'i1A j.
compt it/E S
IF A4Lo!,,JED 1 TH/5 ,,,2DIA/ANCE.e.
tAiovLD bl,(11FES7 A PRorociAn hviPilcr
ow 57 t. COMMUNItIL, e.0 riVE
Pk6:55RVE
CITY oRo/NApic 6 #0.
fkoP05 TO ilicR 56 TICE' A/418e
OF ,651 P5. (17 PEA' I/0115E revim
To /2. (og m 0/(E)
PEoPosC TO eumN47-6- 16/A ithui/vt
PIS -FANG& R EST- R/cT/o/ii gE red 67-6--//
go() s6 5 o ktov, .01 44.3.-.2-
" &Poo P liome 56R /),416,- 4 LAR 6-8e
A4E6 A Np/ne MORE r11/1 /V ON ,4'A:9E
lR A GIVEN Loc4 77a Iv OF re/
e
/
,
R
s
i
,
r
m ii (M Ai VA/ It/ " vPRI57N6_'' pL4c/N G-
UNDue NE6,--A7IvE 4 r 7 -5-4/7-/o/v ON .41.4.
GROW? 14 041 E
NUL
fegAseR/mAsdAt pRomorm6 Film /L7 6/VP/RoNA4E4/T
A rmity - pAke/v7-5 ?Lys R5617-6,D cfilLDR67/v
- Al/e MM// TWO Pliee--4/7--..c ?,e as"
TWO C1-1/4bR6A1
FS 6/ Ppopos-44. Com7CE)‹ OF GROW' 11005ES
MA.SoW
3C. vNeccA
Focc. r/A46 PARENrs
5(18ST/Tvil- ?MEN/
CookS to'
MA-11) S
A DV/5472 C
AED,Cic 477eA/DEEc
APAA11.1 15 TWATIV "e cop/is-0k s
poqi, He.-c_?ERs
N/6-N7-- NapE2
171 Ahg/A14 L07-1 7-3055s-
Ii
ff
AN M5T/TV770/V
1911 -7
ARE4
36 SQ ma,E
pAs-ri'°
cou'4 1c-r"cl"
ciry F EPEN PR ,91R/ E
AREA
miccs
Y5Ag ?opt/L.4770A/ GRowril
19 -20 6.1 9oo
et 4,0 0
ig go /3; Soo
1 /, 85- n 4,0, 000
8 1 S -or)
/ 9'S"'
°
77/-6 Pk)65 ER 1/E
Yo Of /3,e.6-4 OF 51EN p-1209/e/c)
YR
Torn L
P oPo CA-77 Al
66 °A
mpurrs of A vve..7
.•nnnn *ewe ••••••1
1/00 (ay) 9
/;00 (20 ,x) SG8
ign
W/-)AT Do WE WANT EDEN p g 11 1 / e 1
TO 86 NOTED F
UNIQUE PLAAIN[D
RESIDEA/TML
COW/ PA /177E5
0
THE CIO/ I-OR
C RcUP OM E
Co/7PLE/ES
R'ELSIDENT/JAL INST . TUTIONS
I9119
RECohimeW01[7 /OW 5
I. TNE Ev64 f-ye/i/x/ECi77 7-VIWIN6 -
Commisc/o/y VoTE NOT To
ORD1AMNC6 4/0. a7g,
G /OOP liomES h126 WELComE TO 66 -4/
?2,q/gIE (7116PAPe36 -/Z.ve) A S O/V6 0.95
T1161 COA4,9 17 W/7-1/ olz 6-A•757 -//f/G Cocoin_
oRP)No4Nc6 LA14/5 , DIJZ6C"r/v5S-,
3, THE NvftLee F 620v? hlofrit -s" /A/ 4/17
Fcc/Fic A 2E4 1-4)/T11 7-1/6 Co-/ L/ A4 /775"
e6N pie,4/./2/6 g6: cov6;eNti.) 8/ 7,6
6.risT/N6- P,977 0I IT/-1/A) 7T4'4r #4 kE.4
77-M1 TI//SA / RE LIA4/TED
To 3% oc." 77/ EY/ 5 -riAi 6- Po Pvbfrriov i
'2
3
1950
TO: Dick Putnam, Planning Director
FROM: W. Marian Perbix
DATE: January 19, 1976
RE: Ordinance 289, Chapter 60 Laws 1975
I'm trying to answer the questions you posed to me on relatively
short notice so that you might have something before you at your next
meeting. It appears to me from a reading of the Chapter 60, Laws 1975
that the State Legislature amended portions of the State Law relating to
public institutions and providing certain rules and regulations for the
Commissioner in issuing or not issuing licenses for homes governed by
M.S.A. 252 and, secondly, amended the planning and zoning portion of the
Statutes; namely, Chapter 462.357 by making mandatory permitted uses of
the types of uses as set forth in Section 7 end 8. Our ordinances cannot
be more restrictive than a State law although they can be more liberal.
It would seem to me that should the property involved in the problem
before you be rezoned to accmaodate the multi-family use that the proposed
use is a permitted use subject only to the conditions that the City might
impose to assure proper maintenance and operation of the facility or such
conditions that arc necessary to protect the health andsafety of the
residence of the residential facility for the mentally retarded.
As to the numbers involved and the 300 . foot requirement that you have
alluded to that would be in the hands of the Commissioner. The State
law has made the ratio portion of our Ordinance of no effect except insofar
as it might be persuasive on the Ommmissioner in issuing oi let issuing
the license.
You asked also what procedure the City should use to consider this
project. I suppose technically the two can be distinguished but the
fact of the matter is that the public understands that if the property is
rezoned to the appropriate multi-family use that it is going to contain
homes that would accommodate Fraser school. I believe, therefore, the
technical part is that you are considering a rezoning but it is
inescapable that you consider at the same time the type of use because
everyone now knows that that will be the occupancy assuming they meet
our requirements.
These answers are quite general but I believe that they may give you
nose guidance in your deliberations. If they do not fully answer your
question I would be happy to answer thms more specifically given a little
more time. 1957
South Her epin Human Services C
5401 France Avenue South • Edina, Minnesota 55435
Phone 9201194
Serving:
Bloomington
Eden Prairie
Edina
Richfield
January 5, 1976
Mr. Roger Ulstad, City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minn. 55343
Dear Mr. Ulstad:
The South Hennepin Human Services Council, on December 17,
1975, at the request of the Eden Prairie City Council, reviewed
a proposal to develop three group care homes for the mentally
retarded to be located in Eden Prairie.
Louise Whitbeck Frazer School, the proposers of the Muriel
Humphrey Residences, has a long and eminent history of providing
services to the mentally retarded. Because of its performance
record in providing excellent day services, Frazer School already
has a long waiting list for the proposed residential program.
The SHHSC, in reviewing this proposal, was particularly concerned
with the effect the colocation of three facilities would have on
the integration of the program and its residents into the Eden
Prairie Community. It is important that new programs provide as
normalized a living environment as possible and not be isolated
within the larger community.
The development of community residential services is still in a
rather embryonic stage; consequently, few models are presently
available to allow a comparison of the advantages of each.
/gfa
VS11,1n7
Page 2 (Cont.) Mr. Ulstad
The opportunities available in the Preserve, however, and the
ready access to the Cooperative School Rehabilitation Center,
Vocational Technical School #287, the future site of Opportunity
Workshop, and possible employment opportunities at the shopping
center and golf course offer a unique setting for this program
model. The proposers also assured us that they would make a
concerted effort to involve the community in their program and
their residents in the community.
The following motion was approved: that the SABSC support Louise
Whitbeck Frazer School's proposal to develop three residences
for the mentally retarded in the Preserve in Eden Prairie, and
encourage the Eden Prairie City Council to consider approving
the concept of three residences connected in a developmental
sequence because of the unique services available in the Preserve
and because of the need for an alternative model for future
comparisons of residential opportunities.
/ will be happy to provide any additional information on this
matter that you deem appropriate.
Sincerely,
PJR:jh
cc: Dr. Robert Kowalczyk
Robin Reich, Department of MA/MR/CD
Glen Anderson, Minneapolis Association
for Retarded Citizens
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission, Human Rights, & City Council
Dick Putnam,
. January 8, 1976
Preserve Association Meeting on January 7, 1976
Presentation of Fraser School Project, Muriel Humphrey
Rdsidences.
Mectim.
Agenda THE PRESERVE ASSOCIATION MEETING
January 7, 1976
AGENDA
FRASER SCPOOL PROPOSAL
I. Open Meeting
Define IL 0. A. Role
introduce Donald Hess, Jr,
0.- Greeting
Developer Position
introductions
John Nelson
Donald Hess, Jr.
Richard Putnam, City Planner, Eden Prairie
Dr. Robert NowaIrcyk, Fraser School
Moderate Question 4, Answer Session John Nelson
Suturnariration
Close Meeting
BACKGROUND
The City Council asked the City staff to bring the Muriel Humphrey Residences
proposal to the Human Rights Commission on December 16 &the South Hennepin
Human Services Council on December 17, 1975. The Council asked that
the groups consider the proposal in light of City Ordinance and the need
for homes fors retarded citizens in Eden Prairie .
The Ewan Rights Commission reviewed the M.H.R. proposal and recommended
its approval by the City Council as a valuable housing opportunity in
Eden Prairie. They also asked the staff to consider changing existing
Ordinance 289 so it would permit construction of the 3 homes. The South
Hennepin Human Services Council endorsed the M.H.R. proposal also as it
provides a high quality program with access to unique services available
in The Preserve and Eden Prairie and as .an alternative model for residen-
tial care opportunities. A letter from Phil Riveness, Executive Director
of the South Hennepin Human Services Council, dated Jan. 5, 1976, explains
their findings.
An article appeared in the Sept;:mner 19th Eden Prairie News covering-the
Hunian Rights meeting of December 16th. Prior to that article The Preserve
Homeowner's Executive Committee had been made aware that the M11.R. proposal
was to be located in The Preserve and that they would be involved early
in the process.
i95-q
Staff REport- M.H.R. -2- Jan. 8, 1976
The Preserve Association held a meeting HOnday, December 22nd at which
time the representatives of MHR presented their proposal. I attended the
meeting and explained the City procedures. At the meeting it was decided
to hold a Preserve-wide homeowner's asociation meeting on January 7th
to explain the NUR proposal and answer questions.
The agenda is . at the beginning of this memo and the summary of the
meeting proceedings follow ;
SUMMARY OF JANUARY 7, 1976 MEETING.
Mr. John Nelson, President of the Preserve Homeowner's Association, opened
the meeting and explained the role of the homeowner's assocation and their
Executive Committee's involvement with the HER program todate. He intro-
duced Don Hess, Planner for the Preserve, who outlined the design review
procedures followed by The Preserve in reviewing the proposal. He also
indicated the position of The Preserve management , that they endorse the
proposal after considerable research and negotiations with the Fraser
School staff.
Mr. Hess introduced the City Planning Director to summarize the process
that has occurred and to outline the steps which the proposal will follow
through the Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
The Planner summarized the steps that have been taken todate which include;
review by the Human Rights Commission , review by the South Hennepin Human
Services Council, presentation to the Preserve Association Executive
Committee , and the meeting presently being held this evening. He stated
no presentation has been made to the Planning Commission or the City
Council and that the meeting this evening is in advance of any official
City meetings.
He outlined the tentative review procedure for the propsoal. with the Planning
Commission meeting to be held on Monday, January 12th to be the first pre-
sentation to the Planning Commission. He indicated the item would be on
the agenda no earlier than 9:30 PM and all interested residents are invited
to attend. He expected the Planning Commission to refer the item to staff
for a report and the item would be continued to the January 26th meeting.
The next step would be to set a public hearing before the City Council
which may occur in February or March , D76.
Mr. Kowalczyk, Executive Director of the 'Fraser School, was introduced
and he read an explanation of the program and request included in the
application for the project ( the development broChnre you received ).
Mr. Bart 'Jordan() , Board member of the Fraser School , presented the
plans for the houses and the site development. He also conveyed experiences
which he has had with his two daughters who are retarded and have gone
through the Fraser School program.
9S
Staff Report- MHR -3- Jan. 8, 1976
He also cited the visit which he had with the two homes run by Mary Wagner
in Farmington , Michigan.
Mary Wagner, Director of the Farmington program, presented slides of the
homes and program which she runs for retarded adults . As background she
explained approximately six years ago she started the group homes idea
as a result of personal experience with her son as a way of improving
his ability to cope with life. Loneliness , rejection glack of friendship
are common problems with retarded young people if they are living at
home isolated from the community. Her attempt was to bring together
retarded young people with similar interests so they might benefit from
the home setting. Her experiences indicated that the program is
very successful in assisting retarded to lead a normal life.
She believes a key to the success to her program and the MHR residences
will be the level and quality of support services offered.
SLides of the homes that Mrs. Wagner runs were shown. The homes were
very large and in residentail areas. She stated that in her six year
experience there has been no probelm with criminal , deviate, or other
anti-social behavior from their residents or the neighbors. In fact
the neighbors have been tremendously helpful in making the program
a success. She stressed that the majority of residents have taken
people who have been tax users and turned them into tax payers through
shelter employment or competitive employment .
Mr. Nelson opened the meeting for questions at this point. The following
summary is my impression of the questions ( questions and concerns are
grouped )
\ Many asked what is a retarded or developmentally disabled
individual
Mrs. Wagner, Dr. Kowalczyk, Mr. Jordano and some parents of retarded
children in the audience tried to explain what the retarded adult living
in group homes would be like. In short they are young adults and adults
that are classified as slow learners and some with physical handicaps
which slow their ability to develop independent living. It has been the
experience of the Fraser and other retarded programs that retarded that
would be eligible for community living are not aggressive , criminally
insane, mentally ill , or anti-social, infact to the contrary they have
become high quality citizens in the community they live.
\ A number of questions related to the deep fears of people concerning
sexual attacts, aggressive behavior,, criminal behavior and that the
retarded would be a dangerous element in the Preserve Community.
This was answered by Mrs. Wagner and Mr. Kowalczyk in that they know of
no samples in their programs or in the Twin City Area where mentally
retarded citizens have committed the feared offenses. To the contrary
the have a high degree of responsibility and perception of right and wrong.
In addition there is a high level of supervision to insure undesirable
traits in a resident would be sighted and properly taken care-of and
placed in other centers.
19610
. Memo- MHR -4- Jan. 8, 1976
\Questions related to how many individuals would be living in one home as
well as the philosophy of Fraser School and the homes.
Mr. Kowalczyk said the residents to supervision ratio would vary which
each of the homes as outlined in the brochure, but that approximately
14 people would live in each home ( including house parents )• He
stressed the philosophy of Fraser School aS discipline , high organ-
ization,and program emphasis.
\Questions of wether or not the MHR residences would be tax exempt and
if they would be paying homeowner's fees.
Jordano stated they would be tax exempt and yes they would pay homeowner
fees at a'xeasonable rate based on population.
\A number of questions regarding;property values , the affect of slowing
development in The Preserve because of the MHR homes, and of what benefit
are the homes to The Preserve.
Answers to these questions are difficult , but the Preserve management had
certainly considered the affect upon property values and the impact upon
future develcpment and do not believe that these were adverse features of
the MHR proposal.
Jordano indicated the retarded residents would be good citizens of the highest
moral and social calibre and would contribute to the community as any
resident in The Preserve would. One resident from The Preserve felt the
project would be of benefit in that it would help her children and other
children understand better what mentally retarded citizens really are and
to eliminate many myths that exist.
\A number of residents expressed concern about safety and the existence of
the homes changing the atmosphere and uniqueness of the Preserve, and
that they did not want retarded citizens living in The Preserve.
\Questions were asked relative to the city ordinance 289 in that would it
permit 36 retarded individuals to live in The Preserve bisid upon the
home care ratio. Also, they asked if the State law would apply to this
davelopment and could the 3 twelve person home be reduced to six pemon
homes.
The City planner explained the intent of the Family Care HOme Ordinance ( 289 )
and that it provides living opportunities for retarded ,handicapped , and
elderly citizens within the City of Eden Prairie subject to certain controls
and standards. He indicated the State law would have to be considered by
the City in its decisions.
Dr. Kowalczyk indicated their program is geared to twelveperson homes with
house parents, and that the six person home would not fit their program
And would not be economical on the site given the cost and size.
At this time in the meeting Mr. Nelson requested questions on how the
Preserve Association and its members might deal with the MHR proposal.
Petitions, straw votes, etc., were mentioned.
At the time / left the meeting no decision had been made
on the project.
1957
APPROVED
EDEN PRAIRIE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MEETING
December 16, 1975
7:30 PM City Hall
. The regular monthly meeting of the Eden Prairie Human Rights Commission
was called to order on December 16, 1975, at 7:30 PM by Chairman Tim.
Pierce.
Regular business was postponed until the January meeting to allow the
commission to hear a presentation by the Fraser School to build 3 group
homes for mentally retarded/developmentally at The Preserve. Contents
of the presentation is contained in the attached report ' Muriel
Humphrey Residences'.
Motion 1
Upon hearing the presentation, Dragseth moved, Palmer seconded, to recommend
approval of the Muriel Humphrey Residences in concept to the City Council.
Motion 2
Palmer moved, Dysinger seconded,to ask the staff to prepare for the City
Council pros and cons in the 3 options involved in granting group homes,
i.e., (1) variance, (2) adding to the ordinance, and (.3 ). zoning
provided in the State Law.
A letter was sent to the Council acknowledging Mr. William's excellent
service to the commission.
ADJOURNMERT.
Dysinger moved, Dragseth seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 PM.
Respectfully Submitted
Mari Dragseth, Secretary
MD:jj
• NO
PROPOSED
KUM. DPW RULE 40: Location of Residences for the Mentally Retarded
(I) Introduction
(a) Philosophy
The purpose of this Rule is to regulate the process of deinstitution-
alization for the mentally retarded in a manner which is fair to citizens
who are retarded and the communities of the State.
(p) Definitions
(1) Community Residential Facility - licensed or publicly funded
group living arrangement, other than a State institution, serving five or
more persons. Community residential facility does not include:
(A) Fanily foster hones licensed under DPW Rule #1.
(B) Nursing homes and boarding care hones licensed by the State
Board of Health under Minnesota Statutes 144.50 to 144.58.
(C) Facilities licensed exclusively as boarding and lodging places
by the State Board of Health under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 157.
(A) Public and private hospitals.
(2) Community Residential Facility for the Retarded - means a com-
munity residential facility consisting of one or more households operating
under a license issued pursuant to DPW Rule 034.
(3) Habilitation - means the range of specialized services required
in assisting persons who are mentally retarded to achieve their maximum po-
tential. Habilitation includes, but is not limited to, educational, voca-
tional, medical, recreational, therapeutic, day activity, and work activity
programs.
(4) Mew License - means the first license issued to a program in a
specific location pursuant to DPW Rule #34. Renewal of a previously issued
license under DPW Rule #34 shall not constitute a new license. Where a li-
cense under DPW Rule #34 has been previously revoked or not renewed for
cause, and application is made for license, it shall be considered a new
license.
(5) City of the First Class - means a city with a population of more
than 100,000 persona.
(6) City of the Second Class - means a city with a population of at
least 20000, but not more than Incym persons.
(7) City of the Third Class - means a city with a population of at
least 10,100, but not more than 20,000 persens.
(3) City of the Fourth Class - means a city with a population of not
more than 10,010 persons.
/159
(II) Policy
(a) Determination of Met Constitutes Excess
i
v
e
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Residential Facilities
(1) The Commissioner shall not issue a new lice
n
s
e
t
o
a
n
y
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
r
e
-
sidential facility for the retarded pursuant
t
o
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
S
t
a
t
u
t
e
s
2
5
2
.
2
8
when the issuance of that license will con
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
t
o
a
n
e
x
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
-
tion of community residential facilities w
i
t
h
i
n
a
n
y
t
o
w
n
,
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
y
,
o
r
county of this State.
(2) The determination of whether or not a con
n
u
n
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
a
-
cility for the retarded shall be given a
new license pursuant to this section
shall be based upon the following criteria:
(A) Except when a facility is granted a s
p
e
c
i
a
l
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
permit by the appropriate local zoning au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
,
t
h
e
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
licensed pursuant to Section 252.28 unless:
(i) In cities of the first class: (as) The combi
n
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
persons to be served by both the proposed f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
residential facilities located within one-eu
a
r
t
e
r
m
i
l
e
r
a
d
i
u
s
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
facility is less than 10e of the total numb
e
r
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
r
e
s
i
d
i
n
g
within that radius; and (bb) The combined n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
t
o
b
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
b
y
both the proposed facility and existing co
m
e
u
n
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
l
o
-
cated within the municipality in which th
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
i
s
t
o
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
in less than 5% of the total rember of othe
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
r
e
s
i
d
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
u
c
h
municipality.
(ii) In cities of the second class: (Se) The combined number of
persona to be served by both the proposed fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
residential facilities located within one-ha
l
f
m
i
l
e
r
a
d
i
u
s
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
facility is less than lee of the total number of other persons residin
g
w
i
t
h
i
n
that radius; and (bb) The combined number
o
f
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
t
o
b
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
b
y
b
o
t
h
t
h
e
proposed facility and existing community
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
the municipality in which the proposed fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
i
s
t
o
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
i
s
l
e
s
s
than 5% of the total number of other person
s
r
e
s
i
d
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
u
c
h
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
y
.
(iii) In cities of the third class: (aa) The comb
i
n
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
persons to be served by both the proposed f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
residential facilities located within a thr
e
e
-
q
u
a
r
t
e
r
m
i
l
e
r
a
d
i
u
s
o
f
t
h
e
proposed facility is less than 10e of the to
t
a
l
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
r
e
-
siding within that radius; and (be) The com
b
i
n
e
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
t
o
b
e
served by both the proposed residential facility and ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
residential facilities located within the m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
y
i
n
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
facility is to be located is less than 5% o
f
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
-
sons residing within such municipality.
(iv) In cities of the fourth class: The combined
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
p
e
r
-
sons to be served by both the proposed faci
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
-
dential facilities located within the county
i
n
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
is to he located is loss than 5e of the total
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
r
e
-
siding within that county.
(v) In unincorporated townships: The combined
n
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
to be served by both the proposed fecility a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
facilities located within the county in wh
i
c
h
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
i
s
t
o
b
e
located is less than ee of the totol number of other persons residi
n
g
i
n
that county.
1940
(E) No facility shall be newly licensed pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes 252.28 unless the habilitative services required by the residents
of the facility are, or will be, available and reasonably accessible to the
facility when it commences operation.
(3) The Commissioner may increase the limitations set in sections
(i)(bb), (ii)(bb), (iii)(bb), (iv), and (v) of (II)(a)(2)(A) in any instance
in which a governmental or quasi-governmental agency determines that the
actual number of persons who would be suitable candidates for community
residential facilities licensable by the Commissioner exceeds 5%. The
Commissioner may increase the limitations only to the actual percentage
of such persons within the town, city, or county.
(4) The determinations required by Section (II)(a)(2)(A) of this
regulation shall be the responsibility of the Department of Public Welfare,
and not of the proposed facility.
ES/gia
1961
H.F.Uo. 319
AN ACT
ClIAPTER No.
•
60
Distributed By
Secretary cf the SENATE •
Room 231, State Capitol
St. Paul, 296-2343
1
2 relating to health) pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
3 zoning regulation of r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
s
f
o
r
n
e
n
t
a
l
l
Y
4 retnrded and physicall
y
h
a
n
d
i
c
a
p
p
e
d
person
amending Hinfo:sota st
a
t
u
L
a
:
1
9
7
4
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
2
5
2
.
2
0
,
6 by adding a subdivisio
n
:
a
n
d
4
6
2
,
3
5
7
,
b
y
a
d
d
i
n
g
7 subdiVisions.
e BE IT ENACTED BY THE LE
G
I
S
L
A
T
U
R
E
O
F
T
H
E
S
T
A
T
E
O
F
H
I
N
N
E
S
0
T
A
1
9 .Section 1. Minnesota
S
t
a
t
u
t
e
s
1
9
7
4
1
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
5
2
,
2
9
.
i
f
10 amended biadding a
s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
t
O
r
e
a
d
i
11 Subd. 3. (1) Ho new l
i
c
e
n
s
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
g
r
a
n
t
e
d
p
u
r
s
u
a
n
t
12 to this section when the
i
s
s
u
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
l
i
c
e
n
s
e
w
o
u
l
d
13 substantially contr
i
b
u
t
e
t
o
en excessive concentration
o
f
14 community residential
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
a
n
y
t
o
w
n
.
15 municipality or cou
n
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
a
t
e
,
16 (2) in deterining uhether a l
i
c
e
n
s
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
i
s
s
u
e
d
17 Pursuant to this s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
n
n
e
r
o
f
p
u
b
l
i
c
IS welfare shall speci
f
i
c
a
l
l
y
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
t
h
e
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
l
e
n
,
s
i
z
e
,
19 land use plan, avai
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
the
20 nunher and size of
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
u
b
l
i
c
and private ccmmumity
21 residential. facilit
i
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
t
o
w
n
,
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
y
o
r
c
o
u
n
t
y
22 in which a licensee
s
e
e
k
s
t
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
e
o
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
.
U
n
d
e
r
n
o
23 circunstanees nay t
h
e
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
e
r
n
e
w
l
y
license any
24 fern-Ste tc this secticn it the
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
w
i
l
l
b
e
1962,
,
H.F.H0. 319
1 within(300 feet)o:: any existing community residential
2 facilitY, unless the appropriate town, municipality or
County zoning authority grants the facility a conditional
4 use or special use permit. The commissioner of public
5 welfare shall establish uniform rules and regulations to
6 implement the Provisions of this subdivision.
1 •. (3) Licenses for co unity facilities and services
8 Shall be issued pursuant to section 245.021.
.9 Sec, 2, Minnesota Statutes 1924, Section 462.357/ 15
10 amended by adding subdivisions to reads
11 Subd. 7. In order to implement the policy of this
12 state that mentally retarded and physically handicapped
13 Persons Should not be excluded by nunicipal zoning
14 Ordinances from the benefits Of normal residential
15 surroundings, a state licensed group home or fester hone
16 serving six or fewer nentally retarded or physically
17 'handicapped persons shall be considered a permitted single
18 family residential use of property for the purposes of
19 zoning.
20 Subd. 8. Unless otherwise provided in any town,
21 municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this
22 SUbdiVision, a state licensed residential facility serving
23 from 7 through 16 mentally retarded or physically
24 handicapped persons shall be considered a permitted
25 multi-family residntial use of property for purposes at
26 Zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority •
27 may require a conditional use or special use permit In order
213 to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility,
29 proVided that no conditions shall be imposed on the homes
30 which are more restrictive than those imposed on other
31 conditions' use or special uses of residential property in
32 the sarc zones, unless the additional conditions are
24 faculty pursuant to this secticn if the facilitY will be
1943
/96y
4
necessary ta protect the health and
:
.
a
f
e
t
:
c
u
t
h
e
r
e
t
i
d
e
n
t
.
2 of the residential f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
l
y
r
e
t
a
r
d
e
d
o
r
t
h
e
3 physically handicapi)e
d
.
N
o
t
h
i
n
g
h
e
r
e
i
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
e
d
4 to exclude or prohibit
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
h
o
m
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
l
y
5 retarded or physica
l
l
y
h
a
n
d
i
c
a
p
p
e
d
f
r
o
m
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
6 if otherwise permitt
e
d
b
y
a
l
o
c
a
l
z
o
n
i
n
g
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
7 Sec, 3. This act shall become
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
t
h
e
d
a
y
following final enactme
n
t
,
• •••
Unapproved
Planning Commission Motion
February 23, 1976
V. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
B. Edenvale 11th Addition, by Zachman Homes and Edenvale Corp., requesting revi-
sion of the previously approved rezoning and preliminary plat. The proponents
request is for rezoning from RN 6.5 to R1-13.5 for construction of 22 single
family homes and preliminary plat approval.
Motion:
Lynch moved, Schee seconded, to close the public hearing and to recommend to the
City Council approval of the Edenvale 11th rezoning and preliminary plat per
the recommendations in the staff report dated 2-19-76 and the engineer's report
dated 2-18-76.
Staff report recommendations:
A. 'Approve Edenvale 11 Addition with the condition that Eden Land Corporation
prepare plans and begin construction of recreation facilities comparable
with other PUD developments.
1. To construct at least one "recreation area" providing game field
space at least 230' x 300 ' .
2. To illustrate on the Edenvale Concept Ma!) where the Edenvale and .
public pathways are to be located and what level they are to be. 3. Young children play area for the Edenvale 11th Addition to reduce
the need for individual home play equipment.
B. Provide setback variances as requested except for the 20 ' front yard
setback remain at 30 feet.
C. That all improvements to pathways', recieat'ion facilities, etc., be assured through a bond or coMpleted before Wilding occupancy.
D. That the approval be based upon the revised site plan.
The motion carried 3:1:1 ( Fosnocht voted nay, Sorensen abstained ).
/966
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
Planning Commission
Dick Putnam, Planning Director & Marty Jessen
February 19, 1976
Eden Land Corporation
Rezoning to 111-13.5 and Preliminary Plat Approval
Attached are copies of documents that have been submitted by Edenvale
or residents. The points made by Mr. Peterson in his February 10th letter
say they will not develop recreational facilities or improve the pathways
any more than their previous plans have committed.
1. The pathway plan for Edenvale indicates a Primary Edenvale
Pathway System to be hard surface and the responsibility
. of the developer and homeowncrs association. Where is
that system?
2. The site plan of the Northwest Area indicates three levels
of recreational facilities, recreation centers ( 2 public
2 private ), 4 recreation areas ( private ), many play lots-
private. Today only 2 playlots exist for the areas 200+ homes.
3. The Vita Parcour is part of the Edenvale Secondary Pathway
system for exercise purposes.
4. The public park improvements needed at the school park site
can only be provided if a school or park bond issue is approved. •
No other sburce of funding exists or is anticipated.
S. That the lack of active recreation space has created a problem
for residents of Edenvales Northwest area. The staff believes
the solution must begin concurrent with further new unit construction.
RECOMMENDATION
A. Approve Edenvale 11 Addition with the condition that Eden Land Corporation
prepare plans and begin construction of recreation facilities comparable
with other POD developments.
1. To construct at least one "recreation area" providing game field
space at least 250' x 300 ' . •
2. To illustrate on the Edenvale Concept Map where the Edenvale and .
public pathways are to be located and what level they are to be.
3. Young children play area for the Edenvale 11th Addition to reduce
the need for individual home play equipment.
B. Provide setback variance7 as requested except for the 20 ' front yard
setback remain at 30 feet.
C. That all improvements to pathways', recreation facilities, etc., be assured
through a bond or completed before building occupancy.
D. That the approval be based upon the revised site plan.
/q61
CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE
CHECK LIST FOR REVIEWING PROPOSED
LAND DEVELOPMENTS
DATE: 2/18/76
DEvELorisErry ; Edenvale llth Addition L.D. WO. 75-Z-22, P-13
LOCATION:
6 Acres Northwest of Woodhill Trail and Edenvale Blvd.
REFERENCE P.U.D. OR PREVIOUS Suncrest Townhouse Development
ZONING AGREEMENT Edenvale PUD 70-4 RES. O.
DEVELOPER: ' Zachman.Homes, Inc. & Edenvale, Inc.
ENGINEER/PL7INBER: Landmark Engineering & Planning
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW:
Preliminary Plat Informational Booklet
dated Dec., 1975. See also Edenvale Inc.•letter dated 2/10/76
PROPOSAL:
The developer is requesting the necessary approvals for the
construction of single-family homes -
1. Land Development .application filed and filing fee & deposit paid
Copy of application forwarded to Watershed District
yes
2.. Processing Schedule:.
a. Planning & Zoning Commission Preliminary 1/12176
b. Park & Recreation Commission
C. Human Rights Commission
d. Planning 'Commission Public Hrg. 2-23,76
e. City Council consideration
. •
f. Watershed District 1-26-76
3. Type Type of Development Single family residential
4. Environmental assessment or impact statement required per Environmental •
Impact. Policy Act of 1973:
No
/96g
- 2 -
. Preselt Zoning RN 6.5
6. Proposed Zoning R1 13.5
Consistent with 'approved P.U.D. or Comp Plan? Ye.;
List variances required & setbacks that apply: DrxelcUr-r-tesaurata:
20' front yard; 5' minimum sideyard with 15' minimum between homes;
density exceeds 2.0/ac 'allowed by T1 .13.5 zoning
7. Project .ZIXOLC . 1.7 6 acres Density 3.6 units per acre
8. Publie.open space and/or. cosh dedication consistent with Edenvale PUB
Private open space
Outlot to be deeded to Edenvale Owners Association
Trail systems & sidewalks Proposed (see 2/10/76 letter from Edenvale, Inc.) ,
Range of lot sizes
t 6,600 S.E. to t 15,000 S.F.
9. Preliminary Building Plans 860 S.F. to 1040 S.F.
10. Representative Soil Borings Not submitted
11. Street System
A. Access to adjoining properties None
P. TYPe
Roadway (Back to Back of Curb)
Private
driveways, no
parking
24
Post no parking signs
Leading' to Cul de sacs 50
28. required
(not over 1000') &
minor residential
Cu]. de sacs loo 78 (no island)
120 98 (with island)
• •
•
Thru Residential (collectors)
& Cul de sacs
over -1000'. 60
32
. /969
MqA 70 44
Parkway 100 28 divided
Fire Road
12
Pathways
12
6
Street grades-max. 7.5%, min. .5%
Concrete curb & gutter required,
Deep strength asphalt design Required
C. Check Cfty's comprehensive street system.
Developer builds 1/2 of parkways at his cost, & R
/
W
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
D. Street Names - try to conform with existing in t
h
e
a
r
e
a
.
A
v
o
i
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
naoes on cul de sacs having eight or less lots.
• Check list of existing street names. . .
Required
E. Private parking lots-136-12 cone C&G and fu
l
l
d
e
p
t
h
a
s
p
h
.
d
e
s
i
g
n
N.A.
F. Street signs-Developer or City installs
12. Parking: (See Ord. #141)
O.K.
Developer pays City costs for
iniElITar65"--
13. Utility Systems:
A. Sanitary Sewer Available .- extension required
•. 1. Service Detail
4" required
2. Service to adjoining property .N.A.
B. Watermain: Available - extension required
1. Check Service Design (20 psi at highest fixtur
e
)
O.K.
2.. Hydrant location-Fire Inspector Maximum Hyd. spading 450'
Cheek. 4-Fi-TiaTaTit location 3. Valving
Pending final design
4. Complianee with fire code Fire inspector to review
5. Service to adjacent property
Provide easement and access for
- future looping te the west.
. i9'10
C. 9orm Sewer & Grading...q9JOAUMLAXAReq#.11alt Wabilitted- -Required
1. Sediment control plan None submitted
2. Skimming & grit control for commercial parking lots N.A.
Suncrest proposal indicated retention
3. Positive outlet for drainage ponds 22,110 al_norr,on Check
further.
4. Avoid excessive grading and tree removal _Er_92and
S. Arrows showing drainage
Not submitted, required
'Accomodate drainage from adjacent properties required
6. Denote drainage area for individual inlets and projected high water
for ponds
Required - Pending final design
7. Keep drainage in gutters, not in center of street Required
8: .Sod drainage swales and steep slopes
•
9. Flood plain encroachment
none
10. Watershed District approval Required
11. DNR approval Not Required
Required
D. Natural Gas & Telephone underground required
, E. Electric (underground) ...Required
14. Street Lights & On-Site Lighting Required
15. Preliminary plat to be submitted to MHD or Henn. Co. if abutting a
State or County Hwy.
No
16. List special assessments levied and pending Assessed: #5858 - trunk Sew/water,
. • $17,876.00. Pending: Street improvement, $7,998.00
17. Re-zoning agreement required yes
Developar's Agreement required yes
Title Abstract for Attorney's review No
/97/
c&'w,,,-143,0 •tJ 1c
EDENVALE, INC.
7766 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, Minn. 55343 • 612/941-5300
February 10, 1976
Mr. Dick Putnam
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Dear Dick:
The following will be in response to the questions raised regarding the
Zachman, Edenvale proposal for 22 single family homes in Edenvale llth
Addition. I hope these will respond to all of the concerns raised by
you and the Planning Commission regarding the proposal.
2schman has been able to successfully respond to a certain market in
Eden Prairie which has not been provided before. He has shown me that
he is able to build inexpensive housing that is satisfying a lot of
people. who have no alternative in Eden Prairie. It is with this in mind
that we are requesting a change from the previously approved double project.
We realize that at some point in time the double project mill again prove
feasible when financing condition change but it happens that this is the
most effective little project in Edenvale to provide inexpensive lots on.
Because of the drainage pattern, utility layout, grading cost, etc., we are
able to cut $2,000 to $3,000 off the lot cost here as compared with any other
project in Edenvale with the exception of Edenvale 10th which averages
about $800 to $2,500 more per lot. However, in the 10th Addition we don't
have the garage option which could save an additional front end cost of
$3,000.
The following conments . are answers to the coneerns raised regarding the
project:
1. We have changed the garage layouts to provide a 5 foot minimum
setback from side lot line. We are also requesting 6 foot sideyard
on homes with no less than 15 feet between houses. We feel that
a 20 foot front setback is a desirable flexibility which would be
desirable on all lots but most important would be 20 foot front
197•
-2-
yard on Lots 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 22. Lots are numbered clockwise
from the southwest corner.
2. We will provide the same landscaping treatment as shown on the double
bungalow project with no less than one 2" caliper tree in each front
yard.
3. We intend to construct a pathway in Outlot A to the northeast corner of
the subdivision. This will eventually lead to the east into the next
subdivision and will loop back to the pathway in Edenvale 12th Addition.
We will add a pathway from the street southwesterly along Edenvale
Boulevard to the point where the path turns north along the west side
of the subdivision. This will allow people to walk down the cul-de-sac
to the path and then proceed to where they want to go. We intend to
construct either a compacted crushed limestone pathway or a bituminous
stabilized pathway in keeping with our overall pathway program. When
the City adopts a policy to construct pathways into existing neighborhoods
and a method to finance these pathways, we will consider conforming to
the standards arrived at. However, we do not have the funds to comply
with the standards desired by the task force and I doubt seriously if
these standards will ever be initiated in secondary pathways.
4. The covenants will be recorded regarding outside storage.
5. Regarding play facilities and recreational areas, I submit the following:
(a) Last fall a play lot was constructed in the northwest corner of
Edenvale 10th Addition. This location was arrived at after consid-
erable discussion with Summerwoods residents who didn't want it
in their back yards. This lot is 1500 pathway feet from the 11th
Addition.
(b) Approximately 600 feet west of this subdivision, Edenvale has
committed to dedicate over 6 acres of land for park purposes. my
feelings are that this should be used as a natural area with a
boardwalk such as Wood Lake area as it is unique in providing an
extremely diverse example of vegetation and trees. This park
could join with another 30 or 40 acres adjacent to it to provide a
beautiful nature preserve in the heart of Eden Prairie.
(c) Approximately 2000 feet from the project and about 2500 pathway
feet from it, Edenvale has committed to dedicate approximately
35 acres for a school park site. Marty Jessen is presently working
on a plan to provide community playfields, including ball diamonds'
and other facilities on this site.
(d) Last fall sic constructed a small ice skating rink About 2000 feet from
the project and the Edenvale Association Open Space and Maintenance
Committee will be planning further improvements to this site this
spring and summer.
'73
• (e) Our Open Space Committee will be seeking other recreational sites
and we will be working to provide these consistent with their
maintenance capabilities as we develop other projects. We contest-
plate no further facilities within the boundaries of this 22 lot
subdivision. With the present financial obligations which we
have, we are not promising or committing to any improvements which
we cannot produce or which the association is unable or unwilling
to properly maintain without outside financial support.
We feel that Edenvale is rich in natural amenities and also .the potential is
there through our park dedication program to provide public recreational
facilities for everyone in the neighborhood.
6. The five tuck under units in the woods will provide the least possible
damage to the woods on the east side. The three lots to the south of
these will require no tree removal at all for hone construction.
Please evaluate these comments regarding this project and convey these thoughts
to the Commissiw: for their next meeting and if. you see any major hangups or
things which miqbt be changed, I'll be happy to meet with you at your
convenience. .
Yours truly,
Donald R. Peterson
DRP/so ,
cc: Marty Jessen
i
approved
Planning Commission Minutes
-4 -
February 9, 1976
E. Edenvale 11th Addition, by Edenvale Incorporated, request for rezoning to
R1-13.5 with lot size variances A preliminary plat approval for approximately
22 lots on 6 acres. The site is located north of the intersection of Woodhill
Trail and Edenvale Boulevard. A continued public hearing.
The planner reported the revised plat was received last Thursday and no staff .
report had been completed on the revised plan but one could be completed by
the next meeting.
Mr. Peterson explained that pathways of limestone would be constructed along the
north and east sides, that no '0' lot line garages would be required, and that a
20 foot front setback is desirable.
Sorensen asked if the pathways would be constructed to the Hikeway/Bikeway Report
• standards. Peterson responded negative and said blacktop paths are too expensive
and most residents of Edenvale prefer natural nathc.
Motion 1:
Bearman moved, Schee seconded, to continue the public hearing to the February 23rd
meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2:
Schee moved, Fosnocht seconded, to recommend a public hearing before the Council
be set at the earliest convenience. The motion carried unanimously.
/975
approved
'Planning Commission Minutes -5- Jan. 26, 1976
E. Edenvale llth Addition,by Edenvale Incorporated, request for rezoning
to R1-13.5 with lots size variances G preliminary plat approval for
approximately 22 lots on 6 acre. The site is located north of the
intersection of Woodhill Trail and Edenvale Boulevard.
The planner referred the Commission to the staff report by Chris Enger.
Pauly asked why the previously approved project was not pursued.
The planner responded that Suncrest Homes Incorporated left the project
and now Edenvale Incorporated is interested in doing something with the land
that is already graded.
Sorensen stated he supports lower cost housing but has difficulty with the
lot sizes and the house/garage, house/garage appearance.
Bon Peterson said he is willing to make some changes as suggested in the
staff report.
lynch felt the garage sacrifice would be acceptable temporarily.
Motion:
Lynch moved, Fosnocht seconded, to continuethepublic hearing to the Feb. 9th
meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
/9')4
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
8950 COUNTY ROAD 44
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55343
January 26, 1976
Mr. Richard Putnam
Director of Planning
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Re: Edenvale 11th Addition
Dear Mr. Putnam:
At the last meeting of the Board of Managers of the Riley-Purgatory
Creek Watershed District, the development proposal for the Edenvale 11th
Addition was reviewed. The Managers expressed concern that adequate safe-
guards be taken by the developer for any necessary site restoration to prevent
erosion from the site due to previously undertaken land alteration activities.
The Managers recognize that no grading and land alteration permit was
obtained from the Watershed District by the developer because, at the time
the land grading activities were done, no permit was required from the
District. Not withstanding this fact, the Managers recommend that the
City of Eden Prairie obtain commitments from the developer that he retain
responsibility for providing adequate erosion control measures on the site
regardless of future ownership of the entire site or subdivided portions
thereof. Obtaining these commitments will provide assurances that necessary
steps will be taken to mitigate any adverse impacts coming from site erosion.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions regarding the
Managers' review and comments pertaining to this site development.
S ncerely,
il?
Allan Gebhard
AG/11c
c: Mr. Frederick Richards
Mr. Don Peterson
All Managers
/977
PLANNING STAFF REPORT: Edenvale 11th Addition
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Chris Enger
THRU: Dick Putnam
DATE: January 22, 1976
DEVELOPER:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
BACKGROUND
Eden Land
6 acres north of the intersection of Woodhill Trail and
Edenvale Blvd.
Preliminary Platting 6, Rezoning from R.M. 6.5 to R1-13.5
with lot size variances, of approximately 6 acres.
The site was previously rezoned for 32 units of Suncrest double bungalows.
The developer states in the proposal brochure that the site has previously
been entirely graded for the Suncrest Project and no further grading will
be necessary.
As the project is proposed it will require the following variances:
1.. Under RI-13.5 zoning maximum density would have to be varied from
2 units/acre to 3.6 units per acre.
2. Minimum lot widths varied from 90 to 18' or an overall average of 54'
3. Minimum side frontyard set backs would be varied from 30' to 20'.
4. Sideyard set backs would be varied from 10 one side, combined sides
25', to zero one side, combined sides 15.
5. Lot size from minimum of 13,500 sq. ft. to an average of 10,200 sq. ft.
6. Under Ordinance 141, one enclosed parking space/dwelling unit is required.
This would have to be varied to allow no garage.
7. Ordinance 141 requires single lane driveways to be paved a minimum of
12 ft. in width. This would have to be varied if the developer is requesting
8 ft. minimum as stated in the covenants.
8. Ordinance 141 requires that drives meet the street at no less than 60, and
be no closer together than 20'. These would have to be varied.
9. Restrictive Covenants should expressly state that all buildings should be
done in conformance with State Building Codes, because of fire codes
relating to building on lot lines. A 1 hour rated fire wall containing no
/972r
-2-
windows would be required on both garages and houses on the side within
three feet of the lot line.
PROS OF THIS APPROACH
1. Since the grading has Already been done, the Watershed District informs
us that no further action is necessary.
2. Don Peterson informs us that since there is such an economical use of
street and utilities, the lots can be offered to Mr. Zachman at a good
price.
3. Mr. Zachman tells us that these units, without the garage, he should
be able to offer at around $38,000. This base price can be compared with
Ban-Con, in the Preserve in Northmark II which started at $39,900.,
now up around $45,000. Northmark Ills probably the most inexpensive
detached single family home in a conventional manner now available in
Eden Prairie.
4. There is a definate need for moderate priced homes.
5. Construction could begin within 30 days after approval.
6. Hopefully, it would allow families who could not otherwise afford a
single family home to live in Eden Prairie, and build their garage when
they could afford it.
CONS OF THIS PROJECT
1. The woods on the east side of the site considered important at the time
of review of the Sunset Townhouses would be greatly reduced. The five
tuck under units would help, but the three units to the south of this
would necessitate removal of trees for; the house, the entire width and
length of a driveway to reach a backyard garage, And the garage. The
The original woods edge would be moved toward the east between 100 and
150 feet.
2. The proposed project of 22 homes is more than one-half mile from the
future school/park site or any developed playground. There appears to
be no provision for this type of open space.
3. The average lot width requires that the houses occur on the lot line with
the garage and driveway occupying the other entire sideyard. This gives a
street scape of house/driveway, house/driveway, house/driveway, with
no greenspace in between.
1919
-3-
4. This platting layout incorporates all of the open space which in the
previous project was to be used for feeder trails to the Edenvale system.
How do people not backing on to the trail system reach it, all of the
previous out lots have been eliminated?
5. With garages not being required it is unrealistic to believe that some
outdoor storage will not occur, thus adding to the general cluttered
appearance of such small lots. At the very least, cars which would
otherwise be stored in a garage will be sitting out next to the house
year round.
6. Lengths of driveways to reach future garage locations are in some cases
in excess of 80 feet.
7. Driveways of some of the lots surrounding the square cul-de-sac come
together at such awkward angles that an accident hazard exists.
8. Nothing is provided for in the covenants to allow a homeowner access
to his neighbor's lot in order to maintain the side of his garage or home.
9. The Planning Staff contacted the Planning Department of the City of
Richfield because of some subdivisions incorporated in Richfield of
similar characteristics directly after World War II. These lots were
about 50'xIS0', many occurring with a I4'-20' alley down the back lot
lines for access to garages. Most of the homes were between 800-900
sq. ft. Some of these old lots never sold and are just now being developed.
Improved lot cost is about $9,000, and homes of between $25,000-$30,000.
are being built. Many of the homes are turned lengthwise on the lot for
more room.
10. Landscaping, shown in the original townhouse proposal is no longer shown.
CONCLUSION
This type of project for the middle thirties to low forties definitely serves an
economic need. However, the way in which the project is proposed would
require modification to make it more desireable. Most of the problems such
as; limited pedestrian access to major trails, cluttered streetscape, drive-
way problems, large amount of tree removal, fire wall requirements, main-
enance problems, etc., can be attributable to tightness. Many of these
problems could be rectified if some lots were deleted and the lots spread
out a little. I realize that this diminishes some of the economical use of the
utilities, but the project was originally designed for tuck under/double
bungalows.
CE:md
/9 ?O
ppproved
Planning Commission Minutes
Jan. 12, 1976
B. Edenvale 11th Addition, by Edenvale Incorporated, request for rezoning'
from POD to R1-13.5 with lot size variances and preliminary plat approval
for approximately 22 lots on 6 acres. The site is located north of
the intersection of Woodhill Trail and Edenvale Boulevard.
Mr. Peterson outlined the site's location and the original approval for
32 bungalow units. He added that no further grading would be needed to
adapt the land to single family.
Mr. Zachman said the houses would be similar to Summerwoods and would
have a garage option. The future garages would be in the rear and the
3 types of homes to be built would be; split entry, split level, and ramblers.
Lynch asked how much the houses would sell for. Zachman responded
approximately $ 36,000.
Peterson stated no homeowner's association other than Edenvale's would
be necessary.
Sorensen asked how outside storage would be controlled. Zachman said documents
are being drafted to control outside storage.'
Motion:
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to continue the item to the January 26th
meeting for a staff report. The motion carried unanimously.
9 8 /
EDEN VALE, INC.
7766 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, Minn. 55343 • 612/941-5300
December 17, 1975
Mr. Dick Putnam
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Dear Dick:
In regard to our application for PUD development plan and preliminary
plat approval for the single family revision to Edenvale 11th Addition,
we are amending our application to also include zoning to the proper
zoning category to accomplish this revision. Please process this also
in the event this is required by the City.
In regard to the provision of storage of miscellaneous materials on
the site, I have consulted with Jim Zachman and we feel that this can
be best controlled through protective covenants filed on the property.
A sample of the proposed draft of covenants is enclosed for your
information. We propose that the option of storage buildings should
be available but also junk storage should be controlled. If an
accessory building is to be constructed then it should be coordinated
with the color and style of the house so it looks like it belongs.
Please process this application to get it to the Planning Commission
as soon as possible.
Yours truly, , „,,
Donald R. Peterson
DRP/so
Enclosures
/4V
PROTECTIVE COVENANTS FOR
EDENVALE 11111 ADDITION
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Part A. Preamble
The sponsor of the development is Zachman Homes, Inc., 7760 Mitchell
Road, Eden Prairie, Mn. and Edenvale, Inc., 7766 Mitchell Road, Eden
Prairie, Minnesota. The property covered by these covenants are Lots
1 through 22, Edenvale 11th Addition.
Part B. Area of Application
The covenants shall apply to all twenty-two lots in their entirety.
Part C. Residential Area Covenants
C-1. All lots are subject to the Edenvale "Declaration of Covenants
and Restrictions" and the owner thereof shall be a member of the
"Edenvale Association" and is subject to the Obligations and benefits
of such membership.
C-2. Building setbacks shall be no less than:
(a) 25' from curb to front of house
(b) 20' from front property line to front of house
(c) side yard setback of 0' one side with total of 15' both sides
(d) garages 0' sideyard
C-3. House plans and locations shall be approved by Edenvale, Inc. or the
Edenvale Architectural Committee. If garages or accessory buildings are
constructed, plans shall be approved by Edenvale, Inc. or the Edenvale
Architectural Committee.
C-4. A concrete or bituminous driveway of at least 8 feet in width and
2" thickness shall be constructed within the area shown on the development
plan and shall extend no less than to the rear line of the house. In the
event the driveway serves a garage within the house structure it shall
extend to the front face of such house.
C-5. Color of houses, garages and acceasory buildings shall be any earth
tone green, browns, greys or natural wood tones. Any other colors must be
approved by Edenvale, Inc. or the Edenvale Architectural Committee.
C-6. Mailbox design shall be approve: by the Edenvale Architectural Commi
t
t
e
e
or Edenvale, Inc.
/9 n
C-7. All exposed concrete or concrete block surfaces s
h
a
l
l
b
e
s
t
a
i
n
e
d
o
r
painted to compliment the exterior color.
C-8. Similar approved siding material shall be used o
n
a
l
l
f
a
c
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
house and garages. Brick, stone or other archit
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
t
r
i
m
m
a
y
b
e
u
s
e
d
to compliment this siding material.
C-9. Accessory buildings may be constructed in the re
a
r
y
a
r
d
.
T
h
e
y
s
h
a
l
l
be located no less than 5 feet from side lot line,
1
0
f
e
e
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
lot line and 10 feet behind the rear line of the
h
o
u
s
e
e
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
.
A
c
c
e
s
s
o
r
y
buildings may be no larger than 8 feet x 10 feet a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
c
o
n
f
o
r
m
t
o
t
h
e
color of the house and garage.
C-10. Trash Containers. No trash or debris shall be le
f
t
o
n
a
n
y
L
o
t
e
x
c
e
p
t
in approved containers. No trash receptacles, or
i
n
c
i
n
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
,
o
r
g
a
r
b
a
g
e
cans shall be located outside of a building unles
s
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
l
y
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
view from off the lot.
C-11. Electrical Distribution. No Lot shall be served
b
y
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
u
n
d
e
r
-
ground electric distribution facilities. Such el
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
be located on or beneath the ground surface. Pol
e
s
,
w
i
r
e
s
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
a
b
o
v
e
ground electrical service distribution facilities
m
a
y
be temporarily installed
during the construction or repair of the undergro
u
n
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
c
a
b
l
e
s
a
n
d
facilities, the grade or contour of the land abov
e
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
s
a
i
d
facilities shall not be substantially increased,
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
changed or altered after installation of the und
e
r
g
r
o
u
n
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
without the written consent of the electric util
i
t
y
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
s
u
c
h
service.
C-I2. Automobile and Recreational Vehicle Stora
g
e
.
N
o
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
,
trailor, or unlicensed motor vehicle may be kept
o
n
a
n
y
L
o
t
e
x
c
e
p
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
a garage and screened from view from off the site.
Part D. General Provisions
D-1. Term. These covenants are to run with the land
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
b
i
n
d
i
n
g
on all parties and all persons claiming under them
.
f
o
r
a
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
f
t
h
i
r
t
y
years from the date these covenants are recorded,
a
f
t
e
r
w
h
i
c
h
t
i
m
e
s
a
i
d
covenants shall be automatically extended for suc
c
e
s
s
i
v
e
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
o
f
t
e
n
years unless an instrument signed by a majority o
f
t
h
e
o
w
n
e
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
l
o
t
s
has been recorded, agreeing to change said covena
n
t
s
i
n
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
p
a
r
t
.
D-2. Enforcement. Enforcement shall be by proceedings
a
t
l
a
w
o
r
i
n
e
q
u
i
t
y
.
against any person or persons violating or attemp
t
i
n
g
t
o
v
i
o
l
a
t
e
a
n
y
covenant either to restrain violation or to recov
e
r
d
a
m
a
g
e
s
.
D-3. Severability. Invalidation of eriny one of these c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
s
b
y
j
u
d
g
m
e
n
t
or court order shall in no ways affect any of the
o
t
h
e
r
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
w
h
i
c
h
shall remain in full force and effect.
/9Fq
-3-
Part E. Attest
Date BACHMAN HOMES, INC.
Witness
Witness James A. Zachman, President
Part F. Attest
Date
EDENVALE, INC.
Witness
Donald R. Peterson, President
Witness
William J. Sims, Jr., Vice. Pres.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
On this day of , 19 , A.D.,*before me, a
Notary Public within and for said County and State personally appeared James A.
Zachman, to me personally known, he did say that he is the President of Zachman
Homes, Inc., the corporation named in the foregoing instrument; that said
instrument was signed in behalf of the corporation by Authority of its Board of
Directors; and said James A. Zachman acknowledged said instrument to be free act
and deed of said corporation.
Notary Public, County
State of Minnesota
My commission expires , 19
I915'
-4-
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
On this day of , 19 , A.D. before me,
a Notary Public within and for said County and State personally appeared Donald R.
Peterson and William J. Sine, Jr., to me personally known, they did say that they
are the President and Vice President, respectively, of Edenvale, Inc., the corpo-
ration named in the foregoing instrument; that said instrument was signed in behalf
of the corporation by Authority of its Board of Directors; and said Donald R.
Peterson and William J. Sims, Jr. acknowledged said instrument to be free act and
deed of said corporation.
Notary Public,
County
State of Minnesota
My commission expires , 19
•
Planning Commission Minutes
Approved
-3- February 9, 1976
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. Th.M. 5 and Co. Rd. 4 Planned Study (PS) Rezoning , consideration of properties
in the northeast, southeast and southwest quadrants of the 4/5 intersection.
The planner reported the Council directed that properties in Planned Study
should be considered as the need arises and it is believed the 4/5 Area
situation warrants consideration.
The planner informed the commission that the Gonyea representatives would
like the City to react to their previous plan.
Michael Thompson, representing Q Petroleum, asked if their property is under
consideration for rezoning to PS. The planner replied affirmative.
Mrs. Ann Kispert asked if their property would be affected by the rezoning.
The planner pointed out that her property is adjacent to the properties
being considered but not included.
Motion:
Schee moved, Dearman seconded, to recommend the Council consider holding a
public hearing on the possible rezoning of the parcels indicated in the
January 29, 1976 letter to property owners ( including Q Petroleum ) to Planned
Study District for 1 year with the option to renew if necessary. The motion
carried unanimously ( Sorensen voted aye with reservations that the rezoning
of the Q Petroleum site is necessary ).
January 29, 1976
Re: Possible Rezoning to Planned Study District
Dear
The City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider properties which
were at one time classified as Planned Study District ( PS ) under City
Zoning Ordinance 135. As you may know your parcel was rezoned to PS
after adoption of Ordinance 135. A provision of the PS zoning . district states;
"Subd. 10.3 Required Conditions.
c.) The ordinance classifying property to PS District shall
stipulate the length of time expected to be required for study;
but in no case shall it be more than one (1 ) year, at the
end of which tire the property shall have been reclassified
or reverted to its former zoning classIfication."
Your parcel reverted to the
District which is explained in Zoning
Ordinance 135 ( attached ).
The Eden Prairie City Council has authorized Brauer & Associates, Planners
to update the City Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was
adopted in 1968 and is the basis of Zoning Ordinance 135. The Guide Plan
update is expected to be completed in about one year . While the City Guide
Plan is under study properties which maybe subject to significantly changing
conditions and pressures are being considered for reclassification to the
PS District . As stated in the PS Section 10 of Ordinance 135, the PS zone
is intended to "Permit an intermediate classification without prejudice. . ."
The attached map illustrates your parcel and the other areas along T.H.5
that are being considered for PS classification by the City Planning Commission.
As specified in Ordinance 135, Subd. 10.4, Initiation;
"Applications for amendment to classify property PS may be initiated
by the Village Council, Planning Commission or petition of affected
property owners."
The Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council regarding
the properties shown on the attached map. To assist the Commission in their
consideration, your input and suggestions are encouraged. The Planning Commission
will consider the PS District rezoning at their February 9, 1976, meeting.
The meeting will he held at the Eden Prairie City Hall, 8950 Eden Prairie Road
at 7:30 PM. If you can not attend the meeting but wish to express your comments,
your letters addressed to M. Donald Sorensen, Chairman of the Planning Commission
will be distributed to the Commission and Council.
19239
• ecl: Ordinance 135
4/5 Map
' DPW
WM
I '
;
"*.
, otti-1-4*
"
— •, , •••• "" • •
,r0
\
71141.. tfrtr tE -7-11! 7.0,41,„ to •
If you have questions please contact me at the Eden Prairie City Hall,
8950 Eden Prairie Road, Minnesota 55343; or call 941-2262.
Sincerely;
44,44.•
aq-vs
Richard Putnam
. Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
February 23, 1976
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 1097
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVER-
TISEMENT FOR BIDS ON PROJECT
I.C. 51-274
WHEREAS, the City Engineer, through Rieke Carroll Muller, Assoc.,
as prepared plans and specifications for the following improvement, to wit:
I.C. 51-274, street and utility improvements
for areas F and G of the Preserve Commercial Plan
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto
and made a part hereof, are hereby approved.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the
official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise-
ment for bids upon the making of such improvement under
such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement
shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to
be done, shall state that bids will be opened at 10:00
o'clock A.M. on Friday, April 2, 1976, and considered
by the Council at 7:30 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday, April B,
1976, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no
bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk
and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond
or certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of
the amount of such bid.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Franc, Clerk
1991
February 26, 1976
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEP/N COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 1082
RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION,
ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS & PREPARATION
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUB-
LIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE RED ROCK HILLS
2ND ADDITION, I.C. 51-285
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
1. The owners of 100% of the real property abutting upon and
to be benefitted from the proposed sewer, water and street
improvements in the Red Rock Hills 2nd Addition, I.C. 51-285,
at an estimated total cost of $140,000, have petitioned the
City Council to construct said improvements and to assess
the entire cost against their property, per their petition
letter dated January 30, 1976.
2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, and upon recommendation
of the City Engineer, said improvements for Red Rock Hills
2nd Addn., I.C. 51-285, are hereby ordered and the City
Engineer, with the assistance of Houston Eng. Co. shall pre-
pare plans and specifications for said improvements.
3. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the City Clerk is hereby
directed to publish a copy of this resolution once in the
official newspaper, and further a contract for construction
of said improvements shall not be approved by the City Council
prior to 30 days following publication of this resolution
in the City's official newspaper.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on .
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk .
/993
John C. Houston
13009 Diamond Path West
Apple Valley, MN 55124
January 30, 1976
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55343
Subject: Red Rock Hills 2nd Addition
Mayor and Council:
In accordance with recent discussions among Messers. John Houston and
Carl Jullie and City staff officials, we are henby petitioning that the
City of Eden Prairie advertise for bids and install the subject project
with City bond financing in accordante with the plans and specifications
on file with and approved by your engineering department and the State
Health Department.
The total estimated cost of the project, in accordance with the enclosed
engineer's estimate, is as follows:
Construction Costs $111,328
Plus 9% for City Eng. and Adm. Exp. 10,020
Plus approx. 17% for Contingencies, 18,652
Surveying, Inspections, etc.
Estimated Gross Project Cost
$140,000
We request that the project costs be assessed against the benefitted
property, all of which is owned by us, and that a public hearing not
be held. We further request that the assessments be levied for a five
year period.
The problem of bonding to assure payment of tne assessments as they come
due has been raised in recent discussions with City staff. It is requested
that the personal guarantee of John Houston be accepted by the City in lieu
of a bond for the following reasons:
1. Mr. Houston's personal assets are more than adequate to guarantee
payment of the assessments.
2. Mr. Houston has a past record of promptness in meeting his obli-
gations and responsibilities in all of his endeavors.
/99q
Mayor and Council, City of Eden Prairie
January 30, 1976
Page 2
3. We believe the time is right now to proceed with development
of the 2nd Addition so the building sites will be available
In 1976.
4. It is very difficult tor a bonding company to underwrite a
bond of this nature without becoming intimately involved in
the project and its financing.
5. The cost of bonding, if it could be obtained, would be an
unnecessary and non-productive cost which would ultimately
have to be passed on the homeowner/consumer.
6. If the City requires bonding, but it cannot be secured regard-
less of cost, the alternatives would be to either: a)seek
conventional financing which would be at substantially higher
Interest rates than City bond financing. The costs of conven-
tional financing would have to ultimately be passed on to the
homeowner/consumer and could have an adverse impact on the
economic competiveness of the project or b)if conventional
financing is not feasible (it is a well-known fact that lending
institutions are not currently interested in land development
loans) because of excessive financing costs and/or lack of
availability, tne development of the 2nd Addition would have
to be postponed.
7. Proceeding with the development of the Red Rock Hills 2nd
Addition as outlined herein will, we believe, be in the best
interests of all concerned, including the City ot Eden Prairie
and its present and future residents at little, if any, finan-
cial risk to the City.
Your favorable consideration of this request will be appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
/99.5'
n51.4.e.iittX.)
C. Houston LaOretta D. Pidcock
angsueekts 7.4.1.1111A‘C
PROPOSAL FORM
RFD ROCK HILLS 2ND ADDITION
Schedule A, Sanitary Sewer
Item
No. Description
A-1 8" Sewer 0-8' Deep
Est.
Unit Quantity
L.F. 330
Unit
Price Arount
$ 10.00 $ 3,300.00
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
A-9
A-I0
A-11
A-12
A-13
8" sewer 8-10' Deep L.F.
8" Sewer 10-12' Deep L.F.
8" Sewer 12-14' Deep L.F.
8" Sewer 14-16' Deep L.F.
6 ,11 Sewer 16-18' Deep Us.
811 Sewer 13-20' Deep L.F.
8" Sewer 20-22' Deep L.F.
8" Sewer 22-24' Deep
L.F.
Standard Manhole (0-8' Deep) Each
Extra Depth Manhole over 8' L.F.
8' x 8' x 4' Rye Each
4" CISP Service Pipe L.F.
TOTAL AMOUNT SCHEDULE A
440 $ 11.00
S 4,840.00
240 $
12.00 $ 2,880.00
40 $
13.00 s 520.00
40 $
14.00 $ 560.00
30
$ 15.00 s 450.00
30 S 16.00 r 480.00
30 $ 17.00 e 510.00
Y
20 $ 18.00 $ 360.00
4 $ 700.00 $ 2,800.00
--.
3 $ L00.00 e„ 300.00
24 s 35.00 840.00
775 4.00 3,100.00
$ 20,940.00
ABS PVC VCP Sewer Pipe will he used (circle one).
PF -2 /444
•4.
FMPD:744.
REL RC g ILLS 2ND ADDITION
Schedule 8, qatermain
P.m Est. Unit
No. Dc,ncription Unit Quantity Price Alael.mt
8-1 6" DIP Watermain L.F. 1,466 $ 10.00 $ 14,660.00
8-2 Hydrant & 6" Gate Valve Each 2 $ 750.00 _. $_ 1,500.00
8-3 6" Gate Valve & Cox Each 2 s 250.00 S 500.00
G-4 Fittinys for DIP Lb. 1,500 $ 0 .50 $ 750.00
8-5 3/4" x 1" Corp. Stop Each 25 $ 30.00 $ /50.00
8-6 1" Curb Step & Gox Each 25 $ 56.00 $ 1,400.00
1" Copper Service Pipe L.F. 746 $ 3.00 $ 2,220.0u
TOTAL AMOUNT SCHEDULE C $ 21,780.00
Schedule C, Stem Sewer
Lem
Descrintion
Install 18" RCP Sewer,
Class III, (0-8' Deep)
To Ce Furnished by Owner
Furnish and Install
18" RCP Sewer, Class II
(0-8' Deep)
Sa1va3e and Install
18" RCP End Section
Est. Unit
Unit Quantity Price Amulit
$ 12.00 $ 1,248.00
104
C-2
C-3
L.F.
L.F.
Each
206
$ 20.00
4,120.00
1
$ 150.00
150.00
C-4 Standard Catch Basin Each
1
$ 600.00
600.00
C-5 Grouted Riprap C.Y. . 5 $ 50.00 $ 250.00
&Install Yard Di -ain Each
1 $ 900.00 4 900.00
wice 'ulecti " TOTAL AMOUNT SCHEDULE C
$ 7,268.00
PF-3
11:c1",!',AL Fo,N
RE0 ROU 51LLS 2ND ADDITIuN
Schedule D, Street Improvements
It ,,m v,;!D Spec.
No. !(%. Description
' D-1 21:i1.513 Clear and Grub Right of
Way
D-2 21E. O1 Comion Excavation
A..
Est. Unit
Unit Quantity Vrice .00nt
Lump 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
Sum
C.Y. 19,000 $ •1.00 19,000.00
0-:1 2105.507 supyrade Excavation C.Y. 2,00u $ 1.0 $ 3,000.00
. D-4 2r5.521 Granular Borrow (LV) C.Y. 2,000 $ 3.50 5_7,000.00
D-5 2331.504 Bituminous Material Ton 29 $ 150.00 $ 4,350.00
for Mixture, AC-1
0-6 2331.514 Base Course Mixture . Ton 130 $
D-7 2341.504 Bituminous Material Ton 2C $
for Mixture
0-3 2341.503 Ditnmincus Uearing
Ton 497 8.00 $ 3,976.00
Course Mix
D-? 2357.502 Bituminous Material
for Tack Coat
Gal. 190 1.00 A 190.00 A
V-10 2506.522 Adjust Frame and Each 3 $ 75.00 t , 225.00
Ring Castiny
0-11 romtablo Concrete L.F. 2936 $ 4.00 $ 11,744.00
Curb and Gutter
(EP Spec. R-7)
6-12 2!,75.5U2 Seed, MiXturea ' Lb. 100 $
5.00 $ 500.00
0-13 2I.75.r:05 Sodding S.Y. 605 $ 1.00 $ 605.00
D-14 EN.6 -79 Adjust Gate Valve Box Each 1 $ 75.00 S 75.00
TOTAL AMOUNT SCHEDULE D $ 61,340.00
101AL AMOUNT SCEEVULE A
TOUL AMOUNT SCHEDULE R
TOTAL iiMOUNT SCHDULE C
Ma AMOUNT SCHEDULE D
VAUD TOTAL BID AMCUNT
$ 20,940.00
S 21,780.00
$ 7,268.00
$751,340.00
$ ljl t 328.00
1.50 $ 5,475.03
150.00 $ 4,200.00
All Sci.Lpuls must k:.! bid. Amrd Contract will be t..aLed
/9Cit
COMMERCIAL STATE BANK IN ST. PAUL;g MINNESOTA
PERSONAL STATEMENT
'4„,„ John C. Houston Engineer - Developer - Builder
P 4X 51r.74 ositions
to thn piupo:n of procurin g credit horn time to time and/or renewals a extensions of existing eterAte, I Wt. and guarantoe that th• fahowing statement of condition
lalty and trul, sets lush rny (mania! condithan on the dote of this statement, which you con oonsider as continuing to be full end oicurroto unto,' notice of
shone, is given you. I agree to notify y ou promptl y of an y change tierd matorloll y reduces my pecuniery responsibilit y . In considnuslion of gm g olfing of
such credit, I og ee that III o f to y tim e am in a failin g condition no become insolvent, or commit on act of bankruptc y, or If an y cri the reprosaltatons made
below pi.* to km untrue, or if I foil to notif y y r... of on y eateries' chonge as before agreed; Iken and in either such case all rny obli gations, direr.. end/or Mx
direct, held b,• you skoll immediatel y become due and pa yable without demand or notice, cod an y deposit tooth.. property In your passestion, ray In...di-
atel y be opplied on any indebtedness owing to roe, nod I hereby givoo continuing lion owl such deposit and *Ow property flan time to time to secure:ell
said obligations bald by you.
January 1 Date of Statemants Reath
• ASSETS LIAD1LITlES
•
Cosh on bond and in y our bank -
Cosh to .11ate honks -........ ....... .. .......... -----....
Loan. Due Ma ..... . ... ' ' --- .. -
First $.!OftGCGO Loan. ROCail,CLIO *
10 000 00
Hetes Po y cble - (Unsccurod) ' .
(Listen rovers. side) .
Not,. Po y abla . (Securcd) „--
(List on reverse fide)
Accounts Po y chle .-.....-.... ... .. — ...
Trust Funds at my Zisposal .
Owing for interest, Rant, etc.. . . ......
Mortgages Duo -- . -
(List on re..•roe side)
Chattel ido:t gag os . s
Othor Debts - (its:salsa)
Misc. Credit Cards etc.
7 744 26
112 993 59
Harecstesi - .. „ ..... •
Other Roof Estate ifolchn g e - .
(List on sensors* Oda)
Listed 54..sks cod Cznes „ ........
(Litton rousse* :Ado)
Othar Stusbs cnd Roods . - . ...
Cosh Volue Life insurance ......... ------- ...... —
Pr:Ts:nor Propert y - -.
Other A ssurs - (Itonsise) . ... -
Houston Engineering
7500k)
15 000 00
34
00
15
122
601
505
GOO 00 1 11 032 09
84 477 75
Red Rock Hills • 157 490 20
John 11 George Houston (partners) 9 155 84 ,
Total Liabilities....
tot Worth _. - . -- .... .
1 $ 00 00
11:1
621
00 000
000 00 TOTAL ASSETS: 621 000 00 Total Liebilitlos cad Net Werth: .
13009 Diamond Path Vest, Apple Valley, • Principal - Owner
Your
1976
Annual Wary: $ lone
Professional Income. $ 20 1 000.00
612.91 Rantals• $
Stocks and Uonds- $ 910.64
00,, $ 45,000.00
ruirrvittrtn:
100,000.00 •
lioneficiery s
Wife
Wife's NOMO No. Children . 3
Insurance. Real Estate: Fire:
60,000.00
Ineuroncs • Reel Eotate: Other: $ 500/300/100
Specif y an y of oboe. osset• or liabilities pled ged es, of secared b y, collotorol and state collateral:
aq_3
bleaCt Pit se fusnish in down ALL the Information on tuvorue olds. end si gn statensont. Pvf..4
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT OF
ST. JOHN'S WOOD SEVENTH ADDITION
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
Roger Ulstad, City Manager
Carl Jullie, City Engineer
February 26, 1976
St. John's Wood Seventh Addition
PROPOSAL: D. H. Gustafson and Associates, Inc., is requesting approval of
of the Final Plat of St. John's Wood Seventh Addition. This is a
multi-family residential plat located west of Baker Road and south of
62nd Street in Section 3.
HISTORY: Zoning to P.M 2.5 was finally read and approved on March 14, 1972,
per City Ordinance No. 164.
The Preliminary Plat was approved on September 25, 1973, per Council
Resolution No. 768.
VARIANCES: A variance from City Ordinance No. 93, Sec. a, Subd. 1, waiving
the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the
Preliminary Plat and filing of the Final Plat is necessary. Approval
of this variance is recommended because the developer has proceeded
with the project in a reasonable and efficient manner.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
will be available to all areas of the plat. All streets will have
concrete curb and gutter and full depth design bituminous surfacing.
Outlet A and Outlot C will be dedicated through the plat as utility
easements. Future extension of the Nine Mile lA trunk sewer is
planned along the south property line of this Plat, between St. John's
Drive and Baker Road.
Outlet B is presently used as a temporary ponding area for storm
water. This pending area will be necessary until a positive storm
sewer outlet is constructed by the City.
An easement for a temporary turnaround will be required at the south-
erly terminus of St. John's Drive. This easement would be vacated
when the roadway is extended southerly.
.200
- 2 -
PARK DEDICATION: There will be no land dedicaiton for public park or
open space purposes within the Plat. A reasonable cash contribution
in lieu of land, per City Ordinance No. 230, can be based on 15% of the
assessor's full and true value of the land being subdivided as pre-
viously required under Ordinance No. 93. This method has been used
for all additions of St. John's Wood. The contribution for this
addition would be $1,920 based on the land area of the Plat excluding
the Drive.
BONDING: Sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, concrete curb and gutter
and paving have been completed by the developer. Therefore, bonding
for utilities will not be required. A landscaping bond will be re-
quired.
RECOMMENDAITON: Recommend approval of St. John's Wood 7th Addition, subject
the contents of this report and the following:
1. Approval by the Hennepin County Highway Department.
2. Receipt of fee for City Engineering services in the
amount of $480.
3. Satisfaction of cash payment in lieu of park dedication
requirement.
4. Bond for landscaping.
CJJ:kh
February 26, 1976
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 1096
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
OF ST. JOHN'S WOOD SEVENTH ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of St. John's Wood Seventh Addition has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances
of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for St. John's Wood Seventh Addition is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated February 26, 1976.
B. Variance is herein granted from City Ordinance No. 93, Sec. 8,
Subd. 1 waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the
approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat
as described in said Engineer's Report.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy
of this Resolution in the office of the Register of Deed and/or Regis-
trar of Titles for their use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3. 1
D. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat.
E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon com-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Franc, Clerk
2C049,