HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/07/1976 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 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 Director John Frane; Director of
Community Services Marty Jessen; Engineer
Carl Jullie; Joyce Provo, Recording
Secretary •
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL •
I. APPRDVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES +—
A. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held Tuesday, Page 2965A
ut 1C,1976.
B. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held Tuesday, Page 2965G
August 24, 1971.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Request from The Preserve to preliminary plat Area H into Page 2966A
2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Regional Service_ The
site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner
Boulevard and U. S. 169. (Ordinance No. 340 and
Resolution No. 1184).
B. Request from Crosstown Baptist Church to rezone approximately Page 2996
9 acres from kural to Public. The site is located at
6SOO!Laker Road, west of a�ker Road, and south of St. John
Woods. (Ordinance No. 323).
C. Southwestern Eden Frairie,_possible rezoning of the I-General Page 3001
located in Southwestern Eden Prairie to Planned Study.
Ordinance No. 341)
D. Request from Robert Nygren for preliminary platting and Page 3005A
rezoning_to R1-13.5 for 8 lots. The site is located south
of Bidden Fonds on Valley View Road between Park View Lane
and the east plat boundary of Hidden Ponds. (Ordinance No.
323 and Resolution No. 1I33).
IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinancc No. 334, rezoning the 10 southerly Page 3011
lots of Ferect Knolls 2n Addition from RI-22 to R1-13.5.
Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,September 7, 1976
IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS (continued)
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 283, rezoning 13 lots in Village
Woods 2nd to R1-13.5, and Resolution No. 1179, approving final
plat.
V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOAROS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members 6
B. Report of City Manager
1. 1977 City Budget
C. Report of Planning Director
1. Request by Hustad and Windsor Development Corporation for Page 3021
varied side yard setback standards for Prairie East 1st
Addition in the Prairie East PUD.
2. Request by Hustad & Windsor Development Corporation for Page 3024
2 foot side yard encroachments for fireplaces on
approximately 15 lots, Prairie East 2nd Addition, in the
Prairie East PUD.
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Mini-Rinks Page 3027
2. Metro Revised Capital Improvement Program Page 2949
3. Forestry Task Force Report (continued from 8/10/76) Page 3032
E. Report of City Engineer
io-
1. Receive petition and order feasibility report for utility Page 3034
and street improvements in Forest Knolls 2nd Addition,
I. C. 51-294. (Resolution No. 1180) P
2. Resolution No. 1181, approving layout No. 6 revised 12/4/75 Page 3036 !;for CSAH 62 (Crosstown Highway) Project No. 6839.
3. Final plat approval for Edenvale Family Recreational
Center (Resolution No. 1I86
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List Page 3040
VI. NEW BUSINESS
V.II. ADJOURNMENT.
4
i,<
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL •
TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1976 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel
Billy Bye
Joan Meyers
Tim Pierce
Sidney Pauly
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Uisted
City Attorney Harlan Perbtx
City Engineer Carl Julli e
Director of Community Services Marty Jessen
Recording Secretary Joyce Provo
INVOCATION: William Bonner, Resident of Eden Prairie
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Meyers, Pierce and Penzel present; Bye and Pauly absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the agenda under the "New
Business" category:
A. D?scusston on intersection of County Road 1 and T.H. 169.
B. Communication from Betty Johnson relative to establishing August 31, 1976
as the date for the forum to identify public health needs and priorities
for Eder Prairie,
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to approve the agenda as corrected
and pui.:iished. Motion carried unanimously.
PI MINT.71 '3 or THE RECULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1976.
Pg. 2, para. 4, last line, strike "to".
Pg. 7, 2nd para., 2nd line, strike "structure" and insert "proposal, among which
were change in parking location to a street exposure, character of the
structure from multi-roof line approach to a monolithic apartment block,
and elimination of sight access to Neill lake from Neill Lake Road".
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Penzel, to approve the minutes of the Council
meeting held July 27, 1976 as published and corrected. Pierce and Penzel voted "aye".
Meyers abstained. Motion carried.
Council Minutes - 2- Tues.,'August,10,'1976
III. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS •
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 298, Olympic Hills, rezoning from Rural to
RM 2.5.
Don McGlynn and Mike Adams, Olympic Hills, answered questions of Council members',
As a rezoning request requires 4 affirmative votes and there being only
3 Council members present, the following motion was made:
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to continue this rezoning request
to the August 24, 1976 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 304, rezoning for Olympic Hills from Rural to
RM 6.5.
As a rezoning request requires 4 affirmative votes and there being only
3 Council members present, the following motion was made:
•
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to continue this rezoning request
to the August 24, 1976 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 339, relating to the regulating of certain
businesses and issuing license by the City of Eden Prairie and amending
Ordinance No. 3.
Council members directed the City Attorney to make several changes in
Ordinance No. 339 by the 2nd reading.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to approve the 1st Reading
of Ordinance No. 339, relating to the regulating of certain businesses and issuing
license by the City of Eden Prairie and amending Ordinance No. 3. Motion carried
unanimously.
IV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council members
No reports.
B. Report of City Manager
No report.
C. Report of City Engineer
1. Consider bids received for street improvements on Preserve Boulevard
and Anderson Lakes Parkway, 1.C. 51-282.
City Engineer Jullie spoke to communication from Suburban Engineering
296�1
Council Minutes - 3- Tues.,August 10, 1976
1. Consider bids received for street improvements on Preserve Boulevard
and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I.C. 51-282. (continued)
dated August 9, 1976, explaining that the low bid was submitted by M. G.
Astleford Company to the amount of$137,674.90,which also includes
a provision for a bituminous walkway along Preserve Boulevard,
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to adopt Resolution No.
1175 accepting the bid and authorizing awarding of the contract to
M. G. Astleford Company in the amount of$137,674.90, and to amend
Resolution No. i175 by striking "East-West Parkway" and inserting in
lieu thereof "Anderson Lakes Parkway". Motion carried unanimously.
2. Administrative Land Division for Harold Knutson property at 9800 Eden Prairie
Road.
City Engineer Jullte spoke to his memo dated August 5, 1976, and answered
questions of Council members. Mr. Knutson also made himself available
to answer questions of Council members.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to grant an administrative land.
division for the Harold Knutson property located at 9800 Eden Prairie Road
as outlined in City Engineer's memo dated August 5, 1976. Motion carried
unanimously.
3. Resolution for Prairie Village Mall sewer hookup.
City Engineer Jullie spoke to Resolution No. 1173.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No.
1173, approving sewer hookup for Eden Prairie Village Mall. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. Resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of
proposed 1976 special assessment roils and setting a hearing date of
September 14, 1976.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to adopt Resolution No.
1176, declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of 1976
special assessment rolls and setting hearing date of September 14, 1976.
Motion carried unanimously.
5. Confirm previous action vacating W. 78th Street, east of T.H. 169 at the
"Wye" location.
•
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Penzel, to adopt Resolution No. 1172,
vacating a portion of West 78th Street. Motion carried unanimously.
0296: C
Council Minutes - 4 - Tues.,August 10, 1976
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Park Improvement: Forest Hills, Prairie View, Round Lake Park.
Director of Community Services Jessen spoke to the Staff Report
dated July 29, 1976.
Meyers questioned how much of this requested $22,061 would come
out of the Park Bond Fund, and how much from the General Fund? Jessen
suggested all the money should come from the Park Bond Fund.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the
recommendation of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission
as outlined in the Staff Report dated July 29, 1976, and authorize the
expenditure of $22,061. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Cedar Hills Golf & Ski
Director of Community Services Jessen spoke to the memo dated
August 6, 1976.
Meyers questioned if the management of Cedar Hills Golf& Ski area
would be willing to let our Finance Director review their balance.
Jessen replied that the City already has copies of such material.
He further explained that the Watershed District might have some interest
and maybe even the Airports Commission; not sure if this project would be•
completely eligible for Community Development Funds.
City Manager Ulstad explained that if the Council is interested at all,
the Council could authorize the expenditure of $600 - $800 to appraise
the property. In the interim3Staff could meat with Ehlers on alternative
ways of financing.
Pierce questioned if we can get Cedar Hills to agree pending our report
on the $800,000.00 figure. Jessen responded he was sure Cedar Hills
would agree to this request
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to authorize staff to expend
from $600-$800 for an appraisal of the Cedar Hills Golf& Ski property and
investigate any and all ways of financing. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Report of Dutch Elm Disease
Director of Community Services Jessen acknowledged the 6-point motion
adopted by the City Council on July 27, 1976. He further stated that the Task
Force has been established and has had one meeting to-date. At the first
meeting the Task Force had a review of legal restraints. Jessen further
explained that a Staff Report would be completed by the September 7th Council
meeting.
.29G50
Council Minutes - 5
Tues.,August 10, 1976
3. Report of Dutch Elm Disease
Mrs. Mary Sethre, 16150 North Hillcrest Court, requested the names
of the members on the Forestry Task Force. lessen responded the
Forestry Task Force consisted of the following members: Dean Holasek,
Mrs. Newell Liebler, Wally Hustad, Dick Anderson, Robert Gartner,
Keith Waters, Walt Carpenter and Bruce Armstrong.
Mrs. Sethre further expressed her interest in the use of DDT to
prevent Dutch Elm Disease and questioned if we should go to the
Legislature to change the law which prevents the use of DDT.
Rick Root, 16001 Alpine Way, explained that he had contact with the
University of Minnesota and was told after August it doesn't help to
treat the trees. lessen responded this is true in a normal year, but that I
any time trees have leaves, the treatment is effective.
Mr. Root expressed his interest in forming a group of volunteers to help
others take down their diseased trees, and that he would be willing to
be one of these volunteers. He further asked if a member of the City
staff could make himself available to show the volunteers how to cut the 1
diseased trees down. Penzel responded that a City staff person could
make himself available to give assistance from an advisory standpoint.
The Council directed Mr. lessen to come back to the Council on September:
7th with a completed Staff Report.
E. Report of Finance Director
1. Resolution No. 1174, appointing election judges for the Primary Election.
Penzel suggested Finance Director Frane contact all political organizations
to make sure we have enough people to help with the election.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No.
1174, appointing election judges for the Primary Election. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Payment of Claims Nos. 2147 - 2243.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to approve the Payment
of Claims Nos. 2147 - 2243. Roll Call Vote: Meyers, Pierce and Penzel
voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
3. Clerk's License List.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the Clerk's License
List dated August 10, 1976. Motion carried unanimously.
.29G E
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues.,August 10, 1976
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion on intersection of County Road 1 and T.H. 169.
Pierce questioned what we could do about the frustrating situation on
County Road 1 and T.H. 169.
City Manager Ulstad explained that he had talked to Bill Crawford, Minnesota
Highway Department, about 10 months ago regarding this situation. At this
time the State is working on a proposal for that intersectionjbut Mr. Ulstad
could not give a date on when we are supposed to receive this proposal. The
State has a list of about 40 locations they are presently studying.
•
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to direct the staff to request
the Commissioner of Highways to reduce the speed limits on T.H. 169,
clearly mem tee median on the curve south of flying Cloud Airport, and
construct signals on T.H. 169 and County Road 1. Nation carried
unanimously.
B. Communication from Betty Johnson relative to establishing August 31, 1976
as the date for the forum to identify public health needs and priorities
for Eden Prairie.
City Manager Ulstad spoke to the memo from Betty Johnson dated August 9,
1976.
The Council requested the following be extended invitations: Public Safety,
Human Rights Commission, School Nurse, P.R.O.P., Jaycee's, Lion's Club,
Vo-Tech, Churches, and Methodist Hospital.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to set August 31, 1976 as the •
date for the forum to identify public health needs and priorities for Eden Prairie,
to be held at the Eden Prairie City Hall at 7:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to adjourn the meeting at 9:18 PM.
Motion carried unanimously.
.29GF
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1976 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel
Billy Bye
Joan Meyers
Tim Pierce
Sidney Pauly
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad
City Attorney Harlan Perbix •
City Engineer Carl Jullie
Recording Secretary Joyce Provo
Chief Building Inspector Wayne Sanders
INVOCATION: Reverend David Nelson, St. Andrew Lutheran Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the agenda under the "New
Business" category:
A. Changing the date of the $3,000,000.00 Bond Sale from September
7th to e5 ptember 14th.
B. Request from the School Board to set a joint meeting for
September 16, 1976.
C. Addition to the Clerk's License List.
D. Report on Edengate matter.
E. Public Hearing for Schooner Boulevard and Hwy. 494.
F. Oiling on certain sections of unfinished gravel roads.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pauly,to approve the agenda as corrected
and published. Motion carried unanimously. •
II. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1976.
Pg. 2, paragraphs 4, 7, and B add "Motion carried unanimously."
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the minutes of the Council
meeting held August 3, 1976 as published and corrected. Pierce, Pauly, Bye
and Penzel voted "aye"; Meyers abstained. Motion carried.
z96cG
Council Minutes - 2 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
III. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 298, Olympic Hills, rezoning from Rural to
RN 2.5.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to approve the 2nd Reading
of Ordinance No. 298, Olympic Hills, rezoning from Rural to RM 2.5.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 304, rezoninqfor Olympic Hills from Rural
to RM 6.5.
Meyers requested that the word "unit" be deleted on page two, line 1, of the
rezoning agreement.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the 2nd reading
of Ordinance No. 304, rezoning for Olympic Hills from Rural to RM 6.5.
Motion carried unanimously.
C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 339, relating to the regulating of certain
businesses and issuing license by the City of Eden Prairie and amending
Ordinance No. 3.
MOTION: Meyers moved to amend Ordinance No. 339 on the 2nd page, 2nd line,
strike "booth" and insert in lieu thereof "room", seconded by Bye. Motion
carried unanimously.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to approve the 2nd reading of
Ordinance No. 339 as amended, relating to the regulating of certain
businesses and issuing license by the City of Eden Prairie and amending
Ordinance No. 3. Motion carried unanimously.
D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 2B3, rezoning 13 lots in Village Woods 2nd to
Ri- 3.5, and Resolution No. 1179, approving final plat.
City Manager Ulstad explained that he and City Engineer Jullie had met with
the proponents over the past few days and requested Jullie outline the
concerns.
City Engineer Jullie stated that Village Woods 1st Addition has been platted
into 28 lots. Mr. Zachman is now requesting to add the 2nd Addition which is
13 additional single family lots. The primary problem involves the extension
of the East-West collector road over to Mitchell Road. In the original
approval, it was envisioned this road would be in place in a temporary manner •
so all traffic would not be sent on to Hiawatha Avenue. The Planning Commission
did recommend that a temporary construction road be provided so vehicles
involved during the construction phase would have another route other than
Hiawatha Avenue. He further stated staff has met with Mr. Zachman and
Mr. Siefert, who was the original owner of approximately 18 acres of the project.
Jullie explained that it is not possible to spread costs of extension against
the 13 lots and that Mr. Zachman and Mr.Seifert seem to have made a reasonable
agreement on cost sharing. We come to the Council to ask for direction on how
we should prepare the rezoning agreement and what the Council would like to see
for future developers.
2y1�5 /1
•
Council Minutes - 3 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
D. 2nd Reading, of Ordinance No. 283, rezoning 13 lots in Village Woods 2nd
to R1-13.5, and Resolution No. 1179, approving final plat. (continued)
Mayor Penzel requested the communication from Virgil Seifert dated August 20,
1976 be entered into the record as part of the minutes.
Meyers explained that when the 1st phase was constructed, the Council
requested a construction road for access. City Engineer Jullie noted
that there was an access road, but there was a problem with people
obeying the restrictions.
Bob Georgia, 8486 Hiawatha Avenue, spoke to the petition presented to the
Council in opposition to any additional houses being built in the area
immediately South of the present development on Hiawatha Avenue until
Village Woods 1st Addition is completed, and until a permanent road is built
connecting Hiawatha Avenue to Mitchell Road. He further stated the residents
do not feel the construction vehicles should dig up the existing road that
was recently paved. (Petition attached as part of the minutes)
Ray Mitchell, 14801 Scenic Hieghts Road, explained that after taking a survey
it was determined that 70 homes are serviced by the road, and adding 13
homes would leave no area for children to play. It would be disasterous
if the access road was not put in.
Matthew Levitt, 8406 Hiawatha Avenue, stated that some of the problems of
• children playing in the area of construction could be alleviated if the
developer would finish the development of the 1st Addition - paths,
parkways and grassy areas, which were supposed to be completed by this time.
Cannot see any likelihood that the collector road will be in if the developer
is not finishing off the 1st Addition.
Mike Glapion, 8409 Hiawatha Avenue, noted that during the winter of 1975
there were two or three occasions when the snow built up so much the residents
in Village Woods were unable to get out. There should be an alternate route
in and out of Hiawatha Avenue. When the vairance was approved by the
Planning Commission the residents were not notified and did not have a chance
to voice their opposition. He further requested that before the Council votes
on this matter, that it be sent back to the Planning Commission so the residents
can appear before that body.
City Manager Ulstad explained that we have a bond in the amount of $4,600
for the 1st Addition, which is to insure the installation of shrubs, necessary
trees, and playground areas.
Mr. Zachman stated that the play structure (tot lot) is to be delivered on
Thursday, August 26, and is expected to be finished next week, and that the
proposed construction road is going 200 feet east of the people living there.
Pauly asked City Engineer Jullie if Virgil Seifert was in agreement
to the 13 lots and in agreement with the $4,000 road costs. Jullie explained
that he had talked to John Houston, Jim Zachman, and Virgil Seifert last Thursday
and upon the completion of the meeting advised Mr. Siefert and Mr. Zachman to
come up with a fair sharing of this cost.
Council Minutes - 4 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 283, rezoning 13 lots in Village Woods 2nd to
R1-13.5, and Resolution No. 1179, approving final plat. (continued)
Mr. Seifert explained that the $4,000 figure was suggested, but he did not .
agree to this figure. He was under the impression that this was to be
shared by the entire development.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to continue the 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 283 and Resolution No. 117,9 until September 7, 1976, and
instruct staff to pursue the alternatives that are agreeable to the
residents, Mr. Zachman, and Mr. Seifert. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request from Clyde Drees, 6820 Rosemary Road, to construct a 2-story
storage facility of approximate 1100 square feet on each floor, to rear of his
existing home.
City Manager Ulstad explained that this request was not looked at as a zoning ilil{
variance and spoke to memo dated August 19, 1976 from Chief Building
Inspector Wayne Sanders. He further stated that in the staff's opinion this
type of accessory building is not in the best interest of the zoning requirements,
and therefore the application for this request was denied. Ulstad noted that
Mr. Drees has requested to appear before the Council on his own behalf.
Clyde Drees, 6820 Rosemary Road, displayed his proposed layout explaining
that he cannot build a one-story building on this site due to the water flow,
and that the building would be of identical material as the existing home on the
property. Did not want to design this assessory building as a garage, but an
attractive building. He would use this assessory building strictly for storing
of his collection of antiques; would not be operating a business or selling
antiques.
City Attorney Perbix explained that the concern the City has is that when
you get a structure of this size and when and if Mr. Drees moves, you have
another home. The only thing missing from this proposed structure would be
the plumbing. It has more square feet than many homes.
•
Pauly questioned if the building would meet the codes. Chief Building Inspector
Sanders explained that it would have to meet the codes, but it has gone beyond
the terms of an assessory building. In the Building Code we are limited to
1,000 square feet.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to deny any and all permits relative
to the proponent's request for an assessory building based on the advice of the
City Attorney, definition of assessory structure in Ordinance No. 135 that building
does not meet the traditional size of assessory buildings in R1-22 zoning district,
and/or that building design and inclusions such as air conditioning and heating
do not meet the usual assessory building standards. Meyers, Bye, Penzel and
Pierce voted "aye", Pauly abstained. Motion carried.
294c11�._
Council Minutes - 5 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
B. Request from representative of Cedar Point Townhouses Association regarding
variances that were granted to Zachman Builders permitting them to build
homes with no garages.
Robert Huelster, 6939 Edenvale Boulevard, appeared before the Council
stating that he represents 26 units of the Cedar Point Townhouses Association
and also a number of the 45 homeowners in the area. He voiced opposition
to permitting Zachman Builders to build homes with no garages on the eleven
lots owned by Zachman on Woodhill Court off Edenvale Boulevard. Mr.
Huelster explained the result would be a rundown neighborhood, as everything
that is usually stored in a garage would be left outside and would soon look
like a slum.
Mr. Zachman noted that of the 11 lots he is building on, 10 have been sold
and only one out of the ten does not have a garage. The homes will be comparable
to homes in Summerwoods.
Mr. Huelster stated that if 10 out of the 11 wanted garages,he thought the
Council's thrust would be if any other variances were requested, particularly
in this area, that those variances not be granted. He further explained that
apparently people do not want the homes without garages.
No action necessary.
C.Request from Homart Development Company and Eden Prairie Center for an
additional year-long approval for the existing Eden Prairie Center
directional signs.
City Manager Ulstad spoke to request from Homart Development Company
and Eden Prairie Center as per communication dated August 9, 1976 from
James Karambelas, Marketing Director, Eden Prairie Center.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to approve the extension
of the directional signs for the Eden Prairie Center to August, 1977. Motion
carried unanimously.
V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council members.
1. Councilwoman Pauly spoke to the request from Ziegler for a Public
Hearing before the Council on September 14, 1976.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to set September 14,
1976 as the Public Hearing date for Ziegler. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Councilman Pierce reminded the Council of the nursing services
meeting to be held August 31, 1976, 7:30 PM, at our City Hall.
)9(, K
.
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
A. Reports of Council members (continued)
3. Mayor Penzel discussed the United Way Drive.
•
4. Councilwoman Meyers brought the Council up-to-date
on the Joint Site Selection Committee's recent meeting
on the Round Lake site.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Report on Minnesota Highway Department Maintenance Facility.
City Manager Ulstad explained that the City has not received any
construction commitments from the Minnesota Highway Department
relative to their maintenance facility. (Property adjacent to#169, east of 8494).
Meyers noted that back in 1974 the Minnesota Highway Department
said they were going to dispose of this property as surplus right-of-
way, and questioned if they had changed their mind. City Manager
Ulstad stated he would look into this situation.
C.Report of Director of Community Services
1. Set Public Hearing date for October 5, 1976 for special assessment
hearing for tree disease control.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pierce, to set the date of October 5,
1976 for the special assessment hearing for tree disease control.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. Zylka Resolution
City Attorney Perbix spoke to the Resolution the Council received
in their packets and explained that Mr. Zylka's attorney had drafted
this resolution. Mr. Perbix thought the resolution to be too strong
and read from Resolution No. 1182 which Perbix had drafted. (Resolution
No. 1182 attached as part of the minutes)
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 1182
as drafted by City Attorney Perbix, relating to the Michael Zylka Property
in Section 27, Township 116, Range 22. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Anderson Lakes Condemnation
City Manager Ulstad spoke to memo from Director of Community
Services Jessen dated August 20, 1976.
)96s L
Council Minutes - 7 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
3. Anderson Lakes Condemnation (continued)
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, with the understanding
that we can drop condemnation proceedings, the City Council authorize
the City Attorney to enter into condemnation proceedings for 4 parcels
of land outlined in August 13, 1976 staff memo and so notify property
owners, and that the Director of Community Services contact these
property owners again for further negotiations. Further, have staff
contact Council for input into a draft resolution to be submitted to the
Metropolitan Council outlining the Council's feelings to their August
13, 1976 letter. Meyers, Pierce, Bye and Penzel voted "aye", Pauly voted
"nay". Motion carried.
4. Metro Capital Improvement Program (Regional Parks Capital
Improvement Program).
City Manager Ulstad spoke to staff memo dated August 20, 1976
and requested Council continue this item until Director of Community
Services Jessen is able to attend the Council meeting.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to continue this item
to the Council meeting to be held September 7, 1976. Motion carried
unanimously.
S. Bryant Lake Park Season
City Manager Ulstad spoke to staff memo dated August 20, 1976.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to extend the operation
of Bryant Lake to the middle of October. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Western Bloomington Development Proposal
City Manager Ulstad spoke to staff memo dated August 20,_1976.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pierce, to authorize the staff
to draft a letter to the Environmental Quality Council for the Mayor's
signature that the City of Eden Prairie is concerned about environmental
impact as it affects public investment in our community, and that the
City of Eden Prairie not get involved with the City of Bloomington
relative to land uses. Motion carried unanimously.
Bye requested that the Commission, be reminded that they are an advisory
body to the Council and their function is not to communicate with other
governmental agencies or other bodies.
.2V)1n
Council Minutes - 8 - Tues.,August 24, 1976
•
D.Report of City Engineer
1. Approve plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids
for W. 78th Street sanitary sewer extension, I.C. 51-284.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution
No. 1177, approving plans and specifications and ordering
advertisement for bids, I.C. 51-284. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Approve plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids
for street improvements in the Westgate (east) Addition, I.C. 51-292.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution
No. 1178, approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement
for bids, I.C. 51-292. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Resolution for CSAH 62, Crosstown Highway Project No. 6839.
As the Council members had several revisions they wished included .
in Resolution No. 1181, the following motion was made:
• MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Meyers, to send Resolution
No. 1181 back to the staff for revisions. Motion carried unanimo;sly.
E. Report of Finance Director •
1. Clerk's License List
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Penzel, to approve the Clerks
License List and Addendum dated August 24, 1976. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Payment of Claims Nos. 2244 - 2398.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve Payment of
Claims Nos. 2244 - 2398. Pauly, Meyers, Bye, Pierce and Penzel
voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Changing the date of the 63,000,000.00 Bond Sale from September 7th to
September 14th.
MOTION: Pierce moved, seconded by Pauly, to change the date of the $3,000,000.00
Bond Sale from September 7, 1976 to September 14, 1976. Motion carried
unanimously.
296rj(J
Council Minutes - 9- Tues.,August 24, 1976
B. Request from the School Board to set a Joint meeting for September 16, 1976.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to set September 16, 1976
as the date for the joint meeting with the School Board. Motion carried .
unanimously.
C.Addition to the Clerk's License List.
•
This item was taken up under V. E.,1.
D.Report on Edengate matter
City Attorney Perbix spoke to communications received from James Dorsey,
legal counsel for Gerald Pautz, dated August 19 and August 23, 1976.
Robert Mavis, Steering Committee Member, Northwest Eden Prairie
Homeowner's Association, submitted a letter to the,Council as part of
the records. (letter attached)
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Fenzel, to accept the material
from Mr. Dorsey and thank Mr. Perbix for his report. Motion carried
unanimously.
E. Public Hearing on Schooner Boulevard and Hwy. 494
City Manager Ulstad explained that the Highway Department is going to
be using Federal monies and it requires this sort of a Public Hearing notice.
F. Oiling on certain sections of unfinished gravel roads.
Mayor Penzel acknowledged that he had received requests that the City
should budget more money for oiling purposes because of the dusty conditions
of gravel roads.
Bye suggested this matter be brought to the attention of the staff and be
considered for next year's budget.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pauly, to adjourn the meeting at 10:40 PM.
Motion carried unanimously.
.2965 a
PETITION 'ied, ��
We the undersigned are opposed to any additional houses o �
being built (Village Woods II Edition, Blocks 1 and 2 — 13 homes)
in the area immediately South of the present development on I
Hiawatha Avenue until Village Woods I Edition is completed
(pathways and landscaping behind houses in this area), and until
a permanent road is built connecting Hiawatha Avenue to Mitchell Rd.
This permanent road is the East-West Connector as named in the
original plans for the Village Woods Development. .
I
NAME. ADDRESS DATE
i
1. ir:! f. j >/`•.).C.C''i .cJ 8486 Hiawatha.Avenue Aug. 16, 1976
Q /� u
2. Cl ./. ,�i�t�'•<�'/ 8Yvi Waxax •• �!t� 7‘
. L/,1r� `�V..l..G�!c r'� `ffll B24w ''4 .J4 1/lb/7rL
5.• L 1: ..1:ii b,0 1 11/0tj.:011/) !^stir. 8101,11C,
6. i'c11, / l 7i,
8 • ,_a n I-' a`UL... J r zu.�_kt 'q33 Nt fl._.,-rrt Qn,-r. 8- ►6. •h_
9 ,. 1C, � S.C<' •d., c„.m?, z.;C\ 1 --Vta.^o`7�+,((�,,1} . c\-\4,-74,
10. !r `i '-('C.,�, )A\ cRt-\ 1 \VCr<.`-.F e, \?Vk'C, -I ..'-\tC,
11. e7,7,,7! 1,r- ii, ' S34--- a u. ., L. __4tLij,..,G,
12' 0.4i - v-Loic.,- !1z., $-v7.5 11/.2 a/Anirl 4Y,. Q'•.,(.,-7(
g:j1 1 _ _�: '._. _ ,:‘,_.. ,f'Y�r .z-� l c��, A'76
14,f,,f/1, a-�G�'t.„.. l,'iit'( .17L0- I/ Kra-.,,,.. -f/!�c e.t.4' 1—/�-7-4
15. ,, 7 Ck,,,,41. ,e.T r— �i'y/3.. /Y[+ric,,s.7/,-,.r Cr-,c D it'"E
16. �_ 1,,,,,%t..: .H0- u.rr. 4 we Hi A a•M 1"1‘A S'- '4:, •7:
let, rr- / r, ';4- `I 50 . Aikr 8-1l- %v
< -sy35 7`1 ' '���-- B'-/>- 7(0
/9 1r7.Cr i cz ,,i r, 10:i_¢/ //„/„,2u/Yz...z.b., �f . 7-i 7- ` d
" �� ,/( J � o l / l,Yiatvit,- /�r-1-. COM NVE t, �1 l
,� ; �;:_, ,�,i .. ... ,/ ,;.r 11,: _�r 4),(> .r,/,,,.,,,,, �,C(" .aa`> ?1' /; 7,.
.
PET IT ION
Page 2
August 17, 1976
(Continued)
NAME ADDRESS ,/ DATE
a,2 1$l. 7 4,A,�Lr—sL-t.c_: ,N4,2 ri•iactA A �'�4�7L
a3 19. rikAf ^/' y�y/n.-n.:7' l / Fp�H�'7`3 f�/,� fY/!6 f7/6
oaq 20,, 1a(.(.-�,4`.1-1-6.1C i.e ae.„,. (4 G c W--.'Ltir 07/74
i
01 21. ,., A/<_----- IV y 1 //,,��..9r14? 07/7 6
" 22✓%��4 i�; . ,,,e) '..� 2,�/. .-: -/'-?‘
y
a7 23. ..� p.X. •<.7 ,t/ �rtt,1,ii...v.thiatigif 9^''/d/ .ncttla . I7-74
al' 21+. ail( I4/1/44.“J�S /,4v Ate44, kla 901-
.
,
25
26.
27. '
. . .1 k
-
.
. .
.
. i
POOliceutf-g-fittu Otto-...
7 6
.
24-, •1116•< t,a_i rcl-r1 2.-4- i
. ,
(3•1\ _..nxi/..x."3...L. rt2 __..t.L__I
b..,.ti -1--. Ad' -10 •41 --4) --tift-L -iCt ' t
i _c_ . ..
..,j,,Ti_TA efiatiwr,_. _lac_ / i
-----' --.,
-).,A)--k•- , 9'11 k,'-4-....Ut:,..k.1__.4.4.,a_4_.?__4,214.4.K-Le- L,_A-4-442-L.Led:4,—;
10.4."0-4.34 thiC..1.?
.1,A4.'" it'• ---4- 4• - . .
. CIIIK--2 61: rt -7/ .Y1.L., A., .c.4fre,'_, ,_
•
- Jail '
_.,"4 ,____3 • ell ._.+_,- ._.(21/ 11:)..e..___X°. ... . --- tdg,:e• -,f-lile-y—
. __2(..k.m„...,...e, _ce...,...., , ..c.e.„ i , _(....c• r-kyr.,.__L .4,.._, zi.,43_____
• . _4 ztet,z_eal. -kwue,..4... 9
T.
,_ .. _,___p7._+„,___,d,-.}____adLi.n. ,,e:r.:s__L_
l
. 1,,,,i . 7
if
-,7 .-/4--)•61-.
CZ, 1,,--e,.(;/
- 1,--4 ,,,,.,,,,. 16; 71,
446,...-. 1.4z,e1,-ii0-0
l- io__ i_3 190,:n ,41:0---- d 1,..,_ z,tf_4, 1,Vz, )0 iii_°---tv' r.-- t/.• ..,-;
----4-4/- 1,4‘44-i't I--- .‘-, 1-'14..litia7; .
' (--( ^1.'12 '2,0,4:(_,,I jt.t,--t...,:-.-• g,) .-7 &lite--/.....,%, ',2-_,.•_. ce0<-_,..,_ ez( .,t,At,'
_
.
.
.
.
'
�
' � |
i
twLAI
~~~ ~~'~^ ''r~-~-- ----`
� - ---' ----------- - -��� /Y f /y
�
�
. ] _
whp/Jh 8/30/76
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE •
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
N RESOLUTION NO. 81 A
A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE MICHAEL ZYLKA PROPERTY IN SECTION
27, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 22.
WHEREAS, Michael Zylka is the owner of certain property located
within the City of Eden Prairie, as more fully set forth on Exhibit A
which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has agreed to purchase approximately
fifteen (15) acres of said property to be used as and for a part of its
park system, and
• • WHEREAS, said Zylka property is currently zoned Rural, and
WHEREAS, the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City makes
reference to said property in terms of prospective roads and potential uses,
and
WHEREAS, the City is presently reviewing said Comprehensive Guide
Plan, and
WHEREAS, said Michael Zylka has been informed that the City Council
cannot bind future City Councils by its actions in regard to zoning,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Eden Prairie City Council
does hereby ratify and reaffirm the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan insofar
as it may pertain to the premises involved herein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That in accordance with its present policy,
it would consider and give fair consideration to any application for
rezoning made in conformance with said plan and the zoning ordinance of
said City.
• i.
ADOPTED By the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this •
day of , 1976.
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John P. Franc, City Clerk
-2-
sc MS Ll
•
August 24, 1576
Tc: City Council
City Attorney
City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Sublect: Eden gate Townhouse Project
We have been advised by the proponent, Mr. Gerald Pautz, that a letter
has been forwarded to city officials which purports to draw some con-
clusion regarding a settlement proposal aide recently to the Loch-
' anburn area residents regarding subject project.
•
We have not had the privlege of a copy of the Aforementioned letter as
yet. However, based upon discussions with Mr. Pants regarding the con-
tents of his letter, we.wish to advise you that we feel that he has
reached scme very erroneous conclusions rfter our recent neighborhood
meeting. He has, in our opinion blatently overstated the sentiment
that exists for acceptance of his settlement proposal.
Robert Mavis
Steering; Committee Member
Northwest Eden. Prairie
Homeowners Group
a9b5 V
•
•
•
Minutes - Parka, Reo. and Page Six
Natural Resources Commission Asmroved July 19, 1976
4. Devolooment Propo r s
a. Preserve Areal(
Jensen spoke to status report, and pointed out location of Area H,
located sw of Ring Route and west of Highway 169, with regional come rofa].
and service coning. Re explained that according to the plan, there was
encroackent of eight acres on flood plain. Be added that the Preserve
has fulfilled their open space cossittments with the 55 acres on Anderson
Lake, and the 22 acre school/park on this particular plan. Be referred
to the Preserve PUD approved plan, Major Center Plan, and Purgatory Creek
Study for background information for present status of the plan.
Kingrey thanked Jensen for the report and asked what the nseseasary action
was at this time. Jessen responded that no action vas required.
•
•
JJ/9-3-76
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1184
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY
PLAT OF AREA H OF THE PRESERVE COMMER-
CIAL PLAN LD-76-P-01
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie
Minnesota as follows: •
The preliminary plat of The Preserve for Area H of the
Preserve Commercial Plan located in the southwest quadrant •
of Schooner Boulevard and U. S. # 169,
being in the County of Hennepin and the State of Minnesota
described as:
That part of the North 4 of the Southwest
4 of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22,
lying South and West of Schooner Boulevard
and U. S. 169-212 , all lying in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
Subject to the terms of the Rezoning Agreement, dated day
l of , 1976 executed between the City of Eden Prii e
and a partnership consisting of The Preserve(a co-partnership of
Carter&Gertz, Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation, and the
Minnesota Gas Company, a Delaware corporation, sole partners ).
AND, is found to meet the purposes and objectives or is in
conformance with the provisions of Eden Prairie Ordinance 93
and allanendments thereto.
ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1976 .
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
l
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
approved
Monday, July 26, 1976 7:30 PM City Hall
CO':'I1SSION PRESENT: Chairman Don Sorensen, Norma Schee, Rod Sundstrom, Richard
Lynch, Herb Fosnocht
COMMISSION ABSENT: Sidney Pauly, William Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Dick Putnam, Jean Johnson
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Schee moved, Lynch seconded, to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion
carried unanimously.
lI. MINUTES OF THE JULY 12, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Schee moved, Lynch seconded, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion
carried 4:0:1 with Fosnocht abstaining.
. III. MEMBERS REPORTS
A. Chairman Sorensen-none.
B. Council Representative Pauly-absent.
C. Others-none.
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Area H of The Preserve Commercial Plan, continued public hearing. Request
to preliminary plat Area H into 2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Reg-Ser.
The site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard and
US 169.
The planner referred the commission to the staff report, dated June, 1976, and
reviewed the open space issues and site plan options contained in the report.
lie stated the plan is consistent with the MCA,and a question the staff has raised is
if the land adjacent to the floodplain should be used for housing instead of
comr.,ercial. The Preserve is requesting rezoning to C-Reg-Ser and would return for
site plan approval when definite plans are known prior to issuance of building
permits. Special aspects of lighting, pathways, etc., would be discussed when
definite uses are known.
Sorensen felt the MCA has substantial amounts of commercial/industrial property,
and if this housing site is approved for commercial it would further increase the
commercial acreage in the MCA.
The planner said The Preserve believes, and he would agree, the present market
situations are better for commercial than multiple. He added that placing multiple
behind commercial without adequate buffers would be less desirable than commercial.
Sorensen questioned if The Preserve has not already received considerable benefits
from the City due to the MCA PUD approvals for higher densities then was originally
anticipated. The planner was not prepared to answer specifically on the question.
Sorensen stated with no pint or MCA ordinances, he questions how the City can justify
their action on such requests hased on the lack of action on the City's part. He
felt the City should establish ordinances whereby requests can be evaluated and
legally acted upon. Schee agreed with Sorensen.
• /
.29 6'7
Planning Commission 1iuutos -2• July 26, 1976
The planner believed the City is committed to the rapid development of the land
. in the MCA and must act on the requests submitted prior to final adoption of ordinance.
Lynch asked Mr. Hess if he had reviewed the staff report.
Mr' Ness stated he basically agrees with the staff report, but the draft agreement
attached at the end should be excluded from the Area H request and handled separately.
He said they would like to keep the option open for housing, would accept the
planner's suggestion of no parking in the floodplain , and presently have no prefer-
ences on plan options. He felt The Preserve and City could negotiate a purchase
agreement if such is forthcoming, and the Preserve is not tied to the $800 figure.
He believed fair appraisals should he received to determine the property's value.
Also, the draft agreement does not need to be part of Area H's approval, should
not he acted upon , or forwarded to the Council prior to The Preserve and City
further working out details.
Sundstrom asked if the commission could take action on lot 2 alone. The planner
replied affirmative, and added be believes lot 2 should be replatted to exclude
the floodplain area at the north end.
•
Mr. Hess saw no reason to exclude the floodplain from lot 2 if The Preserve agrees
to no parking in the floodplain. He stated the area in question provides access •
to the property to the north.
Hess informed the commission sewer and water are available, and Schooner Boulevard
is roughed-in to the property's northern boundary.
Motion 1:
Schee moved, lynch seconded, to recommend the Council consider the draft agreement
regarding park and Preserve open space and decide whether it desires to instruct
the staff and/or this body, and/or the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission to proceed with recommendations with the view that the agreement be in
final form before the second reading of the ordinance, or other action, on Area H.
The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2:
Schec moved, Lynch seconded, to recommend to Council approval of the Preserve Concept
Plan for Area H, amending PU074-12 of the Preserve Commercial Plan, based on the
staff report dated June, 1976, with the following modified recoimnedations on page
10,and exclusion of Appendix A:
1. The floodplain encroachment is consistent with past city.policies,
approvals, and assessments. The fill area and configuration proposed
is reasonable based upon site conditions and city policy.
2. The floodplain land uses should allow open space or recreational
types and not those required by urhan development. Specifically
farming, golf course, etc., are reasonable uses, however, parking
lots for adjacent urban uses are not good open space uses.
3. No floodplain areas should be zoned to C-Reg-Ser use.
4. C-Reg-Ser use illustrated in the Area H booklet (page 7 ) are
reasonable uses for the MCA.
5. Utilize the entire non-floodplain site for commercial uses as
proposed or reserve the area adjacent to the floodplain and west
of the tree line for high density residential.
6. Traffic access should provide one or more future connections to
the property south along TH 169.
7. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission should speak
to the question of puhlic vs. private ownership of the FP area and take
steps to accomplish the public recreational aspects of FP use in this
seeIion of the creek as recommended by the Purgatory Creek 0.S. Study.
approved
• Planning Commission Minutes -3- July 26, 1976
Vote on Motion 2: The motion carried 4:0:1 with Sorensen abstaining because
although he generally favored the motion,he had reservations on the nature and
extent of the encroachment and future implications in this area, and reservations
on the staff's recommendation that the floodplain area be purchased rather than
dedicated as tradeoff, or by granting of an easement to the City .
Motion 3:
Lynch moved, Sandstrom seconded, to recommend to the Council thereioning from Rural
to C-Reg-Ser for Area H be denied based on the opinions expressed in the minutes
of the Planning Commission (4-26-76,5-10-76,7-12 $ 26-76 ). The motion carried
unanimously.
Potion 4:
Fosnocht moved, Sundstrom seconded, to close the public hearing on Area H of The
Preserve Commercial Plan. The motioncarried unanimously.
Motion 5:
Lynch moved, Fosnocht seconded, to recommend to the Council approval of the preliminary.
plat of Area Hodated 3-1-76,on page 13 of the brochure. The motion failed 1:4 with
Fosnocht voting aye. .
Sorensen relinquished the chair to Vice Chairperson Schee
Motion 6
Sorensen moved, Lynch seconded, to recommend approval of a modified preliminary plat
of the 3-1-76 plat with removal from lot 2 and inclusion in lot 1 the northern area
of lot 2 which lies within the Purgatory Creek Watershed District floodplain.
Discussion:
Mr. Fosnocht did not feel it is the Planning Commission's business to develop a
preliminary plat for commission approval, and.should instead reserve action on
the plat submitted by the proponent.
Sorensen withdrew his motion with the consent of the seconder.
Vice chairperson Schee discontinued discussion on the item as action had been
taken.
Sorensen resumed the chair.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- 'July 12, 1976 '
•
•
B. Area H of The Preserve Commercial Plan, continued public hearing. Request •
�, • to preliminary plat Area H into 2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Regional
_ Service. The site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard
and U.S. 169.
The planner reported the staff report has been started, but is not complete, and
the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission still has no recommendation.
Don Hess said they have worked with the situation, and now would request if no report
is forthcoming, Area H be forwarded to the Council where the reports and recommenda-
tions could he sent when they are finished. He then asked that the item be continued
to the July 26th meeting,at which time he would make a presentation,and the commission
• could make a recommendation with,or without,a staff report.
The planner stated a number of issues are being covered-, i.e.,Anderson Lakes' Park
delineation, open space, and cash in lieu of land for The Preserve in general and
in the PUD. -
Hess suggested the staff devote their time and staff report to lot 2,and hold the
report on lot 1 in the floodplain, in an attempt to speed-up action on lot 2.
The planner stated a report would be prepared by July 26th.
Motion:
ScLee moved, Lynch seconded, to continue the public hearing to July 26th. The motion
carried unanimously.
•
• DRAFT AGREEMENT: Between City and Preserve Appenix A
The City of Eden Prairie and The Preserve do agree as follows:
1. The Preserve PUD Concept Plan (pg. 32) as approved by the City did contemplate
the dedication of 101 acres of Open Space to the City of Eden Prairie as follows:
Item 1970 PUD Proposal _S%) As of June 1976
• Acres
Anderson Takes (10 dedication) 55 5.0
(95 scenic easement)
Purgatory Connector 17 1.6
Playground/School 22 2.0
Purgatory 200' R/W 7 .6
2. The original Preserve PUD Concept did not contemplate any public open space
on the now so-called Area H.
3. No additional Park and/or Open Spare dedication was contemplated for the
Preserve except for internal HOA Space as specified on page 32.
4. The MCA Plan adopted by the City Council did anticipate the filling of a small
percentage of the Floodplain land on Area H and the assessment for MCA
improvements was levied against approximatley acres ofArea H or about
% of the land. The MCA Plan anticipated residential use of the Floodplain
land filled with the balance to be used as recreation open space, with an interest
to be granted to the City.
2.13 I
5. The Preserve has fulfilled the dedication of the 22 acres Neighborhood Playground
site and has taken steps to fulfill the letter and spirit of the open space
commitment as follows as of July 1, 1976.
Acres
Anderson Lakes 3.0 Basswoods
3.0 Dedication
Purgatory Connector .37
Playground/School 22
Purgatory 200' R/W
6. The City did purchase from the Preserve a 42 acre parcel known as "The Moorings"
which did include acres to be dedicated as per the Concept Plan Open Space
Commitment.
7. At the time of the purchase of the 42 acre site a comprehensive study for the
boundary of the 55 acre West Shore of Anderson Lakes Dedication was completed
and agreed to in concept by the 2 parties. The so-called Blacklock Nature Center
Concept was adopted by the City Council and has been submitted to the
Metropolitan Council as Eden Prairie's official plan for the park. (See attached
Exhibit
8. The City's Purgatory Creek Open Space Corridor Study did analyze and recommend
the protection and use of a recreation open space along the creek.
9. The City desires to implement the intent if not the letter of the Purgatory Study.
zy/)2
10. The porposed uses on Area H are acceptable to the City with the exception
of those proposed on Block where the City feels public open space
is more desirable as generally recommended by the Purgatory Creek Study.
11. The City will purchase said Block from the Preserve so as to implement
the Purgatory Study intent. The price of the land will be determined by 2
independent real estate appraisers to be paid by the City and 1 to be named
by the City and 1 by the Preserve. However, in no case shall the price per
acre exceed $800.00.
12. The Preserve does commit to dedicate to the City all that land recommended
by the Blacklock Nature Center Concept either thru fee title or open space
easement granting to the City complete rights to manage and maintain the land
for habitat and environmental programs and purposes. The Preserve further
commits to fence and/or construct a barrier along the edge of the total
dedication (approximately acres).
2y'73
•
•
_ approved
Planning Coitus:;ion Minutes -S- June 28, 1976
•
D. Area H, The Preserve, continued-public hearing. Request to preliminary p)at •
Arca H into 2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Regional Service. The site is
located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard and US 169.
Sorensen stated no Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission recommendation
has been received.' Mr. Hess stated the item is not on the Park fa Recreation's
agenda. Mr. Jessen informed the commission the staff is reviewing the project with
the Preserve and there is still work to be done. •
Sorensen inquired if The Preserve wished action within 60 days of submission.
Hess replied that different questions have arisen and The Preserve would prefer
continuing their discussions with the staff. -.. - •-
Motion: -
Bearc •
an 'moved, Sundstrom seconded, to continue the public 'hearing on Area H to the
July 12th meeting for a staff report. The motion carried unanimously.
•
Planning Conmissio❑ Minutes -8- approved, June 21, i
E. Area H, The Preserve, continued public hearing. Request to preliminary plat
Area H into 2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Regional Service. The site is
located in the southwest .. quadrant of Schooner Boulevard and US 169. \.
The planner stated the Paris, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission has not
taken action on the item and no staff report has been completed.
Mr. Hess was asked if he objected to a cobtinuation of the public hearing.
Mr. Hess replied he would not object to a continuation. 4
•
Motion: -
Schee moved, Su mistrote seconded, to continue the public hearing to the June 28th
meeting. The motion carried unanimously. .
•
A i
•
•
•
spproved
Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 24, 1976
11
C. Area H of The Preserve Commercial Plan, continued public hearing. Request to 1�
preliminary plat Area H into 2 lots and to rezone one lot to C-Regional Service.
The site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard and US 169.
•
The planner stated the Parks , Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had not
taken action on the item and that the staff has not completed their review of
the plan or the impacts upon City ordinances and assessment policies. •
Mr. Hess did not object to a Continuation of the item pending Park P, Recreation and
staff review.
Riot i on_:
Schee moved, Lynch seconded, to continue the public hearing on Area H •to the June
14th meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
•
•
2 ` e-
•
•
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
. approved
Monday, May 10, 1976 7:30 PM City Hall
IV. REPORTS AND tECO't4END.ATIONS. - -
• A. Area H of The Preserve Commercial Plan, continued public hearing. Request
to preliminary plat Area-H into 2—lots and to rezone' one lot to C-Reg-Ser.
The site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard and US 169.
The planner stated the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission has not. .
taken any action todate. He informed the commission the DNR has ciassifi.ed
Purgatory Creek as Genera] Development. He then referred the commission to the
engineering report and stated a planning staff report would be prepared by the
following meeting.
Don Hess, The Preserve, stated the uses of auto dealerships on the site are not
absolute, hut they desire rezoning on the property to make it marketable.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- May 10, 1976
Sorensen inquired if the Preserve is willing to wait for a Planning Commission
recommendation until recommendations are received from the Watershed District,
the State Highway Department and the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission. Mr. Hess was not adverse to having the item continued to the next
Meeting.
Motion:
Rcarran moved, Sundstrom seconded, to continue the public hearing to the May 24th
meeting for a planning staff report. The motion carried unanimously.
•
•
Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 26, 1976 •
•
•
•
B. Area H of The Preserve Commercial Plan public hearing request by The Preserve
to preliminary plat Area H into 2 lots and to rezone the property to C-Regional
Service. The site is located in the southwest quadrant of Schooner Boulevard
and U. S. 76F.
•
Mr. Hess reviewed the site location and outiined• the 2 lots, 1 in the floodplain •
and 1 a building pad for clu'.tcr auto dealerships. W. Hess stated The Preserve
does not believe that floodplain designation has to preclude proper development
by private or public conccrns,thereby making the land tax producing instead of
a liability. Be then summarized the tax impact of the project..
Mr. Sorensen questioned how much the city would expend for services to serve the
site. Mr. Hess said more may be spent on services to the site than the tax derived
from the site.
•
(� Mr. Lynch said the floodplain encroachment was of concern to him.
Motion): .
Scher roved, Sundstrem seconded, to refer the item to the staff for a report and
recom.ncndations. The motion carried unanimously.
Motion?: •
[inch moved,moved, Foe.nocht seconded, to continue the public hearing to the May 10th
meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
"f
• CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE t..'
,
CHECK L1ST FOR iu vJ WING PROPOSED !
LAND DEVELOPMENTS
DATE: 4-21_7S+__
a a L.D. NO:LH-76-Z-01, P-Ol
DEVE'"°P1'1liNT: Iiey•-�1c.1 acnereia1 Ceatsr Area II
onF.i I c never Blyd ti T.11, 169
• LOCATION: Snl1J7h'c"•t- Sai1P> 9f%'� I
REFERENCE P.U.D. OR PREVIOUS r:
TONING AGRI:};iP NT: • RES. fi. 1•
• 1
DEVELOPER: The Pre erve 1' ..
I
ENGINEER/PLANNER: The Preserve i,
DOCUMENTS SUEN'LTTPD FOR REVIEW: Preliminary plat r
PROPOSAL; The Preserve is rcnucst•n> preliminary plat a»»roVal and rezoning
(':
of the tract L
•
1. Land D::vclopmcnt applicat.io:; filed and filingfee & depositpaid es 4+P Y
Copy of application forwarded to Watershed District yes !, "
' 2. Processing Schedule:
i
a. Planning & Zoning Commission Preliminary
b. Park & Recreation Commission _ 4'
• • c. Human Rights Commission .
[ '
d. Planning Commission Public nrg. April 26, 1976
e. City Council consideration
f. Watershed District no response todato
3. Type of Development Commercial i,':
4. Environmental. assessmen,. or impact statement required per Environmental
Impact Policy Act of 1973:
yes
•
— 2 —
5. Present Zoning Rural
6. Proposed Zoning C-gegional Service
Consistent with approved F.U.D. or Comp Plan? yes ( Comp.Plan G MCA PUB )
• List variances required & setbacks that apply:
•
7. Project Area T 44 acres Density : 15.5 ac to 21.2 ac. •
__..
j.r
' 8. Public open space and/or cash dedication
• Private open space
Trail systems & sidewalks
Range of lot sizes
9. Preliminary Building Plans not submitted
ii
10. Representative Soil Borings not submitted
11. Street System
A. Access to adjoining. properties Recommend providing access to Schooner Blvd
for properties located south of site. Plans for upgrading T.N. 169-212
provide only limited access to these properties.
B. Type /W Roadway (Back to Back of Curb) CC.'
t:
Private
driveways, no 24
parking Post no parking signs required ,
Leading to Cul de sacs 50 28.
(not over 1000') & •
minor residential •
Cul de sacs 100 78 (no island)
120 98 (with island)
Thru Ieei.d ontial (collectors)
& Cul d.• sacs
over 1000' 60 32 required
- 3 -
MSA 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 City's comprehensive street system.
. • Developer builds 1/2 of parkways at his cost. & R/W dedication Proposed
Schooner Rlcd ( Ref: Area G dedication )�_
D. Street Names - try to conform with existing in the area. Avoid additional
names on cul de sacs having eight or less lots. •
Check list of existing stiect names. required !!''
E. Private parking lots--86-12 cone C&G and full depth at:ph. design
required ,! •
F. Street Signs-Developer or City installs developer purchase-city install
12. Parking: (See Ord. #1141) information not clthmittrd - required
13. Utility Systems:
A. Sanitary Sewer available-on site extension required
1. Service Detail 4" to 6"
2. Service to adjoining property Proposed.utility plan shows which
could Rusibly serve properties southof site .
A. Watermain: available-on site extension required
IM1.
1. Check Service Design (20 psi at highest fixture) OK II
2. Hydrant location-Fire Inspector fire inspector to review II;'
3. Valving Detailed plans required for review. If '_
4. Compliance with fire code Fire inspector to review.
5. Service to adjacent property OR Existing watermain along T.H. 169-212
will serve areas south of site . • I'•,__
•
•
I _
1
• I
_ 4
C. Storm Sewer & Grading.._...�
1. Sediment control plan Required
2. Skimming & grit control for commercial parking lots Required '
3. Positive outlet for drainage ponds Required
4. Avoid excessive grading and tree removal Required i ,
5. Arrow:. showing drainage OK . Ir
{ :
Accomodate drainage from adjacent properties OK.
t
6. Denote drainage area for individual inlets and projected high water
• for ponds
Required
7. Keep drainage in gutters, not in center of street Required 9
8. Sod drainage swales and steep slopes Required 1
i
9. Flood plain encroachment 20% encroachment proposed 1
10. Watershed District approval Required i)
11.. DFR approval Required I,
required
reround
D. Natural Gas & Telephone Underground 9
E. Electric (underground) Required
.
14. Street Lights & On-Site Lighting Required
I .
15. Preliminary plat to be submitted to MHD or Henn. Co. if abutting a
State or county Huy.
Minnesota Nitbway Dept ( T.U. 169-'712 )
it,
16. List special assessments levied and pending Levied: f6133, Ring 'Rnad'$S,526; l :
06343 trunk sewer $ water, $35,935; #643R. Neill Lake Stm Swr_. $14 00 I.
Pending! 1.C. 51-266, $ 21000 ; I.C. 51`274. $ 133.170t.
17. Re-zoning agreement required yes r
I
Dovelnprr'S Agreement required yes i
Title Abstract for Att.orney's review no
f.
Minute: — Par):s, Rec. and • Page Four
Natural Resources Cor.aission mpproved April 19, 1976
a. Preserve Aran H (Contadj
Hess commented that he felt the fload plain could be stored elsewhere,
and that these alternatives have nut been looked into. He added that the
Ring Route is in jeopardy if this is not done.
Upton stated her opinion that a policy has been made and that we should
stick to it, and added that everyone will want to come in and fill parts
of the flood plain. Hone said he agreed that you should take it difficult
for developers to fill, but not impossible. •
.esnen scrtcst.cd that ho would put together a detailed Staff report for the
next neeti.ne, with :specific Idstcrshed District requirenents for filling and
not filling flood plains. He spoke to two valid point:made by Hess:
1. Ring Route location, and the fact that we nay have to fill in flood plain
to tahe advantage of it. 2. The business of too much land for development. •
Anderson geestienad how legal and binding our hood Plain Ordinance was.
•
It was his oh.inion that the Watershed District could do anything developers
requested. as long as it did not create a flooding problem, and the rest of
it was up to the city.
•
ROTior: Angcrson oved to table the Preserve Area H proposal until Staff
• report is lacanred. Holmes seconded, Lotion carried unanimously.
b. Gel co
Tabled until future :reting. •
•
•
c. Edentate
•
Jerry Pautz, E.P. Townhouse Co., spoke to his proposal., which he said was
consistent with earlier 1971 PHD that had received concept approval from
the City Council. he eo:::.ented on the pending lawsuit, and raid it should
be ready to he heard in court between two to three weeks. he continued
that their orupc al for park dedication was essentially unchanged, and that
they are ready to deed to the City for park purposes 76 scream fee ownership.
Ho raid this ec.:als shout a0; of their total land value or 2/3 of land area
that thay own. he continued that they are also offering 8 acres to be used
as a iublic hark etc., which equals another 13% of tl eir total site, bringing
total acreage offered to 84 acres or 3/4 of their land area, and 50% of their
land value.
Middleton and Fifield loft at 9:00 PM.
Uptc.0 inquired ehether thane were rental units and how many children were
anticipated. Pautz responded that the units would be all rental or all for
sale, depending on the. financing available and what there seems to be•a
narkct for, nod anticipoto 1.1 children per unit. •
•
Minutes - Perks, Rec. and Page Three
Natural Resources Commission iapprovod . April 19, 1976
•
V. RE C01 I.NI DATTCHS AID REPORTS '
B, Renort.e of Staff •
•
3. Dcvelounent Propoeals
a. Preserve Area H
Don Hers, The Preserve, spoke to the site of 46-45 acres, located
west of Highway 169 and southwest of where Schooner Boulevard is
now, which consists of two parts-high and dry site of 15.5 acres
and flood plain area of 28.5 areas, he continued that the zoning
request is for the high and dry acreage as it exists, which they
would like to put together for sales, and the flood plain area
where they have no firm cornitteent to anything at the present
time. He explained his position that you do something in a
flood plain, but you do it very well, and that not all flood
plains have to be useless to a community.
Carens questioned the level to which they were planning to raise
the 5.7 acres. Hess responded that it would be 4 feet maximum
fill, going back to nothing.
Garens commented that the existing flood ordinance plan is 824
while they aro planning for 830; and added that flature seems to •
determine flood :.lain accurately, nen only estimate. Hess answered
the the watershed District has studied this point, and he feels
they have more power to control it than the City.
Jessen explained that the State Legislature has mandated all
municipalities to develop a flood plain ordinance, and according
to Eden Prairie's there is to be no fill in the flood plain unless
some legitimate public benefit is shown.
Hess offered some alternatives, such as a plan for private flood
plain uses as presented on sheet no. 7 of Development Plan. He
felt this element has been ignored.
Pierce was concerned that if the 5.7 acres were filled, someone
assume you can build on it, and suggested that it be an out-
lot. Mess commented that they had considered selling it to the
City.
Jessen asked the Cor.asission to consider these questions: Should
we allow the :'ill in the flood plain? Should the Purgatory Creek
Study and 1•:::A plan be considered? .. The relation to the Major
Center, with the problem being too much developable land-we make
7Y more acres available to develop.
2` 3
•
MEMO TO: Perks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Marty Jensen, Director of Community Services/4d
SUBJECT: Preserve Area H Development Plan
DATE: April 16, 1976
Attached are a series of 14 sheets submitted by the Preserve for
development of Area H. This land lies along Purgatory Creek and ) ;
is comprised primarily of floodplain associated with the creek. The
Preserve is proposing that 20% of the existing floodplain be encroached
upon and filled, and in addition proposes that'an additional portion of
the floodplain be used for urban land uses i.e. parking. Further, the
Preserve proposes that the entire site remain in private ownership with-
out any interest or right granted to the City for open space purposes as
suggested in the Major Center Area Plan, the Purgatory Creek Open Space
Corridor Study and other documents associated with the City's park and
open space plan.
•
REVIEW OF THE MCA PLAN t "
The proposal for Area H is inconsisitent with the recommendations of the
Major Center Area Plan specifically the chapter dealing with open space.
The MCA Plan calls for:
1. Public interest in all prominent natural features be a part of every
development proposal while encouraging intense urban development.
2. Development encroachment into the seven very prominent areas be
greatly restricted (this area is one of the seven prominent areas
in the MCA).
3. Development of the MCA in an effort to minimize encroachment
into the natural features in the area encourages intense urban
development. The density transfer of more intense uses on the
developable land for the preservation of the natural features will
be encouraged. Compliance with the policies for the preservation
of protection of the natural resources in MCA is a prerequisite.
4. Encroachment will be prohibited on lakes and creeks.
S. Floodplain encroachment along water bodies and water courses
will be restricted. Encroachment and alteration of steep slopes
adjacent to water bodies and water course. and associated
floodplains will be restricted in an attempt topreserve the natural
character of the area.
2 9 LI
PURGATORY CREEK STUDY •
The Purgatory Creek Open Space Corridor Study suggests the following
opportunities for this area of the creek:
"Opportunities exist for a variety of uses including open space
field games, golf, snowmobiling, cross country skiing, etc.
"The lowland south of Highway 5 should be retained as a major
open space within the MCA. Through management of this highly
visible space aesthetic and recreational value can be enhanced."
"The recommendation of the study is to achieve an area defined
by the 830 contour elevation."
SUMMARY
The proposed Area H development is inconsistent with the MCA Plan
and the recommendations of the Purgatory Creek Open Space Corridor
Study. The floodplain encroachment proposed is to the eight twenty
elevation, whereas the Purgatory Study suggests that the eight thirty
elevation be the "edge" of the open space in this area of the creek.
The Major Center Area Plan suggests that the City acquire an interest
in all of the open space along Purgaory Creek, preferably fee title, but
in any case at least a long term easement.
The Preserve is proposing to modify the land and to provide 21.2 acres
of buildable land. Another major issue to discuss in reviewing this
plat is the application of the park fee to this parcel.
•
Z4 DJ
STAFF REPORT .
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dick Putnam •
DATE: June 17, 1976 / Junc 22nd
APPLICANT: The Preserve ,
PROJECT: Area II, Preserve Commercial Plan
• •
A. PRESERVE REQUEST-AREA H
The Preserve is requesting the City of Eden Prairie to approve the
following:
I. PUP Concert Plan-previously applied for under the 74-PUD-12 t'
Preserve Commercial P3an,11-22-74.
t.. „.
2. PUD Development Plan-implementation of the PUD Concept Plan.
3. Rezoning from Rural to C-Reg Ser- for 24 ± acres.
4. Preliminary plat approval-to divide.the 44 ± acres into lots
l and 2 of Block I.
R. HISTORY OP PRESERVE COMMERCIAL PLAN ( PCP )
The PCP was developed by Development Concepts for The Preserve during 1974
with an application to the City for;
-PUD 70-03 and MD\ Plan Amendment
-Rezoning for uses specified in PUD 74-12
-Preliminary plat approval for Area F
The application was filed 17-22-74 and was considered by the Planning Commission •
on numerous, meetings during December 1974 and early 1975. Due to the scale of
the devclopnwnt, sections were to be considered based •u ponpriority for
development, Area F was selected by The Preserve for first consideration
and the City did approve it by Resolution It 939 and an ordinance for
rezoning to OFC District.
The City Council has modified The Preserve Plan 70-03 and the MCA Plan in
approving the concept plans for Areas F A C of The Preserve Commercial Plan.
Staff Report-Area II -2- June 17, 1976 •
•
The Preserve requested the City to continue action on Areas A,B,C,D,E $ H
pending their in house analysis of park dedication and other issues. The
Preserve has not withdrawn the 11-22-74 PCP application and the City is
considering each area separately at The Preserve's request.
C. GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY PLANS AND POLICIES
?-�.__ Preserve PUD 70-03
'�._;_j�:'`s�: �% �� The City Council approved the original
(" lf_ �•+' `S. Preserve PUD in 1970. The PUD included
\ \
r.n..�'. 7.-"P a recognition of the regional commercial
V__? t.- =J:'^ ^hi ;',.,,. area around I-494/212 interchange con-
j‘ .1 .,... • 1 .,•*.- :40(r.'
tained tained in the Guide Plan. The 1970
�.� ^,; ��`i Preserve Plan included about 120 acres
�� ,':e: __ Wr +,,K of commercial land development.
;fir•,• . 3
t; .r <` 4 -....aV..tL i'i, r% ' MCA Plan
The City adopted the MCA as an amendment
to the 1968 Guide Plan on 7-10-73 and
ti in so doing also modified the Preserve
` •'. ............
,.. •''`- ,ii PUD 70-03. The MCA Plan called for
r•-= •• �..,,,_ F �,� an enlargement of commercial land use
1 ti • '••. ^� ` <r, +Yr t •:•. within the Preserve boundaries. The
• .. 's ' ;�.'\ ( ' +=-=3<::. 1'';;;. location of Homart on 113 acres in The
r,• 1 .0.• ' l • { ......•r r• ., .M Preserve significantly modified the
..., '•• •9".i•t :!��;i�^wr original PUD 70-03.
n'w .,� �, .•,,•••2 'i_ i , ,t .� ;.' .The MCA Plan provided general policy
ti.• •r k u: guidelines for land use as well as speci-
_ 'i rcl1F6 '� f
R ,:,- 1 ! .7ibr'jl,�ti AI '`. fic site development criteria. The MCA
n;< v••,u .( / ,......;•„ y�' xx._1 Plan tried to respond to the city and
�•;r•hc�:.�.-:••�•�.' �•- '9= •'.••' E'rr'•�-•5,J 1,0• other governmental 'agencies while recog-
t,, ,,,„0:„„„ .1•,; "____s,, .`---; nizing development constraints of the
k„'"'")".�� t ` 77 __ land and market place.
1,..,41 (`f d a ,
'
61 7....t/fit •\ -
f7 1 :•\ `fix PM.
6g )
•
Staff Report- Area H -3- June 17, 1976
3. City Floo plain Ordinance 261
Eden Prairie adopted a floodplain ordinance which established •
policies, requirements, and procedures for lands within or adjacent
to creeks and lakes. The provision of the ordinance take precedent
over watershed district regulations and provide a basis upon which
•
to evaluate requests along or within waterways.
•
4. Purgatory Creek Study.
Eden Prairie and Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District jointly
developed a plan for Purgatory Creek over a 2 year period from 1974
through April, 1976. The City and watershed district did adopt the •
plan as a guide for utilization of the Purgatory Creek resource.
S. Department of Natural Resources-Shoreland Management Requirements.
. The State Legislation directed the Commissioner of the Department of
Natural Resources to develop standards and critieria for shoreland •
management . The Rules and Regulations were adopted early in 1976 and
each municipality is required to adopt similar standards by mid '77 .
The City is not required to operate under the provisions of the rules
and regulations until it adopts its own ordinance for shorelands.
The regulations classify lakes as General Development, Recreational
Development and Natural Environment subject to approval by the City.
The land development and subdivision requirements for each type are
more restrictive in the Environment classification and least restrictive
in the General Development classification.
•
•
.29TY
Staff Report-Area H -4- June 17, 1976
D. AREA II PLAN /f -.rp,.pccseni=s4
,, i rr mj a2 a •
�. `! i' ....,,....:„1'..‘,.. 'GeV�r j,"si I. Preserve Plan
•
name es`" Gar r 4erN,•-.-a0'..CCI "
® 4, ,„rear' H,l . .- p4
:omrn31, „cornm2 ..1. • 44v
45ac a Ca r rzc-.t NsJ,". ' • ''i b The Preserve,PUD 70-3, and the Commer •
-
rsncaeetr Fe,Eat~ral. °°4 4 ��r ,,,y. , cial Plan, PUD 74-12, both proposed
dt F°Toed 1 1 '_1 a' , a,c �s commercial land use in Area H. The
4 • -;- J j a�':t",,,, t , rc 1970 concept was for almost 45 acres west
y • ei r r.. G �_, ! of the NSP power easement with about
0, Gtaneli =-Gta1►el_-7 e .,`Jc%: 1�' C 40 n building coverage,
* - Q .� ii u eir4 AO « The 1974 Commercial Plan proposed for •
• �. Q;ea;°„g G`_"s1B aPd 4` Area H a 26 acre building area out of a
_ I , .�__+ total 46 acre site. The 1974 Plan pro-
-� "t �.., _ posed auto dealerships adjacent to the
`t 1�r Ring Road with parking and storage
___..) .4 \
/, Ji t,-v-0 \\ �.,„ _�__• partially in the floodplain . Ownership
r"aa, \\\I\ ,�;. _— ! of the floodplain was proposed to be
''. �\ (� • divided between each dealership with
\• G 1�7` -� r' a _- some legal instrument assuring its
-"- `; 1 ,.; 1,, r`_ , , __-. __ _._ continued use as open space.
•
_._._. ._./ey 5 _• rr.
modrl.in / i- K, ,� "\ \ . .fhe 1974 Plan required about 9 acres of
1 T,.''; ,(1a,;^ ..xF / floodplain encroachment along the Ring
(�__ 1 ±el I _ `<,'' // Road to gain the "maximum use of access
a, /, j 1 ';.;. ` allowed on the Ring Road", and allow'
4 .`�- t '.M t�,-I,S I+T1.1 "minimum penetration into the floodplain".I '
• f— y
1� / i \1 _ ..._. [ 1.;v. Conclusion:
- — •. 1_,..:I 1 it ' _ Generally, the 1976 Area H Plan conforms
I ,....4Ij with the original 1970 PUD and the 1974
r {11 Commercial Plan. The 1976 Area H.Plan
„ .11!. utilizes a different site layout configur-
j l t,, ation but does propose essentially the
„,llt same land uses of generally the same
Ir4 acreage amount.
`1 .
PRIVATE Ft 000 PLAIN /� t,
o a mN".D., ; �'�,.;
Na..Ntt ,D.,4,
a.Dtnmt trl.. sncl '/ / .r: ,
' 4444ILL! / 1
.. [
` �,
♦Neu• , N�N'.fl(YIO�LIN\
IL ', I i I : 1'4.41.114 414.1. 444
\(
1 .t V D 11'xi I I ; �.
\ 41 x.,.S II II KDl tldll t4,p,t,,t
j a I 4 tl v \.1, I1.,,, 4 ` ,p.
!�''c �! wcy.•'�s 11` N is
_ _ 1 \-.
�, lip U
lPreserve Commercial Plan, Development Concepts, 1974, page 32
2939
•
Staff Report-Area H -5- June 17, 1976
2. MCA Plan
The MCA Plan proposes regional service and
vs, . jai-, d� ,. regional office land use on the upland adja-
�' •. _ •( �\ �`- ' cent to 169 and Schooner Boulevard's inter-
4 , , *''+e!•,„ e` section. Medium and high density housing is
�W'�'— ......,....,, ;.. '� �'j proposed adjacent to and within the floodplain
t>t• •,,,,,,;.;.....e ... „;"f y �`4••A�y i g• of Purgatory Creek.
C , � ��:,. i � '' .fhe MCA Plan recommends " public interest in
�^ `'f 7 ,) l ` e•e C all prominent natural features be a part of
e' i w 1• t..f'' ni - :p
`•„ „.!, /<:`•^,•r,_`� ' ,« ; �.o„4,`e every development proposal". . . This does
f 9 •�;' ' fir ^\ •.,,•7 ,e . `''•e .0-,, not necessarily mean public ownership, rather
0.,! r�, i w• •• v,rii pabiic involvement through usage , control.,
!-j ' I " ;�, cry etc.... scenic easement or land retraction
• �__._�_ i ._ 1 I p' might provide reasonable assurances. Purgatory a `
;e , ���� I ': Creek, its floodplain and steep slopes are
23 • '', t,'•0:• ,./t, • a-•,�7 if features identified as signficant by the
k,`, ''f ry•,, r'.•, • MCA Plan and would require development restric-
•
�f - _I• ,`.q0 r•, I 1 rr Y.... ..+••'/. .
• • . ' •tc,,.'44 ,,. `;;,`7 ..,..")'p 44 _ The MCA Plan does balance environmental values •
%' l t.;`•• `�C°,,•' ':;+. 4i• f2iJ',, 4✓ with economic and land development constraints
•/' �r •4 �.� �J Pres in an effort to achieve realistic goals. The
- '` f ;- �T.:,..,, �cl Area H site was anticipated to require grading •
�` 'IV; -...'\,tr•;....., h ,.i>'II and floodplain encroachment. The MCA concept
`` `/ilj 4 -) ,I�\, ,'ti 4 attempted to locate land uses in proximity
1 I , to open space areas where such a siting
t 3 J! enhances the natural environment and land use.
`: I -;For example, housing or office land uses are
+ suggested adjacent to or within the Purgatory
,4 -- ; k i I Creek.. floodplain. The Area 11 plan proposes
- _ __ 1�����other appropriate open space floodplain uses
T � such as: farming, golf driving range,nursery,
etc.
h
1 • Land use plans such as the MCA Plan are only
JL E:
I• feasible if the economic costs equal the
Repoi,al Park -1 benefits or the "hottom line". The city must
Flood PiaO'.:. 2 i
Oren Space••;•., _ 3' maintain consistent taxing,assessment,land
Reglon:+lCex�i,� ic'�I� use, and dedication policies in order to `;;
achieve the high environmental goals—yet
FIIghv,yCorninc cad 5 tt
xav�o l< 6 allow a competitive high density commercial
Rui!on,IF t(
RcKjcrId Office ':;7
center to develop.
Ld,r;i,,l 8f
\He us'u,g f
zy90 .
•
Staff Report- Area H -6- June 17, 1976
•
3. Purgatory Creek Study
•
The Purgatory Creek Study was jointly funded •
by the City and Watershed District and pre-
pared by Brauer S Associates. Eden Prairie
adopted the study as a guide for resource
management and land use development adjacent
to Purgatory Creek.
Norm Stone, consultant/naturalist, summarizes
the natural conditions of the Purgatory Creek
•
•marsh south of TH 5,at the present time, as
an open mono-type of little wildlife value.
With an excellent water regulatory site avail-
able at the marsh outlet it would appear no
better use could be made of the flbodplain
than what nature intended.
•
The study recommends potential uses, manage-
ment and control for the MCA marsh
Potrntlel Use: The lowland month of Righamy S aheuld be retained as major
a(xn iPaCe t hin the M.C.A. She vegetatiat in this area is at present a
annotne consisting of graraes and shrubs. This is in a coccessit al stale
which will gradually beeps.dense berth thereby limiting the long vistas an.,
present. 7hre.hgh mar netnt of this highly visible space,aesthetic and
recreational value can IC enhanced. Initial trail develcernaht should folio
the test marsh edge with future develossent (internal and peripheral)as
necessary.
'Ate tight coulter licrworoo the marsh and Staring Lake rn_reatlan area (water
oriented recreation)provides an cxcellent trail linkage. Access to the tin-
nesting trail can to gained at either end of the valley and at a point
midway through where a field road crosses the Creek. W.creation uses of the
open space nay include: field gases,hiking,bicycling,etc.
Maworrbsatr T e rush has little value at habitat in its present condition.
dui as tf water level mold be=trolled at the'Creek's outlet from the
marsh,an ideal use would be the develcirent of a shallow wildlife flowage.
A dike and control strecture world be needed,after wihirh higher water levels
would control the suooessirral vegetation,
Control: The mush area is another of the atypical sites along the Creek and
tUieref<ire requires sracial annsideratial to establish its overall value to the
system. In this case,alUmacgh not as ecologically significant, the aesvt<tie
and recreational value ranks high. The rectolh'ndaticn in to achieve an centa
defir✓d by the 630 contour. *ale this is in excess of the defined 106-year
flred limits and substantially in dress of the 60 acre/lineal mile concept.
the determination is in accard.seoe with the objectives of the concept and
racrratimal needs. Control through the,corridor to Research laced should be
acooplirJrd through the 60 acre/¢eek mile concept.
I.YSA ado...ran,In b0.a ,
.---•---._.—.q.p.M Nand qaw waa M Ihecw.da
d,w«a caannw-- ..pwaue..-no.o1w.N Leal craw,gra.
ea sea ara„nwr canto .aaad.a.a ap.wd4.Y.aath
boa ry
TYPICAL.M.CA SECTOR-UPPER END
The Area H plan proposes about 8 acres of fill
and encroachment into the 830 elevation. Other
proposed floodplain uses, except automobile
parking lots,seem consistent with the Purgatory
Creek Study.
239 �
-7-
Staff Report-Area H (Section E) July 23, 1976
orI'NSPACE ISSUES
The major issue surrounding the Area H plan as it relates to open space
concerns the Purgatory Creek Study end an interpretation of the menage- ;-
meet policies vs the use of the creek corridor.
The study report itself does not speak to public vs private ownership of the
Major Center Area Floodplain. However, during the course of public
hearings on the study Mr. Brauer on many occasions spoke to the public
ownership and park use of this area. Mr. Brauer speaks to the recreational
nodes on either end of the major trail connections between the Major Center •
Area Floodplain and Staring Lake. Potential uses of the Major Center Area
Floodplain include: field games, hiking, biking, management for wildlife, •
etc. •
The question then/simply statedrbecomes one of public vs private ownership.
Do we visualize for this part of the Purgatory Creek area a major recreation
resource for the community, or do we visualize commercial/agriculatural
or other private uses.
Strict r,dherence to the Purgatory Creek Plan calling for the 830 contour
is probably not realistic.The Major Center Area plan called for some
filling of the floodplain and assessments have been levied against a part
of the floodplain for improvements made. The spirit of the Purgatory Creek
Study for this area could seem to be intrepreted as a public recreation
resource of significant size of community wide benefit. If the City were •
to acquire the area identified as private floodplain on the Preserve's
proposal, we could begin to implement this concept of the Purgatory Creek -
Study.
Because the original Preserve PUD Concept Plan did not contemplate any
public open space on Area H, we need to analyze the method by which we
go ehout implementing the Purgatory Creek Study so as to provide a
equitable and fair treatment of the Preserve. lithe property is to be
acquired by the City it should be done through some method other than
dedication through the development process. This could include trading
other property or outright purchase. The Preserve's open space committments
for this properly have been met through the overall PUD including their
agreement to dedicate the west shores of Anderson Lakes for the Anderson
Lakes Nature Center. In an effort to summarize all of the open space issues
surrounding the Preserve we have drawn a Draft Agreement between the City
and the Preserve summarizing the responsibility of each party (see Appendix
A).
•
•
2_9962-
__ 4 e an
•
-8-
Staff Report-Urea H (Section E) July 23, 1976
Perhaps the question of public recreation space along this section of
Purgatory Creek cannot be answered at this time. In that case, the
City and Preserve could modify numbers 10 and 11 of the Draft Agreement
to reserve the right to acquire the property at a later date:
Finally should the City not wish to achieve a public recreation resource
in this section of Purgatory Creek suctions 10 and 11 of the Draft Agreement
can he modified to provide for "acceptable floodplain uses of privately
held property". These might include all of those listed in the Preserve
Plan except parking.
•
•
2993
Staff REport-Area H , -9- July 22, 1976
• is
F. LAND USE
1. Grading•
Options A,13, 6 C listed in the Area H booklet illustrate a range of land
alteration plans. In addition a modified "C" plan might permit retaining
of the tree line existing between the floodplain and upland. Depending
upon vegetation quality this may be possible.
2. Access
The Preserve Plan, pages 8-11, booklet does not show any connection from
Schooner Pot livard to TH 169. Such a connection might be a modification to
the Area H plan.
3. Development Concepts
The plans illustrated on pages 4,5,6,9,10 6 11 are examples of conceptually how
the site might be developed. Realistically, many other development plans are
possible and the staff can not recommend one over the other without more definite
information. Clearly the break between floodplain and urban land use is critical
as discussed in Section E. The option of reserving the area adjacent to the
floodplain for high density development is also possible and would conform with
the MCA plan.
4. City Approvals_
The Preserve is requesting rezoning based upon the concept plans for Area H
from Rural to C.-Reg Ser. Currently the low land is zoned FP(Floodplain ).
Also, approval of the preliminary plat ( page 13 ) for Area H is requested.
The preliminary plat would divide the property into 2 lots with access easements.
The City has not in the past :zoned property without specific development plans, ._
thereby assuring a high degree of control over the final development.
The City say consider requiring site plan review of all development applications
and approval by the Council or Planning Commission if the rezoning to C-Reg-Ser
is approved. It should be pointed out that it is much easier to interest
purchasers in :.coed property than concept approved property.
5. Development Requirements
If the City approves rezoning and platting of Arca H, then general development
standards should be prepared which deal with many design guidelines for the
specific development plans. For example, lighting, parking, landscaping,
pedestrian syatems, etc. The Council may direct the staff to have such
guidelines incorporated into the zoning agreement.
•
�99�1
Staff Report-Area H _10_ July 22, 1976
•
G. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The floodplain encroachment is consistent with past city policies,
approvals and assessments. The fill area anA configuration proposed
is reasonable based upon site conditions and city policy.
2. The floodplain land uses should allow open space or recreational
types and not those required by urban development. Specifically
farming, golf course, etc., are reasonable uses, however, parking
lots for adjact-ot urban uses are not,in the staff's opinion, good '
: open space uses.
3. No floodplain areas should be zoned to C-Reg-Ser use
in the staff's opinion.
4. C-Reg-Ser use illustrated in the Area H booklet ( page 7 ) are
reasonable uses for the MCA.
S. Utilize the entire non-floodplain site for commercial uses as
proposed or reserve the area adjacent to the floodplain and west
of the tree line for high density residential. The staff believes
either plan will work and meets the intent of the MCA Plan.
6. Traffic access should provide one or more • future connections to the
property south along TH 169 .
7. That the future plans for specific site development should be
received by the staff and approved by the Planning Commission prior
to issuance of building permits.
8. That the staff and Preserve should develop specific site development
guidleines for inclusion in the zoning agreement.
•
9. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission should speak
to the question of public vs. private ownership of the Floodplain
area ;aid take steps to accomplish the public recreational aspects of
Floodplain use in this section of the creek as recommended by the
Purgatory Creek Open Space Corridor Study. •
•
•
249c
•
•
Minutes — Parks, Rec. and Page Seven
Natural Resources Commission approved July 19, 1976
b. Crosstown. Baptist ChIGTA
•
Jensen spoke to Staff Report of July 16 porte1ning to construction of
a church, parking lot and recreational facilities on a total. of 8.57
acres. •
•
Singrey asked what their intention was in building recreational
facilities. Jensen responded that some of the purchased land is
low and not suitable for any use but open space type of use.
Jessen said the property was located between St. John's Wood and
Mr. Kelly's property, north of Forest Hills Elementary.
xingrey expressed interest in possibility of development of ball fields
and wanted to know more about the proposal, suggesting that we work
closely with them on this objective. Jeesea referred to point no. 4
of the Staff recommendation, rich states this intention of the church
and city park& recreation deportment to allow joint recreation use of
city and church facilities.
Choiniere asked whether there was a timetable for completion. Jessea
responded that it was generally set for two years for this kind of pro—
ject.
MOTION: Anderson moved to recommend approval of the Staff Report of
Jrly 16, 1976, subject to the recommendations of the report. Garen
• seconded. motion carried. with Pierce abstaining.
approved
Planning Coir iss.ioe Minutes -3- July 26, 1976
•
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS '
I
A. Crosstown Baptist Church, request for rezoning for approixmately 9 acres from
. Rural uu Public. The site is-locatedta6500 Baker Road, cast of Baker Road
and South of St. John Woods.
f':
The planner referred the commission to the staff report and the brochure submitted
by the church.
Pastor Cornelius outlined the history of the church as an independent bible church,
incorporated in 1971, with a growing congregation. The church decided to move to
the western suburbs and the congregation voted unanimously to purchase this site
without coatinecncy on rezoning. They desire to meet the moral, spiritual, social,
and recreational needs of the community. Their decision to purchase the prolisrty
was based ()lithe Guide Plan, its close proximity to the school, and its location
within a growing residential community.
Mark Putman, Robert Engstrom v Asso., outlined the plans for the site, the proposed
County realignment of Baker Road, parking lots, and recreational uses. He stated
the parking is 20 ' from the existing road, but could he 20' from the future + '
road right-of-way as desired by the city staff. `
Schee questioned how many spaces would be available during the first phase.
Mark Putman responded 47, and outlined the location as per the brochure.
Soren:-en inquired if the city had accepted the Baker Road realignment as
shown on the plans. The planner stated no formal acceptance has been given.
Sorensen geestioncd how much of the 9 acres needed to be rezoned as the City
would lose the revenue from whatever is zoned to Public. The planner believed
the Crosstown Church request was reasonable, and felt they would work with the
city for mutual benefits of the recreational uses and the building.
Schee stated she felt the church use was appropriate at this site as it would give � .
relief from the intense development of St. John Woods. She added she would like
to sec the city and church work together for joint use of the facilities.
Barb O'Grady, 6316 St. Johns Drive, stated she would like to see some single family
around St. Johns instead of industrial or commercial.
•
Linda Knutson, 6374 St. Johns Drive, inquired if the City had any control over
what would be constructed on the commercial property across Baker Road. The
planner stated the present zoning is commercial ( having lapsed from Planned Study ),
and perhaps the site will be considered for rezoning during the Guide Plan updating.
Barb O'Grady asked if the church would have buses and if they would be stored within
a garage. Cornelius said the church presently has 2 buses, ( being kept in individual's i
yards ), and may acquire morn in the future. Mr. Mark Putman felt the site was
unsuitable for the storage of buses.
Motion:
Lynch mov,d, fosi 'cht seconded, to recommend to the Council approval of the Crosstown
Baptist. Church request for rezoning from Rural to Public as per the staff report of
7--16-7e, item: 1-5, and I 6 to read:
6. Bus storage is not to be allowed onsite without adequate
.crr,•nine to be approved by the City staff.
Vets: „r ion carried 4:0:1 with Son:ncen abstainira; boo iusr l;; war, not 0ers0,,:411y
t i ,I, !r u:l;nt , if an) stet'.., ciunr'd he ! ,Gen i t cru idvrati>n of th far: `e:.1 ur
,, :� Q rlra'I
•
STAFF LEPORT
APPLICANT: Cronslown Baptist Church
REQUEST: Rezoning Ilom Rural to Public District
IDCATION: 9.35 acres west of Baker Road south of st. Johns Wood
EROM: DiC: Pn!nam, Planning Director
DATE: :July 3G, 1976 •
COMPREHENSIVE P171: COEPATIRTLITY
The plmn illuntrates tt activities center located around Balzer Road and
County Rcod 62 inte,:mccs-..ics. The intent wan to provide the neichLorhood
and coma:unity services for the north central area of Edcn Prairie including:
shopping, Dulti-tomili hounine„ water tower/parRs, local churches, and other
neighborRecd service ihstitutionn.
A realignment of Behe,1 Rood was anticipated in the 196B Plan allowing
Baker head to function as a mojor city collector street, Today Baker
Rood is classified os minor arterial County Rong.
•
•
7 7 •
• l;
,
"k‘ 3 \ •
r 1 ,
_ ,
s -
\\\\
\
;•
.019 :•:! \\\
P
k, )
fTorc ] rotucticlifi. of the 9 Mile Creek floodplan WAS antic3pated in the
policies ol Con.prehehsive Plan. Also an elementary school location was to
be louJtei; it: the area Co nerve north central Edou
CROSE17.,NN h/O'TIST CnUtCN PLAN COMPATIBILITY
rne ehereh ono an prooened in the July 9, 1976 application accomodates the
constSaint propo:AA acid exitingt
A. a lOC foot iiqht of way for Baker Rood up grad3nit is taken into
:quc1wo.31 of the ri Jht of way'will be necessary by
nennein County ext., to removal of emiL:ting
2 9q
i
0
STAFF REPORT
) '1'LTCAW'I': Crorotown 13apti.rt Church .
REQUEST: Rezoning iic'ni Rural to Public District
LOCATION: 9.35 acres west of Baker Road south of St. Johns Wood
FROM: Dick Putnam, Planning Director
DATE: July 36, 1976
i
COMPIOIIENSIVE P1 r I COMFINI13ILITY
The plan i lli tr, -:s an activities center located around Raker Road and
County Road (2 int•rrcct.ion. The intent was to provide the neighborhood
and cn:. iunity services for the north central area of Eden Prairie including:
shopping, mu]ti-family housing, water tower/parks, local churches, and other
neighborhood service institutions.
i
A realignment of Baker Road was anticipated in the 196E Plan allowing
Baker Road to function as a major city collector street. Today Maker
Road is classified as a miner arterial County Road.
•/p _! gp_t11,,
1--, ::, :., . Tc,,,.'.::1,(..1 :-6/ i
•
L. J1 i„rr.��,,f _l _
•
, r\C \
} \\\\ '
I5S ,
Open space protections of the 9 Mile Creek floodplan was anticipated in the
policies of Coc;rrchennivo Plan. Also an elementary school location was to
be located in the area to serve north central Eden Prairie.
CROSSTOval RAPT1ET CIIURCII 1'LAU COMPATIBILITY
i•he church use an proposed in the July 9, 1976 application accomodates the
constraints proponcd and ,n.lint_fug:
a. a 300 foot right of way for Baker Roads up grading is taken into
connidcratiou. Purchase of the right of way'will be necessary by
Donuc14in County due to removal of existing buildings.
1-` 9 9
fit.
•
Page 2
•
b. open space development of low lands is consistent with watershed,
city and state policies.
•
c. the objectives of the church support the communities needs for
active open ,pace recreation areas.
d. the plan illustrates a respect for the site and locates appropriate
uses to take advantage of the natural features.
e. A phased development program is proposed that can be useful by
the church & city in evaluating future building designs.
£. the church plans will accomodate the needs for city utilities
and respect area drainage requirements.
STIFF REC0,'•:YJ;NDATION
1. That the 8.57 acre Crosstown Baptist Church site be recommended
for rezoning from Rural District to Public District for development
of a church complex including:
- parking lot (conforming to city ordinances)
- church buildings (including residences if required)
- open space/recreation development
2. That the site plan meet the requirements for PUB Districts as set
forth in Ordinances•141, 135, 178.
3. That the site plan presented does not completely meet the front
yard set back, required for the parking lot of 50 feet from the •
street right of way. The parking lot should be moved to meet the
50 foot ret back :rom existing Baker Road. .
4. that the church work with the city park & recreation department
to allow joint recreation use of city & church facilities.
5. To provide if needed a walkway easement connecting Forest Bill
School north to St. John's grounds. The walkway most likely
would be along the west Property line.
•
•
•
•
3oo0 •
•
•
•
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -7- June 28, 1976
C. Planned Study in Southwestern Eden Prairie.
The commission briefly discussed the Planned Study District and the general location
of the property in question. They asked the staff to compile the exact legals
for the property involved.
Motion:
Lynch moved, Sundstrom seconded, to recommend the City Council reinstate the property
in Planned Study for 1 year or until the completion of the guide plan update which
ever comes first.
•
•
•
360i
I •
,
•
Mad Qt to O c �� \Cj
CITY Or EDEN PRAIRIIi
IHENNEP'IN CO>UN'IY, MIN,NPSOTA
NOTICE IS IIuREBY GIVEN, that the Eden Prairie City Council will meet
in the Eden Prairie City Hall, 8950 Eden Prairie Road, on Tuesday,
September 7,'76at 7:30 PM , and will at said time and place conduct
a public hearing on rezoning the below described properties from
I-Gen back to Planned Study.
Location: See map
Legal Descriptions: See back of notice
+,' ... 7210 E L_ B.n !+walrr4y.I I \�,"r(
PUB B'T s-+ /
.%' 7-2 tl10•B. ��—NI•eK �..
, •
c
I.113 I J 9Th B 9f49 f.,,��//
1 4J I4S N12:
:iI wB t�s r « a
��'.. 1.4EN _. ^� 1..._.
B K J 8 S,-r7 N . • /9-57-♦ ILIA ■ iz_ ctu lr.4'.M.I.:,. 10 ¢N`.�.�� .5 RI-22 YI•`.---.- N�_ '1.�.. vRl RCN '•-' 3.L. ,. .J.-
' 93 - I�Rx RI_:. T.T !`.,`,I'A...1 - 149� /7 fdN.11
ITB IY //
H5 I , 17'2 1,1'2 NI•.2// h
NY"2.B .,',
Mitchel_ ; �t-'r B•,
('� IG•6
_, 15.1 Lake r1M
PUB-_ �.
1 Hi.i.6E • - t
O ---fl-
T
��� )� NOI:TH r•.i. • a,. t 4
F p \ .' oa o Rt
t Ss
\� Q\ot' Swab 20. .i rP
cN.- C.- _-J__ '1. . b 4` , ,J
2°42
'' �
•
L r I( 1r° '1 .
M t •
,So• • z, 2p B p1 =. 1
.40� Puy]
Weer . . 2�.1
20®
Lake w .,:Jz• {
21•e
Rilel+... •
2n +' rue 1
•
V I
. re•a
►- 1 I-P PBB
' \ . \. • I
3Cw2-
I, ... ..
A I
:-;
AZ.
n'Pl'n "P“ZW.g.1$77015;RMV.5;:
2
7,1.111.F: 7.2 . 2.- g,V,i ' ,154'721 5, 1.V.A.1
.
kFL,.. ,7, . . .,: v..1,
: "-';''; 7.4 *- 7 .,.* :17,",::: :17;14s,:-,.%
;,.,• ?,-;:tnii:Th-,,,,,ii • C;i:
:11'':".; 7, .4=r; 'F''. .';,; l'•,, .. "C...E.'...; '4 :.:q; .- A4::-. 1,: ,,,.?
;?:,2; ': 7
' :;- 7 V4
,-.„i ';... -
.....".; .
ff''iRli , ,q:. .'..2 .
L.::; E.":1I4:-:dq:'!'iii PsvT.
ICiFi':'; ?
r;
' '. '.ir '; r...I M
.:'.7S:77-t.7 7
.1,2, ,%",,? ,„,:,:,,4 , :v..
? ' Fi
' ' .- "E"° :" Z'l 15 °;;:“WgleIRAti
- ':/ ' gg.a'j-"VsS,77-3' A 5:7:12i4,1S".S°7:: :7: if, 1
"t." - " ° - - 22'S, s.g ;Ira.. .A. ,T4g1,4 .5 _ . . .
F ; g"g ii.11
' 1 ' .E
m - ..
rc. • , 1,— ,
dcl' A2 A2 1
g -S
.
A 7
2 21
- ..-.
I
. ,,,,4, r7;::,: p- ....;', "*4-.7.;;' 4...T"
viV "):':' ?E' AZASI".1SZ 122,SE W.7, Rur: EEZ1?
4.7" 8"- -,, : TZ;;' :i -Ar.;
0- f::: 2, ,, :'1,:!:4 " ;vq; HT - AT itg7".
-' -,-, tip . .3i.foi; ?. .tr-,.
,
'' .rq' ZVgg4 A!'. ;; ,,
;:— • :::°. '94,12. ;g,.P., --; V'F''
. ";;'" -- eZ3Pr rgg. gemi
2.. .1:,,,i7,...
...,?
4 i"!;"': :":''''. .-4-' ti!! ..z-AF • '", -i' °::; .-4,-1.
"I ' '"""" 'i .." ; Er ..i ."" i "'.
t0 '" " ' ' “L " -- x'; 3ZWr -
0""il.:' -'2': 3f.. 1,7.A...'ge,p , ..? g,_.1; • ..1„ ii.41:,,,
:.
,,,
'' ' 'enie4M. Fi AA3 ;,,,i
":.. ::1 I
7..:: !!?' TP.
.1.:*'i liPg.?: iF.1; .-4
. .:.1•IF PV:::371S3 , 4-0 ::; : rv"
::.. ..„--g4;,1,1 ,:ik iig id F., .,...1
?.vqg:,
7? gg°i c. ;.i itrtf
_ 14 ti "
r , :,-,,,, ..1, .o.s..-' :3:17 .... , ....
::. A1'71 4,, x 4.
1.1 ,..
,..42 . „. . 6 vt7 ....
;
.1
z, vl.
,... , .
P34 ir44 I; ilg
A"
,..
...;
S
g, g g 6
•
•
30o3
1 I
Emma
CITY OPPttt2-y 99S9 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD/EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA SS343/TELEPHONE 151E)941•12RI
•
•
August 27, 1976
NAM€
•
P,�nr
. -On Tuesday, September 7, 1976,the Eden Prairie City Council will meet
in the Eden Prairie City Hall, 8950 Eden Prairie Road at 7:30 PM and
will at said time and place conduct a public hearing on rezoning proper-
ties located in southwestern Eden Prairie ( for legal descriptions see
•
back of letter ), from I-General to Planned Study.
Our records show the following property(s) affected and owned by you:
-PLAT rfI R C E.L S •
All comments, suggestions and/or inquiries should be submitted in advance
of the hearing or at the hearing itself. A copy of the proposed rezonings
are on file at the City Pall and may be viewed between the hours of
8:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday.
Questions can be directed to the City Planner Dick Putnam at 941-2262.
1 ry.I rY
Sincerely; ✓'' L, ;.. L I. •✓
. •_. F 1 i ,
•
Richard Putnam ' »'T,,
• Planning Director •
•
RPj ,
�11 �lU
iE�it tlsdtlf��: ;
•
Affected Area tf ! ■6f se:. ;,
Or;►9m Lr: •
• : ‘. # E
•
4.
•
•
•
•
Minutes - Parks. Rec. and Page Sever
Natural Resourcee Coumiiceion approved July 19, 1976
c. Nveren Estates
Jessen reported that the property is located east and south of Bidden Ponds,
and they are proposing to fulfill requirements' of the cash park fee .
Ordinance of G275 per lot.
M)TION: Garen moved to accept recommendation of Staff regarding the
Nygren Estates. Choiniero seconded, nation carried nnaninously.
•
300
JJ 9/3/76
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1183
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY
PLAT OF ROBERT NYGREN LD-76-P-07
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie
Minnesota as follows:
The preliminary plat of Robert Nygren located South of
Hidden Ponds on Valley View Road, between Park View Lane and
the East plat boundary of Hidden Ponds,
being in the County of Hennepin and the State of Minnesota
described as:
All that part of the East 400 feet which lies North of
a line drawn at right angles to the East line, at a point
thereon, distant 525 feet South of the Northeasterly
• corner of the following described tract of land: That
part of the West half of the Northeast Quarter, Section
•
7, Township 116, Range 22, described as beginning at
the Southwest corner of said West Half of the North-
east Quarter; thence North along the West line thereof
724.14 feet; thence Northeasterly , deflecting to the
right 49 degrees, 31 minutes, a distance of 579.72
feet; thence Northeasterly along a tangential curve
to the right with a radius of 1769.08 feet to a point
on the East line of said West Half of the Northeast 1
Quarter distant 1485.35 feet North of the Southeast $
corner of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter;
thence South along said East line to a point 196.48
feet North of said Southeast corner; thence Southwesterly
to a point on the South line of said West Half of the
Northeast Quarter distant 363.78 feet West of said South-
east corncr;thence West along said South line to the
point of beginning.
Subject to the terms of the Rezoning Agreement, dated _ day
of , 1976 executed between the City of Eden Prairie and
Mr. Robert Nygren.
AND, is found to meet the purposes and objectives or is in
conformance with the provisions of Eden Prairie Ordinance 93
and all amendments thereto.
ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1976.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL �OO5
John D. Franc, Clerk •
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
° ••�� 8550 COUNTY ROAD P4
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55343
August 4, 1976
•
.
if
•
I
Mr. Richard Putnam
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Re: Robert Nygren Plat
Dear Mr. Putnsm:
. The engineering advisors for the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed ,i.
District have reviewed the information relative to the above referenced
project as suLmitted to the Watershed District. A grading and land alter-
ation permit must be obtained from the Watershed District for this develop-
meat. This permit should be obtained alter the development has been approved
by the City Council but before building perr.dts are. issued. Plans detailing •
how erosion will be controlled during project construction should accompany
the permit application.
i
Thank you for the opportunity to conaaent on this develop.ent. If you
have any quosti-ons about the District's involvement in this development,
please coat.eel
Sincerely,
p (93,A ,
fit 0 •
Allan Cebhnrd
PARR PNCINEERIMC CO.
Engineer for the District
•
AC/any
c: Mr. Eredcrirk Rich rds •
Mr. Conrad Yi:;kneas
•
1`
' f
•
approved i
Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 26, 1976
C. Robert Nygren, request for preliminary platting and rezoning to R1-13.5 for
8 lots. The site is located south of Hidden Ponds on Valley View Road, between
Park View Lane and the east plat boundary of Hidden Ponds.
The planner referred the commission to the staff report and stated the project
is straight fonsard and the staff recommends approval.
Mr. Nygren stated he will be selling the lots. '
Sorensen questioned the advisability of the offset streets. The planner stated the
street situation is unavoidable because of the existing platting.
Bob Cole, 7160 Park View Lane, asked when and how Valley View Road would be improved.
The planner said Valley View would be improved to a four lane road , perhaps in
about five years.
Lynch asked if sewer and water were available to the project. The planner replied
affirmative.
Motion 1:
Lynch moved, 5undstrom seconded, to close the public hearing. The motion carried
unanimously.
• I
Motion 2:
Lynch moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the Council approval of the request for
rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for 8 lots on 4.1 acres , and approve the preliminary
plat dated 7-9-76 contingent on the recommendations of the staff report dated 7-22-76.
The motion carried unanimously.
•
•
•
•
.3001
_ I
SPili' I,tPrn''r •
TO: Planning; Conrmi::aion
hP(1`d: Chris Engrg
T.I1:iii ell: Dick Putt s'e, Planning Director
j }
Iti.QllllS'1': Zoning District change from Rural to R1-13.5
and prelin,inrry platting , 8 s.f. lots
Robert ivycren
South of hidden Ponds on Valley View Rood
DAP6: July t, 1976
AACI•r;pil.',D
The irrw5aed project is cnr,>r,tly within a Rural Zoning District , but is
depi,:te,l nn rive Guido Pion a, single family .
The s;u•rcundi19• land to the north and west is platted into large single
family hcm.o lots in the rrpgc of 13,000-18,000 square feet. Hidden Ponds
First Addition ;s north of rho project directly across Valley View Road,
and ili:'dcn Pond!. Second Addition and the proposed school/par}: site are
loc:;tcn 400-506 feet wost of the project. •
S1'PI: .(:il n fi
The Situ is. cur'•e:r,ly an old farmstead a;tt, an abandoned railroad running
t.hr,,:,,.1 site direttle r.djaccnt ano sonto of Valley View Road. There
is : i in:! of cb!i ' ra:diun. story vegetst icrt along the railroad line. This
rai lsat i , dusi,n: ::'l on tin City's Opc:r, Space System Map as a major trail
corgi,tu, ,.Gm tl:c• Hidden l'otds area and west up through Prairie View school
site. 1'hc Irru;: .ed Hidden Ponds school site area is also adjacent to this
open,; rer'r•ick: 1inl,. i
The l:i 'lr point of the site of 926' points toward the: southeast and ncrthenst •
to 1,n: elevnt io of f)IP;. Slopes on the site raivc from 2-6% in the iloy6er
Sandy In::,: wren ;c 5--1' on the llavdenClay Loam :,rca. Soils from these Bros s
on tfcy., 1rr+ 'e:n t ' ., have only moderate limitations for urban and c?tc::r•r
cii1 ,:tcle:,_,:;r r:ith irn6lic• sewer. The area adjacent to the south boundary
lane .f tl:c paopor:a is a lower wet area listed as a Marsh soil material.
'Phi ; soi Is ::!.ea r:u,,1,i n:,,st likely not he acceptable for future development
and lot l-l;.Itin wend nave le take this factor into consideration.
Anotl'-.•r l:: I', to con.,idcr IIi this project is that in future are•t plattir,1:
of strn.t hail'ci;r,. The cul-do-sac arca illustrated as Quail Circle
shrn:n in s,cl. :;r that the distance her;:cen its center line and the ccet ar ,I
line ,.1 Valle: \'ie. had ciil dc•- ac which is to the oast, would only be •
nppY,: ii::,tel .(I .•c,l. i',din: :re it lr'l veer:; to street jogs under Sulyd.,,
Article ' , i'ot l,nC:,, " rr,t a: jog,; shai i have a center line offset of
ISO feel or more r;lr,•( a;,l,i 1 :o minor street!: or sarvice streets. In all
of h''.• r ace ;hey I t,I l ho :v.i.i 2d",
SOO
i
Staff Report-Nygren Plat t Zoning -2- July 22, 1976
Approval of thn plan a:; :shown would require a variance in regards to the
street offset. In addition the land area to the west of this project. is
approxinutcly 410 ' wide , or about the same width as this project.
Since a ''heal/pail: site may ultimately hound that project on the west
and ar,::.r: f,,r the school/park site will probably he taken off of the
partway, ibis only accost-. to the land west and south of this project would
he off of Valley View Road much in the same manner as the proposed Quail
Circle serves this project. II. appears that the next project would also
require a tinrianre iar offset. streets.
Since this: projtcl is not a pud application, but rather trying to conform
as closely as pw,Sil,lc to the 13.5 Zoning Category, and Suhd. Ord. 93, the
4 cul-de-:.ac Jot:, labeled 3,4,5,$ 6 would have to be given width variances
from ito 90 foot width required under Ord, 135. Since the lot sizes are
all over 14•, 900 square feet,the width variance for the cul-de-sac lots
seem': to he well founded and infact is almost always the case with cul-
do-sae lots in Eden Prairie
PARK AND OPEN SPACR REQUIREMENTS
Since hit proposed a:a io,• open space link located on the old right-of-way
of the ra.ili-,':,CI goer diagonally across the north portion of this site,
presrr5ation of ite right-of-way should be insured through the platting
process.
.3:52 r,.pa_:ding cash in lieu of land dedication for park fees,
adopted in .luue of this. your, requires $275/s.I'. detached lot payable at time
of bn;ldiuq permit .':pp)teStion . In addition to this , approximately
oc, 'e ,t ;•i' trail +:iii sumcd:ay be coi,slruci.e•d across the north end of this
site on the old railroad ri.t'ht-or••way. If this trail cost were assessed
exclu:ivel;• to thin development, the enst wau?d be about $ 200/lot. This
in addition to the $ 275/Jot seals to he excessive for park fee. Therefore,
the rip,h:-of-way for the trail Should be reserved and dedicated to the
City and the City should !mild this major trailway connection as money
comes aw,ilattle as: is done stitlt other major trails.
The planning staff would reeenunend approval of the request for rezoning
•
from I'::,ral to R1-13.S for ti,e proposed tt lot , 4.4 acre suhdivisiou, and
apprornl of the preliminary platting; for the sane contingent upon meeting
all of lia recommendations of this report.
CIi:ij •
•
whp/jh 8/31/76
R
•
ORDINANCE NO. 334
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to
Section 10, Township 116, Range 22 as follows: .
Lots 11, 12, 13 and 35, Auditor's Subdivision No. 225
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
which property shall be and hereby is removed from Rural zone and shall be
•
included hereafter in the R1-13.5 zone.
Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Rezoning Agreement dated September , l
1976, entered into among EDENVALE, INC., DONALD R. PETERSON, KAY PETERSON,
WILBUR GJERSVIK and GJERSVIK and the City of Eden Prairie, which
agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all of
the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to such R1-13.5
zone.
Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage
•
and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie this _ day of September, 1976, and finally read and adopted
and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said
City on the _ day of , 1976.
ATTEST:
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1976.
whp/jh 9/2/76 F
{
REZONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into in triplicate this day of
September, 1976 by and between DONALD R. PETERSON and KAY PETERSON, husband
and wife; WILIBUR CJERSVIK and CAROL CJERSVIK, husband and wife; and
EDENVALE, INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Owners"
and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation of the State of
Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City."
WHEREAS, the owners have requested the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie to change the zoning of a tract of land from Rural to R1-13.5 •
for an area to be known as Forest Knoll's Second Addition, said tract of
• land is legally described as Lots 11, 12, 13 and 35, Auditor's Subdivision
No. 225, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, it is believed that the rezoning of said area to RI-13.5 will
be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the
City of Eden Prairie; and
WHEREAS, the owners agree to develop the aforementioned property as
12 single family detached lots in conformance with the attached preliminary
plat prepared by landmark Planning & Engineering Company, which plat is
dated April 20, 1976 and the City Engineer's Report dated April 21, 1976,
NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement witnesseth that for and in consideration
of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie adopting an ordinance
changing the zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and of the mutual benefits to each
of the parties hereto, the parties, their respective successors and assigns
do hereby covenant and agree to follow the conditions of this Rezoning
Agreement.
3C1/.2
_
}
The City.and Owners agree:
1. The owners of Lot 11 Auditor's Subdivision 225, Hennepin County,
Minnesotaagree that Lot 11 which on Exhibit A is shown as being Lots 1 and ,
2 of Block 1 shall not be subdivided into more than 2 dwelling sites.
2. That the owners of Lots 2 and 7, Block 1, Forest Knoll's Second •
Addition dedicate a 10 foot easement for [railway purposes along the east
line of said lots.
3. That the owners of lots 1 through 5 inclusive, Block 2 of said
preliminary plat provide plannings on Lots 2, 3 and 4 so that development of
said Lots 2,3, and 4 will not create a negative visual appearance which
would adversely affect the homeowners on the next adjoining lots fronting
on Prairie View Drive.
4. That Edenvale, Inc. is the owner of that portion of Lot 35,
Auditor's Subdivision 225 shown as the public road in the attached plat
and which it agrees to dedicate to the public as and for a roadway.
5. That park fees as required by City Ordinance shall 4e paid by
the parties hereto.
6. That all sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities,
concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing whether to be public or
private, shall be designed to City Standards by a Registered Professional
Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The
developer, through his engineer, shall provide for competent daily inspection
of all street and utility construction, both public and private. As-built
drawings with Service and valve tics on reproducible mylar and certificates
of completion and compliance with specifications shall also be delivered
to the City Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay all fees for City
_2_
gur3
Engineering and administrative services consistent with current City
requirements.
FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE:
1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules,
regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie.
2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and
enforceable against Owner, its successors and assigns, and upon all
subsequent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns of the
property herein described.
3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the
Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
4. That if Owner fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement
within twenty-four (24) months from the date hereof, Owner, for itself, its
successors and assigns agrees that it will not oppose the rezoning of said
property back to its Rural zoning.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these
presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota
BY:
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
Roger Ulstad, Manager
Donald R. Peterson
Kay Peterson
-3-
3oi(i
_ .._ it
' e
•
Wilbur Cjersvik
Carol Cjersvik
EDENVALE, INC., a Minnesota corporation
BY:
Its President
Its Secretary
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1976, by Wolfgang Penael, Mayor and by Roger Ulstad, Manager
of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of
the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public, Hennepin Co., Minn.
My commission expires
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
On this day of , 1976, before me, a notary
public within and for said County, personally appeared Donald R. Peterson
and Kay Peterson to me known to be the persons described in and who executed
the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as their
free act and deed.
Notary Public, Hennepin Co., Minn.
My commission expires
_4_
.'AY • _•__. -- .
' 1
•
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF lfENNEPlt1)
On this day of , 1976, before me, a notary public
within and for said County, personally appeared Wilbur Cjersvik and Carol
Gjersvik to me known to be the persons described in and who executed the
foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as
their free act and deed.
Notary Public, Hennepin Co., Minn.
My commission expires
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of � -
, 1976, by , the President and F :
the Secretary of Edenvale, Inc., a corporation
under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public, Hennepin Co., Minn.
My commission expires
S-
)16 ••
•
CITY OF 1 DEN PRAIRIE
CUECK LIST FOR );t:VILWING PROPOSED 1
• LAMD•oEVELOPMENTS
•
DATE: 4/21/76 '
DEVELOPMENT: Forest Knolls :nci Addition L.D. NO.
LOCATION: North of Prairie View Dr. &�P.a_t of Forest Rill Rd—
REFERENCE P.U.D. OR PREVIOUS •
ZONING 1.GR1:E:LENT: RES. ((.
DEVELOPER: •
•
Mr. G Mr. Don Peterson & ernvikT_ j
•
ERGINEEK/PLWNF.R: 1:Indmark Planning Et ineering
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEt1: Preliminary Plat (not dated)
PROPOSAL: Developer
Develo is re questing Preliminary Plat approval of the Site ('
con.c.isti.ng of 14 lots .
1. Land Mvelopmcrt application filed and filing fee & deposit paid Yen I
Copy of application forwarded to Watershed District
Yes
' • 2. Processing Schedule: • 1
• a. Planning & Zoning Commission Preliminary 4
. b. Park & Recreation Commission
d
• c. Ru:nan Rights Commission
d. Planning Commission Public llrg. •
•
e. City Council consideration 4/27/76 j
f. Watershed District
3. Typo of Develoi''nt Y Res idontia1..(Ru-]3.5) 14 Single family detached lots 4
r_•-- (
4. Environmental a^.ees.^rnont- or impact statement required per Envirorvnontal .
Impact. Policy Act of 19J73: b'
No
•
?"0 I? '0
_ ` _
•
• 1
5. Present Zoning R1-2.2 Single Family aaa
r6. Proposed Zoning R17,13.5 (or varilncr,from'Lresent. zoning)
Consistent with approved P.U.D. or Comp Plan? Yes (Comp. Plan) • (k
' List variances required & setbacks that apply: Variance from approved
zoninor roroninn approval •
7. Project Area ± 7.1 acre: Density 2.0 lots/acre
•
8. Public open space and/or cash dedication Cash dedication.required
•
Private open space none_,
Developer i:: prepared to dedicate a 10' easement
Trail syst es & sidewalks for trail enepoer s alone the eactf:>+, aryl limits of the
lo(,,(n,1iCtirr. .,. yvrt.}•{ t.A,• I;:1/4e i , plat.
' Range of lot sizes ± 14,000 S.F. (32 logs),±42,000 S.F. (2 lots)
. . 9. Preliminary Building Plans Not submitted
10. Representative Soil Borings Not submitted
11. Street System
A. Access to adjoining pre..perticsProposed - see below
B. T...).Pe W 'Roadway (Back to Back of Curb)
•
Private •
• driveways, no 24 }
parking Post no parking signs
Leading to Cu] de sacs 50 28.
(not over 3000') &
minor residential • • t
Cul de sacs 100 78 (no island) {
• 120 98 (with island) l
Thee Residential (collectors)
& Cul de sacs 32 Required
over 1000' 60
Forest Bill stead extension .
Because of existing traffic problems on Kingston Dr., approval of this plat should
he contingent upon the City Council ordering the ext.cn.^.ion of Forest Bill to fi:rker.
Roai through the Boblie improvement I ror•e,s. The roadway surfacing in the
length whore ut:ilicie:: are not its tailed could be phased to keep the initial costs
at a minimum. Refer to the report dated l/23/7G on preliminary road alignments,
for tlw neighborhood. •
301 G ,'t ! • .. . . _ ..
- 3 -
•
W,A 70 44 1
Parkway 100 20 divided rr
• Fire Itoad . 12 •Pathways 12 6
-Street grades-max. 7.5%, min. .5%: .
Concrete curb & gutter. required,
Deep strength asphalt. design Required
C. Check City's comprehensive street system. .
Developer builds 1/2 of parkways at his cost", & NW dedication N.R.
i
D. Street Names - try to conform with existing in the area. Avoid additional
names on cul de sacs having eight or less lots.
Check list of existing street names. N.A. _
•
S. .Private parking lots--SG-32 cone C&G and full depth asph. design
N.A.
F. Street Signs-Developer or City installs Developer purchase; City Install
12. Parking: (See Ord. ii141) N.A. _ '
f
13. Utility Systems: (See below)
A. Sanitary Sewer Available - extension required 6
1. Service Detail
4" minimum
2. Service to adjoining property Service to Lots 5, 6, 7, & S
has not been proposed '
S. Watermai7n: Available -extension required
•
1. Check Service Design (20 psi at highest fixture) OK
2. Hydrant location-Fine Inspector
Fire inspector to review
3. Valuing Final design required
Fire Inspector to review
4. Compliance with fire code
5. Service to adjacent property Provision for looping of watermain
•
•
required
Utility d t'sa,liug PI:m::. The lnalxnaed sewer and water linen on Forest Hill Road
. must 1>e doe:i,;ncd foe: future service to the lot.,: at the end of Mariann Dr, Before
Preliminary flat approval by the City Conned, the developer must submit a grading
and utility plan with sj"cial attention to ,:,•wcr service, lawn and driveway gr.nd•:::
for lots in i+lncl; 2. A):;o, ::owe fors of.l:uulhold agreement will be necessary fqr
tb:>ec: lots rr,t to ba r-rncc•d initially with ,;iwcr F, valor.
• -- Ir.
Storm sewer required - Further. design -. __
ssary
C., Storm Sewer & Grading. ,.
1. Sediment control plan
Required .
/� N.A.
( 2. Skimming & grit control for commercial parking lots
•
3. Positive out]et for drainage ponds
to be reviewed '
Required
!
' • 4.' Avoid exc�csi.vc grading and tree remova3 — I
Not submitted - required •
5. Arrows showing drainage -_
1
Accomodate drainage from adjacent properties requiredf,
6. Denote drainage area for individual inlets and projected high water ,
for ponds
Not submitted- required
• 7. Keep drainage in gutters, not in center of street
Required
$. Sod drainage swales and steep slopes
Required
• 9. Flood plain encroachment
None
10. Watershed District approval
Tequired •
r il. DNR approval
N.A.
D. Natural Gas & Telephone Underground required__—__
E. Electric (underground)
Required ,
14. Street1 Street light required'Lights & On-Site Lighting
15. Preliminary plat to Le submitted to MUD or Henn. Co. if abutting a
State or County Hwy. N.A.
None levied, Prinl_ sewer C
16. List special assesrments levied and pending
Water .
Yus
17. Re-noning agreement required —
'
Developer's Agreement, required
Yes
• Title ALstract fur Attorne hoY'a review
pin() ,
•
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 23, 1976 i..
C. Hustad Development Corporation, requests for side yard variances in
Prairie East Estates and Prairie East Second Addition.
The planner referred the commission to the letters submitted by Hustad(8-19-76)
and Windsor Corporation(8-18-76), which outlines.their requests. He stated
the staff is recommending approval of the variances.
Mr. Woodland, President of Windsor Development Corporation , stated prospective
buyers prefer the larger home designs and• fireplaces making the variances
necessary.
Sorensen questioned the reference in one of the letters that previously
fireplaces were not considered encroachments. Mr. Woodland said the city
building inspector checked with the city attorney, and the attorney suggested,
to be on the safe side, varainces be requested.
It was the consensus of the commission the issue of setbacks be addressed by
the city in the upcoming revised zoning ordinance and pud ordinance.
Motion 1:
Bearman moved, Lynch seconded, to recommend approval of the setback variances
for Prairie East Estates as follows:
5 feet. . single story
10 feet. . single to 11 stories
15 feet. . 2 stories or higher
The motion'carried 3:2 with Sorensen and Fosnocht voting nay. Sorensen's nay
vote was for the same reasons as stated in other variance cases as there is
a strong need for the city to address the problem rather than making variances.
Motion 2:
Sundstrom moved, Bearman seconded, to'recommend the 2 foot encroachment variance
into sideyards for Prairie East Second Addition to be restricted only to fireplaces.
The motion carried 3:2 with Sorensen and Fosnocht voting nay. Sorensen's nay
vote was for the same reasons stated under Motion 1.
•
3O I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
August 19,1976
Mr. Roger Ulstad
Manager, City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road •
Eden Prairie, Mn 55343
Dear Mr. Ulsted:
This letter is in response to our recent conversation regarding the
side yard set backs in Prairie East.
•
As we indicated we discovered that we failed to include the Prairie East
Estates area in our original P.U.D. request for the smaller set back
' requirements. Windsor Development has brought it to our attention that
the larger set back requirements unnecessarily restrict the marketability
..of their larger homes.
Therefore, we are petitioning the Planning Commission and City Council to
permit a 5, and 10' set back on the garage and house respectively.
Attached, for your information, is a letter from Windsor Development
which further explains our need for this variance.
Thank you.
Sincerely, •
Vae/kl
W.H. Rusted %
•
WHH:sh
•
x.._.__.._-
•
•
•
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
•
•
August 13, 1976
Mr. Wally Busted, President
The Bluffs Co:aocn,' •
12750 Pioneer Trail,
Eden Prairie, .uN 55343
Dear Mr.. Hustod:
This letter is to confirm our conversations of the last few days
in which we discussed the zoning and side yard set back applicable
to Prairie :ast, Eden Prairie. •
It is my understanding that regular zoning is presently applicable
.to lots in this subdivision, thereby restricting side yard set ,
backs to 10' and 15' to garage and house respectively.
•
As you are aware, it is Windsor's intent to build upper and upper
middle income hoops irk this subdivision, homes that will be
priced up to $120,000. In fact, although no major sales program
has yet been imnlc ented, we have received a lot of interest from
potential customers wishing for a variety of large homes, incorporating
such features as three car garages etc.
In view of the n.)o:'e and the size constraints of the lots, the
presently imposee :ice yard requirements present distinct limitation
on our ability to satisfy our buyers requirements. As a consequence,
I respe tally rcc;,cst that you petition the City of Eden Prairie
for a cla::oe or rc to permit the same side yard set backs as that
applicable to Pra East, Second Addition. I cannot reiterate too
strongly thc of this proposed change to the successful f `
merchnn::is o; of this subdivision.
Thanking you in :Inticipation.
Yours _._rc_rely,
1'INDSOR !'4:,'1 Lop;1 !.l CORroRAT1ON
•
/G E. John c•:oodInod
President
E0h/c s
SUITr' IO:. 4CC W.NE.iT 77TH PTREET, MINA,
M INNESOTA 5 435 • PHONE (612) 831.0717
0 f
•
' •
August 19, 1976
}
Mr. Roger Ulstad
. Eden Prairie City Manager •
8950 Eden Prairie Road •
Eden Prairie, tin 55343 •
Dear Mr. Ulstad: '.
The•.intent of this letter is to petition the Eden Prairie Planning
Commission and City Council to permit a two foot fireplace encroachment
onto certain lots in Prairie East Second Addition.
As we have indicated,-the problem exists when a fireplace is added to
-.a two story plan which is being built by Windsor Development on these lots.
Attached is a letter from Windsor Development which further explains the
need for this variance.
•
•
• Thank you.
Sincerely, //
Yel/64
W.H. Hustad
•
WHH:sh
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
August 18, 197E
Mr. Wally Hustad
The Bluffs Company
12750 Pioneer. Trail
Eden Prairie, MN
Dear Mr. Hustad:
•
This letter is to confirm our conversations of the last few
days in which we discussed the set batk requirments for Prairie
East Second Addition, Eden Prairie. -
• I understand that the zoning on Prairie East Second Addition
permits the following side yard set backs:
5' From property lines to single story garage wall.
10' From property lines to house wall for single story
or 1 1/2 story home.
15' From property line to house wall for two story home.
These side yard set backs are very workable but indeed very
neccessary for the homcsites in Prairie East Second Addition,
taking into account the lot sizes that may be as small as eighty
feet front footage. Windsor has analized the subdivision and
can work within the constraints in every instance - with one
exception.
The nature of the topography dictates that many of the lots
can only be built with a full basement walkout type house i.e.
a house with eight feet of elevation change from front grade to
rear walkout grade. Windsor is proposing to build on these lots
a specific design of two story home that has proven extremely
successful in other metropolitan suburbs.
While the overall dimensions of this home is fifty feet, based
upon c::ecrience, the ultimate buyer invariably wishes to add the
fourth Bedroom and fireplace options. It is when the house is
confiqui-atcd in this manner that problems are created in as much
as the addition of the fireplace adds two feet to the overall
dimensions of the house and as such the fireplace chimney would
encroach two feet into the then required 15 feet side yard set •
back. In every other respect the house would be in full com-
pliance with all city requirements.
SUITE W'2. 4660 WEST 77T11 ST(1EET, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 . PHONE (012) 831.0717
•
Page 2
While it may seem a trivial matter for an individual house, I
can assure you that this house has proven extremely popular and
this situation will crop up in a number of instances involving
lots of eightytcet front footage - possibly up to sixteen lots
in Prairie East Second Addition. Further the design of the home
does not lend itself to modification without significant detrement
to the desireabili.ty of the plan, in addition to significantly
higher costs.
As a consequence of the above, I suggest that you petition'the
City of Eden Prairie to permit the two feet fireplace encroachment
into the side yard for this subdivision.
•
In making your determination with the City, I respectfully
suggest that you take into account the following considerations:
1) in the past and up until the time this problem was identified
to City officials, the City of Eden Prairie had not been
considering fireplace chimney, stoops and the like to be
encroachments in instances such, as presented a.n this case.
2) Windsor can and will sell this house type without the fire-
place option in full compliance with all City requirements.
• Inevidabl.y there will be instances of homeowners wishing to
add fireplaces at a later date and this problem being en-
countered at a later date. • p :;
I must reiterate that Windsor is anxious to comply with all
Federal, state and city requirements'. However in this instance,
I sincerely request that the City give favorable considerations
to this cv.riance request that will enhance the marketability of
the entire su:.,cavision and avoid future problems such as I
previously described.
Thanking you in anticipation.
}
Yours sincerely 4 •i
F. John Woodland
PreS1d('It
WINCSOA DEVELO.i U NT CORPORATION
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council •
THRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Marty Jessen, Director of Community ServicesiJ.
SUBJECT: Mini-Rinks Season
DATE: September 3, 1976
Attached is a copy of the memo dated July 30, 1976 from Sandy Worts
reviewing the 1975-76 Mini-Rink Season.
At their meeting Monday, August 2, 1976 the Parks, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission took the following actions on this item:
MOTION: "Anderson moved that the Commission recommend to the
City Council that the mini-rink program be undertaken for 1976-77
as outlined in the memo dated July 30, 1976. Upton seconded.
Motion carried unanimoulsy."
MEMO TO; Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commissi
n
FROM: Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervior tk/1C�
44
SUBJECT: Mini-rink Recommendations
DATE: July 30, 1976
In reviewing the 1975-76 Mini-Rink Summary and Evaluation, I noted the
following items which should be considered in determing this years
guidelines. 1
I. Meetings were held between Nov. 11 and Dec. 15, announcements
were passed out in each neighborhood. Attendance at these
meetings ranged from; average attendance was 5.
2. Because of mild weather, the mini-rinks were not ready during
Christmas vacation when parents thought they would get the
most use.
3. Not all neighborhoods showed support in clearing the rinks.
4. Inquires were made from residents in Golf View, Hidden Ponds
and High View, rinks were not put in. Rinks were also not put
in at Scenic Heights or Cedar Forest as originally designated.
5. A limited number of rinks in locations that serve a maximum number
of residents was recommended.
My recommendations for the program this year would include:
1. To Iet the neighborhoods come to us, and set a cut off date of
October 15 and hold to it.
2. Limit the number of rinks to 12.
3. Not to go back to neigborhoods with low attendance unless the
residents show more support for the program.
4. Advertise program in September HAPPENINGS that will be out by
September 15.
;iJ.2
•
Mini-Rinks (cont. page 2)
1975-76 Attendance •
Creekwood 3
Flying Cloud 2 •
Preserve 47
Topvlew 3
Paradise Valley 7 •
Edenvale 8
Hilltop-Valley Road 9
Lochanburn 15
Edenview 2
Crestwood 0
These numbers reflect the total attendance for 11 random counts January 24
thru February 14, and do not necessarily reflect the actual use.
SW:md
•
3(..A a
1975-76 Mini-Rinks, originally designated
CREEKWOOD- residents not cooperative in cleaning rink; did not want
to cross road to get to pond.
FLYING CLOUD-has high usage, city does all the cleaning and maint-
enance.
PRESERVE- had very high use, rink area was almost too large - took
a lot of water to cover - located outside community building where
people could go in to get warm. •
TOPVIEW- did not seem to have the use it had the first year. Problem
with older kids taking over ice.
PARADISE VALLEY - very cooperative neighbors however, site is now developed
with housing.
EDENVALE - nice rink, close to Briarhill whose maintenance staff did
most of the cleaning, our attendance figures showed less use than expected.
HILL TOP-VALLEY ROAD-owner of land very cooperative, good use by kids
after school.
LOCHANBURN- high use, cooperative nieghborhood - took a while to get
landowners permission.
EDENVALE - length of time needed to get owners permission shortened season
and neighbors complained ice area too small.
CRESTWOOD- started too late to get any idea of use and neighborhood
response.
EDEN HILLS - residents response very good however, rink was put in too
late.
SCENIC HEIGHTS- no rink; no resident cooperation, did not feel they should
pay to have rink graded.
CEDAR FOREST - residents very interested, but it was too late to get rink
area graded.
3V30
i ..
Called for rinks after season started:
GOLF VIEW- suitable site not found.
HIDDEN PONDS -not City property, no Homeowners Association.
HIGH VIEW-could not get owners permission.
is
is
1
3U3f
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council •
THRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Marty lessen, Director of Community Services itJ
SUBJECT: Report of Forestry Task Force
DATE: September 3, 1976
To date, the Task Force has followed the work schedule attached and
is now formulating programs. There will be a verbal report on Tuesday •
evening from the Task Force.
•
•
EDEN PRAIRIE
FORESTRY TASK FORCE
ork Schedule--Revised August 38, 1976
All Sessions begin at 4:30 p.m. in Council Chambers
1. August 18 Concensus Ouestionnaire
Copies of State Law
"Early Opinions"
2. August 26 Legislation, Financial Assistance, Technical
9 g
Assistance
Peter Grills--"The State's Program"
Subsidy Program, Department of Agriculture Rules
& Regulations
3. August 31 Senator Keefe &Representative Ewald--"The
State's Role" Future Legislation
Bennett from Environmental Tech.
4. September 2 Development of a "Strategy" for Eden Prairie
"Six points" of Council motion 7-17-76
1. Funding outside levy limits
2. Legislature to develop basic law for entire state
3. Legislature to support additional funding
4. Department of Agriculture to provide more
flexibility among communities
5. Federal involvement
6. Pursue all possible means of reforestation
5. September 7 Report to Council
r '
30.33
Sept. 7, 1976
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA }'t
RESOLUTION NO. 1180
RESOLUTION RECEIVING PETITION AND ORDER-
ING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT
ON I.C. 51-294
WHEREAS, a petition attached hereto has been received and it is
proposed to improve:
• I.C. 51-294, Utility and street improvements
in the Forest Knolls 2nd Addition i.r >
and assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the
improvement, pursuant to N.S.A. 429.011 to 429.111.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY
� l
COUNCIL: YYt
That the proposed improvements be referred to the city Engineer t; ..
for study with the assistance of Rieke Carroll Muller, Assoc., and that a FF
feasibility report shall be prepared and presented to the City Council with
}
all convneient speed, advising the Council in a preliminary way as to the
scope, cost, assessment and feasibility of the proposed improvements.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on •
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
3o 4
1
•
August 8, 1976
Mayor and City Council •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Attn: Carl Julie
City Engineer .
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This letter constitutes a petition for local improvement for •
Lots 11, 12 and 13, auditors subdivision No. 225 which is being
replatted into Forest Knolls 2nd Addition
!'4
The petitioned improvements are sewer and watermain, street
grading and paving of Forest Hills Road from the end of the 1 '
. existing street to the West line of Lot 5, Block 1, and Lot 3,
Block 2, Forest Knolls 2nd Addition. Please proceed with the
improvement hearings so that this work can be accomplished as
soon an possible.
I also petition the sewer and watermain extension between Lots 4
and 5, Block 1, up to the North line so that these lots will
not be disturbed when sewer and watermain is extended into Mariann
Drive. The extension to the North line of Lots 3 and 4 should be
assessed against Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Forest Knolls 2nd Addition.
Please proceed with processing of this petition so that improve-
ments can be installed as soon as possible.
Signed �; '", /i �.:�..
Donald R. Peterson
7025 Mariann Drive
3o,3
Sept. 7, 1976
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
}IENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 1 J
RESOLUTION NO. 1181
.RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT NO. 6
REVISED 12/4/75 FOR CSAH 62 (CROSS-
TOWN HIGHWAY) PROJECT NO. 6839
WHEREAS, Layout Ito. 6, revised 12/4/75, Project No. 6839, showing
the proposed improvement of County State Aid Highway No. 62, within the
limits of the City of Eden Prairie from Shady Oak Road to I-494, has been
prepared and presented to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie, despite serious reser-
vations and concerns regarding the capacity of the Crosstown Highway east
of Shady Oak Road and the impact of an at-grade access to said Crosstown at
Beach Road upon future land use decisions for and properties
esiinet the
eesoutheast
tf
quadrant of 1-494 and the Crosstown Highway
Eden Prairie residents from local road
oadnaccess
ccessito B Bryant
s teLaLake
eeRegionaliPPark
located totally within the City of
extension of the Crosstown Highway, with the following conditions, should
be approved; and
WHEREAS, the County Engineer has stated that the proposed Beach
Road intersection is properly spaced from the I-494 ramp intersection, and
that it would be a safe intersection,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
AS FOLLOWS:
That said Layout No. 6, revised 12/4/75, be in all things `, ,
approved and the County is hereby authorized to commence acquiring
rights-of-way on the basis of said layout, subject to the following: P }',
1. The County shall provide proper pedestrian and bicycle ?
access from Beach Road to Baker Road.
i
2. The County will agree to participate in an amount of
$250,000 to assist the City in construction of an alternate
roadway to serve the residential properties in the .
southeast quadrant of 1-494 and the Crosstown Highway.
Such participation shall be due at the time construction
contracts for the Crosstown are awarded.
'.
3. It is acknowledged that the direct connection at Beach Road
to CSAH 62 is the least desirable solution for local residen-
tial access to community roads and functions and is only a
temporary solution. Active efforts shall continue to secure f;
approval and financing to provide a local bridge access over ,;
I-494 from Baker Road east to Beach Road. At such time approval
and funding are authorized and construction completed, the temp-
ary access of Beach Road to CSAH 62 will be closed.
•
i
'I,,
Resolution No. 1181 - 2 - Sept, 7, 1976
4. The City Council requests future Councils, in order to
protect the existing residential neighborhood and preserve
the content of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, to
stand firm against the encroachment of industrial, com-
mercial or other non-residential uses in said southeast
quadrant, despite the at-grade access to the Crosstown
Highway at Beach Road.
5. County Road 62 (Townline Road) will be designated as a
County State Aid Highway from Scenic Heights Drive to
T.H. 101 and improvements will be made thereon to pro-
vide a properly surfaced roadway to handle anticipated
traffic between T.H. 101 and the Crosstown Highway
on or before the opening of the Crosstown Highway to
I-494.
6. Alignment corrections to eliminate the sharp curves on
County Road 60 (Baker Road) north of existing Valley
View Road will be completed on or before the opening
of the Crosstown Highway to I-494.
7. Baker/Mitchell Road from T.H. 5 to present County Road
60 shall be designated as a County State Aid Highway.
Opening of the remaining unimproved segment between
new Valley View Road and present County Road 60 will
coincide with the opening of the Crosstown Highway. The
County shall also participate in the traffic signal at
the T.H. 5 and Baker/Mitchell Road intersection.
8. County participation in the Ring Road Project (Schooner
Boulevard) shall be as described in the attached letter
dated October 9, 1975, from the Hennepin County Director
of Public Works.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on ,
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
}
•
f r ()CI i 41975
:'' ---...\ HeNNePIN COUNTY
October 9 1975
Mr. Roger Ulstad, Manager '`
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
SUBJECT: Ring Road Project - Hennepin County Participation
Dear Roger:
Since our meeting regarding county involvement in the construction of portions
of the proposed ring route for the Eden Prairie Major Center, we have received
•
your new cost estimates for potential county participation from Carl Jullie. ;
This letter will set forth our cost participation policy and our priorities and
programming considerations as we now view them for the Ring Road construction.
. Hennepin County has jurisdiction over the proposed ring road as CSAH 39 from
County Road 39 on the east to Valley View Road on the west. In addition, Eden
Prairie has proposed that Valley View Road on the west from the ring road to
CSAH 60 (Baker/Mitchell Road) be constructed on new alignment by Hennepin County. .
The estimated cost for construction is as follows:
N.E. and N.W. two lane legs of ring road (including signals) - - $1,600,000. •
Additional two lanes to provide 4-lane N.E. and N.W. legs of ring road 1 =
(except bridge) $200,000.
Additional two lane bridge to provide 4-lane road over FAI 494 - - $500,000. •
CSAH 39 (Valley View Road) from Ring Road to CSAH 60 (Baker/Mitchell Road)
- - - $350,000.
Total Hennepin County participation over the next 15 years - - - $2,650,000.
The Hennepin County Department of Public Works operates with a 5-year Capital
Improvement Program for highway improvements. The proposed 1976 - 1980 Capital
Improvement Program does not include construction on CSAH 39. i'
The projects in the 5-Year Capital Improvement Program are based on priority
evaluations which include consideration of traffic volumes, road conditions,
firm land use development projects and availability of capital funds. When the
priority of CSAH 39 as compared to construction evaluations on other county routes
warrants programming, we will recommend inclusion in our 5-Year Program. If
included in our 5-Year Program, Hennepin County would assume the major financial
burden for the construction costs. Our standard division of cost policy would
apply leaving the City of Eden Prairie cost participation only as a portion of
any needed additional right of way and for other municipal requests such as
increased storm sewer capacity, etc.
Minrxities,Women and Other Protected Classes are Encouraged to apply
Sol Employment at Hennepin County
3v3(
Mr. Roger Ulstad - 2
October 9, 1975
•
The Hennepin County policy for reconstruction before a priority need develops
is that the developer and/or municipality perform the necessary first stage of
construction. This normally includes grading, storm sewer and minimal bituminous
surfacing. Hennepin County would not participate financially but would assume
maintenance. Programming of the final stage would be by Hennepin County as
conditions warranted.
The commitment of capital funds for the reconstruction of the ring road will
be dependent upon the above mentioned priority evaluations each year when our
capital budget is reviewed. It is impossible to make a firm commitment at this
time. We can only assure you that we will endeavor to cooperate with the City
of Eden Prairie to the greatest extent possible.
•
Sincerely,,:
A. J: Lee, P.E.
Director of Public Works and
County Engineer •
AJL:JMW:rm •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
,yt
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
i;
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 7, 1976
3.2 BEER ON SALE
S. S. Snelling
Jake's Ice Cream & Pizza Parlor
3.2 BEER OFF SALE
Jake's Ice Cream & Pizza Parlor
These licenses have been approved by the department head responsible
for the licensed activity.
Rebecca Quernemoen, Deputy Clerk
?JUL/0
JOHN FRANE
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY C.00NIL
TUESDAY, SEP1Etii R 14, 1976 7:30 PM, CITY HALL !'
COUNCIL MEliUERS: 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
Director John Frane; Director of Community
Services Marty Jessen; Engineer Carl Jullie; 5
Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL
•
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. $3,000,000.00 lii?ROVEMENT BOND SALE
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Ziegler, Inc., renurst_ for PUD (pn_cept approval of a oroxima`E1 Page 30r1
Si acres of tndu;rri uses and variances tror. tre1-55 District
for epproxii t 1< acres which are zonrd Tna PUD is located
in the NW quadrant of ValleyViice:: bee & Washington Avenue.
I (Resolution No. 11,5)
B. 1976 Special Assessment Hearing (Resolution No. 1187) Pace 305E
IV. PETIT?ODS, REQUESTS & CO"%UNICAT T0"IS
A. Rcnunst for extension r•- :„ :onis D-1 p_ipartment site to Page 306
•
5_;y r 1078. 1Cc.r ii:r fr'ce non Hess, The Preserve,
det >cple bnr 4. ..ttacfe-d) •
•
r ouc,st for liquor l irnnne by Cu:di-is Khan of Sapporo. Page 3064
•
V. ORDICANCES & RESf:.i111bNS
A. 1st Prndire of 'rrIi Lo No. 336, 1stahlishi.d liceuse fees Page 306t
for .,h2r c i cif om m .,r: ainLeirilefit centers, •
arcr Orc'inonce
B. Int P tdino ni Ord ,,•r, No 347, reaula tino ,end licensing Page 3Q3
ni c J:rn Or i nonce No. 300.
•
C. %no R lno of Dr. :• NO. 341, rr _nnir i or r-hu I-General Page 3tl:i,
lu.Ated :n 1.r. : r.r Lric•n Prair to Piann:•A Study.--�
lS:
Tuesday, September 14, 1976 - 2 - 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
•
VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council members.
B. Report of City Manner
C. Report of Director of Community Services �r
I. Final report of the ForestDy Task Force •
D. Resort of City Engineer
•
I. Final plat approval for Bristol (Pemtom's Mitchell Lake }'
VUD).
E. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List dated September 7, 1976. (Continued from Page 3040
-977776 Council meeting)
2. Payment of Claims Nos. 2399 - 2520. Page 3068
VII. NEW BUSINESS
p:i
VIII. ADJOURNMENT._ •
•
•