Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 04/12/1977
JOHN FRANE SPECIAL EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 1977 7:30 PM, HIGH SCHOOL CAFETORIUM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers, Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly 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; Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. PUBLIC HEARING Bluffs East/West, Hustad Development Corporation, request for PUD Page 4274 Concept approval on 400 acres of single family and multiple, PUD Development Stage approval, preliminary plat and rezoning from Rural to RL-13.5 for the western 200 acres of the PUD. The PUD is located south of County Road 1 between County Road 18 and Homeward Hills Road. Resolution No. 77-47, approving the Bluffs East/West Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and Notice of Findings; Resolution No. 77-45, approving PUD concept plan of Bluffs East/West PUD of 400 acres as per brochure; Ordinance No. 77-20, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for the western approximately 200 acres of the Bluffs East/West PUD, and direct City Attorney to draft a rezoning agreement; Resolution No. 77-46, approving preliminary plat of 250 lots on approximately 200 acres, western 200 acres, of the Bluffs East/West PUD. III. COUNCIL GOALS & OBJECTIVES FOR 1977-1978 Page 4335 IV. NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT. 1 S3 4-(3 1?'1 CL 1$, 1,1 9 1 C�('l/�r►w-Cte_e_ N o-L Pk-k-& p -crud .^. ojs O r J lJ Lc n.�- r cam, u2 �U �. _l_ S S U,s1 ECG, I ([cA A, 4 V)'l A�WhA17 0�L , 5 S-V -(j • S5 LLQ. esik 51.0- 1 die 1 `t w1a--t- `Z;Le Sk-D Le,..,-, p ey e >. L e-, ,", LLJ OLV '1 L COACStom Q_r //7 /-u-,_ h cau,�cs wC, . • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.77-47 A RESOLUTION FINDING TILE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE BLUFFS EAST/WEST A PRIVATE ACTION DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie did hold a public hearing April 12, 1977 to consider the Bluff East/West Planned Unit Development, PUD 77-03, and WHEREAS, said PUD is located on approximately 400 acres of land in Southeastern Eden Prairie which is presently zoned Rural District , and WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning and Zoning Commission and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission did hold hearings to review the Bluffs PUD and Environmental Assessment Worksheet, and • Ua 7S RESOLUTION NO. 77-47 page 2 OPTION 1: NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council that an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary for the Bluffs East/ West project because the project is not a major action which does not have significant environmental effects and is not more than of local significance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a Negative Declaration Notice shall be officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council. OPTION 2 : NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council that an Environmental Impact Statement is necessary because the Bluffs East/ West project is a major action with potential for significant environ- mental effects and that the project is of more than local significance . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that an Environmental Impact Statement Preparation Notice shall be filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council. ADOPTED this day of , 1977 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL • c ma' G.Ssc = addreG 11C m g c , c E p$ m. .... ... «N t c u w_ E 0 a C q o' _ m E a p�Am E N = Y Y m q 3 - d .°w �+ Vf O O q m O m O C a' A 2; p u 52cm 2 a o33A'mc •_ ro u c c S � tg� o dUa p ce « E E .� «- tl v q $ r - c d o aN� g § c « PL wy o. 3 E9$ 3m « gE .5, W N E O. •z• N C G y 3 C - X L~ E.a "e E O `'« �• m \ r m d O C 6 O y"'Y ti s N� 3 Q c ..1fli N� ��//�� oci � w p w m , cq dCD '� ,q, m!^ O a° ,a, $ n c ;IIIiI . nL'Y ` q .p I . C r� g m — S EcO A •; a, u : u « C u .'4'~ ..�� „ c w.c t .m.. c Cw m N c . a E 3 c,« E a. u.co'-'5 i'w ' C u a S: i o Q l t k« E c m ° d ° c" m m o° d° c o c a 13 ° coEr .Eo a c'_ : -c g . a., $ N . ; «„ � .oxt 'o „ c ,. . W „ co-.; $ w wH ;¢ SiinmOx'�SQa 'o > p N p a 2 E Q E v« o A m 2 r, - ci ri . 16 m;is el of ECgf> O. al i- 82°a3m « na1-w m m • C C a.`-- d+ J. i— c o., c o 4,u map-- o a b>o � m t� Ar a c jfl! hh 3 cqL V V /-_. C7c., V - ca ▪ 'camc'oEd ° ca a JO -WSE ool `� N N .r 1-- m ,.p- d C m y C > C C 7 C C C•M .a C i :, .J L ;i ,n a m C 2 E 4, c e.n�. p' r O .- a.... ..ia1�� Q�: u m c o`) c p .t+ °� .7 'Cr, 0 .d-. rnJ, LI H p G:{¢ N a m N C 7 �I • 1.11,1 u c v o E E o m d .. c ..r s.� _ ,-,N.., '� :;„gem e F-a° !a-j i 11 a _a '..E y c rn c E g F, c E o d a H G c m cm V at 4- _ .�. •-i 1 c H • $ m u.9, d p w d U o .m.. w w O . x c .�' m w E a`; c -0 E.�'7 , .{ Q j'� E '" m•c. c �.-1 c IS = o o u v= .. . E AE cm ..., 71' c W m w W m p C N N -73 N .'+ Li.2 .mC C A 0 C x 0 ` y v V ami N d r . T,m !-2 U E 4, a) 2 aaQ m EEE F- V">a� '8¢ E Kra P=Sa '1.);c1\•2e) LICE go%1 �' E $©a ` �4 e4 q Q 4src. ,r P:621 al .r g ��.. C=• -` .5.� 4' y Z.` 0 n ~ 2�:cac: �9 a eb w L CO a x i / J • • t O t}}f z G Z w • = W • d m 0 t W H W Z CC Z < Z Z y W 7 N Q a d 1 w a V • • H W Z W np m C E C p U m m E A n a ¢r°ii C o L `+ , p`N o C m c o m A .0 p m E O 'o2 n Q x q = V d edu:aAN a,`m.N•a,°eLLiQA°C, Avy_A OtnTmmm si�an;.muC mnm�"otio� 0mm oEa L«> «omc=NZu yn u4_ T6p ; o Ear p 9 N oy2. E L >, O CN ^ Nm r cC wm0A omQ0m oOmpu°°c VD q m8 w = v e 2 o ° ° 2 o S w y cDu o « v d d O ` ,c v •° 8 ` ° A 8 n — .L •° ° no Lt .? f. « F ¢ a y O $dmwm D �^ i b ° o c 15 n q ont - vv ov`owm6O cm o8 '; E n u n m q E ° m m 19Ac O wO$mc7 I o ° .ri w+ w.« EN ° ^•°L - ° • ° mOi cCbLL— C a Ev . cc ^ O °E n — n ' ` o,f ° j . EE Eo8 •; 8 s g — m 2 E W p m • a mt‘0, Aopm LL a a A 2" 5itHm uc . c ° ° m L o .« c 8 v oE m E m m_ ma2 o3a °o0oEAFo m o c T; co gT°i. ° o7 m B.` nw oc b ` p m 7 oG « C E o N 2 v8 > 2 t E ; ^ m "To A « v 2 .64x ^ m o oOa « m ..E.7« ° mDE 8 oio « SQ ; EYN ° mA ° "8002vm .gm wQ £ cEow .= _ '2815 _ 8 2 m E iHHU nm n > Af ° VCa m° 11011 E 5 o v o `'i1 w N Ce Y C p An V m n y Q Y 0 ° d ° 111111 m•°1E0m � cE� S° cdQcva czettZ 1p m14, 8 c ,= o _ .c O . E E o .c m E 3 N •�c s ... ° ° • a = c .A-« a a ` CC C u •>' ,'_°t a P "w 1p m a'° .� c c ° E NoctE n ° oc > up c cAop•, 0 O �^ 4 4 4a �• ` •_ m E ; C Z > 'O m O L 6 aci °' C v Z .�. .�'. ri U O gg O 2 m E `o ° ... /,n7 v _ Y o 3 0 ° « >. E u �' m Svn c`. 112' Q° o w ° n C w •� t;c 'a -4 o 0 9 m E m o E V° W t� • • • m q r m a 3 c a o c i c T a « `o t ° c $ 7 a «O -2 „ „ « ; C8 a 5 Yea ► e n Q C it; Ecmea , L ; la Aen • E !a ° « 5.x m m Eq o p Vu a o c " c aO 6 E °. L q ?, q a Er: C» WL ; Q 9 3 E E . c A g a d g > ! $ c c g' sA u u oome m q oSae c c n «e « '0 • v Go m ° E •Ti c. m >c 8 .6 • '2 ov vvN '5 c $ '' vrn M 'w : 6 « m$ c c O 8 x a.« L m 6 A m m L •x 6 O o O « ° II ccn«Om C C q : 2 X « � E : p O a ` m F. O p G m>- a' N O qW ` « 2 C -,:O E 0. m N° N a qpL 2 At • t xi IC $ — ca g ` ° g ° = c nn _ v rn c m• ivvOEc ` 6wo Eo c t c EtoO c mo 5 o o n = , a oC -0 Oa „ 1 E c « w n o c x Oc ° 13_ w '^ a E q qau $ v a ;`,--2 mg if, «o ` o o '" il v m c o • n ? uvc « - o C,, p ` aCO v v u .V C Fa F. . tm7 > m a CNc « tm Wt 'O , Og q E u - ., N C C _ ro c q « • • • • • • • •L.° ° q Oa L" UO O « cc''' C E7 uJ 3 q d 0O a J g m i«. ' a 7P {.) - J g L EJq 07U • •y • • • • • • • •d • • E 3 E, cc « d . 4 . g E S Q o = a t F. 2 '= $ = m � .. c � cp q E Q ° E G • z o E m $2q & n� c 6:,0:i g ` V � ma, c: a Mcoo do m -_ • a � E c cc= c 3A m U n S' y► m p O w q m « ° Na o '° = A aa w O en 030 ° m mE « a a ,7-- Lvcg. g *0 v > M ` n n a -2 0. 8 a°a e ° UYW ° '' A , ' u o c_ ovEVc .o t- O ::« d a .: o U Q n ,.. C: u°A « m 5 m « C'O 1 u c u •E m q a o c - - Al m .°o . m ._ p cur $ a• E E •- ° q E 1O Q L p A E 2 o u E n o 4l c :: _ m m o m.5 ffi .,•a a m c _ a c at! c " o c q Ct O v ° > v a n n M cq .NU.Q V .-L A oV rn a .q.. C �[ m .0 E LV ►-- C c 0 m 7, s ..7. E q c ua $ ` q e0 0 : � o 'o 'a° ro w a.- -- •ag, q E n zam c_A2 q M . y Y > C ° j - W V U _ Q W f%J ; W N j ? 0 a� N N d W N m • y '5 q q ° m ' q o. E o i Q i m L v g,o - o W ... E E `u U g g d .- « E= c u W o Z u c c X — c m m s a d c a • o .v ° 4 «t� c t E o •0 o E o a, o,•- , °¢ ... '. w a n. .. w •`-' '_' E > o d a _ 3 c E o _ « `� ' o o u o ° o O E o a /t a E E H u a a E E d r-, m `- 9_, « <J � m C.O C u N ° U.0 ° V v .° O V p C E « O• q x• q -' 0 C q a 1-- c ,v, c c'• c.q-• c ,L., e...0` c V u p ' . .qu c, E d c C o c :� E c v c•5 v t m E E s m i .c, L 1, E :44 E «°. a o, (.3°: Ft- « 2 Q Q n a. t3 v ex ci:° °c « +ce c :4 Q 3 0. : « 3 m 3 E 3. m'> . = o c c 5 c? o ' « 'aa` S aX c' c •v ® ` 52 ° c od c c •o 42 II c ) L B « c mo c O , E• E qc ,. •C . . u ° o = M N E M O c 0 $ a « g oau c ` "►-- _ioc . ` v S' t 8 • Eo 88 -2 c3 ° 3 Y' $ « 8- ► ag ., ou g O 2 1. ` L r > qdg > a 0 q Ec qr ,, « - ° a . n d ` uvq 'r.0 $ui = $ o0oZ `d c LE . _ o t gm « o uov $ c2o p mOrc7 Ao L m E a o f 7E6i m aam� wq =� O .- odoy ` r re.CA ° VQ . 2 •N O Q « a =a E c « E b a YlO a p T. cu °1 - « p Y .. ° a E• . go q ou, c - w c 1 a ° r,Z p L a 'a o qEt - O_ O, q « N . 0 C2 « . - rA nq o ° uq aN '-U t ` N ` cO o . a0 ' E o a '= o « D • •q y mE a e, oE o •« o`O ' C 'o L ' c T. co v E o « N S. Q c c2 .2 u o . uw • F E0.o 05 Q ° « = .0 2, • u c Zo ° _ c 8 3=7 !— : > .a �. o Va • c O t•'y oC, c 1 °= :� c n • q c .� w q mL u0 q °, ° 1N $• aC • r. t...) „ c . ro E v g S azQ « g vcOwe ° Od aNw Fa _° m O r Y O a AL ` u ° C O ° d O.GaGoc uca'- Wt' c° ` v v O n .V c .-G m c • E c E n v « 'u 9 ° 8 c c'ucq moE O . o_O ✓^ o a . o ro o n- v ov , oo « Q am 7n Q. ? E q C O .c oW E7 � O 5 u ° V 2 I ErnT T d 2a ° o E : ' c O. = u tmc l) h-• . a - " G p c „ „ .c " c u o c . c cyo - n c $ g.y < d ac E co c o coc . v o > c woo ' Um Qo a n 4g► c . , _ ounU aO _ U ." v° c ° oU` woUo..=• U 2 7. i.V 4 • • • a[ ,M m ,C m y C w ' G e ° C 882 ,0 C w L E ..w7 Si.0 w u a CG a m.. 1.O u a U...' FE G c ° c . E u (ra.(• CD a.2 - o ‘ II u 3 u .'`' I!I1 • dE ° . ^\ \`v E di±i Nc V��w= Yw ( � / sv77. ' . woA > o «_«W .. ? t w aM - Aoas 2 z. 0 kii ( Dli c > ' c " a . •m 2 m w E c d U b m L c n 2 g' z m a oa • xf%! ° Ew w d a ccr OQ1-CC d.' • t i ° « m Z ocr G°• C w 'u • s "''� y . C �i • • • • W F• a • E • c •• G c Z EE mod o c � w c E E � ° o ; E o w m a, . S D LL .c w w o a c o •c G pgr W > w V Q g c a G E A d = •> o '°` FL- j, G o m } m a m J �. _ « u w „ � F- m - d .o = o .ii .c r c I.L. c � $ i ? pEut ` -id c3 : =' av= - rn 305.5,:cdadu Q3 nd a • mc nr pC ¢ C 'GO6 Y • � 'Y'pa Enq oo y` «� Fj�►��i > c a (�� E n ° m c V 0 o • win I A V.•. -a-,' a o o' c N V o_ � ��� ue3c �Ew / 1O owo''N 41. � w F. Ota � •. „.erT • c °O C u V C E L n u c t 2 '' g tic c.a.. 5 CC ,w o c ° 8 " $ o L ; C to 5V El FgN % G c %A O r cw mE a • orGd cy�� u A c E P. .. CI! wN E a$ g r. a-. 04 � w IGY a. .cO u E omw « . .Q 7 cO O _ y N c " w ° ownV1 a--I' oa E0c . Enpc ~ U O2W . . ry Ww gCaa.a O C .. w .2 • O' • .. g ca : „ E000dH .9 de > i $ = SrLam,- r ° « � « , n > HO -cc P. m a n. Q c Qm e c O g rn v ow d y .paoaviW ° m —. wwAac nq m >• C.w 4 z' .L« cwE c . t '^ Q o GQ '.i u c °-' c ,� g • °l. +> •� Y • ta- o f n m v 10 Q •�, t_ _' E ° c • c L a o • a �-- o w 3 > ac o `E c E c E FW- 7 c i^ o s „w n °'�v o « E p n m « o c ° _ 3 ., o c - $ E A a oS c Li o c 'J 9 v _ • •y o u o c ..k E. z .:_ w 9- v o >'q ; a E a g ` •W c ac, « v ., n "' w . • '> a O O r v >E t '� : » >.. .. - % t cw a c c v w «S'p 2 g .E a e1 o C.' y o w « m « •'� m H v v E W d . o a a m Z Q G a' w w 8 ." ... ti c c C V L w JJ E d - , $ o « '_' E « g'' 1��� iG° c - • of 2/8/77 MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE E.R. # NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide information on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are estimated. I. SUMMARY A. ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON) ( ]Negative Declaration (No EIS) n EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required) • B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION 1. Project name or title Bluffs East/West 2. Project proposer(s) Hustad Development Corporation Address 12750 Pioneer Trail. Eden Prairie. Mn. 55143 Telephone Number and Area Code ( 612) 941.4383 3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Fden Prairie Address 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Fden Prairie, Mn SSZdz Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information on this EAW: Richard Putnam Telephone 612-941-2262 4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in- spection and/or copying at: Location City of Eden Prairie Telephone 612-941-2262 Hours 8am-4:30pm 5. Reason for EAW Preparation OMandatory Category -cite O Petition O Other MEQC Rule number(s) MECQ 24 t,u C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY 1. Project location County Hennepin City/Township name Eden Prairie Township number 116 (North), Range Number 22 East oria (circle one), • Section number(s) * Street address (if in city) or legal description: *Parts of Sections 25,26,35 and 36 - 1 - y�28� 2. Type and scope of proposed project: Residential development of 400 acres of approximately 850 dwelling units. 3. Estimated starting date (month/year) June 15, 1977 • 4. Estimated completion date (month/year) June, 1982 • 5. Estimated construction cost Land development $3.6 Million Total housing cost in 1977 dollars- $45-50 Million 6. List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals needed from each unit of government and status of each: Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status (federal, state, or Federal Funding regional, local) 1. Federal and State LAWCON or State Natural Resources When plan is land acquisition $1,000,000 (100 acres) completed applica- tion procedure will 2. Metropolitan Park Bond Funds $1,000,000 begin. Council • FHA and VA Subdivision approval 7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act71—N°_YES_UNKNOWN II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION A. Include the following maps or drawings: 1. A map showing the regional location of the project. 2. An original 85 x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 71/2 minute, 1:24,000 scale map with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated. Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main- tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other EAW distribution points.) 3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc). 4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency. Photos need not be sent to other distribution points. B. Present land use. 1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site. The site west and east of Purgatory Creek is utilized in grazing land. There are also several active farms, residences and a townhouse develop- ment surrounding the site. 2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are: (Total acreage is approximately 400 acres) a. Urban developed 0 acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) 0 acres b. Urban vacant 0 acres g. Shorelana 75 acres c. Rural developed 0 acres h. Floodplain 40 acres d. Rural vacant 400 acres i. , Cropland/Pasture land 60 acres e. Designated Recre-125 acres j. Forested 150 acres ation/Open Space I/AB- 2 • 3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near the site, particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within 300 feet. Purgatory Creek meanders southeast through the middle of the site into the Minnesota River which serves as the southern boundary of Eden Prairie. C. Activity Description 1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if any), operational characteristics, and major types of equipment and/or pro- cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons of raw materials, etc).- Standard residential grading and installation of underground utilities. Road grading and earth moving equipment staging-construction of 100-150 units/year. 2. Fill in the following where applicable: a. Total project area 400 acres g. Size of marina and access sq. ft. or channel (water area) Length miles h. Vehicular traffic trips generated per day 6s764ADT b. Number of housing or recreational units 850 i. Number of employees c. Height of structures _ft. j. Water supply needed lg3,350 gal/da Source: City Water d. Number of parking spaces k. Solid waste requiring disposal -tons/yr e. Amount of dredging cu. yd. 1. Commercial, retail or f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space sq. ft. ing treatment 200,000ga1/da (also see attached site plan) III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY 1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently exceeding 12%? No X Yes 2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project, such as fault zones, shrink-swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? X NO YES 3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts. Staging of the development will insure that only portions of the site will be • disturbed at a time. Berms will also be constructed on slopes to prevent erosive runoff. - 3 - 7d�1/ 4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project. See attached sheet page 4a P,4b 5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done: 600,000 cu. yd. grading cu. yd. filling What percent of the site will be so altered? 24 % • • 6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 13 .% 7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and after construction? Graded areas will be topsoildd and reseeded. Temporary sedimentation area will be constructed. Development will be staged to minimize erosion. Erosion control ,I devices will be constructed on the ends of storm sewers. ; ( Also see Soil/Conservation/Service recommendations. B. VEGETATION 1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following vegetative types: • Woodland 40 % Cropland/ 60 t • Pasture Brush or shrubs % Marsh Grass or herbaceous % Other % (Specify) 2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any?8-10 acres 3. Are-there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique botanical or biological significance on the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon Ones.) 'X NO YES If yes, list the species or area and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact. For further vegetation information see attached sheet-p.4c. (also see attached vegetation and slopes map) C. FISH AND WILDLIFE 1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage- ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? NO i_YES 2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife on or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon X NO YES Ones.) 3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish NO X YES • habitat? • `- 4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on them. There is a carp control structure in Purgatory Creek. There will be no adverse impacts due to development. For further information on wildlife see attached sheet-p.4d. • • SOILS The soils in this area are generally sandy loam and are well drained to excessively well drained. They consist mostly of the Dickman, Dakota, Esterville and Hubbard series. Smaller areas of Salida, Biscay and Kennebec series and mixed alluvium soils also exist. The areas of extremely sensitive soils correspond roughly to the vegetative tree cover and Purgatory Creek with the exception of several small areas. The soils are for the most part well suited for single family residential development. Most have low potential for frost action and low suscepti- bility to volume change with changes in soil moisture. Most of the soils in the development are very susceptible to erosion immediately after the vegetation is disturbed for construction. Proper erosion control techniques , such as berming and sedimentation ponds , will have to be implemented as construction begins to insure that soil loss is no more during construction than it is in its present stabilized condition. Soils with slopes greater than 18% are especially sensitive and should be given special consideration before any construction occurs. Public sewer is recommended for the development. Septic drain fields on these soils would cause extreme ground water pollution and would be a hazard to health. SOILS SUMMARY — i Dickman Series Texture-sandy loam Highly susceptible to erosion, gully Well suited for development-bearing capacity and stability Frost action and shrink swell-low Septic tank-Nitrogen and Phosphate pollution of ground water Dakota Series Well drained loamy texture Well suited for development-good bearing capacity and stability Moderate volume change with changes in moisture Septic tank - Nitrogen and Phosphate pollution of gound water Low frost heave 4a. qaeo Esterville Series Sandy loam alluvium texture Very susceptible to erosion Well suited for development-bearing capacity and stability Low shrink swell and frost heave Septic tank-Nitrogen and Phosphate pollution of ground water Hubbard Series Loamy sand texture Extremely erodable soil Suited for development-good bearing capacity and stability Frost action and shrink swell-low Severe pollution hazard with septic tank Slopes over 18% need special erosion control measures (not recommended for development (Hue) ) Salida Series Coarse sandy loam texture Very erodable soil Suited for development-good bearing capacity and stability Low frost action and shrink swell Severe pollution hazard with septic seiver Slopes over 18% need special erosion control (not recommended for development (SaE) ) Mixed Alluvium Soils Not recommended for development Best suited for wildlife habitat Subject to frequent flooding Kennebec Series Silt loam texture Severe limitations for development-fair-poor stability Subject to pending Low shrink swell, high frost action Marsh Wet nearly all year around High in organic matter and poor bearing capacity Severe limitation for development Suited for wildlife habitat or park and recreational use Biscay .Series Wet for long periods , septic tanks not desirable Soil strength adequate for low buildings, low shrink swell, high frost action, drain tiles desirable around footings 4h. '4.,,,c,,,,',), . . ?,),if •-• t.'( ,8 1 -:' '- ''.=' • \ I ' 2 'S 141" \;.::.:„<-.,c m , 1) ',It' '71.‘1, ,t• .1 N./4'r'. .) " cl: -., , , - ,, y..:.t.ep.,-' f'` ' ,..,:;r6t,'. A o 71 '-'',. *A, A ".? 1 • .,t • ' < m )1-.1:i k•.: ' •, 1 '- •• 4(1,,.',.(. u ' ' Mb u S:: % . .•, .\\ 1113,4 .3 s ';'.''' '.• 1 .,',7'41 f' -----"'r --.)."..,, ,, '.' '..V • K:'_/'47) '..; . .; " ''''' •...-• -`'. ..- ,f.0 -0---,,,,,-;4. 0 , . .: ‘, k,,-i • ,;' ..V. -. , ' ', • r )1 4. , 4- . --':---,5'9' . `.. si"x . 1 '',-„' 4 . •,. '' -''°:2 s s.ar. ,•-,• , ,J,, ,A ..- ) ''''' 'e4; -,""..,it:p. t z-', : ,;-, , .(. . , -, ,. W ,.,.,,, ,•• ii' .. ...1 ..T. III -..... f , '.. .` ' • ) ....,....r,:,:' . ..-•,:r.:',4:,1 411. .5,,. 2.{IQ ..1' la 0 •: •.,07:1 ei -,a s:•• 1 ...... IT k..,, l'.--- -- -- rd-,,-Thx,',';,' -3"'`.:• -/ -: •:,. "..* ', 4-' -i 1,,is?' - . 1: .:..... V114111 . •• 3 •. . 0. t * .:,.• .j.‘" '''' ` '1. *. 4' '. I tE;C° .tty. ,, • ..r.•.,,.•.,:-:•,,,%,-. , ,, y - •.: . . ,... ,..!,•,.---(-- , ",1, L 1 .4et... ,.'1,-:•!-15,.e. * :"; -.....' ,s2 --__A -t---*-5 ,,,,, ,:, * 4.J. ., . ' 114 .T ,. .71.,,,, ,„. 0 •*. ,4 6 , . i It'q" 4.-- --:-11 ).„.'''' - ;El- wf• .',) ', -all *.• '''„„-,-....,Yr' " sio.'0' 1 _ 0 ,,,, co. * ,it,. -r • ie., / , i \,,,,.,- --fr .E. WU `, % ` •,..) ),-) U'., °2 '. .1 1 di t . " 'kl - ' ,), , ',i,. ct •-'" , / ..., 4'''' .';/.'' r 3., -,10.-' ,-,c:.- - vfll' . •., -1•- ''' rY, -i ' 4' -.6-.•--k-`1" ' - - I --gomi --- c 9, , •a - I x ta0jr 7 , ulf. , :„.•,,, d.,,, „ . 0k, L_.Z - if.:)-..- i'4 •;. i , , . . L ‘• . , o'• doll,. '1"/.4-y'r '4,. Lr'--t-c !)::, . •"*". .'c',Al2/4iP 1" •• 411/0 A. ' ' 3,t - -• -..t... ..,:,,,-.7 E,... 1/2; ; _if-- -,),,,,' j:+j-a;),T)'.,',4 Ti ''' I f r 0'9'6:7‘ ':/.4.4) Y.' 6'a_2.'.' N'1. -. r'.,-'' ;i-:77'4,—.• 4 4/'it:ar.,..0 • ..•cic'.4,1-,.1f,.i. - ,.,.. , ',',0,-,-,-,• , '.,43. 7 '2,'.- 03.. --_ •.i.:4?4,:':-'. v • • ,,-r ; ', ....._ :,.i•,. ..., , •,3 .,,Q ..., t -.1 --L. , a'° 4 c ‘'t ni. ._. ' s '' co .01 to ‘s• _co ', • a(.97 o., • . ,. .-/' ' '.?'' ' ' •' e . . ' ;-' i e- ti ..\i„.. ' •'`.,! •-- ,: e°. ..,-7.,..1,- / .,. •; i „ '• ,-, .4'2,, ' ' ''')' ' / 1 . y •C,. .....E.f•', .4.4 /NW•,..,..!:. •a' --ill JP' i ;.1 ilr ,',.,':7 - ; 42 ';';; . :—\ :( ) , 0 • *(z) -. -,\,..._, ‘ ••.' -.... tik I 1'," ','('',. ,./..."6 .. ,...A ----\ -t, \ - 'k •,-„, ",,,,I.......: p-, •''' -,, 4 . ' ? 0 A/' I a) I ' .4 1 - ' • 4,"• 1'''''..,-;,"•••,.. .. „.... ,,...4 , ..;'..1,...4 44 4.4 4.- ,0 i ii, ' ' 1111 LI.,...-I/ 1' ?.?:4 c.,.., ( i.4.•‘./1 , . i• 's' . )\ . s • :-) V „ .- s vs -.-• n, "A` • 0 1/4....=,- 41) 01/; ••/ :;.--iiip . , ;7 ,•/'s1j!.? .: t r:/' ,c,-,' :,.A ;-I ; "ss'''s/ -'t '--,cis' L.,. ,'(s C . -4‘•\'s. / ;k1:' ''.' ..../ ''''., • 1 - ' 4- . . ./ '= '-k,- . : ,..'.:.-?.,t),.."' „v.. •-• , 'ir , 1 , .. ._ ,, ,_ -(•-r -Ng.i3 .r ,' ,,,,,,,.,'„.'i. 1 , , (I.) j, ‘',..,('''') ' .„ " .. ...::: i • n Jro ,• , '(; ''. ‘' ( ,'' 2"::•::-''''''", r- ,, , , , . , ,• • co 4 ,A, .• !; it. .„-.4 - r--- ? •C / .) , r• .. -; '4 •:*.C:,,l),Y, '.1. .''''\a,1., •''':'''•,,,, 1'4_ •-''-',- / °--- , --•• A. -. ri, '' . 14,1f, • 6,• ')•' 'i „.. ..„4, s•-v_e' ',..,\:. ", ...1 . /...,,,,./1: 'F, ) ., 1 .,,r2-z I(„,',(/,,,,•,_;,. .. ? .;'74.; ., / • ;' _...\)"(;) •,N'''''s• ''' )c '-\' /,,, •1 ,•,• ,, 7',.. L ?, ,...., . .7: , . ylik , .4_ c j?" :'', •1 i \''''' ' 1/• - _..4(•.E 'ii', ---,,-, , 4 ,--., 7.. 1 f.'e - •• '7 Ai / .4-'1(, - //' I ..,.2 , "••4. .,_:_____ 1., i; • ' -,:. r' -,,. 3..,,' ,-,‘ / ' 1 `s .4 4 , \ n : - ,'•,-.4';1'.'9\\ ",r-_. 7.;',- - ,' ,...j. , , ;, . ...„.:? :.1. . ,, , .. \,. ., ..• 10 / ' •%•(',••• ...,t4- -•• r:'!";.; ' ' \-- '' • --../ , s•••4.. —Sy ' ( -.,p , -......--- ,, iz, \ j3 '" ,,:. ti ' ,."4.4 t• ..,,iµ` k VEGETATION The vegetation in this area is quite diverse ranging from meadow on the glacial outwash plain to dense hardwood growth on the creek valley walls and on the rim. Tree growth occurs mostly on the steep slopes and occupies about 20% of the site. Tree species found in the creek valley include: oak, elm, willow, ash, basswood, box elder and an occasional clump birch and aspen. Other woody vegetation in the creek include Prickly Ash, Honeysuckle, Sumac, Dogwood, Red Cedar, Willow and Nettle. Oak and elm dominate the tree species throughout most of the creek. Dutch Elm Disease is present in uncontrolled proportions in many areas of the site. Oak Wilt is also present.* Some natural prairie species can be found on the ridges and in an occasional open space. The upland which was previously utilized in row crops is now stabilized in the grass species Bromegrass. The grasslands are now being used as pasture and hayland. * The City of Eden Prairie plans an active tree di.sease program to mitigate the detrimental impacts of Dutch Elm Disease . American Elm comprise about 50% of the total tree population in the lower Purgatory Creek Sector. 1 It is estimated that about 15% of these elms are infected with Dutch Elm Disease. Approximately $15,000-25,000 will be spent on removal and disposal of trees infected with Dutch Elm Disease and Oak Wilt. About 600 * American Elms were lost in this area in 1976 . 1Aerial survey by Joseph Fitting and Mark Wurdeman, Aug. 17, 1976. 4c. WILDLIFE The wildlife in this area is abundant because of the variety of natural cover, the proximity to water and the large amounts of open space. The development will occur to the east and west of Purgatory Creek which is the main wildlife corridor. Mammals found in the creek valley are: Deer, Red Fox, Raccoon, Muskrat, Pocket Gopher, Woodchuck,Badger, Skunk, Squirrel and Cottontail rabbit Birds found in the valley include: Robin, Pheasant, Red-tailed Hawk, Marsh Wren, Yellowthroat, Yellow Warbler, Great Horned Owl, Redwinged Blackbird, Green Heron and Kingfisher Many of the small mammals and birds in the area will be eliminated or displaced. The amount of habitat and food will be reduced, eliminating the potential to produce wildlife proportionately. The territorial concerns of other animals such as fox will be disrupted. Microclimate and other changes will increase the population of certain undesirable wildlife species including: Housemice, Norway Rats, Starlings and English Sparrows. Rough fish , such as Carp, are found in the creek in small pools that stay warm. Past agricultural uses have increase siltation in the creek and altered the favorable trout habitat. The surrounding steep slopes and upland have since been stabilized and rough fish controls are being implemented. Generally the wildlife population will be decreased because of decreased habitats, food , territorial boundaries, the introduction of noise, air pollu- tion, man and his movement and the changes in microclimate. The impact on the wildlife is proportional to the amount of restriction imposed on access to the creek valley which is the major wildlife habitat. 4d. sago D. HYDROLOGY 1. Will the project include any of the following: If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures to reduce adverse impacts. a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond, marsh, NO YES lowland or groundwater supply -X_ b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes -X_ c. Dredging or filling operations. —L-- _ 1 d. Channel modifications or diversions -_ _ e: Appropriation of ground and/or surface water X f. Other changes in the course, current or cross- section of water bodies on or near the site X • 2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface? 16 % 3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run- off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc.)? Storm sewer will contain necessary sedimentation basins to reduce siltation runoff. Minimum vegetation removal, sodding and seeding will reduce volume and velocity of runoff. 4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain oy new fill or structures? X NO YES If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO YES 5. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on greater than 5 feet the site? See attached sheet-pp.4a,4b . WATER QUALITY 1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? NO X YES If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the water body receiving the effluent. Normal storm water runoff through sedimentation controls will be enforced by the watershed district 2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is planned, identify any toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants in the wastewater. None • 3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? Y NO YES If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method of disposal. • u291 - 5 - • 4. What measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified in questions 1-3? Maximum sedimentation removal from storm water before discharge into Purgatory Creek. 5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile, depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal. F. AIR QUALITY AND NOISE 1. Will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates into the atmosphere? NO X YES If yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi- mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the emission control measures or devices. Engine emission during construction and heating of dwelling units with natural gas. 2. Will noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation of the project? NO X YES If yes, describe the noise source(s); specify decibel levels (ds(A)), and duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the noise/vibration. Standards for Noise Noise confined to site and only during Day Pub daylight hours. Noise should be dissi- LSO L10 LSO L10 pated at boundary limits. 60dBA 65dBA 50dBA 5SdBA (Also see attached sheet - p. 6b) 3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or reduced air quality-(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give distance from source. Purgatory Creek, a wildlife corridor, lies between Bluffs East and Bluffs West. Development will occur adjacent to edge of valley area. Mill Creek Townhouses is located '1 mile north of Bluffs West. Several farm residences are between'-' mile from the site. G. LAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY 1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production or currently in such use? Y NO YES If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable crop or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use. • 2. Are there any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? X NO YES If yes, �7,!ci`,y the type of deposit and the acreage. - 6 - 4a`� FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT Alternate A as shown in the Master Plan Study for Flying Cloud Airport . is the present role of the airport. It is a general utility airport located about 1 mile west of the proposed development, capable of accom- modating propellor driven aircraft only. The peak noise impact zone will be determined by the extent the airport will be used in 1982. The noise impact is expected to decrease after 1982 assuming technological improvements in reducing engine noise. The noise contour , NEF 25 ( see attached ) extends into the northwestern tip of the site. It is unlikely that PCA standards for noise level dura- tion, LIO, would be exceeded. { 6a. v a99 • • _ �1. �=,---lU_ i l . ' 1:;�._„ J� '',' ;�F:`:;��)J� fry 1 ° m j ...r 1_ 4. c.i/ ift (_ 5 i;.; ' }t c 'I Q N is N0 _ u.j Il W (E0---- i. N ...1‘1',.-24—...„... . `2,.....-4:.-13. 1.:.,r_ .... - :i::::.:•::::::::. I ° /tifi/.? • 1 ; j •LC- J f • „,\.,,j/il .1‘ i. ) " ., : 4) . 11 u. . 0) • :ir- •,•,..,. -.:4 Ii4 - ----\. ,D .. , , .. • . /,4 `'.....".ate. '._r.:sa-:.a.�.. •.. .i f t , , tl;¢\ ia N. G. j r YM I'd ) 1 ....4 jg Ll 'i.. LIN . .• - •' : -' ..--, .• • " ,• ,-.4( 0 4 a g I:, ..... ,1,,i „ 0 i \.1 /., (,7:•.,.:: fri •• .) a i i ' • I • !( ..iaaa .1 • `� •4 . . +/ _- (',} ,till.r;;..., ....U . . u z n n a d '.i......111,• . ... : 1 Sri ? ° x e a. o FIGURE ''\.' .•• . •-.:. . .. .__._____1;.•Ld....,:•••i:d......._, 6 11 :.:,9::::,..i. 8- 0 6b . • uz1 y . 3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO X YES Complete the following as applicable: a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.) See attached sheet-p.7a Estimated Peak Demand Annual (Hourly or Daily) Anticipated Firm Contract or Type Requirement Summer Winter Supplier Interruptible Basis? 485,000 electric Kwat hrs 5-8 PM 5-8 PM ' N S P Firm contract 160 000 .16mcf/ 1.9mcf/ Natural mcfivr. unit/day day Minneeasco Firm contract s b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on-site fuel storage. N. A. 1 c. Estimate annual energy distribution for: space heating 63 t lighting 10 % air conditioning 6 % appliances 21 ventilation t d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment incorporated into this project. N. A. • e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project (e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etcpp Generally this project will increase the length of car trips until the Major Center Area is developed to the point of supporting much of Eden Prairie's business interests as was projected in the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan. Some neighborhood commercial may also be induced by the project. H. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION 1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails, lake accesses)? NO X YES If yes, list areas by name and explain how each may be affected by the project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts. Minnesota givers bottoms - State Anderson Lakes-local , regional park Purgatory Creek-Metro Council trail .corridor, city wildlife corridor - 7 - 429 ENERGY The development includes single family residential and multiple which in the July, 1976 Report by the Minnesota Energy Agency is classified as priority 1 customers. In the MEA Report, priority 1 customers are given the highest priority by Northern Natural Gas in their curtail- ment plan and also allows its distributors to hook-up new customers in this category. However, the development of Bluffs East/West must comply with the January 1976 energy code which deals with all new construction and major addition/remodeling work in Minnesota. 7a. • 11. TPANSPORrATION 1. Will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems (highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? NO Y YES If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will be affected. For these, specify existing use and capacities, average traffic speed and percentage of truck traffic (if highway); and indicate how they will be affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage of truck traffic, safety, increased traffic (ADT), access requirements). Highway 169-212 Co. Rd. 18 55 m.p.h. 50 m.p.h. 12-13% truck traffic 6-8% truck traffic 15,000-16,500 ADT 2,700-3,200 ADT at capacity 9,000-10,000 capacity Also see attached sheet-p.8a 2. Is mass transit available to the site? X NO YES 3. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to reduce adverse impacts? Several transit options exist for Eden Prairie as outlined in "Transit Potentials", Interim Report. Fixed Service and Demand Responsive Transit Service, as shown in concept would serve the development site on Franlo Road, Pioneer Trail , Homeward Hills Road and FlyingCloud Drive, Riverview Road and Co. Rd. 18 respectively. Thirty minute service would be possible with these options. Other possible alternatives include a private taxi system, local government system, park-n-ride and ride sharing services. J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensiveN plans? X YES plans? -- If not, explain: If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing . zoning and change requested. Applying for PUD Concept approval and for phase 1 development, preliminary plat- ting, zoning change from Rural to R1-13.5 - single family residential. Phase 2 development includes zoning change from Rural to R1-13.5, RM 6.5 and RM 2.5 . • 2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character of the existing neighborhood? NO y YES If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce conflicts. Careful site planning, park aquisition and an open spacc system, including Purgatory Creek, will help this site retain its important open space charac- teristics. 8 to9 TRANSPORTATION 169-212 Co. Rd. 18 Completion of this project could add Co. Rd. 18 could expect upwards of approximately 1,000-1,500 ADT to 169- 1,500 additional ADT. This road is 212 which is now running at or near now far below capacity and the addi- capacity. tional traffic could be easily handled. Traffic would enter Co. Rd. 18 at River- The traffic would enter 169-212 at view Drive or Co. Rd. 1. The sight dis- the intersection of Co. Rd. 1 which tance is very poor at Riverview Drive is scheduled for a stoplight within from the north. 2 years . It would add to conges- tion up to F.A.I. 494, at which point traffic capacities increase. 169-212 is a major arterial through south and south-central Eden Prairie. 8a. ya0 3. How many employees will move into the area to be near the project? N.A. How much new housing will be needed? �++ 4. Will the project induce development nearby--either support services or similar developments? If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and municipalities affected. Yes, the project may be the catalyst that would bring commercial develop- ment on or near the study site. 5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle the project and any associated growth? Amount required Public Service for project Sufficient_caQasi*v? water 75 gal/person gal/da Yes wastewater treatment 75 gal/person gal/da Yes sewer 48,600 feet schools 381 pupils solid waste disposal 53 ton/mo Yes streets 9.2 miles other (police, fire, etc) 1.4 officers/1,000 Yes_ If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this one project and its associated impacts? Expansion is necessary for this project, but the expansion is consistent with city plans and is not unreasonable expansion. (Also see attached map on utilities) 6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part of a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensitive plan or program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES If yes, specify which area or plan. 7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage, release or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids on gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisions, etc? X NO YES If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents. ga99 _ 9 — 8. When the project has served its useful life, will retirement of the facility require special measures or plans? X NO YES If yes, specify; • K. HISTORIC RESOURCES 1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 years or on federal or state historical registers? X NO YES 2. Have any arrowheads, pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or early settlement been found on the site? X NO _YES Might any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be affected • by the activity? X NO YES 3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explain any impact on them. it L. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been identified in the previous sections. • III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts that have not been described before. • • • - 10 - 030d V. FINDINGS The project is a private ( X ) governmental ( ) action. The Responsible Agency (Person), after consideration of the information in this EAW, and the factors in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings. II 1. The project is ( ) is not ( X ) a major action. Stat., reasons: • I See attached sheet-p. llb• . 2. The project does (_) does not (X ) have the potential for significant environmental effects. State reasons: See attached sheet llb 3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( X ) of more than local significance. State Reasons: See attached sheet 11b. _ 1 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed until the date of publication of the notice in the EQC Monitor section of the Minnesota State Register. Submittal of the EAW to the EQC constitutes a request for publication of notice in the EQC Monitor. A. I, the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the Responsible Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based on the above findings, the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Complete either 1 or 2). 1. X _ NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not a major action and/or does not have the potential for significant environmental effects and/or, for private actions only, the project is not of more than local significance. - 11 - q3U1 V. FINDINGS 1. The project occurs on gently rolling meadow and will displace only small mammals and ground nesting birds. Soil erosion is only signi- ficant if not mitigated by erosion control practice as established by Soil Conservation Service and the Riley/Purgatory Watershed District. Municipal services such as sewer and water are to be extended to the site as are natural gas and power. Other municipal services such as policeand fire protection , schools$transportation systems are being planned as capacities warrant. 2. Assuming careful planning and construction , the environmental effects of the project will be mitigated. The creek valley will be left virtually undisturbed so the major wildlife corridor remains intact. The Soil Conservation Service is making recommendations ( attached) to insure soil loss during and after construction is kept at a minimum. Little tree cover will have to be removed to accomplish the development. 3. The development will be characterized by the open space corridor and major wildlife habitat retention, erosion control and minimum tree loss. The development area will maintain its unique physical character while creating an enjoyable local community. The detrimental concerns mitigated on the development site sill negate other than local signi- ficance. lib. 43v2 2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE --An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a major action and has the potential for significant environmental effects. For private actions, the project is also of more than local significance. a. The MEQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances, the MEQC calspecifically authorize limited construction to begin or continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this project, specify the extent of progress recommended and the reasons. • b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted: (month) (day) (year) (MEQC Rules require that the Draft EIS be submitted within 120 days of publication of the EIS Preparation Notice in the EQC Monitor. If special circumstances prevent compliance with this time limit, a written request for extension explaining the reasons for the request must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.) c. The Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s) or Person(s)): Signature Title Date B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies of this EAW were mailed to all points on the official EQC distribution list, to the city and county directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question III.J.4 on page 9 of the EAW). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of the EAW which is sent to the EQC. C. Billing procedures for EQC Monitor Publication • State agency Attach to the EAW sent to the EQC a completed OSR 100 ONLY: form (State Register General Order Form--available at Central Stores). For instructions, please contact your Agency's Liaison Officer to the State Register or the Office of the State Register--(612) 296-8239. 12 - // �303 • • 1 41 LkMIK' Figure IIIA•4 N' ..,• a+,N,«, I fu.na I 0.Spent North) inneapolis I a ANON CO. C«u..uf I ' w.u. ammo .flat**. North ,u I .{.Scant,. i St;Paul I > I .,.»�". ». N. heast I ""." Lc4J now it St.Paul" ' Non west " t... MinnsapOlis 101 ,•J . . 1131, n WA6NM16TOM co. I 0 run r" f i f..t.... ' p... ...,{..... 04.1100 IA. —1.. •.„. I . HENNEPIN CO N _ M ?lyf I 4 I NN.nns.•{ ..a .e." " � 1 ,,,, *I� f1f , � h f as.'f� • t RAMIFY CO. tIet�r.lae.� N,gggggg �`t i x M..TNH .uu f { " CSOIN IN ;Wax., I4.... 7,.... `(�f�{ South ' .•+,. ..,."., •�, . .. Southeast . 1000. I ..Ce„ MA. ..,.... Minneapolis St.Pa.I Southwest "';'' '$ 111.11.0. r Mlnnf,apolis CAKYEK CO t.•w. Ir ..•.. WON m".... _ } • ••,•••• e ' "...cxl. . l " u.« ••w,n, DAKOTA CO M{ {., y �,.I`,. ...« f th St Paul �X' F ». I I 1- x•>.lo ,.. .• 1.100.0510 .„ N..e.It. 1 s.nx•.... I iI: ' ...{Nu. rat, WI. I Y YELL "us"." I • I ,.,.». .0•..•... 1 ..'aElf. Dad.. . ..kdt{.,.I.{r 1 ..N.r�u.E I M.... Clln t'.. I tuna. I [.H..a.M. 1 i " .• I ....ION I OOuftl.Y t I «r..•nl I I TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA ...«e..N..O. PS...U. I e• •o;.... Io:.:0::'..... . ....... E.n«...oe dtlGK�County •..u...... .H. II..0. ...• I•...e.0 if w.•..t» Boundary n 10410.�.•" if I.xu w��", PO"n.{.oxe T «IO Municipal Boundary II• t.to x+....ns.n A• w.In «u." o" Township Bound if n ran •I t.N.•.f.0.1 'S-S--- P •..nn...... .f owl.. H•...ow« f9 In MA..f.«a, • • 119 . 11 ol/ • ~` `� ''''Li ' � , \ \ ,.l r 0` '� -, , ,,,/, } p � Z ri r o Y- r. • 1 �, i 76 \_ •l , 9) �Eds R•smc Cem o � .. i «°• (( / y J • / �1� _— :\ �� , l\ BLO /MI TON ,r.., r �`} „,. l.- �,L ° ° }�/ �(, NCO x n� - .. Y V T �n ,. 2 0 1 rxa• e \ r a e L Y 1 7 1 V I�I( ,� / • A W C ,1 rV ,•--moo. Ps k ▪ B0. Jl\ \\ I� ee Y 7f/- \ m lC- 'I \ ''',\• _nl C� v,e ; ly . / .Y -J �IK C ZI � • I r i, c 1 i'- Imo, \ ,„ \ \ (\ • 1 N Blue Lake I .N \s.4 • \) -' ' . I -'1 } ) ` +I +/tea \\o j '• BI°apmgtnn nrrY r . V., `_14- /mac \yv N.•�•`ti 5 - -\ 1 -wcn -\;�` �, Qu6r.Y I ter/ ('r 7071 . _ Quarry 1 , �, v� �,. " �, v '`j Rice Lake ;' 1'\ RrH ti -- I34rden ,4.'�. I ' ES ` - , \ , ("� � -• . 1. � � ._ _ _ .. !\�\.' 17 - Ot V u -.••... .... ..,.- ., • * a * jr * ; I!',y C ,` �� * * j j •peuy olue^j '� /^ til£ ...„``'', NZ / • q,1e ` f rr r lea ggSo kV Q _?: fi„ • 6 (441 -,-/ ., . peOU.10/7 MOW011 � S a Y L C • W • . 4,r_ • ,,,, yam(( r_ .4 1•;} ,I ,�+-°�f—�.i,` II c r';;{ 11L, (Nig _�}_-o. A ' lr ._ ^� "(IA L 1 i /1`r/ ,- ‘ ,4 1 (-It ' %;"'es%-i". I 'i.;1XDUC.,7.4•l,;A try i ri-IAI 2.;.P".:HADIS 15i)%lL .� � 1 a / ' a _ ' d -'.,/. �. . ., r\ I EDE VA E .,i< C. ' JI 1 1 ,f a II -t ICI NM `l'R' I Jg�,- �- ;— ",.,,i1:sill Ji `r - Ls�{ MIT _ � , ��, v-:. • II l A..`�1 a a L i 1 �s ^�l "Yf I i ..cf {ti —T` C.4/,"l'a,j— f_L--- $.1 , _ Ce I I 5k'k.._;-1 •., I -!-v---+-1_L,,L-L�_Ll l r-F''3.^1 I I 0..w._....-!_—L_I .- ! '.�. l / y _ - 7".4j I 1 i ' i 1 �J,,I.•�9I , , ',� I I ; i GYM 1 �r Cam. I r' ' — fi1lNItti it-1— i , . r :%ice-, + Y L`t,_,JD I I I i I 1 , i __i . Py_-)-11_1'' '_ erit 1 'I I r l' IVEri it i....e'' VILLAGE OF EDEN RIAIRIE sector map �- 7 purgatory 1130 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1Eden Prairie Facilities Study, School District #272, Spring, 1975. 2Kennedy, P. and Lueth, R., Landscapes of Hennepin County, Soil Conservation Service, 1976. 3Noise Pollution Control Section, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1974. 4Purgatory Creek Study, Brauer & Associates Incorporated, 1975. 5Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District Overall Plan, Minnesota Water Resources Board, August, 1973. 6Soi1 Survey Hennepin County, Soil Conservation Service, April, 1974. 7Transit Potentials, South Hennepin Route Ridership Improvement Project, Twin Cities Area Metro Transit Commission, January, 1977. 8Urban Runoff, Erosion and Sediment Control, Soil Conservation Service 9Interim Report Flying Cloud Airport Master Plan Study, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Feb. , 1975 10Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council, Jan., 1973. 11The Uncommon Ones, Department of Natural Resources. SOZ STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dick Putnam, Planning Director DATE: April 8, 1977 APPLICANT: Hustad Development Corporation PROJECT: Bluffs East/West LOCATION: South of Co. Rd. 1 , east and west of Purgatory Creek REFER TO: Bluffs PUD Proposal, March 20, 1977 Environmental Assessment Worksheet Purgatory Creek Study for preliminary site evaluation of the proposed Bluffs Country Addition in Eden Prairie by Soil Conservation Service BACKGROUND The Bluffs Country project has been discussed for many years with the city with lack of utilities and road systems the primary reasons for delay of the project. A joint meeting of the Planning Commission and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was held on Feb. 7, 1977 . The project for private ownership and development of the land within and adjacent to Purgatory Creek was presented by Hustad Development Company. The commissions asked that an alternative be developed that would illustrate the acquisition and dedica- tion of the Purgatory Creek Corridor from rim to rim consistent with the recommendations of the Purgatory Creek Study prepared by Brauer $ Associates. A second alternative, termed the public alternative, was presented to the commissions and discussed with the developer. The total cost of the public alternative was of great concern to both commissions and a compromise , or composite approach was suggested . The compromise plan appears to be the most acceptable alternative which provides for the strong points of each solution both public and private. The preser- vation and protection of the creek valley and slopes combined with the high quality home sites and tax generating properties appears to provide "the best of both worlds". The staff in cooperation with the developer and numerous state and technical agencies prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet ( EAW ) on the Bluffs East/West compromise plan . The developer has submitted the PUD application and zoning/platting request consistent with the compromise plan evaluated in the F.AW . • Staff Report-Bluffs E/W -2- April 8, 1977 CONCLUSIONS The environmental assessment finds that this private action , Bluffs East/West, is not a major action and does not have the potential for significant environ- mental effects. Also, the project is not of more than local significance, - therefore the assessment recommends a Negative Declaration Notice be filed requiring no EIS to be prepared for the project. The staff in reviewing the findings of the EAW asked the Soil Conservation Service to prepare a brief analysis of the project. Mr. Kennedy, Director of the SCS,has worked closely with the city staff and developer in formulating concepts which will lead to specific soil erosion control measures if the project is approved. Also, the staff has examined the site with Naturalist and Wildlife Management Consultant Don Fondrick. RECOMMENDATIONS The staff would recommend the Plannning Commission based upon the review of all pertinent documents and plans approve the following: 1. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet findings and conclusions are accurate and that a Negative Declaration Notice requiring no EIS be filed with the Environmental Quality Council and published in the EQC Monitor. 2. That the city approve the PUD Concept for the 400± acres Bluffs East/West. 3. That the rezoning request from Rural to R1-13.5 with setback and lot size variances listed in the Bluffs brochure be approved subject to modifications of the site plan reflecting the recommendations of the Soil Conservation Service Report, and the inclusion of a small scale neighborhood play space to he maintained by the homeowners and dedicated to the public. 4. That the Bluffs West preliminary plat he approved for approximately 250 lots subject to the detailed requirements of the City Engineering Department. DP:jj • (mid • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PRELIMINARY SITE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED BLUFF • COUNTY ADDITION IN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • by Mahedi Jiwani, Patrick N. Kennedy and James L. Anderson 4311 • I. INTRODUCTION • This is a preliminary site evaluation of the proposed Bluff County West Addition in the City of Eden Prairie. • The primary concern in this area of development is the control of erosion and sediment. As indicated in the Environmental Assessment prepared by the City of Eden Prairie for the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council the soils are sandy and loamy. These soils are considered to he very developable. They exhibit low shrink-swell; have a low danger of frost action and generally have sufficient bearing strength for residential development. Of course additional engineering tests should be conducted before construction is begun. These sandy soils are very erosive however, when they are left bare of vegetation and occupy slopes greater than 12 percent. This erosiveness is evidenced in the gully formation that has taken place on certain areas of the property being discussed. At the present time these gullies are fairly stable due in some part to agricultural control structures pres- ently in place. The subject of this report will consist of recommendations and suggestions for the control of erosion and sediment from the site as Well as insuring the stable nature of the gullies in the future. This report is done without the aid of a grading,drainage or erosion control plan, therefore the recommendations should be considered preliminary and upon the receipt of additional information may change somewhat. II. REVIEW PROCEDu RE Due to the concern expressed about the control of erosion and the stabil- ization of the gullies present in the area of proposed development the following additional information should be provided before construction is begun. In order to fully evaluate the erosion and sedimentation hazard a detailed erosion and sediment control plan should be prepared. This plan should include the proposed drainage and grading plans. Before final approval of development in these critical erosion areas these plans should be reviewed by appropriate public officials and technical staff. From the erosion, grading and drainage plans, estimates can be made of the potential soil loss. With the inclusion of the appropriate proposed erosion and sediment control measures soil loss may then be reduced within acceptable limits. For the proposed standards of the Metropolitan Council see "Environmental Protection: Model Ordinances for Use by Local Govern- ments". These erosion control measures may include the recommendations made in this report. as well as other acceptable temporary and permanent • nteasut•es. For construction and implementation specifications for the er- osion control measures suggested in this report refer to the "Urban Run- off, Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook". V8/) Page -2- III. CONSIDERATIONS • This landscape has many attractions for residential development and is generally compatable with their use if environmental concerns are given consideration in planning. We have examined the site, and based on available information, see a need for erosion control measures to sta- bilize the critical erosion areas. • Our reconnnendations are in most cases general: However, specific rec- ommendations are also made at some sites. It is up to the developer to select the erosion control measures that will best serve the purpose. 1. Drainage systems should be integrated with erosion control practices. The present site plans do not show the drainage plans and thus it is not possible to fully evaluate the storm water erosion potential. . • 2. Erosion control plans should be developed prior to es- tablishing lot lines. Where temporary erosion control measures are necessary, they should be in place prior to the beginning of construction. 3. Steep erodable site conditions should be avoided. Areas with slopes steeper than 18% should not be built upon. Slopes greater than 18% should be protected from foot traffic by fencing or some other barrier. Where houses are permitted on steep slopes, each lot should be prepared individually. General grading of several lots at one time should be avoided. 4. Development should be staged such that no area is left ex- posed for a period longer than 60 days. 5. Elevations should be stabilized below which no grading should be permitted. 6. Temporary erosion control measures such as use of straw • bales on the downhill side behind the home construction area on each lot may be necessary. 7. Water will have to be diverted from the gullies. In add- ition, the gullies will have to be revegetated. Where this is not possible or where gullies are designed to con- vey the runoff, grade stabilization structures should be provided. In most gullies a series of grade stabilization structures may be necessary. • y313 Page -3- 8. Level diversions where constructed should be designed to adequately protect against a 50 year storm runoff. 9. Where gullies are to be filled in, adequate easement should be provided to safely convey a 50,year storm run- off. Our specific recommendations are made at three locations. These locations are shown on enclosed maps. The maps identify steep areas which unless filled, be fenced out or some sort of a barrier be provided so as to dis- courage pedistrain traffic. In addition, areas where level diversions and pipe outlets into the gully are necessary are shown. The maps do not show any grade stabilization structures within the gullies. However, the potential for erosion is so great that the use of such structures should be investigated. Also shown on the map, are locations where a realign- ment of the roads would permit lots to be outside of the steep areas. Most erosion control measures require yearly inspection and regular maintenance. It will therefore, be necessary to establish a party or parties responsible for inspection and maintenance of the erosion control measures. In addition, where both are located on steep slopes, home owners should be apprised of their erosion control responsibility. There responsibilities may vary from lot to lot and every effort should be made to explain the specific responsibilities to the home owner. It is hoped that the developer will incorporate these suggestions in developing an overall erosion control plan. We will be able to better evaluate the site once sewer plans are made available to us. • • 431W fl . All/. 2)y'''1;;7/(/"'-,;:: :- .-----/ ‘s-s'N '.-..°1'.--j\\\\V! JI I (\,, , ,,) _______..I-- C. A ,. , ‘ I i I ` / a .1 , i . t , 1 )1 `.. � ,, 1I\ f ' ' 1 � ' _ , 7,I f ; ( , ,, __........x.:,. ---:-;-_,, •,-,-„,.; „...il . Z.----- 1 111: \\ ,i .\ ., lyr\N;.$ 1..k..-.....,_....-,....N....,-1.Mb , \\ . \\ i_, ,\ i . \\ , i 'V /. -''''',`,-A „ \ . \,,..\ • pd I \II -,,, fiir`\ ! a�\ \ p ,'\\, \\\ •-'---/N • •-•,...-, 1 ,/ -\ -,-, \ il � " �/v` vv� <tn I s \ _, i 1l I1';'I\, \(/' � .1 `J/�4I^1 �/(...1,1 - ' {�( „ 1 1 11 11: a \ lL. 11II ll/.1 I\\:,. t vfl�, a J/\ r . �, j \� r y l , . I I if', �llll {- (\ �rI. I .. --/. , k ; i 7 , \\- • /; \I 1 \ i 1. •-1:-.\1•;\,,`‘, \ .\\ s>,:, ,,, \ ,,, \ , ,, .1., 4, : , Q:._:„...:.,--_— :A, ,:.4 - '' '_- 4 , ,..._ ..., ,„,; .„,. /,1 , , , i; , ); , ;j' �1 ' �r .-", Sao_ .. ; ,/ ,,- , .; ,/ ) \,,,s,\ ,, ..,, , ;; 1,,i, ,...„,)\\....__ y3Is • • w • . y////��tie// �/ �9 ° -2 -7.9 t---' '''-,,,) (fir27-.. ' •-..1 : 1 t i . i i /i / c .iiI, , - I1/4 . . 1 ----------_- ___:_,--.-- , ,., \- - \.' „)4 { ,,„.,. r ,„, t..7, .* ., \., ........1. ,,4,,_, , . ; k* �-.'. , \ _ IWI• ,, ill � ' ,,-7 .1,\i N.%.// ' 1 : I a�� ,�, , , -\ 0,_. il ., \ , , \\ �. �i� )! _, , __\- ! , , 1 • , ,,,\,, , .,. \ ,II, , \\-.%:,./ , 1\� - r 7:,--st ,,:\ )1,1, ' e Y \����l./' '"�.I 7 K._.I „I I"' II 1 `I'V.I. .. II_= , V \ `/ n1 1 ' _ I •1 - V 1 •I I t, , \ —i I I It K • ! ; \ I' 11t, (l' \‘, ‘\„ s„ y . \ ‘, \ *I\ II ., ,•' ,, v 7\1\..,......\, i ,- ,-. ,/ s\\ . ' c, i \‘\\ il ,' "\\.., 1' `` \ 1� ) • i l . r ��';� , I;! Its,Av" .. l`f',,, i ,��� �•/ , fir / 1 (}) ._ . 7\ ,ire v .;) , ,, ...,.., , , ,1 ' ..,,.........L.,\,.:,,:,.,:i (Vi 71/\., ...., , f , z i mI (' ' „l ..y,.. // I 1 1 1\" , 1 , b - :,_,\: .\,N''''=:‘,- / „ i ai ,, \/ ,\, \k's.,../..././N,_-..71- ,___ -_,.--\•••'. , -1,-,---,---•,, ';•'--,, - ./. .?.., ,,...,,,, -- r- ( P , ':,1,/ -._' ,;'''-,`c-.---.i,... ii,, '",',.ic 5 1 0 1 , ;,J--, , / 0 1, )i --- (A,,,, ,, (,, ,,V i / 1 , h ! I \` ,�_, �V --. A / ;---y • '.3) ,1.'. ': 2...-.. '; .',1'..)i_.,i. ,\ 1 I , 71\ i',.) . • ,(\. 1-1( ;\ \''''' '' ' - - , .r.1:•:.--\4—-•:. . '.- \\ ' i 1/ ,. / ., . \ , , =‘:-.„.,.._,<\,,,. \—,-,_. .,_..1.___ -, - ->) ...- s?---f-----_--„, , .. ,,„ _ .,...,... .„. ,. . ., ._.,.._______:,,- v ^ -y \ �•.,i \/ 1 - r Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 28, 1977 C. Bluffs East/West, by Hustads, request for PUD Concept approval on 400 acres of single family, multiple and commercial uses, PUD Development Stage approval, preliminary plat and rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for the western 200 acres of the PUD. The PUD is located south of Co. Rd. 1 between Co. Rd. 18 and Homeward Hills Road. A public hearing. The planner referred the commission to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, (EAW) and the Environmental Review Process outline which delegates the assess- ment to local governments. The planner stated if the city approves the PUD the EAW would be forwarded to agencies for further review and published in the EQC Monitor. After 30 days from publication, the EAW stands as final and objections to the EAW can be raised and filed within those 30 days. Mr. Wally Hustad outlined the boundary of the PUD and stated utilities are available for the project and the market demand exists . He stated thehomes would be higher income houses, starting between $60,000- 70,000, and they are suggesting private ownership until the city can imple- ment a comprehensive preservation program. He stated they are ready to develop this summer if approvals are given and the development will only encompass 120 of the 200 acres. Seventy acres ( 2 vista locations ), are identified and suggested to be purchased by the city. The project would contain approximately 250 lots . Lynch inquired if the $60,000-70,000 costs would include the price of the lot. Mr. Hustad replied affirmative. Sundstrom still did not feel assurances exist that the public land could survive the private development surrounding it Sundstrom then asked if any recreational areas are planned . Hustad_replied negative. The planner stated the staff todate has no final determination on appropriate uses near or in the creek valley. Mr. Robert Engstrom, Engstrom. 8 Associates, did not feel the fragile nature of the creek would be suitable for trails if it is to retain its character. Pauly asked if a price mix is necessary . Mr. Wally Hustad replied it would be unfeasiable to develop the entire area as higher income homes. Pauly, referring to the EAW question about archaeological sites, asked if any indian mound sites would be encountered . Mr. Hustad believed the indian mounds are located primarily along the river bluff. Sorensen asked the staff how much money is involved with the acquisition as shown in the Hustad plan. The planner felt the 70 acres to be purchased may be assessed in value as if it weredevelopable property. Sorensen questioned the advisability of the variance request on such a large development of 5' on garage side , setbacks not to include overhangs or fireplaces. Mr. Ilustad stated they are requesting the variance as the need does arise in a few circumstances. Sundstrom inquired if nature specialists would be available to answer questions on the compatibility of private and public uses. The planner hoped to have qualified specialists at the next meeting. Cordon Camphc11.9901 Riverview Road, disapprove of the number of small lots /t21 Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 28, 1977 Helen Fowler, 10315 Riverview Road, believed more trails in the area would cause more trouble, the increase of people near and in the creek valley would increase the danger of fires which are very difficult to fight in the creek valley, and _ suggested the land be developed in larger lots. Fred Ekrem, 9845 Bluff Road, inquired if the Bluffs East would have city sewer. Mr. Hustad replied affirmative but may be 3-5 years off as lift stations are required. Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 28, 1977 Bluffs E/W, cont. Motion: Fosnocht moved, Pauly seconded, to continue the public hearing to the April llth meeting and refer to staff for a report. Motion carried 3:0:3 ( Schee, Sorensen and Sundstrom abstained ). Y311 • approved Planning Commission Meeting -5- March 14, 1977 D. Hustad's Single Family Creek development, preliminary discussion. Jim Ostenson informed the commission their Bluff PUD will encompass 400 acres and they will be requesting PUD approval on the 400 acres and zoning and platting on the western 200 acres. He stated an EIS is being•done and they plan to have the brochure done within a week. Bearman asked what the average size lot would be . Ostenson replied 80 x 135 . Sundstrom inquired if public or private development has been decided for the creek valley. The planner replied the council has not made a decision iodate but a combination of the two seems the most feasible. Sundstrom and Fosnocht expressed concern that the private development so near to a public creek valley area may be detrimental due to dogs, cats, trespassers, motor-bikes, etc. The planner stated he would try to arrange for a DNB representa- tive, Wildlife Specialist or Park Reserve representative to be present at the next meeting to answer the commi$ion's questions relative to public/private use of the creek valley. g3a4 approved Planning Commission Meeting -8- Feb. 28, 1977 VI. OLD BUSINESS 1. Purgatory Creek The planner reviewed a revised development plan for the Purgatory Creek area and the lotting for single family . The plan included private lots, an easement area, and public areas to be purchased. Sorensen inquired if the streets in the single family development would be private. Mr. Hustad replied affirmative. Sorensen then asked if Hustad's would be fencing the public areas. Mr. Hustad replied negative. Mr. Hustad stated that this revised plan is approximately 250 lots on 200 acres and they believe the easement areas and public areas can be worked out. . i VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. PLANNER'S REPORT IX. ADJOURNMENT • • Bearman moved, Sundstrom seconded, to adjourn at 11:35 PM. Motion carried. Respectfully Submitted ' Jean Johnson • tia2 I • • APPROVED PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COIlIaSSION ILNDAY, larch 7, 1977 7:30 PE CITY HALL I293ERS PRESEINT: Chairman liarvin Erickson, William Garens, Jerry Kingrey, Randy Rotterath, Nary Upton, Steve Fifield, Richard Anderson, Paul Choiniere,(8:00) Tim Pierce, and Francis Heimer(8:00) 1•0BERS EXCUSED: Geneva Middleton k21 BERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services Chris Enger, City Landscape Architect Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor OTERS PRESENT: Tom Bartel, E.P. News, Bike Thurston, Eileen . Dirlam, Al Teas,•Lynne Forster, Dorothy Eenalis, Sharon Hutchnson, Isr. & ldrs. J. G. Campbell, & llrs. li. Lyhkcn, Jim Ostenson •- ally Rusted, Busted Development, Jim Osberg, Larry Heiman, Bob Krue11, Ray Welter, Sr., and Ray Welter, Jr.. Chairman Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:35 PE. VI. Purgatory Creek Study - Lower Creek Sector Chairman Erickson requested that this item be moved up to 7:30 Pi . Jessen spoke to joint meeting of PR & NE Commission and Planning Commission on public preservation of the lower creek sector of Purgatory Creek and pre- liminary development concept presented by lir. Wally Hustad of Hustad Developers. Jensen had graphics available representing discussion of joint meeting and pre- sent compromise proposal by Hustad which he would present tonight. Rusted spoke to revised proposal and re-stated landowners position that private ownership would be the best way to preserve the valley. He agreed that there was a legitimate concern regarding future owners who may not have the same concern for the environment. He said the new subdivision boundaries would stay away from conservancy sone, and re-stated that there was complete agreement that no one should have access to the valley. He suggested three categories of land: 1. development land 2. acquisition land, which public would acquire for public use 3. conserva- tion area, lying between property line and creek, would remain private through the use of an easement until otherwise decided. He added that the criterea for use of the valley would be agreed upon. lie also added that they have discussed this plan with most of the people involved. Season spoke to how this plan relates to the Purgatory Creek Study. He said that the trails remain, and development on the slopes will be restricted to certain points,which he feels is consistent with the minimum protection standards of the Study. Dusted added that they were asked to develop concept for entire valley, and that this plan was only a preliminary concept. 43a2 • • Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural March 7, 1977 Resources Commission .approved Page Two Tom Bartel, E.P. News, asked about the third land category referred to by Busted. Rusted explained that this was a way of conserving that section in perpetual ease- ment, until the public is able to implement some type of public program. He said that one of the concerns is to see what happen in fifty years when ownership changes hands, and that there has to he a way that restriction of the valley be perpetual. Eustad added that the landowners are also concerned with how the public will imple- ment what they say they are going to do. Garena comaented that anything we do is going to disturb nature, and was concerned with how we are going to keep people out. He asked amount of acreage of acquisi- tion area. Rusted responded approximately ninety acres, with about forty acres in each of three nodes, and said the public will not be allowed in the valley at all and it would be a view only. Chris Eager, City Landscape Architect, explained the concept of the trails, which had been developed directly in reply to the joint.weeting. He spoke to the Brauer Study, describing this area as outstanding, and they developed the idea the same as Anderson Lake. He said it became clear that it should become a place to view the valley. he added that one idea of how both public and private could cooperate would be to develop a long trail with an overlook, using foot bridges, and fencing the trail to keep p crle out of the valley,but to allow a high visual access. Garens asked what the cost of acquisition for this area would be. Jessen responded for these ninety to one-hundred acres, his guess was about seven to twelve thousand dollars an acre, without any depth appraisal. Erickson asked whether this could qualify for any funding. Jessen answered that the liklihood of LAZOU funding would be extremely good, and that there was a chance for funding through Metro Council Special uses and Trail funding. — i Kingrey commented that the easement will be an interim agreement until land owners and the City would be sure that the easement could be bettered by another approach. Be asked whether LAUCGN monies would be granted on that kind of situation? Jossen answered affirmative, and that if easements are properly established and perpetuated, he is certain that it would not deter from any chances of funding. Be added that the Federal govcrnmant has experience with easements of this type and this is usually acceptable. Chairman Erickson opened the floor to the public. Mrs, Dorothy Menalis, 9715 Mill Creek Dr., asked who owned the land on the other side of the creek and what was the future of that land. Hustad answered that one of the reasons they were asked to start developing was because they control most of the land on the other side, and that the staff is concerned with total program. Re added that there is not a lot of individuals involved on the other side. 43z? Minutes - Perks, Rec. and natural March 7, 1977 Resources Commission approved rage Three Sharon llutchnson, 9734 Mill Creek Dr., asked about placement of the fencing. Enger responded that there would be only one fence, occvring on the back lot line of the properties, which would be on the cast side of the road and trail. He added that it would probably be a cyclone fence, about five feet high. Al Teas, Box 1156, asked whether this proposal was directly relating to the Purgatory Creek Study adopted by the City. Erickson responded affirmative. Teas inquired whether the City had made a Study. He added that he was under the impression that two studies were going to be made for both private and public and to consider non-implementation. Jenson responded that the City Council had adopted the Study last April to use as a guide for Eden Prairie, which included various alternatives, among which was non-impletation. Teas commented that he has not seen any evidence about directing the PR ec NR Commission to prioritize all of the critical areas here. He felt there was no. planning to it, and that the Park Commission was too vague on funding. He added that the practicality of the trails and the policing and maintenance of these trails was also unclear. Jensen responded that all of these questions were discussed at the joint meeting with the rlannina• Joi;caiosion, including the funding, but would be glad to go over them again if necessary. Menalis inquired what the average size of lots were. Rusted responded that they were basically like the lots in the Prairie East development. he added that a variety of size of lots is the need today. Anderson commented about plan presented at joint meeting and the one presented tonight, but wanted to remind Commission members of the original plan drawn up by Brauer. NOTION: Anderson moved that we accept recommendation of original proposal made by Brauer for Lower Creek Sector. Garens seconded. I•iotion failed with a roll call vote of 3-5-2. Anderson "yay" Erickson "nay" Pierce - abstain Fifield "yay" Garens "nay" Helmer - abstain Choiniere "yay" Y.ingrey "nay" Retterath "nay" Upton "nay" Anderson commented that we would no"er know whether we can get funding unless we try. lie added that we have spent years looking at Study, and in studying it have recognized it as one of our major resources. Ringrey, addressing Anderson, asked what his main concern would be with the compromise if the funding 1;as not r problem. Anderson responded that a compromiso is a compromise, and the Brauer Study is the best we could come up with, and in order to guarantee its maximum protection, we should go public. Jossen responded to time element as far as funding sources for LAWCOU, which would take about a year, and for Metro funding, which he felt could be accomplished by this Fall. 43A Minutes - Parks, sec. and Natural March 7, 1977 Resources Commission *Proved Page Four 2s. Robert Engstrom, spoke to the notion on the floor, and said he was confused as to its real intent. He said that strictly interpreted, the Study is encouraging public in the floor of the valley. Anderson responded that the Study was done for implementation of a trail, and if you are going to preserve it, you have to make plans to preserve it. No added that the rest of the proposal was to stay out of the valley. Upton expressed support for Hustad's compromise proposal, because she felt this would be best for the greatest amount of people in Eden Prairie. Anderson commented that this Commission started vitt. a plan a long time ago and agreed to this plan in concept. he felt that we will never really know if we can implement this plan, which he thinks is the best plan, if we never try. Garens called the question. Campbell spoke to significant loss of tax base to Eden Prairie and felt that would be unacceptable to the people of Eden Prairie. Kingrey pointed out that the significant develorment would not be retained because of the stated interest by Hustad, to request tax abatement on the property held, easement encumbered, land. Choiniere felt that the Commission was reacting to the proposal because we do not have a plan. he felt there was not enough reference material to make a decision on. Helmer expressed agreement with Choiniere's position. - Games felt that acquiring this amount of money for the purpose of the few people who would use the area was not in the best interest of Eden Prairie. Choiniere felt that in voting for compromise plan, your concept is destroyed, and you have a piecemeal study, and that we will continue to react. Eustad,to the previous comment byKingrey, noted that there is a substantial difference because the land we are talking about is easement line and is below property lines. He added that we lost 50 lots from one proposal to the other, but we still have an area where high value homes will bo built. There was discussion as to whether the entire creek was being considered or just the sectors. kenalis requested the Council's position on the issue. Garens responded by reading the memo containing the Council action on the Purgatory Creek Study. Teas asked whether the Riley-Purgatory Watershed District had studied the creek corridor. Jessen answered that the District Board of Managers have receiveithe Study, and that they also use it as a tool to evaluate land proposals that come be- fore it in regard to any water issue. Anderson spoke to all of the background research that had been dons within the past two years, including the public meetings held at the schools, where the entire plan was laid out. • Fiutchnson pointed out that not all people involved had been residents at that time. G� q,J • 1:inutes — Parks, Roc. and Batumi March 7, 1977 Resources 'Commission approved Page Five Erickson inquired whether LA?iCUit would fund such items as fencing. Jensen res— ponded affirmative. Kinrroy asked what amount of land would have to be acquired according to original plan in Brauer Study. Jensen answered 300 acres, with an alternative for minimum protection in which the conservancy would be set aside and sensitive controls for recreational and private use occur in transition zone. King oy then asked for approx. no.` of acres to be acquired by Mx. so—called 'ustad proposal. Jessen said 90 to 100 acres. PSr. J. G. Campbell, 9901 3iverview itd., asked whether there had been a study done on acquisition and loss of tax base. Jessen spoke to loss of 100 lots, which he said was previously discussed at joint meeting, and would amount to co290,000 for one year. Campbell asked what the cost of acquisition was for the 300 acres. Jessen answered it would be approximately o2,000,000. Hustad added that this only represents the west side of the Creek. lienalis spoke to previous inquiry she had made at previous meeting on whether a Study would be made on run—off and water level of the Creek. Eager responded that the City Staff is undertaking environmental assess:ent of lower Purgatory creek, which was precipitated by I;ustad's development proposal. lie said that the assess— ment looks at all of those issues and balances the pros and cons. Be added that they are still in the process of studying soils and gathering data. lir. Robert Kruell, 6780 Tartan Curve, asked about acres involved in proposal. liustsd answered approximately 120 acres in development area, 605 development and 40. preserved. Kruell asked what percentage of unbuildnble land would you be proposing into ease— ment, and how such land is the City being asked to consider. Hustad responded 20% in the easement, 20% in acquisition, and 60% development. He added that you are looking at 80 acres, 40 to be acquired, 40 in easement. Kruell suggested that attention be given to unbuildable land as zero value to use as a starting point. Hustad said as far as he is concerned, there is no zero value land. Plenalis asked how much tax money is involved and how are tax paysers expected to pay for it. Anderson said that the purchaso of this type of land could be funded through non—taxable money from off—shore drilling, gasoline tax etc.. Be added that if we have that valuable of land, the State and Federal governments will provide the funding. Bartel asked whether the cash park fee could be used as local share. Erickson responded that the City could decide to allocate these funds toward this purpose, but generally they are used for neighborhood playgrounds. Bartel asked about land dedication in lieu of cash as an alternative. Jessen said the dedication of easements would be as partial local share. 1•Ir. Ray Welter, Jr., Pioneer Trail, expressed his opinion that the cost of purchase would exceed 2,000,000 because you will have to go all the way to the river. • 1inutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural Karch 7, 1977 Resources Commission approved Page Six NOTION: Pierce moved to recommend tc the Council, that using the Purgatory Creek Study as a guide, being that this sector is highest priority and using method of public and private ownership as presented to us in the compromise plan of ]larch 7, 1977 that we accept in concept this plan with the following concern: Clarification is needed as to whether the Study should be used in this way, since all points in Resolution 1125 have not been completely answered. Garens seconded. Motion carried, with Anderson casting the dissenting vote, and Helmer abstaining. Bartel asked as a point of clarification whether it was the intent of the motion • to go ahead with outside funding sources. Pierce responded affirmative. Choiniere consented that outside funding will be required according to Res. 1125. Chairman Erickson called for a five minute recess. Erickson left the meeting at 9s45 P11, with Vice—chairperson Garens continuing. Garens called the meeting back to order at 9:45 PM. • 93c'1 • =pproved Planning Commission Minutes -7- Peb. 14, 1977 G. Purgatory Creek Study, discussion of Purgatory Creek. Mr. Enger referred the commission to the general master plan model prepared by the staff since the joint meeting between the commissions. He stated the staff's plan would eliminate about 80 of the lots in Hustad's plan. Mr. Jessen illustrated the tree line, possible fence locations, trail locations for biking and walking, and the staff's suggested lotting plan near the rim. He felt the area is very important as a wildlife corridor and funds will be sought for acquisition and development. Lynch inquired how much the acquisition may be. Mr. Jessen replied approximately 2 million for the 300 acres. Pauly asked if funding would be available for road and fence improvements. Mr. Jessen believed it would. Pauly then asked where the city's share would come from. Mr. Jessen was unsure. Fosnocht inquired how much revenue the city might lose if the master plan was implemented. Mr. Jessen estimated 2.5 million. Pauly felt the project would require community support to be successful, and doubted that a bond would be passed. Lynch asked if the Hustad plan would protect the wildlife corridor. Mr. Jessen replied e personally does not believe it would. Mr. Enger meted this area of the creek was identified in the Brauer Creek Study as the most unique in the city and that the city would most likely not have to spend this amount of money or purchase this much land in other sectors of the creek. He believed public management is the best solution to preserving the creek valley and controlling its use by the public. Mr. Hustad stated he believes the staff's master plan will eliminate 90-100 lots and that the lots nearest the creek have the highest amenity. He stated they would be drawing final plans and that perhaps could develop the same number of lots with less encroachment. He believed the creek valley will be enjoyed more by the individual lot owners than it will be by the public. Motion: Lynch moved, Pauly seconded, to recommend to the City Council that this property can best be preserved under private ownership. Discussion: Fosnocht hope a 'middle of the road' approach would be found and doubted if the city would pass a bond to finance the acquisition and development. Pauly believed, given the economic situation, private development would be the best and attach restrictions and covenants to protect the valley. Sundstrom believed the public will criss-cross the valley with paths as the result of root and motorbike traffic. He stated he is against the motion because of the damage o the.creek valley that may occur with private development. As this is the most unique area of the creek, he believed it should be protected for all to enjoy instead of a few homeowners. Schee excused herself from the meeting. { approved Planning Commission Minutes -8- Feb. 14, 1977 • orensen believed incalcuabledamage could be done to the creek corridor if the public interest is not protected. He disagreed with the motion and felt a solution should he sought and strict controls would be needed whether public or private develop- ment occurs. Don Peterson, 7025 Mariann Drive, suggested the city not allow building wherever 10% slopes occur and purchase the vistas. Fosnocht doubted that private development would protect the amenities of the creek valley and that extensive damage could be done by motorbikes, dogs, etc. Vote: The motion carried 3:2 with Sorensen and Sundstrom voting nay. • APPROVED MINUTES JOINT PARKS, REC. AND NATURAL RESOURCES CO]S•IISSION AND PLANNING & ZONING CONIIISSION MELTING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1977 7:00 PM,CITY HALL • PARKS, REC. AND NATURAL RESOURCES Chairman Rarvin Erickson, William Garens, COI•IIISSIOI] PTIMERS PRESENT: Geneva Middleton, Richard Anderson, Randy Rotterath, Paul Choiniere, and Steve Fifield }02Il3ETS EXCUSED: Jerry Kingrey • IZEBERS ABSENT: Francis Helmer, Mary Upton and Tim Pierce PLANNING & ZONING COI.4IISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Don Sorensen, Richard Lynch, Rod Sundstrom, William Beaman, and Herb Fosnocht 1•II1;BERS ABSENT: Norma Schee and Sidney Pauly STAFF PRESENT: Director of Community Services, Marty Jessen Planning Director, Dick Putnam OTHERS PPFc HT: Tom Bartel, E. P. News, Hr. & Mrs. James Bublitz, R. D. Twiss, Ray N. Welter, Sr., Ray Welter, Jr., Jim Ostenson-Larry Griffith- & Wally Hustad, Busted Development, Roy E. Olson, firs. G. Offerran, Mrs. Dorothy Menalis, Leo Dorf, Helen Fowler, Werner '•'. Schulze, Jim Brown, Bob Brown, Don Brauer- Brauer Assoc. Inc., Sharon Roland, and Mrs. Nancy Heinen Chairman Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:05 P11. I. APPROVAL OF AGFIIDA Fosnocht moved to approve Agenda as published. Garens seconded. Motion carried unanimously. II. DISCUSSION OF PURGATORY OREM Chairman Erickson turned over the Purgatory Creek discussion to Jessen. Jessen gave brief presentation relating to the lower Purgatory Creek area, which lay to the west and south of Co. Rd. 1, and spoke to potential develop- wont proposal by the hustad Development Co.. He spoke to the commission of Brauer & Assoc. Inc. to conduct a study of the Purgatory Creek, which revealed nine basic sectors and the possibilities of implementation. He said four of the sectors arc completed as parkland or other development. Jessen referred tin Hinutes - Joint FR 14 HR and Planning Com. Page two Approved February 7, 1977 to recommendations from the Study which included management program of the Lower Purgatory Sector. He turned over discussion to Planning Director,Putnam. Putnam spoke to the Hustad proposal and their need to know what they can do and what kind of time schedule they have, and that it is critical that the City makes a decision on this sector. He continued that we have two options which are: development as proposed by the Hustad Development Co., that represents a private option; and land along the rim of the creek as public, with sane development space. He asked whether all felt it was a significant resource that should be protected and managed or left as a development site. lie asked the two Commissions to discuss these two alternatives tonight. He turned over the floor tc lr. Wally Hustad to review what they were attempt- ing to do. Hustad agreed to the need to protect the creek valley, and commented that the question was how it is to be done. . He said that he represents the feeling that it is best protected by being privately owned, because it is beyond the capability of the City to accomplish this. lie continued that he felt there would be a need for fencing and for maintenance, and that you will have more people enjoying the creek by having then live along the creek, with proper restrictions,such as required at Creek Knolls. He added that he feels that the public will destroy the area if they are allowed in, and also spoke to significant tax base for the City through the expense of the homes along the rim. Hustad, referring to the conservancy zone, pointed out that 80 lots would be eliminated through use of this line. Jessen spoke to the tax impact, stating that 100 homes with average market value of v90,000 and based on 1976 taxes would be `r.289,100 for one year. He asked for questions and comments. Planning Commissioner Bearman asked what steps would have to be taken to determine whether there was need for a fence; what kind of usage would take place; access points and whether there was a way of entering without disturbing the wildlife. Jessen res- ponded that he felt because of character there would be no need for a fence, and that if it is properly laid out and it turns out that there is a need, a fence can be pro- vided along this whole area. He added that they had problems with fencing along one portion of Anderson Luke, and he feels that situation is working fairly well at this time. He added that the uses would be such as cross country skiing and no motorized vehicles would be allowed. Be continued that in order to accomplish public recreation, we have to invest in public land within transition zone as indicated in Study. Jessen said that there would be a couple of access points, that would be severely limited and would be very primitive. Bearman asked whether there were any figures available as to how many people would actually use this area. Jessen spoke to the Richfield Wood Lake Nature Center, where presently about 60,000 to 75,000 people pass through their entrance per year. lie added that he feels it is too large of a number for tho Lower Purgatory Creek area. Jessen opened the floor to the public. Dorothy kcnalis, 9715 Hill Creek Dr., expressed her concern that the police patrols would not be able to get into an area such as this, and spoke to the mounted police that Bloomington uses and its lack of success. Jensen responded that they have dis- cussed this with the Public Safety Dept. and they are concerned with non-authorized persons getting in, and that in the creek bottom area thore would be no way for the police to get in, but in the upper rim section there would be road access. 1/33I Minutes — Joint PR& hit Cora. Page three and Planning & Zoning Com. Approved February 7, 1977 hir. Ray Welter, Jr., Pioneer Trail, spoke to loss of taxes and naked whether they had extended their thinking to the future loss, and where the City would get the money to purchase land. Jesson said that their calculations, based on their best guess rather than market value, showed that the cost would be 3.3 to 3.5 million dollars for acquisition on the non flood plain land in the conservancy and transition zones. He added that they cannot make assessment of tax loss for the rest of the creek because we do not know what kinds of development would occur. He spoke to grnnt sources from LAUCON and SNR, tirith possibility of funds from Metro Council and Riley l+latershed District. Welter asked about requirements of City in order to receive these funds. Jessen answered that the City would have to agree to buy powerline, and not to discriminate against race, color, creed etc.. Ile added that some of the other parks owned by the City were funded this way, and the Council sets the policy for them, with limited requirements. Erickson asked whether he felt policing would be more difficult in an area like Purgatory Jreek. Jessen responded affirmative. • Busted added that the present problem was quite serious and special patrols were necessary already. Mr. James C. Bublitz, 1.0720 Co. Rd. lff, asked whether the landowners have anything to say about this matter. Jessen responded that the Purgatory Creek Study was pre— pared by Braver & Assoc. Inc. and that the decision is now before the City to adopt, modify, or whatever other action needs to be taken, and that the decision will be made by the Council upon recommendation of the PR & l.'R and Planning Commissions. llenalis asked whether the effects of development runoff on the raising and lowering of the Creek had been studied. Putnam responded that no cork had been done on this, but he felt that erosion control costs would be substantial. Fosnocht questioned Putnam why there was no half way position where the landowners get what they want nod the City gets the protected area. Putnam responded that there were all sorts of "in between" solutions if the people are interested. Jessen added that in order to apply for grants, you need to have the whole picture. Planning, Commissioner Lynch inquired about ownership of property on east side of the proposal. Jessen answered that there were about five owners fairly close, with several further down. Various options on cost vs. benefit was discussed in response to Sorensen's comment that he had thought one of the charges given the Commissions was to evaluate private or public options,&what effects they would have on funding sources. Helen Fowler, 10315 Riverview Rd., expressed her concern against bringing the public into the area. She felt that private landowners would do a better job of protecting the Creek. She spoke to recent robberies she had experienced, and added that she did not think that a recreation area as proposed would bring in bird watchers,but criminal elements. • Minutes - Joint PR t,• 1R Com. Page Four and Planning & Zoning Com. ApproVod February 7, 1977 Anderson commented that ho is one of the people who lives on a small lot, and is. not able to enjoy an area with wildlife everyday, ` • Be added that he felt that there were many people such as he who were just as con- cerned about the protection of a resource of this kind. Fowler said she felt that receiving federal funding only cost us more in taxes. She added that the people who are willing to pay for land such as this are willing to protect it. Anderson responded to example of a party getting out of hand,by speaking to one of the causes for present problems on parkland. He said ho had talked to persons in Bloomington, and because they have tightened restrictions with the use of the mounted iolicemen, we are receiving the brunt of this with young people coming into Eden Prairie for their parties. He spoke to Richfield Nature Center and the fact that there is relatively no vandalism that goes on and he feels that many young, people have a lot of respect for this area. Rusted commented that the Richfield Nature Center is a very controlled wildlife center and that is the kind of controls we would need to have. Middleton commented that she had lived through all of this by living near Anderson Lake and there were many calls made to the police before it was park land, and that nov;vu3t of the parties do not happen here. liustad pointed out that the areas were different, and that Anderson Lake did not have a public road all along the area, with the need there to regulate several accesses. He added that different controls are needed for a ravine than for around a lake. Putnam responded that today, without many neighbors around, there is a serious pro- blem of people coming into area, but that with more development you have more barking dogs and activity, which would not be a protection for wildlife. Bob Twi.as, 10010 Bennett Pl., expressed his disapproval of the proposed plans. Jim Brown, 11551 Riverview Rd., spoke as a 4.0 yr. resident of the area, and expressed his opposition to using the land for the public. Be spoke to large amounts of money spent by present landowners because of washouts etc.., and felt that people would not only go through access points but through fences or wherever they can get in, causing more washouts and problems,because the lend is very sandy and fragile. He added that if you let people in, the wildlife will leave, and felt that you must keep people out of the lower valley area. Garen commented that we all seem to be in agreement that this is a very fragile area, but we are not in agreement to the solution. He felt that if we reach some type of comprorise of development on the bluffs, severe restrictions will have to be put on. Anderson said that the wildlife is what we are concerned with, and suggested trailway up abe a without going down into the valley,&with no homes overlooking it. Putnam spoke to the problem that liustad or homeowners would not be able to afford to set their houra back because the 3reek is so broad, lie said the proposed plan does go down from the slopes. He added that if you can't build there and the City cannot buy it, what do we do with it. Putnam continued that if you are trying to protect it from top of rim to other side, it is probably not fair to ask the homeowners (633 • Minutes - Joint PR f: JIR Con. Page Five and 1lanning & Zoning Corn. Approved February 7, 1977 to pay for all of it. He said that somebody should buy it, it is the only fair way, and that it is going to be doveloped if it isn't used for a park. Austad spoke to problems if City used transition zone, wiping out 55 acres of land. He said there uou]d be problems of long cul- o-sacs with restrictions, and the impossi- bility of running roads at a 10% slope, because houses have to be at the same level as the street. Planning Commissioner Sundstrorn asked what the typical lot size along the Creek.van. Busted replied two per acre and maybe three to four in open areas. Fowler expressed concern of overpopulation of Eden Prairie, commenting that there would probably be more children, causing increase in taxes for more schools and more services. Anderson commented that one of the things he was trying to get across was that if we allow developers to build right up to the edge of the valley, gullies will have to be filled in etc.. Iie said we are trying to use the transition zone to bring develop- ment back away from the rim and its purpose is to preserve this area, and he feels it is the only way. Fowler suggested that the Commissioners contact Mir. Wilkie to show them his pictures of the wildlife in the area and said they would have a great insight into what that whole area is about. Menalis questioned the zoning for acre lots. Putnam responded there was R1-22,(one- half acre minimuri)and what it is today, which is Rural,(five acres minimum). Sorensen added that there was a need for more residential zoning categories, and this is being considered in the update of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. III. ADJODR!i NT MMOTION: Fosnocht moved to adjourn at 9:15 Pm., and suggested that.the Planning Coma and PR and AR Commission include the issue on their Agendas and consider separately, advising the Council, giving people present an opportunity for comments or reports. Sorensen seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Submitted by, Donna Stanley, • Recording Secretary 1133t1 April 12, 1977 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 77-46 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRE- LIMINARY PLAT OF BLUFFS EAST/WEST PUD - 250 Lots on approximately 200 acres, western 200 acres BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows; That the Preliminary Plat of Bluffs East/West , dated March 23, 1977 , a copy of which is attached hereto and amended as follows: is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL 4384 A W .) W .roil CEN EEC W V 0. Qt 0 'c C O a U) N C N 1 i r- r 4 C °r r 0 '0E C CO r, c ro U vro 'v0 �.c >6 b n Y = W O 0 N 3 Y.O d X N V . N N 41> 4.. o SI O N W W U N U O ro i W 1 C 0 S.- i 4-.P >0 Ow y) .+ O.cu a O U ro Gw o 4 ro N N .- C ro l >. 1 �T C U N C 7 CO W(o W co COD OC au 8 p. W i Vi i w O. V O N 0 a w o 0 0 aw b W O) O NIC N 'O r0U ro.> 7> U W CO .0 'O r i N CI W C O N. ro p. U 0 y'O r• .O 1 1 -0N W U -1'O U w++ n n nv jo ro � o L a) > > V) 0 C 0 I-ro I-0 Urcl CC �_ O 1h W . } 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.4 Lu W r> CO O C i 0 0 °n ro Cr) j� S. (C1 U CC Y W N O .O U C4 O E n C T. JO C E N r P U .z C Wi,y . N 0 .c .-. N C > 4- W V m 4' d >� O N S.- O) „ .c a 1) a W C 0. A U .1., U > -0 CA .> 0 en 1.- L.> W C C ro Y a n ro E ro 0 ro c •E ++ LA roa U ••c- > iX E 0 ro 0 0 0 C T. 8 w C Z L) i-of) L n 0 L 0 0 X) L•r W +, 4- a ro U c oa W Y U N N C; Y 4- 0C C 0) 'O 0) C C i0 N • RI 0 C V a N C ro L 'O N L O 0 i' a [1 4-. C W U2 'O••- 0 N Ym U N n (s F_ r N 0 'O 4-, W O O U • ro W (0 U L ro •u 0 L I c 4-) N U C W E O a x a ro ro w N • 'O C U CC ro ro C Y •N 0 'Y .0 W W S 4 c r - . U C W Y (K r W • row w >s 0 L- 'O Y O c•r 0 W ••W-, .aQ > O .O •> • X'O 'O O T. ro 4-. U T. L O 0 ,-.• 0 W 2- O c O •C 4-, c 4-6O O O `+' CC•�+ J ro C> a 1h ro V) ro ....10 n 4.0 k O 8 . co U N 0 CC CO C/ C) W U.. 0 ro CD H HI N (12 i as a' N r in �, l a) c j. IH • a) +) a) O C .0 4-)I- .c as •' a) V) ns 0. +-.) U aa)) (.- as J 1O n a) a) ,c U a) 4-) 4' >. U +) a 4- 0) •n 4- a) w as E '•- ya •O i E ++ in— U r 0 .0 _.0 C 1 C N a) i a C d U n O >, I o'O a)'N +) a+) L r- a) .c U N'E inUa) .c EO C) C a) f-() I I I I 1 -p 4- O a) a) 7 a) 4-) C r L U 4-4- 4-7 O4-) a C a C a a) U E i-a V) a) m v c 0 .- O a >, 0 C CO +) a) U U .•- 7 Y C0 1- C •O C 47) VI O'C +) 10 c C u N O. E O1 4-) • ' 'EO c 1•. a) L a a U a .0 U a) C) rn > VI 4-) S-r L O EO•� C a) EN o a) a C 0 a VI +) L U r a) > L > ' d 0 +-dY a) V) V .0 > a) 0 O C L L•.- OC O)a a) r an L 4• .-. a U) ++ r- )' ab E C) N 4- a) E N ea a▪ a•'- E C L 4-) > L a) a) V IA •-. a) N U L a C ' .0 C > En 4• O O a) VI C Cl C Inc7 O Y a VI 0 47) • C O in 4-) > L O VI E 0'4-) -I a) C +) 0 r VI 0 U a) a a) C L E •r U U C c[ >,0) ♦- C1 L 4) L C•.- >, U U a) 4-7 C 0 U + U 0 0 L Q W C •n an U C L a' .N r C 1/7C V) a ro •q inO 4-3L a) titO a •--• a) O•I-) a) +) C )C C O a) a) L) a a) O)JC O. U C a 7 G./ U71- > CC N C a 4) a) V) X C +) X r C u) +) 4- ea .. _ 0 -)n a Uroa a M a) 4-) >, a) C C) Li. I- f Q I- > V) (7 0 04 an U 4-7 .- a al a.0 4-7 >, • a) > 0 1, u+) a +) IV .0 7 CC O C J.- in V 0-1 N C•) •cr U) (0 N. CO O k O) o0 0 • • a) V 6 w I.L. J S U an • C 7 a O 0 V (J ti •... 43(n 1.10 i<' • 0 L CD 0 U CT CO y a.O > 4-) C. 4, 4,0 L ro L a C 0 O 0 0 40..-4a.. C4 40- co N•r MI 4, 0 or iroN .•0i• 3E r. 0 I 0C LL cc. a U aa)) v4- • R) C•••- U E 0 0 L C O O C•O t V C E E `2 ro 4•' U E 0. +' 7 0 • 0 a •- O.a Y a 0 :.50 N•.�'.- L N 0 RI•.- ro E.0 a m L. N U 4- 4- vs C NU C Q4' 44r-4, L y L U CD a Vl rob E�-. G ro O� L L Cn C L 4) 0 a 0 O Os 0 A a vs 0. .L us ro '0 Rf N X •N 0 a ro 0 al N'O • •0 ro A. 0 0 LL >.7 +• 0 .0 0 0 a C 0 4, a 0 a Cl L 0 V 0 4%. 0- 5'•++' as }''O 4 C^4 S 7 C C 4-Y cV > U C 7 4-01� 0 a ' UECD a4J a4 5- 0c � ) +. 1 N� O CL O C f- X > y L y 5F } L > 0 7 C •Of • V CO •U 4- RI aJ a L S. a'O a C O 4,> L a Y>4, vs a a4J O 4)—4- Na varo •C Ui soay. 4' C.. n ro n- 0V 4-'0 0 0 CU N - O L O C ro CD C-) CD CD 7 L 40- Q'Y Al CO (v)4-0 0 ro a .O~ a^ 44 a r N O.O 4- N 1.() N 7 0) 0 a s •pa LUa •00 L4, O 4 0 s sr)0 0 0 ro V V C V 0)4, • N ro L C a 4q C0 N CO 7 C4) . O- C 4,..- CUa 0a ooa 0 >,.w � E o C 0 N•� 0 V C 0 C 1 Y 0 E Oar N 0 O'0 a tO O5 7 U'C 4 U� b ^V CO •C 7 0 L 0 O L C C I N 0 .-0 V r• 4- .0 Al 0•r a CO 4-'0 a OI•.- C N •0•+ 0 44•.•-_>O N a 0 0 S- C CO 0 7 a a Q`LO a 9 •CO N N d 0 N a CO O.a j L O. C >,V 0 U'0 U 0 4- 1 0 L C 0 CP-C U C.0 C a X O ro'0r- C a.- L a U V••• U E 4-' 4 ro 4.> <L N a U A 0- 4 0 S.44 d L k 1 I I 1 I I I a L IA b a L U O. C C a C CD LU 0 4-)4 W - • 4 a 0 cn 4 V S. 0 a N C Rf o CO Y c o O. E a' C n CD t) C X 0 CD> co U as a 0 0-rtS rn a 0 L >, > 5- ^ r� 4• > L L C. a N E C CO C 4- 0 4-' a 0 - .s .o a a v S. U 0 C NC L .- 4.) '0L •0 F' C A 4- 0 VT. c o¢ ass /� RI V ro C.1 0 N '0 0 •0 C 0 C r • ro N ro'0 N C 0 CC roS. 0 a �� a > 0 0 4-. 4.. N CO ro 0 0 -C '0 •- C O MI S. F L CS U C. N Y 0U 50 N 4 CO 03= E C 4.. r-r N r L a IV ' .0 I L Cn > Cr, 4, >. A a O N •-- Y C 0-C Cr-•• ro 4-' 4) L 0ro U as + U W 0) � C C N.-• 4.. •h[:G N U U U 4, E a w IA U L ro 4 '0 • •., i U•0 N •O co .•4 N M U) 1C A Cl' O C ats (a 4 m U U N C A 7 0 ) (0 U31 ".i s. • 443 433 443 1, ,L C, A d C 0 t_ a E s_ OD h 1 to h O/ h C N 01 0) O > s- 0 L 0) 0 W 0- C 0) O 171 N C s- O 0) • 0 > + ro 03 05% O- U+ s_ • _ v u a C 0) C .A 7 0) O 1+. A In b b O 0) G. > 4- IO m eil � 0 U N N In 0 1/1 C C C 0) 0) 0) 0) IO •4-3 o 4-9 <.7 O p L U O . O • eil N Q fD U u In • O• )0 O 0 0. V l0