HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/04/1978 •
12AV INANE
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 1978 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers,
Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly
COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Ross Thorfinnson; Planner Chris Enger;
Finance Director John Franc; Director of
Community Services Bob Lambert; Engineer
Carl Jullie; and Joyce Provo, Recording
Secretary
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
11. CONSENT CALENDAR (One motion to approve all items on the Consent Calendar)
A. 2nd Reding_of Ordinance No. 78-12, amending Ordinance No. 152, and
prcvidin _for the regulation and licensing of adve.tising_signs_
B. ?nd Reading of Ordinance No. 78-13, amending_ Ordinance No. 261, and
regulatiLg and requirigg permits for signs and imposing a penalty
C. 2r.G re,,ding of Ordinance No. 78 52, :.mendingOrdinance Mu. 111,
Community Based Services Board
P. 2nd Reading n; Ordinance No. 78-51, amending Ordinance No. 77-2,
changing name of the Human Rights Commission to the Human Rights
acid Services Commission --_ -- —
E. Payment of Claims Nos. 9146 - 9281 Rage 595A
F. Setting of a Public hearing for May 2, 1978 for Raven Ridge Addition Page 595E
in Edcnvale 3rd Addition
III. MINUTES •
A. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, March 14, 1978 Page 595F
B. Special City Council Meeting held Monday, March 20, 1978 Page 5951
iV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
-:45 PM A. Round Lake Area Trunk Sewer, Water:nain and Street Improvements, Page 595J
I. C. 51-315 - Resolution No. 78-62)
•
:15 PM B. Anderson C ,-:ming of a 22 foot strip west of 1-5 District, lying Page 596
in Ite N< corn-, of ValleyVinr Road and lashin!}ton Avenue.
.24 acres 1:0m Rural to 1-5 Park lOrdinancc No. 78-2+0)—
•
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,April 4, 1978
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued)
_:20 PM ,_„E!Bryant Lake View Estates, Thelma Griffith Haynes Property. Request Page 601
for rezoning from Rural to R1-22, and preliminary plat approval of
26 lots on approximately 24 acres. Site is located NW end Bryant's
Long Lake. (Resolution No. 78-60, approving Preliminary Plat, and
, Ordinance No. 78-19, rezoning to R1-22)
:45 PM , D. Pheasant Oaks, Burmith, Inc., request for p reliminary plat approval Page 621
and rezorrinofrom Rural to R1-13.5 for 96 single family detached
homes on 55 acres. Located east of Red Rock Lake and South of
Village Woods. (Resolution No. 78-55, approving EAW, Resolution
No. 78-57, approving Preliminary Plat, and Ordinance No. 78-17,
rezoning to R1-13.5)
-:00 PM ,k'l Super Valu Stores, Inc., request for PUD Amendment to Major Center Page 649
Area POD fora 140 acre site, and rezoning of 37 acres from Rural
to Office for corporate headsparters to be located on south end of
Bryant Lake.---(Resolution No. 78-51, granting PUD approval,
Resolution No. 78-52, approving EAW, and Ordinance No. 78-14,
rezoning from Rural to Office)
10:00 PM F. Hillsborough and Hillsborough Second, The Preserve, rezoning Page 721
tJc•,4' f�•cai Rural toR1-13.5, and peelimina plat pproval of 80 acres
into 149 lots. Lot size and setback variances requested.
g preliminary plat, Ordinance
TRcsolution No. 78-53, approvin reliminar
•
No. 78-15, rezoning to R1-13.5, and Resolution No. 78-5B, granting
PUG a('"'"-Val)
-0:30 PM rx''Amsden Hills III, The Preserve, request to_preliiminar_v_lat 32 Page 749
acres for single family, multi-family, and park uses; and to rezone
16 acres from Rural to Rl-13.5 with variances for approximately
30 lots. Resolution do. 78-56, approving preliminary plat,
and Ordinance No. 78-18, rezoning to R1-13.5)
_1:00 PM •H,- inne=ota Mini-Storage, 2nd Addition, request by Bruce Hubbard to Page 778
- rezone from Rural & Highway Commercial to I-2 Park 3.06 acres for
individual storage warehouse space. Site is north of the present
Minnesota Mini-Storage building at 6570 Flying Cloud Drive.
(Ordinance No. 78-21, rezoning to 1-2 Park) •
V. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
V!. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Attorney
C. Report of City Manager
D. Report of City Engineer
1. Consider bids for prw phouse #3 and pjprtenances, I. C. 51-301A Page 790
-(Resolution Nu. 78-63)
I
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues., April 4, 1978
D. Report of City Engineer (continued)
Easement agreement with NSP for Pumphouse #3 Page 794
33'. Resolution setting hearing date for Dell Road/Valley View Road Page 798
' Improvements, I. C. 51-326 (Resolution No. 78-64)
E. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List Page 799
VII. NEW BUSINESS
VIII. ADJDURNMENT. •
1'.
•
•
`f.
•
APRIL 4, 1978
STATE OF MINNESOTA
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
COUNTY OF IHENNEPIN
The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows:
03-15-78 9146 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 44.95
9147 PEPSI-COLA CO. Pop for liquor store 67.30
9148 LEDING DISTRIBUTING CO. Liquor 1,188.20
9149 LAKE REGION BEVERAGE CO. Mix for liquor store 261.19
9150 BEER WHOLESALERS, INC. Beer 1,832,70
9151 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 1,118.25
9152 COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO. Mix 68.75
9153 DAVIDSEN DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer B.70
9154 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 1,082.20
9155 MINNESOTA DISTILLERS, INC. Beer 1,238.66
9156 QUALITY WINE CO. Wine 553.11
9157 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO. Liquor 329.15
9158 JOHNSON WINE CO. Liquor and wine 966.55
9159 INSTY-PRINTS Service-Public Safety dept. 17.35
03-21-78 9160 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Employers contribution and employees
ASSN. withheld 3-17 payroll 6,346.29
9161 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK Bonds deducted 3-17 payroll 318.75
916? 7.B:RAL RESERVE BANK Taxes deducted 3-17 payroll 7,702.08
9163 UNITED WAY Donations withheld 3-17 payroll 28.62
9164 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 830.80
9165 PETTY CASH Reimbursement of fund 36.92
9166 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 131.52
9167 JOHNSON WINE CO. Wine 324.02
9168 LUCILLE O'MALLEY Reservations for I4unic-Pals dinner 112.50
9169 ED PHILLIPS & CO. Liquor 972.85
9170 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO. Liquor 404.11
04-04-78 9171 PEGGIE ANDERSON Artwork services-Public Safety dept. 21.50
9172 A&M INDUSTRIAL TRACTORS Equipment repair-Community Development
project 23.00
9173 AMERICAN DATA PRODUCTS Energy saver lights-Public works bldg.
and City Hall 937.05
9174 AWARDS, INC. Plaques for Awards night 117.15
9175 AMERICAN BANK Cremation of bonds 25.00
9176 A&H WELDING & MFG. Equipment parts 4.14
9177 BLOOMINGTON CHRYSLER New cars for Public Safety dept. 10,384.60
9178 BATHER, RINGROSE, WOLSFELD,
JARVIS, GARDNER, INC. Engineering services-Lotus View
Street improvements 1,474.35
9179 BROWN PHOTO Services-Public Safety dept. 31.35
9180 RUSTY BRACE Puppetry aide-Community services 3.50
9181 BATTERY TIRE WAREHOUSE Equipment parts 141.86
9182 BRAUN ENGINEERING Services-Foundation investigation
for proposed fire stations and
Well pump house 1i3 2,044.35
9183 CARGILL SALT Deicing salt 80.38
9184 COPPLSS CORP. License forms 246.25
9185 CLUTCH A U-JOINT Equipment parts 11.63
9186 COPY EQUIPMENT Supplies-Engineering dept. 5.11
*9/1/77 Bond Issues
APRIL 4, 1978
04-04-78 9187 CUTLER-t1AGNER CO. Lime for Water Dept. 84.30
9188 DORHOLT PRINTING Printing services 154.67
9189 DANIELS STUDIO Photography & materials for
Police officer of the year 1OD.00
9190 DALCO Cleaning supplies-Water dept. 205.15
9191 EDEN PRAIRIE CLEANERS Service-Park & Rec. dept. 1.00
*9192 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES Sales & issuance of bonds service 14,792.50
9193 CITY OF EDINA Water samples-Water dept. 39.50
9194 EDEN PRAIFIIE. FIRE DEPT. Gloves for firemen 111.90
9195 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS Gasoline for equipment 772.74
9196 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS Community ed class 16.00 `
9197 ESS BROTHERS Manhole cover 40.00 .'
9198 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY Supplies-Water dept. 99.99
9199 FRONTIER LUMBER CO. Materials 243.66
9200 FREEWAY FORD New trucks- one for Water dept. and
one for Building dept. 8,958.00
9201 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN. Book-Fire dept. 10.00
9202 INSTRUCTORS ASSN. OF MINN. Dues for firemen 10.00
9203 FAIRFIELD INTERNATIONAL CORP. Supplies-Water dept. 107.46
9204 JOHN FRAME March expenses 121.75
9205 FUTURE PUBLICATION, INC. Rule hook for Park & Rec. dept. 7.1.15
9206 GENERAL ELECTRIC Starter repair-Water dept. 175.98
9207 G.T.C. AUFO PARTS Paint for utility trucks 23.45
9203 GROUP HEALTH PLAN April insurance 823.95
9209 C°.." 00D TWIN CITIES Equipment parts 638.98
9210 GREGG NELSON TRAVEL Balance due for travel expense for
special investigation school for
three police officers 99.72
9211 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Radio repairs 98.05
9212 DONNA HYATT Shorthand course tuition 26.00
9213 PENNY ANN HARRISON Refund on figure skating class 6.00
9214 HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE Ski lessons-Community services dept. 467.00
9215 HONEYWELL, INC. Supplies-Water dept. 42.50
9216 MARK HURD Services-Engineering dept. 20.77
9217 HENNEPIN COUNTY Supplies-Public Works dept. 289.63
9218 ALLENE HOOKOM Puppetry instructions 36.00
9219 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF'S
ASSN. Dues for Ray Mitchell 10.00
9220 HAYDEN-NURPHY Equipment rental-Water dept. 3,637.50
9221 JACK HACKING Expenses 19.60
9222 INSTRUMENTATION SERVICES, INC.Radar repair-Public Safety dept. 85.07
9223 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF
ARBORICULTURE Dues for Stuart Fox 40.00
8224 ITASCA EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts 39.20
8225 CARL JUELIE March expenses 118.78 .;
8226 JOURNEY SPORTS, INC. Instructions-Community services dept.1,086.00
8227 J. C. PENNEYS Hand tools for Fire dept. and repair
services for Public Safety 45.98
8228 JOHN'S WELDING SERVICE, INC. Thaw water lines-Water dept. 577.50
8229 KOKESH Clothing for Public Safety (donated
money) 454.21
8230 REBECCA KNOULTON Instruction services-Park & Rec. 240.00
8231 LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
SERVICES Services 6,313.01
8232 RICH I_EUIIJ
Yoga instructions 72.00
r ':,"j!
APRIL 4, 1978
04-04-78 9233 PAM LESTER Exercise instructions 128.00
9234 MOTOROLA, INC. Monitor units and carrying cases
for Public Safety 2,620.00
9235 MINNEAPOLIS STAR Employment ad-Tree disease 17.68
9236 MEDICAL OXYGEN Oxygen-Fire dept. 2.66
9237 MIX TRANSFER Shipping charges-Bldg. Dept. 8.25
9238 MINNESOTA FIRE, INC. Neckstraps for tire dept. 21.72
9239 MEDICAL OXYGEN Oxygen for Fire dept. 59.37
9240 MAGIC SHOP Magic instructions 88.00
9241 MINNESOT MARTIAL ARTS Karate instructions 64.00
9242 MINNESOTA POLICE AND PEACE
OFFICERS ASSOC. Dues for 16 officers 160.00
9243 MARSHALL AND SWIFT PUBLICA-
TION CO. Valuation publication for assessing 55.00
9244 MINNESOTA TORO, INC. Hydraulic lift mower and broom for
Park Maint. 14,950.00
9245 MED CENTER HEALTH PLAN Employees insurance 318.93
9246 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Blacktop-Public Works dept. 378.14
9247 METRO PRINTING, INC. Printing service 479.30
9248 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC Service 4.75
9249 MINNEGASCO Service 2,413.05 '
9250 NORTHERN CONTRACTING CO. Contracted service-Water dept. 265.00
9251 NORTHERN STATES POWER Service 4.56
9252 NORTH CENTRAL SECTION
^MERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN. Water works operators workshop 120.00
9253 NORTHWOOD GAS CO. Propane-Drainage control 4.41
9254 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE Service 584.27
9255 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Service 2,324.0E
9256 OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE Supplies-Tree disease dept. 63.70
9257 PUBLIC SAFETY PETTY CASH Reimbursement of fund 7.56
9258 LAURA PATTERSON Dance instructions 134.40
9259 BARBARA PETERSON Exercise instructions 64.00
9260 POWER, INC. Battery-Fire dept. 21.94
9261 PARK AUTO UPHOLSTERY Replace seats-Public Safety dept. 110.00
9262 RUFFRIDGE-JOHNSON EQUIPMENT Equipment parts 57.66 i,
9263 ROBERTS DRUG Supplies-Public Safety dept. 1.49 '
9264 ROOT-0-f1ATIC Thaw frozen water line 110.00
9265 STATE OF MINNESOTA Engineering and inspection services-
TH169 1,599.12
9266 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES Portable restrooms-Park Maint 44.50
9267 LEIGH STOCKTON Refund on tennis lessons 9.00
9268 JUDY SKJEI Calligraphy instructions 96.00
9269 TRUMPY HOMES Refund on excess escrow deposit 823.36
9270 TRU-GRIT Supplies-Fire dept. 38.38
9271 TELE-TERMINALS Terminal paper 30.00
9272 ROGER ULSTAD April expenses 100.00
9273 VESELY, OTTO, MILLER, KEEFE
R LABORE Preparing quit claim deed-Scenic
Heights upgrading 25.00
9274 VALLEY EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts 198.00
9275 MUNICI-PALS ASSN. Dues for 1978-1979 5.00
9276 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
MACHINES CORP. Service agreement on machines 130.00
9277 R. C. PRINTING ID cards for liquor license 6.00
D •
APRIL 4, 1978
04-04-78 9278 NIELSEN, 8LACKBURN & MERRITT Legal services 795.00
9279 WALTER JOHNSON March expenses 28.19
9280 MARK EINHORN Volleyball official services 198.00
9281 PAUL BROWN Volleyball official services 324.00
TOTAL 113,004.84
•
4
riiki
MAR 3 1918
EIH.NVAI.E?,INC.
gq66-Alrfrkd4l?eurd•Eden Prairie,Minn. 55343• 612/941-5300
14500 Valley View Road
•
March 28, 1978
Honorable Mayor & City Council
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Ladies and Gcntlen>a
The Eden Prairie Planning Commission voted to recces nd to the City
Council the approval of the application for rezoning and preliminary
plat for Raven Ridge Addition in Edenvale 3rd Addition.
I am requesting that the City Council schedule a public hearing for
this project and consider it at the earliest possible time.
Yours truly,
EDENVAtE, INC. '•
Donald R. Peterson
DRP/sr
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
SPECIAL EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1978 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan
Meyers, Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Ross Thorfinnson; Planner Chris Enger;
Director of Community Services Bob Lambert;
City Engineer Carl Jullie; Finance Director
John Frane; City Assessor Bob Martz; and
Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary
I. ROLL CALL
All Council members present.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS DF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the Council agenda:
A. Addition of two Resolutions: Resolution No. 78-43, setting terms
for S5,090,000.00 Improvement Bonds, and Resolution No. 78-44, authorizing
the M yor to sign documents in conjunction with sale of bonds. rane
furticr requested that the agenda be .mended under IV. A. to read: "Resolution
No. 78-41, Awarding Sale of $11,240,000.00 Refunding Bonds",and IV. B. to
read: "Resolution No. 78-42, setting terms for $6,150,000.00 of General
Obligation Water and Sewer Londs.
B. Report on Dorenkemper lawsuit under City Attorney
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the agenda as amended
and published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Set Public Hearip for Super Valu Stores, Inc. for April 4, 1978
B. Set Public Hearing for Hillsborouq h_& Hillsborough Second, Preserve
South PUD, for April 4, 1978
C. Set Public Hearing for Pheasant Oaks for April 4, 1978
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve all items on the
Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
Finance Director Frane spoke to resolutions listed, and introduced Bill Fahey
and Bob Ehlers, Ehlers & Associates, and Rod Pakonen, Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood,
who answered questions of Council members.
Special Council Meeting - 2 - Tues.,March 14, 1978
IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS (continued)
A. Resolution No. 78-41, Awarding Sale of $11,240,000.00 Refunding Bonds
•
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution No. 78-41,
Awarding Sale of $11,240,000.00 Refunding Bonds to Continental Illinois
National lank and Trust Company of Chicago and the First National Bank of
Chicago, Illinois, and Associates, as listed on Bid Tabulation sheet dated
March 14, 1976. Roll Call Vote: Osterholt, Bye, Meyers, Pauly and Penzel
voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
B. Resolution No. 78-42, Setting Terms for $6,150,000.00 of General
Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No. 78-42,
Setting Terms for $6,150,000.00 of General Obligation Water and Sewer
Bonds. Roll Call Vote: Bye, Meyers, Osterholt, Pauly and Penzel voted
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
C. Resolution No. 78-43, Setting Terms for $5,090,000.00 of Improvement
Bonds
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Resolution No. 78-43,
Setting Terms for $5,090,000.00 of Improvement Bonds. Roll Call Vote: Meyers,
Osterholt, Bye, Pauly and Penzel voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
D. Resolution No. 78-44, authorizing the Mayor to sign documents in conjunction
w i Lin tie'" cf •
tionds
POTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Penzel,to adopt Resolution No. 78-44,
authorizing the Mayor to sign documents in conjunction with sale of bonds.
Roll Call Vote: Pauly, Penzel, Bye, Meyers and Osterholt voted "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. Round lake School/Park Deed
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Penzel, to accept the language as
submitted on page 484 of the packet attachments without changes. Motion carried
unanimously.
B. R port f At.tornex
City Attorney Thorfinnson brought the Council up-to-date on the Dorenkemper
lawsuit. •
VI. DISCUSSION OF GUIDE PLAN UPDATE
•
Mayor Penzel introduced Richard Robey, Manager of the Eden Prairie Center,
and new resident of Eden Prairie, who was invited to take part in the Guide Plan
discussion.
Council members went through page 1 of the Introduction, and pages 4.9 - 4.12,
recommending changes to be made in the Guide Plan by Don Brauer, Planning Consultant.
Pauly was excused from the Council meeting at 10:00 PM.
Special Council Meeting - 3 - Tues.,March 14, 1978
VI. DISCUSSION DF GUIDE PLAN UPDATE (continued)
Council set Monday, March 20, 1978, 5:00 PM at City Hall, as the date
to continue the discussion of the Guide Plan Update.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to adjourn the Council meeting
at 10:40 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
•
i), ,j 1-�
SPECIAL EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1978 5:00 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers,
Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad and Planning
Director Chris Enger
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM by Mayor Penzel.
Roll Call was taken and all Council members were present.
Goals and objectives were reviewed by all members of the Council. Suggested
changes were discussed and the Council requested Staff to provide additional
recommendations for Council consideration at their next Special Guide Plan
meeting.
Meeting stood adjourned at 8:30 PM.
J5-J51
April 4, 1978
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, HINNESOTA
. RESOLUTION NO. 78-62
•
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS
(I.C. 51-315)
WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 21st day of
February, 1978, fired the 4th day of- April, 1973, as the date for a public
he%•'inq on the following proposed improvements:
1.C. 51-315, Round Lake Area trunk sewer,
watermain and street improvements.
•
WHEREAS, all property owners whose property is liable to be
assessed for the making of this improvement were given ten days published
notice of the Council hearing through two weekly publications of the re-
quired notice and the hearing was held and property owners heard on the 4th
day of April, 1978; }
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF r.
EDEN PRAIRIE:
•
1. Such improvement as set out in Council Resolution of Fe ruary 21,
1978, and as above indicated is hereby ordered (and ?monde. as
follows).
2. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the Engineer for
this project and is hereby directed to prepare plans and speci-
fications for the making of such improvement, with the assist-
ance of Rieke Carroll fuller Assoc., Consulting Engineers.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on
li
4
4Joffgang H. Penzel, Mayor j,
MI EST: SEAL
•
John H. I rats:, Clcr E
•
f;)s,T
•
JOHN FRANE
•
•
•
IiilIJTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING CO:IMISSION
approved
Monday, Feb. 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice-chairman Lynch, Retterath, Redpath, McCulloch,Schee
COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Jean Johnson
•
approved
Planning Coanission Minutes Feb. 13, 1978
D. Anderson Rezoning of a 22 foot strip,west of I-5 District lying in the NW
corner of Valley View Road and Washington Avenue. .24 acres from Rural
to I-5 Park.
•
The Planner outlined the site location for the Corrunission and referred them to
the Engineer's memo of pec. 2, 1977 which explained the road locations and
need for rezoning of this small piece. He added the Engineering and Planning
Staff are recommending approval of the rezoning.
•
Redpath inquired if the 22' foot strip is presently owned by Anderson. •
The Planner responded he believes Anderson has bought the property from
Mr. Swendseen.
Motion: •
Schee moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Anderson rezoning request for .?4 acres from Rural to 1-5 park based upon
the Engineer's Memo of Dec. 2, 1977. 'lotion carried unanimously.
•
596
•
WILLIAM B.ODELL
ATTORN[T AT LAW MAIL*DOA ow,
101 HIGHWAY tit EMIT P.O.00%11
CHASKA.MINNESOTA 15311 iMMKA.MN, 11S1•
0 14w +Q {OIL,,,C-tiGG
•
,f), ld November 22, 1977
Mr. Roger Ulstad, City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Dear Mr. Ulstad:
Re: Richard W. Anderson - Swendseen
This letter is written for the purpose of transmitting to you
the Swendseens' reply to the proposal made in your presence yesterday •
by Mr. Anderson with respect to the proposition to purchase from the
Swendseens an additional triangle of land on the westerly boundary of
the original site for which he has requested a building permit so that
a comparable triangle could be taken from the southeasterly corner of
the subject site for the purpose of altering the right of way of existing
Valley View Road to make a diamond inte—:hange from Washington the
option in the City to acquire the southeasterly triangle for road right
of way from him at his costs of acquisition.
At that meeting it was understood that I and the other representa-
tives of the Swendseens who were then present would take up that proposal
with the Swendseens and advise you of their reply to same by letter.
- This will advise you that that proposal is generally agreeable to
the Swendseens upon the following assumptions:
1. That the North-South road alignment for the remaining Swendseen
property in the Northeast Quarter of Section 12 be defined as same
would traverse the Swendseen property from its south line to its north
line, and that the Eden Prairie City Council would initiate proceedings
to rezone the remaining Swendseen land to I-2 zoning.
2. That the westerly line of the additional triangular parcel to
be included by Mr. Anderson is a suitable location for the North-South
road traversing the Swendseen property as it would originate from the
South Line of the Swendseen property and follow the westerly line of
the triangular parcel to be additionally purchased by Mr. Anderson.
Reference is made to the maps and surveys which were used to
illustrate the proposal made by Mr. Anderson yesterday for the specifics
of what I have previously discussed in this letter.
Thank you for your willingness to meet with us and to discuss the
Page 2
Mr. Roger Ulstad
November 22, 1977
•
details of working out an arrangement which adequately deals with the
varied interests and requirements of the principals involved in the
bringing of this desirable industrial development to the City of Eden
Prairie.
Yours very truly,
i"
William B. Odell
WBO/dab
•
•
•
•
•
59?
•
MEMO
•
•
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: December 2, 1977
SUBJECT: Richard Anderson Property
Northwest Corner of Valley View Road
and Washington Ave.
Rezoning Request
The City Staff has been negotiating with Mr. Richard Anderson, the pur-
chaser of 5.78 acres at the northwest corner of Valley View Road and
Washington Avenue, in order to obtain the necessary right-of-way for
a realignment of Valley View Road to provide a direct connection to the
approach of the County Road 18/Valley View Road diamond interchange.
The attached drawing shows the location of the property involved.
We will be recommending to the City Council that the City enter into a
purchase agreement for approximately one acre of land necessary for the
realignment. One of the conditions of the purchase agreement will be
the rezoning of the 22 foot wide strip from rural to I-5 Park a..?jacont
to the ::xisting zoning limits. Mr. Annorson will then purchase the ad-
ditional property which he needs to support the buildings proposed.
This seems to be a very equitable arrangement and will help solve what
has been a very difficult access problem for the City staff and property
owners to deal with. Accordingly, we request that the Planning Commission
consider a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the
rezoning of said 22 foot parcel. The legal description of the 22 foot
parcel is attached hereto.
CJJ:kh
599
wi
la
— -— - - - 74 noi.rtoRETil�i - I- - - —
1 . {
\ i i
11
,! a I
1I
, 4- I
, : 1
8
-�z j 4d \ I o
W
a Q I o
In 03
m i
* \ j
11
$
• T i
WI
I
4.0
/'..'. K .
ce
o tr. \ `
.‘k ---71
\ ,
G,oU
•
Rec. and Unapproved
Na Monday, March 6, 1978
Minutes Parks, - 10
Natural
Resources Fteaoureea Commission
•
VII. OLD BU 3?:'ESS
A. Knvnes Property - 3rvont 1.nhe View
Lambert spoke to the Staff Report of parch 3, 1978 and to the Planning
Staff recommendations.
Kruell naked for an alternative for the collector road, and could it bo
roved to the north. LL::bert responded that the land to the north is
hilly rnd would not be a good location.
Garens suggested looking to the arcs nround the Crosstown, and sroko
to n trail historically being located through that property.
A. Envncs Property (Cont'd)
Anderson suggested en easement to run a trail system around the
•
lake, exluding certain areas. Tnngen commented there were a
variety of opinions on such a trail system, but felt there woula
be general opposition.
Tangen suggested connector trails with Anderson Lrkes, Valley View
Rd., and Schooner Blvd..
1•YTICN: Tames raved, seconded by}:ruell, to recor7nend approval
of this subdivision as per Staff report of Mnrc3, 1978.
Motion
nf
oarried, with R. Anderson voting "nay", becauseofu
the trail system.
Kruell asked whether these trails line up generally with trail
pystem. -Lambert responded affirmative.
•
(OI
•
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
approved
Monday, February 27, 1978 7:30 PM, City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Schee, McCulloch, Lynch
COMMISSION ABSENT: Liz Retterath, Paul Redpath ,Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Jean Johnson •
INVOCATION: Given by Pastor Gary Peterson, Immanuel Lutheran Church
B. Bryant take View Estates, Thelma Griffith Haynes Property. Request for
rezoning from Rural to R1-22, and preliminary plat approval of 26 lots on
approximately 24 acres. Site is located NW end Bryant's Long Lake.
A continued public hearing.
The Planner stated the staff is suggesting the east/west road in the plat •
Lave 60' right-of-way to allow construction of a 32-36' wide street of 2 lanes.
In addition to the 60' ROW, the staff is recommending the developer place in a
road of 30' width with a cul-de-sac at the bottom of the hill , and construction
of a trail 8 ' wide .
The Planner reviewed the background information from 1974-1976 regarding the
Crosstown extension and alterante access for Beach Road residents.
Lynch expressed concern that once the residents are along the 30' wide street,
it will be very difficult to upgrade the street to a collector and connect
through to Rowland Road.
Sundstrom inquired what other benefit, than allowing resident access to Bryant Lake
Park , the proposed bridge over 1-494 would serve. The Planner replied such a
bridge would allow the Beach Road residents access to the west without having to
use regional freeway systems.
lynch asked if decibel readings had been taken recently at the site. The Planner
stated the most recent readings were taken in the approximate location of lot 13,
at a reading of 69 decibels.
The Planner stated the staff is reconunending approval of the rezoning and preliminary
plat contingent upon the staff report and inclusion of additional noise barriers.
Mr. Hakon Torjesen, 6605 Rowland Road, submitted a petition from residents dated
Feb. 27, 1978. Mr. Torjesen objected to the connection of Beach Road and Rowland
goad. He believed the regional park is well served by regional road systems and
will not require additional access. He expressed his and other Rowland Road
residents desire to be kept nut of the stream of development as they do not desire
their neighborhood to develop, but do favor Eden Prairie's development.
<0oa
I
•
approved
Planning Comission Minutes -3- Feb. 27, 1978
The Planner believed approval of the Bryant Lake View Estates plan will not
mean approval of a through street to Rowland Road, but allows the possibility.
Lynch inquired if the 8' trail would be consistent with the Hikeway/Bikeway
Report. The Planner responded affirmative , adding the trail would be a
'backbone' trail.
Mr. Hemping, 6641 Beach Road, asked what the future plans for Beach Road are
with the 62 Crosstown extension. The Planner replied the intersectim of Beach
and Crosstown would be realigned to the east.
Motion 1:
Lynch moved, McCulloch seconded, to close the public hearing on Bryant Lake
View Estates preliminary plat. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2:
Lynch moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Bryant Lake View Estates rezoning from Rural to R1-22 for 26 lots based
upon the Feb. 15, 1978 staff report. Motion carried 3:1 with Schee voting nay.
Motion 3:
Lynch moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend approval of thg preliminary plat
dated Jan. 16, 1978 based upon the Feb. 15, 1978 staff report. Motion carried
3:1 with Schee voting nay.
• _ j
{
c�o3
•
•
•
•
•
•
MINUTES •
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION •
approved
Monday, Feb. 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
•
COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice-chairman Lynch, Retterath, E'.edpath, McCulloch,Schee
COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Bcc;wan
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Jean Johnson
e proved
I ianr,inc Cc.,.-.ission Minutes -4- Feb. 13, 1978
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
A. Bryant take View estates, Thelma Haynes Property. Request for rezoning
from Rural to P1-72, and preliminary plat approval of 26 lots on
approximately 24 acres. Site is located NW end of Bryant's Long Lake. •
A public hearing.
The Planner referred the Commission to the Highway Department letter and
•
Park A Recreation Department memo regarding the single family proposal.
The Planner then briefly reviewed the proposed road connections contained in
•
the Guide Plan Update that will affect this piece of property.
Jack Lynch, Bather-Ringrose-Woldsfeld, representing Mrs. Haynes, introduced
the following other individuals : Mrs. Thelma Haynes & Bruce Haynes ; and •
•
Lynnae Nye of Eberhardt Realty.
Jack Lynch presented diagrams of the site plan, vegetation, grades, topography
including the east/west connector from Beach Road to Rowland Road as suggested
by the staff.
6Ot1
• approved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- Feb. 13,197E
Lynch stated all lots are above 22,000 square feet and only six of the
lots have lakeshore. Four of the lots will have access off Beach Road
with the others being served by cul-de-sacs. He stated the Haynes intend
to retain lots 16, and 14 or 15 , besides their existing lots.
The Planner stated the staff is suggesting the east / west road be to a
collector status in case the bridge over 1-494 is built in the future.
Schee remarked that it may be difficult to build on some of the steeper lots.
Mr. Jack Lynch replied that some of the lots will require a good architect.
Schee asked how much cut is required for the east/west road. Mr. Jack Lynch •
replied 10 feet.
Mr. Hakon Torjesen, 6605 Rowland Road, stated he has a petition from the
surrounding neighbors. In sununary,he stated the residents do not oppose the
single family plan , but do oppose the collector road through the parkland .
from Beach to Rowland Road. Mr. Torjesen said he would submit the petition
at the upcoming meeting when all signatures are obtained.
Mr. Waterbury, 6681 Beach Road, expressed his opposition against the collector
proposed. He suggested a bike path allowing residents west of tFe lake to
•
go east to the park.
The Planner felt that sioce the collector road is shown in the Guide Plan
and requested as part of the 62 Crosstown improvement, that if it is not
planned on , then the Guide Plan should be changed.
Considerable discussion followed relative to the feasibility of building a
collector road through a residential area after the homes are constructed.
Schee expressed her feelings that during prior discussions on the Crosstown ,
the collector road was desired to provide access to the park for.areas of
the community which are "detached" from the Bryant Lake area.
Mr. Torjesen stated he does not feel the collector is needed and he prefers
the quiet isolation that presently exists.
Mr. McCulloch requested the staff to supply the Commission with the background
information on 62 Crosstown Extension and related roads. •
Mr. Peeping, 6641 Beach Road, stated the proposed intersection of Beach Road
and the cast/west collector will be dangerous because of the large berm and
had sight distances. Jack Lynch replied the berm is on public right-of-way.
I
Motion:
Redpath moved, Retterath seconded, to continue the Bryant Lake View Estates
public hearing to the Feb. 27th meeting for a staff report and background
information on the Crosstown extension. Motion carried unanimously.
•
•
Ninutos - Parks, Rec. and approved
Natural Resources Commission - 5 - Man., Feb. 6, 1978
•
d. Haynes Property
Worts sroke to the Bryant Lake View Estates located on the western
side of Bryant Lake at the northern tip of the lake, and to the
•
considerable amount of grading that would be necessary - especially
on those bordering Bryant Lake Park. She spoke to the necessity of
a temporary cul-de-sac on the eastern end of Beach Rd. to prevent
traffic through the City's property at Bryant Lake Stables and to
the park; to the removal of tagged elms and those that are affected
by adjacent cut and fill; and to the requirement of a "cash park fee".
Anderson spoke to the immediate problem of access to the park from all
areas of the City. He suggested asking for shore land in lieu of "cash
park fee", patterned after Zinneapolis lakes - to connect shore land
along with our park land.
Tangen disagreed with acquiring all of the shore lino, becauaeit will
be abutting private property - since the whole Beach Road segment
was developed. He spoke to the updated guide plan,'-and inquired whether
there is a main trailway through the area.
Kingrey expressed opposition to acquiring this land because of
expense, and favored developing land we already have.
Anderson felt the Commission should aim for the best proposal for
Eden Prairie, and added that he felt it was bad not to have an access
fe the public to public water.
NOTION; Kruell moved that the Bryant Lake View Estates proposal be
sent back to tLe Staff to have the items-brought up checked or resolved
to see if there isn't some Corson ground on which to • resolve
some of these problems,and returned to the Commission. Upton seconded, •
motion carried with Tangen abstaining.
Other concerns were "s" curved road to be used as access, and the chang-
ing of the status of the lake to"natural environment waters". •
THE GARDEN
Orchard & Nursery
•
Hakon&Karen Toriesen •
6605 Rowland Rood Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55343 Telephone(612)944-2404
February 27, 1978
•
The City Council
City of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie MN 5534+
Dear Friends! ei(/
Enclosed is a survey that Dean Hola i and I conducted in our
neighborhood. The signers, who represent all but two of the private
properties on Rowland Road in Eden Prairie, are unanimous in their
view that the dotted line for an extension of Rowland Road accross
the parkland to the Beach Road area should be stricken from the
long-term projections envisioned in the new Guide Plan.
•
At the citizen's forum in the Guide elan .last fall, we asked everyone
at our table and surrounding tablee whether anyone wanted that dotted
line, or know of anyone else who did. No one did. Accordingly, we
recommended that the staff remove. .I have expressed my regret to
the planning staff that this has not yet been done.
I understand that the Parks Advisory Committee feels there should
be a trail connection accross the park, rather than a connector road.
In this, I believe they represent the views of both the community
at large and the Rowland Road neighborhood.
As a nest of your awareness of community wishes in this matter, I
hope you will amend the current recommendation of the plar,niing staff
in the matter of the Haynes subdivision. That application shows a
60-foot right-of-way pointing like a dagger at Rowland Road. It
implies that you will approve the dotted line in the Guide Plan.
We feel certain you will not do so.
So long as the Haynes subdivision is separated from Rowland Road by
the park, it is an appropriate land use, in keeping with the homeeenous
high-income, single-family character of that side of Lake Lryart.
Rowland Road is a cohesive neighborhood of a very different character.
He pride ourselves on the diversity of our income levels, our land
use and our life styles. We like it that way, and Lhere is deep •
sentiment in our neighborhood for doing all we can to maintain our
diversity. To plan a coningiirg of the two sides of Lake Bryant is
an affront to both neighborhoods.
Re ctfully
THE GARDE\
Orchard & Nursery
•
Hakon&Koren Torjesen
6605 Rowiand Rood Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55343 Telephone:(612)944-2404
February 14, 1978
Dear Neighborss •
The draft of the new Eden Prairie Guide Plan contains a dotted
line for a future connector road. It would run along Rowland Road
to the vicinity of the stables and then cut acc''oss the p.rkl_'nd
and the north end of Lake iiryant to tie into a new road system being - ,
devised for the other side of the lake. •
From a long and inconclusive conversation with the city planner ,
about this. I get the impression that there are no overwhelming
reasons for projcc;ing such a road. I told him that I thought most
of my neighbors felt as I did that the dotted line should be removed.
Since the City Council will be studying this plan in a few weeks.• •
the uity plannor asked fora letter expressing the sentiment of ,•
neighborhood on the connector. I propose we send him this letter,
with opr views recorded one way or another in the columns telow, and
then take whatever additional individual action we may, wiuh.
Rospectfully1� (i,j.',,e
NAME RE•10YE THE DOTTED LINE I DO NOT WISH TO
1 ..-.1° i{ EXF2?�5 S OPINION:'
'YES 1 NO ^ OPINION f IN THIS WAY
-cry' • ,-t l.:I.--66J1" 1.�_____1 I_ _...,._ .__.._�
r.... .......
. s �_! -- ----• --..--•-k----------.1
"e
, V_, 1 1
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Jensen, Planning Assistant
DATE: Feb. 15, 1978
PROJECT: Bryant Lake View Estates
APPLICANT: Thelma Griffith Haynes
LOCATION: Northwest shore of Bryant Lake on Beach Road
REQUEST: Preliminary platting of 26 single family lots
• on 23.4 acres
Rezoning from Rural to R1-22
BACKGROUND:
The 1968 Guide Plan designates this area as low density single family
residential. The current Draft Guide Plan indicates single family
residential for this area with the exception of the northern 1/3 of the •
proposed plat which is shown as medium density residential.
The site is located just west of the northern tip of the lake which •
is designated by the Department of Natural Resources as a Recreatio.at
Development Lake. This designation by ONR requires minimum lot size
to be 15,000 square feet, lower than that required in R1-22, and
minimum setback from the normal high water mark of 75 feet. The DNR
has established the normal high water mark at an elevation of 851.5
A minimum lot width of 75 feet is also required in this classification.
LOCATION MAP ' -" '—., • .-T�;-- f I I, .,
--t.,•y__ BZ, ant .p � � 1 r'
r... a.
/ L4ke Vie qh" tates
Joo
1 :'-.< — --.r'N.r,.A ll-If
'- PUD! l A i '� ?z (
l 2
_ ...r�-
ter,...., io•e o vAw` rFp 1\ '.. . : tAgit11Ri
L r-• is �' �.•-�;�- 1
- \I,(Y) 4.r.,.5.-,-,;,---i }t••• \ ....,
..r.rto,r,�.�.�. ✓Ta.rarlti� -f. 11
1 �:^.t •",r+--lam••.- -.../I._
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates -2- Feb. 15, 1978
•
ZONING REQUEST
The proponent requests rezoning from Rural to R1-22 for 26 lots on 23.4 acres. •
The overall density is 1.11 units/acre. Lot sizes range from 22,300 square
feet to 78,800 square feet.
These are provisions of Ord. 135 for the zoning district R1-22:
22,000 square foot minimum lot size
30 foot front yard setback •
15:30 foot side yard setbacks; one side, both sides
20 foot rear yard setback .
This classification allows development without public utilities.
No variances from Ord. 135 are requested.
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
The site is bordered on the west side by Interstate 494 , on the north by
Rural, vacant land, on the east by Bryant Lake and on the South by The ...ove
single family subdivision zoned R1-22. The proposed site borders Bryant
Lake shoreline for about 900 feet.
To the east of the proposal is Bryant Lake Park, a designated regional park.
A horse stables is also located in the park and operated by the City. Bryant
Lake is and will be further developed as a water recreation resource.
TRANSPORTATION, ACCESS: •
Access to the site is gained from Beach Road which runs parallel to 1-494
and connects to the east/west underpass for the future I-494 and 62 Crosstown
extension intersection. This east/west underpass then intersects Baker Road
and continues west as Townline Road and Co. Rd. 67 in Minnetonka. Essentially
Beach Road is a mile long cul-de-sac.
The draft Guide Plan has the preliminary indication of an east/west collector
status road crossing 494 in the approximate location of lot 14, block 1.
This road is shown to connect with Shady Oak Road following Rowland Road
on the east and following Edenvale Boulevard and connecting to Valley View on
the west. This routing of the east/west collector would provide a needed
connection to Bryant Lake from the.north central and northwest parts of town •
(see figure 1)
4 is
•
t /
Nj,
3_ ,L.
( 1
, ‘41..1.4
:;;'
i ,,,:::_,6,0
Lift
U o
g , ..„
•
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates -3- Feb. 15, 1978
•
Transportation, Access, continued
Hennepin County has proposed a signalized intersection of Beach Road
and 62 Crosstown at such time Crosstown Highway is extended to the west,
(see Figure 2). This intersection would be moved about 1200 feet east
of the present location to assure appropriate sight distances. However, the City
Council feels that this is only a temporary solution and that a bridge over
1-494 in the location indicated in Fig.2 is the desirable answer from a traffic
movement and safety standpoint.
On Sept. 7, 1976 the City Council passed Res. 11131 approving layout 6
for CSAH 62 Crosstown. ( Resolution attached).
The roads proposed on the site will consist of 3 cul-de-sacs, one bearing a
temporary cul-de-sac, shown on the plat as a through street. The grades
1 s according to City Engineering standards, on the internal streets should be no
greater than 7!2% although in several places the grades are shown to be up to
9 % The gradients on these areas should be corrected, -
.J.\\V I MI ItaEb 1..Z. Nd
44:LauNRa+
1n ----- )
Ili(
� It1161r l,ati•
N
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates -4- Feb ,15, 1978
Beach Road should be straightened-out. by the developer as shown in Figure J.
Complaints from the Cove residents have been received about the corner and
the earth mound on the east side. If the straightning of the curve still does
not give adequate sight distance, then the developer should remove as much of the
mound as is necessary.
SOILS, TOPOGRAHPY & GRADING:
Generally the site slopes from north and west to south and east with a complete
range of microclimates and slope grades. Many of the slopes on the site are
as steep as 2:1(50'vertical drop in 100' horizontal distance). The grading plan
for the entire site has been requested by the staff in conjunction with road
construction and grading. This is to insure that building pads are provided
for,as shown,and not left to each individual builder. Much of the site that
is to be graded will be as steep as the original slopes. Cuts of up to 20'
will be required to accommodate road construction and some of the building pads.
The soils on the site are primarily made up of the Hayden series and are on
slopes of 2-35%. Other smaller areas of LeSeur, Lester and Marsh soils also exist.
Generally these soils are loamy, deep and moderately well drained. Bearing
capacity and shear strength are fair. Fairly wide footings are required.
Extensive grading, as is indicated, will increase erosion hazard and sedimentation
into Bryant Lake,so erosion control must be implemented per Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District recommendations.
The proposed grading plan shows the home cr. lot 1, block 2 to be built on
the Marsh soils. These soils are high in organic matter and wet much of the
year. Drain tiling is necessary or foundation should be plaro1 above the
normal high water table. /
•
\— \(// /K-s:'''''.-'''''''--v_.
\ r \ & %
o 1
1'1/4 \
\s)t-‘ %,y‘t
N.
s
•
(.01.17% \ ,,FOOLP it
Ergo
ptys Dr vvvei.orglt-
G 1 3
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates •5- Feb. 15, 1978
Bearing capacities are poor so foundations must be placed on pilings. Organic
material should be completely removed before fill is added. The hazard of
frost heave on this soil is high. This lot should be improved during overall
grading operations. t •:‘ „ , ;q t
I 1' °`�
I..1_,.i. \; f1 t ;_, .
t.
Vegetation ` } 1
The northern half of the site is . \I�,! i. i l! '
tit •
wooded with elm, oak, maple and : '�i'I �� �j r -' !hi! 1 .� �G=.
basswood. The City Forester `��I '', .� �;� •`'e •.�
recommends that all tagged elm )1, i
�14' _ `�_T `
trees for Dutch Elm Disease should > ;, -
be removed prior to April 1, 1978. t , ! — - ''‘ , : ! t r .-'i \ `.`r'
` ;` , .ice 1•, , of ,- -
The Forester also suggests that `' i • . ,� • ��• �,
any marginal elm trees or those \�,t• ° ..
weakened during construction be �� ,r- '' ,•`~'•''
removed so as to mitigate the \` I ���
spread of Dutch Elm Disease to 1�'; <<. '% `
�c
damaged or weakened trees. Care .� / .,-4...
�wi• .
should also be taken not to .' };�•'_= '
damage oak trees as this would \'`\`ti.0, ;t kt tp M
also provide favorable conditions '\�r, \. (6 r
for the transmission of oak wilt. !,t =-'�
disease ' .,,� . ' -
, . , '�G tvlq
Sodding and seeding should occur '
immediately following construction {, MO
T
to restablize the steep slopes. ': \ H(�1 -
Adequate erosion control should be ..\•.P7 \!!
maintained until reestablishment of `5
all disturbed soils with around cover \ 1
occurs. An erosion control plan must 1 ' ;,�;
be approved by the Nine Mile Creek \. :` \.... ' `
Watershed District, prior to issuance - . -
of a grading permit. \ iv:.-.-.1�... %'. 1
&iq
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates •6- Feb. 15, 1978
•
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
A trail should be constructed by the developer in the right-of-way of the
east/west future through street to Rowland Road as shown in Figure 4. The
trail should he 8 feet wide and constructed of 4" deep strength asphalt. The
trail will connect with future trails in Bryant Lake Park.
UTILITIES
The site presently has an interceptor —,•„
sanitary sewer line running through ` 'i
it so sewer connections will be made o
at the time of development. Public � .
water is not readily available at i.i - •
this time so all lots will require ' "
individual wells. The proponent has �. �*
agreed to install water service and ,.. . '.;j;i_ , ,(
plug the mains until public water is , 4.,
available to the site.
NOISE ABATEMENT •
,
Noise levels from 1-494 have been ;
estimated by the Department of -
Transportation to be in excess of IFID5h..-------f
State and Federal Standards for resi-
dential land use. MN DOT informs the
staff that noise abatement measures
will not be provided for any newly
developed land along existing trans-
portation facilities. ! l.NT has •
projected a 59 dbA noise level for this
area which would exceed PCA Standard . .
L-10-65 for a residential area. Based •
upon this information, the staff requests
the developer to provide noise abatement
plans prior to final approvals, incorporating grade separations, earth berms.
and vegetative plantings to mitigate the effects of the freeway noise. The
staff recognizes that the problem is especially serious in the area of lots
13,14, & 15, Block 1, because of lack of grade separation or vegetation. •
(44J)
Staff Report-Bryant Lake View Estates -7- Feb. 15, 1978
•
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning staff recommends approval of the request as follows:
1. Rezoning from Rural to R1-22 contingent upon the following
conditions:
a. Erosion control be implemented prior to and properly
maintained during construction to prevent sedimentation
entering Bryant Lake, according to Nine Mile Watershed
District recommendations.
•
b. Noise abatement plans be submitted to and approved by the
staff prior to final approval . Earth berms, grade
separations and vegetation should be incorporated in such plans.
c. A trail be constructed along the east/west roadway in the
right-of-way from Beach Road to the east property line.
This trail will connect to future trails in Bryant Lake
Park. Trail should be 8 feet wide and constructed of 4 inch
deep strength asphalt.
d. The road should be planned so that no more than 71% slopes
are used.
e. Any homes constructed on organic soils should have proper
footings , excavation and granular backfill. Drain tiling
should be incorporated around footings where appropriate.
2. Preliminary plat approval for 26 lots on 23.4 acres with cash
park fee of $275/unit be paid at time of building permit
CE:jj
,0ci;4Esop p_ y
r/ '�.l, Q Minnesota Department of Transportation
L 4F , e Transportation Building, St.Paul,MN 55155
yl OF•I B?
February 7, 1978 Phons 296- 008
•
Mr. Chris Enger
Planning Director •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 •
S.P. 2785 T.H. 494
Plat Review of Bryant LaPs View Estates Located
East of 494 on the North:oest Shore of Bryant Lance on
Beach Road in Section 2, Township 116, Range 22 and
Section 3, Township 116, Range 22 in City of Eden Prairie
Hennepin County
Dear Mr. Eager:
We are in receipt of the above referenced plan for our review in accord:-nee
nil n.C• Pim,.-t:o et statutes 505.02 and 505.03. Plats and Surveys. We find tic
p]at teceptabic for further development with consideration of the Poll ^_,c •
noicinon ta: ,
--Bowl on a preliminary analysis, it is anticipated that noise levels veil]. be
in ez.•crs of Stato apd Federal Standards for .res den,aii land use. We augcfect
aitcinative neacnres to the design of devrlolmcni: such :.,; building set i.acks,
use of loonl topography or earth berms, to lessen tiro noise eifect be iovedf-
iguted. The City and the Developer should be aware than, the Mitmesota Deport-
ment of Treosportat.i-on will not provide noise abatement measures for ar;,/ sew
devclopile:rt located adjacent to existing transportation facilities.
--The survey of the development should be coordinate: with our District Land
Surveyor, Mr. Keith Slater, so that it is compatible with our existing right
of way lines.
Jf you have any question: in regard to the above comments, please contact our
District Layout, Research and Development Engineer., Mr. J. S. Katz at 545-3761
cri,cttsiou 150. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
•
Sinerrc.ly,
Wi.li.r ,. Mcvr.Ltt
Analnt_gnt Co=i sioncr .
Elrld Op rationa Division •
cc:
Jahn Be]:nti - Metropolitan Council.
Gary Backer - Hennepin Cotuity •• Surveyor's Office ///77,
An Equal Opoxti Klf•I'u,ployor 61�
•
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Conunjtion
i
THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Servi615
FROM: Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor Cr
} \ •
SUBJECT: Proposed- Development of Haynes Property Adjacent to Bryant Lake •
DATE: February 3, 1978
BACKGROUND
•
This site is located on the western side of Bryant Lake at the northern tip
of the lake. The site is steeply sloped with an elevation of approximately
140 feet. The northern half of the site is heavily wooded with oak and elm.
The site has about 900 feet of shoreline on Bryant Lake. Bryant Lake is
designated as a Recreational Development Lake by DNR. This designation re-
quires a minimui of 15,000 square foot lots with a minimum setback from the
high water mark of 75 feet and minimum lot width of 75 feet. The high water
mark for Bryant Lake has been established at 851.5 by the DNR.
•
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed plat contains 26 single family lots on 24 acres. The lots range
in size from 22,300 square feet to l8,300 square feet. The proposed ,,1,'
shoos 6 lots bordering on Bryant Lake. All lots will be served by public
sewer, but rot water.
Considerable grading is necessary on many of the sites. Adequate erosion •
protection during ccnstruction should be required to alleviate the impact on
the lake. Reestablishment of the vegetation during the construction season
should also be required.
The proposed development shows an east-west connection between Beach Road and
in the future - Rowland Road. At the present time a temporary cul-de-sac
should be provided on the eastern end of the road. Presently that road continues
through the City's property at Bryant Lake Stables. Barricades around the cul •
•
-
de-sac are necessary to prevent entry into the park.
The northern area of the proposed plat is densely wooded with elm, oak, maple,
and linden (basswood). At, the present time 83 elm trees have been marked as
being infected with Dutch elm disease. Dutch elm disease will continue to be
a problem in this area because of the large elm population. The Community
Services Staff recommends that all tagged trees need be removed prior to April
1, 1978. in addition, during the initial construction of the northern cul-de-sac
and the establishment of building pad sites, that elm trees should be removed
whenever adjacent cut and fill will affect the fitness of the tree.
Oak wilt disease is not an important factor at the present time. However, during
the construction great care should he taken to prevent damage to the oaks which '•
could provide conditions favorable for oak wilt introduction.
61
Haynes Property -2- 2/3/78
The developer has not proposed any open space dedication. The CASH PARK FEE
would be required to satisfy the developers recreation open space requirements.
SUMMARY
The Community Services Staff recommends the following:
A. Adequate erosion protection during construction should be required
as part of the grading plans approved by the City Engineering
Department and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District.
B. All grading of building pad sites should be done at one time with
the reestablishment, during the construction season, of vegetation
destroyed during grading.
C. A cul-de-sac at the east end of the future Beach Road-Rowland Road
route, with barriers to prevent access thru the adjoining property
to the park.
D. All tagged, diseased elms need to be removed prior to April 1, 1978.
E. During the grading of building sites, the elms should be removed
whenever adjacent cut and fill will affect the fitness of the tree.
F. The CASH PARK FEE should be required to satisfy the developers
recreation open space requirements.
SW:md
•
•
• l
619
'larch 28, i576
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEP1N COUNTY, MINNESOTA .
RESOLUTION NO. 78-60
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
• Bryant Lake View Estates
LE 1T RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Bryant Lake View Estates
, dated jabn. 16. 197J a Copy of
which is attached hereto and amended as follows:
is found to be in conformance with the provisions of
the Eder. Prairie Zoning and platting ordinances and
unendments thereto and is hereiL approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
•
•
John D. Prune, Clerk .
•
3/78
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 78-55
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR PHEASANT OAKS A PRIVATE ACTION DOES
NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
WHEREAS, the City Council of t.ho City of Eden Prairie did hold a
public hearing April 4, 19/8 to consider Pheasant Oaks by Burmith,
Incorporated, and
WHEREAS , said rezoning is approximately 50 acres of land from
Rural to R1-13.5 District, and
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing on March 13, 1978 to consider the zoning and platting request
of Pheasant Oaks and recommended said request by approved by the City
Council, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council
that an Environriantal I;lnact Statement is not necessary for Pheasant
Oaks becau,n the project is not a major action which does not have
significant environmental effects and is not more than of local signifi-
cance.
•
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a Negative Declaration Notice shall
be officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council.
ADOPTED this .__ day of 1978.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
,loin D. Trane , City Clerk SEAL
ki
•
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Unapproved
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Richard Lynch,William Bearman, Matthew
Levitt, Paul Redpath (arrived later)
COMMISSION ABSENT: Liz Retterath
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Chris Enger, Planning Assistant Jean
Johnson, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 13, 1978 •
C. Pheasant Oaks, Burmith, Inc., request for preliminary plat approval and
rezoning from Rural to R1-33.5 for 96 single family detached homes on 55
acres. Located east of Red Rock Lake and South of Village Woods. A public
hearing.
The Planner referred the Commission to the staff report, engineering supplement,
and EAW prepared on the Pheasant Oaks project. He stated the proponent is not
•
requesting any variances from the Rl-13.5 District, and the staff is recommending
credit be given for the proponent's construction of the trail.
Mr. Robert Smith, Burmith Inc., outlined the project location with description of
the vegetation , slopes, and utility availability. He stated they are proposing
to dedicate 11 acres to the city which amounts to approximately 20% of the total
developable site area.
Mr. McCulloch inquired if the proponent agrees with the staff report. Mr. Smith
responded affirmative , except for full cash park fee payment.
Bearrnan asked if the project would have architectural controls, and who it would
he. Mr. Smith stated they would be establishing controls on house size, construc-
tion, etc.
Levitt asked what the price range of the homes would be. Mr. Smith estimated
$75,00-100,000 .
Levitt then asked if storm sewer facilities were present. Mr. Smith replied the
project would be drained to a sedimentation pond and then into Red Rock Lake.
McCulloch asked if the specials would he paid by the developer. Mr. Smith replied
the specials had been deferred because for the last 3-4 years the property has
bren in Green Acres, but the specials will be paid as the project proceeds.
Redpath inquired if Hiawatha Avenue would intersect with Village Woods Drive.
Mr. Smith replied affirmative.
Gal
•
Planning Cor:mission Minutes -5- • March 13, 1978
Levitt asked if Mitchell Road would be able to handle the additional trips
to the north. The Planner replied positive.
Mr. John Houston, Red Rock Hills, stated he believes the project is compatible
with the surrounding development. He then suggested the street Village Woods
Road be renamed Village Woods Drive for consistency. The Planner replied the
Engineering Staff is recommending the name change forthe final plat.
Motion 1:
McCulloch moved, Redpath seconded, to close the public hearing on Pheasant Oaks.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2: •
McCu
lloch moved, Redpath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the EAW finding of no significant impact. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3:
McCulloch moved, Redpath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the rezoning of the 55 acres from Rural to Rl-13.5 contingent upon the staff
report of March 3, 1978 the Engineering supplement March 7, 1978. Motion
carried unanimously.
Motion 4:
McCulloch moved, Redpath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the preliminary plat dated Feb. 20, 7975 contingent on the staff report dated
March 3, 1978 and the Engineering supplement dated March 7, 1978. Motion
carried unanimously.
(n2z
March 8 , 1978
•
MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSPtiNT WORKSHEET (EAW)
AND NOTICE Or 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)
Ci_]Negative Declaration (No EIS) EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION •
1. Project name or title Pheasant Oaks
2. ProjecL proposer(s) Rurmith , Inc.
Address 7669 Washington Avenue South , Edina, Mn. 55435
Telephone Number and Area Code (612) 941-5202 •
3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Eden Prairie
Address 8950 Eden Prairie Roati. Edon Prairie, 45144
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this LAW: Chris Enger 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 941-2262 Hours 8:00am-4:30pm
5. Reason for EAW Preparation Mon.-Fri.
Ci)Mandatory Category -cite O Petition O Other
MEQC Rule number(s) MEQC 24h(1)(cc)
C. ACTIVITY DE_:CRIPTION SUMMARY
1. Project location
County Hennepin City/Township name Eden Prairie
Township number 116 (North), Range Number 22 East or®(circle onc),
Section numbers) 16 $ 21 Street address (if in city) or legal description:
Part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 116, Range 22, also
part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22.
- 1 - 6 3
2. Type and scope of proposed project: Urban development consisting of 96 single •
family detached homes served by municipal sewer,water and street systems.
3. Estimated starting date (month/year)
June, 1978
4. Estimated completion date (month/year)December. 1980
5. Estimated construction costLot and municipal improvements $674.000
Houses $ 6,528,000
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)
Eden Prairie final plat f, zoning pending
watershed district land alteration and storm sewer
construction pending
E.Q.B. negative declaration pending
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepared under the National. Environmental Policy Act?.iNO YES UNKNOWN
•
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
A. Include the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the project. (see map following page)
2. An original 8', x 11 section of. a U.S.G.S. VI 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.
Part has been farmed. Remainder was open field. Site is surrounded by
farm land and urban development.
•
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are:
a. Urban developed 0 acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) 1.5 acres
b. Urban vacant 0 acres g. Shoreland 14 acres
c. Rural developed 0 ncren h. Floodplain ,5 acres
d. Rural vacant 2 acres i. Cropland/Pasture land 47 acres
e. Donignated Recre- 0 acres j. Forested �acrea
at ion/Oven SI\tce
- 2 - y
\
\
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
.." .
L :Zi i
20 OF/9/75
•
11.••••(K.% ,
--Tir--
I
......NORTH...
• M1NEAPOL IS
. ..
"°- CO..,N 0 RTFT-- kit>,
061610
_(_ orrif 1 •Ma. 4.1.1•1••• 6•6 /..14'3 I el.SC•rot•
,,... ST.PAU L
I ,
•
••••
Li . ""1". . ."'" .•..., ''''''N-6.1)"'1""'NOR Tti EAS.I
Fr ) -- I. -- ST.PAUL
.I.• 'i---
..,61PRTIMUIV r 1; :?,i7......'7L" „'
MI Mil E APO L I "".""" ,.„,V.'il.:— c:::.7,}...„;vriS
)
touttoout co I...0u to L.::11!to' 117,..)71,:',.
. 1 *16.4•016•
0•••s1.• 1";1 '''''' j7";11 1'1.'111 i% il' ..4\.1;C,• S 0111
• ...• .17 1....:A/,k.' t r-, 1 1-. - 14 a--,...-.
4•01•1••••64.1.\ ....0..
t I _
- -
, :.1 -,),
Nti -,.. I.,63....................7 a '' ..".‘*". :'''''
.,....,,,............r--,,-----:,....f,.-:;---:=,, _. : W4 1 nausto co ri • ".`".c..
S••I6 I:A
I ..• fsl ''. • 1 S6 to.... Ls Sala,06.1/1. -..
-,......ressf..........—J*1 t.
yi,,,f(?. Vl•-• f;,,) " 1":.t.a."11 f, •-•
-,6.7.1r.V 1 11 Toon es.7.")
,rb I ic) 13C i-i--1-'i••,)' # C . ':."I t, 1,,
N.,..v• ,.?--—-.............., •-•• 1..................T'yr-. [-"1,,,,,.. •
1. ' ' . ,. •.-1`..:'\''''''SOUTHEAST
ISQUTfili.tST
i....i.. 1 ,_ ..,„... "..-c- "cc A,5T.PKO.L.
IMINNE,-VOLIS ........MO •••••*b.
"/
I CAAVI• CO •166•IS ‘1.6.66,06.GRIM 06•••••
I [06•146 e, DAKOTA CO ..c..
,-Fla". ,.cq 1 . J.... i,..Y.,. •-•••••• - --I- —•-
•••••1111.6.
.,,i. ••••:•1• I —L_
l
,t.,.•,....ge.•:•I stk.% i
;.4:1,.(1 I, .....•••••• 111116•••60/ :,7,..,,,.•ck s
W1."
-1:-;::::::!:. .."'.."--.'"g-I SmO:;U. 1-i c.„.,r......,,, _ _ ...„—fr.‘
.r•
1
l'li".7:01 MIL APOUSI
II i 114.4•01
I ."" ‘ •••• ••• STI .PAW.'
TT CO
1 .L-
I
I I I
I .....P,•••f I ..1•••• V 0161 4.0•1 ....• 1 , ... .6Ca• °"1
/or••••• -d.
1 I
I 1 .,zutf I
I q. I, . .....,
1••••1(161 I NU..
t............... ....1 1 •ore,••••11
1
-1
f .4....
I i ,
—ID 13'...‘'.''..AI n II•i1.•••1 ii•aft••1•0
Figure 8
SUBURBAN SECTORS
,..•..... IT••"••..,,i••• n so.,••I
T••••• go••••••1•••• l••••,66•
i•••1••••••41.• 11..••...••.6S. 10 a••.96.1 16••.0•I.• Artg•4—County Boundary
li•••••V
•.t...t.1 I.•..... 41 4 •.. , ohnst--.lauto.opal Boundary
1::;.;'..... ....O...wo••••• .1.0,••••• 1.1••••••••144••••
i.e••T..... T.••••I ••• .1 L•••••••••1•4, 11,-1.1-•••••Toonsh.p Boundary
a too,tt.... to to. . st tt•to t 1,6411,
6 21;
•
•
uo ' ( .�"�\,` i -- - -\.9 �••'r1 4, ,�� •.mil
�'�` .r 1 1 -., t 4QM,,/, •6 9 %• ` :11 f •�� J`,._` t
ound 1 g� �..�5_ `�` — ..^--y T+ Q�r�eGa , toZ w .
wo
?J /0t y
Ncc,„..j ,, -- i .,,.: (; * I( ':. '.'" .. ..: CS*
:O aA1 eer
v R60.7 ' � cam" A _`` • rY ��..J
z.iY on.*ea 't U J
moo-
,,/ .' ' a/ ra / _1o�gJ
A',l P �- O U -� f! ,J -p i
f (j, /•\1 $ :- •o h )))� l' O - ' ,'
- �' —•/16 f �� 15
1. .. -• * Arr ` \ , AAA I � /-�17 , o flff -
•
' � }.�17r: _ \�
o
ite
-1'1°' — —• — ."Ii:•'•• — ',,•,:''',,A...i\______......----7----•i''_5
p. a o z\ r .8 l
J.
•
C, '0 U� I�';') ()21 .�1 . �,./��-- ." 22
\ c—). N1, !?;:--: -_____,u...-_..c-___) ,
887 903 ` \
;74�,
\ 1 ;1 ',.. /\ 1 ilhNG CIISUD• !1\`
' '.• � \ ''--\.,� :(1 \..•u I t I:j AIRPORT. 1
�.' ); '••�L`, it '. 2t I��\ t.-..� °\ R ..
�•%` `'• to -^�' , j/ ,:t �\ -1. ~� -l�ss� .-�. •`� `,\ \ 1).• - :vv ...
�, - 1� .. -- / ~---_(�- Off♦ t O
1 � ..�at /J// -t _:.. .� -_�---- � -tip�.:�h.. •
'� }p1C � `, C,xc $ l Lake • -\ ^"i ' �-'t.t!
crass \ \ .r^� ,,:A— -,
.---7::Z.N..7'•-•.,..—'''''--i ' —
i'.1- ),\:N---_ .-?-'))• ) .
'VI\ s ) \1-
. _11 ' 11( -. •.- ,
mi". : il - _s------:
-7------------:_ic( 1, I) \ (----
I ---, , .
-;--7,..'":":7„--''.;'' 1/ // )
1 ...._- • r /
,.........-_,- .,",.:ti,•,, \V\ i ( , , :
/ \ ....,
\
.•
/ .., .•• -...: .\,•,.. ,,. ,,,-, ,
---,...., ---s• . ,...:-...---- _-,...)1; ;,,, , ,.\\ „
Om \ --47-..\ \ y -.''', .---'.S•:"i--4:.'-i I .
0 \s. ,. zir../:_. -1f.C--
•
r- ....
z •,.'
o ,/ ,,Y7-7;f,--.7(
7
---7---,'----u-- . -`:-.---1- i" -.. "' •• • •
-___-_,--
.,---} ' ------ -------
,,-----" /.!,-- •----,‹ ; - -- -- 1 •- .
/, ,• -.. .,,_
, .
- ----------- ' --;;-:;--• i
----- '' -
• -'---., ; ,) , - ,-..., ' 1•-----, - •
. •
i/1// >/' '/ -/I ' 1 ' -',"1',' 1 •
"",,"i' ' / 7___:-- '-,'.' ,'• __ i •\-N., I, \_,/''. . . .
. ,
e. , - _,._•4-- \ (2- ___,.,•. ,/ - -._3.y.t.-_..., i. .,7:/—
, .
, .
127,
.,.,,,
0..--. 7 ._•.;•-...,--N _.. '.
• -s_ •
_..,• . 1 t.. .f;-o \/ , \ -1, __.\\.
- i .. . . ----,-, i r ,,..,a.:,--..:.• /,\
, f , -- -'s\,) ,, ,\- ,cc": , _---
1 i
;--3-"-:•)/ "•\. \,s 1,_-- ,, (. :Z5 i',7; <\..:1* '--- - ,,,..----- -_-__-_.'„)\,
'I? , l' - --------: -- ' ,,,/ i i 0 . V/ , 1 '
I 1 .
..____t,...r 47' 1:Li 11:5........
/// // •
61
:=-:•-srl..-,L.wr.:-..ve.a.c.:-.vacuszsvecetaort-wrafanitatigzsznownamicuta .r.....rffrusrrliZaZi.WYSZ.. ' ,
1 VEGETATION
....... .... . McC01`,111S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATIS,INC, I .(C‘Ttill...;1“....114$a 11.4 S....11..•1 AI 1.11,1..4%01
•- . 1'.k \ ...... . 11-"---.1 PI-IFASANIT CIAllg ,
4
•
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. Red Rock Lake, a 90.5 acre lake , is located directly
west of the site. Part of the lake touches the site in the southwest
Corner.
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).
The proposed development is to be constructed in accordance with City
standards for land subdivision and municipal services. The utilities
will be installed as soon as possible, with building construction to
follow as dictated by market demand, etc.
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area 55 acres g. Size of marina and access N.A. sq. ft.
or channel (water area)
Length N.A.milcs h. Vehicular traffic trips
generated per day 800 ADT
b. Number of housing or
recreational units 96 i. Number of employees N.A.
c. Height of structures 30 ft. j. Water supply needed 40,000 gal/da
maximum Source: City of Eden Prairie
d. Number of parking
spaces k. Solid waste requiring
disposal 300 tons/yr
e. Amount of dredging pone cu. yd.
1. Commercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes requir-
industrial floor space nossq. ft.
38,4
ing tredtment QJal/da
III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
A. SOILS AND TOr0GRAPIw
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 12t? 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.
Where possible existing slopes will )e left undisturbed; where new slopes
are created planting will he utilized to reduce adverse effects. If it
appears that runoff during construction will carry sediment to the lake,
straw hale dams will be utilized in crucial areas.
3 !;2 l
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic
systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project.
Site soils arc typical to the area and as such have been satisfactorily
utilized for building foundation support. Additonal info on following page.
5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done:
70,000 cu. yd. grading 70,000cu. yd. filling
What percent of the site will be so altered? 60 t
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 20 t
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
Steep natural slopes outside of actual house pads will be be disturbed.
Distttttbed slopes will be seeded and mulched or sodded to prevent erosion.
Temporarypo erosion control structures will be constructed where necessary
B. VEGET�TiC�rent against sedimentation.
. 1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types:
Woodland 10 % Cropland/ 88 %
Pasture
Brush or shrubs none % Marsh 2 t
Grass or herbaceous none t Other none %
(Specify)
Additional information on following page.
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 1/3 acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical or biological significance on the site? (See DNR public..- on
The Uncommon Ones.) ..1......NO YES
If yes, Till the species or area and indicate any measures to be used
to reduce potential adverse impact. •
C. F1&11 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 YES
2. Are there an3 known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife
on or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon _s_NO YES
3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish —NO ��YF.S
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. During construction period, birds and small animals will he forced
to seek new areas of habitat. The amount of food and habitat will be reduced
therefore the potential to produce wildlife will he reduced proportionately.
Territorial concerns of other animals , such as fox, will be disrupted. An
increase in the population of undesirable species, such as housemice, Norway
Rats, Starlings, and English Sparrows is likely to take place. The general
impact on the local wildlife population will be negative due to an increase
in noise changes, in microclinnate, decrease in habitat, food and territorial
boundaries, but mostly due to the presence of man and his residential environs.
•
4. Continued, Soils
The western half of the site is gently undulating with the exception
of the extreme north side, dropping-off sharply to an existing pond.
The highest knoll on the site, located in the east center, has slopes
of 18-20% to the south and cast. Most of the site drains to the tow,
wet area, Out lot B, proposed by the proponent as part of the park
dedication. Smaller portions of the site drain to the north. 4
•
The grading plan submitted indicates a minimum amount of site preparation
grading. The high knoll on the site will be cut about 10 feet to allow ,
for the road and adequate pads for the lots. 1.
The soils on the site have very diverse characteristics. Soils having
sandy texture and well drained character are Basso, Dickman, and Lester.
These soils have good bearing capacity and shear strength. The hazard
of frost heave is low and changes in volume with changes in moisture
content is low. Erosion potential on these soils, however, is quite high.
•
The soils having loamy texture and moderate drainage are Heyder, Greys,
Nessel and LeSueur. They have a fair to good bearing capacity and shear
strength. most heave potential and shrink-swell is moderate. Erosic.:
hazard for these soils is high, but not as bad as the sandy soils. Fairly
wide footings should be used on these soils.
•
The moderately well drained soils on the site are represented by the
Kennebec series. The bearing capacity and shear strength'of these soils
are good,however, because they are underlain by deep sand. A seasonally
high water table may present some problems. The hazard of frost heave
and shrink-swell potential are fairly high. The low area of Outlot B
consists primarily of peat soils.
•
B. 1. !etation, continued
Vegetation on the site consists of fairly small areas of oak and elm.
There is one fairly large stand of oak and elm on the southwest corner
of the site. Very few of the trees will have to be removed in the •
grading of the site.
•
•
_4b_
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 .Y..� -
b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes • 4- -
c. Dredging or filling operations a.__ -
X •
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 _ ,
2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface? ...al_e
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 drainage will be picked up in two separate drainage systems.
Both systems will outlet in a common sedimentation basin. The overflow
from the sedimentation basin will flow into Red Rock Lake.
4. Will there he encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain
py new fill or structures? -
X NO YES
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO YES
S. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on + 4 feet
the site?
. WATER QUALITYsewage
1. Will there be a discharge of process or ccoolr ing water,w groundwater? NO YES
•
or other waste waters to any water body
If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the
water body receiving the effluent.
Process water - no I sanitary sewer-yes(Metro waste treatment plant to Nn.Ric
cooling water - no storm water -yes(erosion/sedimentation controls appror
by Riley/Purgatory Watershed District
2. If discharge of waste ester to te o the municipal
u ni ip�r olutueltscnt llusystsm is
planned, identify any
in the wastewater.
N.A.
3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed proje
ct? .1_210 YES
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method
of dieposal.
iCC?I
4. What measures will be used to minimize thu volumes or impacts identified
in questions 1-3?
Erosion control and sedimentation removal before entering Red Rock Lake.
•
5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile,
depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal.
N.A. •
•
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. During construction period(ie grading.
utility, streets, and building)and following occupancy, low levels of carbon
• monoxide and hydro-carbon emissions, etc., will be released. These emissions
are typical to combustion of fuels and due to the limited size and scope of
the project will have only a minor effect on the atmosphere. Following
construction , the project will generate approximately 800 auto trips/day
and emissions from heating 96 hoses. •
•
2. Will noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation
of the project? NO X YES
If yes, describe the noise socrce(s); specify decibel levels cib(i+)j, and
duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative Treasures to reduce the
noise/vi::::.xt.ion. During the construction period, equipment will be running
from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Approximate noise levels within SO feet of equipment
•
will be in the range of 90-100db. The noise should be confined to the site. •
Standards for Noise: Day Night
L50 1.10 L50 L10
60dllA 6Sd8A 500A 55d3A
Maximum dBA Ranges: Equipment At Machine At 250 ft.
scraper 85-115 64-100
dozer 88-10S 73- 90 •
• grader 78- 96 63- 81
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.
Some scattered residences are within 100 feet of the point where some grading
operations will take place, but will not be significantly affected.
•
G. Li>ND RESOU):CE.CONSERCA:ION, ENERGY
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO YES -
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of market::bla crop
or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use.
35 acres corn at lOObu/ac. Land quality varies from sandy loam to clay loam
so conditions exist for crop failure in a dry year.
2. Aro there any known mineral or Scat deposits en the site? X NO YES
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? N0 X YES
Complete the following as applicable:
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
Estimated Peak Demand
Annual (boun .' or Daily) Anticipated Firm Contract or
Type fa::n,i resent sum summer Winter Sunnlic•r Interruptibt.e Doris?
28,700 .16 mcf/ .19 mcf/
Natural Gas c r Minnegasco Firm contract
Electricity 70P1 K.W.H. 2,900KWH 1,700 KWH NSP Firm contract
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on—site fuel storage.
N.A.
•
c. Estimate annual energy distribution for:
space heating 52 t lighting 6 t
air conditioning 25 t processing 1S t
ventilation 2 t
d. Specify any :major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project.
1. Thermal pane windows S. combination storm doors
2. 4t-22 ceiling insulation 6. special fireplace air intakes
3. R-I1 wall insulation 7. attic fans
4. Bronze metal weatherstripping 8. polyethylene vapor barriers in ceilings
e. What secondary encrey use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etc)?
Longer car trips can be anticipated if we assume that new residents will be
moving out from inner or close in suburbs. However, the project may
reduce length of auto trips by providing housing near existing employment f,,
• the future employment center within the Major Center Area.
H. OI'I:N SPACE/p1:C}z ATION .
1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or
open space areas near tic site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
lake accesses)? NO�LYES
If yea, list areas by name and e::plain how each may be zff.'ctcd by the
project. Indicate any meaaureu to be used to reduce adverse impacts.
City park is planned for area (forth of site. Size of park will be adequate
for increased number of people. A neighborhood park is also planned directly
south of the site. A community park is located at Staring Lake, south of the
site. The project is a planned residential area, no adverse impacts are
anticipated.
6,33 . 7 _
U. TRANSPORTATIO`1 1. Will the project affect any to existing or proposed transportation X ysttion systems
(highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? will be affected. 1'oz
If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) •
these, specify existing use and c q,acities, average traffic speed and
percentage of truck traffic (if highway); andindicate
they
will be
ue
•
affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage
. safety, increased traffic (A17f), access requirements).
The project will increase traffic(ADT) on the surrounding roads, but
alternate routes arc available tNdispeIse theattraffic
e 494wi11 be utiland no ized
are anticipated. State }tighwayS
and by the traffic to the Metro Area.
1•N45 : 55mph, 6% truck traffic, 12,750-14,000ADT,at or near capacity.
Completion of this project could add many of the projected 800 ADTs to
TI15 which is now near capacity. Traffic congestion is relieved at
FAI 494, at which point capacities increase substantially. Tin S is an
cast/west arterial through Eden Prairie.
2. Is mass transit available to the site? NO...L. YF.S ,
3. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to
reduce adverse impacts?
it
als
Een
options exist
Potentials or
Fixednservicerandle as Demandut
lined •
in Response
"Transit
Transit Service are two possibilities. Park-n-Ride Service is presently
available at Ttt 5 and Mitchell Road which is within walking distance of
the site.
•
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, CO:4MUNITY SERVICES regionalcomprehensive
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or compreh eh _YES
plans?
If not, explain:
If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing
zoning and change requested.
Portion of plat in Section 16 is at present Rural with PUP approval presentfor
Rural. Project will
single family; portion in Section 21 is at
require rezoning of entire parcel to single family residential , RI-13.5
2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the cha%racter ofYt3
existing uoigld orhood?
If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce conflicts.
The site is primarily upland with some lowland in the south and north
on
e
n
l be
as
parts of the site. The
storm site
tormwaterlrunoff. Thedo
space and relatively
en
small amon ount
en spacen should tbeeat well osuited developmentl option ofor r c�the r
sites . I
site in relation to Iced Rock Lake and the planned open space system.
CO2C4
3. How many employees will move into the arca to be near the project? N.A.
How much new housing will be needed? N p,-
4. Will the project induce development nearby--either support services
•
or similar developments? No •
If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and
municipalities affected. •
The development will help support existing and future commercial development
on TM 5 and Mitchell Road as well as commercial centers on Co. Rd. 4 and
in the Major Center Area.
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 caivagity?
water 40,000 gal/da Yes
•
wastewater treatment 38.400 gal/da Yes
sower 4,290 feet Yes
schools 144 pupils Yes
solid waste disposal �__ ton/mo Yes
streets 1.2 miles Yes
other (police, fire, etc) existing 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? •
Existing local plans have resulted in expansion and improvement of existing
public facilities at a pace consistent with planned growth and in the best
public interest. •
b. 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 ye.' specify which area or plan.
7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage, release
or disposal of ;etentially h rzardous or toxic liquids, solids on
ga eous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisions,
etc? X NO YESi.
If yes, please specify the suh tanco and rate of usage and any measures
to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents.
1
r
63S
I
s
•
•
•
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 •
Night 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.
•
•
L. OTHER ENVIRON ENTAL CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been •
identified in the previous sections.
Urbanization of the area will result in increased amounts of storm water
runoff with a potential for a decrease in the water quality of Red Rock
Lake. As previously stated, the sedimentation basin planned should effectively
alleviate this problem.
III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
Twenty percent of the project is reserved for natural environment and habitat.
City Staff will review all public facilities and utilities , building permits,
etc.
City Staff field inspection of all public works construction.- .
• 6,3(0
- 10 -
•
V. FINDINGS
The project is a private ( X ) governmental ( ) action. The Oesponsible Agency
(Person), after consideration of the information in ,this EAW, and the factors
in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings.
1. The project is ( ) is net ( X ) a maj_.r action.
State yeas::,s:
The project is an average size project when compared to other plats in the area.
No unusual features are proposed, the approach being similar to that offered by
other developers for similar land. The project as proposed complies with the
local and Metropolitan System Plans, urban development standards, and open space
retention.
2. The project does (____) dues not ( X ) have the potential for sie,ni Iicant
environmental effects.
State reasons: Because of the proximity of this property to the lake, failure on
the part of the developer to use proper precautions during construction, or failure
•
to comply with the proper mitigative measures that have been proposed could have
adverse effects on the water quality. The developer however, has proposed that
the storm water runoff be diverted through a settling basin and that straw bales
will be utilized if the existing vegetation does not sufficiently clean the surface
runoff during the construction period.
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not (X ) of more than
local significance.
State Reasons:
The project is situated near the center of Eden Prairie. As such, all environmental
factors relating to the project car, be considered to be of local signiacance.
The project will respect natural hydrologic and other natural systems, common to
the larger region, and is consistent with all City growth plans.
IV. CONCLUSIONS AM) CERTIrICAIION
NOTE: A Negative Declaration or hls Preparation Notice is not officially filed
until the date of publication of the notice in the !QC Monitor section of
the Minnesota St.:te Re.gisteer. Submittal of the MI to the EQC, constitutes
a request for publication of notice in the EQC Monitor..
A. I, the undersigned, am either the aut'horiLed 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. AL NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE
No 1:IS 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 morn than local significance.
GO
11 -
2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE
An EIS will Le prepared on this project because the project is a
major action and has tnc potential for ignislalso environmental
effects. For private actions, the project
of more than ,
local significance.
a. The t:EQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the
project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances,
the M !C caa ecitically authorize limited construction to begin or
continue. If you feel there arc 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 EC 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 Drc.it EIS will be prepared by t'ist 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 tIkp official EQC distribution list, to the city and county
directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be
9
directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question
III.J.4 on 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 Enc Monitor Publication
State agency Attach to the EAW sent to the EQC a completed OSR 100
MIN: form (State Register General Order Form--available at Central
Store:). For instructions, please contact your Agency's
Liaison Officer to the State Beni!;ter or the office of the
State ^negi stcr--(Gl2) 2%-R239.
12 —
L
3/7/78
•
Engineering Staff Recommendations
PHEASANT OAKS
Supplement to 3/3/78 Planning Staff Report •
1. The proposed street names, Pheasant Oaks and Hilltop, conflick with
names already in use. These names must be changed and new names
reviewed and approved by the Engineering Oept.
2. Sight distance at the intersection of Village Woods Orive and Mit-
chell Road must be verified by the Developer. The in-place bituminous
paving on Mitchell Raod ends approximately 120 feet northerly of the
proposed intersection. The Developer will be required to extend the
paving of Mitchell Road to the southerly limits of the proposed plat.
3. The proposed watermain system must be looped through the most north-
westerly cul-de-sac to the existing watermain, located parallel to
the west property line of the plat. Connection to the existing sys-
tem will also be required at the intersection of Village Woods Drive
and Mitchell Road.
4. An existing 18" storm sewer is located within the plat, but it is
not shy.. on the proposal. This system is an overflow for the pond,
located in the northerly portion of the plat and outlets in the •
proposed Lot 15, Block 4. The developer must either relocate the •
storm sewer or adjust the plat as necessary. •
5. A 9' radius should be platted along the property line at all street
intersections and cul-de-sac returns to enable utility companies to
install their lines without crossing private property at these points.
6. Assessment information:
The fol}owing special assessments have been levied on the prop-
erty included in the proposed plat:
#6137, Lateral sewer and water, $53,722.57
#6138, M.R.S. Collector, $1,876.23
#6139, Scenic Heights Area Collector, $9,332.50
#6442, Storm Sewer Supplemental, $2,149.05
06143, Trunk sewer and water, $1,500.00
#7030, Trunk sewer and water, $66,394.40
#5881, Mitchell Road Improvement, $17,829.33
The above listed ac.r-csments were levied on all that part of the
plat in Section 21. Pending assessments: Pending storm sewer
on Parcel 6525, $10.000; Special assessments will be pending
rezoning and development of 7.75 acres of the plat located in
Section 21 at current rates for trunk sewer and water. storm
sewer and street improvements.
BURMITH, INC.
7669 Washington Ave. So.
Edina, Minnesota 55435 MAR I 0 1978
March 6, 1978
City Staff & Planning Commission Members
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Subject: Proposed Pheasant Oaks Park Dedication
Gentlemen:
Having had the opportunity to discuss with Staff the City's guide
lines on park dedication, we would like to ask that you consider
our beliefs on how Pheasant Oaks relates to these guide lines.
On your Park Guide Plan, a trail corridor is called for along the
north side of Red Rock Lake. This corridor will be an integral
part of a north — south connecting park system. We feel the system
will be a very excellent amenity to the entire area.
Pheasant Oaks as porposed allows for such a corridor to an extent
which has a great deal more land dedication than what is called
for. Over and beyond the wetlands in the area of the walkway, we
are proposing an additional 6.5 acres of public open space along
the corridor. For the most part, the additional acreage is made
up of wooded knolls and natural areas. This will allow the residents
using the [railway to stop off and enjoy an unspoiled wildlife area;
something which is becoming increasingly harder to find.
May we ask that you consider the very valuable dedications proposed
within this plat when determining if any additional monetary park
dedication be required.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours very truly,
BURM�ITH�,�INC.
Richard M. Smith
•
RMS:Ic
640
•
•
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission •
FROM: Jim Jensen, Planning Assistant
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Planning Director '
DATE: March 3, 1978
APPLICANT: Burmith, Inc.
PROJECT: Pheasant Oaks
LOCATION: 5S acre parcel located west of Mitchell Road, east
of Redrock Lake and south of Scenic Heights and
Mitchell Heights residential areas.
REQUEST: Preliminary plat approval for 96 lots on SS acres
Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5
BACKGROUND:
This project is part of a 1973 PUD by Zachman Homes depicting townhouses
and zero lot line homes. The open space and roads proposed in Pheasant Oaks
are in conformance with the original PUD (refer to Fig. 3)
The 1968 Guide Plan carries a single family designation for the enti:.-
area proposed. The proposed plan corresponds very closely with the
preliminary indication of the current Guide Plan Update. An elementary
school is shown approximately in the area of Mitchell Road/Village •
Wood Road intersection, but could be directly south of that area.
The Guide Plan Update denotes a density of 3 to 4.5 units/acre for •
residential , low density.
The proposed subdivision relates well to the surrounding land uses,
being R1 and IUI residential. An environmental assessment worksheet
has been prepared and approved for the project.
LOCATION MAP
Ru^p hu I7: it;'/RI-22j a •• 7.6N�K ' �—
/ raPac ' 1
♦ !I tin t 1 - • 1•RPRK ✓ I 1
ti]tC ,:1,1 / . PUtl 16.91611 i I -may 1 ttt
..L t1:C.1.U.U,_.1./ 'Scenic^I_''1:...!•R°adc=Pu111. 1 f 3 i1 :,'�ia , `� /S
2 Hei gas- 'Jcenicri0., ! \R4 rk, � , <,J
u•v•
1 � Re� Ad i:i( x u-Ln' AthertOnPJ U
/ 'y Rork �-._. : train •' t6)
1` 1 ,r R.1 ,a ``\v
1- 4 11 .A
// /., i11 L'hcasan l
ta.lp �,1`•471�: to
0,....:;• .,,
)
/ .
•
2v, ��� t �I_i
Ifl;Pz U+�r .'
•
Staff Report-Pheasant Oaks -2- March 3, 1978
ZONING REQUEST
The proponent requests rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 . No variances are
being requested. Provisions of Ordinance 135 for the R1-13.5 District
are as follows:
Maximum density of 2 units/acre
13,500 square foot minimum lot size
30 foot front yard setback
10foot - 25 foot sideyard setback
20 foot rear yard setback
The minimum lot size is 13,500 square feet. With about 11 acres of open space,
the overall density is 1.75 units/acre, well below the maximum allowed.
TRANSPORTATION
Access to the site is gained from Mitchell Road on the east end of the subdivision.
Village Woods Road is a through street joining Red Rock Hills 1st Addition.
The 96 lots are served by a series of cul-de-sacs and a loop road off of the
through street.
It is estimated that 800 ADT will be generated upon completion of the project.
The trips will probably be north on Mitchell Road to Scenic Heights Drive and
TH 5. (ADT based upon 8.5 trips/unit/day)
The intersection of Village Woods Road and Scenic Heights as shown in the
•
proposed location, will have to be upgraded to establish adequate sight distance
both to the south and to the north. The pavement on Mitchell Road ends about
120 feet to the north of the proposed intersection. This also represents a high
spot in the road which drops off sharply to the south. Therefore, the inter-
section is just below the high spot. Since curb and gutter, pavement, sewer
and water are already in the part of Mitchell Road ending north of the intersection,
it makes sense that the intersection will have to be raised to allow for the
sight distances required. Sight distance should be at least 300 feet both north
and south on Mitchell Road at this intersection.
.
1
t �� =Di , ? ///, ,
i
2 o FI 4 ;t�I ?Nt �� t
4 t I t-:
t.W gt$Fs 3. } / li
�j`/J �2 J 1k,,J( N''
g i£` t �) ,:. • r; \' 1
tit tt,,:I.:: tek .:;4-,,,N.,1 ,7
l o.i i ;d i i$:` !NAWAH'CtA J.
///7.. \ \k' \'
f _+ � /.wry ` ( .. \•
•p \ , �'+ ,1 Y '�/ l Jfrs q!t
I \ II " ? 6,,N-....... -f.•-i'-,,q;K::.%-,-•A <or/-•
."," . v --' ''',1-;",,-,' 1 --- ----4";.:.=.--- .1-- -
I ' .-- )/'1,. '' '"$-;:1,‘ :i l '4-: :---k-1'!"'-I.k\::;-A-.---:'''-177----5:', (-4/:1-'1 0
I ''---''' i ii ' ::;it ' IVA 1, 4'', '''':''';,,,,',.'.-7-'''V, '
.
.,..,
..-;\
.,,,,, ,,,,,,
`� -\�-i/-s--- R��tYfl) /. . _�
v '.,;.:e_47_ it,< ,/,(7",:,-- 4 4,, '''-'d: .— ,_•,---..„1:;,r-,,,,... --,,,. ., •0
, , ,,_ .. _4-. ., -,..'i--- .,,/,'A.,\\V , "
Q •
i •/ / r a\ R . d �(1
1---, 4/ . . 1— [.--; - , ,• i .n'7.-'Wor. -'')V-,KY:Z.',./' o9rch6
Lt
yt .._.
1 l',!.. ,. A:4.1, .4:...i: •\,..i NI:: . ,.1.,,....,\,..2• .,.:, ,,,,, ,,, t,;..,:::\ ,,,.. ,..,ep.,,.-
•
^il�.�.47.1-=._�. '^.`1:5...:3LIIC7 �. �,- Z:.t tar.
.�-TSTvrt�ea�a�ra'r�s•."`-="a'�^sa
4 `� C >;.tom C
• �� ;a a PRELIMINARY PLAT
t Mr.COMI3S"KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 1t+ O
•»)))) \ nuuu�.c s°u.un IIr•.n so,.nu.s r ill erurut ` ri t-1 4,.ro .
n \ u,..a••n.rs...u...•,rw........r:.us_r.- ,sus• 1 /.1,i n W !: A A. A k 1 -r c A v f1
•
•
t •.
-- ''': \'-- —\-;..."7---,--7-:;•-• '- -.T.
. .---•' .f.'t• • f. • . -
— .. -.t •t....71\N.I. .. ''' •
I I .*".., . \1.1 ))
.......N, .•^1••••./.. \
\ \, ..ss '
) \t' isZ 1.1 i-- ; I : • . = :
i ;;I I i , ; •••• ; I , • I\ - 11;,1 k
. .. . i• ii \ y t l'.‘ — •
li-ItiW `. ! 1 i. ....;..A ....,„
1 ..i1) 1, 11, ! •wnt.i / ----,„:„ .... - ,, •,, , ., (-, •
3'i / ,.-- -;:-....-..1..z.-:!.--s.,<•:. • • '
..,2111 ; ; . :is 3 / 13 . ! /
/ //' V A., . --.
,.,v . .. ,
. . . ,
sAT., '',- '.•‘ \.-, \ .;.1--z
X- ',/,. ..-•,'-.. \--!,' \' '&-- \
.- -1- i IN',7- `':--;-'' ''-' .\---- : .' • 'N. /
„.„... NJ \•.„ „...,..,_.,' . ...et.- -1-..— -"...--'''. ' 1
;!:
I ! ,:5 .. _ . ( L.....--..,,,\
/2 • ,.,z.:, • - 7 .i. iy-..`;\'•
. i ---:7._,--7--:z.,Th (• • '<'2',/ ',. f IV) • '•\
-:.:-•:__23)1)i ........,..... ,••••.---,-..--/-- --...-„? I ..-.‘ -
,, -. ,1,2 N.
,-,:---ey,-2-. .,•• •I. \/,..--,,,,- I ••,
...------ -- , - . • — )( •
2.- _ --•-•-/ > ' '2, p
.,, ,..z.-.... :-:2(.<.„, -,•-,...,- 2•N," \ \
. ,
• ..://,, -,,,/; >_.N. ,... i /i, 1;;f-, .:,.; ,y- )•, . I.,
///
..i -,• --, ,
, , .,.-1 ,, \ ; N)//3\ (• "--- "k2r.—k). := 1 -.-,.=•"-. -/,'/1 =
i z.. .,'Ni
.\; -- .*. „ :rj •. ; N ' I ..._, . ...:---N.1 -""i- ' -/.I
/ :C. : • ' .• ',-•:'-i•:.`,..• '\\.\ \\ I / I . '",-1-1 " /
. , i."- ',/ :P \.•\ •NN,\1 ' - / • I - ' I ,
1. .1 .i-\ .' •
''-- ,' •-/ -/ti --.•K , :-- - .- ,7'
\1 , . • .' 1,...\ - i 7--,:
• 1 .. ,, /...,I
i N 1.i 1 .J.• \• •-- / .-1 / ( .
. .... \' ,: . ..1-- t \f\ ,..\,\ .' ...,... '- \--
. / ,,,, \ • --- v • '•,/ ( A ‘ 1/4'.-, .-_, "'" N \- s:: - 2\\'z, : .. ' • ..-.2/.• ) . \., \ ..— \ -•
, .._ / .. - ,/ 7---;.,;,.;...,.. ....--,.\:-..\ ,,--e, ........ ...;1„.-,. • , \• - , t - ./1, ,-, ---c-- \ , 1
l't j 11 ' - " _ - . •
- • . .:
'/ 1 I , -... ill r,'IN q I Y / ''' • .----. . N..,...•
`. - q2-.• ,..,:. ‘.-‘. '• ‘, './ .4.: f) •,"\/ ./. ,..- q I -,', -
•• ., • - 7 P-1--.= • ,.' // ........ .._.. . -
•
. . .... , ,
. .. . . -
. ii A..11 .i
\ • li/ 611q 1...„:„.,-1,7.771':;
CON': ' 'Ill: 'Al iv''.,•;0(:!..'cri,; INC. 11 I ;1
- i .
v ii''''''' ! ;.'it :1 .. .:..:../'‘NI C.AKg
•
,n r._?.. :2_,.............. . t”3ii.1, C4 SO li i,i
. tt;t:,,e1 lig le
t�• 66 r
1 if.ii I
.
•
h... og.ii:_ .,'fir •'' ..i,
/r .., .. :.i'
1 -
i et.t . • •, «.,,, ..
ra..r1
•
,' I ?� . .
•
...�° a
1
-
V� \ ••,:fir \I I 11
utb .• p, , i
�._ _) ,_)f•, ` Illy , ! t
„_,T'—ll , . t \°tom T`. .. 1I
,'rJ=ry , t .r t J !->`l_
( 2 c
fl t/ j +-i;RL `,t't;i o .-', If
<t
f '-' .
h J - • ._,?/:, ir...:„.„...:,....:„.„,....,.:..:.:„... ::.....::;.......,,.____ .., ,
,,....,,,.i,„,,...:„..:.„......,:„..;,...„,....::„...,:::,.,...............:::::.:,.,
. .
....". . .
1 . ,.,:i . , ,,..,,.,,..„.:.-„,.,..:,:::,.... ......„.„..„....:.......,...,.....:::....,:,::......::1
. ,
?. ., , ,.
•
-,.." -!':.:•..•.:.' : •.. ;.';',,,,',•; ;-••• ji 1
t
... . - _____. .... ��
l
Staff Report-Pheasant Oaks -3- March 3, 1978
SOILS, TOPOGRAPHY, GRADING , VEGETATION:
The western half of the site is gently undulating with the exception of
the extreme north side, dropping-off sharply to an existing pond. The
highest knoll on the site, located in the cast center, has slopes of
18-20% to the south and east. Most of the site drains to the low, wet
area, Outlot B, proposed by the proponent as part of the park dedication.
Smaller portions of the site drain to the north. •
The grading plan submitted indicates a minimum amount of site preparation
grading. The high knoll on the site will be cut about 10 feet to allow
for the road and adequate pads for the lots.
The soils on the site have very diverse characteristics. Soils having sandy •
texture and well drained character are Rasset, Dickman, and Lester. These
soils have good bearing capacity and shear strength. The hazard of frost
heave is low and changes in volume with changes in moisture content is low.
Erosion potential on these soils, however, is quite high.
The soils having loamy texture and moderate drainage are Heyder, Greys, Nessel,
and LeSucur. They have a fair to good bearing capacity and shear strength.
Frost heave potential and shrink-swell is moderate. Erosion hazard for these
soils is high , but not as bad as the sandy soils. Fairly wide footings should
be used on these soils.
•
The moderately well drained soils on the site are represented by the Kennebec
series. The bearing capacity and shear strength of these soils are good
however, because they are underlain by deep sand. A seasonally high water table
may present some problems. The hazard of frost heave and shrink-swell potential •
are fairly high. The low area of Outlot B consists primarily of peat soils.
Vegetation on the site consists of fairly small areas of oak and elm. There
is one fairly large'star.d of oak and elm on the southwest corner of the site.
Very few of the trees will have to be removed in the grading of the site.
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION:
Asphalt trails at least six feet in width should he constructed as
shown in Fig. I. Trails shall be of 4inch deep strength asphalt and
according to City Engineer specifications. To the west the trail will
connect to trails along the north side of Red Rock Lake. The trail to the
cast should provide pedestrian movement to the parkland north of the site.
Credit for this trail will be given against the cash park fee.
A sidewalk shall he constructed along Village Woods Drive by the developer
from Red Rock Ilills, where the sidewalk will connect to existing sidewalks
to Mitchell Road. The sidewalk should he placed in the ROW and constructed
of concrete according to City Engineer specifications and match with the
sidewalk in Red Rock Hills.
•
Staff Report-Pheasant Oaks -4- March 3, 1978
•
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the projects as follows:
1. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for 96 lots on 5S acres.
2. Preliminary plat approval contingent upon the following:
a. the intersection of Village Woods Drive and Mitchell Road
be upgraded so that sight distances both ways are adequate.
The staff should approve such upgrading prior to any
construction or grading.
b. trails be constructed in Outlots B and C as shown in Fig.l.
Trail should connect to existing trails in Red Rock Hills
2nd Addition and future connections to parkland to the north.
c. erosion control should be implemented prior to construction
because of the erosive nature of must of the soils on the
site. Permanent erosion and sedimentation controls should be
constructed per Riley/Purgatory Creek Watershed District
recommendations. •
d. ground cover should be established immediately following
construction by sodding or seeding. Slopes over 8% are
especially critical with the existing soil conditions.
e. a sidewalk shall be constructed along Village Wood Drive
in the ROW and of concrete according to the specifications
of City (ngineering Department. It shall match the sidewalk
in Red Rock Hills and extend to Mitchell Road.
f. the cash park fee shall be paid according to Ord. 332 with
credit given for the recreational trails in Outlots B and C.
JWJ:jj
Mar. 28, 19;
CITY OF Eilfl, PR7+IRIE
Y.c':NEPIN COUNTY, M1':HESOTA
•
RESOLUTION NO. 78-57 •
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
PHEASANT OAKS
isE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of__ PHEASANT OAKS
dated Feb 20, 197B , a copy of
which is attached hereto and amended as follows:
•
•
•
found to he in conforma„cc' with :provisions of
P.:.irie Zoning and platting ,,,dinances and
, ..”»uments thereto and is herein approved.
•
Aix:)ih 1;D by the Fae n r'airie City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
SEAL
•
John D. Franc, Clerk '
•
•
�y8�
jn;j
3/78
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 78-52
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR SUPER VALU STORES, INCORPORATED, 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 on April 4, 1978 to consider Super Valu Stores, Inc.'s requests,
and
WHEREAS, said Planned Unit Development is located on 140 acres on
the south end of Bryant Lake with said rezoning of 37 acres within the
total 140 acre PUD site, and
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a public hearing
on Feb. 27, 1918 to consider the zoning and platting requests of Super Valu
Stores Incorporated and reconciended said requests along with PUD approval
be approved by the City Council, and
NOW JH1RLFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council that an
Crnironrr. rtai Iiapact Stater,-ent is not necessary for Super Valu Stores Incor-
porated beii.,,_ the pro,rt is not a major action which dues not have igfifi-
cant envirernantal effects,and is not more than of lncal significance.
BE IT FURTHER RESINVED, that a Negative Declaration Notice shall be
officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council.
ADOPTED this day of 1978.
li
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: • {
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
3/78 LD-78-PUD-03
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 78-51
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
OF SUPER VALU STORES, INCORPORATED AND A"FNDING 1HE
MAJOR CEN1LR AREA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135 provided
for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the
City, and
WHEREAS , the Super Valu Stores Incorporated PUD is considered a proper
amendment of the Major Center Area Planned Unit Development, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did consider the Super Valu PUD
uses of Office/Office-Coienercial/Open Space E Housing and made a recommendation
in favor of the City Council approving said PUt) dated Feb. 13, 1978
WHER!AS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie did hold a public
hearing or Coral 4, 197D to consider Super Valu Stores Incorporated request
for said PUD '•pproval
NOR llif.PEENRE HI IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Hinnnsota ,•as follows:
1. The Super Valu Stores Incorporated PUD, being in the County of
Hennepin and the State of Minnesota, and legally described as
outlined in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. The City Council does give conceptual land use approval of the •
PUD d.+ted Feb. 1 3, 191E attached hereto and labeled as Exhibit
B consisting of approximately 140 acres on the south side of Bryant Lake.
3. That the PHD reset the intents and recommendations of the Staff
P.,e mt dated I Such 7, 19/8, Nine Mile Watershed District, and
E:ilertment of Natural Resources.
4. That any future requests for PUD Development Stage approval be
reviev. d by the Planning Commission and Parks, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission , and approved by the City Council.
ADOI'1LD by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this _day of
, )9r78.
Wolfgang N. Pcnzel, Mayor
AlliST:
John D. Ir.,re City Clerk SEAL
v •
(en ;,(�
RESOLUTION 78-51
EXHIBIT A
Super Valu PUD 78-03 , legal description
•
1: Tc,..t • ' • f•r.1 flu off,r.•11,....
•
, t: y
•'••••ce
.11,I •••I I.. t • ••••
./f1 t •e f-Art
f t`f., .f.t ";, esf
to t'.,• • t .•• fr! !tr, to -`..•.k /'..•!: .1,17., •
•
f. "10 tIff r.f.,..f.r!: tit 0.1. of
I.`j.. I • I I.1,g• err I I•1.• •• I •..I I sfq.
•
•
P/,11,FI,
c.,•s•t, Cit 4 . t to, Sect f I1, it,
111, 1.1! 1.•::'it, 1..•1 u• No. If-fi
•,..-SI•t II.' ",11 % :ft'f ot-ti 1 ott f t•et puf-fl..tft to
11.a f•I •-•ft 1., 4 at.: at',-. thet.‘to tl 1,rt of
tto 1, t •1..• tf .•t, II, 7,..4'
:2,W,, n• • tt II •1`,•1 1,1 Ioct
1.“1•••I !If )1 tf•• t ir''t
•,•••,‘ • 1,,r• •,.I r•r r"II iUt 4. I On t tf l•e-
.13••• tlIt•I t•• 1•.• • •I•lt t• I, ;1,•1r-77
ts, •,‘", 1•`," ii. ,, f •st
2
, r J j
i c:,
•
? ....\t Cf • G� C --N, ' / /
I
1 { •
( t y
•
l 1J ,,-.f i } ,
/ 1.,,.../ '
•
1
111 \ J f'`\\r
•
• ,
is N ,
rq
f .
/' :...'7"
SUPFG 1{A;_ll CT(Rt INC. ND 71 03 i
(n :.
/ m [XHI(iI7 B
/' . 1
1. , • ..• . . f\.ye i 6,1 D' ,. . .. ..-i.- ` —` .
March 23. 1978 -
Colmnunity Staff Recommendations •
SUPER VALU PUD
Supplement to March 7, 1978 Manning Staff Report
The Community Services Staff concurs with the Planning Staff that the proposed
Planned Unit Development is in conformance with the 1968 Guide Plan and the Major
Center Area Planned Unit Development, and that office use is an appropriate
substitute for high density housing in this area.
Les Blacklock has said 'I see the development of the Major Center Area here
not as an ecological catastrophe, which it certainly could be, but as a great
challenge, with tremendously high stakes". We must attempt to develop the
Major Center Area "in a manner that provides for: the continued maintenance
and enhancement of the habitat and wildlife presently using the area; a continued
functioning of the natural systems, including hydrology; of viable "urban"
environment, including transportation, land use, livability, etc".
Although, I do have some concerns over the distance from the building to the
pond, after our recent field inspection of the site I am convinced that Super
Valu has proposed the best possible layout of the building in terms of the
screening and visual impact from the lake and the surrounding community.
The Major Center Area Report indicates open space around the pond and includes
the marsh area and the two knolls as open space. The proposed PUD shows nearly
the same amount of open space.
There has been some discussion of the need for a trail around the western and
southern side of Bryant Lake circling the lake and connecting to the park on
the east side of the lake. There is a need for a trail corridor connecting
Bryant Lake Park to the Smetana Lake and eastward along a proposed County Trail.
That k
connectedl could follow to the park viahe a routeMile eastCofeWillowidr Creekrom Bryant development. and be
The 852.6 contour has been determined as the ordinary high water line. All of
the area below the contour is public open space. The 854 contour has been
dtermined as the floodplain. Community Service Staff has the following reconrnend-
ations:
1. That Super Valu dedicate all of the land below the 854 contour as
scenic easement.
most
2 That Sur Valu easement to preclude�any edevelopment of the entire r that n knoll as scenic
knoll.
3. That Super Valu dedicate the northern half of the knoll immediately
north of their building as scenic easement.
4. That the City make a provision in the proposed PUD amendment that
would restrict any construction of docks or piers.
5. The CASH PARK FEE of S1,200 per acre for the approximate 37 acre
office district be paid at the time of the building permit.
61/9
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
• Unapproved
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
•
COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Richard Lynch,William Bearman, Matthew
Levitt, Paul Redpath (arrived later)
COMMISSION ABSENT: Liz Retterath
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Chris Enger, Planning Assistant Jean
-- Johnson, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert
I. SWEARING IN OF COMMISSION MEMBER LEVITT
Planning Director Chris Eager administered the oath of office to Commission
Member Levitt.
II. ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA •
Levitt moved,Bearman seconded, to place Election of Officers under New
Business to await the arrival of Mr. Redpath. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 27, 1978 MEETING
P.1 COMMISSION ABSENT: add Bearman
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to approve the minutes as written and
corrected. Motion carried 3:0:1 with Bearman abstaining.
V. MEMBERS REPORTS
A. Chairman - none
B. Others - none
VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Sujr Valu Stores, Inc.,request for PUD Amendment to Major Center Area
PUD for a 140 acre site, and rezoning of 37 acres from Rural to Office
for corporate headquarters to be located on south end of Bryant Lake.
The Planner informed the Commission Super Valu applied for PUD Amendment to
MCA PUD to include : office, housing, open space, and office/commercial uses
on the 140 acre site. He referred the Commission to the Draft Environmental •
•
Assessment Worksheet.and the staff report dated March 7, 1978. He stated the
Department of Natural Resources will be determining the actual high water
mark , and once it is established Super Valu intends to respect the setbacks
required.
The Planner reviewed passed PUD approvals on the site as : 1968 Guide Plan
depicting commercial and housing; a 1968 Amendment to the Guide Plan outlining
single family detached; and the MCA I'UD of 1973 which outlines uses of housing
and commercial. He believed the office use of the site is preferred to
medium density housing as there will he less use of the land , traffic E public
services. The Planner stated the zoning request will require variance from
Oid. 135 whereby office structures are limited to 30 feet, although since the
project is within the MCA, structures may be higher than strict ordinance
requirements.
The Planner recommended the PUD and zoning request be approved contingent upon
the conditions within the staff report;and that no docking facilities he
constructed on the lake, and future building and/or parking plans be subject
to commission review and council approval.
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 13, 1978
Mr. Robert Dill, Elierbe & Associates, briefly outlined the PUD uses on
the 140 acre site and the layout of the 37 acre office site.
Mr. Bearman inquired if Super Valu anticipates selling any of the 140 acres.
Mr. Dill replied that it is undetermined at this time.
Levitt asked if the building design proposed on the plans and models is
the only one Super Valu is considering. Mr. Dill replied during initial
•
meetings with residents alternate building designs were shown, but the
building in the brochure and on the model is the type that will be built.
Lynch asked if the housing depicted in the MCA PUD would be apartments.
The Planner replied it would be possible.
Levitt questioned where additional parking would be accommodated if the use
is expanded. Mr. Dill replied they believe 1 space/1.2 employees is adequate
based on current studies, and future parking could be provided nearby and
by decking.
Sundstrom inquired if the small pond on-site would be covered by the same
restrictions as Bryant Lake. The Planner replied affirmative.
Levitt inquired what the City's cost would be for the 1-494 ramp.
The Planner estimated 90% of the anticipated $100,000 cost.
Bearman asked if the City has to assume any of the costs of the industrial •
revenue bond. Mr. Morrissey, Vice-President Super Valu, Hopkins, repiie,l
Super Valu would be responsible for the cost of underwriting, legal costs, etc.
Sundstrom asked if the PAW is written on the entire 140 acres or the 37 acre
office site proposed. The Planner replied the EAW is basically written on the
37 acre office site and if future uses are proposed additional EAWs may be
necessary. Redpath arrived
The Planner informed the Commission the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resouces
Commission discussed possibility of a trail around Bryant Lake, but the
motion to recommend a trail failed.
Don Sorensen, 7321 Willow Creek Road, asked where future building expansion is
anticipated. Mr. Dill believed additional expansion of the building would occur
•
to the southwest of the building location proposed.
Mr. Sorensen stated he is impressed with the Super Valu proposal but does have
concern over the siting of the building. He believed the area could be better
protected and preserved with unique architectural design and siting.
Sundstrom asked if any activites are planned in the open space areas of the 140
acres. The Planner believed the open space designated areas would be preserved
in their natural state.
Mr. Bearman inquired what alternate sites on the acreage were investigated.
Mr. Dill outlined the alternates sites, but stated the site selected has the
best soils and will have minimal impact upon the lake.
Sorensen suggested placement of the building at and into the base of 'Old Baldy'
be investigated. /
(O J I
•
•
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 13, 1978
Sundstrom inquired if the total office site proposed must be rezoned in order
to meet setbacks, i.e., the northern tip near the lake. Mr. Morrissey replied
the line could be redrawn if the City desires and still meet setbacks.
Mr. Redpath complimented Super Valu for the admirable plans on a site which has
had less than desirable proposals. He added he does find reason to agree with
alternate siting possibilities as stated by Mr. Sorensen, but believes the •
plan proposed is acceptable. •
Motion I
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
EAW.finding of no significant impact. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2
Lynch moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
Super Valu's PUD dated Feb. 13, 1978. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3:
Lynch moved, Bearman seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Super Valu rezoning of 37 acres from Rural to Office according to the 140 acre
PUD contingent upon the staff report dated March 7, 1978, subject to the approvals
from the Department of Natural Resources, Nine Mile Watershed District and ,
Hennepin County, that a variance from Ord. 135 height restriction be recommended;
and that no docking facilities be allowed on the site. Motion carried unanimously.
•
6,62
{
•
ec
i ._ ..., ._ ...._,• icn ,.iru:es -3- Feb. 27, Isib
Pc11TlO S i•tcD {;EQUFSTS
A. Super Yalu Stores, Inc., request for rezoning from Rural to Office for
approximately 37 acres for corporate headquarters located on south end
of Bryant lake on a total site of'approxiutately 140 acres.
Mr. John Morrissey, Senior Vice-President, Super Valu Stores, Hopkins, introduced
Mr. Robert Dill of Ellerbe E Associates, who have conducted the site analysis.
Mr.Morrissey stated Super Valu has purchased 140 acre site on the Southwest shore
of Bryant lake , are requesting rezoning to Office for approximately 37 acres
for their corporate office, and are looking forward to their move to Eden Prairie.
Mr. Dill, Ellerbe, presented slides of the proposed Super Valu Office site
depicting existing hills, vegetation, surrounding land uses, access, proposed
parking lot location, and sight views from lake.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -4- Feb. 27, 1978
Mr. Dill stated Super Valu intends to plant additional vegetation to increabe
the screening of the building from the lake in the Winter time.
Mr.Morrissey stated design studies to establish which area of the site is
most suited for building location,,and which will have least impact on the land
and keep it as close to nature as possible have been conducted and the site
most favorable is the one proposed for rezoning.
Mr. Dill informed the Commission three neighborhood meetings have been conducted
to familiarize residents with Super Valu's plans.
Lynch inquired if Super Valu has plans for the 100 remaining acres. Mr. Morrissey
replied the headquarter office building will only require about 35-40 acres, but
they purchased the entire acreage for sale , therefore controlling the area to
surround their corporate office.
Sundstrom inquired what types of trees are existing on the site. Dill replied
elm, willows, oaks and some fruit trees.
McCulloch, referring to the 2-27-78 letter from Don Sorensen, 7121 Willow Creek
Road, asked if the proposed building is within the floodplain. Mr. Dill disagreed,
stating the DNR has not yet established a high water mark for Bryant lake and they
will be meeting with the DNR and watershed district
Lynch asked what type of bonds are requested. Mr. Morrisey replied industrial.
revenue bonds in the amount of $1,000,000, not the $1,000 which is a typographical
error in the brochure.
Mr. Harrison, 6941 Beach Road, stated Ellerbe and Super Valu has been meeting with
residents over the last 2-3 months. He complimented Super Valu and Ellerbe's on
the cooperation received, and hoped Super Valu would become good corporate neighbors
of the area and of the City.
•
Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Unapproved Mondays March 6, 1978
Natural Resources Jo3:rassion - 9 -
7. pevelor:.cnt Procosal$
a. 3urcr Vo1uc _stores. Inc.
Tangen, noting that he had attended the neighborhood meetings
held for the purpose of support and suggestions of the residents,
cemented that he felt their plan was good, but felt the Commission
should trke a look at the proposal.
Anderson smoke to recommendation by the Shoreline }:anagcnent
Ordinance for re-classification of lakes, and how we treat
this plan as a Commission. he spoke to 2•:inneapolis lakes as
an example for public use.
Tangen said Super Value have indicated they do not want public
trails between them and the lake, for the purposes of security. •
Kruell asked whether residents were generally in favor of the
flan. isogon responded that both the Cove area and 'Allow Creek
seem to be in favor of the plan, but are ornosed to a bihrsay
system co_Ang through from Beach Rd. to Bryant Lake Park.
}OTICIT: Kruell moved, seconded by Afield, that Super blue
plan be referred to the Staff for a comprehensive report.
Votign carried unanimously.
•
•
•
G Sal
approved
Planning Co'h'nission Minutes
-4- Feb. 27, 1978
Mr. Peterson,7147 Topview asked if any portion of the remaining site could be
developed as a distribution center. Mr. Dill replied if additional improvements
are desired, the proponent must further apply for rezoning and receive approval.
Mr Morrissey stated a distribution center is not intended to be part of their �.
corporate office site development.
Diane Fisher, 7275 Topview , asked if Super Valu had plans to expand in the future.
Mr. Morrissey replied office expansion may be needed in the future, and if so, they
would return to the City for approval.
Mike Solan, KRSI, inquired how tall the office structure would be. Mr. Dill
replied 46 feet.
Lau Fisher,7275 Topview Rd, expressed disapproval of 'spot locating' of industrial/
commercial type uses.
The Planner stated the site is depictedin the Major Center Area Planned Unit
Development as housing and regional commercial. Super Valu is requesting an
amendment to the MCA PUD for 1 office structure, instead of multiple housing;
and the remainder of the 100 acres will not be developed unless future requests
are approved.
Motion: lynch moved, McCulloch seconded, to continue the request to March 13th
for a staff report. Motion carried unanimously.
•
61-1
MEMO
•
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Chris Enger, Planning Director
•
DATE: March 7, 1978
PROJECT: Super Valu Stores Incorporated
REGARDING: Request for PUD Amendment of Major Center Area Public PUD 73-08,
and rezoning of approximately 37 acres from Rural to Office for
on international Headquarters for Super Valu Stores, Inc.
BACKGROUND: toilLf� ( Figure It 1 ' 111 of ,'
The 1968 Comprehensive Cuide Plan, as shown i 1\�` l
in Figure 1, dcsignates:Mi, High Density \l' \fi ` l'."'-----4-k-sk L_k p Vv-
Multiple family housing; M?, Institutional, 1 ,-\ -� i , `Commercial Reeional Service; and a limited --11 ,--- �.^„-* --'� •�j' !ram
amount of quasi-public open space on the �- •.j \ •. \ t;. , (\�\`\ ;P_.
I
1A0± acres recently purchased by Super '�/' �� . '�,.\�., I P ,
Valu on the southwestern end of Bryant Lake.f
\ f 'e•• :\. 7‘--7l. I '�� I,
"High Density(over 1S units/acre)inultiple I P; I �'` ``.�" --~
development is limited to the area surround- 1 i••",1 ,_t ' ' •} i•,t
ing the major, regional, commercial center. I j 'l '�'�-'.
1 P .2?-', at, }� s�
Large scale institutional development 1-` ,1t 1 '�,.. ` JC
vs. =4 ;>1,
A communit col le e, vocational school, Ca,r.;. „ I'
Y g �\5� ...\ tt� 1
hospital, medical center, retirement commun- --+;, <<.174sl:."-- i. /'
ity or other high density quasi-residential U �
development would he acceptable and desir-
able in this area. M. C3 C; /` ..S r
The C3 area is proposed to he a limited regional commercial area in which the
Primary business is service oriented. Here is where the bank or savings and
loanbuilding could be located when it is desired to have a detached site. here
also, would be found the automobile dealers, because of the service orientation,
but also because of the large area requirements. hovie theatres, athletic clubs,
•
office buildings, hospitals, restaurants, and other such ser"ice rather than retail
uses are suggested. " 1
•
11968 Comprehensive Guide Plan, City of Eden Prairie
•
t�,f}
i
Memo-Super Valu Rezoning -2- March 7, 1978
Major Center Area PUB ( MCA PUD ) Figure # 2
t
,� .V ,:1 s ` sr`n r
Subsequent to the 1968 Guide Plan, the 2 °4` uP `t'•E}ryan=1.tko
Major Center Area Planned Unit Develop- ;i^A \ 1:. ,R�sidontiplSootor
went was adopted. �`:r, s r..r r.. .:t_;. .;•:' '';,,/
4.
The Plan designates two high density ..0 sj,: ; ''F w i'r=
housing sites,a highway commercial '; '., • " '>^• .r
. or regional office site, and open 1 i • high l." k.V i'
space which approximates the 854 O, \\\-,",Cc •'`.,1 It
floodplain contour, plus both high r. t`NI , _
knolls near the lake. See Figure # 2. .:i °; ��'.t , `•
`. kYljvf �. ',ri �.�. of
ri
ki .' i .0. -9 .l v 72 ea
f�'-' ,4. M r..,�.;• 5,6,7 M P`_! /
.1 '--
e• n;ri tcovf• _4t.rRFU
Mllt-9•b . •t"It?r....ib.
ZONE 3 .
The land within the Ring Route in Zone 3 is very
similar to that of Zone 2 in that it contains less than 50 •
acres of very developable land. The freeway exposure The majority of the property north of the Ring Route
to 212 and the interchange as well as the views to the is well suited for residential development of a low to
north of Bryant Lake make this site ideally suited for medium M.C.A. density. Approximately 50 acres are
highway commercial use,office or selected free standing available as buildable land if the wooded knolls adjacent
commercial facilities.The rather high proportion of to Bryant Lake are preserved as public open space. Site
Ring Route frontage,compared with the total acreage, development should provide for the dedication of the
suggests higher trip generating uses in this area,as the wet lands and the prominent knolls fur public open
volumes of traffic on this segment of the Ring Route space and preservation of the southwest cove of Bryant
arc lower than those adjacent to the southwest Lake.Special building types such as terraced housing to
quadrant. accommodate the steep slopes or clustered multiples •
The land outside the Ring Route is of high environ- are required to accommodate site constrains. Designing
•
mental quality with steep slopes, mature woods and
to preserve these natural features will create a resi-
proximity to Bryant Lake and good plain. The narrow dential environment of the highest quality.
strip of land where KRSI has built its offices offers very •
limited potential for small office development. Limited The residential units would have limited use of Bryant
parking requirements and minimum flood plain en- Lake. Small sailboats or canoes for the residents might
croachrnent arc mandatory for further site development. be appropriate for the size and function of Bryant
A site next to the 494/fling Route interchange could Lake.Preservation of the major marshes and land
support highway commercial or regional office use on . character north of the Ring Route are critical to the
less than 10 acres of land. The access, land forms and success of development in this visually and environ-
visibility should enable development of this site to blend mentally sensitive segment of the M.C.A.
the commercial and residential use in the quadrant.
. .1..3 i
iz
1 •,
• .,/
., . .
z w
. w 0
0
ca
.• 1.:-..: ;-„,.. ,, \'''•;\ \,.., :i
—---' ...2."; ,-,., ',. \‘ '1,4 \s„,•,,\-'s
• ';i-3,'':;(:- ;, :‘'' .'• <Y\\i \)\\ ' z
/ .?›..4-,,...: -` \..;•.- •, N . \ ,...-.i - _. • =
,....
!rt,,,,._,..z....- <-_-", .<. ; k,, 4,\-\,- • . — _-_ gt.
l' ''' L' \I!\t\\••...4 4, .,..."'',..J, ;-_:.0 . z. , a.
1 \ 0 . .s.'\''.1%'\l'.\<\7 •S.,..`.1..t ' ii: ..,.., - 0 4
\ ' ;0'......"`-::. N,-4,.."'s, ,&:••:-Ii) ,I,-, Lt. , 1 ,
,k\ **' ,• 'il ,4 ‘*.l: £
CC
.• • \--''';*--N„ .., , b _,--_ , - w
,
.....„...,,,z,...
...
. . ._. z
\\
''),- : I•
_......,a,
..),,:n____. \ C3 cg
'• / , • •-•1 ‘k ui °
\ ,..,'• tx•-‘•P.-.• **‘-'\--••• ,c2 - A, z -
_ •__ ..-__;.-.............:::„.--1 ILA tu , ',,t,z 4
—.....0. -
\
(...../s!.
1 t, /:)4------r ‘ ___ .., \ ii.,,E5 __j
_.....:,t, / _ -.1,••••• ....... •-... '..V 0,-....„ . I e a. 0
- .. . ; i
"--N.._.„...s._rv:.....—_:....--:, __„... ,
1 If =
.., ...._........•••••)
•
1
...;
---, 'a I...
' 7 111 .1 . .1 .*'. 0 ' r•... ..„.......„ .. ......."-.." 1••• CC
: ..;-•,,....‹.% . .....^ 7. Z
it/0 ‘ • __., L1.3
0 cott• Z
• ' -0.. .°'. • . CC 0
-.....-..'. "••••'...-
.. ..
. ....•••''' . 0 Z
( •. ''. • • VI 4
•
.....••••1 ._... ."1„.........*,••. .
,...,..
• -.1 •• .
„rou......7--„, 1 i i e.e' 13 ::...I1 VALIJ
tbi (...._:irr5J13A1. CO2PORKIE 1-IEADQUA/Till.RS
.......,_
eclen DiTiriO. Mirinn .nnin
•
Memo-Super Valu -3- March 7, 1978
•
Proposed Plan Comparisons:
The Planned Unit Development amendment proposed by Super Valu is in substantial
conformance with both the 1968 Guide Plan and the Major Center Area Planned
Unit Development. •
The proposed plan shows significantly more open space than the 1968 Guide
Plan, less commercial area, and proposes an office use on the 37 acres rather
than Institutional.
Super Valu's plan encroaches slightly on the eastern knoll shown as open space
in the MCA Plan, however, the building is built into the side of the hill pre-
serving the integrity of the land form. The office use is substituted for high
density housing.
GENERAL LAND USE PROPOSED PROS AND CONS
PROS CONS
1. office use provides control 1. lower building requires mere ground
of water runoff to sedimen- coverage.
tation ponds.
2. use is not an "active" lake 2 provides.no public access to lake.
user.
3. form of building low near 3. 700 feet long building may appear
lakeshore preserves landform massive from lake side.
'skyline'.
4. parking area screened from 4. lighting cannot be screened.
lake and surrounding roads. •
S. low night time and weekend S. easy access into site may cause addi-
usage. • tional policing problems.
6. low tax service user. 6. •
7. provides additional develop- 7,
ment incentive to MCA.
8. lower ADTs than anticipated 8.
high rise condominiums.
9. lower parking requirements 9. housing parking may be partially enclosed.
than housing.
Memo-Super Valu -4- March 7, 1978
•
Changes Since the 1968 Guide Plan
1. KRSI/KFMK Radio Station has been located in the M2 Area shown in the
1968 Guide Plan. The radio station's towers have had a profound effect
on the 'skyline' and character of the area.
2. An old swimming beach had been operated on the southwest shore of the
lake within this site. Since the 1968 Guide Plan , the City has
acquired approximately 170 acres of land for a Community/Regional park
on the northeast shore of the lake. This is about twice the area
designated in the original guide plan. Much of this land has been
acquired since 1973 when the MCA report was adopted. This has given
the City control over a substantial portion of the lakeshore.
There is currently no way to bring a lakeshore trail around Bryant
Lake without cutting through existing backyards or swinging away from
the lake. There is, however, ample room within Bryant Lake Park for
trail development. Round Lake and Staring Lake are examples where the
City his purchased the entire lakeshore which may be used for trail
development.
3. Major Cen,er Area Planned Unit Development was adopted.
4. Metram Properties , in 1976, announced plans for construction of 1500
units of luxury highrise condominiums on this site. Rezoning was
applied for, but the proponents requested to be taken off Planning •
Commission schedule until further notification . No further
requests were received.
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS AFFECTING SITE
1. The floodplain elevation for this site has been set at 854. This is an
anticipated floodplain level taking into account the full land use devel-
opment of the watershed. No filling or alteration of this area may be done
without a permit from the Nine Mile Watershed District. We have spoken
with John Dickson , Barr Engineering , staff consultants to the watershed
district, and he will be carefully reviewing Super Valu's plans and making
recommendations to the Watershed District.
His preliminary comments tr;.'ate do not point-up any major problems.
Storm water runoff from the parking area and building will he channeled
to a sedimentation pond prior tb release into the natural pond.
Memo-Super Valu -5- March 7,1978
The watershed district will suggest procedures and methods of
applying non-polluting fertilizers to the lawn areas on the
lake side of the building.
There is a small amount of encroachment into the floodplain by
the entrance drive, which the watershed district must review.
The building and parking have been located on soils and slopes
which have least erosion potential. Preliminary soil borings
show no problem with groudwater in anticipated building areas.
2. Shoreland Management Act classifies Bryant Lake as a Recreational
Development Lake which requires that buildings he set back 75
feet from the normal ordinary high water mark. We have spoken
with Ron llarnac of ONR regarding this. He states the normal
ordinary high water mark is set at 852.6 feet. Super Valu
will have to conform to this restriction.
3. The City, under state law, has done an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet in order to determine if the proposal is of regional
significance.
4. Super Valu will have to obtain the necessary permits from
Nine Mile Watershed District, Department of Natural Resources,
and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.
ACCESS:
Access to the site has been reviewed by Hennepin County, and
they find the sight line distances acceptable. More indcpth
•
review of the access by the County may point-up a need for
turn lanes. Super Valu must obtain an entrance permit from
Hennepin County contingent to their recommendations.
•
There are no conflicts with other entrances onto Valley View
Road. The City requires additional ROW dedication of 60 feet
from centerline on Valley View Road to allow for Ring Road
improvements. Off-ramps from I-494 west bound to US 169
will be accomplished this summer; although a ramp from I-494
south bound and an on-ramp north bound must be constructed with
90a City funding.
•
There arc currently 1,300 ADTs on Valley View Road with 1,400 being
anticipated additions if Super Valu is constructed. The County
projects 8,000 ADTs for the Year 2000.
•
Memo-Super Valu -6- March 7,1978
PARKING:
Super Valu shows 5S0 employee parking spaces for 68S employees.
• Our Ordinance requires 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet gross floor
area. According to this, Super Valu would be required to pro-
vide 825 spaces.
Super Valu feels that the parking they propose is sufficient.
As long as parking expansion area is provided on the site, as •
shown in the site plan, the Planning Staff feels this is a reasonable
approach.
•
Parking for future additions,above the 820 spaces shown potentially,
should be provided through a parking deck directly south of the main
building. This will provide additional parking without adding more
impervious surface area.
Memo-Super Valu -7- March 7, 1978
UTILITIES:
Sewer and water are available to the site. There are two ways of servicingvingrin
the site with sewer. These will have to be worked-out with the City Engineering
Department.
Super Valu has been working with residents of The Cove and Willow Creek Areas
of Bryant take to develop a plan which is acceptable.
ORDINANCE 135 REQUIREMENTS:
OFFICE DISTRICT
"SECTION 6 OFC-OFFICE DISTRICT
SUBD. 6.1 Purposes
In addition to the objectives prescribed in Article 1 General
Objectives, the OFC-Office district is included in the zoning
ordinance to achieve the following purposes:
a) To provide opportunities for offices of a semi-commercial
character to locate outside of commercial districts.
b) To establish and maintain in portions of the Village the
high standards of site planning, architecture, and land-
scape design sought by many business and professional offices.
•
c) To provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern offices,
including off-street parking of automobiles and where appro-
priate , off street loading of trucks.
d) To provide space for semi-public facilities and institutions
that appropriately may be located in office districts.
e) To minimize traffic congestion and to avoid the over-loading
of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of
excessive size in relation to the amount of land around them.
f) To protect offices from the noise, disturbance, traffic
hazards, safety hazards , and other objectionable influences
incidental to certain commercial uses. •
SURD. 6.2 Permitted Uses
a) Business and professional offices and accessory uses.
b) Supporting commercial sales and services to office users
within large office structures only.
c) Public and quasi public facilities and services required
by the resident or working population.
•
Memo-Super Valu -8- March 7, 1978
•
SUBD. 6.3 Required Conditions
a) All uses shall comply with the regulations precribed in Section 2,
Site,Yard,Bulk,Usable Open Space, Screening, Landscaping, Parking,
Loading and Performance Standards.
b) All professional pursuits and businesses shall be conducted entirely
within a completely enclosed structure except for off-street
parking and loading areas.
c) Acceptable approved sanitary sewer service must be provided
to all occupied structures.
d) Zoning requests will be considered only on the basis of a
•
comprehensive development plan for the entire area to be zoned
and specific plans for initial structures and site development.
Section 2--Site, Yard, Bulk, Usable Open Space, Screening, Landscaping,
Parking, Loading, Performance Standards, page 2 , Ord. 135
OFC District
Minimum lot size 20,000 square feet
minimum width 100 feet
minimum depth 100 feet
Setbacks:
front 35 feet
rear 20 feet
sides 20:50 feet
Maximum FAR 0.3 - 1 story
(Floor Area Ratio) 0.5 - multi-story
Maximum Height of Structure 30 feet
. Memo-Super Valu March 7. 1978
-9-
SUMMARY
•
Proponent is requesting amendment to the MCA PUD 73-08 according to plan
dated Feb. 1978. Change is mostly from Housing to office land use for
one of the two designated housing sites.
The proponent is requesting rezoning of 37± acres from Rural to Office
District in conformance with the amended PUD . No variances are being
requested.
The City Staff is submitting the E.A.W. to the advisory commissions and
council for a finding of no significant regional impact to be published
in the E.Q.B. Monitor.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
City Staff recommends approval of the PUD amendment dated Feb. 1978
according to the development brochure and site plan of the same date.
City Staff recommends that the request for rezoning from Rural to Office
be approved with the following provisions:
1. The site plan, with modifications required by Nine Mile Watershed
District, Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers,
and Hennepin County, dated Feb. 1978, be the basis of approval.
2. That right-of-way 60 feet from centerline along Valley View Road
be conveyed to the City of Eden Prairie.
3. That open space as proposed in the PUD be preserved unaltered
in its natural state.
4. That additions to the building be in conformance with all City ,
State, and watershed district regulations.
S. The additional buildings not now proposed in the 37 acre office
district, be reviewed and approved by the City Commissions and Council
prior to application for a building permit.
6. The cash park fee of $1,200/acre for the 37 acres required for rezoning
be paid at time of building permit.
7. A erosion and sedimentation control plan must be approved by the
Nine Mile Watershed District.
8. Construction must commence within two years from date of second reading
of ordinance.
9. No clearing along the lakeshore'other than removal of dead vegetation.
10. Parking be allowed as proposed, SSO spaces, with an additional parking
capacity of 825 to he provided as need warrants within the 'loop' of road.
If spaces above the 825 arc needed for this site, they should be provided
in a parking deck. //
•
SORENSEN & SORENSEN
QQ]j� ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(►3(Cm11/3MdWbr—No..l.m.C a.
ISO South Seventh Snen
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402
Tdwbon.,15111 3314313
Donald I.Snnnen
Harold L S..ro.n mew.dl
March 2, 1978
Mr. Ronald D. Harnack
Regional Hydrologist
Department of Natural Resources, State of Minnesota
1200 Warner Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55106
RE: Super Valu Corporate Headquarters
Dear Mr. Harnack:
At the suggestion of Mr. Chris Eiger, the land use planner for the
City of Edon Prairie, I am herewith enclosing a copy of a recent let—
ter I sent to him. I trust that you are the appropriate person within
the D. N. R. to appraise of my concerns and that, if you are not, I can
impose upon you to refer them to the one who is.
Since the time of writing the enclosed letter, I have learned from
Mr. Eiger that the D. N. R. has established the Ordinary High Water
Mark for Bryant's Long Lake to be 852.6 feet, based, as I understand
it, on the current transition elevation of the marsh type of vegetation.
If that is the case, and since the project is to be sewered, my com—
ments as to set—backs and elevations in the enclosed letter should be
read with those factors in mind. I am not aware of whether or not your
department's setting of the ordinary high water mark for this lake takes
into account the future effect of increased run-off from substantial
development of upstream properties, which is almost certain to occur
and which may well effect the water level of this lake. If it does not,
I am curious as to how the intents and purposes of the shoreland man—
agement rules and regulations are to be accommodated and accomplished
in bodies of water and watershed area where this situation of certain
increase in impervious surfaces and resulting run-off will occur. •
My concerns with this proposal do not relate directly to the pro—
posed land use, which has some beneficial aspects to it if one agrees
•
•
Mr. Ronald D. Harnack 2
March 2, 1978 • page
that economically the land can not remain vacant, but rather with the
proposed siting of the structure, the extent of the proposed surfaced
parking area, and a need for overall planning and use criteria for the
entire site.
As the land in question has a number of building sites within its
boundaries, same of which do not involve the actual or possible viola—
tion of the minimum standards set forth in the shoreland management
sites and regulations,r I find ar�hces po erms permitting anstify eencrooaachment on the
sed structure
site or the granting of any P
rules and regulations.
I would appreciate your attention to this project proposal and
your taking whatever actions you believe are appropriate.
Yours very truly,
DJS/cgc
cc: Mr. Chris Hager
SORENSEN & SORENSEN
y9- ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A{s Ca,,ill&Edina—Noreh,tar Canter ,
119 Sooth Seventh 5
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402
Madonna,16121 A2.SS19 ..
Donald 1.Somme.
Harold 1.Sorensen IRe tredi
March 2, 1978
•
Mr. Chris 'tiger
Planning Director, City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
RE: Super Valu Headquarters Proposal
Dear Mr. Eager:
Enclosed herewith please find copies of letters I have sent to koi10 y
Department of Natural Resources and the Nine Mile Creek '.Jatershed Dis—
trict in regard to the above captioned matter. 4
I would appreciate receiving a copy of your staff report on this !.
project when you have completed it. 1
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns.
Yours very truly, ,
v
i
DJS/cgc
F2 closures A.
tom' ._ ,%;" -':tj t..C' t i~ c yj f.:•+, .c.,r,, , 2'C�. S.'�•,J
17.-4;, _,A): 1 .�.t: , • /!'... _ ... 6-„.i=, (A1(: , 4 the i'!"....,..:�
SORENSEN & SORENSEN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Gn01 Eulldln.—N.nhenr Omer
110 South Seventh 5 •
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402
Telephone.16t:1 0554St9
Donald I.Soeeneen
H.rald 1•Sorensen IRedredl
March 2, 1978
Board of Managers, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
c/o Mr. John Dickson
Barr Engineering Co.
Suite 339, 6800 France Avenue South
Edina, Minnesota 55435 •
RE: Super Valu Headquarters Proposal
Gentlemen:
At the suggestion of Mr. Chris Enger, Planning Director for the
City of Eden Prairie, I am herewith enclosing a photocopy of my rec.nt
letter to him relative to the above captioned proposed development on
property abutting Bryant's Long Lake.
Since the writing of the enclosed letter, I have been informed
that the D.N.R. has set the ordinary high water mark for the lake at
852.6 feet and that,since the proposed development is to be severed,
the shoreland management rules-and regulations set a lake set back min—
ismlm of 75 feet from that elevation.
In general, I favor the proposed change in land use to office
usage; however, I am concerned that the proposed structure siting, the
extent of impervious surfaced parking area, the possible nutrient run—
off from the proposed sodded and irrigated areas on the lake side of
the proposed structure, and the lack of planning criteria for the total
site at this time raise serious questions as to whether or not the pro—
posal should be approved in its present form.
While I am aware that the City's flood plain and wet lands ordin—
ance and the standards of the watershed district do permit an encroach—
ment of up to 15%, I question whether any encroachment should be
Board of Managers, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Page 2
March 2, 1978
permitted in this instance for the following reasons:
1. I understand that the flood plain elevation for this lake of
854.0 feet was set in part with the knowledge that increased
development of properties upstream from the lake would in—
crease the need for water storage areas to prevent downstream
flooding.
2. There already have been encroachments of the flood plain per—
mitted on downstream water storage areas, i.e. Smetana Lake. j
3. Given the nature of the lake's water exit area under Willow
Creek Road, a reduction of the water storage capacity of the
lake's flood plain could well result in an increase in the
lake's water level and thereby have possible adverse effects
on existing and future land uses around the lake.
4. The site in question does have other possible building sites
on it which do not necessitate any encroachment on the flood
plain and thereby there appears to be no need to permit an
encroachment for this proposal.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns and for whatever
actions, if any, you feel to be appropriate in this matter.
Yours very truly,
•
DJs/ago
cc: Mr. Chris Enger
March 1, 1978
MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
ENVIROPUMEUrAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
E.R. A tl
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) EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION
1. Project name or title Corporate Headquarters Building
2. Project proposer(s) Super Valu Stores, Inc.
Address 101 Jefferson Avenue So., Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
Telephone Number and Area Code (612 )932-444
3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Eden Prairie
Address 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this EAW: Chris Enger Telephone_-941-2262
4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in-
spection and/or copying at: Location Eden Prairie City Hall
Telephone 941-2262 Hours 8:00-4:30
5. Reason for EAW Preparation
XJI Mandatory Category -cite Petition (Other
MEQC Rule number(s) MEQC 24(b)(1)
(dd)
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
1. Project location
County Hennepin City/Township name Eden Prairie
Township number 11C (North), Range Number 22 East or® (circle one),
Section number(s) 11 Street address (if in city) or legal description:
2. Typ•: and scope of proposed project: Headquarters Office Building
3. Estimated starting date (month/year) August 1978
4. Estimated completion date (month/year) April 1980
5. Estimated construction cost $5 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)
City of Eden Prairie Zoning permit
Building permit
Nine Mile Creek Grading and earth moving
Watershed District
DNR Ch 105 - Work in Public Waters
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act?-X-NO YES UNKNOWN •
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
A. Include the following maps or drawings: •
1. A map showing the regional location 01 the project. See p.2a
2. An original 8', x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 71 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
RAW distribution points.) See p. 2b
3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including
significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc). See 2c
4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency.
Photos need not be sent to other distribution points. See 2d
8. Present land use.
1. Briefly desciibe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site.
See Attachment #1
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are:
•
a. Urban developed 0 acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V)40.3 acres
b. Urban vacant 0 acres g. Shoreland 106.9 acres
c. Rural developed 0 acres h. Floodplain 80.0 acres
d. Rural vacant 64.7 acres i. Cropland/Pasture land ,acres
e. Designated Recre- 0 acres j. Forested 34.4 acres
ation/Open Space //
(0,7).. 2
1
r /
i '..;1,,i'' • \t I ;;/J.• i :11 1 ; I 1 '.1 , _yv._[_____L.
C ,
? , ,h.1 r cm , f 1
1 .. of f \ L- •
t11 r ( ( l fig! :' `
/9.' i , II
I
t ,1.•,'„, _.i ; y ..ut-, fit: -f.. E;•. /i i,
Q v 11 r 1,, ✓. a C%:(t�' :, • i 4..; I - .-"� 1
i.
l` . - I 1 t^ • (.•p- ,0\' ;;tom j -1( !i\ '-=', A. ,~'
114/1 i no .:- .,. "i'!1 •••igke_-_• !. ' N.,..\\ :‘,,,,. _ 1.,, ,• :
L. � I A" i 1 1 I ;
1 I f: F,�y T�1Jr,, •` . _ ter. \ I r
I- .—t-,.---, . i-, ''' \ \ /
• •I ! ° II' 1 t / 1 , { . _ �i ,, -
':'t...0.,t' (i i .3, ',., ,•I I ,, 1.7 • ....g.t? ' •••, LZ:...."'••
Uf
w
4
j Q o + . I
a E
0...t Z Z a : s,
(/z,'
W i s .. I,n
u a J1 0 ; 5 ." Z
Zug W , . . N
z co o -. . �}O a
Y L • 0
. Is!
Ll3 2a
.• ...1i1„:-.''..••••-,•••-.I •i,•11".....N; . "-.•,,,I.' ,; . /'••• •.-- -,-,-,"'" "." •/._ '/**1„.•••:.\,,
. . . .
i (,--•-•i:
,__C( " :
--•-•L ••;1•• •:•.,,,)•i\ ..1/4,.\- -...7_/0., 0,,,_ . , -,//. •1 .r_t ., •
k . ,
i.4,era...,0--.. .\'''''. •::\:(
• • I
/1a 7,..• k V . I .
:, . Cr., 1 _..--,,t: )
••it La k t , : : ; i.: - ','',• ..,1 ;{. 0 tro ,0,5°-"A.._..j n \ IRO • '' .
los ‘. : ;"..'".c/ " N(t-I7. c•1 • • • • i 4:,t:, . /X, 5.1- i i .r1 ' • •. )''
(•- .• tiEL
34':::_?'' • ' _1 '..., .'", ,, 35 c ', / '--\,„ ' -:) 6
• ., ,
"" . / /"..* \;_, !.,.,' ,, i r'i ,,'k\,.7.?),i_:..'•;,:i-r-=•=,?, ,, (1,, : '' .. 4-- . .,--‘,,,, '
• • , •, .., . •. , ,. _,.-_,;. f ' ‘,.,_.„......\ e4s.1%,.., ... \ . . .c\ ...-., 1 1 I.• ‘ •••' --t-''..1 ,t '. .., ----V •-.''-•-• •O' :1\11.
(
• A•) .,•: ' , ! \''t, ' i .,\f-.. ; '2 .i..' 1 j ';-) . '
.-i, . i,,.). =. '6., "7• '. \ •1.•,'''%7 f 's t
• : . • , • 7.:.1 , • 1‘: . •„ 4...•?•77.0.a.,,i, ....- ,. . 4;
7 • • 1 •7 c• I\ '• ":‘ '• '. • `, • ..1..«......,...::.i..:7"1:.:-.;:—_‘::1.....,--1.—;:;::,,-.. „...:, • ..----.,• .-----7 -_-, =, %:::-.,,,--",-,,,--,---,-1-- ----7.-;.='-'--t-c1:5?"c„--,7-,,c.:",-‘.'•:•,;----r-----,-7., -'--!--"' -•-.:4A. '")'N.
.,-• .1 : '- 1 - (. , •', '; „L -----1(1' .}•,, t •-- ........ l*inc•r7.2"•-.„ .•.",,-. "`.1(t27..
' -•' .t,' '' . ..' V r; ,' l, 7 1,,, (7\: '---t777.••*,..--...,( (?.
• •7%' . , 7. „,\.(7 ,
( • l• • ' ‘‘7'ri. ' " •7 ''*•', l.-1_ t .'f) n(J .. ri\'•• •/ye' ',,
• ,*„.) ;t17-'AXG.tk....o P.! .,.. . 11, !II .' . .1. \ ..„ :fa \• '.-‘ 1 /-, -- C..-) 1 %•i „ ..‘f•
.2.-: ,,' t"A • ' .Z----- ...;'-'0•• '"':, - 7\) (,i ,.. ',‘ i,v-• \.5' -.,-/, %•••':,.. • --- • \(.. :
•, • , „, , ,,,,,,, , 1 , _.; v , 9„ ) .. •
, , • • ,:-.- ,
',. ., ; , v.s, ,, --•\ ,- :i. !: — , ..,,•': i - ,__,•:— • %,-'. , .---, •,,.0 •.•ii. •
• _.„1:4.-, \ - \, s r, s.',..1.-2, ‘., \ ....:,,_:..:• • ,,,,,,... .,:::• c ,,p) is-----,;•‘,\\•,- - • ,, .1', , . . '
.-_-1•:"1, '' , 3 1,.., , ._ \, ; , \ : . ] 4.0,,, -'I 1,-,-;:-,"-I-A-0 ,,,)• , ,.- . .. .
.,
, .... , ,
- ',,,,-..:,-- . —i ' . , ;,1,,.. ••• • 't c p --i,i ._.
-- — ;: ' s'' "ts.,_ '''''-'.. •,r)i 3 f —..,;-,1,-cfr, :\i . mc, \\,,.-- ---- „q vr..„,
...1 .-.—• -?, V / , 1 .- —Q+,.. .- ",:,-;..,-\,_ 1 , •,,, '•-i I ...,,. ...-1 . :....„. _ ,-, ---!1....;!••• ,
.,\
-A:ill•-•'.--i,-”--.1_,-4,v-t,;,-.,, ... , '.1.• • ; . . ,
It. •' !,,, ,
• , e, , , ••1 ., s .. •..1i ' 2. ••fr ,.sy• --.\ •v : ,..
,,..
--%. - - •-----,.'-':'.,,-,;---- - ••..---7----------- -- -.-, - '..... • , ,,% \., ,.. 1.' 4 ' ' ; e.t, . , . - ,... ., . 12 ,
...' )- ti_,..._, _ ..! ____/__,_, ‘A\-,,,,, ., _A._.4„e.k,-. •. i . ./ A
...,
fi'...1 Pt. \ t' ''''.-...!.\ \s Bryant lane
\ t .,-..-:":. .. ' N- k.., .N"-='\ - oadir .•i
'N : •.:• ..--.---*— --,;.,,,-„,,,,z,., ',', \ 1 - 4- d,-.• 85:!\:•: -.. . • A. '--•.,.. z ,.., ,• • '..; , .' .. e ,
•A\-Z. 1: , ' .°. '''. ' ..•
' ,i.vA''; _ • _ \ t , '. ‘A'S.I . • Ca' ,
'F2.,--1..-0-:' _c, ..- •.: V:, •.',,J ..11,..\ .r. -\'-''''• ,
. .,, % - - -.. ••.,,' -7'.„,;.,4 ‘-" \ ;. /,, .w.„ ;';' - '‘ ; ' ‘--..;) i• - "-:
-) - ,,,.•-- - .. i .1,- ._, •••••• _.,_, •,, ' 4.i. r ,, . . ,•,,,, -• ...Gravel FM , '
r, t..•\ I - - \ - .k \ , \ .. c
•.,,, ,, , ). \\
1., t 1 °51,, ch.) • ' \ Gravel Pd..
• \ . _, .\ ,-` tili...._.,.....,...../- ..;-'1:.).`"•--.7,,,..,---,..-/e)-- ,/,**/7-'4-.7'.-'.. ::.,,,\t.s.,,,,.1 ,,,7 .7. -\\ ' ,-
C-.\..<\-,,,,,-,k A \,--.--,-,)-.,•.,,•.'•. , 1, t,i.4•""I''':. '. ---7-:i7.7 7••••-...7.._-_.\—_''-.
1......_.‘‘ S ou:.1t h
- , 7 ., - -- " '''.'i\- •" / itimbrK1 - .' ''' --.. ! . 4.
a. k•••‘
\ IR ‘,.,.. 1 _ • -'*-7 ----• •—••••, ,..„ r•.,
\) (- 1 \•''-e• . • 6"•• ' ' 11114, • , ....,........,....so...1•4-Ain-
.
/ e4. .
.% . . I' 0......,1° . / • • •'1. *A ;
) • if ,, ' t ' . i_ '- i r , - :I., '-:•
- ‘- ‘:
:* •.\' •••‘ - •-•\-- k.k\. • •X?
I!, i ' 11.! . s! \,.. ri N 0
. \, --,),\ .,.... \, '. ..,.\ 11):.•
° i ,i•1, , ) i
; 1 .1 1 - \ I HoP104§ QUADRANGLE
..,.,
, l - • . ;/) \. ". A___ MINNESOTA-HENNEPIN CO.
(`• '
-. \ ) /./ ' • .ji.14. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPH
/ to/Y-4 ! ..: n. ''
• NW/4.41.1441.AIN.0 I.:.l't 01/All14 VI•it.E
s F'•- : ./.. . . .
• EDEN PRAIRIE QUADRANGI
,,, M INN I.SOTA
- -
. .,. . - . se...1.- • - -21; • * ! "I 4. MIMI.1-.1.7 ,.:4:011 4. /*ITU+/Vs I.,1 rti
. •
.-r.„. ..... . „.. .....,..........„.....,.....-,,,..„ • • .
_,..74.1. • r,-i ?
. - .-- ,:,• i // .'•
. . •At
--,
. ". .
f. . 7,6/ ..,.,
• ,4. 1,/ .
.•
•
, :.. „..,,..........-
--7-''/ • .
-.e,ty7 7.)rk;.,%" : ,,`•,,,•Ai 'v\ -111.11 ..,.-`,,, I.? , \
. ' n\". •
.. '.
• , ' '- ' I, 'S.,: .,':..).,1 I 1,.:,, •, .,L.'.,
ii . )' ., i'''.1'.'..",,J,..!.'•..e'' `' ... ....',•
i 7 ,7N,
. ' N
• • .
.7.% , • ' ;:' '.
*X11.... .
'. .
.. . '
L......47) ,11., '- . Illt '.*. '2 \\:.fX • ..A
.........mi...A.,•\(:). , .._• - .._
3 •
• ,
J.-(,..e-leT• ,,':,,. .. -... _\
••, . . , ,
•
•
I • '(t' -. -.'*... , .
.. . s• i . '
-1‘‘ • - --- -- . - - - • •• -.."'"' ; .,
. .
, ..,
0 --':-_ -•;; .-.."•-•:;s-tf'' ''' •
......:1,:-:•?'' ,• ! 1 a
•ilz, -.- ,
.. • , •
, •-• - - - •.',T
. „
•
•
a . .
t .
. - •
, • ,,
.
. •• .,-''''' • • ..
i . • ..• ' '
' r ,
..,.,.. . . i ..
.. 4,001010414,440rftN '' • J,k.,'T.44. *VP,'0.."0.9 ,i.,•,,'+V 1 t",-,..4,,,,4 i'l'' 1,
SUPER VALU
,,661127..:=7)CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
rii -.<:-.. ig"4.' tartan nrniriA minnesata
::‘:.:..‘.':"' , ''':
r / t '�` i Jl/� ! •1�t i .!sue-t`t.:.-',. -:,...,'",'—.:
,-..,7- (/_,..r „, ),', -s\1 i.4 ) 1, ; - •i/ -, . . \—, . ? k.,. .
- 7 ' \ . t• V a 1 • ';.7 �,..
.• 4. i• ,. �.., ••:
�.r A may.. .I.,t Rb..a! `ei...., I
p -rt- - ' %t'• 'r., t Y , �,tiJ4 t
F . .
It.'
44' 1
7-7."r\ora.r7w-r•..y"7.1c r,w `
7'1 17,' \ /
J 1y"/rn
' - • -/ \C J\! 11 1, :�<- ' � . t ..�
jj _ J�
r tiJ,
y•. ,
•
• yt t r si .•• ! T }h't.
1 f i a 0 i.
sr :`••-,-- t f' ' ram; w! .. \... `. ( x i f j l �.
I
2 `',. 4 ..- �.»
E^�"} 7':a to w,F,y,{..i\:•., f•X- .^ter-•......�1✓+ r a.f
J
• a.i-- , -2d-
.. �?v 2
•
1 .4r,•
•
Ivy .. �;l ,0 . , `1,. !', ' '�' ,I
• irs ' / ,.\•,
t t Svc'•'
4 • i \af
\ �� ..:-:..,.,•.:".;:--:'- `~ cif l , -
`, -ly-• . - ,,...,,,•,-„,„„;,,4c ••.o.--. i 1,
y` Y4 V S• .
4
•
Ir ;' 1 `
•
r .
1.
1 3
7.7N-.
4...,:77--,....v.... ..7,:,,,i7_,--77:17or.7-,,,,
\u:-.
/ •,, • - .... . ,' ..A.,,"" '''#;.: ,',
1' • h,. 11 i. 1 ..— -V••,,.Y.• � Ir
1 is � 1 tt 1t1 It ✓ `4
• it Ls.-1• . t \ �.- - •.S ' fit, IW 3 ,• -4 t• '' r ' 4
�� a �r j( •� 1 t }j r
f ,
• iL' .r \ U t `/1r1 -2d-
-..
• •-. '.if'-t :
' , '," ' ,,,q1 •
' I .
,t.i •
• , r17•', -
' k • r ....4,1
'• .' _1144 . 1, \ i _ "'' t ',
, ?I. ,. •.40.„, ;,. es:I.,...,.1 ,,,,1 "`"4"‘r2; '
. ....\
N...... ...v ska....V, •....... I
"., ' .At ' • , . •.....vivaliva.... a.i.Wvi ,....4..,..,..,.., j.,. 1 i
-. %" .I: s.• ,41.,r,,,, ‘‘.1., v Al.." .1! ..' , t I . 1 /. 1
"....'''.- ....:';‘ - t 1 -... 7 • I 1
1 .7, -------,; ---"4""." . •,,,
.,
' ' i ,) i :- _,_t.. .:
,1...1.,:.•_11.4- ., t.:1,., ' . ., ;
«, •
........4— 4' --.*. '"" ..°4-.'.. .
. „pis.
...1•P"'
-1 i
P..17,;• ',•:-'!., it;7 ‘‘\ ,'% 1 , •,k,..,,
\ .,,,•••• ......, ...--ie.t
S'c'.Y'''-'-' .4)' . pi , f 4 ••• --I'S'''. ''''' '' .". •**..0",„I'
,. ,i: , .1 "cad,: li,...4.4,r. \,•-.....N.,,,, ,,,,,
\.."."I! ;.,i 41 1 4. ' 4
\Pi 1,1 ;1" ' 1 ''. _so or ...,
5•4:-:- ' ' -fr.'' i' , l ( i t— - ----:4•: ' —7'41 1
,.--
, 7-,, -...,--vvver-v n\rtyll ,T.T.-7 A,:5r/ ...... • T . ,, ,. •, s ....7,-,,,-- •
•, /..\ "
. : ,, 'KJ •
,i'.\ 1, ;
,0', ,
.\3•.\\.\z, ,,,,' : \I‘., ' .1/.
7,4i`;,:\IV,..,
;1.‘ ,Mei. ;1‘ • iii\k" .- \•;' '. .X.-
K-t,,,S1 e
il'i 'ii • - .
‘ . e ,.
si
\ - l • `\..1, ;
'7 \II.N\,‘, / / 4 ,...•
... • ,
I,: •r
s.!t.... ',..,„,,z ,_ ---- --kik Wk...• 1\("( .,. , ..\ / • ..,...her,,,,,,,„,,:.,--- - _, V., '''c ,,,.,;.. ,
...
le i,
i•'
, , .., -..„.: ...,- i...
.....,...... ,_,s ,............7....„....,,An„.. .4 ,i ,' .. 1-"'.„,„..."- .... • ‘ ••, , , I ,
2 •7. •. f
' •s\ *.tt,' .I ,.L. ••,.,iii,,j'.
k.../2
Li
I
'''''''\ 41' 1, • ',,v1,,i ....A,.!i i\•'•
•1,4.
1/i.i\
: i ` ' ,4-'•-:j•-• , ... ".1\• r • 4 ...arr ..i
.4,......"" k ..‘•-I :• '\.: • i i',‘ It;
' ' iv: ..‘•1• . ,., ..1. ' . , • .
. ..
• .
I L,• 4••••.''':"''''''.. ...V. a.
........1....... - ,- .'•••••
,............#**,,, • • :
E
•
• / •
,
, • i; / „:-/
,--
P \ ', ',,•/,. . . '-.
( .•
• ...
, -
, ..
.... ....• .
..----- ...,
. • 1 ;
. T •`' 1 t 'i .1011, ''r'. '
"?.., At' 't i
---,- '
> , ki., , ,..,:•:: ,,,...-.
,
a ..to-- s y,
•
I is N i ' ,.------ - sret . --k - •,-,-
,-;.;.,1...., / r:........4 -•,,,,,.....
..444t4
i . \ • ... , . , ;" . •
,..,:....., ..e.,,......c t
'.0.4.4.i..t .v.... , ..- .... .I ,... 7: 'f• 1.
....„,.
k. •/ A-4... ...:.-.,;.&-,--.--:-,....-- .;,..
c--,,,, .
11 ' 4 '.
...,..-
,•• ,,A.,... ;''' 2131.< s 4- •-: -z.',..)
(. ' .. '-- -, 1.. 4'. - , -:;,t.::, 1 ...*-
1 i . ••,..„....,--7-->• '4 . 11.4- V•4 ! ',7
Ai ,.... -.,--. ...--- h.- ...,-: • -h. - I N4 i
LI ''.-K''Irl'i--.'''.L'.''....7:/2.•it'-' 41" :..is . ...% / '••. ii 1 ‘lil I
. :• , 1 odi,... , ...: t '
v 1
,-' 1'' . :P::: .*. It' .;•' ""r. , 't,
oaly-..6...:7::,•• ...,r. -7 -'.
'"---—_
.
, I.
,...„.....,...,..„
.. , .
•
i .
1
i tv...strmalLuiir 1,ti\, . .
t..„7,.....,,,........... ,.... ...............,. ... .a.
-•
2 I - ''. ,---, ir.--.....„ - ,,„ ,....,, • 4......L.:,,,,..,.:,,...,..arey...1...r!„:24.,. .
w , ., ...,..,-,,....„ •,. 1...1.0„...„...,.‘, ............,..,-.....z.._ • ............
----- .,•. !.• - -- ...„....;,,,,..s.. . C..
...
.. ,• \ , e .f\.•-.; :,..1 • .A. A •t" •
IN • '. il s' I k , , , !:4!•,•'1,., •?0: •••1 .• • • : \ 'N , .'s t 1, : ' -:•', ,,.'4.n'''.•
.--••••I-'14 1 :„..,.. : . ., . 4 • • . .11;?! •! ` • -4" . it.
• ' ' 4.1.•-• . , ‘1‘'.. , .7.' • NI
i''‘ ••• 't . .,'..' ,3%. '",7„.i.;:;,,,t4„•,!...1-... t .... .;,,t,1 I kik
(019 i 1 ••• ....1 „?. .• 4,../44,,,.4-4. , i • 4•1 `• 1,
"q,',1:1",t,41‘A‘1•4•401',k1*• ' • • .4 •••.%,14 , 4 ,
«,:4'4*.t , ' ,..- .,' . 0,.. , I 41.4• "''';,
, • ".'1V1.111 '' '. N11t4 i t\' s .--'-.. i t ,I }
,,.N<S.." I( : t Ii, N' 'N ' •
. , ,..,...;"1: ,i 1 ' /•,1 .4••Y , 1
• ' " V!• r \
.• f i! \ .
''ll','• it t ‘.
.1 1 ‘ ,t,, N, -4r -2d- ,j k .A. i ,•E
..... ...) •-'-'-4.. , •
ATTACHMENT #1
A.
ra.
The site, totaling approximately 140 acres, is located in the north-
east quadrant of the City of Eden Prairie. It is bound on the west
by Interstate 494, south by Hennepin County Road 60 (Valley View
Road) on the east by Radio Station KRSI's studio, transmitter and
towers and Bryant Lake on the north. Single family residential is
across Bryant Lake and the wetland to the north. The site is presently
vacant. It is roughly triangular in shape, is approximately 3,153
feet in a north-south direction paralleling I-494; 3,153 feet in an
east-west direction along the center line of County Road 60, with
approximately 3,820 feet of Bryant Lake shoreline.
Up to about 1960, the site was utilized for agriculture by several
different families. The last farmer, Mr. Fritz Holasek, pastured cows
and cultivated the relatively flat area along the eastern side.
•
7!7
. I
6010
•
d
s of
kes,
streams on or near the
3. particularly nlakes ewithin ai,000 feet sand d site,
List names rivers and streams within .
300 feet. •
•
Bryant Lake - 200 Acre
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).
See Attachment 42
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
and access - sq. ft.
Size of marina
a. Total project area 140 acres g.
channel (water area)
or
Length - miles h. Vehicular traffic trips 2,300ADT •
generated per day
b. Number of housing or i Number of employees b85
recreational units -
Water supply needed 20,000 gal/da
C. Height of structures 46 ft. j. Source: City of Fden Prairie
d. Number of parking k. Solid waste requiring •
spaces 550disposal 260 tons/yr
e. Amount of dredging 2000 cu. yd.1. Commercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space - sq. ft.
ing treatment 18,000gal/da
III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
•
A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently No yea
exceeding 12t?
2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project,
such as fault zones, shrink-swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? _NO R YES
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slopeconditions
anseore unstable
e area and any
measures to be used to reduce pet
•
Regrading of slope exceeding 10 and removal of Muck and Peat. Nino
•
Mile Creek Watershed District will review construction and gridding
plans and issue permit. Permit for Muck and Peat excavation required
from Minnesota ONCR.
(UG1 - 3
Attachment M2
Page Three
Color of natural exterior materials will be of warm, neutral tones so
as to best relate to characteristics of the site.
Initially, 550 employee parking spaces will be constructed. This
represents 1.2 employees per space (based on 685 employees). It
is also estimated that 1,400 area daily trips (ADT) will be generated
by this facility. Area is provided within the loop road for up to
820 automobiles if needed.
Sod and irrigation will be limited to the area inside the loop road
and around the building. The remainder of the disturbed area of the
site will be planted with a prairie culture.
ij
The first level of the building is at elevation 860.0 with the main
entry at elevation 867.5. These elevations allow for the natural
mounding of the site to diminish the height and size of the building.
3
ATTACHMENT #2
The basis of the development is to locate each major activity where
it can best protect and utilize the major natural features of the
site. The building, located on the narrow neck of land, is so placed
to take advantage of the view to both Bryant Lake and the pond. To
take advantage of the diverse topography, the building thrust out of
the hillside hence complimenting it not overpowering it. To lessen the
impact, the building steps from one to three stories, and is tucked
behind the smaller of the 3 existing knolls.
The natural vegetation between the building and the lake will be
retained. However, selected pruning and the removal of dead and/or
diseased plant material will be carried out. In addition, vegetation
will be added as required for screening and accent.
The relatively flat, open grass area affords the most ideal location
for. parking. To diminish the impact of the automobile, the parking
areas will be separated by a 4 foot vertical, 30 foot horizontal :
planted green space. Each consecutive lot, when viewed from the main
entry, steps up so that the view from the main building entry is into
a series of green terraces.
The same green terrace concept is true for the edge of the parking
when viewed from the lake. To further soften the impact of parking
upon the lake, the existing vegetation between the service drive and
Attachment #2
Page Two
the lake shore has been retained and strengthened with additional
plant material.
Site circulation is straightforward and simple. To insure maximum
safety, site access is placed at the high point (with maximum sight
distance) of Valley View Road. The entry drive moves from the high
point downward through the wooded area toward the pond. breaking
into the open, the site unfolds and the main building entry becomes
visible for drop off and visitor parking. •
Employees entering via the same route turn right to parking, then to
the main circulation spine into the building. A strong planting of
canopy trees identifies this area and gives direction to the ent.i.
Service vehicles continue on past the parking to the service dock
located on the first level of the side of the building.
The three level, 165,000 square feet stepped building, will initially
house 550 employees with internal expansion accommodating a maximum
of 685 employees.
ij
Natural materials such as concrete and/or masonry will be used on the
exterior of the building along with an amount of glass that will allow
building occupants to fully experience the natural beauty of the
site while at the same time demonstrates a commitment to maximum
energy conservation.
fp0�
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic
Systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project.
See Attachment #3.
5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done:
119,098 cu. yd. grading119,098cu. yd. filling none to be moved off site.
What percent of the site will be so altered? 18 t
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 33 t
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
Bales of straw during construction, and planting (seed and sod) after
construction. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District will review final
construction and grading plans and issue permit.
B. VEGETATION
1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types: See Attachment #4
Woodland I 24 % Cropland/ 8 t
Pasture
Brush or shrubs 0 t Marsh 29 t
Grass or herbaceous 26 t Other 13 % Bog
(Specify)
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 1 acres
For entry drive
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.
C. FISH AND W1LDLIFE
1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage-
ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO 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 x NO YES
habitat? See Attachment 1l5.
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.
1
ATTACHMENT #3
•
United States Soil Conservation Service Soil Maps indicate peat plus
four additional soil classifications as being present within the
boundaries of the proposed Super Valu Site. Hayden Loam, Heyder
•
loam and complex, LeSueur loam, and Cordova silty clays, are all
present.
Cordova formed under the influence of a prairie grass environment is
characterized by a surface layer of black clay, or silty clay loam
10 to 20 inches deep. A subsoil from 20 to 36 inches deep, with firm
olive gray clay loam underlaid with olive gray loam till.
•
Cordova soils are sticky and hard to work when wet. They become hard
and cloddy upon drying, and increase in volume as water is added.
They are normally found in flats and drainage ways, remain wet for
long periods, arc moderate to slow permeable, and have a seasonal
watertable 1 to 3 feet below the surface. Bedrock is usually greater
than 60 feet below the surface.
•
LeSueur soil is very similar, too, and is closely associated with the
Hayden soils. LcSueur differs from Hayden in having more gray color
mottled with dark yellowish-brown in the layer subsoils and underlying
material. Surface depths vary from 12 to 15 inches with 24 to 40
inches of subsoil.
Attachment $3
Page Two
LeSucur soils are found in low mounds and knolls, are seasonally wet
for a short period, are moderately permeable with a seasonal water
table of 3 to 5 feet below the surface.
The Hayden and Heyder series differ in that Hayden is formed in loamy
Grantsburg till over 20 feet thick, and Heyder is formed in Grantsburg
till contaminated with Superior lobe drift. Surface depths are 7 to 10
inches for both, with subsurface varying from 24 to 40 inches and
28 to 48 inches respectively. Both are well drained, never saturated,
and are moderately permeable.
is
The soil erodibility rating (K factor) is one of the five factors
that make up the Universal Soil Loss equation. The higher the ”,. rical
K value, the more erodible is the soil. In general, the K values
have been grouped into three ranges:
.23 and lower low erodibility
.24 - .36 moderate erodibility
.37 and higher high erodibility
More specifically, the following K values for the soil on the proposed
Super Valu site are:
Low erodibility Heyder .20
Moderate Erodibility Cordova .24
Lesueur .32
High erodibility Hayden .37
• i
Of/
7
Attachment M3
Page Three
By assigning these designations to the soil and by mapping each sepa-
rate category, an illustration of soil erodibility can be shown and
provisions for erosion control made.
•
•
•
(pig
•
-------- . ‘
' .
.. -,
/ .
-;,.....,. - N...,
..,_
.--'
,-
--
'' I •'7
,------'---- v7„:-... :::,76.- ,. :
i;,.:i'L7`. .,....,_/.4114 Ili" ; " ;••-; ' -., ._. ___ - .
•
'''''\v\' ' '' • ---- '., . •'%'•.‘ t •
,. .....,,,,,,, ,• ,
/
:
" .. .
-- . • i it
,;;,.-::-....,:::,,,_---- • .t'
N ‘,..`‘‘
' •
•..z..--.::.---,/,:- - _
/ •\'' :r i ._ (/'''•8 '
/ \ ,
,:. '' ,, ':•.P. ..,...-_';''' ' _ -j-I-.1.----.-..— : • ... ' •
J '.....,..0......:‘ 's, ::‘,-..,:j..:,-.: •—: ..-.:.,,::.:-.;::-.:. ....,,,,f,'• .:,,,, , t.. - 000 .
,-
_,_, .•.-•.cs, \.:::::-.-----) ',.: ::,' ',.', ii. '_ ;.„2 ----,
.. • ,—,,-.,A • ----- ai
''''3/4 :i:' ..,_;....r.• ,.4. ., ,, ..--"••----- , ;;:ii---- f,
. ..
•:., , .- _ , r
,I .
• i• - V.---
:. y , .• .....-- .----
,i' .,.r.:„. .:...., .1.. •'.- * . _...., ,
li.k...... .'.. ....,,-'''.. •
./ — 1- '.,......, •
..:.,..--
...,-..--- . • .
64 ,
nrie '
SITE/Flood Plain o too zoo ;
•
--_ _,. .,
.._ . .
7_,
. .,,
..
1 . .
/%
.._;>.‹. .---..---.---.\
-'.(//:'
• ...., . , ,,, .
" .. ..
•
,.___,.....__---- ;,;(,,: -- :„..,..-...::.::.;.„..., .,..,, i, .
.. . ..,,... „1.... ..?,,,.„).,.. ., ,, ..
• ......... . . • . •
,,,,•:.,„±- ,.s......,_.:.. ,.. .. ......,...„., .1. __ _ . .- .... :
es.. .
o ;
/ .\ ;
- - fTT :
/" 8 t
J cs
L
- ,..--- 1... ill
,
•
•
0 r SblUFaat o�i e .
oo
•
7y
•
•
r
t
--_ - -:/, '..,' ''• '.. ;\,f‘.
' ii/1/
•
{--- .,.
. ..„„:... ...:.......,...:::.- - .....: . ,,,,.:..,„;: :„ pt.
..,
/77— .. a„,..::-.. lf.
., 7-':_t_______.---___.%. .
LiT2'
_ ..
G 9! e
sO.L,LowGosion 9 WO200
k
i
1
,2-
W YI
T.
,j'
`i \ i It
r c8
--= - t
•
•
• Pt J i 111
1 i ..fi/!.'� �_ t
•
(p6LZ SOIL/Modium Erosionb—ioo:o�
___..... •
r ____
•
—1
.1•• ....... ..• ,
•
I.t.
- ,
. •
„:.. , •
•':;.'::';: ' ,,,.''.,'_',..,;.' ,., '';‘.;: ‘ :i Ns" 11v,'‘' . .. ---:-----,`',-. ' ..% • ', •
t:',1, •. - :....,, , .',.. ' ).'.. '
N °.',':;•,, k,,.:,., t f.- , i \
i ,-...
... ..,
tl,,-_:, ,::','.6',' •
. .....,, /
. .
,,/./.., ..---- (.3•:, . •---....,9-) ...,
- ."-'-f,";-"=T --) • i ,
). .
---)-}
: ••• .. . ,
.:$.1....: . ,7'•':":.' ,•,- ='-'••'•-- •
: •,:- . -'-`,, 4i . •
) -4,\:•• "' i t ;
4-..---• • .:, :',. .. •.-::-.• •.-
,..i• _,.:....---: 1 itIL
•
. .7.,....., . il _
........„.....-- It ,
• % ..• s••••
....---
' 4,• r-. .1.,.!-2/-: .•., : .:::: ':
..—
"..-:;'. .C '.••• ..----':' .......--" ,
•
.......„.....<.:..:.....41' ";;;............-----
---• . ,. ,4.:2°-/-'L....... •
.. ...........____..... ..... _.:. . ._ • .,
, .,
6'33 %rile
Qt111!Minh Frosinn n Inn,nn A
• -: ,.
.^
. •,, . ..... , . ,7-•, i .b.
•
•
).
f.
/.�.T.
` .,
, .y,C., ``` t . %• .
4
'o";;"'";;-,-,----1),/,ii,' 1 k. -. A
,,,,i,...,:i.:,,,,,,.:,
••••:‘;,,_:::.___,..:„.‘: •...,
2
\.., • ,.
... .
0 /_........„..... .
.., • , -,.... ......_
., ......:.,___:„..-.2,,,, .
,..
_____,._ _.• ..... _
.., .
. . .
.} , ••4 ;:., •, •
�, • e
Ir--' . 0°C) _. .1/
is
y -. __%I(I!
•
r-.:��/•, ice •
.--. • ..�f ,. .
6,911 SLOPE/0-6% o!"lop2oo
•
2_ H
•
i
,,,,:,...„ ,,,,,. . .,/ '''''.
, i ..•, ...-.,;.:77.7.N
� ,.. � - � ,
J `\c,.�` • i r '
•
1
/ j Z
1' ti o l `i
• ,........_
.•
,:
.•
..
t:, .„
�\ c\�.. 1:.....,.•... . r FI :�' % �p
.,
.,
.,
L ,
...„<....:,.. ..:,..,:., .
, ...„ .... ..._.................__. .. ... . .. •---. . .„
...
.„„
7 SLOPE 7-12% oi�oo e
i
i •*1
• tit
� r
y\. ....r-
:i „
•
_ )
\• • • ( •-• :. --.- -- - ./. . ,
1 .„,:,. . , ...:. , ... Opp.<- ,
-1---- . ..._.....
....,„.......... ..,,,.. :::,,, ,, ,
, ,
,__. _
L9(0 SLOPE/13-18% 0 too too
•
•
...,
'y r.74
i
•
-)I r c• a -� ,h
\ .
,/ _.:____,2,-:,‘x__ .\\ ,
s-.`
r
... .....T;:\,:., . ..--. ....„...:: i...,_!„ ., , _ ...........: , ‘ „,.....-- ! ,
A.1 % •;1 i
1- -
•
o / SWPE/>18% o-ioo Qo
ATTACHMENT N4
Native vegetation which developed on the site, probably consisted of
mixed hardwood forest, mixed hardwoods with prairie and marshland.
The site was used for agriculture until 1960 which impacted the native
vegetation. Parts of the woodlands were cleared for crops, used for
pasture and most likely harvested for forest products. Grazing and
crop production have apparently eliminated the native prairie. The
marshland, a transition bog area, and the steeper wooded slope appear
to be in a natural condition. The unsuitability of these areas for
agricultural land use probably account for this natural appearance.
Vegetative Types:
Five major vegetative types have been identified on the site. Each
type is described and indicated in the following paragraphs and maps,
along with the area and the percentage of the site occupied by each •
vegetative type:
A. MARSH - 40.3 acres or 29 percent of the site. The
marsh category defines lowlands areas without standing
water, but waterlogged within a few inches of the
surface during the growing season.
Marsh areas are found bordering Bryant Lake on the north-
western and southern portion of the site and surrounds
the pond. Vegetation type includes cattails, bulrushes,
reed canary grass, and sedge&.
698
Attachment 114
Page Two
B. OPENING WOODLAND - 17.1 acres or 12 percent of the site.
Open woodland vegetation occupies the two knolls adja-
cent to Bryant Lake, the northern tip of the west knoll
and along the edge between the upland woodland and grass-
land. Vegetation is characterized by mature overstory
+I
growth with grass and prickly ash as the understory.
A
Cattle grazing seems to have eliminated the natural
understory in many areas.
:j
fi
The vegetation of the east-most knoll and west-most knoll
bordering Bryant Lake is predominatly mature burr oaks 1
with grass as the ground cover. The abondoned farmstead R
is included in this area, and large overstory plantings
aro found here. Plants observed at the abandoned farm- 1
stead include burr oak, red oak, sugar maple, silver
maple, apple, willows, Norway pine, Colorado blue spruce, s
lombardy poplar, lilac, honeysuckle, moonseed vine and
various grasses.
•
2.
The vegetation of the northern tip of the western knoll
is predominantly burr oak with a very profuse prickly ash
understory. Otherplants found
y un here include red oak, A.
Norway pine, jack pine, a few ironwoods, a few sumacs,
and bittersweet.
Attachment #4
Page Three
The edge area between the upland woodlands and grass-
land contains a mature burr oak overstory with prickly
ash, buckthorn, hawthorn and sumac as the understory.
The vegetation in these edge areas is quite dense.
C. UPLAND WOODLAND - 17.3 acres of 12 percent of land area.
The upland woodland category defines area containing
mature canopy vegetation along with understory vegeta-
tion. Upland woodland vegetation occupies three areas
of the site; a) western knoll, b) north facing slopes of
southern wooded knoll, and c) the north side of the
westernmost knoll bordering Bryant Lake.
The upland woodland vegetation of area "a" is predominantly
a bur oak, red oak overstory, with ironwood as the
understory. One white oak was found in this area.
'i
A small group of lindens and cherry trees are in the
swale on the north facing slope. Wild grape and a few
prickly ash were also in this area.
In woodland "b", burr oak is the main overstory tree with
mature ironwoods in the understory. Other species
observed include one white oak, red oak, several black
cherry, a group of lindens, buchthorn, wild grape, and
a few prickly ash.
100
Attachment #4 •
Page Four
Woodland area "c" is a steep slope, vegetated almost
entirely by burr oak and ironwood. Red oak is found
here, but is few in number.
D. TRANSITION BOG - 18.3 acres or 13 percent of the site.
It occupies the lowland between the marshland and up-
lands.
The transition bog area is so named because the areas
have transformed from a wetter habitat type, possibly
a cattail marsh, to the present condition.
j
The major plant community in this category is redtwig 1
;
dogwood, willow, and bog birch thicket. The thicket is
very dense and difficult to walk through. Along the
woodland edge of the thicket, aspen, box elder, willow
arc found; thus indicating dryer soil conditions.
Plants observed in the transition bog were aspen, box
elder, buckthorn, and paper birch. Understory plants
include redtwig dogwood, willow, and bog birch.
E. GRASSLANDS - 35.6 acres or 26 percent of the site.
The grassland areas cover much of the site occupying
abandoned fields and former pastures.
701
Attachment #4
Page Five
The grasslands of the property consist primarily of
grasses and forbes, however, many areas arc being
invaded by woody vegetative types such as prickly
ash and sumac.
The greatest diversity of plant species was observed
in the grassland areas. Plants found in the grasslands s'
include: small ash, cedars, hawthorn, popular, small 1,
Siberian elm, sumac, prickly ash, curly dock, milkweed,
aster, Canadian thistle, goldenrod, sweet clover,
and various grasses.
Some old fence lines and roadside vegetation is also
included in the grasslands category. These areas are
different in that they have mature elms, black cherry,
lombardy poplar and plum, in addition to grasses and
forbes.
1
•
-- ------ \................„0„,..--,----''-1—___ ---_
y. 11. 1 :.
1 '7 '
,/ . /' ..
f,' f'
i.
'•fit ,r. \t ,,`• i
;fi ;, l \•
/' __ .. ._ �M�'"/J� Ili
r
/
ram„ `_ / 1
.. \-...,-,.,:! .• ..,,,,.........:---jp.i.. .
"_ G jai
•
•
>/ •
?U� VEGETATION/Marsh o 100200 }
---...v..........‹...1 — ,
•
•
t./. ----:'.. -- -. ' . n •
ll1 J \rl \ 1
) .
\ ..':'•
••.. t ): ..
- -- - • ft/ :
/ . , .
Jr !• t .� \ I i r `
I I. ''� �f
-)01" VEGETATION/Opon Woods 0 100 200
-1\----------....-7-7..... -.1 !•
, •
•
,---.,--."7.----- ,fi.-,...:. .. .,:,::',::;;,...... . -••••\'' , .% — •/./1 ''''.
•
\� 1 `%` t' ‘‘
nst J � �� t t
•
i ,-...., ( .
�r,.';er i t- ',` t 1
',.'.'0`"-C.,#-'''14j1:' i \'S\i, :\.\ li
/j" : /..„..... •. . • ..../.
. ... .. . ./ ,. , .. . f
E . .� c,..,,. �o 1,
.,
,..,_,._ • :: �, r' -�/�,.. =ter
• but
i•.",• ram. pit
,? i :r'` jam-. ii /--
•
•
' VEGETATION/Upland Woods o 0o aoo
`wv I
•.
% •
•
•
` •;. % /.
Qd
110j \�i 4 t ,
I I.'-':,':71:2-•^&-. yi NN, , gi i‘
,,..::::... ...:::::„_-,..,,_,.,ii..... ,
y•.:, ‘...‘• : 1
i.,.:;:,,,,,,-,,,,-,----)hi., :, , , \).- - ,
iqy._,6-.:,:?! ././., .1 ,
=-:--...--_------/'-- \ .). ,
�, ....._ A.--,17--,--.1, -J
.
-"N... ....„------ i,........„,
1 ,
.' , ,._:-.,-,..--_,... .- ,-. ---- -_,-____ : T. . - , .
e+� � L
. .
:r If - \ v O
( t t'1 ��. • p� ,I
. . _.... ,.
... : :to _
1........2...„...,....-,,, 0
t.:.:iii!. : ,
-� r /.. ram- _ (' -
!� ....:;--- i ,
•
�ts�
G
•
/)/„ lED
VEGETATION/Transition Bop o�ioo:ao
v`f' 1
/ l
---7\-/-......<-1 .':
/ "
ea
tt�i,c • ` ��� t+ t l
2 \ • -
' \ ,
-�-- d - 8 1
: A: '' . .-.;...,• ,-••••.... ---.., 2. 4, ' - . --.. 1.... coo 'ij go :!.
r .. .
.. .
..... . .•
. .. ...,
. .,.. ,..,.... ..::. .0 ....
............":. „...,„,. ..
" ., ,
, , , ,. ..._ ..
.•
...,.:: „„, .
.. ,.. ;. ,
. ... ... •
,• ,
..
r . .....\... ... .
..
7--_____.....„-- ,,
, . . ,..„...„-
iiv"7 del VEGETATION/Grassland o ,no zoo
ATTACHMENT ®5
•
Several factors are currently affecting wildlife populations on
the site. Major highways on both the west and south sides of the
property create an access and egress problem for many species. In
addition, the noise level created by highway traffic also influences
a few of the more secretive species.
ATV (All Terrain Vehicles) utilize the site. This type of disturbance,
especially during the spring and summer months, is very detrimental
to almost all terrestrial species of wildlife. Waterfowl, upland
game and many song birds are denied territories for nesting due to
this disturbance; mammals are also affected.
Several roads have cut the area into smaller habitats and have made
the area readily accessible to man.
Ornamental plantings, roads, a concrete platform, culvert, fireplace,
litter, cleared shoreline, cattle grazing, agricultural production,
•
ATV trails,•powerboats, amphibious aircraft as well as the surrounding
roads are all signs of human interference that have impacted the
wildlife habitat of the site.
The absence of all woodpeckers, nuthatchers, juncos, and ground
eaters during visits and the low number of summer song bird nest
indicates the site is not being utilized by many species. The
7Og
Attachment #5
Page Two
abundant amount of good browse (redtwig dogwood and aspen) that is
untouched would seem to indicate the absence of white tailed deer.
Despite the lack of a defined public access, Bryant Lake does support
recreational fishing. Game species present in the lake of interest
to fishermen include northern pike, largemouth base, bluegills,
• pumpkinseeds and black crappies. Most of the angling success is with
the panfish and largemouth bass.
The prevalence of sand and gravel bottom shallows and associated
aquatic plants is very conducive to panfish reproduction. As a result
the general spawning potential of the lake as a whole is excellent
for the bass and sunfish.
Northern pike require a different habitat for.spawning and the
vegetated marsh areas with sufficient water depth in the spring
utilized by this species are very limited in Bryant Lake. As a result,
natural reproduction of this important predator is problematic. High
spring water levels flooding back into the marshes of the inlets and
outlet areas would tend to favor reproduction of this species; but
sufficiently high water levels apparently have not been frequent in
the past.
"2v"'
Attachment #5
Page Three
The spawning potential of the pond under present conditions appears
quite limited. At current water levels there is no access to the pond
from the lake for spawning fish. Even if such access existed, the
unconsolidated, heavily organic nature of the pond bottom would not
be particularly suited to spawning by the panfish and largemouth
bass.
The pond and shore vegetation would seem to offer greater potential
for northern pike spawning provided water levels were sufficiently
4
high to allow access and egress by the adult fish, and provided
water levels in springtime were high enough to allow spawning and
1
early development of young.
The portion of Bryant Lake immediately adjacent to the property are
for the most part shallow with widespread pebbly or gravel bottom
and appear quite suited to sunfish and bass spawning.
The shore area of the property appears to constitute in excess of 25%
of the shoreline of the lake and, as such, its offshore waters obviously
provide a significant percentage of the spawning area available in
the lake.
')/O
•
4. *tat measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified
in questions 1-3?
Sedimentation ponds will be used to control storm water run-off and
discharge of sediment into Bryant Lake. Oil skimmers will be used
in the ponding areas draininn the parking lot.
5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile,
depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal. N.A.
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 emissions from 550 automobiles and service truck traffic daily.
Engine emissions during construction, and heating and cooling of building.
•
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)1 acetify decibel levels [do(A)]. and
duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the
noise/vibration.
Noise during construction should be confined to daylight hours.
Standards for noise Maximum dBA Ranges:
Day Night Equipment At Machine At 250 feet
L 10 L 50 L 10 L 50 scraper 85-115 64-100
60dBA 65dBA 50dBA 55dBA dozer 88-105 73- 90
grader ?R-QA 63-81
3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether airy 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.
1000 Feet to existing single family residential development.
This should not be adversely affected as to air quality or noise.
G. LAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY
1. Ia any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO X YES
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable crop
or wood produced and the quality of the ..and for such use.
35 acres or 261. of site was used to pasture cows with some crop
cultivation until 1960. Topography would limit cultivation.
2. Aro thero any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? NO X YES
If yea, erecify the type of deposit and the acreaue. ;1
63 acres of swamp deposit of black and dark brown peat and muck.
II
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO X YES
Complete the following as applicablet
•
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
Estimated Peak Demand
Annual (Hourly or Daily) Anticipated Firm Contract or
Type Requirement Sumner Winter Supplier Interruptible Basis?
Elect. 2,000,000 KWH 1,300 KVA 1,000 KVA NSP Firm
#2 Oil 38,800 GAI. 183 HRH 2,818 Mmli - Firm
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on-site fuel storage.
10,000 gal #2 Fuel Oil.
c. Estimate annual energy distribution fort
space heating 59 t lighting 36 1
air conditioning 3 t processing 2 •
ventilation 0 t
d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project.
The building will be insulated to conform to new Building Code
Standards.
e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etc)'?
-facility 5 miles from present Super Valu Headquarters.
Project remains central to existing employee location.
May increase housing demand in the area.
•
i 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.
Bryant Iake Regional Park, presently 120 acres with an additional
60 acres planned for acquisition is located on the north side
of Bryant Lake. It is doubt full if project will be seen from
the park.
Nine Mile Creek designated by Metropolitan Council as trail corridor.
1a - ? -
H. TRANSPORTATION
1. Will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems
•
(highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? X NO YES
If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will be affected. roe
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).
Project will add 2000 ADT to County Road 60 (Valley View Road) - presently I.
. 4000 ADT on this road. Hennepin county projects in long-range plans
8000 ADTS by the year 2000. Road is part of planned Eden Prairie ring
road.
Owner requests the City to initiate improvement of Valley View xuau
consistent with planned future development of the ring road system
and the construction of access ramps from Valley View Road to
Interstate 494.
2. Is mass transit available to the site? g 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 the
"Transit Potentials Interim Report". Eden Prairie Center is expected to
be center of activity in the area and seems to be the logical location
for several transit alternatives. These include Coordinated Transfer
Service, Park-N-Ride, Service & Car and Van Pooling. Others not
necessarily dependent on Eden Prairie Center as a central location are
Fixed Route Deviation and Demand Responsive Service.
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehhensive S
plans? — •
—
If not, explain:
The 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan indicates the site as Institutional-Multiple
dwelling and commercial. The preliminary indication in the current Guide Plan .
Update is Public and Commercial.
Sewer, the City Engineer has indicated a desire to provide sanitary sewer
service to the property located south of Valley View Road, the Owner will
petition the City to construct a sanitary sewer to the proposed project and
adjacent property. Total length of approximately 3600 lineal feet is :equired
of which 2100 would be required to serve this project.
•
If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing
zoning and change requested.
•
Rezone from rural to office. The project is a part of a consistancy
with Eden Prairie's Major Center Arca public planned unit development.
2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character of the r
existing neighborhood? X NO YES
If yes, explain and describe any measure:i to be used to reduce conflicts.
Existing lands surrounding the immediate site are rural, vacant land.
A single family residential area is approximately 1,000 feet to the North.
')'3 _ 8 _ 1
1 '
i
f
I 3. How many employees will move into the area to be near the project? unknown
How much new housing will be needed? unknown
4. Will the project induce development nearby--either support services
' or similar developments? Yes '
If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and
•
municipalities affected.
The project may induce housing projects, in turn which may be the
catalyst for developing additional commercial projects to serve them.
5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle
the project and any associated growth? Yes
Mount required ;
Public Service for project Sufficient capacity?
water 20,000 gal/da Yes
wastewater treatment 18,000 gal/da Yes
Sewer 3600 feet Yes
schools -N A pupils - N A
solid waste disposal 22 ton/mo Yes
i streets _ 0 miles Yes
f other (police, fire, etc) _ no additional Yes
,
If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local •
i plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this
one project and its associated impacts?
•
Expansion is necessary for this and other projects . The project
is consistent with City plans.
6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part
I of a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensitive plan or
1 program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES
If yes, specify which area or plan.
n
} 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
t If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures
! to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents.
i
°llLI
•
•
•
8. When the project has served its useful life, will retirement R Nt of the
YES
facility require special measures or plans?
If yes, specifyi
•
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 beOaffected
by the activity?
YES
3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explain any
impact on them.
L. OTHER ENVIRG:l.4ENTAL CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effec;:s which may not have been
identified in the previous sections.
None.
•
,1
III, OTHER MITIGATIVE MEAS[1RES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
Filling permits must b2 approved by the Department of Natural Resources.
Erosion control plan must be approved by the Nine Mile Watershed District.
City Staff review of all public facilities and utilities, building permits,
etc.
City staff field review of all public works construction.
10 •
'1t y�
1I 1
V. FINDINGS
The project is a private 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.
•
1. The project is ( ) is net ( X ) a maj..r action.
Slat, rcas.:%s:
2. The project does (_) does not ( X ) have the potential for significant
environmental effects.
State reasons:
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( X ) of more than
local significance.
State Reasons:
!J. .;ONCLUSIONS 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 RAW to the EQC constitutes
a request for publication of notice in the Egs.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).i
1. !� 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.
��1(+I_
- 1i
FINDINGS:
1. The project is an office use for an area that had been shown as
institutional multiple family in the 1968 Guide Plan. This designation
means a mixture of use, which would include office uses. Municipal services
such as sewer and water will be extended to the site as will power. Other
municipal services such as police and fire protection and transportation
systems are being planned as capacities warrant. The project is consistent
with urban development standards and growth plans of the City.
2. The site will require grading of slopes to accommodate building pads
and parking lots. Pending areas on the site will be engineered and
constructed to control storm water drainage from all hard surface areas.
• The site will largely be left in its natural state. The site will
largely be left in its natural state. Bordering the site on the north
is Bryant Lake, to the south is Valley View Road.
3. The development will be characterized by a regional office use, maintaining
the majority of the site in its natural,pristine state. The project will
respect all of the natural systems of the site and is consistent with City
growth plans, therefore, it is of no more than local significance.
I
I
I
C
2. CIS PREPARATION NOTICE
An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a
major action and has the potential f .�i ofmore
ficantenvironmental
effects. For private actions, the project
•
local significance.
a. The VE2C Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the
•
project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances,
the MEQC catspecifically 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)
(NEQC 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 craft EIS will be prepared by (iiet 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 pane 9
of the LAW). The affidavit need be attached c+nly 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 OBR 100
ONLY, form (State Register General order Form--available at Central
Stores). For instructions, pease contact your Agency's
Liaison Officer to the State Ceoister or the Office of the
State Register--(612) ?96-8230.
-a .
BIBLIOGRAPHY i.
Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan, 1968
Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council, 1973.
Noise Pollution Control Section, Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, 1974
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Overall Development Plan,
Minnesota Water Resources Board, April, 1973.
Soil Survey, Hennepin County, Soil Conservation Service,
April, 1974.
The Uncommon Ones, Department of Natural Resources.
Urban Runoff, Erosion and Sedimentation Control, Soil Conservation
Service
Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan Update, 1977-78.
•
f)i9
February 22, 1978 •
Chris Enger SUPER VALU STORES,INC.
Planning Director STORE PLANNING RENGINEERING DEPT.
City of Eden Prairie - 121 Washington Ave.So.
Hopkins,8950 Eden Prairie Road HopMinn.55343
kins,M24Ii81
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 3S343 61MAILING ADDRESS:Cox 1243
Minneapolis,Minn.55440
RE: Corporate Headquarters
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Enger:
There was a typographical error in the booklet we submitted for zoning of our
site on Bryant Lake. On the last page of written text, under Tax Exempt Bond
Financing, the amount of the issue should read $1,000,000 - not $1,000 as indicated.
Below is the schedule we plan to follow on the rezoning process.
February 27 Presentation to Planning Commission
March 1 Submit EAU to City
March 13 Second Meeting "',inning Commission
March 21 City Council Order Public Hearing
April 4 Public Hearing & First Reading of Ordinance
May 16 or June 6 Second Reading of Ordinance
If there are any problems with the above schedule, please let me know.
We have been working with the neighborhood representatives for several months.
All of the Oryant Lake residents have been invited to a meeting Thursday night,
February 23rd, at which time we will present the project to them prior to our
appearance before the Planning Coninission next Monday.
Sincerely,
sup VALU STORES,
oward B. Loomis Jr., P.E.
Manager
Engineering and Construction
WBL:dg
cc: Roger Ulstad
John Morrissey
Lloyd Stcnbeck
Gene Stormoen
Bob Dill
0(26
1
March 23, 1978
Community Services Stafff Recommendations
HILLSBOROUGH FIRST AND SECOND ADDITIONS
Supplement to 3/2/78 Planning Staff Report ',
1. Recommend to deny variances on Hillsborough I based on the rationale
of the Purgatory Creek Study in an effort to preserve the wild
character of the creek corridor.
2. Concur with Planning staff recommendations concerning grading, trails,
restrictive covenants and the CASH PARK FEE. •
•
•
-7d'l
- MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Unapproved
7:30 PM City Hall
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1978
COMMISSION PRESENT_: Chairman Sundstrom, Richard Lynch,William Bearman, Matthew
•
Levitt, Paul Redpath (arrived later)
COMMISSION ABSENT: Liz Retterath
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Chris Enger, Planning Assistant Jean
Johnson, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert
B. Hillsborough E Hillsborough Second, The Preserve, request for PUD approval;
rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 , and preliminary plat approval of 20 acres
into 34 lots and 60 acres into 115 lots respectively. Lot size and setback
variances requested on both additions. A continued public hearing.
The Planner Stated the City staff is recommending approval of the revised site
plan based on the conditions in the staff report dated March 2, 1978, and
the Engineering Supplement dated March 7 , 1978. The Planner then referred the
Commission to the Preserve letter of 3-10-78 regarding response to the staff
report.
Redpath asked Mr.Hess why The Preserve is objecting to the sidewalk. Mr. Hess
stated he agrees the sidewalk should be built, but does not believe it should
be a contingency on the project
McCulloch asked who the property owner to the south is. The Planner believed
Hustad Development Company is the owner.
•
Bearman remarked that the redesign of the plats has created smaller lots.
Mr. Hess replied the Second Addition had to be redesigned slightly to create
access to the property to the west as recommended by the city staff.
McCulloch inquired what basis The Preserve has for requesting "standard variances".
Hess replied projects in the past have received similar variances, therefore the
same variances are requested and referred to as Standard PUD variances.
Sandstrom inquired what the city is receiving in trade-off for the
variance requests. The planner stated the Hillsborough plat is basically in
conformance with city ordinances, but the Second Addition due to NSP, sewer
f, utility easements, and Airport Zone restrictionsrhas constraints which were
difficult for the developer to deal with . Mr. Hess stated the development
respects difficult soils and steep slopes, and the overall density is less
than 2units/acre. •
Motion 1:
6earman moved, Redpath seconded, to close the public hearing on Hillsborough
and Hillsborough Second additions. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2:
Beaman moved, Redpath seconded, to recommend approval of the Hillsborough
PUD for 149 single family lots on approximately 80 acres based on the �'
PUD submission dated March 13, 1978 , and the staff reports of March 2, 1978
and March 7, 1978. Motion did not pass, vote 3 ayes (Redpath,Snndstrom, Levitt),
3 nays ( Lynch. McCulloch, Bear:Ian). ^�� •
/ e
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- Feb. 27, 1978
C. Hillsborough 8 Hillsboroug_h Second, The Preserve, Request for rezoning
from Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat approval of 20 acres into 34
lots, and 60 acres into 115 lots respectively. Lot size and setback
variances requested on both additions. A continuedpublic hearing.
The Planner informed the Commission The Preserve had not submitted revised
grading plans on the revised plat until last Thrusday, therefore, no staff report
has been completed todate.
Motion
McCi1Toch moved, Schee seconded, to continue the public hearing on Hillsborough
and Hillsborough Second to the March 13th meeting for a staff report.
•
' {{f
•
�a� 1
MitIUIES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING C0;MISSION
approved
Monday, Feb. 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
•
COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice-chairman Lynch, Retterath, Redpath, McCulloch,Schee
COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Jean Johnson
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- Feb. 13.197E
B. Hills_borough & Hillsborough_Second, The Preserve, request to rezone from •
Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat approximately 60 acres located east
and west of Homeward Hills Road and So. of Co. Rd. 1. A public hearing.
The Planner stated the proposal is for approximately 160 lots and the staff has
been meeting with the County Highway Department regarding the project.
Mr. Hess apologized for submitting the revised plat late, but redesign was necessary
after reviewing the plat with the County. He stated no lots would be platted into
the floodplain and grading would only occur in the Conservancy Zone.
approver
Planning Cor,mistion Minutes -6-
Feb. 13, 197E
Mr. Hess informed ttr Commission the smallest lot is 10,300 square feet and the
largest is about 1 acre in size . He added they are requesting lot size and
setback variances.
Mr. Lynch inquired what percentage of the lots are below the required 13,500
square feet requirement. Mr. Hess estimated 50% .
The Planner stated that The Preserve is requesting standard PUD variances, but
have not applied for.PUO Concept approval.
Mr. Lynch felt the variances would be more favorably reviewed if the proponent
requests a PUD approval. •
Cherly Hutchinson, 9734 Mill Creek Drive, asked if the proposed project would
drain into the Mill Creek pond which is spring fed. Mr.Hess replied affirmative.
Cherly Hutchinson then asked for the average lot size of the Hillsborough plat.
Mr. Hess replied 5 of the 34 lots are below 13,500 square feet in size.
Dorothy Menaiis, 9715 Mill Creek Drive, inquired how close the back lot lines
of the single family plat are from the closest Mill Creek unit. Mr. Hess
estimated 80 feet.
•
Motion:
n .{;•:� i, ,_cved, Schee seconded, to continue the Hillsborough plats to the Feb. 27th
meeting for staff reports. Motion carried unanimously.
aq
The • reserve MAR 13.1978
March 10, 1978
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: Hillsborough First and Second Additions
ladies and Gentlemen:
The Preserve has had a number of meetings with the staff and offers the following
comments and suggestions relative to the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated March 2, 1978:
Item 2).c. - The trailway alone Homeward Hills Road is designated a "trans-
portation trail" in the Guide Plan Update and would seem to be of sectional or
quadrant benefit similar to Homeward Hills Road itself and should be constructed
or supplemented with funds from a larger assessment district. I suggest that
the liability of the homeowners in Hillsborough I and II be limited to the 423
per front foot State Aid Assessment for the improvement of Homeward Hills Road.
In addition, since Homeward Hills Road is in a transitional construction phase,
I would recommend that construction of a concrete sidewalk be deferred until
the final upgrading construction. I am concerned that much of the sidewalk
put in now would be destroyed, ruined or be in the wrong place when final con-
struction occurs. This would result in a double cost to the Hillsborough
homeowners ,..d/or City.
Item 2).d. - A cash park fee is required by Ordinance 332 to fund land acqui-
sition for this area; therefore it would seem reasonable that a credit for the
value of Outlot A in Hillsborough Second Addition should be given against the
5275/lot fee for the Hillsborough lots. City policy on fees and dedication
should be applied consistently with the land being developed to the south.
Item 2).f. - Attached is a updated preliminary plat of Hillsborough Second
Addition that responds to the question of access to the property to the west
(Street D). However, the Hillsborough residents will need assurances that the
property west of •Street D will be developed to a low density residential land
use.
I believe we are in general agreement with the staff on the platting and zoning of
Hillsborough and because of construction deadlines I urge favorable action at your
March 13 meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
THE PRESERVE
i9
Jo
ice President-Engineering
LWJ/jl cc: Chris Enger
Attachment n f
A Total Environment Community--8020 Franlo Rd., Prairie,Minn. 55343—(612)941.2001
•
•
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James E. Jensen, Planning Assistant
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: March 2, 1978
APPLICANT: THE PRESERVE
PROJECT: Hillsborough $ Hillsborough Second
LOCATION: Both additions are south of County Road #1
and have frontage on Homeward Bills Road.
The first addition is a 20 acre site east of
Homeward Hills Road and south of Mill Creek
Townhouses. The Second Addition is a 60 acre
parcel west of Homeward Hills and South of #1.
•
REQUEST: Zoning District change from Rural to R1-13.5
Preliminary Plat approval for 149 single family
lots on 80 acres.
BACKGROUND:
•
Both the 1968 Guide Play F,thepreliminary indication on the current Guide
Plan Update, agree in land use with this proposal, showing both as single
family residential.
Purgatory Creek borders the first addition on the south and east and Mill
Creek Townhomes are directly north. The Second Addition has a 125 foot
NSP powerline easement running parallel to and adjacent to Homeward Hills
Road. A 66 foot sewer easement affects the eastern portion of the site.
LOCATION MAP I! allt _:�,. •
I Sunn�sbroo Read 7 ,
�}F.A� � �,lic ' �:0 zu l' airie,n
7.
�779.i.1"t1 •\\ ' t 7.- ( ai ��l•acf ,, o_.--
) r' i ��Hills�►1i11. �"� a "tla.',«� 'LID
2" hOrOUIII Creek: . -i A g: ...•
_
ruu' ruu , ' `oc
r.... ... i_IL2t 1 _if 1st1 2 II
r F'llp 70 1 N�\ 1..__ ,.N\�a I .
1 a 1 . .I I i' ii
•
Staff Report-Hillsborough E Ili 11shorouth Second March 2, 1978
page 2
ZONING REQUEST
The proponent is requesting rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 with lot size
and setback variances. The following setback variances are requested:
5 foot setback to nearest garage wall without living
space over or behind
10 foot setback to nearest main house will 1% story.
15 foot setback to nearest main house will 2 story
Setback provisions of Ord. 13S for R1-13.5 District are as follows:
30 foot front yard setback
10-25 foot side yard setback; one side, both sides
20 foot rear yard setback
13,500 square foot lot size minimum
maximum density of 2 units/ acre.
Lot sizes in the plats vary from 10,000 square feet to 52,200 in the Second
Addition; and 10,800 square feet to 40,125 square feet in the First Addition.
Lot size average is 16,691 square feet in the Second Addition, and 17,33E
•
square feet in the First Addition. The maximum density of 2 units/acre is
•
not exceeded by the proponent, it is 1.86 units/acre.
ACCESS, CIRCULATION
The First Addition h;is one internal dead-end road with 4 cul-de-sacs serving
the 34 lots. Access is from Homeward (tills Road. The Second Addition takes
one access from Co.Rd. 1 and 2 from Homeward (tills Road. A dead-end road abuts
the west border of the proposed second addition and will connect to future
development of the property to the east.
Upon completion of the projects it is estimated that 1260 ADT will he generated.
Homeward dills Road, preliminary indication of a collector on the Guide flan •
Update, and County Road 1, shown as a minor arterial , will carry these trips.
Homeward Hills Road will provide a major connection to Schooner Boulevard and
the Major Center Area, and US l69/212 to the south.
•
Tlir staff has requested the proponent to dedicate additional ROW on Homeward
Hills Road from the (lb feet shown to SO feet, the standard for a future collector
road. There arc no lots fronting on Homeward Hills Road or Co.Rd. I.
The proposed plan has :shown one roadway area with slopes of up to IOS. The City
Engineer has determined that 7'.1, should he the maximum wherever possible. The
proponent has been requested by the staff to decrease this gradient to the standard.
• )2-f) •
•
Staff Report-Hillsborough L Hillsborough Second March 2, 1978
page 3
SOILS, TOPOGRAPHY, GRADING:
The Second Addition topography is characterized by a knoll in the north-
central and central portions of the site, dropping off gently to the east
and west. The site drops off about 90 feet very sharply to the south.
Lots that are platted on the steep slopes are narrow and long to help in
the preservation of the grades. The First Addition has two high areas
in the cast and west center of the site and drops off in all directions •
from them . Purgatory Creek runs on the east and south borders of the
site where the gradients increase significantly.
The grading is shown to be quite significant on the two sites. The Second
Addition has cuts of up to 20 feet on the highest point of the site, the
fill being utilized primarily on the lower,southern area. A 15 to 25 foot
grade will separate the most southern houses from the area to be dedicated, .
Outlot A.
Significant amounts of grading will also take place on the First Addition,
generally leveling the upper portions of the site and filling in the lower
areas on the perimeter. Maximum cuts on the site will be about 16 feet,
with the maximum fills of about 8 feet. Finished grades are shown to not
exceed 2:1 ( I vertical foot to 2 horizontal feet).
The soils on the sites are primarily made up of the soil series Salida,
Esterville, Dickman, and Hubbard with smaller areas of Kennebec, Biscay
and peat soils. The latter group of soils are concentrated on the
southern portion of the Second Addition and are less desirable for this
development. The soils which occupy the largest part of the sites are
good soils for residential development. These soils have a sandy loam
texture and have a good bearing capacity and shear strength. Changes in
volume with changes in moisture content is\cry low and presents no problem.
However, erosion occurs quite easily when vegetation is removed,so erosion
control measures must be taken to prevent this.
The poorer soils on the site, Kennebec and Biscay will be filled upon.
These soils have a high hazard of frost heave, but because they are underlain
by sand, they have a fair to good bearing capacity. .
SOIL MAP
Percolation rates are slow in the upper •,,,.,, K 1 .`�
soil horizons but are good as you get �,) , +�' •-' .- .'� '"
into the underlying layers. These soils ' ,`�, �^ v'�\�' ' /" 4' '� ,
are wet much of the year. The area of ' \' 1.;,.•
peat soils is proposed as dedication to 1 +� ift}i`��"` I '2-'
the City. . -:-_ �\` (• .\', v\ t' .,}"'I..
i 1 nu
Staff Report-Hillsborough G Hillsborough Second March 2. 1978
page 4
Vegetation on the site consists primarily of upland meadow grass species with
very few trees interspersed. Any elm trees marked for Dutch Elm Disease should
be removed prior to April 15, 1978.
•
OPEN SPACE, TRAILS •
•
In the First Addition, the dedicated land corresponds roughly to the floodplain •
of Purgatory Creek. The Conservancy Arca, as represented in the Purgatory Creek
Study of 1974, will not contain any huilding pads. Conservancy Arca is defined
as the area needed to provide adequate protection for the resources associated
with the creek corridor. The land dedication proposed for the Second Addition
is outlot A, a low , wet area on.the southern reaches of the property. A trail
should be constructed along Homeward Hills Road in the traditional sense of
•
•
a sidewalk. It should be S feet wide, constructed of concrete, and be placed
in the road right-of-way on the west sideof the roadway surface. A major trail
•
along Co. Rd. 1 will be constructed in the future and will connect to the
Homeward Hills Trail. •
RECO>IME.NDATIONS •
The Planning Staff recommends approval of the requests as follows: •
1). Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 with lot size and density variances
as listed in the report dated March 2, 1978.
2). Preliminary plat approval based upon the following conditions:
a. grading and filling should occur in a sensitive manner, disturbing
only the areas of the site directly affected. Temporary erosion
control measures should be used during construction, per Riley/
Purgatory Creek Watershed District recommendations to insure soil
loss is kept to a minimum.
•
b. permanent erosion control measures and sedimentation ponds should •
be implemented to help assure the continued integrity of the creek •
corridor. All storm sewer out lot areas should be associated with
•
sedimentation devices. All drainage and erosion control plans
shall be implemented according to Riley/Purgatory Creek Watershed
District recommendations. Ground cover should be established •
immediately upon completion of grading, especially on any slopes
greater than 8',.
c. a trail he constructed m the west side of homeward Hills Road in
the right of way from Co.Rd. l south to the southern property
line. The trail should l,c ; feet wide and constructed with
concrete in the traditional sense of a sidewalk.
•.r
d. that cash park fee of�$275/unit as per Ordinance 332 be paid.
c. restrictive covenants precluding any building within the Conservancy •
Zone of Purgatory Creek.
f. a road should be stubbed out to the west property line to provide
a through connection to future developmentto the west. •
JEJ:jmj 1 a )
I
4 • ,
4,-
1
1
• NEI 4'. 1 i -is I.: Toil-
4 1 l' 1013. 1 , •••;
i i v."............—, •-• .
.!--1--/Ot.' '')'.(."'-'-f f 01 ' '-;-\-I 1177-71-S-c...-:'.::::-:*--:•.. •
_..1. ,-;-/-r-'„ ..\-.....k...-...1 •,•It_ , -:-;=,.._ 1.- •.....- --:.
- _
--• ' .Cj.I\;1,-.••-0.,, •:,.
••••.:1A, :. . `-Tr\ .•-_,;_ ,•...-,.. , •
•
0 4 - .:.•—••••••< „.••••:. •:. .. \ ,-,..-.....\„. ---•.••• ....:,.. '..y..fi,.. 7... -
,• •-;.,..,
•
. .. \' I.. , •..',4•• -- .';'.-:. ‘,..: -.1:ir' lli • 8 :•
•7• ...‘• -....,, .,
• liD -;:•rsi( .
• . f•-•:. „ \ • /. '• ' ,' -r-1 ...a:"-. • •
! ' e. i. ' ..,, ' '/ : ....•-• --(..••••••0'24.,..-._.-,...- ''i ,
•.*:. ‘' • v..," ' ,, ,: ,:k..t s . ..:•:41....•,,-, .;;\ "". . ,
. ., 11 ' i• /-IL 7,' i /4 :/ ', . .\'' ''I.‘.'..)1,-4::.;.% "-- ...::,-".'-
. ,,I•.4•I',it. ',, • 1 .4 ••/ •,:-.; '.';• v.''..••;: • 1 ‘ ,,,
• .
- § I; :i.! :: .' 1;1.'•, - ' . ''':'••••••`;.-1 — '•(.•>-. '
. ,•.1..
Pt . ' :ex-- •';‘ .',.'•‘.X.,:.: • .;:'''A 11 . :/if ' t IA\\',.•\''.,:t';•:\•. •
Qi :f„.{.; I . ; .:'• ' ..k.' 7, ,..,a,., .4. ro.„,,". • ...-:,:,,•-.). ,.,,
lkil 1.,," ,,, :). .,, .....:(.. , ,;•...., .. • , t•,,,,• , -;i:L.,,,,-:.:.::::..,.
.1.
••-,\‘ .7).,42,..i,.: , ...0,:; : -- •-- ,-.--,/,•;-/-..•
-1 - ,L / -----<1 ••\.:.s'i'zif. •/•.1:.„, ..,,..-,„4 ,:'...„-• , .‘ ....1/4.s,, 4. .`.--/...., - •"i .v.;,,: .. '.-•. - ...ss z 4:: I..
, _ ' ''[• • .(,.. •i c . >);. . .tl'i
;11' • • -
k
,• . ; . (---••••:.,:.,... ,... .:7 . •Aii.4......;
' , \ "' % 't
/ '
. • • . ' 1 i
' /.'..."'—‘... ..'" 0 /
• ,C..7,...., 23
- N.-- 0 or-
k;;_-.• /`I ,',E , ;I), ;. .,..-- -.7-.-1. 77":••••-- """:%?;' ; fl.1 'I
::,,,,t-----. '''' -7.-.1.". •".. ..k.•
it 3 :t
2;'1 •, 6 4';. .,--- ---‘4,,",,../...-' 7,
... . ,... ,—.43----,::
r.,......,._,;: ....., , ,,.„. . . ,.. ,
ii .. : „ . ..., .....+_... ...,. ,... \ .,,../.‘„,.,...__.,.„, . ,
. , k'.. . ' ,.. •
, .1. ..4b.• 71. -,,, \. ;24-,... ,,, :.,.. \-. - •:-:-, i
/ •:; , • ..1, .. .., _,. 1 ss.4 ,,....:
/
1
. z_f.-;i , ' -,, .J.I__,„, -. i •--
.._, , . .-7,-..‘...., — t .----.1°' __1•21L__:., ....,\ ii.1.:.- .P
.1" t
. --* ' T-T,'-..:- . i- • . - ,:iLL.-.: ' , i -.— 1
. ell.-/: 'i• •,,./.,./:..:''' '''' i ,-.7s--., ,, / i 4: e . 1 • " a i .4 :f
1,:. I, .,,' l ', .. .,•••• • , ., -! : ` \ ..,..,..i • r 4..r.j ,i
4.'_',' • . .
. P._ - , • . • 4f.,•.1. F. a-I i
- •-• . .. .... .. . ..._ ... . . . .
:*.4 ' /
.,., • . . , . ./ y.
, •
'-.. Y ' ' ' ' -....:'/. •;.• if•I'''' /
,, ..... .,
----"•, ‘,::":,..'...7.7"------- ""' ' ..(''' •" • . -
C ti•adi'% t
-- --' ' .'`'.4",- ,. • , '..• )....,/i4:' .; 'f'ke:':
• / 1. .
't••••,, ...
,, • .',3..
, ... .. : • ‘..'-' I / if'••--
. . .
iri., -• - • e... • .. s . •- • t';'.. , , ; ' :
. t
: .. '•'‘‘ ' : • : ( -77
'I '' 7 '' I
_ —
1 . .
t ' ' \. ' '''• 1, .', t .
3 '\
. -
. . .
•
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HILLSROROUGH SECOND ADDITION •
fort, THE PR[Sf RYC - i y _... .ROAD... ram.. — n. �_�
scup fR.M.p ReAp-• Cot. T 1-• ,„` D- ' '��_ �-- EF�CNif$---r .r_
f77r� Sa tl .I >, I{
.
, /ARDARr H7a _ -�rt?� I- f`r~_'. .'r �,�� I A,,,a
ZEvrSEo zh7/70. :; � 55 11
•
I - I
" .• 'l t' e/ Kcm k _i 1 M .l • ;k ..1 r c
t 1 ii
DNA... .....rn tx �' - L r• f r' O D: I 'Ije_
oK ,,,f..4,
e'..,.ddi .. , .rt...41 :3r x C •0 ‘1, - l L
li of ':
� � : , l
7-- I '.
i ; •• 1 t .» df 10 Iph
c_
' • y' t L :see • ., i"'
yS / '- . - ,1 ( 1
Peree,viaw. - nr 6 !n H ( J ' f I • 1
S nr.,+rx..,.wr.,rr �1•u� w ! p - Z• a {tL`�
,.. w S..rn„A., .r a
4
777cp yr•L ' I I
' �i lt4f; ,. . ,,,z. . , :WO-1,.....- ...,..!. ,,,....,.. ? - .
i y ' /1,00 i5000 li.-• A(-1.
roue pm. ADD,ern n . . -
1 OVUM A'67J 41,0 •• --- A l
xr L.
ROAD AREA'176A1.,,
IM gyp,• '` . ••,..,. lifill ..1 '. 1
(, 500..mot- 51 t.n) 71 ! Iw i.
up U r �• I I I
•
•
3/7/78
Engineering Staff Recommendations
HILLSBOROUGH FIRST AND SECOND ADDITIONS
Supplement to 3/2/78 Planning Staff Report
1. Plat 9' radius along property lines at all street intersections and
cul-de-sac returns to provide sufficient R/W for utility installations.
2. Developer's engineer to verify proper sight distances at intersection
with Homeward Hills Road.
3. Developer shall contact property owner of Parcel (7210) Sec. 26 to the
S.W. of Hillsborough 2nd Add. to review the need for access to this
parcel.
4. Developer shall submit a finalized Development Plan, prior to final
plat approval or building permit issuance which shall show proposed
grading, storm water drainage areas and direction of flow, prelimi-
nary utility plans, ponding and floodplain high water levels for
100 yr. storm and minimum floor elevations for all lots.
5. Hennepin County and Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District review !
required prior to preliminary plat approval.
6. Some changes are required on the preliminary utility plans regarding
the proposed watermain in the 2nd Addition. These changes area noted
on the Eng. Dept's copy of said preliminary plans.
7. Street grades shall not exceed 7.5%.
8. Assessment information:
Hillsborough 1st, Pending: Trunk sewer and water $38,000,
Homeward Hills Raod Imp. $15,500. a
Hillsborough 2nd, Levied: #7029, Trunk sewer and water,
$66,243.94; Pending: Additional trunk sewer and water,
$38,000, Homeward Hills Roaf Imp. $44,700.
•
•
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
55343 �`'1
Hopkins, Minnesota •°��°�
HENNEPIN
935-3381
February 3, 1978
Mr. Chris Enger, Planning Director
• City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. Enger
RE: Proposed Plat - "Hillsborough and Hillsborough Second"
CSAH 1-South side at Homeward Hills Road
Section 26, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No. 618
Review and Recommendations • .
Thank you f_r submitting this plat for our review. We reviewed the
proposed plat and have the following recommendations for your consideration:
1. Dedicate for roadway purposes, an additional 17 feet of right of
way for a total of 50 feet from and along the centerline of CSAH 1. s.
2. The proposed new access locations from the plat to CSAH 1, are not
acceptable. These locations do not meet sight distance requirements
for exiting vehicles. A vehicle waiting to exit onto CSAH 1 should
have an unobstructed view of 740 feet to the left and 700 feet to
the right. These figures are based upon the roadways 50 m.p.h.
speed limit. Actual sight distance at the proposed access points
is as follows:
- West location (Street E) 515 feet left, 630 feet right. •
- East location (Street G) 400 feet left, sight distance to
right is good.
We recommend locating a new access approximately 630 feet west of
Homeward Hills Road. An access at this location will have sight
distance of over 1000 feet to the left and over 980 feet to the
right.
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equoi opportunity employer
I
2
3. The developer must apply for and receive an approved entrance
permit before beginning access construction. Permit' forms are
available from our Traffic Division.
4. All access must be via City streets. Separate driveways to
CSAH 1, will not be permitted.
5. Sight distance to the left at Homeward Hills Road is below
the 740 feet minimum. Actual sight distance left is 630 feet.
Since Homeward Hills Road will function as a collector carrying
considerable traffic to and from CSAH 1, serious consideration
should be given to relocating the CSAH 1/Homeward Hills Road
intersection.
6. Any construction within County right of way requires County
Engineer approval before beginning construction. This includes,
but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction
(utility permits required), trail development, and landscaping.
7. The developer must restore all areas within County right of
way disturbed during construction.
Please direct any response or questions on the above comments to Douglas
Mattson at this office.
Sincerely Ji
ames M. Hold, P.E.
Chief, Planning and Programming Division
•
1MW: DBM: bg
Attachments
-)3q .
i
% r- 1. • i 1Y ...
• '• . .. . . \
\•... . \ I. . ...,-- ye,/. / , 1 •/. *- ' •
_. / . ,
P--.• . -..,... ,. •• • - • (.. .
, , • -..._---. ,.,. • •, '.. , • --....7 )•,,...."-
. ./•'•.'....'"••• `,'..:- ,(..)
/ • • . .
O.. .,
\-- i • %.," 0
. , 0 A>,7 • ....s.: -. ,:::,
.
f f., 2, _ el. • -.•
..,,• •:,,, ; • ,.\ ,,,....? • ,
1! ;
. fy/ ...• I( -:,5.. .„ ..,,. .-.., ., -
- /. „ .... 0; ,I....,•, --';.; "• ,;'''••
.e,•, <•., .,.7r, - ;..., /
=
. t
.. . •'••••:. ., .
---7,7---- . .;•,. • ... . i 0
.... 1.,,,, 7,-/•,';' , :•• . . 0
,,.,.; • --•--- /,../..; ;:..: r....„ ,......\---,\ ,A,p, a
) , .
Ci/,-. .1•
• .0,
. , 4- ••,. i, -..:.......) ; „.,-
• . . , ,
w -----n-7,;,----,..-.--„--,_;
::•,,,-.• co ac -I
. ... L 1
. i
!j-, • o t;,
..,.. =
. I
. .
,t
• ,e, ..! 1 • ,,,
•:4-,., ..
‘?'
°
. ..111.;. , t•
4• '4' 1
.,,,:,. .
-•-,no 1N-9.7• ' "'"•• _
.. .
—_ . +04-i-r-r.4.--,-- 7.7-040.1,4--6-1=t+ii—toruzai-oet;
e 1 .. I
4
1
2 . .,
a
o
'.,'• ..,--'• f . ,
to ••,• r, , g II' .
, . 6
. .
0 r)
i
" .11-,q ;.• 9 u, . .
4n 0
F 1
• ..$ Z
-I 0
- 0
=
,1 •
I,t il
: .
•
1 1•••-•,,,t, -
• .
. :
• . .
•
-•
i.f! --... 1 • .. ...... _—._.......,.... _-___—_-. ._—.. ,.
,.!
.-. • .
. ,
.. -.-
. Zi •
.-•
. i.
• k • 11,
• •• rk.
. --- :-
, k • :', 1
. .
. \ _..
.1 k 13o I :
.t.,
•
•
•
•
�
, �
•
•
'f 4: � tee,,. •` `• F) �: -� •
1' T i 'r i '..f.. 1 ?
1,4 44
r/* I„ t 1 ..I� .p' `lam t 1
4,
.! . r 'w<
i j { 1: t,}t I'
zarL. zi !1..17.11Mxu011 t , :
j t ;It Q
+ if t .a. ..c 3+ ,tl:. VV
ti Y‘.4 •, w/ t r `t - 1. 4' Ft. •
t R, al , + ♦ y
1 .
; ' .t
.'t ` t`` ..-:wr.'•i�l�R.>�vi_r.: -0...:: -:1CtititiC�Qf97�fiKr:�. -__.•:.dt11�.=y Yt-� q:
1 A
15\sit
Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District
M L
� •�• 8950 COUNTY ROAD 00
EDEN PRAIRIE.MINNESOTA 55303
February 2, 1978
t 1
•
Mr. Roger Ulstad
City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 :�'
di
Re: Hillsborough 1st and 2nd Additions
Dear Mr. Ulstad:
The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley-Purgatory
Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary plans for the above '6
referenced projects as submitted to the District by the City of Palen Prairie.
The following policies and criteria of the Watershed District are applicable
for these projects:
•
1. A grading and land alteration permit application must be submitted
to the District for both additions of this development. A detailed
erosion control plan showing how sediment will be prevented fr.<,
leaving the development site both during and after construction
must be included along with a plan illustrating the staging of 's
grading and the timing of each stage must be submitted to the District.
A revegetation plan and specifications indicating areas that wills.
be revegetated with sod, seed, mulch and special revegetation t
techniques that will be used in particularly sensitive areal. must
be submitted to the District. The revegetation plan must also '!
include the estimated time between the completion of grading and
the commencement of revegetation.
2. A detailed utility plan must be submitted to the District for review
and approval. The District encourages the use of upland storm
•water storage areas on development sites. The District requests
that the developer investigate the possibility of providing ponding
areas on the development sites, especially on the 2nd Addition.
3. The Board of Managers indicated that a bond will likely be required
on the 1st Addition to insure that proper erosion control measures `l
are carried out. ,
•
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this development at an !'
early stage. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, ,
please contact us at 920-0155. +,
Sincerely,
A an Cebhard
BARR ENGINEERING CO.
Engineer for the District
AC/111 7
cc: All Managers
Mr. Frederick Richards
Mr. Richard i•uturm
1-3
TheJreserve •
January 17, 1973 •
(hi le,Fer,4116,,zi . • :.
rmaw es - Zoning & Platting Request
THE PRESERVE - HERMAN PROPERTY
Donald 1. Hess, Jr.
Vice President - Architecture & Planning
a
OWNERSHIP ..
The entire property is owned in fee by The Preserve a copartnership of "The Minnesota
Gas Company" and "Carter & Gertz, Inc". .
THE PROPONENT
- The nature of The Preserve's business, its experience as well as its fiscal responsibility
is well known from previous 3-9 years experience working in the community.
EXTSTING USAGE- Rural zoning - open field.
PROPOSED USAGE -
Only the 80 acre portion of the Herman Property lying south of Pioneer Trail is being
proposed for rezoning, preliminary and final platting as per F.H.A. specifications.
The remaining 38 Acres+ tract lying north of Pioneer Trail will be proposed at a later
date and•is not a of this proposal.
A portion of the south site lying west of Homeward Hills Road and east of the NSP
transmission line is proposed for 13 duplex lots fronting on Homeward Hills Road. •
This usage will require R.M. 6.5 zoning.
All of the remaining buildable areas of the site are proposed for 146 single family
(R.M. 13.5) lots suitable for housing comparable to Northmark II and Garrison Forest
developments in The Preserve P.U.D. 70-3.
The project is not a part of the original Preserve P.U.D. 70-3 and is not adjacent to
it. Consequently the following schedule of park fees is anticipated unless other
arrangements are made:
146 single family @ S275.0D
13 R.M. 6.5 units @ 5200.00 ,
SITE ANALYSIS
SOILT-- by S.C.S.
Most of the site is comprised of Salida, Estherville and Dickman sandy loamy or
i'ubbard loamy sand all of which posses's very high suitability for building development.
Only a minor portion of the proposed lotting area is "assay clay loam which is located
at the toe of slope in the west site. Approximately 10 building sites will require
special footing and foundation oreparatien to meet F.H.A. specifications. ";
A Total Environment Community—8920 Frania�d.,Eden Prairie,Minn. 55343—(612)941.2001
Herman Acres - Zoning ?. Platting Request Page 2
SLOPES
A rather small percentage of the site is composed of slopes exceeding lErf. The pro-
posed grading and lotting plan leaves significant portions of these slopes untouched.
VEGETATION
No significant tree growth exists upon the proposed building and grading area of the _
site.
•
FLOOD PLAIN
The proposed lotting and grading plan excludes all areas of the site identified on
city maps as Purgatory Flood Plain.
CO'.SERVANCY ZONE
There are no building pads or lot grading within the Purgatory Conservancy zone as
identified on city maps.
TRANSITION ZONE •
The proposed grading plan is designed to maximize control of surface drainage within
the area designated as transition zone on city maps.
METRO AIRPORT COMMISSION - NEF 25 Zone
Proposed lotting limits are outside that portion of the site where non-corrected NEF
25 noise contours are projected if the 81 improvement program is implemented at
Flying Cloud.
•
The Preserve's E.I.S. prepared by N.U.D. indicated that standard single family con-
struction upon this site would satisfactorily mitigate projected air traffic noise
impacts upon future residents. It further recorrended that all new construction
include air conditioning to permit closed window operation of affected units.
(See 81 map inclusion)
66" SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
The cast portion of the site is affected by the previous placement of a metro sewage
interceptor. The proposed lotting pattern in corporates this restriction to develop-
ment.
•
'75' N.S.P. EASEMENT
The west site sector is affected by the restriction to development caused by the
7241
Herman Acres - Zoning t Platting Request Page 3
•
Previous placement of transmission lines. The proposed lotting dnd zoning pattern
attempts to incorporate development which is marketable.
•
CITY SERVICES
Both sewer and water services are available to the proposed development.
PUBLIC DECISIONNS
Aside from the typical issues regarding standard zoning and lotting proposals the
current proposal requires that the following additional issues be addressed:
(Variances requested)
ThePreserve's standard P.U.D. side yard setback variances are proposed to be
employed to permit continuity of development standards in Preserve projects
and..to permit maximum flexibility in responding to slope conditions.
a .5'_ setback to nearest garage wall without living space
_ over or behind.
- 10' setback to nearest main house wall 11/4 story.
15' setback to nearest main house wall 2 story.
(Parks and open space)
A decision will be required to specify the city's requirements for park land
dedication and or payment of park fees.
(Land alteration permit) •
The proposed plan is intended to address the concerns of the Riley-Purgatory
Watershed District. The permit should be secured concurrent with the City's
zoning and platting process.
(Metro Council Review)
Since the project is affected to some limited extent by the operation of Flying
Cloud a review of "Metro Council" may be necessary. If a review is required
it should be conducted concurrently within normal city review time frames.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL •
The proposal including application materials have been prepared by The Preserve or
consultant staffs to assist in the public presentation of the platting and rezoning
application.
The Preserve staff will be happy to provide additional information or clarification
at any point prior to, during or after the public presentation process regarding this y,
proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
aRESERV, .1d L. ss, r, 71/0
V.P. Architecture & P anning
• ••••.,..
•
____.
N. 1/2 SEC.26,T.116—R.22 ,
"a--,'..-. 1" - •
, .
_.— • 1 r ....
:41
,
i
! i
- .:-.
4- III ) • i ..
•
• .,,
1
' Id
‘...
. . \
. .., , 111 . .
, .
/
$r . . ,.... ..-•
- • '
47
i . • . .
- 1 •
- a .6• : -g- ,.__ ,... '-_- . _ . ___ --- •-• -•% - 1 *i
i --•—_-r--____ 2-.- _ z..- ---, ,............t•
db
•
-' milk • 1 N .r . •
- MIMI aleill
11. • -...•, . -
*willIN T •#•", ,^ ,
.0.• ‘2,•-••... ,... i'l. .
44111M1 . 0 • tA- v..... .—.— ;
if
1411 I a , { T4W
--za----.
Illh..•
i ..........
1 ... • ; .....
PP A
lil ' .-4. ... .
Alen' °CM= -7
- -or
— _
.74,--- ill4-7 iiPti.10.1r tt) „... ,
_ $ • rx. - 4 1
:.-.. 1 i • 4 .‘ i VA
S ...4i .. ...
_,=s=
!- li I ivii*tsly
I, I AIM i•
III — • t ....:-..= ir
CrF.-... 4:M.= CV ,
.k.....',4 .....,• --- S .
.C-% . 4,i. 1..I
"t. .. -f *re 42‘" -.._-' ......,..t. ..... -i
• i r.,=.-.:.
1 1
, .
. ? '''') -z.c. 1 1
miff
_ . -.. •
.
•• •, • -\\;\e7..' • i
' •
• -
..•
,,
.:. N, •••.‘,,
•, .; i . , -- -
•".""" . L.-. ;,,t'l /1 . r ....,
. •----•
i ,,....•._-! _.. ........, ../Z; .t,," ,, i;
, •.,,,,,S\-‘ 1..f. 1
--,...
N•• I
• ;
• • .
- I
''.....- .^.--•.' ';''.:7...... :-.r, ',,--v--- 1'-• . , . ..- • ;I L IIIISIL
.7.--t: .:7‘' -.ti. -• . : 7,
. s. •••• ••••
• , . : ...••..s.'1,. .. ••__,...,:.;:l..7.1 S 26
-4-- ---'• - 5‘.4-=-• •••• -
•
'lira
- J, `• Y ••• _ BOUNDARY SURVEY
•
,; ...,,,- - -TT'-Ds--------- ,„ ' ' r)
#(,-----__,„,, : ...%7
r----
.t ,' ,...... _., , .
, ,. .
. ,
, .
, .
,.. „,,,„... _,,,,,,,_, ..), , . . __.,.„, , ,
.....,, ............. „.„. „,..?...„.. " .(.. ... s. ,__.. ,
_. ........ ___„ „f
__,,,-1--- \_ ' 1----- '' . - ; '
. is .Iii
,pm ,tE s•,, ,`' j' �-' v f i4
'1111.11VIV „ .'s- _ , .; ; ,,-.) i 1.
• c.;1 r7/11141/ • 7 : , , , ,, .:,
i _ ___.
;� -_0 sue__
1 1
....;..,-4—... ___: _ N. \ _; t: --" li 4,. \
1 ' 'ti- — ' .- : j
.Z;I 4tf" *it 1 -•-
� t
I-
N4 - -i
' -
-----,--.___- .
..::----:------.:------ _
--......_--z-z-1------.:--.-------- • ''r•--1 ,i
74130— . -------•77-_,..„-- , - i x A- ?'3. • ,
, ' ' ',4"( I . • .. e CV ... fire'N • '-';'' 'S )t' Avii n. •
A • ,..... ____ t• .
, .
! cr. ,.. , _ .-. VN' - 1 '.../ 4 Frtir:°71.1711VE , •
'•v, EXISTNG AND•PFC. tPOSE
i .. N LAND FEATURES•
....,• r am r aso 1
1 -• ‘N• yr.---.,....,,,..::. - - • !
) 4B•'‘‘‘‘‘‘‘. i •4 SiOPeS: 18% plus
., ,
Z 7 - •- l'% 7. • ' ..--/,' ilf .....- : _r... , 1111 ,
III I i ' .
, 111‘••,... l,--•-...
1 __X.'_:____L__
}4'.1.:) i -, -- 1 i
11 - .
------.-:
_ • '. -7\N--. j:.°P.--4-:', \ ' • . •
T..:• • 1 1
t • . - - -- ''5'..C.:...). ,-:0.4 \. ,
' -• ' I
; • r.--- • , 1\ ,
,
r \\.`,s, • I i5i:‘,
.,,, ,
4-
I .
..,_-.. \--7--r---a .N. • • IL'
--.--•:-:.4!),O.. ",..„_. -"-:-,,.,.- - , ---7 :
..:-
..', .11 1111116 rs---,-4:,,,-- --„,-„,=_.,„ , ,
, 2 ' ''' I - 71 1—"' -,,--- ,... -:7-: ' ti-\, i,
--MI Mk\ 1111 II :b , —\ > •;:f,..,.
, ME V !! IS '''\\. r'i
bliEli . op --.7.- - 1.. \ r),. r .-----:.-1 ',. --,.'. ''''1•., ',.
Ii \ - ) , I
, I.Itir ." \,\N -Ai- -•
:„)
,
111." '' ; ,
wawa// , ';,;i i I, t, -
' --,'• •
' ,
.( . n itir 1'Ai . -. /-i ,/, - ,-Ni.:
, • , I '---'er- • „ ':drg -
I : itLix I 1-1 1-,Z. -•‘‘ ,k473:ce.cj --'
• - i 1 t - ' L: ''"•/ ••
.41 , • ,,, -_-.--,-, ,.
It i ,_„. ,,,.•• „,..„.,.. .
•— ..—, , s:-- --, " - .,: •/ .
i : A
. . . _.,.,,.
, NI ‘-,• :..t;-..,...% --%5- -_,,, , .
- •
1 ....
- -1--,..• — ---, ::::5,,,-,>.....,,,,..,.,: :
• '''L
4 1-* , •,. ,___. ..-7. ,I, :::
_
N )
q I-- - ---- .1, 1 - ll- N_,.. , i2r,-,•'4,1 „
, I -
, , ,____ , 't • _._—• -t..-....-,. .... •+ , ..---,4,--,‘I or: :
.. -4 • ...---,-- - - ‘ .--,„ - 6 ' . ‘...• • :
0 o..•
"11 \ \\ \ r - ,--,,-..,....,=1;144? 1 ., 7L,,, 6.,,,. ...:
I_
-->tm 1 ,
!I: 1
•
ii
'y w BOUNDARY SURVEY ,
i
fi- c� ' t r
\ - sue; —=�. :/f .
..7 .---111 immikei 7411 In \i / /,-- --------------4,:lqr 1 . . ,
: N a tAin /
. \11) pl‘1111111 .. .,
r)! iikir4 1 r, , IL .- .0-1„'.,t.:ii) , 1 , , •
,',.;A i V4I 1106 ;......! li011': -...- I.,1 ... 'h.',i ; i
-..,,,,,
1II2 ots pir - . -_ , .
Az
2,01, _ -Vi al .
‘ir ,
/ -- ##�
• , + )4 •-
•
4 " y) ti - BOUNDARY SURVEY
14...\--' - 7Th,----------- _____-- . LW_j ..(\'' 1
_ _ ,,..N --4,, ; f --,,, --., \ , i I /i•
rmi.
•�� � i \ I`'r I , { I \ , \ • kI i i f
�; f '/. 11 N:
ki
'? / - (�( f"V.�` ,
l ��. c,,,"( E-V\s,
c ��� ��' --- —
\- '1(1I2 S F lots) . _, „r. i- . (I --
1 1 '--' f� - ` \�JR' ``-=•\ j-a\i�',;\ lr..t� 34 iF�.,1.{ i ' �_ _ ' A
!
o 2 N
4.-3 •!Aril' 0 L„, 1'4 1"'.....1-11/ o i— . `--ii D .1.
..', ....,_ .,„„11. s '
• l'Ui: .1/ r
...n
i - '• LieaL/.0.4". •e:::-,::''--. 4' .. LU: 1, 0 16
I ....r.• elzi...,,y:,;21 9.1 Mil A N. J
? 1 I 7
0
, r
1 c:1-,-<7.'T /.." q),L,.1;.. .r. ..
43 0 Cji (el .. *--..'• f _ ...a.r!'.- • ,-. 1.1
4
:".4
: s .
(<:--31---
1 • r:- . G 'f rj3 i FLP j,, 4 -I,. }4144/ . 1
[
-04 2 c°°-/---\ ._••,!--"Ill_a l' - -, :,
. a
It_vi
•;.-tg .,*-1.
._.,,,..
U 0 , *: • r i -IP) .",,2, ,.; .1...._ •••,
0 o LLI "
I .1,...,7 ,......6„ __2. :•:.,.,j it.: ,... ., , ., AV/ 1
p, ..... "71\ .0.°1
kz ..-:
. 0. . ••• ••:.--tat, lo
, ,-.4.,... . •
u).: ';6l 71 . 4.. .i, • e
} 0J -s
% ".4- - • ._r —1-- 0(,,t
-,--...r_ _________ti •I in.):,,„,„,,,, .1..,.. , 1.1•%., 2
;,,... . -,,,,,......„ •.A.
''' 2 $eti. :Li . 4 ,, • • ,
., .' -4'. 'il c..1 •••... , '-''..i. ft.
,, • ..A.. 5
' ' -cf' • 4 e a-_-
_
r 0
0.
) . i ii _ ",11117 •:,(*Si I:hili .ei :f mu, rin op
' . el'J . ' ,`81, •.'"q : ).-. 1.1 3 Fila J•"" ..- ,
'a
• , : . iy l's A &i .
01 ct 3 0 0
I fl '4 . 1 • • : 4« k?
v *- ' t's .. • f-
t..
J\
1.1.10
23 Z 4
V.,,,V . • : ' /ii ' --. s ' ''," • ,a .1 ).
,
s. ell- , :. (.} ,i, );.. ,,----- r.,_,-, ; u
) s'' -4' ( • h ,,, ,*-7 . 1---:7 t.it s.,—Noc, ,•,-. ..1.4,1i,__. i 1 5 1,)
4 a II.
lir 17"' ..-. • ' -•,, -..'"..--4:•-••.3•-r-•.'Z'.*.3.- a - a ; g in•-.1 , - —172),;,2-,•*-- '4gal" ' 1 i p li 6
----•—e.t t ' 0 ;I :-! : --- 4%; -,14.w. - (240: • - 3 a "
I
N. 4 _ i
1 lir • I WI' : f.ft......1-"'' 2 ....,^; i<
i,..,
-4 • Q a '' ,-• --\,2
L. - t4,_i J I 2 ti 2
a
`.... : it 4, 5 4
''''' ,i(ti ,It co \ ------i135,11/4-(.--,_-;_f-t,lc. .Ed ! a _-.
1 _,Ell 1.—. .. , i a I-
-, • e*" a 3:
1 ,„ /
I
Nig 00 2
J . a a Ig
a E • a a I- FIGURE
, ) ,., 0" ....-U1%;-.7••:::: .-••,.••••;7,,"1. ,., , 2axsaa
1 ' '' 's ' ••,2- •1111 ./1.•,, .+•f 0.1t iiimiulaa
- N -/- \,-,-ali------":-1• ' i , "--,:!
, -1/4. ., +, . la I IT ': SW124
,
•7::'‘') ,,,l'Ir* 77 :'''-',1 l'-' ' •
W H
--'\ ' — • •
1" N _'-•z % _4. _ __ 1,1,. ..-.• _ J a
ji
I 71/(0
Mar. 28, 1978
CITY OF EU::N PRAIRIE
hC NEP1N Co_ .TY, M1t.S4ESOTA •
RESOLUTION NO. 78-53
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PRELIMIN+RY PLAT OF
HILLSBDROUGH ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of HILLSBOROUGH ADDITION
, dated Jan. 18,-T08 , 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
am.ndments thereto and is herain approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
I
j
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
• ATTEST: SEAL 1
i
John D. Frane, Clerk
•
Fluff 1
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HEI:NEPIN COONTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 78-54
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HILLSBOROUGH
SECOND ADDITION
BE 1T RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of HILLabbiuUGH StCOND
ADDITION , dated_ —Feb-1r rYI8 , 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
am,ndments thereto and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ,
ATTEST: SEAL
•
•
John D. Frane, Clerk
•
•
•
•
1 Ely
/78 LD-78-PUD-D1
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUN1Y',MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 78-59
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HILLSBOROUGH AND
HILLSDOROUGH SECOND PLANNED UNIT DLLVELOP.'IENT
AND 1fLUDING THE 1968 GUIDE PLAN •
WIR116S, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135 provided
for the Pl.inned Unit D .elupiarnt. (PUD) of certain areas located within the
City, and
WiI!RFfkS, The Preserve 's Hillsborough PUD is considered a proper amendment
to the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did consider The Preserve's request
for PUD approval of residential and dedicated open space uses and recommended
approval of the PUD to the City Council, and •}
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie did hold a public
hearing on April 4, 1978 to consider The Preserve's request for PUD approval.
NOW MERLE-ORE DE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Ni„io sofa as follows:
1. The Iiil L Lorouyh HUD , being in the County of Uennepin
and the State of Minnesota, and legally described as
outlined in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant POD approval for residential •
and open space uses as recommended by the Planning Couu8 ssion
at their March 13, 1918 Meeting.
3. That the PUD meet the recommendations of the staff reports
dated 'March 2, 1978 from the Engineering & Planning Departments.
ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this _slay of
, 1978.
Wolfgang H. Penzel,Mayor
Alit ST: •
John D. Irene, City Clerk SEAL
RESOLUTION 78-59
EXHIBIT A
Hillsborough PUt1 78-01
legal' described as:
The North 1/2 of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast. quarter of
Section 26, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
The Southeast. 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 and N1/2 of the Northeast
1/4 of :he Southwest 1/4 and the N1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the
Southeast: 1/4 of Section 26, Toenihsip 116, Range 22, all in
flcn e 6 i t Count..
•
•
•
• r
t44
f i
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION '
approved
Monday, February 27, 1978 7:30 PM, City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Schee, McCulloch, Lynch
COMMISSION ABSENT: Liz Retterath, Paul Redpath, Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Jean Johnson
INVOCATION: Given by Pastor Gary Peterson, Immanuel Lutheran Church
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Schee moved, McCulloch seconded, to approve the agenda as submitted.
Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 13, 1978 MEETING
Add new P, page 5, Bryant Lake View Estates :
Considerable discussion followed relative to the feasibility of building a
collector road through a residential area after the homes are constructed.
Motion: Lynch moved, Schee seconded, to approve the minutes as submitted
and corrected. Motion carried 3:0:1 with Sundstrom abstaining.
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
A. Chairman Sundstrom
I. Sundstrom announced that this evening is Commission member Schee's
last meeting, and thanked her for her past years of service.
B. Others none
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS •
A. Amsden Hills III, The Preserve, request to preliminary plat 32 acres
for single family ,multi-family, and park uses; and to rezone 16 acres
from Rural to R1-13.5 with variances for approximately 30 lots. A
continued public hearing.
The Planner referred the Commission to the Feb. 2I, 1978 letter from The Preserve
regarding outlots E and F and stated The Preserve has agreed to alternate access
to outlot D, perhaps'along the south side of the storm water retention pond. He
added The Preserve has indicated that outlot G will be developed in duplexes.
The Planner suggested the northern part of outlot E,and outlot Fashould be dedicated
to the public , and the storm water pond within outlot E should remain in Preserve
association ownership with use available to the public.
Don Hess, The Preserve, stated he agrees with the staff report and recommendations.
Sundstrom asked if anyone in the audience had questions or comments.
Mr. Kurland, 10186 Laurel Drive, objected to the pond remaining in Preserve
ownership as - it would remove it from public use.
The Planner replied the City prefers.the ownership and daily maintenance be The
Preserve's responsibility, with right of access for all the public.
P)u9
1
•
• approved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- Feb. 13, 1978
Motion 1:
Schee moved, Lynch seconded, to close the public hearing on Amsden Hills III
preliminary plat. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2:
Schee moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Amsden Hills III rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 with lot size and setback variances
as per the staff report of Jan. 25, 1978 and The Preserve letter of Feb. 21, 1978;
including,that the storm retention pond be the responsibility of the Preserve home-
owner's association and the City have responsibility of outlot F and the northern
portion of outlot E. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3:
Schee moved, McCulloch seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Amsden Hills III preliminary plat dated Jan. 12, 1978 including the same items
as in Motion 2. Motion carried unanimously.
•
•
{
7
•
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
approved
Monday, Feb. 13, 1978 7:30 PM City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice-chairman Lynch, Retterath, Redpath, McCulloch,Schee
COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Bearman
STAFF PRESENT_ Chris Enger, Jean Johnson
•
B. Amsden Hills11I, The Preserve, request to preliminary plat 32 acres
for single family, multi-family and park uses; and to rezone 16 acres
from Rural to R1-13.5 with variances for approximately 30 lots.
A continued public hearing.
The Planner referred the Commission to the two staff reports and the engineering
report with recommendations on the platting, land use, diseased trees, deer
corridor, etc.,
Mr. Hess, The Preserve, stated The Preserve does not believe the deer corridor
has to be flared to the extent the staff is requesting and that the fence and
additional plantings along the proposed corridor should not be the developer's
responsibility. He stated they are still unsure of the access possibility
for outlot D.
Redpath suggested access to outlot 0 he resolved prior to Commission recommendation
on the plat and rezoning requests.
McCulloch also believed the Commission should not take any action on the Amsden
Hills III plat unless access to Outlot D is known.
Schee suggested the proponent prepare alternatives for access and return
for Planning Commission review.
Lynch inquired if members of the audience had questions or comments. None were
raised.
Motion:
Redpath moved, Schee seconded, to continue thepublic hearing on the Amsden Hills
III request to the Feb. 27th meeting , and if no further information is provided
at that time,the item would again be continued. Motion carried unanimously.
,)c'
Minutes - Parks, Rec. and ' approved
Natural Resources commission - b- Mon., Feb. 6, 1978
c. Amsden Hills III
Werts spoke to the proposal and to the Staff report of February 3, 1978,
recommending that the Commission consider three points - (1) widening of
the doer corridor where it meets with Anderson Lakes Parkway and Franlo
Road and to fence and screen the corridor (2) suitable access to Out-
lot D so that there is no interference with the corridor (3) Preserve
should receive credit for the deer corridor through the northern section
of Outlet E, and balance of land remain in Homeowners Association possession.
Kingrcy questioned whether we would have any kind of deer population in
fifty years. Anderson responded that according to Les Blacklock's plan,
this could be done.
Werts responded to a question by Kruell on the non-application of the
cash park fee for this proposal, explaining that this area is part of the
original preserve PUD. She added that the question of getting "cash in
lieu of land" does apply to the area around the Les Blacklock line, but
not in the rest of tie Preserve.
NATION Tangen moved that we approve the Staff recommendations of Feb. 3rd
in regard to the Ainsden fills III. Kruell seconded, motion carried 5-1,
with Kinrrey casting the dissenting vote.
51
•
•
•
•
a2pr,7.:ed '.
?iing Co::issior ainutes -4- Jan. 23, 151E
B. Pmsden Hills III, The Preserve, request to preliminary plat 32 acres for
single family , multi-family, and park uses; and to rezone 16 acres from •
Rural to R1-13.5 with variances for approximately 30 lots. A public
hearing.
The Planner informed the Commission Don Hess will present the project, there
is no staff report todate,and the Council is presently considering payment
of cash park fee on past PUDs.
Mr. Hess reviewed the site's soil conditions, vegetation&slopes as distributed
to the commission in the application.. He stated The Preserve is still delib-
erating on how to develop• the outlots and the deer corridor.
Lynch inquired if the Anderson Lakes Parkway location had been resolved.
Mr. Hess replied affirmative.
Lynch remarked that approximately 30% of the lots are under the 13,500 square
foot size minimum .
Sundstrom inquired how the island in the cul-de-sac would be handled. Mr.-Hess
replied it would be deeded to the City and mainatained by the HOA.
Retterath asked if the City would be requiring the developer to remove diseased
trees during initial construction. The Planner replied it is being recommended
by the City Forester and Cormunity Services Department.
Motion:
lynch moved, Retterath seconded, to continue the public hearing to Feb. 13th
and direct staff to prepare a report. Motion carried unanimously.
•
•
7 53
•
rip
February 21, 1978
Planning Commission •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road '
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 •
Re: Amsden Hills III
Preliminary Plat
Ladies & Gentlemen:
•
In response to the concerns outlined in items 1-6 in the
January 25, 1978 Staff Report summary The Preserve proposes ;.
the following: °.
1. The Preserve will not request access to Outlet D
across Outlet F.
2. Outlet F (the doer corridor) will be widened at
the'two ends per the attached sketch. a.
3. Outlet E and F will be n zero mainenance area and
allowed to "return to nature". After construction
is completed in the adjacent areas of Amsden III
and Outlet G, Outlet F will be reviewed to deter-
mine if supplemental underbrush and overstory
vegetation is required. Cyclone fencing shall not
• be required unless a high density multiple develop-
ment on Outlet G is proposed by the developer. If
such a proposal is brought forward, its site plan
shall include a boundary treatment between Outlets
F and G consisting of the fencing, slopes and
plantings needed to limit the higher intrusion
potential resulting from the higher density.
4. Outlet G is currently (wider negotiation for sale
as a double bungalow site with a lotting plan sim-
ilar to that shown on the attached sketch. If the
negotiations are successful a proposal will be be-
fore you shortly. No development ue(;otiations are •
underway for Outlet D at the present time. Develop-
ment potential is anticipated to be low density
attached or detached residential with a density up
to 2 D.U./acre. •
•
•
•
/54
• � .
is
Amsdon Hills III
Preliminary Plat
February 21, 1978
Page Two
5. The cul-du-sac island will he riwncd and maintained
by The Preserve Association.
6. Tho Preserve will work with the City Forester to
determine the extent and method of tree removal #'
during overall site development. I .
I believe The Preserve and the City are in substantial agree-
ment and because of restrictive construction time deadlines ;
I urge your prompt and favorable acceptance of the Amsden
hills III subdivision.
Respectfully submitted
TILE SERVE
r�Ct L �
Lee W. John n
Vice President - Engineering
LWJteh •
Enclosure
t
cc Chris Enger •
C
f
•
..I'' 4. 11-
�' _ , ' 4' -
Vi ! C '3
aii t `:,
s' i
r
c
<, F d y� r .
b
b
t n 98 ♦ -f'- u
• 0:4——41 / i" ' ..0''
4 — ..•."' ...` .
IV
4 3 il' •
0
''•+c['„^'"' epa �` `' may'
$ �. ' a
r+ te
p• C
s,‘ -k,,,k \ rit \.‘,1;r-.•
`yy' ', \A
•
•
t J \ `
i4 ., 6/ V { ` Lsi''
i ) 1\j \ \. \,' ),,,i:,t
1.
d� _•_ —.G1r '^\ fit, /�}'
(‘'HJ J.1 /
\` PLUDRI.IAL. BPG.00 J} u
1
_ �v.. ��
P.,
e.
"
-i. 1
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
• 8950 COUNTY ROAD as '
EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA 55343
•
February 1, 1978
Mr. Chris Enger •
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Re: Amsden Hills 3rd Addition
Dear Mr. Enger:
The engineer advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley-Purgatory
Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary plans for the above
referenced project as submitted to the District by the City of Eden Prairie.
The following policies and criteria of the Watershed District are applicable
to this project.
1. A grading and land alteration permit application must be submitted
to the District for this project. The permit application should
be accompanied by a detailed erosion control plan showing how .
sediment will be prevented from leaving the development site
both during and after construction. A restoration schedule and
restoration specifications must also be provided.
2. A detailed storm sewer plan must be submitted to the District
for review and approval.
Thank you for,the opportunity to comment on this development at an
early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments,
please contact us at 920-0655. `
Sincerely,
if
I'
A lan Gcbhard
BARR ENGINEERING CO.
Engineer for the District
AG/111
cc: Mr. Conrad Fiskness
Mr. Frederick Richards
Mr. Dennis t brlwla - BRW
'15_
PLANNING STAFF RLFORT
TO: Planning Ce'i:'i,sion
FROM: Jr.i1 Jcn,cn., i'laaning „s istant
THROJld!: Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: Jan. 25, 1978
APPLICANT: The Freserve
PROJECT: Amsden Hills III
LOCATION: West of Amsden Hilly II on Anderson Lakes Parkway
REQUEST: Preliminary plat approval for 30 lots and outlots A '
through G on 32 acres
BACKGROUND:
The 1970 Concept approval of PUD- 70-03 ( The Preserve ) designates this
area ;s low and media:a ddnsity residential. The 1968 Guide ?ian shows
this A,-,:. as sin41 family -esiaent .l.
The site is bordered on the ,•.r • '; (f
east and south by llrsden i'.i l l s t :.: 1
I and II., single family resi- \-,.) , ,Rior�c rxr+ . t ;',
dentiai subdivisions. It is r\ cagy,': ;.;,1:Eo ,� . •
bordered or. the north by C., (�.. .\ono"
6 .
Anderson Lakes Parkway and " , • , C • •
Outlots G and E. are bordered \ ?'( /1 AN `x0 r.1. •
on the west side by Franlo I ,L,, 1 1 ,� y 4
Road. North of Anderson Lakes ; „, '.,� *� 'P
Parkway and Amsdcn Hills resi- ' ^' %j`�
dential areas ;s Anderson 4 ,ylt,,%,: it
Lakes Regional Park, while to 111 q:.\: & t.. ` .
the west of Franlo Road is L,.---.rim—.ea-r,ayj—�i
Olympic Hills, a single i I V;' t,r•�.i" . Fmr:tr
familysubdivision which , ' '''`n '
is zoned Rii 6.5 OtYfAr !N;;:,
_r
frYt11. ails ., I ,..�44yT.. ••,
lcrX.G -ft.„ M•: ir J
LOC AT ION MAP :} �'- �- - 1
.4- , frrA.R1f •
, . t 1f)1
,
h••• i ...• i I•••
.^-n-r1 . •7., ---- • ' r
_: t 7)N- i .•
751
Staff Report-Arrsden Hills III -2- Jan. 25, 1978
DENSITY 8 70NIt1G
The proposed plat has a total of 35.3 acres, 16 of which are requested
to be rezoned to R1-13.5 and final platted for single family residential.
There are a total of 3U lots on the 16 acres for an overall density of
1.88 units/acre. The maximum density in Ord. 135 is 2 units/acre.
Lot sizes range from 11,050 square feet to 31,750 sourre feet and
average 15,000square feet. Lot size variances will he required to
accommodate the lots under13,500 square feet.
The following are provisions of Ord. 135 for the R1-13.5 District:
2 units / acre maximum density
30 feet front setback
10 feet-25feet side setbacks; one side-both sides
20 feet rear setback
13,500 square foot minimum lot size
Variances requested by the proponent are as follows:
5 foot setback to nearest garage wall without living space over
or behind.
10 foot setback to nearest main house wall, 11/2 story
15 foot setback to nearest main house wall , 2 story
The frontage of lot 9, Block 3, is shown as 40 feet. The minimum acceptable
frontage for lots is 45 feet, so this should be changed to reflect this.
•
•
-7 59
Staff Repert-lckden Hills III -3- Jan. 25, 1978
ACCESS A CIPCUI ATION
The 39 single family lots gain access from Franlo Road and Anderson Lakes
Parkway through i'n,sden Hills I and 11 respectively. The project could
generate 250i AUI per day a"on cuauletion, most of which will be funneled
to Anderson Lakes Parkway east and west. (traffic generation figures based
upon 8.5 average. daily trips per day per single family dwelling unit).
When Franlo Road was realicned to intersect Anderson Lakes Parkway, the dedica-
tion of the new ROW from Th; Preserve has never taken place nor has the vaca-
tion of the old ROW to the respective owners. This should be taken care of prior
to any final approvals.
The northern cul-de-sac is shown to have a center island. The center portion
of the island is outside of the road ROW but does not have an outlot designa-
tion. The staff reconmmends that the island outside of the ROW be shown as an
outlot on the final plat and that it not be deeded to the City, but rather be
owned and maintained by the homeowner's association. There will also be a
1I foot strip inside the RCil that will be part of the island owned by theCity.
The Preserve has agreed to maintain both the portion of the island owned by
the HUA and that part eened by the City. This maintenance should he assured
through an aO cement prior to final plat approval.
I J
I I
/ Z. :,
6 \
I 77 :47WPY, .;:i. ..4.
"r, ti�7 sc�tiE:b '
v„..„(:‘,..,,.„,„..7......., . '..i...„.....,....1,C.11 cdrAG-x-' --.:Th. ''
''';1!/1Th. -- ).: \.............„..„...--•"
..... i...........................,,,,\
/ / ')60 t
\ ,
\....•-•''''"'"' ..
•
Staff Report- Amsden Hills III -4- Jan. 25, 1978
SOILS, TOPO(1'!J'HY. GRADING F. VEGETATION
The proeonc:it has provided maps illustrating steep slopes, soils and •
vegetation. Generally, the site is severely undulating and heavily t:ooded.
The main tree specie on the site is oak, but there also large populations
of elm, ash , basswood, ironwood , and some aspen.
Dutch Elm Disease is apparent in many of the elms, with only a fraction of them
marked and tagged for removal. The City Forester has recommended that all
diseased trees he removed during initial construction and those that are
marked be removed prior to April 15th. A pile of elm and other tree
species located approximately in the north/south roadway of Amsden Hills II
should also be removed before April 15th. •
The grading plan proposed shows a very sensible treatment of the site in
the grading of the roads. However, the City Forester has recommended that
any oaks receiving significant cuts or fills during the grading of the road,
be removed. Removal at this time will prevent a more difficult removal
after the subdivision is built-up. ( oak trees are very susceptible to
construction damage). Sensitive individual site grading will provide beauti- -
fully wooded walkout lots.
•
The soils are made-up of the soil series Erin which is a well drained soil
having a loamy texture. The slopes range from 0-24%. Bearing capacity and •
shear strength of this soil series is fair, and changes in volume with changes
in moisture content are moderate to moderately high. Fairly wide footings
are needed. These soils erode easily, so erosion control, on slopes over •
12%, is imperative where vegetative cover is removed. Sodding and seeding
should occur as soon as possible following construction. •
LAND USE 0B,1CCTIVES
The proponent is requesting preliminary platting for Outlets D,E, F,G and H
which are not to he rezoned or final platted. The staff requests that the
proponent make their specific intentions clear as to the uses for these
outlets, especially Outlots D and G. High density residential is indicated
in the application material. Outlet E is a low stormwater pending area
that drains a majority of the site aid will be considered part of the •
doer cor•ridor.Out.lot I is to be left as an open space deer corridor, allowing
migration through the developed areas to and from habitat areas in Anderson
Lakes and Purgatory Creek.
Outlot D appears to be a land-locked area unless a road is considered on the
south side of the pon:ing area or on the north side of the pending area,
the latter which ,auuld again cross the proposed deer corridor. The staff
feels that an additional road o, ro•s the ch•er corridor would he a very
•
detrioi,mtal obstructing in oe aiready difficult corridor situation, causing
the crossing of reads in less than 1000fect. The staff requests that the
proponent present a rc.rsenahle access alternative without crossing the deer •
corridor, if an access cannot he located to the future development areas
'J(p l ;
•
Staff Report-1iasden Hills III -5- Jan. 25, 19/8 •
•
•
without interfering with or crossing the deer corridor, it is the •
staff's opinion that this platting configuration is not acceptable.
Outlot F, shown as the doer corridor, is ;II the staff's opinion :•ride
orlotiOi allee tbroueii, hoeever, tit c two ends of the
corridor should be flared-out. to 250 feet + from at least 100 feet frost
the ends. ( see figure 1 ). This is to allc., ca_i r visual con[act with •
the corridor for the deer. Once the .leer have moved into the 100 foot •
wide corridor, the width should he sufficient to alto, movement, providing •
that there are sufficient visual barriers on both sides to define the •
corridor. The staff recommends that dense underbrush and tree cover be
established alen,_i the borders of the proposed deer corridor , as well as
the flaring of the entrance areas and that the access to Outlot D not
cross it. A fence should also be constructed along the corridor sides •
in conjunction with the plantings to discourage excessive pedestrian
movement through the corridor. A..ny approvals concerning the deer corridor •
and Amsden stills IlI do not preclude future special treatments reouired of •
these projects for the veer corridor when Outlots D and G are developed.
•
•
•
•
S U t t "TAR Y
•
Outlet D, having access limitations is an important issue in the staff's nninion,
especially as it relates to the proposed deer cerridor. The following •
should be considered in the approval, denial or modification of the plat:
1. The proponent should not plat a road across the deer
corridor to 'serve as access to Outlet D.
2. The deer corridor should be widened at the 2 ends to at least •
250 feet starting at a point at least 100 feet from each end. •
3. Dense underbrush and overstory vegetation should he established •
to define the corridor and to allow easier movement through
the corridor by the deer. This planting scheme should be
explained by the proponent.fencino,egual to 6'cyclone , shoulc occur along the
border of the corridor in conjunction with the plantings. •
4. The proponent should provide more specific information on
Outlots D and C.
•
•
5. The cul-de-sac island shall he maintained by the 110A through agreement with
the City or el ir:inated.
G. The developer shall work with the City Forester to determine the extent and
method of tree removal during overall site development. the removal of
•
diseased alto and marginally Ic:.tted oak trees is ininortant in the di•,rat,' •
film?, sanitation program and also prevents the more costly removal alto). ue Iup-
,,,e„r ai ilia area tic rrrru,v,'d.
Staff Report•Aesdcn W lls III -6- Jan. 25, 1978
The Conrrission should be aware that preliminary plat approval of
Outlets D and G would be given without snecific site plan and land
use iniorrr.,tion. Hoieve r, rezoning of these outlets will be
reviewed by the Planning Cce ission.
The following would he appropriate actions by the Planning Cominission:
1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary
plat dated Jan. 12, 1978 and the rezoning to R1-13.5,with
lot size and setback variances , 30 lots on 16 acres. •
2. Request modification of the plat as per items 1-4 on page
4 of the Jan. 25, 1978 staff report.
3. Deny the project on the basis of road access to Outlot D
because of crossing the deer corridor.
The Planning Staff would recommend Alternative 2, providino the access problems S.
to Outlot D are satisfactorily resolved. If this problem is not resolved ,
the staff would recommend Alternative 3.
• 1
JEJ:jntj
•
•
(1,aZ
-..,
.....-...
...,
.:.
••••.....,
--.,
•
.._. ,......_
-----
-•"-------........- ..........—............-...............----\\„,..............
s...
A r-,
•-
.-..
• e (t.....,,,-,1, -
"••-..
• '1 • ,,
''''`.......,
..--•-''
„....
-.----,_
-
r•-----
1 ,/ \\,\
•
•
•
/
,
/ //' \ ,.....-T
i.,
rt i'•:,-•t, •
•
\
() -'‘ i ,
,
61 .._,- r,•,-'‘`‘-':-'. /3 \ 1
' 1"--1-
.,‘
%.,
4,'
/
1 ,,,.;!.\
i,r,:; :::-..!/.. ,i
/ -,......
...
-------(' .. -
',.
/ ,,, i
, ,
L.,.1 .!.
E! !. ,:
,...
1 i4 I:.-1.1'1'Li'l 1
/
‘) I
t‘ .
1.
r .t,
, \ ,
f it 1
ifr-- -- -t.
/ \
. /1'
I \ • •••'4
1 .. i I \ / f
' 1 I. ' /
/ .
i
) b.
/
\--......,.
---........ 'I
.,
\-% ''‘ ...,. ;
\.•,• ;
i
..•
I f,t,. .:17:if., .......
......
...•
e' •
1 1.......‘
..-•'''
-.
..• ...... -----...
..---- ---"\
-....---"':-.-
1
e.....„1.1:•!, i \ / c..„... •f,'ri•
%t'f .
. t c, , , -i.L•t‘;r ‘•
.... •."•
(.;
I
.•1
•i
\ t
-)&q
City of Eden Prairie
Public Works Department
'Engineering Division
•
CHECKLIST FOR REVIEWING
PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENTS
Date 1/19/78 -'1.D• 0
1. DEVELOPMENT NAME AMSDEN HILLS THIRD ADDITION
LOCATION So. of Anderson Lakes Parkway, east of Franlo Rd.. .
west of Amsden Hills 2nd Addn., north of Amsden Hills
2. DEVELOPER
The Preserve
3. ENGINEER/ARCHITECT/PLANNER Bather, Ringrose Wolsfeld, Inc
Preliminary plat, not dated Jan. 12, 1978,
4. DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW
Preliminary utilities & grading, January 1978; PUD zoning & platting re-
quest, January 11, 1978.
5. PROCESSING SCHEDULE:
Application received ____Watershed
. 1/23/78 planning Commission - :Conan Rights
Park & Recreation ___ City Council
6. PROPOSAL m
6.1
PUD Approval EID Rezoning
6.2 ED Preliminary Plat
6.3 Present. Zoning Rural
' 6.4 Proposed Zoning R1-13.5
6.5 Previous. Pup G Preserve PUD
6.6 Previous Rezoning Agreement 0 None
• ')G6 .
- 2 -
6.7 Single Family detached lots:
9 less than 13,500 sq. ft. Density
21 13,500 sq. ft. or more Density
22,000 sq. ft. or more Density
30 Total SFD lots Density 1.88
Multiple Dwelling Units:
RM 6.5 Acres Density
RM 2.5 Acres Density
Total Mult. Units
6.8 X Owner occupied Rentals
•
6.9 Homeowners Association. proposed YeS (Preserve Niomenwnerc J.Iccoc.
6.10 Other uses proposed _ 9.3 acres are shown as open spare &
wildlife areas. Outlot G intended for high density multiple,.
6.11 Requesting City to provide streets and utilities NO
• Developer will install utilities & streets
6.12 Consistent with City's Comprehensive Land Use map Original
PUD indicates low density multiple.
7. PROPOSED OPEN SPACE, TRAILS
AND PART: DEDICATION
7.1 parcels to be undeveloped as open space Outlots A, R, C, E
and F
7.2 Trails Uncation, surface type, ownership) Refer to
Planning Report dated January 25, 1978, Outlots E and F are
proposed as deer corridors. No other trails indicated
ri(6.
3
7.3 School/Park sites Dedicated through Preserve PUD •
7.4 Park dedication fee
8. PROPOSED STREET SYSTEM
• 8.1 Check City's Comprehensive Street Plan O.K.
8.2 Access to adjoining properties Developer must submit
future plans for Outlot 0 and indicate access. Agreement must
• be provided for maintenance of island in cul-de-sac.
8.3 Street R/W and pavements widths Minimum 50' R/W and 28'
roadway. Recommend use of standard 50' radius cul-de-sac in
Northwestern portion of plat.
8.4 Private streets None
8.5 Street grades, sight distances at vertical curves, concrete curb
and gutter Final plans and profiles must be submitted by
Developer and approved by Engineering Dept.
8.6 Street names have not been submitted. Must be approved by
Engineering Dept.
8.7 Parking (Ord. ft141) N.A.
8.8 Traffic volume impact on existing streets minimum impact
76?
•
•
•
— 4 —
e.9 Frontages on collector streets
None •
Sufficient R/W must be provided for the
8:10 Other comments•
future expansion of Anderson Lakes Parkway. This R/W must match
R/W dedicated through Garrison Forest 2nd Addn.
9. GRADING AND UTILITIES
Maximum cut 12'
9.1 Range of cut and fill
Maximum fill 3'
•
9.2 Significant land features to be preserved
Drainage pond
in Outlot E and steep slopes in OUtlot D
•
Existing holding area in Outlot E
9.3 Drainage ponds
None
9.4 Flood plain encroachment
9.5 Development plan showing proposed grading, storm sewer, sanitary
sewer, watermain, minimum floor elevations, pond levels and
representative soil borings. Must be submitted by
developer prior to final plat approval.
9.6 Skimming and grit control for commercial parking lots N.A. —_
_ 5 _
• 9.7 Sewer and water service to adjoining properties
The developer must provide future plans for Outlot D and
indicate how utility service would be provided.
•
9.8 Sewage lift stations required
None
9.9 Landscaping, buffering and lighting plans Must be
submitted by developer and approved by planning and engineering
departments
9.10 Natural gas, underground telephone s electric Underground
utilities required
9.11 c.cher comments
!t
The following setbacks have been requested:
10. VARIANCES REQUESTED
5' garage to side lot line; 10' - 1 and 11 story house to side
lot line; 15' - 2 story house to side lot line. ?'
• •
11. OTHER AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUIRED BEFORE FINAL CITY APPROVAL
X Watershed District DNR
Minn. EQC Minn. DOT
Henn. Co. Metro Council
Adjoining Community
•
— 6 —
12. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED AND PENDING Levied 06438, Neill Lake
Storrs Sewer, $14,161.75; #6446, Franlo Road Street, $3,720.00;
#6452 trunk sewer & water, S2,800.76; #7031, trunk sewer & water
$35,403.71.
13. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Environmental Worksheet
X Rezoning Agreement
• X Developers Agreement (PUD only on Final. Plat)
•
•
•
•
If
• 3
77
JIlL...�;t�S113
January 11, 1970
•
Ai1SDEh HILLS III ADDITION - P.U.U. Zoning & Piatting Request
The PRESERVE - Area 5
Donald L. Hess
Vice President, Architecture & Planning
OWNERSHIP
The re^wining unplatted portion of The Preserve's Area 5 is comprised of portions
of the Garrison and Sander's farms which are presently owned in fee by "The Preserve"
a copartnership of "The Minnesota Gas Company" and "Carter i, Gertz, Inc.
THE PROPONENT
The nature of the developer's nosiness, exoerience of the owners as :well as the
proponent's fiscal responsibility is well known from previous S-9 years experience
working in the com:.unity. •
..
•
THE PROPOSAL
Amsden Hills III, the only part to he proposed for first phase final platting, with •
its larger lot sizes is proposed for custom lot sales. It is anticipated that the
market range of future housing units will he equal to or greater tian existing or
proposed housing in Pmsc!en Hills I and II {additions. See the attached preliminary
plat for identification of lot sizes, boundary limits and adjacent platting.
EXISTI',G USAGE
The existing underlying land use is presently zoned rural - P.U.D. medium density
residential. Its current and previous use has been that of a wood lot.
PROPOSED 'USAGE
The developer's proposed low density residential use downgrades the previously app-
roved medium density residential portion of the Area 5 P.U.D. conre7t. It is felt
•
that the proposed downgrading of density is consistent with adjacent plattings
which have been similarly downgraded by previous commcil actions. It is proposed
that the previous general densities he consistent with previous P.U.D.-70 approvals; •
Amsden Hills III portion of the unplatted portion of Area 5 is proposed for high
income single family housing to be marketed to custom buyers in the $100,000.00+
price category on lots as large or larger than Ausden Hills 1 and II.
PUCL:C o:CISIO't •
In addition to normal critical public decisions regarding re:oning, platting and
utility extensions for Arrsd^n Hills III a alder:rination regarding the configuration
of previous P.U.D. open space and deer corridor co+...aiteents need to be defined. The •
preliminary plat of the remaining unplatted portion of Area 5 has been filed at •
this tirle to encourage a basic solution to these concerns. •
A Total Environment Community--8920 Franlo Rd.,Eden Prairie,Minn. 55343—(612)941-2001
•
•
N'SSEl HILLS III Ah;IIT[^:: - P.U.9. Zoning t Platting P.eauest Page 2
VXUTA;CES RFO;1FSTFO
'Ihe I'reSarve's st.and::ri P.U.D. variances are proposed in Amsden Hills III to permit
maximum flexibility in 'louse nad location which respond to existing tree and slope
conditions. (side yarJ setbacks):
5' setback to nearest garage :rail without living space over or behind.
10' setback to nearest grin house wall 1; story. •
15' setback to nearest main house wall 2 story.
•
The developer proposes to do a minimum amount of site :;radio.: and tree r naval in
Amsden III during initial construction phases to assure 1) The least amount of im-
pact upon the land is created. 2) The maximum sales desirability of wooded lots is
retained.
•
Proposed land development in Amsden Hills III which results in late spring and early
summer of '73 unit construction and sales is desired. •
•
SITE ANALYSIS
•
the Preserve staff has prepared the attached graphic materials for your general
knowledge.
•
1. The Preserve Area 5
This exhibit shows the relationship of previous area density
plans and current adjacent development. •
•
2. Slope study •
Indicates that the proposed Amsden Hills III plat is primarily
•
located on 0-12`o slope which occur at the upper elevations of
the site. .'ost of the proposed building sites will be attractive
to walkout homes. •
3. Vegetation •
Indicates that the proposed Amsden ;,ills III plat will result in
wooded sites.
•
•
4. Soils - by S.C.S. •
•
Indicates that the proposed Amsden Hills III plat will be con-
structed on Erin silty clay loam which is well suitable for pro-
posed footing and foundation construction.
•
•
SU,:IARY OF PROPOSAL
•
the proposal inciudin; application materials have been prepared by The Preserve or
consultant staffs to assist in the public presnntatien of the preliminary platting •
of Areas anti the final platting of Amsden Hills III.
The Preserve staff will be happy to provide additional information or clarification •
at any point prior to, during or aster the public presentation process regarding
this proposal.
•
Respectfully submitted,
/7 .
•
•
Donald L. Hess, Jr. / 7 /,Z
•
•
\ v\t•
-_1
----,� ; •
CGiy Park •; _ .
t j3 -Ti I.
r -" "," 7 _
•Y-. 4{ 7Q \ (r -,J 1- 'j/- Jam' 1 ,o .
,;_• '.:(:,';:::,;_,r:
•
sr -
I . .PARK �• ,, 7 ...1 - �" c... l_i .. -, _
; c:::).--......:::::g:::::::.::::::::r--r,51,.7 r.',„..__, t_____1 1_ .: : :
>1. i.--—1 Fl--c_fl;',/...' - ..._ ---. -c---r-I-
0' -0,0iVr____I ,,_ ___
Hustad �� —I--
-L__ ��= Development
. ILL) ill //
CO
----7 fr-----. a ,
, •
,,,,„,„1.
j s� _ II
•
i -1 (-- 'a -\\
�- Li__-- 0 _ J`\
I I r4:4-..). .yr252:i*V2
4411 do , __I Hi• in.
r1 TI1.1=Cl i
•• NOR H •
7 ,lan.O,1978
1'r •
\\ ' \ _ . ' . —--- —------- , ,
r �. \ 1/
''t` : \/\ti, \`` :�.\' / J J�� I , ( , .-'!'' -u\ ‘
l� S+1 : ;- ; i,t s FrI li i l `
i • ::"!: : :.:. 'c:' ' ./ '' r:' ' '..)---.::-, *- 1 l
6 tr, - 1 �;,:—...-N-----:r9 l:..I
r1 ` T I., ' rY , t+\
r 4s„ 4 , .-ems.•�a= ( \ '1 t.
"•
{ `�- • ✓; • ��
1 1 • - i • \,•a . i k1
1.
•
I}f• 0;;' .: ,, , 1 T, :zs 4., .a \jam _ _ .. `\.i./.,`) '\ 4
Y il/�''` f^ . • 12=1,,,,• t
l 1 t r
1 J _7 .. .1.—....Lisi ';1.421'-':,.-,/ ...ii.-. ./:; ._. s . ------::-. . , _ .
,.• ���� ; _1r- 1\ \ski , - , _ ���
�- � ` j _
_ J \____ -•''.--_.. -,;-•• � Yti-��., --p. S�.Ty old
� tt is / �� j'1 (•��// + � t
•it _. . 1 \ J 1 i^
�E ; < i1 , ,, `• I„( ; .IF --- -,
� n /•t t ' 1)) �1 A
I
'1
jiiiii .,,,: . .\\ ,. ,,. .., 7, ___ ,
•
,,
ii
.
�L' ,
i
1 ;�''� -,-f 1 t.
-ss
•.h-try P t ` 4 t \l'tl l o \ `s !7 �` I
---..• :1-\ li ,.. /— '—'1:"-•'"*---. --_.i‘ TA
f i i� �-. _ �_. • I�
,-- -'-{q----- / . i ,, _. , . , ,,
•
\,,
{ 1 I
.;seps . 75 I\1 `1, \. illi i li'‘.,,,. .t .)
I a-S /• \ . ' _' \ -: !I1 ;,. i! i / i �� '�; ,\+l I
. A • -' - ‘' ' ' • • s'--- - ' ' ,,<-1',1_",.En E
• ? ‘. •
i / \.. ,.., '... Mh. • - ' */,; ') '. Co •.‘, .. I.,t '`si's" .
.7 Cy S. LC°2 '''` -W ' -'I' 7's • • bus: . - l•••''''7.--' --..--'',.'s' -..- . is' '
•
•• •
1 • , • --, F • .,-,••••.^'''..' •' ' l. ',6-','',• • ' '.;,',...::•:-. ,
•••••• 1, ,
1. „-....
1 .
' ' 1.../.,......7 .. -.. .-... '.. s 2, Tir. • .1‘•-•''.," '''" s-.-.1/ (-, 6.1, ,
C. . •, •,
. , . • ( .. \„,,_ ...-•. _.
-6 -.
'
: 1
Ha C22 I, ' .• ' ,\ • ' `, . : I-•,,.•• "--,!'••••7-...7 .7'1.7.7:-.......'': •''\., ,
' ' ••
! _. ,. . ,, • ... . J., ., ,,_ 7' ,(:.."7.7 .-.-...:::-....::::-..•.--:::::...:
' . .'..-- '•, , , i - - ..' ! \. :,...-.........- •:._,..-...-.-:•.-: -)
, : .. -. : ..• \ . ,.., . -../
, , i'„i.......: ......•:../ 1—.•, ,/ , l .-lir i:, i ' , ,,,_ •1 \ /, -...,-- -- ' - ,. _
.... •
21
_
LID
I t.:7-''.
\.) . ,-• /
-..-1- ._
• . Er C1
1 - .
F'.......' l_rn 0
..... . e .
•.• , - •
2..,.. „,,..._ 1 ' i •
-',1' 1, i •I - 1- Du En 0
i - ._. ,7'22.••. 6I'sj--.--,' '" • ' •\ ,IS• .
• ,„i7,\/, 0-:`' ,-7 7'.-s) :'-• - t- •-\ • - ' - •, ,
- . ,' '• 1 'I;''.."7: '''
• ••• -.. .
, 2 . -• 2- .• .--I ‘., ,„/. --..
,..,, , ... ,_ i / , i , i'• ''' t .
•-. / \- 1/.)•• ,\ .,I •_ _ ' ' \. -• •• -:., G. ;,..•.,., ,,.
! '''' -..'.1.::'"'l-k-, •i -1.' 1 - I ,
, 1' . i ` ' ---- r_ . -__• ,Lr n .pm ,
• _. .
..
A. , __ - Er-s,..' ,/:::' d • En C2 - ••••• ' .
. „......••••• F-la C // jr---. .t ---\ s7 ' / .. ,
, Ha F3 • En D ' 1. ' '
- \ Z•r C M. r i :
' - ...
- ...... __
: • , .. ,... ' ' S ...'n .. --- ' ./. '-' '.I 1 .
. -'------• , .- Ha 12,-ike ' ''' 1,
•--'
• .,.( I i
- • ,. ) ,'/
-4N-".1••"N•r'N 7"1 • I:--•.-"'":".:‘"--'..i"
'-.:„-Jt.;,•..,---- - --..,',,... " \::. -;;- , ' ? ' L-.• '..". ._..sii 14.
• . id'4',1 ,r.)i'.:1.1...... .1.,..:',..., ii ' ',V . t,
aW.)
.... II
-,.,•-•,...._....
f .... rt.,
- ‘\ -\.. \ ''•€.-• a_ 7•*,-. -. ""krh:'.. ''' '..s 3"."".
J. -,._____•,__ :, \,-----, ,,,; \, -,,u '-.1
li 4,a................ — , .2., 1
(..1( ,- _ ..... --\\„ ,, : , ,• , ) ..
_. ,..„, , . i..., . „..,-
2E, 1472
CITY OF ELEN PRA1kIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 78-56
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AµSUFN
L HILLS IHIRD AnnITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of AMSDEN HILLS THIRD ADDITION
, dated Jan. 12, 1978 , 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
a..,.ndments thereto and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by,the Eden Prairie City Council on
•
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
• ATTEST: • SEAL •
John D. Frane, Clerk
Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Unapproved Mon., March 6, 1978
Natural Resources Commission -10-
•
B. l'ini Stt m e nn •
PDTICll: Tangen novcd, seconded by D. Anderson, that since he had
questioned the proposal, and after looking over Staff Report of t
lsreh rd, he had no more objections, and roved to ayprove the
13nnesota I:ini Storage end Addition propcsal. 1.:otion carried,
with Kruell abstaining. •
•
i�.
'0 I7
Minutes - Parks, Rec. and approved
Natural Resources Commission - 3 — Mon., Feb. 6, 1978
b. Mini Storage II
Worts spoke to the second addition to the Mini Storago proposal lo-
cated along the Flying aloud Drive and recommended the "cash park fee"
for industrial development bo applied.
Tnngen expressed concern for the appearance of the site and pointed ott
that the development would bo visible to people coming into the city.
MOTION: Kingrey moved that tho Commission voice its concern with the
Mini Storage II site and the development of that site with regard to
its final appearance from a standpoint of natural resources, and recommend •
strongly to the Plnaning Commission and Council that the final appearance
include the grading of the site be one of their priorities in consider-
ing the proposal, and recommend that the "cash park fee" be applied here.
Tangen seconded.
D1UMION
Community Director Lampert felt the motion was not strong enough, and
suggested requesting the site plan showing the screening.
b. Mini Storage II (cont'd) •
Sore Commissioners felt this would be encroaching on the Planning Commissions
role, but it was agreed that "visual polution" was a matter of concern for
the Commission.
Warts commented that basically the PR & NR Commission should be concerned
with "cash park fee" and not final approval, and suggested recommending
•
screening and be{•ming because of the visual affect on the area.
The motion and second were withdrawn.
•
MOTION: Kingrey moved that we voice to the Planning Commission and to the
Council our concern with development proposals such as the subject pro-
posal, and we are going to express our concern with the natural resources
aspect of those proposals, and request that the Mini Storage II proposal
be returned to us with mare information on the final lay out, including
landscaping. Motion died for the lack of a second.
MOTION: Tan en moved that :::$ reco;i end to the Planning Commission and
Council that this site not be approved for're-zoning until such time as
the PR & NR Cce:insinn has had an oi:;:ortunity to review the site plan;
this would include I;radin,-., plantings and berms which would be accomplished
to improve visual impact of the plan. tT^ton seconded, motion carried
unanimously.
Tangon commented that after plan is returned would be the appropriate
time to consider the "cash park fee". q 7 A
EUEti F ;1k1E PL''J:St:G CO'MISSION
ap:rc:�d
t opCay, Feb. 13, 197E 7:30 F7l City Hall
COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice-chairman Lynch, Retterath, P.edpath, McCulloch,Schee
COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Sundstrom, Bearman
STAFF PRESENT_ Chris Enger, Jean Johnson •
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- Feb. 13, 1978
C. Minnesota Mini-Storage, 2nd Addition, request by Bruce Hubbard to
rezone from Rural & Highway Commercial to I-2 Park 3.06 acres for individual
•
storage warehouse space. The site is north of the present Minnesota Mini
•
Storage building at 6570 Flying Cloud Drive.
The Planner referred the Commission to the staff report which answers the pre-
vious questions of the Commission, and stated Mr. Hubbard is present to
go over questions and outline sight distances and site treatment.
Mr. Hubbard reviewed the building locations proposed, surrounding property uses,
adjacent road systems, existing and proposed screening. and sight distances.
Mr. Redpath inquired how many garage doors would be visible from the freeway.
Mir. Hubbard stated the garage doors are on the north and south sides of the
proposed building and very little would be visible from the freeway.
Redpath then complimented the proponent on the existing building.
The Planner stated landscaping and screening would be accomplished according .
to City ordinance.
F,
Lynch inquired if any members of the audience had questions or comments.
None were raised.
Motion: ``
McCulloch moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
rezoning from Rural and Highway Commercial to I-2 Park for the 3.06 acres of
Minnesota Mini-Storage 2nd Addition as per the recommendations of the Feb. 2,
1978 staff report. Motion carried unanimously.
•
approved
Planning Co„issicn :inutes -5- Jan. 23, 1978
C. Minnesota Mini-Storage 2nd Addition, request by Bruce Hubbard to rezone
from Rural and Highway Corc:.ercial to I-2 Park 3.06 acres for individual
storage warehouse space. The site is north of the present Minnesota
Mini-Storage building at 6570 Flying Cloud Drive.
Mr. Bruce Hubbard located the site for the Commission and stated he desires
to expand the storage facility. He added plantings and berms would be installed
along with a fence enclosure with a gate to be locked at 8:00 PM.
Redpath asked how „..,h.the garage spaces rent out at. Mr. Hubbard replied • 1'
the prices start at S18/month ( 50 sq. ft. ).
Retterath asked how many garage spaces exist and how many are proposed in
the 2nd Addition. Mr. Hubbard replied 260 units exist (40,000 square feet)
and 34,000 square feet additional space is planned in the 2nd Addition.
Sundstrom inquired how many doors may be visible to the freeway. The Planner
stated the staff would address the project's visibility in the staff report.
Lynch asked the staff to also include in the staff report an overlay of
surrounding land uses.
Motion:
Bea man moved, Retterath seconded, to continue the request to the Feb. 13th
meeting and direct the staff to prepare a report. Motion carried unanimously.
��l
•
•
o ff,�'�,t° Minnesota Department of Transportation
\• !
•i a Transportation l3uilding. St.Paul,MN 55155
•
Qo
Fyr OF 296-3ooe
Pbon��---
I+ebruary 7. 1i78
Mr. Chris Eager
Planting Director
City of Edon Prairie
• 89'90 Eden 1rairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
S.P. 2744 T.R. 169
Plat Review of Minnesota Mini Storage 2ml Addition
locnted in the N.E. Quadrant of T.H. 169 and C.S.A.H.
61
in the North half of Section 1 Township 116, Range
in the City of Eden Prairie, Ilennepi.v County
Dear t . linger:
•
lye se in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance
with a. c :05.C2 and 50c.0"i. Plats and Surveys. Vie find the
plat acceptable for further development w`,.th consideration of the fo.l..lnwl..„,
cow:lents:
--Our District hydraulics Engineer has noted that the plat lies within
the boundary of the 9 Mile Creek P.'atershed District. If more than 100
cubic yards of earth is to be excavated, it will be necessary to apply
for a permit from the watershed district.
--i,':ien the property is sarveyed, the surveyor
contact 199 so District
ILand ;iurve n', Pr. Keith 51a tor, at 545->l , extension
survey is compatabie •:r-.:h cur existing right of nay line.
e
ct
If you have any questions
in1Trd tothe
L•'ahoveec,ve comments,
• s, pplease.c at ontact our
District h:yeut, development
extension 119. '.thank you forycur cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Will ins C. t',:a'ritt
A;:.,iat:nt ao:r.mi.3^ioner
Field Opci.atloos D.ivi;ion
cc: '
John Boland - Met:70l1oi Ian Council
Cary llaeh.er - ilonn;pin County - Saint-yes Office
An Eq..:Op;n.tr d„ !•+Pla•rr
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Jensen, Planning Assistant •
THROUGH; Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: February 2, 1978
•
APPLICANT: Minnesota Mini-Storage •
PROJECT: Minnesota Mini-Storage 2nd Addition •
LOCATION: 3.06 acres northeast of and adjacent to the
Minnesota Mini-Storage at 6570 Flying Cloud
Drive. The site is bordered on the northwest
by US 169/212
REQUEST: Rezoning from Highway Commercial and Rural to
1-2 Park •
\_. \ ,, - I \'st OPUS TE 'N.
d .. _ __ .....---:-,
,.)i--\ .,,..._------\ I , ,, ,.
' i d .
ilt% �yj� ���
• I
_ ice
.. 1 \ ) . (J
•
t _ / Ni., pry., Q. ' I -
M
,,,,,-4--T-7,— rAKT.
•
!!!r° \
----\._ II
N. Jr— 1 i.1\. --- ,; .!, x gstvA44e,
I/ --Oen lime
j( i __ intli BOMA nori i
1 ;: 1, Jt 1.-1%--- / I LOCATION MAP �'
Staff Report-Mn. Mini-Storage 2nd -2- Feb. 2, 1978
LAND USE:
The site is shown on the 1968 Guide Plan as Commercial Regional Service with
preliminary indication on the Guide Plan Update as commercial. Surrounding
uses are conniercial and industrial. The staff feels that this proposed plan
would be a suitable use for this property.
ZONING REQUEST:
The proponent requests rezoning from Rural and Highway Commercial to I-2 Park.
The following are provisions of Ord. 135 for the I-2 Park District:
50' front yard setback
20-40' sideyard setback; one side, both sides
25' rearyard setback
40ac. minimum zoning area
ACCESS, CIRCULATION:
Access to the site will be through the first addition for the public. A service
entrance comes into the property on the east side from flying Cloud Drive in the
form of a platted 24 foot road easement.
It is estimated that 50 ADTs will be added to Flying Cloud Drive upon completion
of the project. (Based upon 16 trips/acre/day). These additional trips are
minimal and will not overburden existing transportation systems.
SOILS, TOPOGRAPHY, GRADING AND VEGETATION:
Soils
•
The soils on the site are made-up of the series Hayden and Hamel. The Hayden soils
which occupy the majority of the site are generally loamy and well-drained. These
soils have a fair bearing capacity and shear strength; fairly wide footings are
needed for foundations. The low drainage way which corresponds with the proposed
storm sewer and consists of the poorly drained. clay to loam Hamel soils. The
bearing capacity and shear strength on this soil is poor to fair.
•
9311
Stafff Report-Mn.Mini-Storage 2nd -3- Feb. 2, 1978
Topo & Grading
The site generally slopes from north to south to the low area between the
first and second additions. This swale drains storm water not only from this
site , but also the adjacent property to the east and part of the Ghengis Kahn
property. About 8 feet of fill will be placed in this swale to accommodate
the grading of the second addition. A storm sewer system will be installed •
to handle the off-site and on-site drainage. This storm sewer will empty into
an existing outfall area of US 169/212 and drain from there along the highway
ditch to the southwest.
Vtation
The site of the proposed 2nd addition was formerly a nursery for growing trees.
The proponent should move most of these trees to use in the screening and land-
scaping of the project.
SCREENING:
The proponent has agreed to retaining the existing earth berm along the US 169/212
border, and ex'e d it toward the first additio- to meet the existing berm there.
Tree plantings should be used to screen any areas that a berm cannot be constructed.
The existing trees on the site should be transplanted in conjunction with berming
to provide adequate screening.
RECOM 1ENDATIONS
The staff recommends approval of the rezoning from Rural and Highway Commercial
to 1-2 Park contingent upon the following:
1). Screening occur along the US 169/212 border, consisting
of earth berming and evergreen and deciduous tree plantings.
Prior to issuance of the building permit a landscape plan
must be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department.
in accordance with Ord. 178, and screening of garage doors and loading
areas.
2). The storm sewer plan be approved by the City Engineering
Department.
3). Erosion control be implemented , in the form of hay bales,
during construction to prevent excessive soil loss.
4). Cash in lieu of land be required as per Ord. 332.
5). Signage be limited to existing signs for Mini-Storage I.
JEJ:jmj
7
/ , . \
•
Yetxl.ra \
/\
/ .
*7,4 '''s,'•\ . ,.
.
t.
....\ /
V 1 S
1
\ i
1.
. / .
. k.
,t.
// & i \.
!.
Mir+nair\ i
Rot-�irICW1 • r
Ai
I
i. <
I. J•
"I ,
.y N
•
• ii
1�' A� is
• .. 1. ck
j).-..
tis
A
Q� •
.14 ().811 •
MINNESOTA liA j] V]]a
a.
P0.BOX 186 a WAYZATA:MINNESOTA 55391 ■ 612/473-9591
City of Eden Prairie January 10, 1978 •
Eden Prairie. Minnesota
Minnesota Mini-Storage is owned by E. H. Jaroszewski And
W. B. Hubbard. We have a contract for deed with Helmer Greguson
on the remaining 3.06 acres of land next to our present facility.
We want to add on to our present facility at 6570 Flying Cloud
Drive. The 3.06 Acres lyes to the north of our site. This parcel
is presently zoned Rural with a small portion zoned Highway
Commercial. We would like to have it zoned light industrial (I2)
to permit expansion of our Mini Storage. The existing Mini
Storage is zoned I2 and some of the adjoining property owners
to the east are in the process of requesting 12 zoning. We feel
I2 zoning is compatably with the development of the area and it
complyes with the Lake Smetana report I saw last. We do not need
any variances from the I2 zoning ordiance that we know of.
We are proposing to build 7 buildings, totaling 34,600 square feet.
The buildings would be built the same as and of the same materials
as the existing facility. The site plan shows how the buildings
set on the site.
All runoff surface water would enter a storm sewer line which
would be built in the bed of the existing ditch which has
handeled the run off far longer then we have owned the property.
Minnesota Mini-Storage will own the site and improvements. The
morgake will be in our name.
The project will add very little to any traffic counts and no
improvements are necessary to the existing streets. The entrance
to our present Facility will also serve the added space.
We would like to break ground Spring 197E and complete the
project in the summer 1978. •
We propose to maintain the existing berms as buffers to Highway
169. Evergreens would be planted to link the northern end of
the berm to the northern most building. In addition to the
highway fence we will have fence around the rest of the properly.
We look forward to our meeting and discussion on this matter.
YIr;NESOTA f.'.IN -STORAGE
>r _
t''•(A. Hubbard
,Y
AA tAii- c,crcr
os, . . . _ , 4 ,,,. 0,....4...,,,,a,......,....-!...a.ok .. • ; -
24.1.4...ibuiff4a$4-rir .....54...rA.....--34. .
\ Q-',. .'' ...)..2..A./. ...p r• ,ii RI 1 -'‘••,: sfr, :::.N-4"er-W9
1-.
ElPy")7: \ .,, 4 • 7i;V:)..i..i
-••
to
$ r ,
:IL,t_..-- -'-',",• ‘ ,5./1/ %I i
• , -..- ...,-;:..... e•:.:,- ...,,, i,:•• r•, ,i.::
E.1 ,-',3 ..;,..t... • •;......,'''''',7,-,:.fri'ile „••••••-- -•••`-''" \ ‘O'C.`.1 ' ,4 Tr 4-7.',0 :i
,-; v 44;, ,, ,-,,,,,,,,,-,. ...4..4.- (.1 t i*-._;,forurr,,,'it ... • ,• 'iR,,
,..."•-•,:,A,_.„--..., -',"",,,....,,'-'Q..L..., . % ....,...'-\ il "' 0 —%-.4 .',1-* c',1 N
,..:, 1,;."''' 1.....,.... rs ,....m,.: k ..,/,'• ,..:f!', 4..,72:•1 ,,..1."-'',, , --..,,. ...
...'.••
--4 1• • II,..,....
.. -rf
.,.:• , ir„....:1 j..,.........,--
.,...7:t........'7;,,ri ' ,:,.,,, •,,
...„. .• .,.., ,.._I-,,'.-Tp,ON J . c!....( ; k ....,-,,,,—•
7.,"*.i..
i•-'''V f ,,,,''''' ',..„..&lef<C>./__• " 1 t„,'''. • •''71 \ .
• r..0"• "'-*''''. -
•-•:•••,„„ ,/ ti , .,
'1,---•• : s... _.\--,.. ."4",\--.',1._ ; . ,:f. /.',,,,, :: 1 - ' ‘,,. '-‘,."-'1.„:i-' • r_______—•---- t$:-.."•• :
''''.•'s"..'0
1
..,-, • ••, ,,,, ---,.•:•....fr'l?---4•r.•• '' '
••••• tr- . '..,---"-h-AsTA!-.-5;.
........„. Ec). .. 1, :.,- s....1..
/ ,, , , ..
f,,,„1, / .........,-,0..a.- ; 1:,....): i,,,.. ......r.r.:...7................ •,
,.•-•:,,,,....L....:;.,...-- ,,,,. .,..;-"i r 9 .. ..' "•!,'
\•- s'i•-7
forum .7.4,1' '
,,0, i ,,.,..0 ,,, :,.. }./z;.•‘:.•;,:-.fl- •-...-p:
,„...,“-,.....1
: -:-..-_,,,,-. r. II .,,, • • . -I
--•'"'"'S`. =-C, ..'' 1
1! \•. ..'". ..... 7-: ::''•-•'''''' '''''''-' • i.! , •
„,...
. -_,
' \\'' ' ''''•,_ - ) 'r
, . -
-
.e. : ' — (- "....1:.c`-" - .......,...0--',..-.
2
.) t .. • -"4
•'''... 1.,..,. i /-": --ATorunl
.,.
. 1.-
•,,- / - .
),.....0) '' ' —..:•f ' •'3,
/ ! p ''•-•,,,, •n .
sl • .
•f.,.. 1 _ j •••••-.• t--
" - '' ‘• ...e-:_,(',.. •---"":_:::;33:;('_• rt'1,-.
1 I •• '...-;:•"""'"..."7---.1".""............................-...4...........:,---...;:7: . -^--......
.4 I
p::: pro j CC LS newly constructed or in progress • , •r••••#::. ''•-•'- i-/.. • :1
1
I
I
•
CITY Of EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, minursoTA
RESOLUTION NO. 78-63
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID
•
WilEREAS, puruant to an advertisment for bids for the following
impruv(;;,ents:
I.C. 51-30IA Section I - Well House #3
•
Seclion II - Walermain Construction
bid! were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids
reo.2ivA ore shon en the attached Summary of Bids; and
WHEREAS. the City Engineer recuTmends award of contract to
A S K fjeJrAL:ctien fur Section I and to G. L. Contracting, Inc. for Scilion II.
;,.F. the resp3nsihle hidders.
hut; : KTRII UPS, RI 11 RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
as follows:
The Payer and Cicy Panager are hereby authorized and directed
to triter into a contract with A S K ConstIlnIion, Inc. and
._
G. L. ui, inc.
in the of the City of Eden Prairie in the amounts of S58,173
S7X3 reseectively in accordance with the plans and
!p:A:ificatious thereof approved by the Council and on file
in the office of the City Engineer.
AlYPILD by the Eden Prairie City Council on
•
1.1ayO-r
:
,I,J1e1.0.
•'h i•L)
C) CD (-) CJ C) (7 CC C) C) C> C) C) CI CI
C_) U C) 4.) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) CC Cl)
.1` U) C) C) C) U (l C) C) (D CD C) O I C1 C)
• •L, I-- C(C C1 fC C) u) O -.1- W C) C) () OD CO
L) I- 111 IL) C> CO CU r-, C, N (CT CD CO CO u) CO
4.-4 1- •-C IU C) '4 CO L.C. .-. Cl) .--C N.
(4-1 C) (`) N (V
.-. N
N
lt'
U
It...';
.
_)1 t) C) CD CDC) C) C C) C) C C CD CD CD
I C) C> CJ C) 6 U (D N CT C> CJ (V tl)
..0 CC.
I I ( CJ i . ) CC) r-C (0 C) C) LJT
V ^ r-. Cl� C:wC OT () C) CO
C)
C) (V
• C) C) C) C) Cb C) C) CC C) (7, (-) C> CC CJ
C) o C) C) o C) C) C) CC C, C) a CC C)
)I C, C) C_) t-) C) co O CIC) C) CD It) C) (7
I-- C) C) C) C) c) C, C) C) C C) C1 CV )n CO
<, C.0 IC) • - I' C CV C) (.1 U) CC U CC) (()
t-�
.-4 (v) C N C) .� COlD V' (COr. N U, C
C) )
CV C)
t- CO
CJ
I_ 4
• CC(C CJ () CJ I- ()i'
:'r IJ I... tl .. CJ C_ --
- C1 C) C7 () (2 C) C C> C) CT CJ CJ C) CC
<t `i c
C, C; C-, o + .- C., CD 0 C) . u) CD C) o a CDLn . .
U C>-
C. 1:) C() V. p- C'. C) CV C) C) u) CC1 LC) CC C) CD CO CC
C) O'_ U, •.. .) C t,l CO U) N Cl Il) C) CJ CC 111
C) C')+ r - �. .0 _J 1-. t\ CD 1� L() CD C)
J CU C) 0
I. CO PI
1
V)1,1+.,
CT V C N-
L)C-).-- t (_' C. t 1
C; C_
;.T C) < , . -.
_IJJ 0 -- c 4 < V-) C .-. CC) () C) r-. C-C Cs) C1 CJ .--1 .--1 M C7 M
(J Cl, 1.I (..• C- 1_1 N. CO C) CT C1 IC) rI C:
•L
-Y '1 C) . G) CA
CT .Z.)
CD 1I
1•- CI.(.>-+ -.1 I— IJJ >- IL) `'1
I,I ; `3' IC.. CI_ I. .Z ct 4 It_ :-.1" N cc) Cr: LLl
I i t,) - ' ._.1 J _-) 1,1 w w .J C) _.I J CC • CC
C1 C_ 2 1- C C7 H
CO
4,1 C+ 1- C
I-.
V) IJ -)
C. _J ,-
LJ ( C
(l C) co
() CC) CO
• r ,' E
i i J CU
.) �' .-.
• 1- 10 t IT
C i-a C , 111 -
• C). I- I C Cl .-.
1- _ C'. l) CO III 0 C•1 I-
), Ci CC-1 C' •- In GI 4 • w
C" < ) 4-+ L; ( C .(- •r,) .. - CCC IY Ct N
() t l 4.01 I. C! C •.- N C/f I=
4--
I/) CC C) Ill I) (I, Cl. - - .0 •.- S CI)
I 1 1 4.' (` V) .C) r - C)! CC C , U) -i: In C) C) 7 •-.
-C Ul N C- so i Cl)
t. 1, I
7 •'1. < n. ) CO Ca , 1) C) :, (T. t_vCC , ) ) C, N C •- CI) N i D. ,•-) C'1
C C CCC CO .) I� U I 'C+
, A C -C
I•1
C. C. .).) C. ) ) _. I-) _J I' I C 'i, NCO CC
)
(
CV C, . C )) : I^ Q) .l' CI) •() - C3'
I- •a - , I 1 . -. i _, • /)LI) ) .
It
1.11 N C•) SI If) u) N. up U) Cam) CC) 01
;kJ N i) .C I V) `i Vfl !.It
� N
(;1
/1.1
1
•
RIEKC C,\!,:RoLI_ NAULI_E:R /♦S OCl/A,TES INC
March 30, 1978
Mr. Carl Jullie, P.L.
City of Hen Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN. 55313
RE: BIDS Oil WELL (LOUSE AND TRANSMISSION MAINS
I.C. 51-301A
RCM 7710 i3
Dear Carl,
The bids on the above project, received on Thursday, March 28, ::•
1978 ��,
are summarized below: <.;
Section I Section I1
A Y K Construction, Inc. $58,123.00
Lee iii,;be t I'lt+:ui:ino f, lleatino 62,900.00
G. L. Coo.. • '.ing, Inc. $207,1113.00
Brawn K Cris, Inc. 227,380.00
The bids on Section II are higher than anticipated, primarily
due to the high ground water table, an area of soils where piling I ,.
is rtyuired and an unusually large number of restrained joints
where pipe alicl,w,ent ch,ntges. The bids on Section I are very
close to the estimied costs.
Although we e;ould have welcomed additional bids, we feel that the
low bids rellest the true costs of the project. We therefore
trot :Ind that the in-ejects he awarded to the low bidder on each
section. „„ ;,;,,,;,,,;,,,,,,,,•_
Very t.nly yours,/LI
1 David 0. ilur.by, P.L.
RIl KC CTUIiIOU Milli ER ASSOC I!',l["S, 1NC.
h0i1:cp
• J. i /
'. f
,)`)"..
MEP10
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
TUROU7,11: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
1I10,: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
OAR: March 31, 1978
SUBJI-CT: USP EascienL Agreement
Pum:house ;{3
I.C. 51-301A
City wellhayse t3 is to be constructed at a location which lies within
an area covered by an LISP power line easement. Certain special con-
ditiens Lava been included with the plans and specifications for the
In,;rphc,use and discharge lines to conform with NSP's requirements. In addi-
tion, SSP hits requested an agreement form to be signed by the City.
This fora, is attached hereto and Council approval is recoioended.
{iff
CJJ:kn
ALLdch, r,t
•
•
•
J�t !
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
414 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis: Minnesota 55401
1'ebruary 28, 1978
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc.
Alin: Richard C. rutz
pc>:t (1rt:ce So:: 1.30
Hopkins, 1 1 S5343
WEL1, 110i1SS NO. 3 F. WATER iMPROVI:MIihf 1'ROJE.CT
Line 0E57 - ld`. SW., Section 10, Township 116,
Range 22 Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Your letter to M. L. Anderson of February 17, 1978 informing Northern
States 1'oi.ir Company of the proposed water improvement project which
will encroach on pert ions of an existing transmission line easement
has beta reviewed.
The Special Conditions which wore enumerated in your letter are •
:;cceg fold e i`: posc•d. However, in ❑ddi_'ti ca; to tha inclusion of
said Sp.•ci Conuitinn, to tilt Contest:: ;ipecificatiens, we request
the City :1 Eden Prairie thview and sign the enclaccd copy of this
letter to indicac, their cos;liassce with the following clause: •
The City of Eden prairie agrees to assume all liability,
and to i_udemniiy and cou:pen::ute NS(' fur any injury or
dsnlagc to persons or property, including NS1''s property
or employees, occasioned by, or arising in connection I!
with :he use of the ahovc: press ace by the City, its !'
cr,:picy,`h`.., customers or agents and the City further
agrees to drf.:nd, indemnify and save NSp haiauless against •
;ill action::, claims, damages or demands wltieh slay be
brought. or itsIc against NSi' by reason of acts or omissions
of the city, it.s employees, cn::t:rnner::, or agents, in its
use of the. property.
(1')
R. ( .Ihmd.:nl
Aden. straLor, Real Estate
Enclosure
cc: C. I.. (;ol1'15111 .l
H. C. Hinson CI'l'Y OF EVEN PRAIRIE
Jhhllio '?
Accepted By
Its
1) 1,
h1:CFI'.'U1)
FL13 23 1:1/8
i'21LiC1:: CAIUaOLL MULLt_1: n'-';s +, ftnllr :;}ZINC
February 17, 1918 --- i"r � '---
•
Mr. M. U. fcnrl.er miu, hanager D•, 1- ( I I; - -
i;cal 1statr f,r;+..i:�ilit .._i__
Northern Sl,.tr. i'i:;or Cou:pr:n; .0 i ,�_I 1.n0.1•.,,1••y,,,s
414 Nicol let
Minneapolis, ilinru:rota 55401 1- yr/, 1It nnn�,s
RI: 4,[EI. t)O [ 1.3 Fill WATTR IPIPROV[MCU1PROJECT
[Ittl! 1'1:itikil, F.=LSUTA
PC1.1 Fii L 1110'Ci
ERN PPA1R1E Ih:;'1;011L[ICNT CONTRACT 51-301. "'„It,•I".::'"
Lopinr.,1 unurS:,J4J
Gen tl e:::en:
•
Enclosed is a location map, plan and profile sheets and site •
plan sheet showing the roposedwater•caain and well house location
i 1 ! Gtz 7as r?Dt
for the e.bove roirrenced project. As you will note, a portion
of the project fails within the existing easeis0nts of tiSP. ide
arc reque:.ticq approval from NSP to encroach upon these easements
with our ,. ,:,traction.
Following are proposed Special Conditions tie propose to use it
our r:iiic:;ttiuii for ynnr rr.,vir'w. Ple•-I•e advise if there are
any cribliciitio:l: or additions to these Special Conditions.
"Portion—, of th,• e teracin align:linnt is within existing Northern
States Power Cowpan:r easements for high voltage trr.nsmission
lints. The lont.ractu;• shall comply with NSP safety requirements
du;iclg ccr,-,traction -,nd shall advise NSP of construction
schedsi nq on a r., ,i,cr basis. For consttcietion within the NSP
eas m nts, the Contractor shall adhere to the following minimum
requ i i i,rents: I„•I, ,.,.,,,1,,,,.,,1.,
1. A riinicrunc corking clearance of 20 feet between the electrical e, ,°' ,
conductors and any material or equipment must be maintained
at. all Limes.
2, t>:c,+t'oted I:i.ttcrial and construction equipment material rccst not
be stochpiieci under the line or against any of the transmissioc
lint towers.
3. A cone of cndi tucIeci c u th 10 feet in radios from any s
j
, u trnrr, siolt lit - log.: 1 , ak be maintained. ll;is can be r-c (1,1117
ecc,,,r;,li ln';1 1 . any ,c,prvrd rust i a such as maintaining a /�`�` t1�
1:1 slope cribbing or driving sheet piling.
•
Mr. M. L. Anderson
February 1/, 1978 •
•
Page 2 •
•
4. The Contractor agrees that it will reimburse NIP for the •
•
actual cost and cs;unse of any alteration, relocation, •
protection, supervision or damage of its electrical trans- !
mission lines and facilities necessitated by the location
and construction of said sanitary sewer.
' f
5. If any of the terms and conditions cannot be maintained and
if it beco::us necessary to de-energize the transmission line
during construction activities, the Contractor agrees to
contact NSP at. 330.6141. Any request to de-energize the
transmissiun line rust be mode one week prior to the actual
time of construction. The final decision to de-energize
the line will be at the sole discretion of NSP.
Very truly yours, _-
Richard C. Potz
RIEKE CARROLL I-tUEEEC ASSOCIATES, INC.
RCP:cp
cc: Carl Jul lie,.City Engineer
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
)/\--(--)71P/./‘ ,;(?1\s..,
J i
7
April 4, 1978
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
11ENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 78-64
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A HEARING
(1.C. 51-326)
WH1RCf,S, the City Engineer has reco;r:mended that the City Council
call a public hearing on the following described improvements:
I.C. 51-326, Dell Road and Valley View Road
through the Edengate project and Maple Leaf I
Acres
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: Ei
1. The Council will consider the aforesaid imnrevenents and
the assessment of property abutting or within said boun-
daries for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
pursuant to M.S.N. Sect. 429,011 to 429.111.
2. A public hearing shall be {field on such proposed improvement
on the 2nd day of May, 1978, at 7:30 P.M. at the Eden Prairie
City Hall. The City Clerk shall give published and mailed
notice of such hearing on the improvements as required 'le,
law.
AD)PTLi) by the Eden Prairie City Council on
Wol fgang H. Penzel,Mayor —--
ATTEST: • SEAL
iolui D. Fi'dfle, Clerk •
--
•
,t.,
I !)
b-
•
CITY OF EDPN PRAIRIE
4CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
•
April 4, 1978
CoNTwo-"Iciq (1 2 Y;:roily)
Ci-Araction, Inc.
StepIK:n Lr.:1-0in Builders
Plywooa Minne::mta, Inc.
Robert A. Schulcr
MOBBING
Petri i'!eicr Plumbing
Niman & Heating
Stomberg Numbilig
Wcnl PlumiAng & NoTitinu Inc.
(-11‘
Wenzel PlariLing S neat ins Inc.
ON SATR 1J.CNOR LICRNSE
Olympic 113,11
Tic cc lieenrc‘r Rav:i buyn “pprovea Sy ths doliartment heal respeniiible
for t.10 a,livity. 1
/ 1 )
C I I( et;1.'1
1;0110(.," (-?11,..1.110140e11, rhIT/It.),
•