Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 07/17/1978 _ i 1978 JULY 17 MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AGENDA PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY, July 17, 1978 7:30 P.M. , CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: Richard Anderson, chairperson; David Anderson, Steve Fifield, William Garens, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell, George Tangen COMMISSION STAFF: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services Approx. Time to Begin Item 7:30 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 1978 IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 7:45 A. Community Center/Ice Skating Facility - Dick Feerick f 8:00 B. EPAA - Dennis Marble V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners 1. B. Reports of Staff 1. Development Proposals 8:15 a. Gelco 9:00 b. CPT Corporation 9:15 c. Creekside Heights 9:45 d. Anderson Lakes Parkway Apartments 10: 15 e. Briarfield Estates VI. OLD BUSINESS 10:45 A. Shoreland Management Ordinance B. VII. NEW BUSINESS 11C'00 A. LAWCON Grant Application - Mitchell Lake 11 :15 VIII. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY, JULY 17, 1978 7:30 PM, CITY HALL # COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Dave Anderson, Steve Fifield, William Garens, Robert Kruell and George Tangen COMMISSION MEMBERS EXCUSED: Richard Anderson and Robert Johnson r COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Chris Enger and Recreation Supervisor Sandy Werts r. OTHERS PRESENT: George Bentley, Dick Dahl , E.P. News, Judy Lobstein, Barb Taylor, Dennis Marble, E.P.A.A. , Rod Kesti , Jerry Wigen, Don Opheim, Dick Feerick, Jan Hubred, Jill Schultz, Ray Geiger, Emerson Greenberg, Gelco, Judy Brinkhaus, Gelco, Lyman and Joan Olson, Marijean Carr, Beverly Marlow, Richard Sampson, Frank Hartmann, Larry Jensen, R. 0. Knutson, Dick Putnam, Hustad Development Corp. Geneva Middleton,Mark Fuller, Atty. for Pride Bldg. , Doug Goriesky, Dominic Sciola. and John Mash b Ct Vice-Chairman Garens called the meeting to order at 7:4n 'PM. II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA t Addition of: V.A.I . Super Valu - Tangen VII.B. Construction Erosion Control - Kruell " C. Guide Plan - '68 or'78 - Kruell v MOTION: Dave Anderson moved to approve agenda as published and amended. Kruell seconded, motion carried unanimously. III. MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 1978 Pg. 4, para. 5, sent. 2, delete "were reasonable", add "would be reasonable to most citizens." Pg. 6, para. 2, delete "Dave Anderson", add "Tangen". 8, delete "the entire", add "that half the". MOTION: Tangen moved to approve minutes of June 19, 1978 as published and amended. Dave Anderson seconded, motion carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Community Center/Ice Skating Facility - Dick Feerick Mr. Don Opheim, 13731 Theresa Place, updated Commission on present status of the project and distributed literature on various aspects of the proposed community/ice skating facility. He spoke to recommenda- tion of professional fund raising group for a low key type of campaign and use of experience of other communities who have built such a complex. Minutes - Parks, Recreation, and approved Natural Resources Commission - 2 - Monday, July 17, 1978 A. Community Center/Ice Skating Facility (cont' ) Opheim continued that they envision a "shell" , with possibility of additions in the future such as a swimming pool and meeting room for senior citizens. Mr. Dick Feerick, 6518 Leesborough Ave. , spoke to contact with E.P. industr.}es, explaining that they have shown interest, but would like to see total plan and assurance that it will be a community project. He asked for the support of the Commission. Tangen asked whether the $600,000 referred to in their literature included the cost of land. Opheim responded it would be City owned, and spoke to possible site at Round Lake. He spoke to other alternatives such as adjacent to the school . Jerry Wigen, 7000 Kingston Drive, referred to facility at Apple Valley that was built in cooperation with the school district. Kruell felt it was more school oriented, and suggested turning it over to the school district rather than the City. He spoke to school hockey teams, swimming teams etc. as examples. Opheim responded that turning it over to the school district would limit advertising opportunities, and they felt it made more sense as a community recreation center. Tangen asked whether the Staff has done any preliminary work on the project. Werts responded negetive. Fifield arrived at 8:15 PM. MOTION: Tangen moved to direct the Staff to research the total concept as presented, including possible funding sources, .location of site, recommenda- tions on "ice" portion, and possibilities as meeting place for senior citizens. DISCUSSION: Opheim requested public-endorsement from the PR & NR Commission and additional information from the Staff in order to feel confident in trying to secure funds, and would also like it to be identified as a civic project. Kruell inquired how much financing would come from industry. Feerick res- ponded approximately one-half, and they anticipated 100% financing from govern- ment body for senior citizen portion. Tangen assured the representatives the motion was meant as a positive step, explaining they could not make a response until more information was available. Garens commented that this Commission has always been in favor of such a facility and they can be assured of Commission support. l Minutes - Parks, Recreation and approved Natural Resources Commission - 3 - Monday, July 17, 1978 A. Gemmanity Center/Ice Skating Facility (con't) VOTE: Motion carried 3-2, with Kruell and Fifield abstaining. Kruell commented he preferred to refer it to counsel to deter- mine whether there was any conflict present. B. EPAA - Dennis Marble Mr. Dennis Marble, E.P.A.A. , spoke to previous meeting and pro- jections of future usage of fields and facilities for teams of various sports, noting that lack of ball diamonds was the biggest problem. He explained that it was difficult for a volunteer group such as the E.P.A.A. to plan to handle the amount of children they do without the ability to create facilities, and asked whether the City had ever con- sidered operating the Association with the E.P.A.A. providing the volunteers. Garens responded that it has been considered, but is not feasible. He added that the Commission is in agreement that there is a need here, but feels it will have to go through the Staff and that the Commission can help where possible. MOTION: Kruell moved that the EPAA meet with the Staff to determine the field needs for E.P.A.A. program, and work out schedules based upon present schedules and advice on any park objections that may arise. Tangen seconded. Dave Anderson requestioned AMENDMENT TO MOTION: that this Commission partake and go on record to be involved in this issue and by having Commission member sit in on proceedings. The amendment was accepted. Motion carried unanimously. V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners 1 . 4per Valu - Tangen Tangen spoke to previous Motion by PR & NR Commission regarding this development, and noted that the Council did not accept the motion and did allow such a structure. B. Reports of Staff 1 . Development Proposals a. Gelco City Planner Chris Enger spoke to request for re-zoning by Gelco for approximately 18 acres for construction of Stages III - V of their building construction program. He spoke to the q Minutes - Parks, Recreation and aep oved Natural Resources Commission Monday, July 17, 1978 review in February by PR & NR Commission of the'Blacklock Line'and explained that none of this property in the proposal lay to the south of this line. Mr. Ray Geiger, The Leonard Parker Associates, made a brief presentation of uf` the request and spoke to the recommendations of the Staff report of July 7. 4 Enger noted City concern with the water quality of the lake and what type of impact the parking lot areas would have on Anderson Lake. He spoke to the Shoreline Management Act requirement of not more than 30% impervious surface, and informed the Commission that they were awaiting the decision from DNR as to what constitutes that 30%, and of Gelco's agreement to abide by that decision. : Geiger spoke to plans for run-off, and to their intention of constructing ; structured parking in Stage III, if the ruling says the roofs are impervious. r Kruell spoke to a letter from the Minnesota Waterfowl Association pointing '. out that because of proposed development, an Environmental Impact Statement was needed before further development takes place. Enger responded that this s EIS has been included in an overall Environmental Worksheet prepared by the City, and which will go out to forty agencies. Garens expressed concern with the height of the seven story building proposed. 1 Geiger responded they felt it would compliment the high point of the hill , and and added if it were built further west, it would stand out. CMr. Emerson Greenberg, Gdlco„ explained that the reason for going to seven stories was that they feel it is the maximum the site can stand, without rising above the tree line at that point. Tangen inquired whether if the re-zoning were approved, we are granting the right to Gelco to construct seven stories if they desire to. Enger responded :. that Gelco is agreeing to re-zoning agreement that will protect further building, with approval by the Council . He explained it was important to note that when . the Planning Commission approved this proposal , they were not approving seven { stories portion. i Fifield asked how Gelco plans to handle the run-off on the site. Enger f responded that at this point it is a schematic plan only, but that the drainage - system must be reviewed by the Nine Mile Watershed District. Mr. George Bently, 10800 Fieldcrest Rd. complimented Gelco's present building and asked the purpose of the proposed expansion. He also spoke to the lack of notification of the residents and although he was aware of the City's policy of notification of notifying residents within 500' , he felt they should be notified because they can see the project even if they live outside of that range, as he did. Greenberg responded that their plans were strictly expansion because of their tremendous growth. Enger explained the City procedure on public meetings and hearings, adding that we seem to have a consistent problem in a growing community where the Staff tries to make a determination on far to go for notification, noting they have gone as far as 3,000 ft. G� !µ Minutes - Parks, Recreation and approved ' Natural Resources Commission - 5 - July 17, 1978 Mr. Dick Sampson, 8048 Ensign Road, expressed concern with traffic problems and run-off, and requested that the lake be checked twice a year, and that the standards be stictly adhered to. Greenberg spoke -to a recent study done at Ridgedale Shopping Center, indicating that better parking lot maintenance is what was shown to decrease undesireable run-off of chemicals into the lakes. Enger added that additional information available indicates this fact, and he spoke to the high percentage of phosphorus could be from leaf droppings, which good parking lot maintenance could decrease. Mr. Frank Hartmann, 8216 Ensign Rd. , President of the Anderson Property Owners Association requested that the letter submitted July 10, 1978 be recorded in the Minutes pertaining to the 560 signatures obtained to petition the State Environmental Quality Board to have anEnvironmental Statement dose for unbuilt lands on the Anderson Lakes and requested that this action be taken into con- sideration when receiving input for the Gelco property. Geneva Middleton, Timber Trail , expressed concern for the lake itself, explaining Ky i that she felt the development going on around it is disturbing run-off and causing the lake to go dry, and requested that anEIS be done before any more construction take place. She spoke to previous measurements done and the vegetation indicating that the water level has dropped, in spiteof the recent heavy rains. C Marijean P. Carr, 8100 Ensign Rd. complimented attractiveness of the present Gelco building. She identified herself as a U.S. Wildlife volunteer, and expressed concern with the lowering of the water line, which she has noted within the past one and one-half years, explaining that only about one-half of the usual geese popu- lation has been observed during that time. Greenberg responded that Gelco would like to be in concert with the environment, and they are willing to spend the money to correct any problems, but feels it is C an engineering problem as to why the outlet doesn't work. He added that Gelco is here for approval , and we have to live up to these concerns. y Dave Anderson, addressing Middleton, inquired whether in any of her conversations with the DNR, they have given any indication of what is causing the lowering the water line, Middleton responded they don't seem to know, adding that their re- quest for an EIS is for the purpose of finding out what is happening to the lake, $ and not to keep development out. MOTION: Kruell moved that the recommendation as submitted by the Staff be approved K with the exception that the State II building be limited specifically to 3 stories. Dave Anderson seconded. y Garens request.AMENDMENT of limiting Stages III - V to 5 stories. Amendment was accepted by Kruell and refused by Dave Anderson. u AMENDED MOTION: Kruell moved that the recommendation as submitted by the Staff be approved with the exception that the Stage II building be limited specifically to w 3 stories and that Stages III through V buildings be limited to 5 stories. Garens seconded. i I l Minutes - Parks, Recreation and approved Natural Resources Commission - 6 - Monday, July l7, 1978 . !. G c DISCUSSION: Tangen noted that the listing of 7 stories on the report indicates that PR & NR Commission has to address itself to that issue t in opposition to that high of a structure on Anderson Lakes. Middleton asked whether park land marked for future park acquisition will be included in the re-zoning. Greenberg responded that the park land referred to is proposed to be given to the City by the Preserve. s Dave Anderson called the question and the VOTE was: Motion carried 4-1 , with a Dave Anderson voting "nay" , stating he was not opposed to the seven stories in Stages III - V. MOTION: D. Anderson moved to direct Staff to contact appropriate bodies to i find out why Anderson Lakes water level is dropping, in spite of recent heavy rains. Fifield seconded, motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Tangen moved that the Environmental Worksheet for this project be forwarded to the Council . Kruell seconded. DISCUSSION: Fifield questioned whether plant species and vegatation was checked. Enger responded that on-site inspection was done along with ardal inspection. VOTE: Motion carried 4-1 , with Fifield abstaining. �• Acting Chairman Garens called for a 5 minute recess. b. C.P.T. Corporation Enger spoke to the proposal and Staff recommendations , noting that according to Shoreline Management Act guideline, the pond was considered public waters. He added that a "Cash Park Fee" would be paid for 30 acres, and a sidewalk would be constructed along the west side of Mitchell Road. Mr. Robert Knutson, legal counsel for C.P.T. Corporation, responded to questions from the Commission. Tangen inquired what the nature of the opposition was. Enger responded that a 70 signature petition opposing any project was submitted by the residents. Kruell asked why the change of zoning from each guide plan. Enger responded that the site was in a very undefined area, with no definite use outstanding. MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend to the Council the approval of the C.P.T. ; proposed project for a corporate headquarters facility, with the Staff recommen- dation. Garens seconded. Motion carried 4-1 , with Kruell voting "nay", noting that the Development Proposal Check List contained opposition from neighbors who would rather see a different type of construction and he would like these owners to 'have the opportunity to be heard. Knutson responded to the opposition of the neighbors, commenting that many who were against the project were from the Red Rock. and Atherton sections, and were, . mainly opposed to any traffic congestion. i j Minutes - Parks, Recreation and Approved Monday, July 17,1978 Natural Resources Commission - 7 - C. Creekside Heights Enger explained that this was an attempt by the Hustad Development Corp. to put in some lower cost housing in the $30,000 to $40,000 range and were asking for variances for smaller lot sizes. He explained further that the steep wooded hillside would be deeded to the City. Enger, referring to Staff report recommendations, spoke to the proposal and answered questions from theCommission on: size of Outlot A that would be dedicated as play area - about 10 acres; who would pay for it - Hustad Dev. Corp. would construct pedestrian foot bridge across Purgatory Creek and con- struct a totlot structure in the open space area which shall be dedicated to the public free of any taxes or assessments; and whether this project will qualify the City for low cost housing credit - this project would not fall within modest cost housing, but would be to the City's benefit to have them. Dave Anderson questioned no. 3 of the Staff Report and asked where the utility sheds or garages would be located. Putnam responded that they would be a combination patio fenced storage area for items normally stored in the back of the the garage, and the reason for this was to keep the costs down. i Kruell asked whether any of the land would infringe into the Purgatory Creek area. Enger pointed out a small area which would lay in the conservancy zone of the Sunnybrook Sector. C Kruell spoke to the limited recreation area avid what would happen when the center area is developed. Putman responded that the area is close to Staring Lake and the Flying Cloud Fields. The Commissioners questioned the feasibility of crossing T.H. 169 until a traffic signal is installed. MOTION: Dave Anderson moved to recommend approval with the Staff recommen- dations except for no.3, that the garage be made an integral part of the house construction. Motion died for the lack of a second. Tangen asked what the trade-off was to the City. Enger responded approximate- ly 10 acres and facilities in lieu of "Cash Park Fee". MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend approval with the Staff recommendations, because Eden Prairie has to consider alternatives in types of housing, and that because of the location it may be one of the better sites for this. Fifield seconded, motion carried 3-2, with D.Anderson and Kruell voting "nay (Dave Anderson because of disagreement with no. 3 of Staff Rec. and Kruell because he was concerned with the lack of sufficient play area for any future development here. d. Anderson Lakes Parkway Apartments- Tabled. e. Briarfield Estates Enger spoke to the EAW prepared, and explained that there was no Staff report prepared at this time, but would be ready for the next Planning Commission Minutes - Parks, Recreation approved Monday, July 17, 1978 and Resources Commission - 8 - e. Briarfield Estates (cont'd) meeting. He located the proposed duplex lots and spoke to no recreational facilities or neighborhood parks. He spoke further to suggestion that the developer provide their own recreational facilities. He expressed concern with the anticipated 40% fill and noted the presence of some very old white oaks. He spoke to the acceptance of the use proposed, and would welcome changes in the plan that would provide better use of the wooded slope and less fill- ing of the flood plain. Kruell inquired whether it was an area that could be mined, with Enger responding that there were areas to the north and south, but the land- owners have no permit to mine. Mr. Dominic Sciola, Pride Building Maintenance, responded that they will take out some trees in order to make room for young trees, and added that they wanted to conserve trees as much as the City does. Mr. Doug Goriesky, Engineer for the project, spoke to the sites, ex- plaining that these were not detailed plans and that he was prepared to answer any questions or problems the Staff has on the project. MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend approval of the concept of resi- dential development on this parcel , but recommend denial of this speci- fic proposal as shown to us tonight, and direct the Staff to review the plan and suggest alterations and bring back to this Commission. Dave Anderson sedonded, motion carried unanimously. The AMENDMENT was requested that open space be given to residents and for them to provide their own facilities. AMENDED MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend approval of the concept of residential development on this parcel , but recommend denial of this specific proposal as shown to us tonight; to direct the Staff to re- view the plan and suggest alterations and bring back to this Commission; and that open space be given to residents so they can provide their own recreational facilities. VI . OLD BUSINESS A. Shoreland Management Ordinance MOTION: Tangen moved to table Shoreland Management Ordinance until the next agenda, and that it be listed prior -to development proposals. Fifield seconded, motion carried unanimously. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. LAWCON Grant Application - Mitchell Lake �, Werts spoke to the Application and informed the Commission the option was Minutes - Parks, Rec. and approved Natural Resources Commission - 9 - Monday, July 17, 1978 C about to expire for the Miller Brothers property at Mitchell Lake. MOTION: Tangen moved that the Commission recommend to the Council that we submit the LAWCON Grant Application for consideration for 1979 funding for the purchase of Miller Brothers property for a neighborhood park, which is presently under option and expires December 30, 1978. Dave Anderson seconded, motion carried unanimously. B. Construction Erosion Control - Kruell Kruell expressed concern that the City may be creating an inequitable situation for developers who are trying to control run-off and suggested either removing all restrictions or enforcing requirements for developers. MOTION: Kruell moved to have the Staff report back to us on who is responsible and how they are inspecting erosion control at building sites presently under construction. Dave Anderson seconded, motion carried unanimously. C. Guide Plan 168 or '78? - Kruell Kruell requested direction from theStaff or Council which Guide Plan we should be using as a guideline. �- VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Dave Anderson moved to adjourn at 12:30 AM, Tangen seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary y _._. .,.