Planning Commission - 06/09/1980 AGrt!uA
Eden Prairo Planning Co:.,-nissior
Monday, Jui;e 9 , 1980
7:30 PM, City liall
CG(��"1ISS1C�'� I[71.1,,ERS: Chair,,:tin Wil l iunm i' arman, Liz Rc:tteratli , Gc-ore;e
Bentley, Grivit Sutliff , Virginia Giiii-tner, Miat Lhi.-I
Levitt;, l{C.(:on Torjesen
STAFF MEMBERS : Chris Enger, Director of P1 ::nning _
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
Pl edge of Allegiance -- nol 1 Call
I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA -
II . APPROVAL OF THE 14AY 12 , 1930 MINUTES
III . MEMBERS REPORTS
IV. DEVELOM-194T PROPOSALS
A. DEER CREEK PUD AND RE7.0NING, by T. G.C. Devel op,ment I nc. Rr_quest
for P1JD concept approval on EO acres for s r.gle fu.mily, to%•:nha1-1r.V,
quadraminiums, and commercial use; rezoning from; Rural to RM 2 . 5;
preliminary plat approval , and approval of an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet. Located Last of Mitchell Road , youth of
Old Fann Quads , and North of Ridgewood ►•Jest.A ccnti need pu 1 i c lica nq .
B. SUPERAMERICA STATION, at Co. Rd. 4JTli 5. Request to rezone 1 . 3 acres
from Plan S;.iidy to Highti•tay Commercial for construction of a conven-
ience store aid gas station. Located in the Southwest corner of I'll 5
and Co. Rd. 4. A continued public meeting.
C. GELCO FIRST ADDITION, by Gelco Corporation. Request for PUD -
Develcpment Stage approval to preliminary plat the 60 acre Gelco
PUD into 9 lots and 10 out.l ots. Located north of Anderson Lakes
and South of I-494 and West 78th Street. A public hearing .
D. ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY NFIGHBORHOOD S( OTTING_CEP;T_ER, by Eden Prairie `
Real Estate lnvesiment Corporation. Request for PUD concept approval ,
rezoning frcw Rural to C-Co,ir, and preliminary plat approval . Located
in the Southeast corner of US 169 and Anderson Lakes Vjrl-wel% .
A public hearing.
E. BRYANT LAKE VIE!•! ESTATES-Replat of Preliminary plat. by
he. Th�1r . " s _
gtIest to hreii;ninaiy 1)1 t a7 ur 4Z,1: z3 acres of the previou-i E
preliminary plat for 1 existincl hov , and r nc.w lcots for Div-#4 li: fw::71y
construction. Loca ted along tl,e nor•t1.wos t corner of llrvao t Lake
adjacent to Beach load. A public livarirng.
V. OLD GUS 1 MESS
III . NEW (,1151 NI-SS
VI I . PI_AN(r(:!:' S
W." (;ti i(1c -V I t:s
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
approved
41 Monday, June 9, 1980 7:30 P14 City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman William Bearman, Liz Retterath, Grant S,utl i ff,
Virginia Gartner, . Matthew Levitt, GeorgeBentley, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director Planning; Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
RetteratE movW9 futliff seconded, to approve the agenda as submitted.
!Notion carried unanimously.
IL . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MAY 12 1980
.2,Motion 1, add-(Bentley abstained because of past involvement in '
litigation against the developer) .
Bentley moved, Gartner seconded, to approve the minutes as amended.
Motion carried 6:0:1 with Torjesen abstaining.
II1 . 1EMBERS REPORTS
Retterath welcomed Hakon Torjesen back from his leave of absence.
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
X. DE E R CREEK UD-WD REZONING, by T.G.C. Development, Inc. Request
or FUD concept approval on 80 acres for single family, townhouse,
quadrz.minitwos, and commercial use; rezoning from Rural to RN 2.5;
preliminary plat approval , and approval of aq Environmental
Asses-sient Worksheet. located East of Mitchell Road, South of
Old Farm Qjads, and North of Ridgewood West. A continued public hearing.
Notion
rtner moved. Retterath seconded, to continue the Deer Creek
public hearing to June 23 as requested by the proponent.
Notion carried unanimously.
B. SUPERA1rERICA STATION, at Co.Rd.4/TH 5. Request to rezone 1.3 acres
from Plan Stu y to Highway Conmerrial for construction of a convenience
store and gas station. Located in the Southwest corner of TH 5 aid ;
fo.Rd. 4. A continued public meeting.
lotion
ettPrath moved. 6driner seconded to continue the Superamerice
Item to the July 14 meeting as requested by the proponent.
Ploti.n carried unanimously.
• C. GELCO FIRST ADDITION, ay Gelco Corporation. Request for PUD
►"eloopa�en�t Stage approval to prel iminary plat the 6C acre Geico
PW into g lots and 10 ou*lots. Located north of Anderson Lakes
and South of I-494 and hest 78th Street. A public hearing.
Isne Planner Informed the omission the plat request depicting building,
parking and access areas upon land zLlned Office is to facilitate
mrtgaginq for construction purposes. We statld that presently building
Aumber 7 is urArr constructions. the P1arnier then reviewed the strff
rim it retawendetims.
approved
Minutes-Planning Commission June 9, 1980
Gelco First Addition, continued
Emerson Greenberg, Gelco Corporation, reinterated the need for the plat to
allow separate mortgaging of construction of the approved phases.
Levitt -inquired if all land within* the plat is zoned Office. The Planner
replied affirmative, adding that also depicted on the plat plan is land
which is zoned Public around the lake. .
Fred Rosenblatt legal counsel, Gelco Corporation, stated that the legal
description of land conveyed to the City is separate from the plat legal .
Levitt asked if two buildings are contemplated upon Lot 1 , Block 2.
Rosenblatt replied that at this time it appeared sensible to plat the area
only into 1 lot until it is known whether one or two buildings will be
constructed. He informed the Commission that as part of the PUD and zoning
agreements each building phase plan must return for City approval .
Levitt inpulired if the plat as proposed with off site parking and cross easements
would be functional if Gelco sells one or .more buildings. The Planner replied
the area could still function as an office park if a building is sold because
easements for access and parking are outlined similar to what has been done
in other communities. •
Bentley stated he is uncomfortable making a recommendation on off site parking
as it could set a precendent.
Emerson Greenberg stated that the plat proposed confonh to the City's
previous approvals on the overall site.
Bearman asked if there were other parties than Gelco and the bank to the
mortgage. Emerson Greenberg replied negative.
Beannan asked if anyone in the audience had questions or comments. None
were raised.
Motion 1
ev tt moved, Gartner seconded, to close the public hearing on the Gelco
First Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2
ev tt moved, Gartner seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the preliminary plat dated May 19, 1980 as per the staff report of June
40 1980. Motion carried unanimously,
D. ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER, by Eden Prairie Real
Estate Investment Corporation. Request for PUD concept approval , rezoning
from Rural to C-Cam, and preliminary plat approval . Located in the Southwest
corner of US 169 and An4erson Lakes Parkway. A public hearing.
Dick Krier, Westwood Planning b Engineering, reviewed the site lcc4tiors past
meetings with neighborhood, site character, location of buildings, proposed
access points, landscaping,and berming,as they are outlined in the submission.
material , Mr. Krier then presented the Commission with copies of the project's
proposed design standards which will control building design, lighting,
planting material , signage, etc.
• '.Unapproved
Minutes-Planning Commission -3- June 9, 1980
Mr. Bensh oof, Westwood Planning 6 Engineering, reviewed the traffic studies
conducted to determine the amount of traffic the proposed project would ,
generate. He estimated 353 daily trips to the commercial development.
He noted that the connection of Anderson Lakes Parkway to the East will
in itself increase traffic at Anderson Lakes Parkway and US 169. He stated
that the present traffic grade and the projected traffic grade (with improve-
ments installed) is an 'A' .
The Planner clarified the traffic information submitted as assuming a
light controlled intersec t'ion.
Mr. !Crier stated the developer will share in the cost of necessary improve-
ments and_will contribute the $20,000• for a temporary signal .
The Planner then reviewed the staff report and commented that the design
standards submitted tonight are broad. The Planner' then summarized the
proposed improvements to the intersection.
Bentley inquired who would assume the cost of the Lake Eden Drive connection
to US 169 and the street construction through the pmposed com-nniercial .
Mr. Kri er replied the developer.
8earman expressed concern that without specific building plans the City may
end up with unimaginable land uses. He asked how high the buildings would be.
Mr. Krier stated the sight line views depicted show 18 foot high buildings.
Retterath inquired if the restaurant users are known at this time.. Mr.Schumacher,
Eden Prair;e Reel Estate Investment Company, replied negative.
Levitt felt zoning upon the entire site is premature at this time since only
i building may oe constructed at a time.
Sutliff asked if each proposed building is located upon a separate lot.
The Planner replied yes,
Torjesen asked if buildings higher than 18 feet ( 30 feet allowed in ordinance)
could be built after City approval . The Planner believed the height could
be stipulated in the developer's agreement as has been done in other projects.
Bob Lamoreaux,8905 Darnel Road, stated that the signal is needed now as the -- -
intersection is presently very dangerous. .
Monroe Levie,President,Eden South Hmieowners Association, 12440 Cockspur Court,
• listed the following concerns: fast food establishment is undesirable,
prefer to have sem-o'-trucks prohibited from the area ( perhaps allowed to stop
along US 169) , and the current traffic conditions are hazardous, He stated that
the developer has agreed to relocate the fast food restaurant from the
northern end to the southern end and sign the fast food exit to encoura,e
trips to exit via Lake Eden Drive instead of Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Fred Montana, 12525 Crowfoot Court. asked how far east. Anderson Lakes Parkway
would be extended. . .The Planner replied it would be. extended from its present
termination in Ridgewood to The Preserve where it is in place to Co.Rd. la.
Montana then asked if the com rcial development would require Construction of
4 lanes to Anderson Lakes Parkway. The Planner replied negative.
All I
approved
Minutes-Planning Commission -4- June 9, 1980
Jim Peterson,8946 Darnel Road, asked who decided that commercial develop- '
ment was needed at this intersection. The Planner replied through City
wide meetings, recommendations from staff and commissions, and finally adoption
of a Guide Plan by the City Council , this area was identified for a neighborhood
commercial site.
Mr. Cornett, 8745 Darnel Road, felt that restaurants opening in the early morn-
ing mould augment the already congested traffic at the intersection.
Mr. Nyberg, 8965 Darnel Road, felt the traffic analysis given has ignored ttie
continual increase of traffic along US 169 from southern communities, and
that if and when a commercial project is -developed(3-4 years front now) the traffic
will even be greater.
Torjesen asked if Outlot A is part of the PUD request. The Planner replied
negative adding that it is not part of the zoning request, only a part
of the pl a t.
Mr. Schumacher stated he has committed to the residents that. Outlot A will not
be used for a fast food or retail establishment.
• 1
Motion 1
Bentley Rowed, Retterath seconded, to close the public hearing on the Anderson
Lakes Parkway Neighborhood Shopping Center. Motion carried unanimously.
Notion 2 t
Bentley-moves, Gartner seconded, to recommend to the City Counc i i approval of
the PUD Concept dated May 129 1980 as per the staff report of June 5,1980.
!lotion carried 5: 1 with Bearma►; voting star.
Motion 3
Siht7ey moved, Sutliff seconded, to recommend to the City Council denial of
the zoning and platting requests with consideration of the zoning and plating
upon resolution of the intersection improvements and signal installation and
only upon submission of development plans for each lot to be developed.
Discussion:
lean noel t unclear of the lot line delineations in the brochure. �
Levitt questioned thr separate action upon the PUD and zoning & Flatting:
and suggested perhaps zoning upon each lot as it was ready for development
could be made.
Bentley and Sutliff agreed to withdraw Motion 3.
_
Motion 4
ent py moved, Levitt seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat dated May 12, 1980 as per the staff report of June S. 19M.
Torjesen moved, Sutliff seconded to amend the motion to include the developer' s comait-
ment to prohibit fastfood or retail establishment development upon Outlot A. - it
tarried. MotiaNy as amended carried 5:2 (8earman, Retterath voted nay).
Motion 5
Bentley mioved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council denial of the
zoning until resolution of the intersection and signals, and submission of �
specific plans for each lot. Motion carried 7-0.
��cM'li ��, a� •.•��s!.�-- y2. 1'�:'k� .r...i 'M' 'rR�'."�".<�r "u''` 1 ..'S{'11$eK�• _ `ii . YET:' � � {
Minutes-PlanningCommission approved
-5- June 9, 1980
E. BRYANT LAKE VIEW ESTATES, Replat of preliminary plat, by Thelma Haynes.
equest to preliminary plat 17 of the 23 acres of the previous preliminary
plat for 1 existing home and S new lots for single family construction.
Located along the northwest corner of Bryant Lake , adjacent to Beach
Road. A public hearing.
Don Ringrose, 8KW, stated the economics of the previous 26 lot subdivision
were infeasible. He outlined the location of the sanitary sewer to serve
the lots, the access easement for the hone to the northeast, and stated that
the homes would install private water.
The Planner informed the Commission that the previously planned collector
street over 494 does not now seem likely , but the Engineering and Planning
staff feel a neigh';jrhood collector should be planned to connect this project
to development to the north and northeast, and to the City park.
Torjesen commented that the improved road suggested by the staff would only
serve two homes. The Planner stated that it will ultimately serve more and
function as a neighborhood collector, and if not built now will be more difficult later.
Mr. Ringrose expressed his belief that building of the road at this time is
not necessary ; instead he suggested that the right of way be deeded to the
City or that the area be placed in. an outlot which could be conveyed whan
desired by the City.
Torjesen inquired if the R1-22 zoned iots could be further divided. The Planner
areplied affirmative.
t .
Levitt asked if the plat meets the requirements of the Lhoreiand Management
Ordinance. The Planner replied yes.
fir. Ringrose felt restricting building to the 880 contour would be detrimental
because it would not allow the opportunity to place homes away from the freeway
and within view of the lake. He added that because it is a sensitive site,
individual building plans could be submitted to the watershed for review and
erosion control recommendations.
The Planner felt placement of homes below the 880 contour could lead to unnecessary
r awval of zdditicnal trees and landforms .
Mrs. Hanley,6408 Rowland Road, inquired if her access is being kept intact.
Mr. Ringrose replied affirmative.
Motion 1
Torjesen moved, Gartner seconded, to close the public hearing on the Bryant
Lake View Estates preliminary plat. Motion carried unanimously.
Notion 2
Torjesen moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval
of tie p ' _Ti r _-, ° t —L '. .' ; per the staff report of
June 6, 1980 with revisions to recommendations 1 and 3 as follows:
1. A 50 foot wide right of way must be platted in the location
shown as 1 rod easement on the proposed plat.
3. On lot 2, th� Shoreland Management Ordinance requires that the
home be no closer than 125 feet from the Normal Ordinary High
Water Mark.
Notion carried unanimously.
. - T
approved
Minutes-Planning Commission 0.6- June 9, 1980
V. OLD BUSINESS
none
VI . NEV! BUSINt..,a
none
141I . PLANNER'S REPORT
A. Guide Pla—F-Amendments
The Planner briefly updated the commission on the City' s Guide Plan.
review by the Metropolitan Council : •
Beaman believed the City is being unfairly penalized for being one
of the first cities to commence a guide plan and one of the first
submitted.
Bentley hoped the Metro Council thoroughly reviewed the guide plan
because some items requested are already included.
Torjesen expressed concern about the amount of staff time being
expended .
After review of maps depicting: excavation sites, airport zones,
MTC routes, cropland, significant slopes, suitability for on site
sewer systems: and user counts within the Sanitary Sewer Districts,
the following motion was made:
Motion r
Bentley moved, Retterath seconded, to receive and accept the above
amendments to the City' s Comprehensive Guide Plan and to submit said
amendments to the Metropolitan Council for review. Motion carried 7-0.
Upcoming Meeting:
Gartner moved, Rearman seconded, to corrinence the next regular scheduled
meeting, June 23, at 6:00 PM for dinner and a presentation o. she
Torj esen family experiences in Thailand.. Motion carried unanimously. -
VIII . ADJOURNMENT
Gartner moved, Sutliff seconded, to adjourn at 11 :40 PM. Motion
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
°� Jean Johnson