Planning Commission - 02/22/1982 AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
Monday, February 22, 1982
7:30 PM, City Hall
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman William Bearman, Liz Retterath,
Hakon Torjesen, Virginia Gartner, Dennis
Marhula, Robert Hallett, Grant Sutliff
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
- Sue Schulz, Planning Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 8, 1982 MINUTES
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. BRYANT LAKE CONDOMINIUMS, by Metram Properties Co. Request
for PUD Concept approval on 65 acres for residential attached
units with variances and approval of an Environmental Assess-
ment Worksheet. Located east of I-494 and Beach Road and
south of proposed Crosstown 62. A continued public hearing.
B. LAKE EDEN CARRIAGE HOMES, by Zachman Homes, Inc. Request
to rezone and preliminary plat 8.7 acres from Rural to
RM 2.5 which land is part of the Edenvale South Planned
Unit Development (PUD 73-11) . Included with the zoning
are variances for setbacks and the use of wood as an ex-
terior material. Located north of Anderson Lakes Parkway
and east of Darnel Road. A public hearing.
C. CITY WEST PHASES 1-3, by Richard W. Anderson, Inc. Request
for approval of rezoning from Rural to Office District and
preliminary plat of part of the City West Planned Unit
Development. Included in the public hearing on the proposed
preliminary plat will be the consideration of the granting of
variances, pursuant to Sec. 11, (relating to Planned Unit
Developments) , Ord. 135 from the provision of said ordinance
applicable to the Office District. Located east of New Shady
Oak Road (Co. Rd. 61) , and south of Crosstown 62 and west of
US 169/212. A public hearing.
D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT. (C.D.B.G. ) A public hearing
to obtain the views of citizens on local and Urban County
housing and community development needs and to provide citizens
with the opportunity to comment on the Urban Hennepin County
Statement of Objectives/1982 and the City of Eden Prairie's
proposed use of Year VIII Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant Funds. A public hearing.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
7 }
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
approved
Monday, February 22, 1982 7:30 PM, City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairperson, Liz Retterath, Hakon'
Torjesen, Dennis Marhula, Robert Hallett,
Grant Sutliff, Virginia Gartner (7:38)
MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearman
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Sue Schulz, Planning Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Hallett moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Torjesen seconded,
motion carried 5-0.
II. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 22, 1982 MINUTES
Sutliff moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Marhula seconded,
motion carried 4-0-1. Retterath abstained.
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
None
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. BRYANT LAKE CONDOMINIUMS, by Metram Properties Co. Request
for PUD Concept approval on 65 acres for residential attached
units with variances and approval of an Environmental Assess-
ment Worksheet. Located east of I-494 and Beach Road and
south of proposed Crosstown 62. A continued public hearing.
Torjesen asked if i t is-'in _anyone'sinterest to_keep cont!_r_uincL_the__i tem____The_Pa�nnPr re-
plied that when progress has been made residents will be renotified and it will
be republished.
Retterath expressed her concern that this is the fourth month of continuing this
project.
MOTION
Torjesen moved to continue Bryant Lake Condominiums to the March 22, 1982 meeting
with the intent that if_ progress_has not been made,- the Commission 'would not continue
the item further unless there, was�4good=reason.for the continuance. Sutliff seconded,
motion carried 6-0.
.approved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 22, 1982
B. LAKE EDEN CARRIAGE HOMES, by Zachman Homes, Inc. Request to
rezone and preliminary plat 8.7 acres from Rural to RM 2.5
which land is part of the Edenvale South Planned Unit Develop-
ment (PUD 73-11). Included with the zoning are variances for
setbacks and the use of wood as an exterior material . Located
north of Anderson Lakes Parkway and east of Darnel Road. A
public hearing.
The Planner stated Mr. Steve Ryan of Zachman Homes, Inc. was present to give
the presentation.
Ryan reviewed the development parameters: 1) environmental factors; 2) land use/
zoning; 3) transportation; 4) service facilities; 5) housing costs and interest
rates. He reviewed the existing conditions for the 8.7 acre site. Stated that
they want to protect the trees and pond. He also reviewed market interest trends
and housing costs from low density to high density; high density -$100,000+ house
needs a minimum income of $50,000; medium density -$65-95,000 house needs a minimum
income of $40,000; low density -$50-75,000 house needs a minimum income of $30,000.
The proposal is for 8 condominium buildings for a total of 64 units with 7.3 units
per acre. The site was originally approved for 12 units per acre. He reviewed
the landscaping and stated that there will be a single private drive through the
site and felt that the traffic would flow to Anderson Lakes Parkway. He reviewed
the utilities; a loop and connecting sewer and water system. Most of the site
drains from west to east to the pond. Very little grading is required. Engineering
Department finds no problems. He gave a brief slide presentation on the condos;
colonial style with white accents on the trim and deck detailing.
Retterath asked the distance between the garages and the building. Ryan replied
approximately 25-30' .
Ryan stated that there will be 7 phases and stated that they are not proposing
park dedication but are willing to construct a totlot. He stated the phasing will
start at Anderson Lakes Parkway and work around the site for a total construction
time period of 1 year. There will be a 4-6' berm adjacent to the single family
homes.
The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 2/17/82.
Torjesen asked if the original Edenvale South plan was designated as medium density
residential. The Planner replied yes and stated that he reviewed the plans as per
the 1973 approval .
Hallett asked if there will be 1 garage per unit. The Planner replied yes and
stated that the ordinance requires 1 outside and 1 enclosed parking space which
is available.
Sutliff asked the size of the buildings. Ryan-approximately 36,000 sq. ft. Sutliff
asked how large the garages are. Ryan replied 10' x 20' single stall garages. Sutliff
then asked the amount of impervious surface coverage and asked if the roadway will
be completed with phase 1 construction. Ryan replied that there is 25% impervious
surface coverage and that completion of the roadway has not been decided yet but
they will talk to the City Engineering department. Sutliff asked if there will
be mass grading on the site. Ryan replied 25,000 - 30,000 cubic yards on the entire
site.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 22, 1982
•
Hallett asked if there is a difference between private roads and public roads.
The Planner replied that private roads are privately owned and maintained and
public roads are maintained publicly and owned by the public. Private roads
do not have a right-of-way and public roads generally have a 50' road right-of-
way and 30' setbacks from the right-of-way to the unit. With private roads,
the proponent is able to accommodate parking parallel to the private road and
garage structures on the private road itself. There are less setback restrictions
on a private road.
Torjesen asked The Planner to explain the variances. The Planner stated that the
ordinance does not allow wood as an exterior material im multiple family, ind. , office,
and commercial areas. Because of the internal platting, there will be a building
with a lot around it, the building will include the garage and the drive, etc.
Because the proponent is platting each individual lot for financing staging
purposes, the proponent will end up with garages on lot lines: As each lot is -
platted beyond the first one, it will become absorbed into the first one and
becomes part of the overall homeowner's association. A variance is needed to
gain access off of a private street, and a variance for the lots which do not have
an access to a public street.
Gartner asked the cost of the units. Ryan replied $50-65,000 per unit.
Retterath asked the size o-f the units. Ryan replied 870+ sq. ft. - 1000 sq. ft.
not including the garages.
Retterath asked if there is anything that can be done to prevent the workers from
damaging trees. The Planner stated that the trees will be fenced.
Hallett asked when the totlot would be constructed and stated that he felt that
it is important__to_have.- The__P1a-nner stated that the_-Parks,__Recreation_and Natural
Commission-will -address that in detail .
Gartner asked who will provide snow removal for the private road and if there
is any restrictions so that it will be removed. The Planner stated that the
Homeowner's association will contract the removal out and that there are State
Statutes restricting the removal. He further stated that the City can go in
and remove the snow and assess the property owners for that removal .
Paul Becker, 8680 Darnel Road stated he was concerned with the buffering of the
site.
Bob L' moraux,--._.... 8905 Darnel Road stated that he was concerned with the amount
of parking and stated h$ would like more. Retterath asked the overall parking.
The Planner replied 130- spaces for 64 units or. 2.5 spaces/unit.
Wayne Mutterer, 8690 Darnel Road stated he was concerned with the compatibility
of the neighborhood, the square footage, the exterior, the garages, and the
price. He stated that he felt the average single family home in Lake Eden is
now approximately $100,000.
Barb Hopson, 8770 Darnel Road stated she felt chore parking is needed and asked
the width and height of the berm. The Planner replied height from the
existing grade to the property is 6' and ;the width - 25' at the narrowest point.
s
,approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 25, 1982
C. MITCHELL LAKE_ ESTATES 2ND ADDITION, by Karl Peterson. Request
to revise the COR PUD, preliminary plat 3 lots on approximately
4.21 acres and rezone from Planned Study to Office, for construc
tion of 3 office buiTdings with variances. Located in the south-
west quadrant of TH 5 and Co. Rd. 4 west of Superamerica Gas
Station. A public hearing.
The Planner -stated,-that_tbis__parte_Lis___annravPd_tMate for 48 apartment units.
It was then revised to include approximately 25,000 sq. ft. of office space on
the northern portion of the site and 64 units of elderly housing on the southern
portion which was approved by the City Council and given first reading. However,
2nd reading was never given because the owner never signed the developer's agree-
ment. Karl Peterson has a contract-for-deed or purchase agreement for this site
and is proposing to develop it as low-density office which would have the same
amount of traffic as the approved plan. -He;-stated that Superamerica has had some
problems obtaining access from the public road planned in the area. Superamerica
is now not interested in accessing onto the road. Fie then reviewed the current
proposal and stated that Lee Johnson was present to give a presentation.
Johnson stated that access has been placed at the west end directly across the
access for the bank as a right-in/right-out only. He stated that all 3 lots will
have access to the cul-de-sac road. Parking for the entire site is 1 over the
required amount but when it is broken down per building, the site is short 1 space.
He stated that Dr. Bonnett currently has a veterinary clinic across from Eden
• Prairie Center and has at the most, 3-4 cars parked at a time. He stated that
individual landscaping around the buildings would occur at time of building permit
issuance.
The Planner stated that he was concerned with the access and stated that the
original intent was to access from Terrey Pine Drive, or Superamerica. He stated
that Terrey Pine Drive is expected to continue west to other property. He stated
that he wants all land-locked parcels un-land-locked which is the reason for
recommending that the small portion of the land be deeded to the City as Outlot A.
He felt the site plan is mare suitabld for the site than previously requested.
The buildings will be small offices and stated all mechanical equipment must be
screened. Co. Rd. 4 is expected to be upgraded with a median to be constructed.
He also reviewed the staff report dated 1/4/82.
Retterath asked if Outlot A is deeded as public ownership, if Superamerica would
have to go through any chanels to get connection. The Planner replied no.
Sutliff asked if the -mechanical equipment is to be screened according to Ordinance
requirements. The Planner replied yes.
Torjesen stated that if Outlot A is deeded to the City, he felt that the City
should be able to determine when Superamerica will connect to it. Bearman stated
a possibility would be deed it to the City that no rights be given, so Superamerica
would have to return to the City for connection.
Marhula stated that the City should have control over Outlot A rather than the
proponent. He then asked if there are occupants for the buildings. Johnson
replied that Dr. Bonnett purchased his lot contingent upon rezoning and is not
sure what his time table is. He stated that both office buildings will be con-
structed and Mr. Peterson will be a tenant in one.
..approved
Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 22, 1982
Paul Becker, 8680 Darnel Road was concerned that when the road is not plowed in the
Winter months, that people will park on the road. Ryan stated that the homeowner's
association would have the snow removal contracted and it would be run like a
business.
Agnes Daluge, 8795 Darnel Road, was concerned with the entrance off Darnel Road
to the site. She stated when she built her home that there would not be a road
entering or exiting onto Darnel Road by her home.
Mike Furst, 8693 Darnel Road felt the project is too dense.
John Lillicrap, 8579 Darnel Road was concerned with the impact this project will
have on the intersections at Anderson Lakes Parkway and US 169 and Anderson Lakes
Parkway and Co. Rd. 18. He was concerned that site lines have not been drawn
of the berms when the site is developed, that the totlot is planned next to the
pond. The Planner stated that when Anderson Lakes Parkway continues west of
169, there will be a permanent semi-four light and felt that it would be able
to handle the traffic generated. He stated that the Commission members had site
lines. Ryan stated that the site lines show the trees 4-6' high when planted.
Karen Paul , 8912 Darnel Road was concerned with the noise level and transportation
level. She was concerned for the children at play and felt the existing wildlife
will disappear.
Wayne Mutterer, 8690 Darnel Road stated that he felt the project should blend
in with the existing neighborhoods.
Bob Lamoreaux, 8905 Darnel Road was concerned about the setbacks, asked what
the berm will be on the south, and asked if there are any requirements for
the types of trees to be put in. The Planner stated that the setback from
Darnel Road is 50' and the City requirement is 35' . The berm on the south
will be 6' high, and stated that a landscaping plan will have to be- submitted.
John Lillicrap, 8579 Darnel Road asked the distance between the exit on Anderson
Lakes Parkway and Darnel Road. Ryan replied 110-120' . The Planner replied that
the minimum requirement is 125' and the plan is scaled at 150' . Lillicrap asked
if there are any traffic light provisions and stated that he felt it was necessary.
The Planner stated that there will be approximately 62 average daily trips/unit
for a 400 trip total at peak hour.
Marie Cornett, 8745 Darnel Road asked how many people wi ll be living in one area
when finished, how the Lake Eden North home owners wil_l get to the park, and
how many ballfields, etc. will be provided. The Planner replied that the park
can handle 5000 people, the people will get to the park via a sidewalk on the
north side of the park which will lead to the bikeway to get to the trail on
Anderson Lakes Parkway.
MOTION 1
Gartner moved to close the public hearing on Lake Eden Carriage Homes. Hallett
seconded, motion carried 6-0.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 22, 1982
S MOTION 2
Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning from
Rural to RM 2.5 as. per the material dated 2/17/82 and the staff report dated
2/17/82. Sutliff tecondedq motion carried 5-0-1. Marhula abstained.
MOTION 3
Torjesen moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat dated 2/17/82 as per
the staff report dated 2/17/82 eliminating #6 of the report and adding: #10: City
make a serious effort to bring the developers and Lake Eden Homeowner's Associa-
tions (north and south)* together to arrive at a compatible color scheme; #7 should
read: A detailed landscaping plan including but not limited to use of 6-8 foot
high, but not less than 4' high, evergreens at the north end adjacent to the
single family home, be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to
building permit issuance. Landscaping of the berm to be completed in conjunction
with phase 1 construction. Gartner seconded.
DISCUSSION
Sutliff asked if there is a time frame for the northerly berm and stated that he
felt it sould be done at the time of first phase construction. Ryan stated that
total site grading, construction of berms, and utilities will be completed at
the time of first phase construction.
Motion carried 5-0-1. Marhula abstained and stated that he-abs-tained from com-
ments on this project because of business reasons.
----------- -- --
MOTION 4
Torjesen moved to recommend approval of the variances requested: a) use of wood
as an exterior; b) sideyard setback variances within interior sideyards; c) lots
without frontage on a public street; and d) private road as per the plans dated
2/17/82 and the staff report dated 2/17/.82. Gartner seconded.
DISCUSSION
Sutliff stated that he felt that the City Engineering Department should review
the egress on Darnel Road. Torjesen and Gartner agreed.
Motion carried 5-0-1. Marhula abstained.
C. CITY WEST PHASES 1-3, by Richard W. Anderson, Inc. Request
for approval of rezoning from Rural to Office District and
preliminary plat of part of the City West Planned Unit
Development. Included in the public hearing on the proposed
preliminary plat will be the consideration of the granting
of variances pursuant to Sec. 11, (relating to Planned Unit
Developments) , Ord. 135 from the provision of said Ordinance
applicable to the Office District. Located east of New
Shady Oak Road (Co. Rd. 61) and south of Crosstown 62 and
west of US 169/212. A public hearing.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 22, 1982
The Planner stated that Mr.Dave Sellegren of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly_& Lindq_ren was -pre-
sent and would introduce the others.
Sellegren introduced: Dick Anderson, Warren Isrealson, Russ Solan and Ken Johnson,
of Johnson & Solan Architects, Brian Field, and Scott Anderson from ADI.
Sellegren stated that the request is for rezoning. The PUD was approved in October
of 1981 by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council in November of
1981. He stated that BRW is currently working on a feasibility study. They are
platting 7 lots with the remainder of phase 1 as an outlot. It is necessary to
plat the outlot for road purposes. There will be 2 6-story buildings by the pond
and construction is scheduled to start May 1, 1982. In 1983 ADI would like to
return to build the second phase of the first phase. The plan has been broken
up since the PUD approval , however, the square footage remains the same. 742 of
1200 parking spaces are located under the buildings with 36% ground coverage on the
site. The original floor area ratio (FAR) was .39 now it is .34. First phase
berming will be along Shady Oak Road (in its entirety) and will be 2500' long
planting the shrubs and trees 3-7' apart. A pedestrian walkway system is proposed-
a jogging path in the first phase. Staff suggested a sidewalk along the east
which will not be built now but will be done in the future. Final grading cal-
culations are not done. Sewer and water will be in the road. Water is expected
to flow to the lot line into the pond. Inlets and outlets have been discussed
with the City Engineering Department. Maintenance costs will be assessed to the
building owners. Reviewed the recommendations of the staff report and found it
acceptable.
Russ Solan, Johnson & Solan Architects, stated that they would like to maintain
the amenities of the site. They want to take advantage of the slopes on the
ends where the parking lots would be to buffer the parking lots. They are pro-
posing a ring loop road. Two buildings will face the pond. More than half of
the parking is underground and out of view. The buildings are rectangular in
shape.
Ken� Johnson, Johnson & Solan Architects, stated the buildings will have a brick
exterior and they are planning to use poured concrete for the stair towers,
elevators, and the parking lots. The main entrance is at the end of the
structure. The buildings by the pond are linked together by a cafeteria. A
two story atrium is located at the first and second floors, third and fourth
floors, and fifth and sixth floors.
Sellegren explained that the parking__s aces- allocated as follows-:---the-200 spaces
as in the staff report are under the buildings; 56 spaces, each with 126 spaces
under the plaza and approximately 20 will be handicap along the private street.
The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 2/18/82 and stated that at the
writing of the staff report, staff was unclear about some items. BRW is under
contract by the City to complete the design for public utilities for the public
road for the entire City West area which was petitioned by ADI and BRW was
selected. The utility plans are not completed yet for the loop road and consequently,
the storm sewer plans are sketchy at this stage. The information heard is not
documented and stated he first heard some of the information. He stated that he
had not seen a plan showing the existing trees on the site yet. He felt that it
is important that the mass grading plan was received_ only_ a-couple_ days _p rior_to_.the_
meeting. He stated that fill for the total site will have to come from the entire
first 16 acre site. Concerned that grading plan has not been balanced. A sidewalk
will be installed. Landscaping plans have not been reviewed had not seen a ped-
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -7- February 22, 1982
estrian plan prior to the meeting. Felt free-standing parking will work. He
reviewed the variances being requested. Shady Oak Road will need improvements in
the future. These assessments would be allocated to ADI . The berm along Shady
Oak Road should be constructed at this time which will create the need for grading
off the site. Concerned with the grading around the ponds. Felt the mature trees
can be saved if a detailed plan showing the location of the trees is submitted.
He suggested continuance of the project for 2 weeks.
Sutliff stated that he would like to see elevation plans and site line plans.
Marhula expressed concern if the feasibility study is not completed by the next
meeting and if ADI will be ready. The Planner stated that he does not know how
long it will take for the study to be completed. Warren Isrealson stated that
ADI has been working with BRW and stated that they are planning on having final
drawings to the Council by April.
Sutliff asked if the sewer that was built will create a problem for this project.
The Planner replied that the sewer was built to accommodate development on the
Honeywell property and this property.
Sutliff asked if the undergrowth will be affected when the grading is done so
the berming can be done. The Planner replied that the undergrowth in the low
area will be removed. In order to accommodate parking on the area, as contem-
plated in the PUD, there will have to be a sur-charge for a capping of the area
with earth. Filling of that area with five feet of earth is being proposed and
felt that it is reasonable. Construction of the berm will largely not affect the
vegetation. He stated that trees are needed to be located on a grading plan to
see where the vegetation will be altered.
Warren Gerecke, 6622 Golden Ridge Drive stated that he was concerned that plans
showing construction on the entire site have not been shown.
Dick Feerick, 6518 Leesborough Ave. , read an exerpt from the City Council minutes
dated 9/15/81 approving the City West PUD and stated that he was concerned that
these plans are not what the Planning Commission and City Council expected-to
see. Sellegren stated that the project has substantially changed _-in. the respect_
that the large mass on the western part of the project has been eliminated.
Torjesen asked what would happen to the requirements if after the buildings are
constructed the buildings are sold to different owners. The Planner stated that
a structure to make things work; when phase 1 is built, phase 1 parking should be
built; when phase 2 building is built, phase 2 parking should be built; and on so
that all buildings will have parking designated. He stated that this will have
to be decided prior to final plat approval.
Torjesen com limented ADI on the model and stated that_he_feltthat--the--staff _
needs more information from ADI for staff's review of the project.
MOTION
Torjesen moved to continue the public hearing on City West Phases 1-3 to March 8,
1982. Gartner seconded.
DISCUSSION
Sellegren stated that they are willing to come back in 2 weeks and commented that
final detailed documents should be a contingency for occupance of the buildings.
Motion carried 6-0.
x
f approved
Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 22, 1982
D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (C.D.B.G. ) A public hearing
to obtain the views of citizens on local and Urban County
housing and community development needs and to provide citizens
with the opportunity to comment on the Urban Hennepin County
Statement of Objectives/1982 and the City of Eden Prairie's
proposed use of Year VIII Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant Funds. A public hearing.
The Planner stated that the C.D.B.G. program has been a Federal program since
1974. It is a Revenue Sharing Program with specific goals as listed in the
Statement of Objectives. The money has built the bikeways on Co. Rd. 4 and
Valley View Road, parks, has remodeled the Senior Center, reforstation, and
in general , fundable activities have become more specific toward housing. In
1978 the City saw a need for low and moderate housing. The City chose to bank
the money for a current total of $200,000 which is for elderly housing. The
City has approved three elderly housing requests and is optomistic to get the
money from Federal Government 202 Funding. Professional groups have come close
to getting funding, however, none have received it; one for example, was because
a grocery store was not within walking distance. Now the City is concentrating
on the site west of Prairie Village Mall . One suggestion would be to bank a
portion or all of the money for elderly housing. Information regarding the
C.D.B.G money has been distributed to all department heads. One suggestion,
from Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor, and the members of the Historical
Commission, would be to donate the money for the restoration of the Cummins-Grill
• house. ,San lerts and some representatives_ _ were present to give a_brief
presentation. The Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council .
Sutliff asked if the funds have anything to do with the MHFA grants. The
Planner replied yes and stated that three or four have been granted to-date.
He stated that it was well spent on an appropriate use.
Bruce Brill , 7041 Willow Creek Road, Historical and Cultural Commission,
stated he would like to see the money donated to the restoration funds for the
Cummins-Grill house. He stated that he felt that that would be something for
the entire community to use. He stated that Mona Finholt was present to give a
brief presentation.
Mona Finholt, 10010 Pioneer Trail , gave a brief slide presentation. J.R.
Cummins built the house. He was one of the first settlers in Eden Prairie.
Cummins bought the house in 1856. He was a farmer and horticulturalist.
Brill stated that this house is important to all the kids that have learned
about it, and stated some have been taken to the house and ask many questions
about the history of it. He introduced Mike Eames, 17345 West 78th Street,
the contractor for the restoration.
Eames stated that the Cummins-Grill house would be his fourth restoration project.
He stated he restored the Bartholemu house in Richfield.
Brill introduced James Brown, 11551 Riverview Road.
Brown stated he felt the history of the house is important to keep alive, the
house has value and a special value which would be made more available for
children and adults to find out the history of the house.
a .
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 22, 1982
Brill stated that the house will be restored whether money is donated for it or
not but stated that the money is needed for restoration of the roof so it will
remain in-tact.
The Planner stated that if the -City cannot get elderly housing approved this
year, he felt that there will not be another chance. He stated that if the
elderly does not go through this year, the money will have to be reallocated. `
Torjesen asked if the money is allocated to other projects besides elderly, if
- - -- ----- -it will cripple the elderly housing project. The Planner replied_ _ that-hecould ___ _
not -an- that_quues ha tion.but stated tt the $200,000 is necessary.
Hallett asked _i_f the City has an option on the Moore house. which is across from
who
Lakes. The Planner replied yes. Eames stated that once the people
who are living in the house die or move, the house will become the City's. He
stated that this house is in good condition but the Cummins-Grill house needs work.
Brill stated that the Cummins-Grill house would be a useful house; classes , tours,
picnics, etc. He stated he felt that the Moore house has been maintained well .
Hallett asked who owns the house on Co. Rd. 18. Brill replied the County.
Hallett asked if there is only two places left for a cultural house. Brill replied
that he felt that the Cummins-Grill house could some day be placed on the National
• Register because Mr. Cummins has 60 years of diaries documented.
Sutliff asked if the house will be kept up with funds provided from the Government.
Brill replied no.
Marhula asked how funds are being raised. Brill stated that they have formed a
committee which hopes to start working in the Spring.
Marhula asked if there is a bank account for the restoration. Brill stated that
a -student collected approximately $60 for the house after seeing it which is in
a bank.
Gartner stated that she felt the house should be restored but also felt that the
money is needed for elderly housing.
Torjesen asked who has the descretion for what to do with the money. The Planner
replied the County.
Hallett stated he felt that both projects should be allocated some money.
Marhula stated that the tradition has been to bank the money for elderly housing
but stated that restoration is an important function and felt the money should go to both.
Brill stated that the restoration of the roof is top priority.
• MOTION_
Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council $26,000 of the C.D.B.G. money be
allocated to the restoration of the Cummins-Grill house, $5,000 to be allocated
to the energy restoration, and the remainder be allocated to elderly housing.
Torjesen seconded.
H �
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 22, 1982
DISCUSSION
Sutliff stated he had concerns with recommending a specific amount of money toward
the restoration of the house.
Hallett stated that he does not feel that $5,000 should go toward the energy
restoration.
Motion carried 6-0.
V. OLD BUSINESS
None
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None
VII. PLANNER' S REPORT
The Planner reviewed the upcoming items.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Torjesen moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:20 AM. Marhula seconded,
motion carried 6-0.