Planning Commission - 01/24/1983 AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
Monday, January 24, 1983
7:30 p.m., City Hall
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner,
Robert Hallett, Dennis Marhula, Liz Retterath,
Grant Sutliff, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Kate Karnas, Planning Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES, JANUARY 10, 1983
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. RED ROCK RANCH, by Robert Mason Homes. Request for
Envrionmental Assessment Worksheet approval. Located
east of Red Rock Lake, west of Mitchell Road, and
south of Pheasant Oaks.
B. RYMARLAND CAMP 3RD ADDITION, by Milton 0. Quam.
Request for Development Plan and Zoning amendment to
allow development of 4.4 acres as single family
residential lots. Located east of Highway 101 and
south of Hidden Ponds 2nd Addition.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
A. Interim Uses, Major Center Area
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 24, 1983 7:30 p.m., City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Dennis
Marhula, Grant Sutliff, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Kate Karnas, Planning Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion was made by Sutliff, seconded by Retterath, to approve the agenda
as submitted.
Motion carried--7-0-0
II. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 10, 1983 MINUTES
Motion was made by Sutliff, seconded by Marhula to approve the minutes of
the January 10, 1983 meeting as written.
• Motion carried--6-0-1 (Liz Retterath abstained)
III. MEMBERS' REPORTS
Commission members with terms expiring, Robert Hallett, Liz Retterath, and
Grant Sutliff, were reminded to send letters to the City Council regarding
their desires to remain on the Commission. Appointments to these
positions would be made in February by the Council .
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. RED ROCK RANCH, by Robert Mason Homes. Request for Environmental
Assessment Worksheet approval. Located east of Red Rock Lake,
west of Mitchell Road, and south of Pheasant Oaks.
Staff explained that, while an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
had been prepared for the-project previously, due to the amended density
figures which had dropped from a range of 600-1,100 down to 350-525, a
revised EAW had been prepared for the project. The revision was before
the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation.
DISCUSSION
Gartner stated that a previous study done by the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) regarding Highway 212 indicated that Red Rock Lake
was one of the two best natural environmental habitats in the county, the
other being Rice Lake, also within Eden Prairie. She stated that she
Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 24, 1983
was concerned that proper evaluation had taken place regarding this fact
in preparation of the EAW. Planner Enger stated that the DNR had done a
portion of the research for this particular EAW as the City took advantage
of a new service offered by the State for such purposes. A wildlife count
was yet to be completed. However, no negative environmental effects were
pointed out by DNR.
The Commission discussed the revised EAW in greater detail and requested
corrections and additions be made as follows:
Page 4, item 2j--List City as source of water supply
Page 11, item 5--Determine more exact length of sewer in feet and more
exact length of streets in miles
Page 12, item K2--Insert footnote to this item noting that proponent has
agreed to, and City is yet to complete, an historic review of the site for
signs of early settlement
Sutliff questioned whether 65% was a realistic figure for the amount of
the site to be altered by the development. Planner Enger stated that it
was an appropriate figure, somewhat towards the low end, of what the
average development must alter for the site improvements to be made.
Gartner questioned whether the City would allow the developer to fill the
area along the lake frontage of the site which was swampy. She stated
that this swampy area was quite close to the portion of lake frontage
which was intended to be developed as public park. Planner Enger stated
that the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission had not yet
reviewed the revised plans for the development, but would be doing so in
the near future. He added that he did not feel the City would allow this
area to be filled.
MOTION
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Torjesen, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the Amended Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Red
Rock Ranch, based on the revised density ranges recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission at its January 10, 1983 meeting, and based upon
the revised plans of December 13, 1982, and the supporting material dated
December 2, 1982 and January 6, 1983, and subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Report of January 6, 1983.
Motion carried--7-0-0
B. RYMARLAND CAMP 3RD ADDITION, by Milton 0. Quam. Request for
Development Plan and Zoning Amendment to allow development of 4.4
acres as single family residential lots. Located east of Highway
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 24, 1983
r
acres as single family residential lots. Located east of Highway
101 and south of Hidden Ponds 2nd Addition.
Staff reviewed the memorandum to the Planning Commission regarding the
proponent's project and the need for additional review of the project as
an amended Development Plan and Zoning amendment. The preliminary plan
for this land had been recommended for approval previously by the Planning
Commission and Council. When the project reached the City Council, the
Council questioned whether the zoning needed to be amended also. It was
the opinion of the City Attorney that the project be routed back to the
Commission, with proper hearing notification for a zoning amendment.
Planner Enger pointed that there had been no physical changes to the
proposal since the Commission had reviewed it at their meeting of December
27, 1983.
MOTION
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the amendment to the Development Plan and Zoning for
Rymarland Camp 3rd Addition, based on plans dated November 22, 1982, and
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated December 21,
• 1982.
Motion carried--6-0-1 (Chairman Bearman abstained)
V. OLD BUSINESS
Transitions Between Existing/Proposed Uses
Hallett stated that he felt the Commission should establish a policy for
dealing with transitions between existing and proposed uses. He stated
that problems may arise in certain areas due to the fact that the Guide
Plan density ranges had changed recently, wherein the low and high ends of
the density ranges had been increased. For example:
Low Density changed from 0-2.0 units/acre to 0-2.5 units/acre
Medium Density changed from 2.0-6.7 to 2.5-10 units/acre
High Density changed from above 6.7 to above 10 units/acre
In general discussion, the Commission members pointed out their concern to
be consistent in their review of all projects to accomplish the goals of
1) allowing the development of land to take place at its highest and best
use according to the Comprehensive Guide Plan; and 2) protecting the
existing neighborhoods from encroachment of any type, including higher
density adjacent to their lots which were established under different
density ranges.
. The Commission members discussed ways in which this could be accomplished.
One way would be to "transfer" the density from the periphery of the site
Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 24, 1983
to be developed to the center of the site, thereby using distance as part
of the transition from the existing neighborhoods established under lower
density ranges.
Another concern raised was that of changes in the Comprehensive Guide Plan
as requested by developers. The periphery of the sites proposed for
development should perhaps be treated differently when these existing
neighborhoods, established under the lower density ranges of the previous
Comprehensive Guide Plan, abut sites proposed for a Guide Plan change.
The change to the Comprehensive Guide Plan requested by the developer may
be appropriate only for the center of the site, as opposed to the entire
site when adjacent to this type of existing neighborhood.
Marhula questioned what rights the developer had as pertained to the
Comprehensive Guide Plan. Planner Enger responded that the developer has
the right to apply for zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan
designation.
Planner Enger pointed out that the Comprehensive Guide Plan was changed
after much study and review by the Staff, Commission, and Council, with
sound reasoning behind any change made. He stated that it would be
important to see to it that the basic intent of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan not be changed without sound reasoning and thorough review.
The Commission asked Staff to review these situations further.
IV. PLANNER'S REPORT
A. Interim Uses in Major Center Area
Staff reviewed the ordinance drafted by the City Attorney. It was pointed
out that two goals were kept in mind as the ordinance was prepared for
review: 1) To allow Major Center Area (MCA) residents in single family
homes existing in designated commercial areas to sell their homes; 2) To
allow for a smooth transition to take place from residential to commercial
usage for the MCA.
Planner Enger stated that he felt two key elements of the proposed
ordinance were that it limited the time frame of the Interim Use to three
years, and that reference was made to allowing for only minimal
improvements to the residence in which the use was proposed.
Gartner stated that she felt the City should look at other areas where the
tool of an interim use would apply. She stated that she felt it would be
appropriate in any situation where a residential structure existing in an
area guided for eventual office, commercial, or industrial use. The other
is Commission members concurred.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 24, 1983
Chairman Bearman stated that he felt that the word "may" in Subdivision 4,
Additional Conditions, should be changed to "shall." He stated that he
felt it was important that every proposal be treated equally. Planner
Enger stated that what may apply in one proposal , may not apply in another
proposal, therefore the use of the word "may."
Staff was directed to prepare a survey of the City to determine how many
areas of this type existed and report back to the Planning Commission.
MOTION
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Torjesen, to recommend to the City
Council adoption of the proposed amendment to the City Code for Interim
Uses within the Major Center Area.
Motion carried--7-0-0
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn was made by Torjesen, seconded by Gartner.
. Chairman Bearman adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kate Karnas
Planning Secretary
•