Planning Commission - 04/08/1985 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
. Monday, April 8, 1985
School Board Meeting Room
7:30 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes, Dennis
Marhula, Ed Schuck, Christine Dodge, Julianne Bye
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. MINUTES
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. HUBBARD OFFICE/WAREHOUSE, by Hub-Jar Partnership. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 Park on 0.76 acres, with
variances, to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary
Plat of 0.76 acres into one lot for an office/warehouse facility.
Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of Flying Cloud Drive, and
• East of Highway #169. A continued public hearing.
B. TECHNOLOGY PARK, by Technology Park Associates. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial/High Density
Residential to Office on 19.65 acres, Planned Unit Development
Concept Review on 68.36 acres for Office, Office/Showroom uses, and
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Review on 68.36 acres.
Location: South and East of Valley View Road, West of Washington
Avenue, North of Viking Drive. A continued public hearing.
C. AUTUMN WOODS 3RD ADDITION, by Trumpy Homes. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres, RM-6.5 to R1-9.5
on 2.37 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5.01 acres into twelve single
family lots. Location: East of Highway #101, North of Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul , and Pacific Railroad. A public hearing.
D. THE GARDEN, by Hakon and Karen Torjesen. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.16 acres and Preliminary
Plat of 10.16 acres into 25 single family lots. Location: North of
Rowland Road, West of Shady Oak Road. A public hearing.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
• EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, April 8, 1985
School Board Meeting Room
7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ed Schuck, Christine Dodge, Virginia Gartner, Stan
Johannes
MEMBERS ABSENT: Julianne Bye, Robert Hallett, Dennis Marhula
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to adopt the agenda as
printed.
. Motion carried--4-0-0
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
III. MINUTES
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to approve the minutes of the
March 25, 1985, Planning Commission meeting as printed.
Motion carried--3-0-1 (Johannes abstained)
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. HUBBARD OFFICE/WAREHOUSE, by Hub-Jar Partnership. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 Park on 0.76 acres, with
variaces to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary
Plat of 0.76 acres into one lot for an office/warehouse facility.
Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of Flying Cloud Drive, and
East of Highway #169. A continued public hearing.
Staff advised the Commission of a letter received from the proponent
requesting withdrawal of the subject project at this time to allow for
revision of the project, adding the parcel to the west.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 April 8, 1985
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to close the public
hearing and return the item to the proponent, without prejudice.
Motion carried--4-0-0
B. TECHNOLOGY PARK, by Technology Park Associates. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Industrial/High Density
Residential to Office on 19.65 acres; Planned Unit Development
Concept Review on 68.36 acres for Office, Office/Showroom uses; and
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review on 68.36 acres. Location:
South and East of Valley View Road, West of Washington Avenue, North
of Viking Drive. A continued public hearing.
Planner Enger reviewed the progress on the item since the previous meeting,
responsive to Commission concerns involving Smetana Lane extension, traffic
volumes, and final alignment for Golden Triangle Drive.
Mr. Brad Hoyt, proponent, stated that, after review of the items of concern
to the Commission, and discussions with Staff, proponents would prefer to
defer the issue of the Smetana Lane extension at this time, until further
information on the necessity of connecting this road was available.
. Regarding the alignment of Golden Triangle Drive, Mr. Hoyt stated that he
had worked with his consultants to move the road further to the west, as
suggested by the Commission. The revised plans showed the road 62 ft.
further west than the original submission. He added that this alignment
would save the top 50 ft. of the hill and would not require any retaining
walls adjacent to the proposed parking lots within the development.
Mr. Hoyt stated that he was in the process of negotiating with the property
owner to the north for fill to correct the elevations of the property caused
by the mining operation over the past several years. Mr. Hoyt pointed out
that, in order to grade the building pads for the property east of proposed
Golden Triangle Drive, and to grade Golden Triangle Drive, itself, it would
be necessary also to grade a portion of the property on the west side of
proposed Golden Triangle Drive to achieve a balance of the materials on the
site. Mr. Hoyt expressed concern, in particular, for the northwest portion
of the site, which was a wooded site, the elevations of which would be
difficult to deal with in relation to the existing elevations on surrounding
properties. He suggested that the best alternative for this northwest
portion of the property would be to grade it to the elevations of the
surrounding properties. Also, Mr. Hoyt stated that the area adjacent to the
Cherne site, along the west property line and from which there was a 12 ft.
elevation difference to the subject property, would be restored for a more
suitable transition of the grades between the two properties.
Chairman Schuck stated that it would be difficult to make a decision
relative to the grading of the northwest area of the site without a tree
inventory of this portion of the property. He suggested that the inventory
be prepared for Staff and Commission review. Mr. Hoyt concurred that it
would be helpful for evaluation of site impacts.
Planner Enger reviewed a brief history of the mining operation on the
Planning Commission Minutes 3 April 8, 1985
•
property. He explained that the current average elevation of the property
was below that approved by the mining permit and that it did not appear that
the property had yet been restored to the approved elevation of that permit.
Also, the plan proposed by proponents did not show the final elevations to
be at the elevation approved by that permit. He stated that the Staff would
require additional time to evaluate the difference between these plans.
Staff would also require the tree survey for the area adjacent to Nine Mile
Creek to determine whether trees in that area could be, or should be, saved.
Regarding the relocation of Golden Triangle Drive, Planner Enger stated that
the revised location represented a better plan in that it did not require a
"sheer cut" of the hill . Regarding the extension of Smetana Lane, he stated
that it would be Staff's recommendation that it not be connected until such
time as the character of Smetana Lane changed, west of the subject property.
The existing character of Smetana Lane was single family residential . He
added that it would be important to maintain the option for extension of the
road in the future.
Gartner asked whether, as part of the gravel mining license issued by the
City, a bond had been posted for guarantee of the restoration of the
property. Staff responded that a bond had been posted; however, the mining
operation had not yet been completed and opportunity for restoration still
existed.
• Gartner asked when City Staff had become aware of the amount of mining which
had taken place on the property. Planner Enger responded that the City, as
recently as three years ago, had become aware that there may not be enough
material on the site, itself, for restoration of the property. At that
time, City Staff inspected the site and determined that there was adequate
material available for restoration purposes.
Mr. Hoyt added that, based upon their earlier proposal for the property, it
would require approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards to bring the property up
to the approved elevation per the mining permit issued by the City.
Planner Enger stated that since 1975, the Engineering Department had been
responsible for monitoring of the mining operation. He stated that, in
discussions with the Engineering Department, it was determined that the
mining, for the most part, had taken place within the boundaries of the
permit issued.
Chairman Schuck stated that he felt it would be important for Staff to have
additional time to review a tree inventory and the mass grading for the site
to compare proposed and existing elevations of the property. He added that
he felt the proponent had done a good job in trying to mitigate the concerns
of the Commission and Staff with the revised plan.
Mr. Frank Smetana, Sr., 7680 Smetana Lane, stated that he was in favor of
maintaining Smetana Lane in its current residential status.
. Mr. Frank Smetana, Jr., 7722 Smetana Lane, stated that, at the time of
review of the mining permit in 1975, it was felt that the final plans were a
compromise between what was proposed by the developers for final use of the
property and final elevations, and that he did not feel any further
Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 8, 1985
compromises should be made by the residents in this area. He added that he
felt the Smetana Lane area had been protected by the 1975 plan with a
specified final elevation for the property. He stated that he did not feel
the property should be allowed to develop until it could be filled to the
elevations approved by the 1975 plan. Also, the 1975 plan showed a High
Density Residential use along the west border of the property, while the
proposed plan did not.
Planner Enger explained that the designation of land use for this area was
for either High Density Residential, or Industrial, or both on the
Comprehensive Guide Plan.
Ms. Marilyn Heath, 7665 Smetana Lane, stated that she was concerned with the
northwest area of the property with respect to tree loss. She also
expressed concern regarding the widening of the creek, which she had
observed over the recent past and regarding the drop in elevation from the
Cherne property to the subject property.
Staff explained that the widening of the creek had been done by design of
the storm water drainage system in the area and was according to plans
reviewed and approved by the Watershed District for sedimentation control .
Ms. Heath stated that she would be more comfortable with a definite final
grade established for the property.
• Gartner stated that she was concerned about the enforcement of Code in with
respect to the situation involving the mining operation on the site, adding
that the Code had been adopted to prevent such things from taking place.
Gartner stated that she did not feel the Commission could act on the east
half of the proposal without knowing how the west half of the property will
be impacted. She added that she had no problems with the the east half of
the proposal as presented at this meeting.
Mr. Don Bundlie, 700 S. Meadow Lane, Golden Valley, attorney for Mr. William
Pearson, owner of the subject property, stated that he was uncertain that a
final elevation had been established by the mining permit.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to continue the public
hearing pending additional information including a tree inventory for the
northwest portion of the property and a mass grading plan, all to be
reviewed by the City Staff prior to Commission review.
Motion carried--4-0-0
C. AUTUMN WOODS 3RD ADDITION, by Trumpy Homes. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres and from RM-6.5
• to R1-9.5 on 2.37 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5.01 acres into
twelve single family lots. Location: East of Highway #101, North
of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul , and Pacific Railroad. A public
hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes 5 April 8, 1985
•
Mr. Dennis Truempi, proponent, reviewed the proposed project with the
Commission, explaining that the third addition consisted of three small
parcels, which had been remnants of the first two additions of Autumn Woods.
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff
Report of April 5, 1985, evaluating the project.
Gartner asked if the Staff Report concern regarding variety of housing types
could be mitigated at a Staff level . Planner Franzen replied that proponent
had already submitted several housing types; however, additional types would
be necessary.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--4-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Trumpy Homes for Zoning District Changes
from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres and from RM-6.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.37 acres
for Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, based on plans dated February 22, and March
• 1, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 5,
1985.
Motion carried--4-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Trumpy Homes for Preliminary Plat of 5.01
acres into twelve single family lots for Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, based on
plans dated February 22, and March 1, 1985, subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Report dated April 5, 1985.
Motion carried--4-0-0
D. THE GARDEN, by Hakon and Karen Torjesen. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 10.16 acres and
Preliminary Plat of 10.16 acres into 25 single family lots.
Location: North of Rowland Road, West of Shady Oak Road. A public
hearing.
Proponent had requested a two-week extension for this project due to changes
which were felt to be necessary by proponent in several of the plans.
MOTION:
• Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to continue to the public
hearing to the April 22, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, pending receipt
of amended plans from the proponent.
Planning Commission Minutes 6 April 8, 1985
Motion carried--4-0-0
V. OLD BUSINESS
None.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
May Meetings
Staff noted that the second regular meeting in May would fall on Memorial
Day and suggested that the Planning Commission schedule a special meeting on
another date to handle regular business.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to schedule a special
meeting for May 28, 1985.
Motion carried--4-0-0
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
• VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge. Chairman Schuck
adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m.
•