Planning Commission - 09/29/1975 AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -
Monday, September 29, 1975
7:30 PM, City Hall
COMMISSION MEMBERS:Don Sorensen, Richard Feerick, Norma Schee,
Richard 'Lynch, Joan Meyers, Herb Fosnocht,
Roger Boerger
STAFF MEMBERS : Dick Putnam, jean Egan, Chris Enger
Invocation --- Pledge of Allegiance --- Roll Call
PM
7:35 I. MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
7:45 II. MEMBER'S REPORTS.
A.Chairperson Don Sorensen.
1 . October 13th meeting date, ( Columbus Day )
B.Council Representative Joan Meyers
C.Others.
8:00 III. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. 169 Mini-Sector Study, staff report on alternative road alignments and
Garden King Market site.
8:a B. Mitchell Lake PUD Revision, request by Pemton for` revision to the
approved 1971 residential PUD. The PUD is located east of Mitchell
Lake and west of Co. Rd. 4.
9:10 C.Prairie Lawn & Garden, request by Stanley Riegert for Development of
a small engine repair, lawn mower sales, and garden store. The site
Is about 1 acre and is located.north of T. H•. 5.across from Fuller Road'-s.
intersection with T. H. 5.
9:45 D.Parkview Apartments Phases 2 & 3, discussion of concept plan revisions
for the second and third phases from the 1972 PUD.
10:15 E.Area .5a , The Preserve, Amsden Hills, request for prbliminary platting and
rezoning for 51 single family lots. The' area is located off Franlo Road
south of theEast/West Parkway and east of Olympic Hills A public
hearing will be held es 'soonva.s .possible.
10:50 F. Presentation by Wallace Hustad "PUD 1975".
11:30 IV. PLANNER'S REPORT.
A.Planning Checklist-Mr. Fosnocht.
B. Guide Plan Update. ,
C,Planned Study District
11:45 V. ADJOURNMENT.
MINUTES
A
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 29, 1975 7:30 PM' City Hall
I
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Sorensen, Feerick, Schee, Meyers ,
Fosnocht , and Boerger
MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Lynch.
STAFF PRESENT: Dick Putnam Director of Planning
I. MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
P. 3, Motion la.- add the sentence"Subject . . . Sector" , that appears
at the end of # 8.
4. should read 1 or 2 story office buildings. . .
P. 4. B. heading should read . . - to install 3 retail gas pumps . . .
P. 5, Motion 1. should read - with a roof of material compatible . .
4. should read- of the maximum three pumps . . .
Boerger moved, Meyers seconded to approve the minutes as written and
amended. The motion carried 3:0 with Feerick, Fosnocht and Schee abstaining.
MINUTES OF ,AUGUST 25, 1975 , PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to reconsider the August 25rd Planning
Commission Minutes. The motion carried 6:0.
*Byers indicated that on page 5 no motion was shown for Motion # 3.
It was suggested the motion should be inserted as follows;
Schee moved, Meyers seconded-
To recommend adoption of the 169/ Mini-Sector Study with the
exceptions listed in the first two motions, that of the east/west
road alignment and the Garden King Market site...
The insertion was acceptable to all members.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS.
A.Chairperson Don Sorensen.
1. Mr. Sorensen indicated that October 13th will be a legal holiday and the
regular scheduled meeting should be rescheduled. The Commission decided
that Wednesday, October 8th, 7:30 PM, at the City Hall would be the
A.
next Planning Commission meeting date.
2. Sorensen expressed concern about-the Eden Prairie development process
and the results of planning in Eden Prairie today. He ques-
tioned •. 'if ' the _' , City has . been .following the adopted policies
of the Comprehensive Guide Plan , and .,if specific • actions'-- -•C
have, been violating policies;-of the Guide Plan and Ordinance 135. i
He cited spot zoning, approving developments directly in contradiction
with the Guide Plan and existing PUDs, approving of blanket lot variances,and
the method of Commission involvement in City land uses decisions.
Rconcern wars the City'should. view the total impact of its decisions
upon the overall development of the City,!
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- Sept. 29, 1975
Mr. Boerger agreed with Sorensen regarding Eden Prairie's
development future. He indicated concern over the confusion that many,
including himself, feel about the City's development policies and "that
an updating of City policies and Council direction in updating City policies
Is badly needed.
Mrs. Meyers said the concern regarding direction is shared by the
City Council and that the Guide Plan update should provide direction.
Sorensen questioned whether there is a severe.,City financial problem.
He felt the national economy and development in general is suffering
from the economic recession . He did not believe the City should alter its
long term policies to accommodate short term economic conditions.
Meyers said some members of the Council felt the economic slow down
warrants flexible City policy application.
Feerick expressed a concern about the degree of support for the Guide Plan by
the City Council , and also the degree of support for the 1968 Guide Plan by
the community. He believed a .Plan' update ` was needed to clarify
policies and objectives for the Commissions and Council.
Schee expressed her concern about who are we as a Planning Commission and
what value do our recommendations .have to the Council Her concern
was that the Planning Commission's work and input to the Council was not
being given review either in the public meetings or by the Council.
Boerger felt the Council when making policy changes regarding the Commission's
role , staff role , or citizen role in City policy should clearly define those to
all concerned. He felt that either the Planning Commission today was not
reflecting the Council policies or the Commission did not understand the
changed policies from the Comprehensive Plan. He felt that today on many
inbtances the Commission and Council seem to be adversaries rather than
members of the same team.
Sorensen agreed with Boerger that the current situation makes the Planning
Commission's job very difficult. He questioned what the Planning
Commission could do to help bridge the gap and make the Commission and
Council more effective in providing leadership . Sorensen felt
the last . year produced a number of differences in policy and operating
procedures that the Commission does not understand.
�Boerger indicated that percentage wise the Commission should agree with
the Council most of the time , otherwise we are not understanding the
Council's policies or we disagree with the Council.
-approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- Sept. -29, 2975
Meyers indicated that the Commission should not take individual actions
by the Council and readinto them major direction changes by the Council.
She also felt the Commission and Council are mostly in agreement and that
there is not a concensus related to development policies , comprehensive
planning , etc. , by the Council members themselves.
Again Sorensen asked what can the Commission do to be more effective?
Boerger questioned how does the Council receive Commission recommendations;
and does the staff , as the Commission's representative, have an opportunity
to convey adequately the Commission's recommendations.
Sorensen indicated that the Planner is in a difficult position as he works
for 3 masters-the Commission, Council, and City Manager. Meyers said most of
the time the Council chooses to have the Planning Commission and staff
recommendations presented.
The planner said - the Council has adopted a different set of operational
procedures -whereby staff input at -Council meetings is kept to a minimum.
He indicated that at the Council's discretion staff reports or Commission recommendations
are :.verbally . -presented . He said this was the pErogative of the
Council to adopt procedures for conduct of their meetings.
Sorensen asked if there would be any value in , having a joint meeting between
the Council and Commissiom to discuss problems and to evaluate
ways to improve the communication and understanding. Boerger agreed that
such a meeting would be helpful and necessary.
Feerick questioned what could be done at this stage, but hoped that meetings
would prove helpful.
Fosnocht hoped that such meetings would be more productive than the last
meeting, and that members.Would :empress `specific 6oncerns -and be r'ea'dy to
discuss them in a direct manner.
Schee suggested to the Commission that the Planning Commission Chairman
draft a memo stating their concerns to the Council at the earliest opportunity
and suggest a meeting between the Commission and Council be held in the
near future.
The suggestion by Schee was acceptable to all the Commission Members.
Sorensen asked the staff planner to make the City Manager aware of the
discussion andcOMP n5so that he may convey those concerns to the Council.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- approved
Sept. 29, 1975
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. 169 Mini Sector Study, staff report on alternative road alignments'and Garden
King Market area.
The planner discussed the recommendations made in the September 12 , 1975
staff report concerning the Garden KingMarket site and the northern Votech
School entrance . He outlined the recommendations listed in the report
and the, reasoning that Brauer & Associates and the planning staff used in
formulating their recommendations.
Members of the audience expressed concerns relative to the following
Mr. Simchudk , across from the northern Votech entrance J was concerned about
the north access road and its' impact upon his property. He questioned if
the Modern Tire. and Energy System's cul-de-sac might provide a reasonable
relocation of the east/west collector Toad.
The planner respondedthat it had been considered , but due to proximity to the
parkway and the significance of the northern Votech School access that the
major access point should occur at the Votech School access rather than
to the north by Modern Tire.
Simchuck expressed his feelings that any road decisions and construction would
have tremendous impact upon his home and possibly his business ( trucking ), and that
he was not- in complete agreement with the road on his property.
Mr. Perkins, owner of the Garden King Market, expressed a concern for safety
of the curve and that of the Votech School access. He stated that people turn
around in his driveway, and that the curve is very dangerous because of the
heavy truck traffic and proximity to his business.
Mr. Gene Hansen, owner of Cleen Sweep, expressed concern relative to the
heavy truck traffic and safety along 169 ,
Motion:
Schee moved, Meyers seconded, to amend the 169 Mini-Sector Study by
Brauer & Associates as follows;
1 . Retain the Garden King home site and adjacent lots as residential
property not commercial.
2. Enforce the requirements of Ordinance 135 pertaining to non-
conforming uses and clearly identify the fruit market as such a use.
3. At such time as sewer and water are provided to the Sunnybrook
area, platting and zoning of the Garden King home site and adjacent
lots should be considered to an appropriate single family detached
residential district.
4. Close Sunnybrook Road when alternate access is available.
5. Give further study, to the impact of cul-de-sating Creek Knold Road.
6. That the east/west collector road is necessary to allow •,
orderly and compatf ble future development of the total area.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- Sept. 29, 1975
7. That the east/west collector should connect with the northern Votech
access road because of spacing from other streets, property served by
the streets location, and connection with a major intersection.
8. That the long term use of lots, 3,4,5 and 6 should be non-residential
as described in the 169 Study. The collector road design and alignment
should be planned with this in mind.
9. That the timing of the east/west collector street should not be in advance
of the need created by either . the residential development east or the
industrial development of parcels 3,4 and 6.
10. That alternates B, C, D are possible at a future date as a way of
extending the east/west collector street.
11 . That at the east/west collector street improvement, cost vs. benefit
comparisions be prepared on the various alternatives .
Discussion
Perkins questioned what was being approved and it was indicated to him by
the Commission that it was the . recommendations included in the September
12th staff report. Perkins expressed his concern about his livel1hood and
that decisions made by this body .effect his business and family . He said his
business had been at the same location for 47 years and that he saw no reason
to change . He did not believe his property should be viewed as residential
and he Doped that his fruit and garden market could continue in the future.
The planner explained that because of the safety hazards (which Perkins was also,,
concerned about ), the limited size of the parcel,and condition of the building,
that a residential use in conjunction with the adjacent properties would make
the most sense. To indicate the parcel as commercial and rezone it to a commer-
cial use would in the planner's and Brauer's opinion, not be in the best interest
of all parties and that the commercial zoning would be applicable to other uses —
not just the fruit market.
Libbey Hargrove, resident on SunnybrookRo ad , asked why the Garden King
Market is different than the Modern Tire request for rezoning and how did
Cleen Sweep gain its operation. The planner responded that the Modern
Tire request for rezoning is considerably different than the Perkins Garden
King Market. Rrst the building condition and investment is substantially
different, likewise the parcel size of Modern Tire and Energy Systems is of
sufficient size to permit reasonable industrial development within the City
Ordinance requirements. The- Garden King site ' would not provide adequate
space for industrial development. Secondly , the Cleen' Sweep operation
started by using the barn when the Hansen home was purchased for park
along Staring Lake. The existing barn was used for storage and then an
addition to the barn was constructed --n o City approvals , such as zoning,
have been issued. The planner asked Hansen to further � explain the
circumstances Hansen felt' the planner outlined the history correctly.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -6- Sept. 29, 1975
Amend ment
Meyers moved, seconded by Schee, to amend the motion by amending
recommendation # 4 to read; that the timing of the east/west collector
street • should not be in advance of the need created by either the
residential development east or the industrial' developmentof parbels 3,4
and 6 as defined on page 3 of the September 12th staff report.
Vote: 5:1 , Sorensen voted nay.
Sorensen indicated his no vote was based upon his disagreement with the
non.-residential uses of 3,4 5, and 6 , but did agree with the staff report
indicating a residential use for the Garden King Market site.
B. Mitchell Lake Pud Revision, request by Pemton for revision to the approved
1971 residential PUD. The PUD is located east of Mitchell Lake and west
of Co. Rd. 4.
The planner indicated staff members Mr. jessen, Mr. Enger, and himsElf
had visited the site and had some reservations about development on the
peninsula of about 12 acres proposed for 15 single family lots. He believed
that it was the staff's responsibility to inform the commission about the
significance of the island or peninsula area. He suggested that the Park
and Recreation and Planning Commission members visit the site and determine
for themselves whether the City should consider acquisition .-of the 12 acres
for its scenic habitat and recreation potential.
The planner explained in his opinion this site is totally unique and of. significant
value that the City should consider investigating possible funding sources
for acquisition of the area. He expressed a concern about development as
proposed in the original PUD of single family attached ( townhouses ), and
those proposed in the revision for 15 residential lots. He believed the impact
would be significant in changing the character of the area and that the time
to give it consideration is now prior to approval of any development.
He indicated some options may not interfere the with the orderly process
of the PUD revisions proposed by Pemton. He believed if the City felt the
area is appropriate for open space acquisition that that area could be placed
in a defered platting arrangement for a definite period of time.
Mr. Hill felt the use of that property for single family development is very
valuable and important to the implementation of the Mitchell Lake Plan. He
asked that the Commission use all haste in determining what action it wishes
to take so that they may proceed with the development in the • other areas.
The Commission suggested that a tour might be possible at 6:30 PM , September
30th , this was approved and the planner . was asked to set up the tour.
Motion:
�Feerick moved, Schee seconded, to . continue this item to the October 27th
agenda with a staff report prepared at that time.
Mr. Hill requested the October 27th date as he would be out of town on
October 8th.
The motion carried unanimously.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -7- Sept. 29, 1975
C.Prairie Lawn & Garden, request by Stanley Riegert- for Development of a small
engine repair , lawn mower sales, and garden store. The site is about . 1 acre
and is located north of T. H. 5 across from Fuller Road's intersection with T.H.S.
Mrs. Riegert explained their concern about the staff report of September 18,
1975. She indicated they did not feel a metal building as proposed was
inappropriate and she did not think the City had the right to restrict the type
of building. She questioned the access . and how they would reach
their site. Also, she felt the needs of the City of Eden Prairie should be
accommodated and that if a masonry building has to be constructed it would
be difficult for them to do.
The planner responded that the zoning ordinance restricts metal buildings
and it is applicable to all builders in the City. He stated that the access
as indicated in the staff report, alternate 1 , would be taken from the east
side of their property at the base of the hill off of the gravel road entrance
that presently exists. The planner believed that all developments should be
evaluated equally, and that other builders and businesses were required to
have certain building standards and Prairie Lawn & Garden should be no exception.
Sorensen indicated concern about the need for sites for neighborhood business
,Sorensen
that he could not justify commercial use in industrial areas as outlined
in Ordinance 135.
Motion:
Fosnocht moved, Feerick seconded, to recommend alternative 1 contained in
the September 18, 1975, staff report.
\� The recommendations'of the 4/5 Study pertaining to access and land
use enables the Planning Commission and City Council to consider
rezoning the entire 18 f acres as illustrated on the 4/5 land use
concept plan to I-2 Park requiring platting and design review for the
industrial park prior to issuing building permits other than the Riegert
property.
This alternative will allow phased development of the 18 acre area j
perhaps beginning with the existing land uses which are now industrial
office, or related minor commercial This alternative would meet the
terms of Ordinance 135 pertaining to I-2 Districts except for the minimum ,
zoning area provision which requires .40 acres. This however, could be
waived based on the site constraints , adjacent land use south of "
Highway 5 which is industrial , and the conformance with the reference
4/5 Study Report.
Mr. Riegert's land use as a small engine repair business storage of
parts and equipment, potential nursery,and mower sales, may be interpreted
as an acceptable industrial use .as it fits under Subdivision 8.2 ,
Permitted Uses, Subd, a and b. Also, the building should be designed
to meet the :standards of the I-2 District which would not permit a metal
approved
Planning Commission Minuses -8- Sept: 29,1975
` building unless it meets provisions of Ordinance 135 , Subd, 2 .7, Special
Requirements, Design, # 4, which states;
"Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction
if the panel material be any of the those na:Yied above. ;glass
prefinished metal, (other than unpainted galvanized iroO,or plastic"•. •
This means the panel metal construction such as used in the Homart Shopping
Center and not the metal pole building with a corrugated sheet metal siding
as proposed. The building should be designed to provide for future
industrial uses as well as the Riegert Lawn. & Garden business.
The sketch provided in the application of the site showing direct access
to Highway 5 should - be revised to accommodate a revised road location
acceptable with. the City Engineering Department 'and the -Minnesota.Highway
Department to group the Fuller- Road and access to the 18 acre industrial
park at one location. This would eliminate the individual access of Prairie
Lawn & Garden to Highway 5. "
Vote: 3:3 , (Schee, Boerger, Sorensen - nay }, ( FeerIck, Meyers, Foanocht -yes )
The commission was divided with 3 favoring alternanate 1 and 3 favoring alternate 3.
Alternative 3 : The third alternative would be to deny the application by Prairie Lawn
and Garden for commercial zoning as it is not consistent with the Comprehensive
. Guide Plan indicating a residential use at this site.
D. Parkview Apartments Phases 2 and 3 discussion of concept plan revisions for the
second and third phases from the 1972 PUD-
The planner informed the Commission the Council asked the Commission to
reconsider the Parkview PUD and the Resolution # 505 approving the PUD,
Mr. Peterson objected to the proposed change as it would be unnecessary and
would require consideration of the assessment levied on the PUD . He also
indicated Eden Land Corporation has no plans to do anything with phas es
2 and 3 at this time.
Meyers stated she has concern relative to %the density requirements listed in
Resolution 505 and that they should be changed to the guidelines of the Red-Rock
Sector Plan
Sorensen agreed with Meyers suggestion.
Peterson said the City would have a review opportunity at a later date for
development stages , but did not see any reason why the Planned Unit
Development should be changed.
V
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -9- Sept. 29, 1975
The planner pointed out the numerous occasions where-specific approvals
of planned unit developments have been applied by the developers to
a specific development proposal.
Motion:
Schee moved, Sorensen seconded, to recommend revision to Resolution 505
to be drafted by the City Attorney in a legal manner which would change Res. 505
as follows: ( delete 1-4, and insert the following #s land 2 )
1. Concept be approved for the 59.3 acre site with an overall
density to comply with the Red Rock Sector Plan.
2 . That varied building types be used on the later phases of
the project to fit the terrain
Vote: 5:0:1, with Fosnocht abstaining.
The question was asked if the Council would consider the 14 acre site adjacent
to Mitchell Road currently zoned Rm 2. 5. The concensus of the Commission
was yes this was intended and that the Council might consider such a change.
E. Area 5a The Preserve, requestfor preliminary platting and rezoning for 51 single
family lots. The area is located off Franlo Road south of the East/West Parkway
and east of Olympic Hills.
The plan- was presented by Don Hess with questions relative to trailways;
grading,and lot variances asked by the Commission. The Commission was also
concerned about the price of the lots and the need for lot size and setback variances.
Hess explained the lots would be similiat in size to those of Highpoint-
ranging from approximately 9,000-25,000 sq. ft.
Boerger and Feerick were concerned that the City was making marketing judgements
without basis when discussing the merits of higher priced homes on smaller lots,
and that this is a market decision rather than a City perogative . They also
felt it was reasonable in the market place for today's housing market.
Motion:
Boerger moved, Feerick seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval
of the Amsden Hills 50 f lots for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 with variances
in lot sizes to permit lots of 8,000-25,000 sq. ft. at a density of 2. 6 du/acre , &
frontage variances less than 90 feet and setback variances as follows.
5 feet 1 story garage
10 feet 12 - 1 story houses
15 feet . 2 story or greater
20 feet houses built on corner lots.
2.That a trailway corridor be established between the 7 acre public park adjacent
0 to Franlo Road connecting with the Prairie East corridor.
3.That the internal walkways provide access along Amsden Way or through the
off street trail corridor leading to the public park at.Anderson Lakes and
the Franlo Road trail.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -10- Sept. 29, 1975
Ab.The Preserve work with Hustad Development Corporation to investigate
connecting the cul-de-sac street in Prairie East with Amsden Way for a
loop road configuration along the Lutheran Church and Preserve common
boundary.
Vote The vote was 2:3 with Fosnocht , Meyers, Sorensen voting nay; and
Boerger and Feerick voting aye. Schee had left the meeting and , did not
vote, the motion was defeated.
F. Presentation by Wallace Hustad, " PUD 1975 ".
Continued to the October 8th meeting at which time it would be at the beginning
of the agenda.
IV. PLANNER' S REPORT
The planner reminded the Commission of the Guide Plan interviews the following
evening and the tour of Mitchell Lake PUD.
V. ADfQURNMENT._
The meeting adjourned at approximately 1:00 AM
Respectively Submitted
Richard Putnam
Planning Director
( Acting Secretary )