Loading...
Planning Commission - 04/12/1976 AGENDA Eden Prairie Planning Commission Mondav, Agri 1 17 1 U76 7:30 PM, City Hall Invocation --- Pledge of Allegiance --- Roll Call I. APPROVAL CF AGENDA. II. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 22, 1976 PLANNING CCMMISSION MEETINU3. III. MEMBERS REFCRTS. A. Chairman Don Sorensen 1. Invocation B. Cou:.:i 1 Representative Pauly C. Sundstrom D. Others IV. REP CRTS AND REC O►NENDATI ONS. A. Homart Development Company, exterior signage criteria for Eden Prairie Center. B. Park Dedication and Cash in Lieu of Land Policies. 0 C. Pur. atory Creek Study, D. Hennepin County Transportation Study Report. E. Anderson Ickes Condominiums, consideration of rezoning the property back to Rural as the conditiArs of the rezoning agreement have not been met. V. PETITICNS AND REQUESTS. PUBLIC HEARING. A. Forest Knolls 2nd Addition, by Donald Peterson and Wilbur G3ersvik. Request for preliminary plat approval for 14 lots and rezoning from R1-22 to R1-13. . The plat is located south of Mariann Drive and east of Forest Hill Road. VI. NEW BUSINESS. VI I. PLANNER'S REPORT. A. Edengate B. Development Cosz Memo C. Guide Plan Update D. Population Data -+ .. _W ... , W ,. w ■ .. .. . ■h „l.l, ■pi, IN 11WOL11111 wYl i6 ..i. MW, .,.. j� 1461I, MkAj 11rill yrlll . IN Ill All. u M I N U T E S EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION approved Monday, April 12, 1976 7:30 PM City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT : Chairman Don Sorensen, Norma Schee, William Bearman - , Rod Sundstrom, Richai3 Lynch, Sidney Pauly and Herb Fosnocht UrURPOC..... 40 ........ STAFF PRESENT: Dick Putnam, Jean Johnson, Marty -lessen 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Sundstrom suggested handling item III .C. under IV. D. The change was acceptable to all members. II. MJNUTES OF THE MARCH 22 , 1976, PUNNING COMMISSION .1-12ETING. P. 1 , IV . A. , 2nd P should read- . . said they will comply with the staff report. 4th P should read- . . to handle present and additional land would have to be acquired for future parking expansion needs. Sth P should read-. . public use of the sidewalk passing the maim entrance to the sanctuary. P. 3,IV.B. , add motion to end of page " The motion carried 6: 1 with Bearman voting nay. P. S, V. after PETIT 1 CUS AND REQUESTS add "PUBLIC HEARINGS." P. 7, B, 2nd F should read - . . . and past business affiliations with the proponents . P. 8,III . A. . delete sentences starting with Schee and Bearman and replace with: Schee and Fosnocht stated they are pro invocation. 5��::.3s.,r..... J YtV4 he h1as no objection to an invocation. Bearman stated he is opposed to invocation being given at public meetings . Bearman moved, Fosnocht seconded, to approve the minu-tcs as written and corrected. The motion carried 6:0 ( Schee had not yet arrived ) . III. MEMBERS REPORTS A. Chairman Don Sorensen 1. Invocation placed under item VI . NEW BUSINESS B. Council Representative Pauly. Pauly reported the Council approved the Minnesota Protective Life rezoning and Brauer' s contract for updating the Guide Plan was approves: 3:1 :1 . D. Others-none IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATI CNS A. Homart Derelopment Company, exterior signage criteria for Eden Prairie Center. Mr, Ken Henk, Tenant Coordinator for Eden Prairie Center, outlined the criteria for exterior signs contained in the April 7th letter. Richard Lynch asked Mr. Henk if he was familar with the requirements of the City Sign Ordinance. Mr, Henk responded negative. Fosnocht asked how the Eden Prairie Shopping Center management reached the conclusion that the Twin City Federal sign met the criteria submitted to the Planning Commission. Mr. Henk .responded they believe it does meC the criteria. - - - - -- - - Bearman asked how the Architect/Landlord Cormittee would differentiate between allowable logos and unallowable logos. Mr. Henk stated logos would be iudeed on tbeir offensivene-z W29doom A approved Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 12, 1976 Schee arrived Sorensen relinquished the chair to Vice Chairman Richard T.,ync'h. Motion : Sorensen moved, Sundstrom seconded, to accept the Homart Exterior Signage Criteria as follows : INTP3DUCT ION: The purpose of this sign regulation is to estaLlish a quality atmosphere while creating an environment which produces maximum traffic and promotes the greatest sales for all Tenants in the Shopping Center. A. AbMINISTRATICN The administration of these regulations is vested in a committee composed of representatives of the Project Architect and Landlord. Detail drawings in triplicate, as well as samples of materials to be used for each sign , must be prepared and submitted by Tenant in conjuction with the storefront design information. Sign drawings must be approved in writing by the committee before the sign may be installed.- No Tenant will be allowed to open without an approved sign. The City of Eden Prairie Staff Sign Review Committee will review the exterior signs referred by the Homart Architect/Landlord Committee to insure conformance with the objectives of this policy and to issue a sign permit. The Staff Sign Review Committee may refer applications which the committee believes do not conform with this sign polir,%, to the Planning Commission. B. CRITERIA-.EXTERIOR SIGHS The exterior of t'i-ic building will be lighted t•� give emphasis to Center entrances. Other special lighting effects will be used to create an attrac- tive., appealing iripi-ession . By nature of the project , only those Tenants which demonstrate a need for exterior signing, such as sitdown restaurants having hours earlier or later than Center hours, businesses not usually located in shopping centers , and major Tenants having exterior ' customer entr3nC05 will be permitted to have an exterior sign - within the following restrictions : I. The Tenant ' s space must he located on an exterior wall of the building. Signs shall be restricted in location to this cxterior wall or an adjacent wall at the appropriate Center entrance. 2. The bottom of the sign shall be -limited in height to 101 -011 above finished grade 11ie sign may be allowed to be located • higher if it has been shown to the committee that this restriction would cause the sign to be blocked from vlw.j by existing landscaping or other elements. 3. These signs shall be individual , Self-illfln. 1113tCd plex;glas letters with metal sides mounte#4 on rh1 wall in such a way so that no light shows excepT through the plexiglas face. - ap. _oved Planning Commission Mintutes -3- April 12, 1976 $. CRII*I;'.% I -A - 1:X'f11:10 011 SIGNS %on t 'd ) 4. If capital letters are used, the maximum height Aall be limited to 14". If upper and lower case script is used, lower case shall ho ln" ti`.'_ ,i. "^3::= �.:" A&&i ia'A iCLLCl',, ascenders or descenders, may be up to 911 greater. S. The use of predominantly decorative sculpti.re, coat of arms , shields, or other such logos, requires special approval of the Homart Ai-chit ect/landlord Committee and the Eden Prairie Planning Commission. C. GENERAL . Doors and Windows: Lettering on doors , in windows or on show windows may not be illuminated on either exterior or interior , shall not exceed 2" in height and shall be submitted to the sign committee for approval. No temporary or permanent paper signs shall be permitted to be applied to the interior or exterior faces of the storefront glass o- other storefront materials . 2, Service Courts , Service entrance signs will be provided by the Landlord. i 3. Action Signs f We flashing action, moving action or audible signs are permitted. 4. Colors : Must be compatible to colors and iiateri2ls for Tenant ' s storefront and submitted to the sign cor,Lmittce for approval . E S. Drawings: Three copies of drawings shall be submitted, showing the size of lettering, proc^lain enamel color, b:3ked enamel color, plastic E or Plexiglas colors and their numbers, materials , mounting details and locations on each elevation. The drawings shall show other elements such as soffits , canopies, and the relationship of the - sign to these elements. ° 6. Responsibility: All signs and related or resulting construction shall be the Tenant ' s responsibility, and all signs shall be installed under the supervision of the Project Supervisor. No sign maker's identification tabs tir stickers shall be permitted. D. SI J LOCATION AND NUMMER . The Eden Prairie Center shall be allowed 6 wall signs , exclusive of major tenants signs and Eden Prairie Center identification signage that conforr: with the P;1i -'- " ines of this policy end be located as illustrated on the following Mails: W , tl ?� SEARS ; #A'r '' ��-•r�`•�.- •M .. ." " ,.. ..raw-..y...r---•-•.1 •r •. fir! . . _ � , f ::•I 1 ' •� f "� oil IF Or dq .� •�— i� f try-� ' •_ i 1 {t0 � � , ,ti � : `�_... __r • . ��� � _!_T,r...a-- •.Pp ,.-�-t—:�►- rj__{�' -'_: ....:, '_' '_ ___r_ _.... N;�.s�fr.w7 s • mow- •�.r.. -•- S .- .�� :i-� _ ie• _j.- •I /�,�-. ; .._/o a 1� � r� •; i; • r {. ..`i,..' f� � � •�e< ; � `{ ••• = it t• • �.iJ __h .. ._ .'t ' '"• IL • � �' E`1�li�ps t • t r• .. . � ........�......r...r.+..ra.wwra•-ww+rr."'..�...�..�..�..ter . .... .. » At'f 'f"r� i,.b!-�_r. �• �.'+ art -�:1. _� '.-, '' {.' _ e }. ,a%>',♦ _< .,;"A-•v rZ:-^ -.... .- ... �`. Z ' i i _+ •.�_ — — s....:•�:�.�.�.= ram--�- • . --„'•` SCAM r� s •s t.� �-- � x' t :. 41 f.. �i• _r � � . , ;�., •••• - �. �E � �; • •. � :�---Mom.::.-. � � . o- QPGA JI— IL LI PO TRS • � i• !+ � ! 1 + t' -r• " Lr . , .,1, � -- v _ .-_'jam. � � •}.,-. _ -_. C� T' .- •• ' t 1 ' • ' 1..1 ti � ` 1 C: ;3 " awdl , `�— . •� }-• ' ••ram. wb+.w..a.A.+a�.. ' fqsq - — ... - - - -• _ - <. �c-. '��-z-.«Xc'�, .r:�-•.;a.,rr,+�ae;?t -?�r..-..,..,�...'!`�.�. _« ,�'•y'�`?'x., :'=^'-`ds'."�'... _f?�t►J�'.' - approved Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 12, 1976 -•Discussion: Bearman questioned if businesses not usually located in a shopping center should be clarified After discussion it was decided to leave the motion as made. V_: The motion carried 6:1 with 9earman voting nay. Sorensen resumed the chair. B. Park Dedication and Cash in Lieu of Land Policies. Community Services Director Marty Jessen outlined the formulas for computing cash in lieu of land dedication. The commission discussed the inequities between the amount charged different types of units, the number of individuals in the different types of units, the recreation provided by lcrge lot single family, how to handle homeowner's association's parks, and techniques employed by other communities. Tl:e planner mentioned that the formula may be conceived inequitable by some because new residents and developments will be paying and these already in the City will not. The planner also mentioned that the cash in lieu of land dedication does not cover the cost of improving the land acquired for park. Motion: Lynch moved, Fosnocht seconded, to continue the item to the April 26th agenda. The motion carried unanimously. -C. Purgatory Creek St The planner read the Council's motion referring the study back to the commission. Pauly believed the main objections raised at the Council public hearing were the fear of comdemnation and the dislike of trails through yards. Sorensen did not feel the path would always travel along the creekside, but also along roads and hillsides. Mr. Brauer agreed. Mot i one: Schee moved, Bearman seconded, to recommend to the City Council reaffirmation of the commission' s previous motion and urge the Council to complete their state&ents of intent and policy on the Purgatory Creek Study. The potion carried unanimously. 0. Hennepin County Transportation Study Report. . Mr. 3.:ndstrom stated the emphasis at the March 4th meeting held in Bloomington was an the concept and not the implementation plan. He stated the 2 basic- premises were : road function can be classified and road function is related to jurisdiction. The comAission then briefly discussed the study. Motion c eramoved, Dearman seconded, to recommend to the City Council sample Resolution 02 in tho April 6 , 1976 memo from the city planner to the City Council and include in the recommendation the r©port. anted March 1;, 1976. The motion carried unanimously. - , -._ _.�e�i�:.ss."�al�!C�'-.� �' -t'�:'"'r ;`sj:�!d�i.tia�i"''"���.�-.�"� Sl'�_ga�SlMs.,.:.uN,r•--- . _ _ ..,....,..�..�. f • spproved l Planning Commission Minutes -S- April 12, 1976 Ot. Anderson Lakes Condominiums, consideration of rezoning tfie property back to Rural as the conditions of the rezoning agreement have not been met. The planner referred the commission to the ordinance and rezoning agreement on the project. Motion hc� ee moved, Sundstrom secznded, to recowmend to the City Council that it consider setting s public hearing to rezcine the Anderson Lakes Condominiums from RM 2. 5 bLck to Rural as the conditions of the agreement have not been met. The motion carried unanimously. V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS. PUBLIC HEARING A. Forest Knolls 2nd Addition, by Donald Peterson and Wilbur Gjersvik. Request for preliminary plat approval for 14 lots and rezoning from RI -22 to RI-13.S The plat is located south of Mariann Drive and east of Forest Hill Road. Mr. Peterson inforaed the commission the lots Would be from 105-140 feet wide, the division would be possible no matter what road extension is made to Baker Road and that he plans to build 1 or 2 lots per year. He explained that he owns the 8 lots on the northern part of the plat and Mr. Gjersvik owns the lower 6 lots. Peterson stated he has no preference on the road extensions to Baker and Gjersvik prefers Alternate B. Sorensen asked £o::, the acreage contained in Peterson's lower 6 lots. Peterson responded the acreage is approximately 2. 5 Sorensen then noted that a zaming request for RI-13.S would require a variance. Mr. Gjersvik said he would prefer sewer from Edenvale along Forest Hill Road and hooking up to Theresa Place. He added that. in the futur-- he would like to plat an additiinal 4 lots to the east of his present request. ' Schee questioned why the lots are not being developed under R1-22 zoning. Peterson responded that the cost is too b.igh. Pauly suggested five lots in Blocks 1 and 2 where presently six are shown. Peterson said it was considered, but the configuration of 6 lots is beter and is not inconsistent with what exists in Edenvale to the west. Dr. Wright ,6970 Mariann Drive, questioned if a city attorney should be present at this hearing and if Mr. Sorensen acts as city attorney. Sorensen stated he is not present as art attorney for the city and does not issue legal opinions, and the commission sends recom wndations to the city council where final decisions are made and the city attorney attends --ouncil meetings. Charles Johnson, 13601 Thleresa Place, inquired about th€ connection to faker Road that would follow Theresa Place. The planner stated 1 alternative would follow Theresa and the Planning Commission at this hearing is considering the Flatting and zoning requeQo- -^ Broadway alternatives . fie suggested those interested In the road alternatives could contact the staff for further information. ,Y C -Mgt „��. "Y"!”" •'"�' —�—�'� ^'-�I:�'�YYIYYIIIi J4. AN. .jw i. IY W Y Y ' -.approvel PlanningCom,ission Minutes -6- E April 12, 1976 E � Dr. Wright asked if maintenance problems would arise ' if the utilities are placed without streets. SulesiSen bLaLed the bLal1 would be addressing that prODlem. Frank Fourre, 13710 Theresa Place, asked , f a road plan to connect to Baker had been approved. He added that he is against Theresa Place being a through street. Sorensen res,onded that the City Council has not taken final action . Mr. Opheim Theres6 Place , questioned if this platting from R1-22 toR1-13. 5 would set a precendent in the area. • Ron Krueger, 7276 Prairie View Drive, asked if Forest :sill Road was envisioned to be a throughfare at the time of the Edenvale plat. The planner said no. John Lobben, 14090 Forest Hill. Road, stared he had no objection to the road alternatives or traffic , but was concerned about safety if the road is extended. Hugh Smith, 13600 Theresa Place, felt the lot sizes should be retained as is and not zoned iiito smaller lots. E Peterson remarked that the lots were previously zoned R1-22 because no utilities were available. • Motion: Schee moved, Fosnocht seconded, to refer the item to the staff for3eview and recommendations with particular .mphasis on where lots 4 and 5 in Block 2 face onto lot 1 of Block 2 Prairie View The wotion carried unanimously. - VI. NEW BUSINESS n Discussion of Invocation 4 Pauly felt the person giving invocation can do so in his or her religion. . Schee said she is in favor of invocation and believes that under the Constitution j we have " freedom of religion not freedom from religion", and that individuals not wishing to hear invocation do not have to listen. -s Beaman stated he is not offended by invocration,but believes it should be noon-sectarian at public meetings. Motion: Schee moved, Pauly seconded, to continue with invocation at Planning Commission meetings and that the invocation part of the agenda should be previewed annually. The motion carried 4:2:1 ( Beaman $ Sorensen voted nay ) ( Lynch abstained ) . •1 is A VIT. PLANNERS REPORTS. -r A. Edengate- the planner informed the commission the item would be on the April 26th agenda. A `3 • approved Planning Commission Minutes 4- 1pril 12, 1976 B. Development Cost Memo-the planner reported that the staff has met with developers regarding the development costs and that other communities IL �_ r_ r_ II aVV uen asked i:V Ju'Jrul I. JJ.1ulla 1111V1LIOa.1V�a iVa %.vu,Yu .i�ia. C. Guide Plan Update-Don Brauer felt that if neighborhood meetings go well the facilitators could be seiectcd from the meetings. Lynch ' did not feel he would have the time to get involved in neighborhood meetings. Pauly and Schee felt they could attend more than one neighborhood meeting. D. Population Data-the planner referred the commission to the memo orl population. VI I I. ADJ QIRNMENT osnoc t moved, Lynch seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11 :45 PM. the motion carried . Respectfully Submitted Jean Johnson