Planning Commission - 08/14/1978 AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
!Monday, August 14 , 1978
7:30 PH* City Hall
C."ISSION MOMBERS: Chai~.=an `,',ad Sundstrom, Liz P.etterath, !�!atthew Levitt,
Richard Lynch, William Bearw#n, Paul Reu*path, Oke
Martinson
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director; Jean Johnson, Planning
Assistant; Jim Jensen, Planning Assistant; Donna
Stanley, Planning Secretary
Invocation ' - Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
7:30 I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
7:35 II. MINUTES OF THE JULY 242 1976 MEETING
7:40 III . MEMBERS REPORTS
7:45 IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Briarfie1d Estates, by Pride Maintenance. Request for
D_D concept approval for multiple and commercial with
rezoning from Rural to Rfl 6.5 for 25 lots for 50 duplex
units. Project located north of Valley View Road. A
continued public hearing.
8: 10 B. Cyl--_dg-_ski na of Creek Knoll Road,l ocated between [IS 169
and Pioneer`Trail .
8:40 V. PETIT,IONS AND REQUESTS
8:45 VI . OLD BUSINESS
8:50 VII . NEW BUSINESS
8:55 VIII . PLANNER'S REPORT _
Upcoming projects:
I . Centex
9:00 I X. ADJOURIOIENT
MINUTES
EDEV PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
approved
MONDAY, AUG!IST 14, 1978 7:30 PH, CITY MALL
C"ISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sundstrom. Bill Bearman,
Richard Lynch, Oke Martinson, and Paul
Redpath
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Mathew Levitt, and Liz Retterath
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Planning Director; Donna
Stanley, Planning Secretary
Invocation - Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION : Bearman moved to approve agenda as published, ti";th item B.
Cul-de-sacing of Creek Knell Rd. moved to first item to be considered
under IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Lynch seconded, motion carried
unanimously.
II . MINUTES OF THE JULY 242 1978 MEETING
The following corrections were requested:
Pg. 2, last para. , last sentence; delete "vote of 4-1-2, and Lynch
abstaining" ; aad"4-1-1 , with Lynch votirl "aye"."
Pg. 3, 1st para. , 1st sentence; delete vote of "5-1 -1 and Lynch ab-
staining; add"5-1-0,uwith Lynch voting "aye" . "
Pg. 3, para. 7; add"Lynch counted that a 7ocr. Thumb type store was
generally the scope in mind. "
Pg. 5, para. 10, correct vote from "6-0-1 " to "6-1 -0"
pg. 6, para. 2, sent. 3. delete "10:00 P.M. % add "10:00 A.M. ".
Pg. 6, ppra. 3, add "Lynch did not believe people Mould travel
north to exit east. "
Pg. 6, last para. , last sent. . delete "longtitote" , add "constitute"
Pg. 7, last para. . correct vete from "6-0-l" to 06-1-0" .
MOTION : Redpath moved to continue ainutes of the July 24, 1978
meeting. as Beaman had some add i t i ma l commebts he- did not havz
with him at the w*eting.- Bearman seconded, motion carried unanio) .ily._
III . MEMBERS REPORTS none
approved
Planning Commission minutes - 8 - July 24, 1978
Mr. Tim Eller, Centex Homes Inc. , stated they are trying to re-inforce
the idea that they are selling their houses as their end product, and
would like to offer houses in the broad income range.
Sundstronl7ked how these lots compared with those east of H. 1. 69. Eller
responded that they were about the same with some larger lots .
Sundstrom summarized Commission action as not opposed to the concept, but
to the size of the lots. Eller responded that it was a business decision
on the size of lots they decide to build.
C. Bluffs West 2nd Addition, by Hustads and Dr. Brandt and Browning
Ferris Industries . Request for rezoning from Rural to R1 -13. 5 and
preliminary plat approval of approximately 207 lots on 112 acres. The
site is located north of Riverview Road and West of Homeward Hills Road.
A continued public hearing .
The Planner spoke to communication with Mr. Pat Kennedy of the Soil
Conservation District, and he expressed_ concern with t.ie planning of
homes on the slope. He reviewed the two alternates as recommended
in the Staff report, and to the consideration of the closing of the road
and re-vegegation.
Mr. Dick Putnam, Hustad Development Corporation, presented slides and
commcnted on the Staff recommendations , stating he was in agreen,, A with
the alternative recommended and right-of-way situation. He added they
could not comply with Mr. Kennedy' s recommendations for the lower lots , and
that were expensive, making it unfeasibile for Hustad to improve the road
by putting in storm sewwer and improving the road in other ways .
Lynch spoke to the significance of these lots , and he was concerned w ".h
how they would be developed, and suggested on eliminating these lots (24-36) .
Putnam responded that they will not be building the homes at the top or
bottom of the bluff this year, and suggested a couple of houses spotting
the area for policing purposes . He continued that if this section was a
problem, Hustad requests that this Block be eliminated
Levitt asked whether elimination of lots 24 through 36 would eliminate the
problem. Enger responded affirmative if Hustads intend to use fencing and
erosion control measures outlined by the Soil Conservation District.
Putnam spoke to undercutting occuring in the public right-of-way and to
their desire to cut down on the vandalism that is such a problem on this
road.
Levitt inquired whether developing on top of the bluffs will worsen the
undercutting. Enger responded negative if it is done with SCS measures .
Sundstrom asked whether that Block be treated as an outlot. Putnam res-
ponded they mould just eliminate those lots (24-36) .
MOTION: Bearman moved to close Public Hearing. Redpath seconded, motion
carried unanimously.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - August 14, 1978
IV. REPORTS A14D RECOMMENDATIONS
B. Cul-de-sacing of Creek Knoll Road, located between U. S. 169
and Pioneer Trai I .
The Planner presented a request from the Department of Transporta-
tion to cul -de-sac Creek Knoll Road as part of the proposed up-
grading of the intersection of T. H. 169 and Co. Rd . 1 (to be let
in 1979) . !le explained that the possibility may also exist for
the extension of Creek Knoll Road at some point in time up to
Sunnybrook Rd . The potential right-uf-way would be acquired by
Mn DOT as part of the T . H. 169 road improvement. -
Lynch inquired whether the Department of Transportation was aware
of former Planning Commission suggestions on cul -de-sacing on
either side of the bridge on Creek Knoll Road . The Planner responded
that Mn DOT was aware of this suggestion , and that it was their in-
tention to eliminate access ontc T.N. 169 at the existing Creek
Knoll/169 intersection , because it is hazardous .
Mr. John James , 9566 Woodridge Dr. , expressed opposition to the
proposed cul -de-sacing of the road because of additional mileage
involved and was in favor of keeping the intersection, open in
order to channel traffic in two ways . He was also concerned about
an alternate across for emergency vehicles-.-
Redpath, noting housing construction to the southeast, did not feel
it was an advantage keeping the road open because of the extra
traffic that would 'short coat" through on Creek Knoll Road .
Martinson inquired how many families lived on the road . The Planner
responded that one family takes access directly from the road and
appruxiinately forty homes have access off of Creek Knell Road or
Co. Rd. 1 . He added there have been numerous complaints re:.eived
on the intersection of Creek Knoll Road and T.H. 169, as well as
Sunnybrook Road and T.N. 169.
Lynch asked where the nearest locations of north/south roads
paralleling T. H. 169 on the :rest and east are. the Planner res-
ponded that there is currently Eranlo Road existing approximately
Ili miles east of T.H. 169 and Co. Rd . 18 occurringapproximately
two miles east of 169, and Co. Rd . 4 occurring approximately two
miles west of T.H. 169, and Mitchell Rd .occurring one mile west
of 169. He further explained there were plans for a north/south
collector road occurring east of T.H. 169 from Homeward Hills
Road north to Preserve Boulevard and that there was also the
opportunity for a m i nor col i ector road nccurr i nc .-hrough the Olympic
Hills 5th Addition connecting up to Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Gv egg McCormick, 9449 Woodridge Dr. . expressed favor for the cul-de=
P
sacing of Creek Knoll Road , commenting that excessive speeds have
been clocked on the road, making it extremely dangerous . He noted
that people tend to take the shortest route, and that with the new
construction, the traffic would get extremely heavy for a road that
is not built to handle it.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - August 14, 1978
Tort Myers , 9539 Creekwood Dr. , spoke in favor of the cul -de-sac,
commenting that the road is very narrow and would not handle the
additional traffic from nPw cm;tniction . nntinn aicn tha nntr+ntial
park site lying on the west side of Creek Knoll Rd . , and the un-
desirability of heavy traffic in that area .
Mrs . Don Iiemec , 9449 Creek Knoll Road , spoke in agreement with the
cul -de-sacing of the road.
Mr. Gregg Koschinska , 9379 Creekwood Drive , noted the danger involved
w} n trying to turn off of T.N. 169 into Creek Knoll Road and expressed
' .ivor for the cui -ae-sacing plan.
MOTION: Lyrch moved to recommend to the City Council approval of
construction or Creek Knoll Road cul -de- sacing by Mn DOT as per mPmn
and diagram of 8/10/78, with "knock down barrier-, placed at the north
end of cul -de-sac for e+nergency vehicles . Redpath seconded , motion
carried unanimously.
Be Briarfield Estates, by Pride Maintenance. Request for PUD concept
approval for multiple and commercial with rezoning from Rural to
RM 6. 5 for 25 lots for 50 duplex units . Project located north of
Valley Ro„d . In continued public hearing.
Dou; Goriesky, representing Pride Maintenance, gave a brief presen-
tation outlining the protect ;; lustrating the changes that had been
made since the original submission.
The Planner reviewed the Staff report recommending approval of the
PUD for multiple designation with no density approval at this time.
He further recommended approval of the preliminary plat and rezoning
of 25 duplex Intc frnm Doe"I to RIM 6-5 subject to the Staff report
of 8 l 0/78 and the plan of 8/10/78. He explainer that the Staff report
recommendations included paying a cash fee to be used for construction
of a sidewalk along the southern boundary of the duplex site at
some future date. As a further r cc=.ien!atin;: , he suggested elimina-
tion of lot 5 as a building site in order to preserve a larger per-
centage of steeply wooded slope. He also mentioned that the Planning
and Engineering Departments felt that a 34 ' right-of-way dedication
should be giver by the proponent along the north boundary cf Valley
View Road on the eastern half of the site.
Bearman questioned the location of the sidewalk and why it was
needed . He also commented that he felt it was not proper to require
34' dedication of property frail this owner because he felt Valley
r�. +�-, J C j. this section,
u..
as it was not in accordance with the Ctn--tI , I_ n4c% : ��.�•� D a
Sundstrom questioned whether truck traffic should be brought along
the residential area.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - August 14, 1978
Dominic Scicla , Pride Maintenance, asked why he had to build a
buffer on the south side of tnE duplex site if the a rp - on the
other cidp of the rn d wac not nrpcPntly 7nnpl indiict.rial .
Bearman felt it would be good pian;:ing for the development not only
to screen from future industrial uses but road noises along Valley
View Road .
Goriesky replied that they could accomplish the herming as part of
their grading plan without additional expense.
Sundstrom questioned whether there was a problem with the location
of the north/south through road on the northern boundary of the site.
The Planner responded that the road dead-ended 120 ' east of the
Swenseen property and would make access to the potential residential
area lying northwest of this parcel difficult.
Goriesky stated that the road had been placed in that location
because it was the only area of good soils . The Planner su9gested
that a cul-de-sac un temporary road ease;fient be constructed at the
end of this road , pending future road connections .
MOTION #1 : Lynch moved to close Public Hearing on Briarfield Estates .
R3dpa th seconded , motion carried , 4-0-1 , with Bearman abs La i ni ng.
MOTION #2: Lynch moved to recorixnend t the City COUnci l a ,•oval of
y Q y a,
-oval
PUD concept for residential multiple only for the Briarfield
Estates designating nc densities , as per plan and Staff report dated
8i10/78 with the following amendments to the Staff report : changing
the recommendation of 34' right-of-w...y to 17 ' , and allowing building
and grading to occur on lot 5. Redpath seconded , motion carried
4-0-1 , with Bearman abstaining.
MOTION #3: Lynch moved to rerorunend to the City Council rezoninq from Rural
to RM 6. 5 of 25 loi:s. for 50 duoiex units . Phase i Briarfield rstatPs as per
Staff report as amended. Redpath seconded, motion carried 4-0-1 ,
with Bearman abstaining.
MOTION #4: Lynch moved to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Briarfield Estates preliminary plat dat..2d as per the Staff report
of 8/10/78 as amended. Redpath seconded , motion carried 4-0-1 , with
Bearman abstaining.
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS - none.
VI . OLO BUSINESS - none.
VII . NEW BUSINESS - none.
VIII . PLANNER ' S REPORT
A. Upcoming projects:
1 . Centex - The Planner explained that Centex has re-applied
with plans for 13,500 square foot lots, and will ccmme before
the Planning Caimissiore.
IX. ADJOWi NMENT
MOTION: Bearman moved to adjourn at 9:00 F14, seconded by Lynch. Mot.car.uwn.