Planning Commission - 10/16/1978 AGENDA
•.,._ - w • • _ w7 t n llllgloving Commission
rVrN • . M .. .�. ( 769
Monday,October 1378
1:30 PM, City Hall
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Rod- Sundstrom, William Bearman-;
Matthew Lev i t L, Richard �ynch;.' .f iv). .Redpath,
Liz Retterath;' Oke Martinson
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director; jeth • . .
Johnson, Planning Assistant; 'Donna
Stanley, Planning Secretary .
INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1978
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Discussion of proposed Ordinance designating the "Management
of Shoreland in the City of Eden Prairie, and Regulating the
Use, and Development thereof" .
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
VI . OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
VIII. PLANNER' S REPORT ~
--__-_ - Ili. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLAF+NiING COMMISSION
.approved
MONDAY, OCTOBER 169 1978 7:30 PH CITY HALL
OMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, William Bea aw,
• Matthew Levitt, Liz Retterath, Oise
Martinson
COMyIISSION ME148FRS ABSENT: Richard Lynch and Paul Redpath
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Planning Director
Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary
I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA
140TION: Retterath moved to approve ti°:e agenda as published, seconded
by Bearman. Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 259 1978
y i►ar•
MOTIft Martinson moved to accept the minutes of September 25, 1978
meeting as p+!blished, seconded by Levitt. Motion carried 3:0:2.
Retterath and Bearman abstaining. •
III . MEMBERS REPORT - None.
Iv. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Discussior of ro sed Ordinance desi nati the "liana event
of Wrelandin the City o en Prairie, and 5eEJ1jti!1gthe
Use-, an Deyelooment thereof" .
rrrra�r�■ r
Planning Director Enger explained the importance of retaining
PUD provisions in the Shoreland Management Act `rom a planning
sta,dpoint, noting the near completion of the updated Comprehensive
Guide Plan and the importance of the 5horei and Hanage wit Act as
a controlling factor in land use.
Stundstrom questioned the Staff suggestion of lots fronting on
or adjacent to shoreline meeting criteria of the State's lot
restrictions, with non-abutting lots regulated by City Zoning
Ordinance/PW lot site. setbacks etc.
Enger explained that since the intent of the ordinance was mostly
to protect Lakeshore, the State draft did not ccmte"late using
the restrictions to the depth of 300 or I,CW feet. The require-
wnt for 1/2 acre to I acre severed lots in &I : shoreland areas
would have a profound effect on the pie devil opment of the City.
Searaan requested more precise terrinology in place of the wand
'feasible' , as"'used on page 17 under Subd. 1 mW 2.
,approved
Minutes - Planning Commission - 2 - October 15, 1978
Levitt inquired how the different classifications of the lakes could
be changed. The Planner responded the State Department of Natural Re-
sources has a formula for classifying waters acc,rding to various criterea
such as the existing character of the lake, how open it is , what the
shorelanu is in ratiio to the size of the lake etc . , and the City has to
illustrate that the formula can not apply in certain instances . He
noted that classifying lakes as Natural Environment makes all
categories more restrictive.
Bearman noted the provisions of the Purgatory Creek Study and asked whether
the Study or Shoreland Management Ordinance would to more important.
The Planner explained that in adopting a definitive and restrictive shoreland
ordinance, it would be one more procedure for the developer, and that the
Purgatory ' reek Study would be in excess of the Shorreland Management
Ordinance.
Enger pointed out that there were instances such as Anderson Lake - and
Neil Lake, where studies cr 'plans had been made, which shouldbe treated
separately.
Beaman felt the restrictions on the docks .should be more flexible in size
to allow opportunities for educational uses or use by the handicapped.
It was suggested that the docks be restricted to a maximum 450 ft. area ,
with a maximum of 75 ft. length, in ;,,-der to allow flexibility.
The question of permits was discussed for construction of docks, and how
they would be administered, noting tEit the $5.00 fee payable when applying
for a tempororary structure would not cover the cost of administration .
Bearman. suggested adding provision that all structures abutting a lake
be required to nook up to sewer znd water to prevent any future problems and that
$35.00 be --egljired for both permit and variance request (pg.20) .
for docks and structures would avoid confusion.
The Planner explained that there is the need to define the distance tram
the lake of installation of a septic tank, thereby also eliminating the
need for "abetting lot" restriction.
The Commission was in agreement that the PUB provisions were needed, for
the sake of land use planning, and that standard City lot sizes alwtting
behind shoreline.
Enger' summarized the concerns of the Commission as far as lard uses in
relation to the proposed Shoreland Management Ordinance as : 1 ) Need for
PUD provision 2) abutting lot question and whether lots behind can be
standard City lots 3) Nrting of different types of land uses - rove
_uses have differentc effec : than others.
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS through PLANNER'S REPORT None.
IX A R D�,OU Nt4EhT
MOTION: Beamman moved to adjourn at 9:00 PM, seconded by Martinson.
Notion carried unanimously.
Beamman left at 9:05 PM.
AGENDA FOR JOINT MEETING
Eden Pra ;rie Planning Commission/
and Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission
Monday, OctoLer 16, 1978
9:00 PM, City Hall
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, William Beannan,
Matthew Levitt, Richard Lynch, Oke
Martinson, Paul Redpath , Liz Retterath
PARKS, RECREATION AND kATURAL
P.ESOURCES C"ISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Richard Anderson, Dave Anderson,
Steve Fifield , William Garens , Robert Kruell ,
Robert Johnson!, and George Tangen
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director;
Jean Johnson, Planning Assistant
Donna Stanley, Planning Sezretary
Robert lambert, Director of Community
ty
Services
I. Art-ROVAL OF AGENDA
11 . M HERS REPORTS
III . REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Discussions of proposed Ordinance designating the "Management
of Stureland in the City of Eden Prairie, and Regulating the
Use, and Development thereof" .
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
V I. NEW BUSINESS
VIM . PLANNIER'S REPORT
will. XT
•
APPROVED
MINUTES FOR JOINT MEETING
A
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION
October 16, 1913, Monday 9:00 PM, CITY HALL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, Matthew
Levitt, Oke Martinson , Liz Retterath
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearm3n, Richard Lynch and
Paul Redpath
PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL
RESOURCES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Anderson, Dave
Anderson, Steve Fifield , William
Garens, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell ,
and George Tangen
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: _"i,%is Enger, Planning Director
Robert Lambert, Director of Community
Service
Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approved.
MEMBERS REPORTS
s} None.
III . REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Discussion of proposed Ordinance designating the "Management
�hol"e and in the C i t of Eden Prairie anJ ReRq7atinq the
Use,- and_eve opment thereo
City Planner Enger explained that the basic concerns of the Planning
Commission were with land uses only, and they were not interested in
changing the intent of the Ordinance.
The Planner- nrpcantPd the mjinr CADnrPrn% of tha Planninn ttaff-
reinstatement of P.U.D. variance ability suggested in the original
Sta-tie Shoreline Management Act to the revised version by PR 6 NR
- Commission; application of setbacks , minimum lot sizes , lot widths ,
regarding severed areas to the shoreline lots only to protect against
crowding potential around the lake or stream Itself; and proposed
i classifications of lakes.
Minutes - Joint Meet. Plan. Cosh./ Approved
PR b NR Commission - 3 - October 169 1978
Various P.U.D. situations were discussed by the Commissions and their
effect on development.
Kruell , referring to the Edengate project, pointed out that the Flood
Plain Ordinance was presently being violated by filling within the 100'
restriction. Enger responded that he would look into this violation.
Chairman Anderson suggested dealing more specificiaily with the shoreland
remaining.
Community Director L&nbert asked whether the P.U .D.provisions would be
acceptable if it did not affect lots along the lake shore. PR & NR
Commissioners were not opposed to, this, but did want strict restrictions.
Tanqen requested the Staff to prepare Draft P.U.D. with some of these
-ideas- that have been expressed tonight.
The Planner summarized the ideas offered and agreed to come back with
a Map showing areas already planned , and determine what would make sense
as far as land use for lakes and other bodies of water as shown in
the Guide Plan, and outline specifically what type of land use we would
like to see in these remaining areas.
Chairman Sundstrom, noting that these were not land uses , listed the
following thoughts the Commission had discussed : definition of size
of dock - concern with allowing for use for educational purposes and for
the handicapped; su9gestion of more precise terminology on pg. 17for
the word "feasible" ;&suggestion of same fee for permit and variance requests
to eliminate confusion.
The Comissions agreed that there was a need for both Commissions to
have the opportunity to communicate, and they expressed the desire to
meet periodically.
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS - None.
VI . NEW BUSINESS - None.
VII . PLANNER 'S RrEPORT - None.
VIII . AOJOURWENT -
Meeting adjourned at 10:45 PH.
Approved
Minutes - Joint Meet. Plan. Com./ - 2 - - October 162 1978
PR & NR Commission
Director of Community Services, Bob Lambert, explained that the
PR & MR Commission feels that the P.II.D. provision seemc. to be a
way arc-.-Id everything that the PR & NR Commission is trying to
accomplish with the Shoreline Management Act.
Chairman of PR & NR Commission ,Dick Anderson asked the question of
how can we best protect our most valuable natural resources - by
PUD or by Ordinance? He felt that taking the strictest approach
was the best way to accomplish this.
Kruell , PR & MR Commission, explained that the City can compromise
from a 1 ,000' restriction on abutting pots, but it is difficult with
anything less. He did not feel the City had the mechanism to protect
wetlands.
Tangen, PR & MR commission, added that they had discussed and were
aware that 1 ,000 ft. may not be applicable in some areas because of
topography.
Tangen added further that he would rather see a variance from this
Shoreline Management Act, than through PUD, because of the control .
The Planner asked what other types of thinking could be considered
before giving a variance, referring to Pg. 8 of the State Regulations .
He pointed out that the City will have overlapping areas in cases such
as in the Purgatory Creek Study or Anderson Lakvs Study.
Levitt, Planning Commission , pointed out that a great deal of shoreland
in Eden Prairie is under City ownership, and there is some that is not but will be. He felt that the Planning Commission was not in disagree-
ment about abutting lots, butt want the P.U.D. provision available because
of land that does not abutt the shoreline , such as in the Centex project.
The City Planner felt that with the need for neighborhood parks , ww need
the money generated from lotr with more than one unit per acre.
Kruel 1 explained, that from the PR & NR Commission standpoint, they
want to remove the higher density development away from the shore,
noting that in the P.U.D. process in order to increase the taxbase,
a density trade-off is made with the developer.
Chairman Sundstrom pointed out that he did not feel there should be
P.U.D. flexibility on thQ abutting lots , but beyond that. He. felt we
should ask whether we were uncomfortable with the types of development
or density trade-off - is this non-preservation?
Chairman Anderson stated that he is in favor of most of the land that
is remaining to be in public ownership.
Garens left at 10:00 PM.