Loading...
Planning Commission - 12/11/1978 AGENDA Eden Prairie Planning Commission 't� Monday, December ll , 1978 x 7:30 PM, City Hall COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, Liz Retterath, Matthew Levitt, Richard Lynch; Wi l l iam Bearman, Paul Redpath, Oke Martinson STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director Jean Johnson, Planning Assistant Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA I :. MINUTES OF NOVEMIBER 27, 1978 MEET14% III . MEMBERS REPORTS IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS " A. Round Lake Estates Second Addition, by Mr. Elliason. Request for pre nary plat approval of 34 acres zoned R1-13.5 into 69 lots and a 3.25 acre park. A continued public hearing. B. Shady Oak Road PUB, by D.H. Gustafson 8 Assoc. Inc:. 'Request for PUB approval on 108 acres for Highway Comerci a l , office rod industrial uses. Rezonina from Rural to I-5 for 29 acres of 108 ac-e PUD and preliminary plat approval for 48 acres. Site is the 71-02 Shady Oak PUD located south of Crosstown 629 east of Co. Rd. 61 and west of US 169. A continued public hearing. C. 4j5 Planned Study, recommendation on reinstating ro rties- iR Ski, and N qua, -rants back intFPTa—nned Study. D. Lake Heights Addition by Universal Land Corporation. Request to rezone from Ruralto R1-13.5 and RM 6.5 for 22 acres, and preliminary plat approval for 24 single family and 52 townhouses. Time site is located south of Anderson lakes Parkway extension and east of Darnel Noad. A public hearing. E. Hipa' s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition, by Richard Hipps. Mquest to preliminary plat 1? acres zoned RIM 6.5 into 30 duplex lots (60 units) . The site is located in the southwest corner of Tamarac Trail and Mitchell Road. A rl is hearing. Y. PETITIONS AID RE fSTS V1 . OLD BUSINESS,• •11 . WN 55SINESS 1111. ICAR ' R' S REPORT, MINUTES EDEN PP.ALR!E -PLANNING COMMISSION mpproved MWAY, DECEMBER 11 , 1978 7:30 PM .CITY -HALL COMMISSION MEMKRS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, Matthew. Levitt, Me Martinson, and Paul Redpath COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearman, Liz Retterath, and Richard Lynch STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Planning Director Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Levitt moved to accept Agenda as published, seconded by Martinscn. Motion carried unanimously. _ Ii. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2i, 1978 MOTION:Redpath moved to carry over approval of minutes of November 27, 1978 meeting to Decerber 18, 1979 meeting. I11. MEMBERS REPORTS None. IV. REPORTS AND R10%'#' MENDATIONS A. Round Lace Estates Second Addition , by Mr. Eliason. �equ.est oi� r peel iminary plat approval of 34 acres zoned R1-13. 5 into 69 lots and a 3.25 acre park. A continued public hearing. The City Planner explained that this item has been continued at Mr. Eliason' s request in order to work out the conrevns that the Planning Commission had regarding the park area and d:ainage plan. Mr. Eliason 'has worked to meet these concerns. He also refereed to the communications received from Mr. Bridge and Mr. Geason dated December 8, 1978.and December i 1 , 1978. Mir. Eliason, Eliason Builders , presented his revised plan , pointing out that basically, the changes from the previous nveting deals with the holding pond and a slight change in the park. site. He explained that the 69 lots were 1395M sq: ft. minimum with 90' frontage. approved Planning Comission Minutes 3 - fecember 119 1978 A. Round Lake Estates. .cont d public hearing Martinson inquired about the depth of the holding pond and anticipated maxi:.r•,x.� depth. The Planner responded AWW -y Martinson felt this mould be a definite hazard whether it Is• �. t•� - near a park or not because of the nature of the neighborhood.. Sundstrom questioned why the pond could not. be awed further -east within -Aty owned park, The Planner explained that because of LAWCON funding received for Round Lake ?arK, this would not t be possible Y Redpath suggested moving the pond further east and -replacing it with land to the west. The Planner agreed to discuss the possibility with the Director of %ommunity Services. MOTION: Redpath moved to close public hearing on Round Lake Estates 2nd, recorded by Levitt. Motion carried unanimously. MnTION: Redpath moved tc recrinnend approval -of the revised P"JO development plan of Round Lake Estates, Second Addition, as per staff reports' of Nov. 1 ; 1978 and of December 6, 1978. and additional study on the holding pond. Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved to recommend approval of Rounu Lake Estates , Second Addition, pre; iminary plat dated 11 /30/78, as •• per the staff reports-of November 1 , 1978 and December 6, 1978 with the addition of: no construction until road between .Lak#4; Trail Estates is completed. Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimously. , MOTION: Redpath moved to recommend approval of the Draft 10/-16/76 EAW finding of no significant impact. Levitt seconded, motion carried •' unanimously. S. ,Shady Oak Road PUD by D.N. Gustafson & Assoc. Inc , request for _ PUD approve on 108 acres for Highway Commercial , office- and - Industrial uses. Rezoning from Rural to I-5 for 29 acres of 108 acre PUD and DreliminarY plat approval for 4R Acres. Site is the .71-02 Shady -Oak PUD located s6uth of Crosstown 62, east of Co. Rd. 61 and crest of US 169. A continued public hearing: Chairman Sundstrom noted letter received from Mr. don Gustafson requesting continuende of the public hearing to January 22, 1979. MOTION: Redpath moved to continue the Shady Oak Road Pr n publ u hearing to the January 22, 1979 +neeting. Martinson seconded, motion carried unanimously, appromed Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - December 11 . 1970 0. Lake Heights Addition. .public hearing (cont'd) Mr. Don Sorensen, past Planning Commission member, explained the- density designations at the tine of original PUO approval , and that the Planning Commission was concerned with housing types rether tMA ntmbers. The Planner commented that the original request was for over 600 units, and felt that the drainage areas and park occurred as .part of density transfer. He Expressed concern with the present suggestion for park dedication, and that no cash park fees Wert collected for the Centex area. °eterson explained L:.41• there was a cormittment of land dedication made in lied of cash park fee. Redpath commented that at that time, it was believed the fairest method was to set aside some land for open space, but now that thinking Is antiquated. The Planner explained that lots were allowed to be spaller here and densities increased, and that there is no place for a neighbarhood park except in the Northeast parcel . He felt there is a neightwhow park obligation along with the open space density transfer. The other �►- option would be to build to remainder of the property out =- single family so that the overall density did riot exceed 2 units per acre. The Planner also discussed the assessments to be paid by toe City on the it acre park site totaling over $60,000. Gloria Pond, 8819 Darnell Road , submitted a copy of a litter from homeowners in the Lake Eden North and South Subd i vi c i tins , dl Ong with a petition which she intended to present to the City Council . She expressed coAcerns of the residents regarding congestion cif area, severe traffic problem of access to Highway 169; and lack of recreation space for children to, play baseball , fo otba l i . soccer, etc. The residents felt the suggested park would be used by the Preserve residents from the multiple residences located there, therefore causing congestion. - The Planner explained that the Preserve Park recently completed, located in the center of the Preserve P*ul d servo the needs of Preserve ^esidmts as well as the Community Center, swimming pool , and tennis courts. He explained further that the extension of Anderson Lakes Parkway through h /drA 1J &.0 &%,ft 04%4• �V I1�hKd / ICy yVu u f� . � �tr 1Cvr/� =y/.� A1 �N S �� llAr'�/ � � � oust•• to • ft.. "- V U The Engineering Department was petitioning the Highway Department for a signal at Anderson Lakes Parkway and t�igNmy 1f9, tut do not expect resul+.s for another 1211 to 5 years because of other higher priority regwsts else- where in tW district. Levitt questioned when Anderson Lakes Parkway would barn- a t lanc Park- way. The Planner rpaponded thdt it may nct be de rl oped wits+ a mW ian be- cause of lack of funds , but he -aviticipates caapletton when traffic warrants, perhaps 5 years. n i� •iWWAR MdET0910441NOWUMM PlanningCanmission Minutes .approved December l l , 1978 A. Round, Lake Estates-, . . . cpitt'd publ is h earing The Mann e:^ discussed the concerns Mr. Eliason has responded to: agreement by Mr. Eliason to provide 5' concrete sidewalk along one side of the east/west road, one side of Heritage Road north of the east/west road and al o% the port;:;scut,", r ^%A toward the top of the plat which would be connected through the park area with a 6' wide bitumi- nous trail between the two cul -de-sated areas; a 6' asohalt trail within the park area through the center of the lark over to the boundary of Round Lake Park would also be provided; the park area of 3.25 acres would be to the specifications as outlined in staff report attachment on mini-parks ; and Mr. Eliason has agreed ic0 platting of the northeasterly cul-de-sac as the 60 foot right-of-way in response to the suggestion by t.;ie Engineer- ing Department. Levitt asked whether the road system was consistent with road alternative approved by the Council for this area. The Planner responded af-Firmativq. • Mr. Ken Geason, �621 Atherton Way, expressed concern regarding the southern access to the park in the form of a corridor and ,of locating the tot lot close to the holding pond area , which he felt could he dangerous to little children. He explained that the homeowner; wou 1 d be willing to forego lots one and fifteen, ro�idin lots 1 P 9 and Z were included in the nature corridor. The Planner discussed direction by the City Council to provide tot lots, and the staff' s response in trying to make them consistent in each develop- ment. The Planning staff feel a one acre mini-park is the absolute mini- mum (for every 50 units) . He agreed that Geason ;.ad a good point in questioning the proximity of the park holding pond, and suggested moving the pond as far east as possible, away from the tot lot. Levitt questioned whether the tot lot would get any use. Geason responded that the neighbors were in favor of the tot lot, bit was ensure whether it would be used or not. -Sundstrom corimented that he felt the revised plan did address the concerns of the Rlanning Commission. He asked whether there was maple space for adequate setbacks in the lots. The Planner explained that no variances are being requested for setbacks. Geason requested that no building commence here until the proposed road through Luther Way is constructed. Levitt pointed out that the Lake Trail Estates proponent will also be building part of thi's road. .err.. .approved Planning Commission Minutes = 4 - December 11 , 1978 ;M .A i C O rcoinenddLion on rei n—tatingC. properties n SW, SE and NE quadrants back into Planned Study, The Planner discussed the memo regarding the expiration of these properties , Explaining these areas zoned in 1958 were inconsistent with land uses when the 1968 guide plan was adopted, and were placed in. Planned Study. The inconsistencies between the old ordinance and the Guide plan arebeing resolved. He briefly outlined the properties involved. MUTIOlN:Redpath moved to recommend that the properties mentioned in the memo of November 16, 1978 be re-instated into Planned Study for one ;year. Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimously. D. Lake Heights Addition , by Universal Lard Corporation. Request to rezone from Rural to R1 -13.5 and P.M 6. 5 for 22 acres , and preliminary plat approval for 24 single family and 52 townhouses. The site is located south of Anderson Lakes Parkway extension and east of Darnel Road. A publi. hearing. The Planner briefly outlined the background of the original PUD of 1973 illustrating 192 single family homes in the center area built by Centex; 26 acres made up by !Neill Lake development; 5!�j acres dedicated as open space; school district land and a park site to the north of the proposal . He explained that no cash park fee has been paid on _this area presently, and they have received requests for an active play area. The Planner felt that since over 600 units had been requested over a gross area of about 185 acres in 1973, the wetland that had been given to the city was a density transfer and did not exempt subsequent additions from paying a cash park fee. Mr. Don Peterson , Universal Land Corporation, commented on the 1973 PUD, explaining that the city requested land dedication at that time. They are presently proposing single family and multiple dwellings , explaining that the large heavily wooded area will be for single family homez . The Planner discussed some of the propbiens that would have to be resolved; property owner access, concern with the four units to the west-noting the need to loosen density in the wooded area . s .: t The Co mmi ss ion expressed concern with the density, sepa ra d on of fourpl exes from single family homes, roadway right-of-way , sidewalks and terming. Levitt inquired what lay to the east and to the west of the preposai . Enger responded future low density residential lay to the east and single family hones to the west, as well as open space or park. . Suiidstrom requested that 14eilI Lake be addressed in the Planning staff f. report because of its listing in the ShorelaM Management Ordinance. ;approved Planning Commission Minutes 6 = December 11 , 1978 D. Lake Heights Addition. ._public hearing (cost' ) Levitt inquired whether any lots fronted on Anderson Lakes Parkway. Enger responded negative. Peterson felt the signalization was needed today, and that the pro- blem was not with the road , but with the intersection. He requested that the City petition strongly for a signal light as soon as possible. MOTION: Redpath moved to continue the public hearing on the Lake Heights Addition until the January 8, 1978 meeting pending a staff report. Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimously. E. Hi ' s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition, by Richard Hipps . Request to preliminary plat 13 acres zoned RM 6.5 into 34 duplex lots (60 units) . The site is located in the southwest corner of Tamarac Trail and Mitchell Roar!. A public hearing. The Planner explained that the request is similar to Hipps Third Addition which the Comnissivn recommended for approval , and contairsed 32 duplex lots. A variance had been brought through the Board,,of Appeals and Adjustments for lots platted with party lot line down the center. He explained further that the proposal requires a variance from the party wall side yard lot line .setback and it also requires a variance from the minimum lot size. This request occurs on a previously zoned RM 6. 5 tract, and that only 14 of the original townhouse units and 29 or the single famsly hmmes nave been built according to the P.U.O. and the house type has been switched �rc»n clustered to a straight duplex lot. Mr. Filippi , of Filippi and Associates Inc. , made the presentation for Mr. Richard Hipps, explaining the changes -, moving cul-de-sac on the north to the other side of the development, deeding of Outlot A to the City, and the sanitary sewer plans. The Planner discussed the Staff report and graphics of the proposal , pointing out the change from townhouse open space to simple duplex grouping, and that trails will now be publicly maintained , rather '+ than by haneowners. He explained that the park site to the south has been contributed to by Village moods , Pheasant Oaks, and Centex and that staff recommendation is for cash park fee to be paid for the !st* 2nd, and 3rd additions, prior to the final plat approval of the Fourth Addition and cash nark fee on the 4th Addition paid prior to _ = _building permit issuance. . 3medstrom questioned the location of the tot lot, noting the closeness of proximity to location of park site, and s4gested moving the tot lot to the north, away from the park site. Nosity trade-off was discussed, with Eager commenting that if the entire area is to be built up as currently proposed , the number of edits would total 137 on 34 acres, or 4 units per acre. He explained eapproved Planning Coamissiin Minutes - 7 December 11 , 1978 E. Hipp`s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition. . . .public hearing (Cont'd) that since in 1972 this was classified as a single family 2 unit/acre density, much of the consideration for density relied upon a presented plait unit development card all its promises. Levitt requested the answers to: 1 . Why the committments from the previous PUD were not met? 2. Why the cash park fee was not paid from 3rd Addition? Filippi explained that they have changed the plan considerably as far as original tot lot areas. Mr. Darcey Peterson , 8357 Mitchell Rd. , expressed concern regarding some assurance that there would be a significant park to the south. The Planner explainpol the City would like to obtain an option to pur- chase -land lying -south of the 4th Addition for the purpose of park land. Peterson asked Mr. Hipps why they did not follow the original plan, and expressed objection to the present plan where the garages are not hidden, and since they are only one car garages, there will be cars parked in the street which he felt was unsightly. The Planner explained that the staff feels duplexes have some of same characteristics of single family homes, but that the ordinance does not differentiate between duplex or townhouse. Performance stsnt-dards are applicable to 6. 5 zoning requirements. Mr.. Bruce Miller, 8349 Heather Ave. , inquired how the Planning Commission felt about the adjoining property. The Planner responded that the originally proposed density was higher. and that there are about 3 duplex units along the western end that only ;neet the very minimum setbacks from the rear yard and that he suggests they snouia be modified. Mr. Dominic Londino, 8238 Tamarack Trail , asked what the total park property would be. Enger explained that the expected neighborhood park is about 15 acres , and there is about that amount of land available. The first phase would be to grade in game fields , soccer field, skating - rink etc. . Londino asked whether Homeowner Association would maintain the totlot.The Planner responded it would be maintained Cy an overallHomeowner Association unless it were dedicated to the City. Londino requested hearing more on the • L park proposal . - Peterson inquired where the park would be located if the City was unable to purchase the Seifert- land. The planner responded that the Red Rock Sector Plan Included a school park site , lying south of Y911age Woods road. Mr. Don Sorersen 7121 Willow Creek Rd. , representing Hipps , r P 9 . submitted some revised plans , and after staff report recommendations were discussed, suggested re-drafting of the plan by the Hipps deve- lopers to respond to these concerns: approved Planning Commission Minutes - 8 - December 11 , 1978 E. Hipp' s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition. . .public hearing (Cont'd) Sorensen suggested alternatives to change "barracks" appearance referred to in staff report: setbacks not all on setbae:k line and front facades can be altered. He explained that the reason h;pps have gone to duplexes rather than town houses is because of financing not being available. The original PUD, Resolution 810, was discussed , and it was suggested that the land use for this area be 're-examined. MOTION: Redpath moved to continue the Hipp's Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition to the January 8, 978 meeting, and that Hipps meet with the staff on resolving of the cash park fee and with a new proposal subject to the staff report of December 6, 1978 and revised plans submitted Dece,ber 11 , 1978. Martinson seconded, motion carried unanimously. _ Sundstrom commented that there is anindicated density in this area and we are well away from the original PUD. Sorensen pointed out that the original concept of 2 units per acre was rZasonable, but it has been dramatically changed through the Red Rock Sector Plan and than, it has been 5 years since that change. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS- None . VI . 0LD BUSINESS - None. V11 . NEW BUSINESS - None. VIII . PLANNER' S REPORT - None. IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved to adjourn at10:55 PM. Martinson seconded , motion carried unanimously.