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.