Planning Commission - 08/13/1979 i
AGENDA
PLANKING CL` ISSION
- MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 1979
7:30 PM, CITY NAIL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JULY 23, 1979
III. MMERS REPORTS
i>
IV. REPORTS AND REC ENDATIONS
A. MITCHELL HEIGHTS TOWNHOUSES Ryco Develo nt Incorporated, request
to revise the MitchelHeig is PUD (72-3) (zoned QM 2.5 for 94 units
of multiple family upon: approximately 15 acres) and preliminary plat
the property. A continued public hearing.
B. LEPARC J.C. Kohlrusch request for approval of Environmental
Assessment Worksheet.
C. BLUFFS WEST 3RD ADDITION request to rezone 84 acres from Rural to R1-13.5
or IR single am y homes. A public hearing.
D. OVERLOOK PLACE request by Hustad Development Corp. and Zachman Homes
to rezone frup Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat 28 lots for 14
duplexes. A public hearing.
E. PRESERVE CENTER 2ND ADDITION PLAT request to preliminary plat
acres zoned M 6.5 for 7 3uplex lots . A public hearing.
F. GONYEA PUD, •-equest for PiiD Concept approval for 37 acres for Dolexes ,
elderly ausing, offices, and restaurant uses. A public hearing.
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS E
A. HIDDEN GLEN request by Zachman homes for PUD Concept approval o," '%g're
alai y attached and detached on approx intel y 125 acres. A nubl , .. -earl ng
B. SHADY OAK PUD, REZONING AND PLATTING request by Richard Anderson for
PUD Concept approval a-pprox may 100 acres of industrial uses; rezoning
from Rural and I-5 to I-2 Park for Shady Oak Industriai Park; Shady Oak
Industrial Park 3rd Addition; Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th Addition;
Shady Oak Industrial Park 5th Addition; preliminary platting of the
Industrial additions; and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
A public hearing.
V1 . OLD BUSINESS
V1 'f. PEW BUSINESS
V111 . PLA161ER'S iIEPQAT
I X. AaiOtlRlAh11'
i
f
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING C"ISSION MINUTES
,approved
DAY, AUGUST 13, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
C"— ISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairmao William Bearman, George Bentley,
• Matthew Levitt, Hakon Tor-jesen, and Virginia
Gartner
COY I SS I ON VEMBERS ACSI;T: Oke Martinson and Liz Retterath
C"ISSION STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Dons-:.: Stanley, Planning Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Torjesen moved to approve Agenda as published, with the freedom of
consideration of itEm IV. F. GONYEA PUD after item IV. B. LEPARC, if the
proponent was present, be-:ause of the large number of residents th:. ; were present
for the project. Gartnev seconded, motion carried 5-0.
II : APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JULY 23, 1979
The following changes were requested:
0 SECTION II . , sent. 5, delete the , first "MOTION" , add "change" before second
"MOTION".
Pg. 6, para. 3, sent. 1 , add "adjacent" before "property owners "'.
" " 4, delete "street" ; and add "storm drainage" before"hol.ding
ponds" .
Pg. 6, au'd "General discussion and general agreement took place on the Hennepin
County Department of Transportation letter of 7/12/79. " after Para. 3 as a separate
paragraph.
Pg. 5, para. 5, sent. 3, delete "City is bonded that" ; add "builder is bonded to
insure that the" .
Pg. 6, para. 6, sent. 2, delete "The Planner responded that the City will not take
over Maintenance of the road for about 2 years. " ; add "The Planner added that the
City will not take over maintenance of the road until it is completed to City standards ,
which will probably be About 2 y.-irs.
Pg. 6, para. g , sentence 3 and 4, change to read ""contingent upon the procurement
of property rights ;or storm sewer lines and holding ponds from adjacent property
to the west. "
MOTION: TorJesen moved to approve the Minutes of July 23, 1979 as published and_
amended. Bentley seconded, motion carried, with Bearman and Gartner"abstaining" .
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - Aug. 13, 1979
B. LEPARC, J.C. Kohlruszh, request for approval of Environmental
Assessment Worksheet.
The Planner explained that this project was considered and acted upon
during the former Planning Commission meeting, and answered general
questions on the E.A.W.
MOTION: Torjesen moved to recommend approval of the Environmental Assessment
Worksheet Findihq of No Significant Impact for the LeParc development. Bentley seconded ,
Motion carried 5-0.
C. BLUFFS WEST 3RD ADDITION_, request to rezone 84 acres from Rural to R1 -13.5
for 166 single family homes. A public hearing.
The Planner discussed the background of the proposal , explaining that the
former proposal was a larger project in terms of acreage and the number of
units. (approximately 640 units) The project has been cut down to the
Third Addition only,of 166 lots . This proposal continues to include a
lE acre piece lying to the the west for a neighborhood park and storm
water area, and a 2 acre totlot, As a part of the request, the developer is
requesting variance from minimum lot size, frontage and sideyard setbacks.
Mr. Dick Putnam, Hustad Development Corporation, presented the proposal , and ex-
plained that he and Mr. Roy Willis,of.Rieke, Carroll , Muller Assoriates Inc. ,
have met with the City Engineering staff on the protect.
Putnam questioned No. 12 of the staff report, the installation of methane gas
monitoring wells before occupancy of any homes in the Thlvd Addition. The
Planner responded installation of methane gas mnitoring wells should
be coordinated with thy: phasing of construction.
The lot sizes were discussed, with 50% under 13,500 sq. ft.. , and a net
average of 2.5 units per acre.
The Planner summarized the staff report FINDINGS AND CQNCLUSIONS and
RECO14ENDATIONS and responded to questions.
The proponent wa4 in agreement with the staff report recommendations, except
for No. 12.
Torjesen questioned the 400` buffer space from the approximate-edge of the
fill area tQ Zoe back i of lines of the homes . The P i anner
explained. that the Staff has researched
the methane gas 'question through the Anoka Landfill end Pollution Contro)
Agency, and that their input has indicated it would be relatively non-expen-
sive and simple to install monitoring wells. -
Torjesen suggested the changing of the wording of No. 72 to indicate the
installdtioll of the monitoring wells "in` a tiwly winner as determined by the
City" , rather than "prior to occupancy (if any he in the Third Additionr' .
Bentley questioned-the -status of the pipe line present in the land. Putnam
responded that the line will probably be re-located along a roadway, and Hus-
tad has agreeO to work with, the William Crothers on this re-lorat y4)n. Bent ley
felt it was important that the City Council be aware of the presence of the
pipe line on the property.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - August 13, 1979
I
C. PLUFfS WEST THIRD ADDITION. . . .publ is hearing (continued)
Mr. Douglas Page;- 15817 Valley View Rd. , was opposed to high density
in the proximity of the airport, explaining that he was a pilot, and
that population tends to grove toward an airport and that pWle are unaware
until it becomes densley populated. Me asked that the Comeissioners
consider the long range plans for the airport. The Planner explained •%at
this was a much 'tower density project than the original proposal , which did
infringe in the airport Tones.
Discussion on the recommnded signs to be posted indicating proximity to the
airport took place. Page asked about information to future ow em. , and
urged str6ng consideration be given to the degree of warning.
Torjesen expressed concern on whether the City should take tW ~,,&_Spoeesibility
of informing prospective buyers about the proximity to the air;",,-4 t.
Bentley felt it was not a question of responsibility, but of information. '
Sally Brown, speaking as Chairperson, of the Flying Cloud Advisory Comission,
referred to th small jet traffic and noise level occurring at the Flying
Cloud Airport;expressed concern that the people living in this development,at a
halt mile away. Will find the noise objectionable. Putnam responded than it_ is
their understanding that the noise level will decrease t%rowomt tlwe years.
MOTION: Gartner moved to close the public hearing on the Bluffs Best Third
preliminary plat. Bentley seconded, motion carriers c-a.
MOTION: Gartner moved to recovend to the Ci t j Cm nci l approval of n1 W con-
cept based upon the staff report of 8/7/79, and the addition that the developer
proceed with negotiations with William Brothers Pipeline raR*ny to establish
final pipe line location. Torjesen seconder!, motion carried 5-0.
NOTION: Gartner moved to r ekonvwnd to the City Council approval of the rezoning
from Rural to R1 -13.5 as per the material dated 6/25/79, 7/12/791, 7/30/79 and
per the staff report of August 7, 1979; with the addition that eieveloper pre-
-teed with negotiations with the William Brothers Pipeline company to establish
final pipe line location. Tor esen seconded, motica carried 5-0.
Bentley requested that blueprints of potential monitoring wells for methane
-gas ad.lacent to the landfill he made available to City Coned 1 at the time of
&I&Fon;ideration of this project.
+ tArtner !coved to recoaarond to the City Council arws1 of y.
to
preliminary plat dated 6/25/79 as per the staff report of August 70 19799
with the above listed addition. Bentley seconded, motion carried S.O.
F. ONYEA PIED request for Pilo Concept approval for 37 acres for dolexts, elderly
housing`�o fires, and restaurant roses. A public Nearing.
Mr. Howard Dahlgren, Planning Consultant, Howard bahlore*i Associates ,
presented the proposal for Gonyea Investment Company, and re%ieMed the history
of the site with the use of graphics. Ne pointed out that this l aft s 1 opes
away from the residential' areas and toward the drdina� peed fn the southern
of the site. Adequate land will be g�iveh` to the City for drainage pur-
poses. He explained that they did not feel this site world be appropriate � ?
�?�s►=t��a�Cs�T�C9rs'1�1► .eLDJ.sIyl+P.e�ea►�eorv�.�..... •.,._,.._• .......... - - -- _--
W .,w ii Writ*A _.Akfil*1 WI VIOLL10:A �iya. *6 01 . W.W6 Wh 10 ills YiliW6"4L I a
: PlanningCommission Minutes approved �.
tes - 2 - August 13, 1979
A. MITCHELL HEIGHTS TOWNHOUSES, Ryco Development Incorporated, request
to revise the Mitchell Heights PUB (72-3) (zoned RM 2. 5 for 94 units of
multiple family upon approximately 15 acres) and preliminary plat
the property. A continued public hearing.
The Manner discussed concerns of the Planning Commission from the previous
Planning Commission meeting requesting modifications by the proponent o`:
submission of a more detailed grading plan; addition of additional quest
parking; inclusion of a "knock down barrier" for emergency - purpuses ; and the
Anderson Lakes Parkway connection.
Mr. Bill Dolan, Koehnlein, Lightowler, Johnson Incorporated , explained the
changes they had made to the original proposal : additicn of 12 additi na; guest park-
ing spaces; addition of more green space between parking areas and drive-ways
and off of Mitchell Road; the turning of the major entrance road so it followed
on through the project; movement of buildings along northeastern boundary of the
project forward for proper screening; and the addition a the"knock down barrier"
in the southern portion of the project.
Levitt inquired whether the proponent had had any more communication with M.T.S.
regarding their property and the possible alignment of Anderson Lakes Parkway
extension. Mr. Donald rill , Director of Development and Marketing for Ryco
Development Incorporated, explained that presently there is no conclusive agree- .
meat with M. T.S. on the Anderson Lakes Parkway extension, but they have contacted
them and will continue to work toward resolution of the road question.
Levitt requested comments by the Planner regarding the project. The Planner ex-
plained his concern that the 2nd Phase of the development not begin until the
future extension of the Anderson Lakes Parkway is worked out with the property
owners both to the north and to the south.
Gill expressed concern with the contingency of building Phase 2 subject to ,the
extension of the Anderson Lakes Parkway. He explained that i t_ was h i s U-n'derstand i ng
that acceptance by the City of the bid for the Parkway extension and then calling
for bids would constitute permission to go ahead with Phase 2. The Planner ex-
plained that no committment has been made, and the two phases were initially separate ,
with Phase 2 depending upon the Parkway extension from the north. whatever form
this takes by the Council , Phase 2 should be served from the north through Ander-
son Lakes Parkway.
Bentley commented that it was not preirature in nature for the recommendation that
the road be put in,as the City Council in the past has requested access to the
development tefore any construction takes place.
MOTION: Bentley moved to close the public hearing on Mitchell Heights Townhouse,
PUB. Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0
MOTION: Bentley moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Mitchell
Heights Townhouses PUB as per the revised plan dated August 3, 1979 and the staff
report of July 19, 1979. Gartner seconded, motion carried 5-0.
MOTI0N: Bentley moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Mitchell
Heights Townhouses preliminary plat dated August 3, 1979 and the staff report of
July 19, 1979. Gartner seconded, motion carried 5-0.
� yw
a
'L
t' approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - August 13, 1979
C. BLUFFS WEST 3RD AUDITION . . .public hearing. (cont'd)
Bentley in% red what the price range r)f the houses would be. Putnam
responded froM nigh $50,000 to law $609000.
The tot lot was discussed and noted that the developer would construct it,
with maintenance by the City.
Levitt inquired about the neighborhood park and how much of the acreage
would be used for storm water. The Planner explained that under 100
year storm conditions , one-half of the area could be inundated for only about
P days.
Levitt noted that the project was extremely large when all additions were put
together. (approx . 600 single family homes), He asked whether any more additions
were anticipated , and also noted he would have preferred to have seen a
PUD concept of 600. plus units instead of the pei cemeal approach that had been
used. Punam responded none.
Levitt questioned the transportation and services impact on this area of the
City. The Planner explained that the road systems and utilities have been '
planned for the- current proposals ' type of density in this area.
Bentley noted that the present density will make a significant impact on the
transportation system arch asked how many estimated average daily trips were
anticipated. The Planner responded that Homeward Hills Road and County Road
will adequately handle the additional traffic , but that thF problem is with
Highway 169 and County Road 18.
Bearman questioned the steepness of the lots on the ridge area . The Planner
explained that in evaluating the project, he found that no grades are over
30%, and would have erosion potential . The staff recommends as part of the
overall grading of the site, that the developer establish vegetation on a-ii
of these s'iope and also assure that all common drainage swales are preserved
as a part of building construction.
Ms. Sally Brown, 10080 Bennett Plare, inquired how many fires have occurred
at the sanitary landfill in the Fast year and whether they were caused by
methane gas . The Planner responded there have been two that the City has
been aware of, and were caused by heat generated
by greehl ogs that were buried.
Brown inquired further whether the Iaid was being taken into consideration
as far as airport zones and traffic. The Planner responded the project is
consistent with the Flying Cloud " "A" and "B" zones.
Mr. Gerald Beauvais, 7735 Meadow Lane, questioned how many lots would actually
be affected by the airport and methane gas , referring to the staff recommendation E
of a "warning" sign at the entry to the developxiient. The Planner responded
about 20 lots were in the buffer strip adjacent to the landfill , but that th
intent was to infnrm all of the -otential home owners. The signs would. not
lb
be a "warning" , but a notice of tie proximity of the homes to the airport, because
of the large amount of_planes going over the area and prox iwi ty to the landfill .
Planning Com. fission Minutes - 6 - Augustv13, 1979
F. GONYEA PUD,. .public hearing (continued)
for retail uses, but felt a good group of restaurants , ottices, and a
series of small users would be a good use. The restaurants they had in
mind were 3 Burger King, Perkins and one other full service restaurant.
Their concept plan indicates residences (duplexes) will go along the line
of residences to the north.
Dahlgren emphasized their receptiveness to ,Xmments and input from the
residents regarding tfie project. He requested the names of the residents
for the purpose of setting up a neighborhood meeting with them, and assumed
the responsibility of notifying the residents oq the future meeti rags. r
The City Planner summarized some of the City's concerns , one of which was
the traffic. According to the Departaent of Transportation, this land use
would have an important impact on the traffic, especially at the intersection
of County Road 4/Trunk highway 5, which is at capacity presently. He ex-
plained that the Prairie Village Mall was meant to be the extent of the
coamerci a 1 according to the Guide Pl an,whi ch indicates medium density resi-
dtntial and quasi public uses because of the traffic situation. He suggested a
joint access to Fuller Road with Prairie Lawn & Garden for the building to the west.
Levitt inquired what type of elderly housing was anticipated. Dahlgren
responded HUD type of housing, and that they realize they will have to wait
until funds are available.
Levitt inquired whether they had definite committments from the restaurants
and who would do 4,,-he constructing. Dahlgren responded they have definite
committments from Burger King and Perkins, and that the Gonyea Investment Co.
would do the constructing.
Beaman received and noted the communication from William and Margaret Hofius ,
7501 Ontario Blvd. , expressing their questions and concerns with the project.
The Planning secretary was directed to send Mr. and Mrs. Hofius a copy of
the Minutes when available in response to their questions.
Mr. Doug Page, _15817 Valley View Rd. , expressed opposition to the proposal ,
because it was a variation from the Guide plan, traffic impacts and that he
felt HUD housing was not usually successful .
Mr. Gerald Beauvais, 7735 Meadow Lane, pointed out that much traffic would
be generated off of Luther Way from possible aligra ent, and inquired what
the stratus of County Road 4 was as far as updating the road to accommodate
additional traffic. The Planner explained that County Road 4 is a minor
arterial road in the Hennepin County road system, and is slated for being
widened by requesting 100' right-of-way. The problem is at the intersection.
Mr. Stan Riegert, Prairie Lawn and Garden, questioned the pondinl area at
proposed by the proponent (who would maintain it) ;and it was getting higher.
He opposed the suggestion of the joint access to Fuller Road. He questioned
how the building would blend in with his business.
Dahlgren responded that it would blend in very well , and explained it would
"" be a two-story building, 90' fromRiegert's property.
_._ .. ... rs _�✓ �� ~� r� S f .tom�i y-'1F, "..
-zl
3'
PlanningCommission Minutes _ 7 _ approved
August 13, 1979
F. GONYEA PUD. . public hearing (continued)
Mrs. Enger, 16221 Westgate Trail , explained that they back up against
the property, and feel that many of the people feel this is the best
proposaithat has been presented yet.
Mr. Ray Ruuska , 7660 Superior Terrace , landowner to the east , felt there
was not much of a transition between the 3 story, 84 units for the elderly a
and his residence.
3 �
Dahlgren responded to the question by Levitt on the elevation change in y
that area as from 6' and 12 to 15 ' .
Page inquired whether an Environmental Impact Statement had been done on
this project , and also expressed concern with the rising of the pond and
the drainage problems on that property. The Planner responded that there
has been no mandatory threshold state reach for the State to consider an
EIS necessdry, although this does not mean the City will not investigate all
areas of concern on this proposal , including the drainage and transportation system.
Dahlgren explained that there has been more water directed to this area ,
and how this area is imp.,t `ant in the Eden Prairie storm area system. The
proponent will give the City appropriate easements that will work in this
area.
One of the residents on Westgate Trail questioned how the elderly would get
across County Road 4 , since they were proposing the units in this area because
it would be within walking distance to a shopping area. Levitt responded that
many of the HUD projects had vans at their disposal .
Torjesen questioned where the holding pond flowed. The Planner responded into
Purgatory Creek.
Dahlgren assured the Plann4; ng Commission and homeowners that the proponent is
committed to solving the drainage problem.
Mr. Paul Nierman, 7531 Ontario Blvd. , also expressed concern with the rise of
of the water level , and further commented that he concurred with the staff
report that there is too much planned for this area.
Mr. Gretchen Olson, 16391 Westgate Trail , expressed opposition to the major
modifications to the Guide Plan and was in favor of suggestions made by the
Planner.
Mr. Wayne Vedder, 7531 Westgate Trail , explained that his lot, along with his
neighbor' s lots were under water after the recent storms , and expressed strongly
his concern with the drainage conditions.
MOTION: Levitt moved to Continue the Public Hearing on Gonyea PUD until
Commission meeting of August 27, 1979 and return to the developer for modifi-
cation as outlined in the staff report dated August 10, 1979. Bentley seconded.
motion carried 5-0.
Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - Est 13, 1979
D. OVERLOOK PLACE,. . .public hearing„ teontinued
MOTION: Bentley m ved to continue the public bearing on Overlook Place
to the Planninn Commission meeting of Augus* 279 1979, a that we also allow
the Proponent to schedule a public gearing before the City Council ! direct
the Staff and proponent to work out cul-de-sac problems (specifically drive-way
entrances, size of cul-de-sacs, use of island, and other mattere. discussed)
Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0.
E. PRESERVE CENTER 2ND ADDITION! PLAT, request to preliminary plat 5 acres zoned
6.5 or 7 dupl ex I ots. A publ is hearing.
The Planner explained that this project and the Preserve Center Re-plat
project as part o,1 the extension of Preserve Boulevard.
Mr. James Hill , Planning and Engineering consultant for James R. Hill . Inc.
briefly explained the proposal and its background, and that the setLaUs
required can be met.
'ION: Torjesen moved to close the public hearing on Preserve Center 2nd
Additioa preliminary plat. Gartner seconded, motion carried 5-0.
NOTION: Torjesen moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat for the Preserve Center 2nd Additin,Plra�t daleid 7/18/r79
per the staff report of August 7, 1979. Gartner se o motion
car ie
PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
A. HIOUN GLEN request by Zachman homes for PUD Concept approval of single
am ttac ed y a and detached on approximately 125 acres. A public hearing.
Mr. Don Hess presented the request by Zachman Homes through the use of
overlays and additions coamentation on each aspect of the proposal . .
Bentley inquired what total density was being proposed, and also whether
there was potential platting into the •flowd plain. Ness responded 2 units
peracrr, and that platting was not meant to infringe into the flood plain.
Levitt asked whether the proposal depended upon ti;e upgrading of Co. Rd. 62
and Highway 101 . Hess responded that the subdivision can stand on its own
merits, and they are Making no assumptions on the roads.
&mrwan directed the .Planner to inMtigete floc plain encroachment and
- -- - situation of trot cover on the site.
learern. Wow ring to the Yorkshire Point development, inquired- whether the
type of situation would exist in the proposed devel on went.
or. Steve Ryan, Yaciim n Han 9 responded the lot sites are 72' by US' and
that they am sfOnificantly lard than Yorkshire Point lots, bvt still without
Ws. SaMy Ce.11 i ns, W1 Tartan Curiae, i mqui red the site of the mini-part
Wd what It wi l 1 contain. Mess respondeO 2-3 acres , and that a wai ttment
will bt me* to City policy and City guidelines will be followed.
L
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 11 - August 13, 1979
$. SHADY OAK PUDvgEZC"I16,ANQ PLATTING.. .public hearing (continued)
'Toriesen s-ouired about the appropriateness of requesting access through
an ease e it. The Planner explained that Phhysica' E;zctronics does have access
out and they favor another access out at same point.
Torjesen inquired further whether it was the .i.ntent of, this being used as the
parcel access? Anderson responded negative, Just where overflow access is
needed.
Mr. Wayne Field asked for a clarification. of what was- being considered . - -
tonight. Anderson responded that we are dealing with about 19 buildings
of approximately 60,000 sq. ft. in size. The 5Lh Addition is contiguous to
the Wayne Field property, and access is 70th Street,
The Planner Explained that the LeParc project has Just been reviewed; and will
be sharing development of the storm sewer system with the Shady Oak Industrial
Park. He noted that this area is very visible from Highway 169, and that further
screening should be addressed for the southern site; .parking area si-4 - yard
setbacks are not shown on the plan and should also be addressed; and asked the
Planning Comlission to consider whether there was any meritto .20` green strip
between buildings.
Anderson responded that trees screen the western side and behind the site;
there was no visibility from Highway 169; and noted high assessments fc*• the area .
Mr. Dave Field, Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. , inquired about the status of the
continuation of Shady Oak Road to Valley View Road, The Planner explained that.
the contract has been let north of '0th Street. and is presently owned by
Kohlrusch (purchased from Swendseen) .
TorJesen noted soil problems on the Kohlrusch property. Mr. Herliev Helle,
6138 Arctic Way, Edina, explained that Shady Oak Road will be tied in with the
bridge through a direct connection.
Mrs Gregg !�^nceau, Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. , stated that they were present
for the PJD consideration. He located their property to the west of the southern
part of the proposal . He felt elevations between their properties were very
steep. He expressed concern with adequate . buffering between the properties
because they have quite a "blatant" vision into the project.'
Torjesen su94ested Mr. Anderson present a more complete vier of the entire PUD.
The Pl&rLv .r noted tiet ka ksA w� r`��? r X1 %A *6 g A6` milt ietivil vr 4'haQy Oak
Industrial Park, because it contained im request for outside- storage.
Toriesen asked whether any member of the community present tonight had ar+y
concern with the 4th Addition. Demonceau responded negative, Rembrandt Enter-
prists Inc. were concerned with the 5th Addition.
• approved
Planning Commission Minutes -. 8 - August 13, 1979
D. OVERLOOK PLACE, request by Hustad Development Corp. and Zachman Homes
to rezone from Rural to RN 6.5 and preliminary plat 28 lots for 14
14 duplexes. A public hearing.
Mr. Dick Putnam, Hustad Development Corp. summarized the proposal ,
and stated agreement with the staff report recommendations , except
dropping of lots as suggested because it would reduce the size of
is the project and cause economic problems . He explained that in wortino
with Mr. Steve Ryan and Mr. Zachman, they have suggested narrowing
the drive-ways down to 18 to 20' and adding an island in the center of
the cul-de-sac of 30 to 40' in diameter and a minirmm of 35 ' between
drive-ways . Referring to concern with placement of fill they have moved
the unit 35 ' , and thay withhold the two units in the southeast corner
from develo m. crit, recognizing the County realignment prcblem of County
Road 1 .
The Planner explained the proposal in terms of land use for this area
according to the Guide Plan, This property is a"fill -ir-l" piece as a
transition use ,ano duplex land use proposed in this area is reasonable,
He explained further that one of the problems with duplexes around the City
is the drive-ways , and that our Ordinance does not provide for common luLL
lines and a waiver would have to be granted for common party lines .
Bentl p v i^qui rep+ hat the finance stipulations were for ;cparati or. od dupl e
drive-ways. Mr.Steve Ryan , Zachman Homes , explained the F.H.A. dnps not -ai
connected drive-ways.
Levitt inquired whether this proposal completed the "triangular" piece of
land in the area, and also asked about the park. Putnam responded that it
would be complete except for the area to the right , and that they will be
building the tot lot within the next two weeks .
Levitt inquired further whether the duplex area would be proper transitio,-:
from the single family area of Creekwood. The Planner explained that the York-
shire Point development to the west contained very small lots , and that the
duplex lots will be larger, with the impact of appearing as a transition.
Putnam explained that they would be willing to initiate change in zoning
for the area to the east to single family zoning.
Mr. Charles McCormick, 9449 Woodridge Drive , questioned the density of the
project, and expres_ed favcr for the development of single family hones
in the area to the west of Creekwodd. he objected to tht_ Fuil'dinq of the
Oroposed homes because of the correlation in price between Yorkshire Point
and proposed homes.
Mrs. Nemec, 9449 Creek Knoll Rd. , inquired whether the land designated for
the park belonged to the City. The Planner responded affirmative.
i
�c
y
• .approved
j Planning Commission Minutes - 10 - August 13, 1979
A. HIDDEN GLEN. . .public hearing
(continued)
Mre - Rra,nrla WAt r;% 1 Rir7 A U4MMVy4 bG Dr tie , was c oncerned with dra i na
explaining that her land was flooded, and did not want another swamp on
her land. She also expressed concern that there was no park in their area .
Bearman assured Mrs. Welch that research would be done on the drainage
situation before any action would be taken.
Mr. Stanley Riegert, 6611 Lochanburn Rd. , expressed oppositon to two entrances
on Highway 101 , and also with drainage prouiems in the area. Mess responded
that the park would be located totally on high ground, and that• thc conclusions
of the soil study indicated that the soil was bad, and they intend on making
the conclusions available to the Engineering Department.
Mr. Robart Kruell , 6780 Tartan Curve , referred to small lot sizes with houses
without garages proposed in the area located in a portion of Eden Prairie
exposed to people traveling through, and requested that the developer increase
the choice of models ; more attention be given to the gradual transition between
existing houses from north part of Eden Prairie as you move into this project
(from economic standpoint) ; more control 'by the City of the Dell Road extension;
time frame; and what type of review should the citizens of this area mete.
Mrs. Lloyd Schroeder, 18809 West 62nd St. , requested pictures of the propose
houses for such small lots and expressed concern about the effect on their
property value.
MOTION: Gartner moved to continue the public hearing on Hidden Glen PUD
to August 27th for a staff report. Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0.
-Gartner left the meeting at 1 :35 A.M.
B. SHADY OAK PUD9 REZONING AND PLATTING, request by Richard Anderson for
Concept approval of approximate y 100 acres of industrial uses ; rezoning
from Rural and I-5 to I-2 ParP for Shady Oak Industrial Park; Shady Oak
Industrial Park 3rd Addition; Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th Addition; Shady
Oak Industrial Park 5th Addition; preliminary platting of the industrial
additions; and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A public
hearing.
Mr. Richard Anderson briefly suiamrized the proposal , explaining that the
project contained approximately 100 acres of land, including 5 additions , with
the fourth addition located in the northerly portion of the propery, which is
presently zoned I-5. Two buildings are planned for this addition., Parker Hannifin
and Crown Plastics. He is requesting rezoning from I-5 tc I-2 because of
the 50' . front yard setback required in the I-2 zoning district. The
request would also be for a common drive-way.
Beaman inquired whether the proponent was requesting outside storage for th
4th Addition. Anderson responded negative. He explained that he is asking
for outside storage for the Shady Oak Industrial Park , and Shady Oak Industrial
Park 3rd Addition, which are sites surrounded by .trees and which cannot be seen
too readily. It is also the intent to put up an eight foot fence.
7 E
• • • t o
-K.74vi1
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 12 - August 13, 1979
B. SHADY Oft PUD, REZONING AND PLATTING.—. .public hearing (continued)
------- ----
Mf1T Tf1N T- * *'--on mr�.`1 ��%o "a Nuu i i�. IICa f'I lity on Shady UdK Fourth
Addition.. Bentley sec,)nded, motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Torjesen moved to recommend approval to the City Council of the
request for rezoning from I-5 to I-2 for Shad , Oak Industrial Park , 4th
Addition as •per the staff report of 8/10/79.Shad ,
seconded, motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Torjesen moved to recommend approval to the City Council for pre-
1 irtmi nary plat approval of 2 lots for Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th Addition as
per the staff report of August 10, 1979. Bentley seconded , Rootion carried 4-0.
M01i0N: Torjesen moved to continue public hearing on Shady Oak Industrial
Park PUD and requested that Mr. Anderson present a comprehensive picture of this
project at the next Commission meeting of 8/27/79. Bentley seconded, motion
carried 4-0.
Mr. Anderso ted that he was not prepared to discuss the P.U.D this evening.
VI . OLD BUSINESS Ark
None.
VII : NEW BUSINESS
None.
VI I I . PLANNER'S REPORT
oni.
U ADJOURNMENT
MOTION Bentley moved to adjourn at 2:30 A.M. seconded by Torjesen. Motion carried
unanimously.
i