Planning Commission - 06/09/1975 • May 30 , 1975
Mr. Roger Ulstad
City Manager
_ City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
RE : Comprehensive Guide Plan Update
Mr. Ulstad:
This letter proposal, which could be .incorporated into an
agreement for professional services , outlines a scope of ser-
vices and fee schedule as an agreement between the CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, referred to herein as
OWNER, and BRAUER & ASSOCIATES , herein referred to as the
PLANNER.
It is the intention of the OWNER to retain the PLANNER to pro-
vide professional services required to assist OWNER staff in
completing an update of the 1969 Guide Plan, herein referred
to as the PROJECT.
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The PLANNER agrees to provide professional services to
assist OWNER staff in the preparation an update of the
comprehensive city plan as follows :
1. Preliminary Studies and Base Mapping
a. Pre-Planning Consultation with OWNER, staff,
z Planning Commission, Council, and other
boards and commissions in order to become
familiar with concepts , concerns , and atti-
tudes which will effect or direct planning
Q implementation, and to better understand
c3
O the problems and alternatives which must
cn be considered and administered.
Q
b. Review and Check Updated Base Map to be pre-
cc
LU pared by OWNER staff.
Q
m -
m
•
6440 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 (612) 941-1660
� 755: :'lest 10th Avenue, Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 238-7363
investigation , Review and Preparation of
Planning Data beginning with a restatement
• of the conditions that existed in 1969 , a
description of current conditions (1975)
and evaluate them in regard to conformance
or non-conformance with the Guide Plan,
goals , objectives , and policies , together
with comments on the implications of de-
partures from the 1969 plan.
The PLANNER would provide an independent
objective overview of change , trends , and
directions of the development process as
well as actual developments under construc-
tion or approved by the City since 1970.
The OWNER will provide and the PLANNER will
evaluate the following general data:
(1) Demographics from past and present
census data (including recent devel-
oper projections) in order to ascertain
both changed (1969-1975) and future
population characteristics and dis-
tribution.
(2) Sociological/cultural characteristics
of past and present and most likely
future populations as evidenced by
• census tract data, solicited data,
_(interview and auestionaires) and
observation at public meetings during
investigation period.
(3) Relate the community to the Regional
area to assess the impact that past,
present, and future growth policies
(Regional) will or have had on com-
munity growth and development.
(4) Review past and present commercial,
industrial, and housing land use in-
cluding specially designated large
P.U.D. 'S and approved sector studies
to assess the impact, problems , and
trends inherent therein.
(5) Update and review previous ,natural
features studies to assess the impact
that new growth (Post 1969) on the
natural environment.
(6) Review transporation facilities and
proposals initiated or completed since
the orginal plan study including
municipal streets , and approved con-
cepts on plats , Hennepin County.
Minnesota Highway Dept. ,rletropolitan
agencies and surrounding municipali-
ties .
(7) Review utility systems , particularly
in regard to investment and operat-
ing cost, phasing, geographic coverage ,
availibility and the influence of metro-
politan agency decisions .
(8) -review community facilites existing
public as well quasi public facili-
ties , such as parks and open space ,
together with projected future needs.
d- Field Observation of the physical character-
istics of the city from public roads and pro-
perties to provide a personal perspective of
the physical characteristics of the city doc-
umented in the printed data, and attendance
at various community or organizational func-
tions in order to become familiar with
social characteristics and attitudes within
the community.
e. Design and Conduct one community interaction
seminar on a structural basis as a means of
generating a representative model of com-
munity response and acceptance of both
reality and realistic alternatives. The
PLANNER will summarize the results and pro-
vide an analysis of the meaning or signifi-
cance of the results to the plan process.
f. Analysis of collected data together with
field observations to. select and define
planning perameters , opportunities , con-
strains and other guidelines.
g. Presentation of summarized basis data from
investigation and analysis in oral, written
and graphic form to be made to the OWNER
staff.. The material will be prepared ,4 n a
form and can be used as a working document
by the participants throughout the planning
process.
2. Goal Formulation
Community Participation Seminars
a. Two community participation seminars will
be designed and conducted on a small group,
interaction basis as a means to inform, ed-
ucate, and to stimulate non-competitive
interaction.
The principal focus of these sessions will
. be to review basic planning data, implemen-
tation procedures (ie zoning, platting,
assements, development techniques) inorder
to provide a basis for meaningful input in
The establishment of planning goals and
of objectives for the city planning process.
3. Guide Plan Development
a. The PLANNER will prepare a first draft version
of the updated Guide plan including recom-
mendations in the form of written concepts
goals, objectives , policies, and procedures ,
with supporting descriptive and explanatory
graphics.
b. Particular emphasis will be placed on a
"planning and policy framework" to be used
as a tool to evaluate future housing, com-
mercial and industrial development proposals.
4. Meetings with OWNER staff as required throughout
the planning period up to three (3) meetings with
the Council and Planning Commission, one (1)
meeting with each of the other appointed boards
and commissions in addition to the community
participation sessions outlined above.
5 . Additional Services such as ; actual collection
of data, preparation of base maps , additional
meetings , or presentations , brochures, graphics ,
• models , plan documentation , or any other ser-
vices specifically requested and authorized as
an addendum to this Contract Agreement.
FEE' S FOR PROFESSIONAL, SERVICES
1. The OWNER shall compensate the PLANNER for
completion of professional services as described
in paragraphs A.l,2 ,3,«4 in the amount o,: ti•:en
seven thousand, e_ght hundred fifty dollars . +
2. Fees for the PLANNERS additional services as
described in paragraph A,5 will be computed on
the basis of the current hourly rate plus
expense schedule of the PLANNER.
S
AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
Monday, June 9. , 1975
7:30 PM Eden Prairie City Hall
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Invocation --- Pledge of Allegiance --- Roll Call
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Don Sorensen, Norma Shee,
Roger Boerger, Richard Lynch, Herb Fosnocht,
Joan Meyers, Dick Feerick
COMMISSION STAFF : Dick Putnam, Chris Enger, Jean M-. Egan
I.- MINUTES OF THE MAY 12 , 1975, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
(continued from May 22, 1975)
MAY 22, 1975, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS .
A. Chairman Sorensen
.1 . Appointed to Community Growth Council.
B. Council Representative Meyers.
C. Other members reports. .
III. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. Modern Tire Company, located east of US 169 (at 9051 Flying Cloud
Drive) , requesting rezoning from Rural District to Commercial Highway
in conformance with Ordinance 135. Modern Tire requests rezoning
to.permit an addition of 50x100 feet tothe existing building.
B. Comprehensive Guide Plan Up=Date, discussion of alternatives for
review of the 1968 Plan.
C. Planned Study Districts, discussion of possible rezoning to P.S.
District and extension of time limit for P.S. zone to longer than
one year.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS. (continued)
A. Areas A, B, C, D, & G of the Preserve Commercial Plan , requesting
PUD concept approval and preliminary platting for large scale commercial
development located west and north of Anderson Lakes and south of
Homarts Eden Prairie Center.
V. PLANNERS REPORT.
A. Project Status:
1. Edengate
2. Clympic'Hills "
B. Flying Cloud Airport Study
C. Draft PUD Ordinance
D. M.C.A. Ordinance
VI. ADJOURNMENT.
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
• Monday, June 9, 1975 7:30 PM City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Don Sorensen, Richard Lynch, Joan Meyers,
Norma Schee, Richard Feerick, Herb'Fosnocht
MEMBERS ABSENT: Roger Boerger
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Dick Putnam, Planning Secretary jean Egan
I. MINUTES OF THE MAY 12 , 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
II.B.2. , should read- . . and recommendations for the review process are to . . .
P. 2 ,3F, delete ( 154 3 bedroom units ) & 4F, delete from 588 spaces to 646 .
Schee moved, Meyers seconded, to approve the minutes as published and
corrected. The motion carried 4:0:1 ( Lynch abstained ). - _
MINUTES OF THE MAY 22, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
P.2, sp. of businesses in first paragraph.
4F, should read- the noise levels could exceed PCA guidelines.
P. 3, IF, should read - so neither the commission nor Mr. Perbix had . .
2 & 3 1P, change date of June loth to June 9
ACTION: # 3 should read - between buildings of 150 feet.
P. 5, DISCUSSION, should read - however, he did believe that the Edengate . .
P. 6, lF sp. of collector
P. 7, 2F sp. of significantly
3F, change recommend to recommended
Fosnocht moved, Lynch seconded, to approve the minutes as published and
• corrected. The motion carried 2:0: 3 ( Lynch , Schee , Meyers abstained ) .
Feerick arrived after the approval of the minutes.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS.
A Chairperson Sorensen.
1 . Appointment to the Community Growth Council.
Sorensen inquired which members desired to serve on the Community Growth
Council on the hehalf of the Planning Commission Schee nominated Feerick as
the Planning Commission appointment to the CGC. A unanimous ballot was cast
for Feerick to be the Planning Commission's appointment.
Sorensen asked if any members had questions regarding the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments decisions on Eagle Enterprise and the Minnesota Tree Sign.
No questions were raised.
B.Council Representative Meyers.
Meyers briefed the Commission on the Council's actions regarding Edengate,
Olympic Hills PUD, City Neighborhood Sector Map, Mini-Sector Study for the
169'Area and an amendment to Ord. 135 permitting office uses in industrial districts.
C.Others.
'None
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 9, 1975
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
A. Modern Tire Company, located east of US 169 ( at 9051 Flying Cloud Drive ),
requesting rezoning from Rural District to Commercial Highway in conformance
with Ordinance 135. Modern Tire. is requesting rezoning in order to construct
a 50x100 foot addition to the present building.
The planner referred the Commission to the June 5th letter from Mr. Crouch,
representing Modern Tire, and the June 4 letter from Harlan Perbix.
Sorensen inquired if there had been any other conditions to the bargain between
the City and Modern Tire referred to on Page 2, 2nd P,of the June 5th letter.
Crouch replied that no other conditions had been agreed to other than the City
allowing the enhrgerrent of a very soon to be non-conforming use in return for
the company's non-objection to the property's rezoning from R-C to Rural.
Crouch believed that such a condition is unlawful and unenforceable.
Schee asked Mr. Crouch if he represented Modern Tire in 1969. Mr. Crouch
responded affirmative.
Sorensen felt Crouch's letter of June 5 o,.mitted important and necessary
parts of Ordinance 135 pertaining-to non-conforming uses. Sorensen read the
following- SECTION 16 of Ordinance 135, 1 a ';
" This article is intended to limit the number
• and extent of non-conforming uses by prohi-
biting their enlargement, their re-establishment
after abandonment, and the alteration or restor-
ation after destruction of the structures they
OCCUPY. "
Sorensen said he did not agree with the interpretations of cases cited in the
June 5th letter.
Crouch felt that non-conforming uses generally cannot be enlarged, but circum-
stances change and Modern Tire has made substantial investments in their property
over the years and the Aty should not limit the use from growing.
Meyers stated the Council recommended a Mini-Sector Study for the area as
recommended by the Commission and the City Attorney did not believe a building
permit could be granted to a non-conforming use.
The planner said a decision on the rezoning request is still before the City, but
since a study would place construction of the addition out of this building season
Modern Tire is seeking a variance.
The Commission members agreed that Modern Tire is a good use within the city
but were unsure how the City could help the company construct an addition
• this year.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- approved
June 9, 1975
• Feerick asked what hardships Modern Tire would experience if they could not
build an addition this year. Mr. Jim Duvick said that presently tires on large
trucks have to be changed outside which blocks the parking lot and dictates
employees must work outside during all types of weather. Mr. Duvick estimated
that construction costs would be up 12% by next year .
Lynch asked if Modern Tire would need to increase their parking lot if they
did not construct the addition to the building. Duvick responded no.
Crouch requested the rezoning request be continued until the Council could recon-
sider the variance request with the information contained in his June 5 letter.
Feerick asked what the staff's recommendation was. The !planner replied he concurs
with Brauer's report and a small scale study to be completed prior to the Guide
Plan update.
Motion 1 .
Schee moved, Meyers seconded (for discussion purposes ) , that the rezoning and
variance request by Modern Tire be continued until a Comprehensive Guide Plan
Study is completed and subsequent ordinance cYarges are made, if any.
Discussion
Feerick inquired if a time limit should be specific. Fosnocht did not feel the
Guide Plan's completion should be under pressure due to a time limit on the
• Modern Tire item.
Feerick questioned what action the Planning Commission could take on a variance
request.
Schee and Meyers agreed to delete the variance request from the motion.
Motion 2
Feerick moved, Schee seconded,to recommend that the first motion be tabled
to consider the variance request. The motion carried 5:1 with Fosnocht voting nay.
Motion 3
Fosnocht moved, Lynch seconded, to refer the variance request to the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments.
Discussion
Sorensen stated the Council can act directly on the variance request as the Board
of Appeals and Adjustments, and that he would vote against the motion.
Feerick suggested amending the motion to recommend approval :: Lynch favored such
an amendmarft-, FFosnocht did not. Fosnocht and Lynch withdrew the motion.
Motion 4
Feerick moved, Lynch seconded, to recommend the council consider approving the
variance request by Modern Tire to allow a building permit on the non-conforming
property. The motion failed 2:4 with Lynch & Feerick voting aye.
• Sorensen stated that the vote constitutes action by the Planning Commission and
now the Commission should consider the previously tabled motion on the rezoning
request.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 9, 1975
•
Vote an Motion 1
The motion failed 3:3 with Lynch,Feerick & Fosnocht voting nay.
Meyers inquired if the members voting against the motion favored a Mini-Sector
Study. They said they did.
Sorensen believed rezoning would constitute spot zoning and would effect
other land within the City.
Crouch felt the Modern Tire request should be considered on its own merits,
not in conjunction with other properties.
Motion 5
Feerick moved, Meyers seconded, to recommend to the City Council reconsider-
ation of their decision on the Mini-Sector Study for the 169 Area in light of the
present circumstances. The motion carried 5:1 with Sorensen voting nay.
B. Comprehensive Guide Plan Update, Discussion of alternatives for review of the
1968 Plan.
The planner referred the commission to the June 3 memo outlining some of the
• issues, study areas and financial options involved in the Guide Plan update.
Meyers said the council has not yet made a final decision on the Guide Plan
update and would like the commission's views on if an update is needed, and
if so how shouldthe update be accomplished.
Fosnocht felt it is important to have information on where the city is now, such
as; present approvals, parks, trails, utilities, etc. , before a decision on how
to proceed can be made.
Sorensen felt the city should update the Guide Plan yearly.
Schee was in favor of updating the Guide Plan and determining where the community
has been, where it can go,and where the citizens would like to go.
The planner hoped the update would outline policies currently existing and those
desired in the future. He then asked when the Commission felt the citizens
should be involved.
Meyers felt citizen involvement should be early in the update after the preliminary
data is compiled.
Fosnocht questioned how a good representation of community citizens could be
• achieved.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 9, 1975
is Sorensen felt it important that the citizens are aware oif the City's present
policies and the City be aware of their needs.
Schee and Feerick also favored citizen involvement in the Guide Plan update.
Sorensen suggested the review of relevant map information be jointly between
the council and planning commission.
C. Planned Study Districts, discussion of possible rezoning to PS District and
extension of time limit for PS to longer than 1 year.
Sorensen suggested placing all parcels previously in PS not yet built upon back
in PS until completion of the Guide Plan update. The planner felt the City should
consult the City Attorney about such a possibility.
The planner asked if the staff should notify the affected parcels now.
Sorensen and Schee preferred 1 hearing before the Council. Meyers suggestedalso
publishing a notice for an amendment to Ordinance 135 if the PS time limit
is changed simultaneous with the PS notice.
• Sorensen and Meyers suggested placing previous PS areas into Rural.
Motion
Schee moved, Feerick seconded, to withhold recommendations on PS Districts
until a decision on the Guide Plan update is made, and if a decision is made
to conduct a public hearing on PS Districts,the Planning Commission would recommend
1 hearing before the Council on parcels in PS and an amendment to Ordinance 135
changing the 1 year time limit to 2 years or some other time frame. The motion
carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS,
A. Areas .A,B,C,D, & G of The Preserve Commercial Plan, requesting PUD Concept
approval and preliminary platting for large scale commercial development located
west and north of Anderson Lakes and south of Homart's Eden Prairie Center.
The planner reported The Preserve is still compiling the necessary information.
Motion:
Meyers moved, Fosnocht seconded, to continue the public hearing on Areas A,B,
C,D, & G to the Commission's first meeting in July. The motion carried unanimously.
V. PLANNER'S REPORT.
A. Project Status
1 . Edengate
2 . Olympic Hills PUD
• These two items were previously covered by Mrs. Meyers.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 9, 1975
• B. Flying Cloud Airport Study.
The planner reported he is trying to arrange a meeting between Dr. Bofenkamp
and Mr. Einsweiller.
C. Draft PUD Ordinance.
D. MCA Ordinance.
The planner felt the Guide Plan update decision is important before additional
work is done on the PUD Ordinance and MCA Ordinance.
Meyers suggested PUD Procedures could be adopted prior to a Guide Plan update
decision.
Feerick felt priorities should be established and work continued on all necessary
proj ects.
VI. ADJOURNMENT.
Fosnocht moved, Lynch seconded, to adjourn at 11:00 PM. The motion carried
unanimously.
Respectively Submitted;
• jean M. Egan
Planning Secretary
•