Loading...
Planning Commission - 05/16/1972 May 9; 1972 TO: Village of Eden Prairie We the undersigned residents of school road have read and reviewed your. memo dated April 18, 1972-- Subj : Eden Prairie Industrial Center. Summary: The subject in your memo, "Visual Relationship Existing Between School Road and the Industrial Center," was resolved in 1967 during the rezoning of the area to Special Industrial {Now 121 after residents adjoining the area protested against heavy industrial zoning. It is obvious ` that to date there has not been much -i,nterest on the part of the developers to insure that proper and agreed to grading, landscaping and construction would be followed. We appreciate the concern of the present planning committee with regard to this problem. Recommendation : The preliminary grading chart which was mailed to school road residents appears to be very good. In view of the long delay on the part of the developers, we feel that during the summer of 1972, in conjunction with the sewer and water installation, the village should insure that the regrading, installation of the earth berm and landscaping as indicated in your grading plan be completed by the . developers. No more building permits should be issued for , this area until this is accomplished. Thank you for notifying us of the planned activity in the area. We support it as drawn in your grading plan : Signed Name Address r� 2. 4•5. 5 6 �� G 7. 90, F ' AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING CONNISSION EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL - LIBRARY Tuesday, Flay 16, 1972 7 :30 P.H. Invocation -- Pledge of Allegiance -- Roll Call Commission flemebers: Marvin LaGrow, Norma Schee, Ralph Nesbitt, Herb Fosnocht, Don Sorenson, Wayne Brown, Patrick Casey, Mike Nanning, Hike Flavin. Commission Staff: George Hite, Village Manager; Dick Putnam, Planning Asst. I. MINUTES OF APRIL 4, APRIL 18, HAY 2, 1972 II. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS. A. Shelter Development Corporation. Presentation of proposal for town- house and apartments under section 236 N.U.D. mortgage financing in Edenvale PUD 70-4. B. H.J. Gorra Preliminary Plat. H.J. Gorra preliminary plat for single • family plan located adjacent to the Adnerson Lakes and County Road 18. C. Gold Medalion Corporation.Preliminary Plat. Gold fledalion Corporation, St. John's Woods Preliminary Plat on 18.9 acre site adjacent to Baker Road. III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Russell Marsh/Midwest Terminals, Inc. Application for Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Approval . 137 acres between Baker Road and Interstate 494. Report and recommendation by staff and action by Commission. B. Hipps Construction Company, Inc. Application for concept plan approval and rezoning on 9, acres in the northwest area of Edenvale PUD to 70-4 Staff report and recommendations. C. School Road/Eden PRairie Industrial Center. School Road/Eden Prairie Industrial Center screening plan - staff report. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION May 16, 1972 Eden Prairie High School Library 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Acting Chairman aSchee, Brown, Casey, Manning, Flavin, Sorenson. Also present: Dick Putnam, Planning Assistant. I. Minutes of April 4, 18, and May 2, 1972, meetings were presented and since there was not time to review them action was delayed-,until the next meeting, June 6 , 1972. t II. Petitions, Requests and Communications A. Hennepin Counr-f requests for�plat approval of land located east of Shady Oak Road and south of County State Aid # 62. A representative from the Hennepin County.-presented the plat plan and noted that they would like to .plat the --land- into one tract. There has been interest expressed in'the development of the tract. The plat was referred to the staff and acrion would be taken- at the next meeting. B. Shelter Development Corporation request for rezoning to'"RM 2.5 .for • Briarhill Development and FHA section 236 multiple family development located in the Northwest Sector of -Edenvale PUD 70-4. Representing Edenvale was Mr. Don Peterson, Shelter Development; Dick Bienapfl, government programs division, ray VanDyke,. architect, Miller, Melby and Hanson, and Mike Carol, Director of Property. Management for Shelter Government Programs Division. Introduction - Site location and character. Mr. Peterson gave a brief slide .presentation of the site and surround- ing area. Access to the site street that .has been graded connecting will .be by Edenvale Boulevard. Also,, the proximity to the"neighbor- hood center, commercial center, churches, and the elementary school is very close by. The major pedestrian trail system whi6 ,runs. on the eastern side of the site from south to-north along:-the railroad rights-of-way was shown with Mr. Peterson's slides. The site itself is one of three areas in Edenvale that has undergone extensive grad ing. Previous to the grading, ;the site' was an unforested hill; today it remains unforested but the-, hill has been cut somewhat: Grading has left a north to south slope with a higher ridge: on the northeast corner. There is tree .cover to the .north, not on the -si&e4 but adjacent to it, and a few trees scattered in' the central.-'.afea,='of• the site and on the south. Mr. Peterson noted the change in the site boundaries and why the :'sita overlapps into two density designation areas. The original sitd.':pro- posed was twice the size and had, 230 units. 'After 'consultation with' FHA and the Village staff, the site and numb.er of units were reduced . s Fagre Two z . 2-0 108 acras and 1-16 units. Also, the site was realigned based upon . the natural site features that resulted in a different alignment from the proposed concept plan. Mr. Peterson pointed out the relationship to the. railroad tracl::s on the east. The railroad is approximately 20-25 feet bedew the grade of the sheiter site at its closest point. Development Philosophy Mr. Bienapfl gave a brief description of the Shelter philosophy of development and some history of t.ie corporation. It was note, that Shelter today has appro,-d.mately 3 ,000 rental units under r anagement. Of that total approximately 1,000 are subsidized units with 500 under the 236 program. The other 500 subsidized units are udder -,',ha 221 D-3 program. There are four projects that are under construction today: one of them near completion in Burnsville. Mr. Bienapfl noted that one of Shelter's major concerns in development such as this, is the management long term developer/resident relationship. ToTraards this goal they have undertaken an extensive study of management resulting in a new approach, which Mr. Carol will explain in more detail. Design/Planning Concepts. Jay VanDyke, the architect for this project, explained the 72DS concept • for design and development. EDS or Environmental Design System, used. by Shelter Development Corporation relies upon the -nultidisci- plinary approach to creating useable spaces at many different levels of human need. Mr. VanDyke stressed the fact that unlike most design approaches where you start large at the metropolitan scale and work down EDS begins at the smallest level, the living environ- ment of the famiif and relates that to the higherarchy of functions at the neighborhood, community, and metropolitan level. The first level Mr. VanDyke described was Scale One, or privacy level, dwelling units for the family or the individual. He described how each type of dwelling unit was tailored to the needs of the resi- dents. For example, in the apartment structures the two story townhouse character is used for the two and three bedroom units with separate entrances and ground orientation for the families. The third or second level has one bedroom apartments with the exterior gallery or balcony that was geared to the young couple, the single person, or, some retired couples or i-he elderly. The small scale, individual unifts,cr.ieritation of the fai„il;- at ground level, Shelter feels are very desirable qualities in a residential environment. Also, the elderly and single people can be separated from the family units who desire but yet have easy access to common areas. • The second level described, as vicinity, relates more to the clustering or grouping of units around common green areas or small play areas. This factor is something that must be handled with extreme care and the scale of it, Mr. VanDyke felt, is extremely important to the suc- cess of a multiple family project. Page Three Scale 3 , the neighborhood subcenter, related to the neighborhood • facilities or the 126 units project, which will have a recreational building, offices, and also the major recreational facilities. T'he ability to unite the people or bring them together was felt to be a very. important provision, such areas as rainy day play rooms for the children, community rooms for resident meetings or parties, are. proposed. Scale four would be the Village center. Selection of the Edenvale site had much impact on this level of activity. The communi y center south of the site, churches, schools, pathway systems, and public facilities, available to the resident of this site, are extremely good and Shelter felt this was very desirable and a major reason for locating in Edenvale. Scale five, Mr. VanDyke described, was the metropolitan area relationships. The two most important things mentioned were the relationship of Eden Prairie to the Metropolitan areas shopping 4nd employment base, and also the proximity of the project with major freeways, 212, 494, and the proposed Crosstown. In summary, Mr. VanDyke noted that the major goal of the Shalrer project whether it be subsidized or market rate is to .provide the . • environment which meets the needs of families living in the project and will satisfy the needs of the community for quality housing opportunities. Example Illustrations of a project in Burnsville, similar to the Briariiill Project, known as Chancelor Manor were shown. This is a project of approximately 200 units on 15 acres or 13 .8 units per .,cro.. It is a project that integrates the townhouse with apartments. The project is not complete and the intent the slides was to give the Commission an idea of the scale and of the buildings. Mr. Bieriape4l noted that Chancelor Manor does not have nearly the "built in" amenity that the Edenvale project has, in that the pathway systems, elementary school, recreational facilities, and nearby neighborhood commercial areas, are not. in place in Burnsville. Burnsville will have to rely upon the normal rezoning and development process to acquire these facilities much as normal suburbs have in the pas.. . Mr. Bienapfl felt that Eder. Prairie and Edenvale provide a much more thorough planned and x:i,her quality environme, ` ��r the residerit_ s. Mr. Bienapfl issued an invitation to the Council, Planning Commission, and anyone with interest in Eden Prairie: to visit the Chancelor Manor • project around the first of June for a tour are, pers-,-wal -%nspectior. of the units. Page Four • Site Plan/Unit Plan F:cplanations. Mr. VanDyke and Mr. Bien�.pfl explained the various types of units and their relationship to tha site. Basically, there are two types of apartments, a building that steps up the hill, thereby providing a two-level building on one side and three level on the other and a building that is three levels on both sides which is used oil flat ground. A third building 'type is the townhouse which is a two story unit that is intended for the families and has three bedrooms with a garage. The townhouse is built with no basement and there are two levels: entering on the first level with a kitchen, half-bath, closet, utility space, living and dining rooms. The st- rway goes up to the second level with a full bath and three bedrooms. A one-car garage is provided with these units and one additional parking space in the driveway. The exterior finish is wood and there is a rather dramatic roof pitch that rises from the garage at the first level to the second level. The basic module for the townhouse unit is a set of two unit garages back to back. These can be combined as in the Briorhill site into groups of 8, 4, and 6 townhouse units. They seem to provide, as Mr. VanDyke indicated, excellent family units. • The building type "B" is a building which utilizes the uphill arrangement to produce a two story elevation on one side. Basically, what this does is present on one side of the building the two story townhouse unit with six units fronting on the two story side of the building. The side that has three stories will have the basic two story townhouse tinit, six on the first two levels. The third level will have a gallery and the one bedroom units. There will be six one bedroom units along the exterior gallery served with two service cores and stairways. Building type "A" provides for the basic three story configuration, as indicated in building "B" , with the gallery one bedroom units on both sides of the building. The construction- of these units is wood frame, with brick and wood used for exterior treatment. The roof- line is a pitched roofline with an interior trust system which gives the lines of the building a unique visual quality. Mr. VanDyke pointed out that in the "A" & "B" type apartment units, as the elevations depikted there is a variety of facada elements. There are cantilebered areas like the galleries, other areas are recessed or popped out, windows are recessed ar various locations. Generally speaking the facadas is broken up into more manageable parts and . combined with the pitched roof the building appears smaller than it really is. A question relating to the visual massiveness in a residential project could be considerable. The planner noted that with the fenced in patio treatments used on the ground level of the townhouse apartment units and the varied facada treatments, balcon- ies, pitched roof, wood exterior, and other factors the building Paga Six • There was concern expressed by Dun Sorenson about the visual effect of entering the project with car parking on either side Of the entry. Mr. VanD;�ke said that: earth berms and proper land scaping would be used to screen the parking. from the entry pray. This raised an important question, Mr. Brown asked the budget and the approach to landscaping on this site� DepAted on the slides, the site is rather barren of vegetation, orculd extensive landscape treatment be used? Mr. Bienapfl pointed out that this would be core and ;mould be a majo_ component of this project. The fact that the project has rent sa`osidy would not lessen landscaping budgets but actually would add to it. Also, a question was asked about bu'.lding cova..rage and total site coverage:. Mr. Van Dyke: Laid t4at 17% of the site was covarod by buildings and he was not sure at th+.s time of the percentage of total site coverage including roads, parkinys, garages, buildings, but would find this out. Another area that eras questioned was the requirements for safety vehicle turn arounds or., dead end s"ree'tw in the project. The roadways in the project- are 30 Feet wida and M.. VanDyke pointed out that there are only certain areas where the turning radius of an emergency vehicle might be impaired. but than this '.vuld 30t-� • studted in greater detail. Regarding recreational vehic s storage Don Sorenson raised the point that he wondered if it was really needed i.n this project. Mr. Bienapfl said that he was not sure whether it was needed and did not really know. Mr. VanDyke indicated that in his examination of the 236 and 221-D3 projects in the Twin City area that there was a definite need for this. Bob Williams, a resident, expressed a concern That the railroad, aloncr the east side of the property and nw t to the pedestrian system, might create some problems for small children. Also, the placement of the trail systems next to the railroad trackage it the N:lrthwest Sector of Edenvale might require i<ui%a:• c-.)nSideration. Don Peterson addressed himself to the railroad question by saying that the railroad is not used more than 5 to 10 trains per day. Secondly, at this point there is a. 20-25 foot cut or ravine where the railroad runs, the sides are heavily wooded with brush and he did not feel that children getting on the tracks would be a problem. The other members of the Commission and the audience expressed a concern that it was an invitation to children and the option of fencing in certain locations along the rights-of-way should be explored. Mr. Peterson indicated that he would work with the Village staff to resolve this situation in the best manner. It was recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission should review in particular this phase of the project in Edenvale's pathway system. There were questions that related to management which Mr. Carol and Mr. Bienapfl answered. One question was the relationship that the project manager and social programmer would have with the resident. Mr. Carol pointed out that there would be a manager Page Seven and also a social coordinator that :voud work to aquaint residents • with the community and also with the project. Also recreation and social functions would be carried .on. These staff people for the project would not be something that would leave ,after the project was rented but are on continuing jobs that would remain with the project as long as it is in existance. Mr. Carol also pointed out that they are applying for a $100 per units supplemental funding to aid in provision in social services at the initial stage of this pro- ject. Members of the audience and Commission expressed concern for the problem of stereotyping people that reside in this project. The necessity for the big red white, and blue sign in front of the project and the method of advertising, what woud these be? Mr. Carol noted that the sign is something that is required. It just . states that it is an equal opportunity housing development; it does not say that it is subsidized. The advertising is done one the basis of merely stating there is a project available for moderate income families. It does not state the rent nor does it state that it is subsidized. His feeling is if one can get the person out to visit this project that. the environment will speak for itself in this case, and the community ;will speak for itself. The problem of rental will be non-existent. Also, relating to the project's . stereotype image was the concern that everyone will be of one type. Mr. Bienapfl pointed out that they are considering and .will be requesting from FHA the provision to include market rate units during the first stage within the buildings. This has been done in Cedar Riverside, and when Shelter inquired about this to FHA they said it was possible in this project. Also pointed out was the fact along with the market rate units if the community so desires, rent supplement meaning that the lower income persons could also qualify to live in these units, thereby providing the spectrum from low income, moderate income, and market rate rentals. In terms of a long term relationship here, Mr. Bienapfl noted that Shelter would be involved with this project as long as it is existing and would continue the services as quaranteed in the. development's legal documents. Also mentioned was the option at a later.date to sell the units or some units on a condominium or cooperative basis to the residents. This offers many advantages and would insure the long term resident life style that is highly desirable. The question about maintenance and,the project management philosophy relating to up-keep. Mr. Carol pointed out that it was extremely flexible in that certain residents could well work at maintaining the project and that people . can work at certain jobs in the project one or two hours each rather than having one maintenance man. Shelter is experimenting with this and does feel it certainly is worth pursuing. Additional information was requested. Page Eight The comparison made in the Shelter brochure, about the cost/benefit of a $25,000 single family unit compared to this project was based upon the fact that someone moving into' this development could only afford a $25,000 unit. Don Sorenson requested this same type of Information to be calculated using the average cost of a single family home in Eden Prairie today. -Also, the cost/child for school today in Eden Prairie's situation. The matter of the fencing and pathway systems along the railroad tracks was referred to the staff for further study. The Shelter Briarhill proposal should be submitted to the Park and Recreation Commission, the Human Rights Commission and to the HTF for ;review and comment. M.J. Gorra Preliminary Plat, Single Family Detatched Homes on Anderson Lakes. Mr. Gorra presented his preliminary plat which has 2,200 feet of lakeshore on Anderson Lakes and noted the approximately 13 one- acre lots fronting on the lake and an outlot that would be developed in the future next to Co. 18. Mr. Gorra noted the scenic easements along the lake which would be left untouched and said that there was a question regarding sewer and water that was • unanswered. The planner said that sewer and water (would be required) for this development and that at this time it is not scheduled. The planner also asked Mr. Gorra if there had been any contact with the Village regarding acquisition of his property for park purposes. The Planner said this area has been identified in the 68 Comprehensive Guide Plan and by the Metro Council, and by the Village recently as land to be acquired for the Anderson Lakes Park. Mr. Gorra indicated that there was contact within last week about purchase of this property, by the Village. , It was suggested by the Commission that the preliminary plat be referred to the Park and Recreation Commission for fin-ther study. . tt was moved that this preliminary plat should be referred to the staff for review and recommendation, Gold Medallion Corporation preliminary plat St. John's Woods 18..9 acre quadrominium project in the Forest Hills sector adjacent to Baker Road, Mr. Dan Gustafson from D.H. Gustafson & Associates presented a brief background on the project noting the initial concept that was approved for rezoning, which had 144 units approved. Today in the preliminary •plat there are 132 units, a drop of 12 units from . the project. There have been some changes in the site plans such as; straightening of the road from an "V shape, removing some buildings to open up some play spaces, including two car garages on some .units, the provision for a pool and other recrea- tional facility within the project, the relocating of the recreational vehicle' storage to improve its location regarding visibility, and the provision for better emergency vehicle turn arounds were changes raga Nine • Since the building season is upon us, Mr. Gustafson asked for rapid action on this project. The planner noted that building permits drawings, preliminary plat and other documents required for building are being submitted concurrently to make best use of available time. Sorenson moved, seconded by Brown that a public hearing date be set for June 13th Council hearing, and that a recommendation from the Planning Commission would be made on June 6, th`a ne:zt meeting of the Commission. The motion was carried. Recommendations and Reports. A. Russell Marsh DAidwest Terminals PU_D Baker Road. The recommendation from the Commission -was decerredr from the last meeting until this meeting to give members more time to read the staff recommendation. The last Council meeting was held at the Forest Hills Elementary School the week previous and the planner summarized in a note to the Commission the comments and the neighborhood reaction which was favorable to the project. Forest Hills resident, Mr. Lou Kinney, had great concern about the lining up of the proposal be the 66th St. entrance with the Pntrance to the Marsh project, feeling that there would be additional traffic • generated past his house and into King's Forest by this alignment. Also, he had concern regarding the alignment of 66th St. initially and his home's relationship with King's Forest School Pai•k. The planner explained that it was not felt that any traffic from the project would go into King's Forest (by his house on 66th) unless it had business in King's Forest, since that would riot be a direct route to any major location in Eden Prairie other than King's Forest.. The need to line intersections up was based on cost, safety factors, and also site location which dictated alignment because of soils and distance between intersections required. Mrs. Schee noted the comments of Mr. Fosnccht, who -was unable to attend this meeting, regarding the Marsh proposal. Mr. Fos- nocht disapproves of the patio home concept on the 6,000 sq. ft. lot. Mr. Alexander, a developer, expressed his concern about Mr. Fosnocht's dislike for the patio home, and his feeling that it is inappropriate in Eden Prairie. Mr. Alexander felt that the patio home is the next innovative building type as the townhouse and offers more benefits than any of the multiple or single fandly structures built today. Mr. Fosnocht's comments are attached. Mr. Sorenson had two amendments to the staff recommendation. They were: 1. Townhouses on wooded terrains. Townhouse use okay, but number subject to review of detailed design. We strongly suggest consideration of "expensive" single family homes on portions of these areas. Page Ten Guide Plan. Recommend to the Council that on the basis of the recommendations stagy,;n above the Mai•sh Midwest, PUD Concept Plan does not fully meet xl:e purposes and objectives of the Village Comprehensive Guide Plan . but however, the Guide Plan shouie. be ;o umEnded. �. That a minority report represented by Mr. Fosnocht's comments be sent to the Council. Mr. Sorenson's amendments were voted on and passed unanimously by the Commission- .;revel) moved and Flavin seconded that the Russell Marsh Midwest Ti!rriinais PULE proposadl he recommended for approval with the rpcomm.endations and amendments as indicated in th- stuff report dated April 18th and the amendments of the May i.6th meeting. B. Hipp Ccnstriiction Company tproval_aM ication for conce ap .r _ _. and rszoniLiq approval of the townhouse project in Eden�alc. The staff report was open for any comment-s or questions and there was only a comment regarding sufficient emergencJ vehicle access. The planner indicated that the space w«s sufficient, especially regarding the site considerations. Mr. Peterson, representing Eden-vale, suggested that the staff recommendation that rezoning not be granted to the entire site was torrent and that he would prefer that only rezoning be granted to the 4.7 acre, Phase I parcel, and that no actin be taken on the remaining acreage., Casey moved with Brown seconding that rezoni q to RM 6.5 be granted to the Hipp's Construction Phase T 4. 7 ...cre parcel, 1"Ath 26 attached single family units in Eddnvale i'UD. The motion was passed unanimously C r The staff report on the School Road, Eden Prairie Industrial Center screening project was brief. The planner noted that there has been some work 1Prith the residents and the industrial owners to improve the appearance and also the actual buildability of the industrial properties in that area. The Commission encouraged the staff in taking the lead in such projects. Brown moved and Sorenson seconded to adjourn the meeting. The motion was carried. The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Wayne Brown, Secretary May 16, 1972 To, Zlden PvaiL-io Planning Commission ' ,rora L H,C.. Foo no cht Subject: Planning Commission Meeting, May 16o 1972 Because of business obligations, T am unable to attend tonight's , meeting. There' are two items on the aganda that request Co>I ai.ssion',. action. T wont to provide my position oiA these i.terns. , �. R. hl r6h, Yli.dWest To_=inals Prolect., . :support the Staff P1a~t�r nine; Report except for the xecoin- el<zdation for apprcval of the }patio Y,omF segment. To cZarai;jJ my Statw,mF�Ajt�: a.�: the last me 3:.�+. it 1 .I,'a 7at:i.o Mmes". T do not like zero l.ot-- ,r: hon ses bl.;1t o:I . b, 000 aq. ft. lots. x f we are sroing tv, :cuil(i patio homes In Eden Prairie, Ists build them on lots c:c reasonable sixa. I silk,- 0:i t the fol ewi ng for yonr cons is ceration: ' -Bxtara or maintenance of a, home should not ri aqv i.re intrussi.oa on adjacent property to erect ocaffol.ds, INddors, etc:. -A ho m owner should bti s: In to walk around' his 'dome without %,04..R.i n through his -Pli.re hazards are ine eas-ad si.gnif car3::ly as distancas bet-woon build'nas are decreased. --Property values in Edert do xol, rE quirt de. elopement of detached homes at a density of 7 per acre. • --,-11 the usual annoyances of noises, nei,, bores Pats, eta.' ;.rrl such a cc-ngested are;: w2ull significantly lower; the "Taal.i.t'y of liZell for the residents. Cf more importance is my concern that i:h:i+zr beco��es ..he means of: salvaging property ravaged by mining onexatione. 1111 ojjr i it :-s ea6i.er and lets costly to nave over suah areas with streets, �toanes . garages, sa.dAwalks arO prtti.os than it is to develor, it wi-th $70.000 homes. I bogl.i.ave- the latter gill ptr�.ide a. !:,et�.er transitional effect from the existing developed area in Forrest x wo4?'d v:?'•.'-.e against- this proposal unless the zero home segment is modified. I urge you to do the same. 2. Iaipps Wenvaie Projevt Y %t the :Last meeting, 'be staff ,pl.annex was asked to investigate the possibility ity of providi ncj a second exit to the planned area. This appears to be missing. frog this :star£ report. ' I believe the safety of the residents deoervehi ztare attention. The developer asks for rezoni)ig.sof the entire 20 acres o, not have him complete planning to the point that this is possible? Breaking a parcel of this size into 4 acre pieces seems to absorb' a great deal of staff -and COM7jjSg;LOn time. � suggaat no act* .on * until these items- are resojve4, ;