Loading...
Planning Commission - 05/21/1974 AGENDA TUESDAY , MAY 21 , 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION 7:30 PM CITY HALL INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL 1 7:30 I. A. MINUTES OF APRIL 15 , 1974. B. MINUTES OF MAY 7, 1974. 7:35 II. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. Sears and Powers Department Stores, design framework for Eden Prairie Center. Report of design modifications made to more closely coordinate the store designs. Action: Approve design of department stores and recommend to City Council, or deny. 8:00 B. Snatana Lake Sector Study,d•is cuss ions of citizen input regarding land use, transportation, conservation. Planners report encompassing the, numerous input received. Action: Recommend action to Council, continue or set special meeting to consider sector plan. 9:30 C. Suncre.st Homes Inc. , located in Northwestern Edenvale south of Kurtz Lane. Request rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval for construction ,of 134 double townhouse units on a 38 acre site. Final staff. . report dated May 16, 1974. Action: Recommend to the Council approval or deny the request for rezoning and preliminary plat approval. 10:00 D. Commission Members and Staff Reports: 1. Chairwoman. 2. Mrs. Meyers-posting rezoning signs. 3 . Planner: A. Revised hearing notice form. B.Anderson Lake Park approvals. III. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS: PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1 0:15 A. Eden Farms PUD. ' _ The Council referred the matter, -of rezoning Eden Farms from 73-PUD-01 back to Rural, to the Planning Commission because the terms and condi- tions of that PUD agreement related to the Ist phase of construction have not been met. Staff report recommending alternate actions. Action: Recommend rezoning from PUD 73-01 and RM 6.5 to Rural, extension of time limit to begin construction or deny rezoning and maintain as PUD 73-01, or continue to June 4, 1974 Meeting. 1 0:45 B. Edenvale Commercial Park, request preliminary plat approval for the 130+ acre site located east of Purgatory Creek and west of the Ring Road in Edenvale. Presentation and staff report. Action: Approve, deny, or coninue. 11:00 C. Prairie East PUD 73-07 cluster single family subdivision of 64 lots with average size of 9,6'00 sq. ft. The project is located east of the previously approved R1-13.5 subdivsion and 1 ,0001 west of Co. Rd. 18. Hustad Development Caporation is requesting rezoning from Rural in PUD 73-07 to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval. Action: Approve, deny or continue IV. ADTOURNMENT: MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY , MAY 21 ,1974 7:30PM CITY HALL iMEMBERS PRESENT: M.E.Lane, Richard Lynch, Dcn Sorensen, Joan Meyers, Herb Fosnocht, Wayne Brown MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairwoman Norma Schee STAFF PRESENT: Richard Putnam, City Planner Mr. Sorensen chaired the meeting - - I. A. MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 1974. The following change was made to the April 15, 1974 Minutes: Page 8 - 4th P should read, Mrs_. Meyers expressed cmcem about the possible overloading of existing roads with cul-de-secs as proposed. . B. MINUTES OF MAY 7, 1974. The following changes were made to the May 7, 1974 Minutes: Page 6 - 2nd P, should read, . . . , they will be requesting set-back variances, & under the motion place parenthesis around --with the deletion of recommendation # 4, . Lane moved, Brown seconded, to make the changes to the April, 15, 1974 and May 7, 1974 Minutes. The motion carried unanimously. II, REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. Sears and Powers Department Stores, design framework for Eden Prairie Center. Report of design modifications made to more closely coordinate the store designs. Various representatives attended the meeting and Mr. Ralph Shimer, architect for Sears and Powers, presented the new model. He illustrated where berms would be placed at the Sears truck court, and the canopy over the customer pick-up in the same area. Mr. Sorensen asked if the canopy could be extended to cover the truck courts. Mr. Shimer did not think It would be necessary. The 2 truck docks'for the Powers store can only be viewed from 1 area. Mr. Sorensen asked if the public safety department had viewed the proposal. The planner reported that he has had discussions with Keith Wall and there is an advantage to leave the truck areas open for easy patrol and visibility. He said that Wall would probably be working with the architects as the designs progress. Mr. Sorensen noted a difference in Power's facade; and Mr. Shimer responded that the brick to be used will be lighter than that depicted on the model. Mr. Putnam pointed out the Council resolution's intent Is related to building coordination not specific brick colors. It was his opinion that Sears, Homart, and Powers have done significant work to coordinate the buildings. Mrs. Meyers felt the designs were vastly improved but she still was disapponinted in Sears sign color (red) . Mr. Shimer requested to be kept on the agenda and informed the commission that they still desire a gas island .. Planning Commission Minutes -2- May 21, 1974 Action:Lynch moved, Brown seconded, to approve the revised design in accordance with the May 16, 1974 staff report. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Sorensen voiced concern that the inside seating depicted in the final 46 design showings were reduced from that in the original design. A Homart representative stated that there would be more seating than shown in the final design. Mr. Sorensen asked the representatives if they had investigated the use of sodium vapor lights. Mr. Spinx answered that because of the lights 'size limitation, (400 watts) , that they would not be practical for the main lighting but may be used. in some areas. Mr. Spinx said that the use of sodium vapor lights could be viewed in the Maplewood Center. Mr. Sorensen felt that the staff should investigate the use of such light's. B. Smetana Lake Sector Study, discussions of citizen input regarding land use, transportation &conservation. The planner referred the commissioners to the most.recent letters from landowners; Smetan.as, Helle&Kosteckas. Kospeckas requested, in their letter, that the Watershed report on the area; and the planner said that the Watershed District will officially respond to the City next month. Mr. Sorensen asked if anyone in the audience had further comments. Mr. Helle distributed his proposal to interested members in the audience and had his son read his 9 page report wh ich covered the history of * his involvement and investment;in the Smetana area. He proposes widening of the industrial strip and straightening of the roads serving that area. Mr. Helle requested the commission members to have read his report by the next meeting; some members had received the report only that evening. Mr. Pearson then addressed the commission and referred them-to the report by the American Aggregate Corporation of Ohio, that was distributed that evening which illustrates land restoration following mining. The planner outlined the projected traffic volumes of the surrounding areas; 60,000 trips / day from Rauenhorst in Minnetonka, 14,000 from Valley View Road in Edina, 30,000-40,000. from the Smetana Lake are, 125,000 from the MCA 00,000 from Bryant Lake, and Shady Oak area, This is . total of 250,000- 300,000 trips/day not includng the present volumes of the Crosstown or 494, Mr. Putnam stated that it is surprising that the Watershed District has not responded because of the implications that development will have on the flood plain and the possible cu.ft. /sec, drainage increase. Currently the culvert under Co. Rd. 18 serving Nine Mile Creek can handle a level of 250-300 cu. ft. sec, . future residential development in that area could increase the volume to 400 cu.ft/sec, thereby producing the present 100 year flood plain, John Dixon , of Barr Engineering, estimates a potential run-off of 1,100-1,200 cu.ft./sec. if there is total industrial development. The increase of water would have to be retained as a lake or the flood plain increased. Mr. Pearson _ Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 21 ,1974 remarked that the culvert across Washington Avenue was improperly placed. The planner said it might be possible to increase the size of the culvert but that the area downstream could not handle the increase in flow and ithat many businesses and homes would be endangered. Pertaining to Mr. Pearson's land proposed to be excavated to 18' above the creek level; the planner suggested that perhaps a similar value of gravel could be obtained by digging deeper in an area therefor building a lake, and that if gravel has community value that the benefit should be realized in economic gain to the community and landowner. Mr. Pearson ' estimates his gravel to be worth about 4 a million dollars. Mr. Brown asked if a storm sewer to Anderson Lakes could solve the drainage problem . The planner responded that the lake could only permit a clean discharge of water but that option will be considered. Mr. Pearson asked what sewer they were paying for over and above Washington Avenue. Mrs. Meyers answered that the landowners were given the option to pay trunk,assestr ents before-7-laterals swere:0va lable. Mr. Bearman presented a petition with the signatures of 7 Smetana Lake residents declaring the following four items: 1. We recognize that some type of- development planning must take • place in the area even though we would prefer to. have it remain it its natural state. 2. We strongly oppose the W.G. Pearson Plaa:,as it would constitute the destruction of this area .and would cause irreparable harm to the ecology. :. 3. While the R.V. Maculaiis Sector Study was done in good faith, it is felt that insufficient data was available with regard to the environmental impact on the area =n addition to the availability of correct traffic data. 4. We ask the Planning Commission to use its wisdom when considering the planning of the Sector, to keep as much of the natural beauty -. of this scenic area as intact as is humanly possible. _ Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 21, 1974 He had not been able to contact 3 residents so he retained the original for further signatures. Mr. Sorensen asked what percentage of landowmrs had refused to sign. Mr_.BawOh r�sponde'd:tl-a-t cf-the residcats ccntactsd-crr1y--2 had refused to-sign,,=_ In referring to Mr. Pearson's report Mr. Bearman reported that he had consulted his attorney for an opinion on the legal implications stated by Mr. Pearson's attorney. He said that Mr. Pearson's attorney was basically right but that he overlooked the restrictions upon mining through ordinances. The Planner said that the City attorney is also reviewing Mr. Pearsorib report. Mr. Pearson stated that the pit has been open since 1948 so people were well aware of what was going on and that they could buy that property if' they wanted. He said that the City should stop spending the taxpayers money on studies and act. Motion: Lynch moved, Brown seconded, to continue the public hearing to the June 4,-' 1974 meeting at which-time a special meeting date will be set. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Sorensen said that all persons will be notified and no action would be taken until notifications and the planner's report were mailed out. He thanked all landowners, and residents for their interest and participation. B. Suncrest Homes Inc. , located in northwestern Edenvale sodth of Kurtz Lane.- Request rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval for the construction of townhouse units on a +- 15 acre site. Mr. Peterson, Eden Land Corporation, said that they basically agree with the May 16 th staff report and have two items to discuss . The first item related to recommendation # 7 which stated that .street widths should meet the City Engineer's recommendation. Mr. Peterson felt that a 28' street was adequate and did not agree with the City Engineer's recommendation of 321 . The second item related to recommendation # 10 asking , Edenvale to conform to City pathway policies. Mr. Peterson passed out a typed summary of their pathway system. He said they will use crushed limestone for most of the paths and there will be directional lighting. Since secondary pathways pass through back yards he believes that the homeowner needs control . Mr. Sorensen disagreed saying that pathways can have restrictions as sidewalks, controlled by City ordinance; and that people , residents or non-residents, should be able to travel _between two points and not be a tresspasser. ' Peterson stated that the residents should be allowed to enforce restrictions abava what the possible City ordinance might be. Mr. Sorensen stated that it As possibly that' homeowners may place unrealistic restrictions on pathways. Mr. Peterson said that they did not want to agree to something they do not know--future City pathway policy. The planner said that Lveryaze would have to live with what the City passes and that all willhave- .input. Mrs. Meyers expressed concern about granting approval for only 2 of the project• Mr. Peterson stated that the remaining portion will be developed in 2-3 years . y Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 21,1974 J Mr. Sorensen felt that it would be a worthwhile investment to have a 32' street in case in the future it is connected to Kurt7_ Lane. Mr. Putnam said that a 32' street would be for parking purposes and that parking on a through street is not advisable. Mr. Fosnocht , referring to page 2 of the' staff report, asked if the landscaping plan should be submitted before completion The planner said that it should read that the plan would be submitted before the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Sorensen said that he mD uld rather see the total tract of land presented for approval and that he does not like piecemeal planning . The planner said it is no different . than if Eden Land would have come in originally with only a 15 acre tract for approval. Mr. Peterson stated that he is very proud of the plan and that they have worked on this proposal for over 120 days and that if no action is taken now they are out of the market. Brown moved, Lane seconded to recommend approval to the Council of the preliminary plat and rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for Suncrest per the staff report of May 16, 1974 with the following changes in the recommendations: 7. Public street widths should be the 28' recommendation. 8. Prior to completion of the issuance of a building permit a landscaping plan should be submitted to be approved by the the staff which takes into consideration the treatments outlined in this report. 10. Edenvale should commit to conforming " with the standards adopted by the City as pathway policies. The motion passed with a vote of 4 ayes, (Lane, Lynch , Brown, Fosnocht), . and 2 nays, ( Sorensen, Meyers) . D. Commission Members and Staff Reports. 1. Chairwoman . Absent. 2. Mrs. Meyers -posting rezoning signs. Mrs. Meyers referred the members to the report on cost and inventory by Ray Earls. Mr. 'Brown said that 'he didn't like to clutter areas with signs but that posting rezoning signs is a good idea and should be tried. He suggested that perhaps it would not be necessary to place 2 signs on Bach site if one would suffice. Fosnocht moved, Brown seconded, to recommend to the Council the posting of rezoning signs to designate areas requesting rezoning as outlined in Ray Earls report of May 20, 1974. Those signs to be posted 10 days prior to the public hearing and to be removed following the public hearing termination. The cost of signs to be covered by adding $ 50.00 to the rezoning fee. The motion was unanimously approved. Planning Commission Minutes -0- May 21., 1974 3. Planner: A. Revised Hearing Notice Form. A revised hearing notice form was distributed to the commission members. - . B. Anderson Lakes Approval. The planner reported that the Council approved it at their last meeting. III. A. Eden Farms PUD. The Council.referred the matter, of rezoning Eden Farms from 73-PUD-01 back to Rural, to the Planning Commission because the terms and conditions of that PUD agreement related to the Ist phase of construction have not been met. The planner outlined the staff report which cites reasons for the 2 alternates of either revoking the rezoning or renegotiating it. He stated that the City had anticipated building a park and that the basic framework is sensible and should be retained. He said that time limits on gojects are not for the purpose of revoking the zoning but rather to phase utilities and development. Mr. Bill Walters, of Shelter Development Corporation, said originally they had intended to build single family ' homes but because of their reorganization they are out of the s.f. business and intend to sell the property. He desired to continue the public hearing to the next meeting sn-,-order to discu-ss the parkland with_the City. Mr. Drew Daniluck, 15904 No. Eden Drive, stated that the neghbors are concerned about the park and if.the property is sold perhaps the buyer will not want the ' PUD. Mr. Daniluk preferred that the property revert back to Rural and arrangements for a park be made. Mr. Sorensen statedthat the time limitation gives the City a handle on projects and that it is important to weigh the benefit and detriment of an action,revoking or retaining the PUD, upon the City. Mr. Fosnocht asked why there had not been a Shelter representative at the April 23, 1974 Caurvail:-Meeting- x- Mr. Walters responded that the ird ividuals responsible for the project had left the company. Mr: Lynch questioned what would happen if no buyer was found. The planner said that the City would still have the park and another chance to revoke the zoning. Mr. Bill Bonner, of Hustads, felt that having the PUD continued creates value and protects the City on approved uses. Action: Brown moved, Lane seconded , to refer the matter to the staff and Park and Recreation Commission to review and evaluate the. pros and cons and to place it on the following agenda. The motion carried unamimously. Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 21, 1974 . B. Edenvale Commercial Park, request preliminary plat approval for the 130+ acre site located east of Purgatory Creek and west of the Ring Road in Edenvale. The planner reported that the request was just for the platting of outlots and that the commercial park areas are larger thanon the original plan. He stated that the land dedication (outlot A) would occur when the property is rezoned. Mrs. Meyers asked about the small triangular piece of property off outlot F. The planner said that it is owned by.Minnesota Tree and that it will be platted when the Ring Route is platted. Two adjacent landowners, asked the purpose of the platting. The planner responded that it allows the building of Valley View Road and that it will be easier to market the property that way. Action: Lynch moved, Brown seconded, to approve the preliminary plat of Edenvale Commercial Park per the recommendations of the May 16,1974 staff report. The motion carried unanimously. C. Prairie East PUD 73-07, cluster single famdy subdivision of 64 lots with average size of 7,500 sq. ft. The project is located east of the previously approved R1-13.5 subdivision and 1,000' west of Co. Rd. 18. Hustad Development Corporation is requesting rezoning from Rural in PUD 73-07 to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval. Mr. Bill Bonner, from Hustads said that they are getting close to an agreement with the City Engineer regarding the street configuration. The project will have 4 basic floor plans most of which will be front or side split types of 40-50' in length. The cost of the houses will raige from $39,000-50,000.0E The parkway will be constructed-with either grass or pebbles with low shrubs. The parkway will be maintained by the homeowners association and Mr. Bonner felt that they will know of maintenance problems, if any, within the first year. Mr. Fosnocht asked if other communitiies have used parkways successfully. Mr. Bonner said that he would compile a list of communitias- using parkways. Mrs. Meyers expressed concern ' about the overloading of traffic on Franlo Road since the plat revision eliminated the road connection to the east. Mr. Bonner responded that it appeared to make more sense to eliminate the connection of the neighborhood'. Mr. Putnam believed that the residents on the western street will be using Co. Rd. 18 to reach the MCA, and that Franlo Road will be up-graded in the future anyway. Mrs. Meyers noted that Prairie East.Drive had a different alignment. Mr. Bonner answered that a change was made because 98th Street is not corning through. Mrs. Meyers asked how much of the collector road would be built. Mr. Bonner said that during the first phase it will be constructed up to the Ist cul-de-sac, during the second phase up to the 2nd cul-de-sac, and that total completion is expected by 1976. Mr. Sorensen pointed out that the lots had not been cut to prevent intrusions-- on the trailways as was recommended previously . Mr. Bonner said that it could be done on the final plat. He added that he expects the roadway to be resolved by the next meeting. Action: Brown moved, Lane seconded, to continue the public hearing and to refer to the staff for a report. The motion carried unanimously. IV. . ADTOURNMENT. - Lynch moved, Fosnocht seconded to adjourn the meeting at 12:11 AM. The motion carried.