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.