Planning Commission - 07/02/1974 AGENDA
' Tuesday , July 2 ,1974
Planning Commission Meeting
7:3 0 PM City Hall
Invocation • Pledge of Allegiance • Roll Call
7:35 I. A. MINUTES OF NNE 18, 1974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
B., MINUTES OF NNE 24, 1974 SPECIAL HEARING FOR SMETANA LAKE SECTOR
PLAN.
II. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Continued Public Hearings
7:45 A. Homart Development Company, presentation of proposed lighting, landscaping,
and parking plans in conformance with previous PUD and rezoning approvals
for Eden Prairie Center. Developers presentation.
Suggested Action: Direct staff to work with Homart's design team to implement
proposed plans or suggest modification of plan based- upon previous approvals.
(refer to green rezoning brochure) .
8:15 B. Lake Smetana Sector Plan. The commission has received numerous . technical
reports, plan proposal4 citizen suggestions,and staff reports regarding the total
development of the 1000 acre Smetana Sector. Additional information regarding
projected road vohmes and ac•3ss considerations was requested by the Commission.
Discussion of alternative plans to-date by Commission.
Suggested Action: Make recommendations to the City Council based upon data
received concerning, transportation,land use,and environmental concerns, for
the Lake Smetana Sector.
9:30 C. Clifford Fraser, Crosstown Apartments, a mid-rise rental apartment project
of 600 units proposed on the previously approved Garrison/Jones/ Ginkel PUD
71-02 to RM 6.5 and PUD development stage approval. Discussion of
Council's policy of June25, regarding limitation of building over 5 stoires to
the MCA. Memo from City attorney reporting on status of PUD previously
approved.
Sugciested Action:_ approve, deny, continue,or modify requested rezoning.
10:00 D. Eden Farms PUD 73-01 The 185 acre site is located north of Co. Rd. 4;
south of Townline Rd. and adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The Council requested
consideration of rezoning of the PU D to Rural becaus e the timlimit- for
development has lapsed. Further report as to negotiations regarding possible,
extension of PUD 73-01 based upon Ist phase park development for neighbor-
hood park.
Suggested Action: recommend to City 'Council rezoning, acceptance of park plan
or other alternatives, or continue.
III. PETITIONS & REQUESTS. PUBLIC HEARINGS .
10:15 A. Opus II,, Rauenhorst Corporation request PUD concept Plan approval, rezoning
to OFC, office district and preliminary plat approval for the —20 acre parcel
located north of Crosstown 62 and west of Co. Rd. 18. Developers presen-
tation and discussion.
Suggested Action: Recommend to Council!-approval, denial,or continue until
the July 16 meeting.
Agenda- Planning Commission Meeting July 2,1974
page 2
-0:45 B. Hidden Ponds by Ecklund-Swedlund requesting Phase II preliminary plat
approval for 200lots located west of Phase I and east of T.H. 101.
Presentation by developer and staff report.
Suggested Action: recommend approval, denial, or continue until the July 16
meeting.
IV REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS .
A. Chairwomen Schee
B. Council representative Mrs. Meyers
C. Board of Appeals representative Mr. Sorensen
l 1:30 V. PLANNER' S REPORT
A. Design changes to M.Z. Jones Associ ates second phase of Shadow
Green, apartments in Edenvale needed to conform to State Building
Code.
B. Discussion - of programs for remainderof 1974, and budget process for
1975.
C. Importance of Managed Growth Issue for Eden Prairie.'
D. Up-coming projects.
ADJOURNMENT.
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, July 2 , 1974 7:30 PM City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairwoman Schee, Don Sorensen, Richard Lynch, Skip Lane,
Joan Meyers, Herb Fosnocht, Wayne Brown
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Dick Putnam, City Planner
I. A. MINUTES OF DUNE 18, 2 974 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
P. 3 Ist P should read-request preliminary plat approval for 2 lots into 3 lots. .
4th P should read- . . adequately handle sewage, .
7th F should read- . covenants of individual neighborhoods, .
P. 4 2nd I? should read 3 ayes ( Meyers, Lane, Lynch) . . .
9th .0 third line - delete visitor
Lynch moved, Lane .2nd , to approve the June 18, 2974 " Minutes as published and
corrected . The motion carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 2 abstains, ( Schee, Brown)
$. MINUTES OF DUNE 24, 1974 SPECIAL HEARING FOR SMETANA LAKE SEC'D R.
Lynch moved, Schee seconded to approve the minutes as _ published. The motion
carried-with 5 ayes ( Schee, Lynch , Sorensen, FosnoCht, Lane, ) and 2.abstains
(Schee, Brown) .
II. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, CONTINUED PUBLIC,. . HEARINGS.
A. Homart Development Comp.2,ay, presaztation of proposed lighting, landscaping, ;
and parking plans in conformance with previous PUD and rezoning approvals
ifor the Eden Prairie Center.
The planner, informed the Commission that the staff had scan the Homart presen-
tation last Friday so that . a , report regarding the landscaping plan by Chris En ger
was not prepared until Monday. :
Mr. David Stautz pointed-out the parking lanes, distribution , and the various
locations of the 55-60. initial handicap parking spaces. Mr.. -Shelly Johnson said
that the Homart Center would have 55'bay-widths, 60",parking and 9 "'wide
stalls,compared to Southdale's : 50' bays, 521 parking and 8.9' stalls. Instead
of designating areas for : - comba.ct . cars, which require extensive signing, all
spaces will be 9' wide. Mr. -Sorensen questioned the adequacy of the 9' spaces
considering standard size cars are 7' wide. Mr. Johnson said that the 9' widths
are adequate since rarely are 3 standard size cars found parked in a row. Mr.
Sorensen asked if the 5.5 parking ratio would be sufficient. Mr. Johnson replied.
that it would be sufficient except during the highest shopping days, Sorensen
asked the Planner's opinion on the parking `I~he planner responded that the
City staff drove a full sized car to Homart's Maplewood Center and found that the
9' spaces and 55'bays are cfdequate.
Mr. Foazocht expressed the concern that no barriers were provided to drive up
to thereby resulting in stagge=ed parking and drive through spaces. Mr. . T ohnsor,
said that if • barrie_s we_e provided wider b:ayswould be needed and barriers would
present a maintenance proI:>lem.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- July 2,1974'
Herb Baldwin p:-esented the landscape scheme of light c a.rnW plant materials -
near the buildings, medium dense canopy trees further oat,, and be_-ms to give
definition of space. The interior mall and 2 court yards will be phn'ted with topico;
as accents . .The planner asked whythe north barrier of evergreens along 169
was not included. Mr. Baldwin said it could not be incorporated . because
the area was limited by depth.* Mrs. Schee asked Mr. Baldwin if he had read -
the staf report and that it expresses some of her concerns. He replied _ that
he had read it briefly that night.
Mrs. Meyers said data primary concern of hers was for pedestrian access.-
Mr. Baldwin responded there are areas of circulation along the berms.
Mr. Sorensen asked what size the plant. materials would be. Mr. Baldwin said
the average - is 3�4 It
caliber :; the largest 6" caliber-:and the smallest 2" -
caliber-. Mr. Sorensen asked if there would be grade separations planned to
crossffe-:Ring Road and if they would be encouraging outside .. seating. Mr. Stautz
said that There -would.be at grade crossing and outside bike racks and some seating.
The lighting plan Includes*10'high mast lights , 120 ' poles with, 10 fixtures each;.
and entry lights with 2 fixtures The planner,asked if the plantings would
affect the light getting to the surface: He was informed that there would be
some shadow effect.
Mr. Stautz said that they would 'like the Commission's approval on ordering .
materials and stock and t1a t placement of materials can be worked out. Mr.
Sorensen asked Homat to give the Commission more time to think plans *ov4n.. _
if they have constraints jn ordering in the future. The planner said that Hom. art
was not seeking approval of specific plans but':a *go ahead -on ordering. He said
that no action was necessary..
Chairwoman Sc_Zea then asked for: the concensus of the members oil
1 . Purchasing of lighting ma terial.- it was the members'conk ensus that they tended
to agree with the lighting and Homart could bid.
2 . Landscaping- 'consensus that stock could be ordered and placement worked out..
Mr. Posnocht directed the staff to work with Homart regarding the parkirg area
and to get the Public-Safety's opinion. Meyers asked that they-also-consider
the purity of the bike parking areas.
Mr. Stautz said that they would like assurance to award the paving contract
based on the original configuration-: . The Planner suggested the staff and
PuLlic Safely Department look at the parking arrangement and that Public Safety
Prepare a repo:-t.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- July 2 ,1974
B. Lake Smetana Sector Plan. The commission has received numerous technical
• reports, plan proposals, ciitizen suggestions, and staff report regarding the total -
development of the 1000 acre Smetana Sector. Additional information regarding
projected road volumes and access considerations was requested by the
Commission.
Mr. Sorensen asked what the status was on the City attorney's opinion of Mr-
Pearson's legal brief. The planner stated that he had asked that it be ready by
last Friday but nothing had been delivered. -
Chairwoman Schee said that the Smetana Lake SectcrS.tudyhas been underway since
the Spring of'73 as a continuous public hearing. She stated that they have respect
for the patience of all those involed and that with all the input of:,individuals and
experts that there is only the City attorney's opinion • 'yet to receive .
Mr. Fosnocht stated that he shared Mrs. Schee's concerns but he was still
puzzeled by the traffic problem and wondered if some alternafie netwo.k of
transportation would work. Mrs..Schee realized the traffic frustration :but stated
that the traffic can not be'defined all that clearly at this time se..their recommenda-
tion could .x--flect the unresolved traffic probl6m'. Mrs. Meyers felt that people
have based their assumptions on standards that are changing and that the conclusion
is in the report summary that ..predicts a 5-10 year lead time. Mr -. Fosnocht
inquired as tb the possibility of limiting the traffic in the sector. Mr. Sorensen
. shared Mr. Fosnocht's concerns and foresees poNtacal and physical constraints
for what might occur. He personally felt that he could not vote for any of the
plans.
Motion: Lane moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to theCouncil approval
of.the Lake Smetana- Sector Study as developed in the staff report of
June 20,1974, and add it as an amendment to the Comprehensive
-Guide Plan as a guide to the development of the Lake Smetana area
and suggest that the City contact the City of Edina and the County .
for the connection of old Washington Avenue and Highway # 5 ,via
A underpass- under Co. Rd. 18.
Mrs. Schee then asked for questions or comments from the audience.
Mr. Carl Swendseen, a landowner, stated that all notices about the hearing had
been sent to his deceased father and that he had not known about the study. The
plannen said that ':he had received letters and inquirn-s from Mr. Leasing and
Mr. Boblett in which they referred that they had consulted Mr. Swendseen
regarding his property: , in the sector. Mr. Swendseen said. that ' no one had
contacted him. Mr. Sorensen said that the staff, Commission and Council try
to obtain citizen input by contacting owners but that the only form of communication
required is public . notice. which had been done and that if it did happen that
Mr. Swendseemwas not mtified that he had their apology. Mfrs. Schee asked if
he would accept their apology; Mr. Swendseen accepted. Mr. Hayes, a Real
Estate broker representing Mr. Swendseen, complained that the roads cutting
Planning Commission Minutes -4- July 2,1974
through his clients property broke the area into unbuildable sites and stated that
if the Composite plan was adopted it would ruin his client's property. The planne�
asked Mr. Hayes for his line of business. He responded that he . is a Real
Estate broker working for himself Hayes Real Estate and Investment.
Mr. Brown felt that it was unfortunate that Mr. Swendseen had not been contacted
and that time should be allowed for his input since his property was critical in the
roadway system. Mr. Sorensen shared the concern however . he felt that the
road was not definite and that the legal requirement for notifications had been meet.
Mr. Kostecka felt that the plan should be adopted and that the landowners should
do their own road engineering and building.
Mr. Larry Griffth, representing Herliev Helle, stated that not every landowner
could be satisfied and that the planner's Composite Plan is reasonable and workable
and urged that it be adopted.
Mr. Frank Cardarelle agreed with Mr. Griffth and desired to : have the Composite plan
adopted-. He felt that the road layout could be worked-out between the landowners.
Mr. Sorensen asked the planner about, the storm sewer run-off question previously _
raised. The Planner reported that the Watershed District had received the 4 plans
and that they have decided not to make a recommendation until after the City had
made a decision. The engineers have stated though that the opening under High.
way 18 could not be expanded.
Mr. Fosnocht then called for question on the motion. The question was approved
unan-i:m ously.
Vote: The- motion made by Lane was approved by a vote d 4 ayes ( Lane, Lynch, .
Schee, Meyers) and 3 nays ( Sorensen, Fosnocht, Brown) .
Mr. Fosnocht's .nay , vote was ' because he objected to the lack of assurance
that the proposed plan provides the'transportation facilities required to effectively
implement the plan. He said that the staff indicates that lack of adequate transpor-
tation facilities represents, an'al.most certain major problem. He believed that there
are skills and techniques available to analys e'the problem and develop an acceptable _
solution. He felt that these techniques should be used to .prove the plan acceptable
or unacceptable.
Mr. Brown voted no because thEre was the possibility that 1 individual had not been
contacted, otherwise ' he was in favor of the plan.
Mr. Sorensen said that he would be submitting a letter. regarding his objections
up to this time. He felt that a less intense use of the land could make the plan work.
Mr. Bill Pearson suggested that instead of leaving the two monuments ( hills )
above the creek that he would prefer to give the City a lake and cut the hills to a
lower elevation.
• Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 2,1974
Mr. Frank Smetana stated that not everyone had received a composite plan, he listed
the names of Joe Smetana, Bernadine & Mrs . Ralph Kosteck'a, Frank Smetana, and
Mr. Heath.
Mrs. Schee said that every effort was made to contact owners but some may have been
overlooked in the various notifications, Mr. Smetana agreed that the City had tried
to contact all residents involved.
Mr. Fosnocht directed the staff to check on the notifications sent regarding the
Lake Smetala Sector Study.
C. Clifford Fraser, Crosstown Apantments, a mid-rise rental apartment project of
600 units proposed on the previously approved Garrison/Jones/Dinkel PUD 71-02
to RM 6.5 and PUD development stage approval. Discussion of Council's policy.
of June 25th regarding limitation of building over 5 stories to the MCA.
The planner read the motion from the June 25 th Council meeting that set the policy
for buildings over 5 stories . He said that an opinion has been requested from the .
City attorney regarding projects previous: to this policy. He stated that the previous
PUD approval is a commitment on the part of the City. He said that MrXraser
would like a feeling from the Commission if the story height for the Crosstown Apart-
ments is reasonable.
Mr. Fosnocht's conern was the traffic the project would generate in the Lake Smetana
• Sector. Mr. Brown saw no problem with the height but also sees problems regarding
the traffic. Mr. Sorensen said that they must follow the Council policy and that -
the attorneys' opinion is needed.
The planner said that his recommendation would be to redesign the site plan using
the original density approved with` the 21 recommendations by Brauer's.
Motion:
Schee moved, Lane seconded, to recommend redesign of the Crosstown Apartments
to incorporate the original537 au and the 21 points in Brauers report, and that .
Mr. Fraser work with the s-ta- tf and other land owners concerning the circulation..-
Discussion
Mr. Sorensen asked what else was said during the height policy discussion. Mrs. .
Meyers responded that if structures over 45' were allowed in the MCA that the
ordinance must be changed.
Mr. Fraser said that he •. could do all that.was requested in Brauer's report and
asked if in light of the new , policy if he could 1 - improve on the approved PUD.
Mr. Sorensen said that theCity attorneys response was needed.
Armncbd Motion:
Meyers moved, Sorensen seconded, to continue the hearing until the next meeting
at which time a written report from the attorney addressing these questions:
1. Is a previous PUD over 45' still valid ?
2. Can a developer modify an original PUD ?
3. Was the PUD in conflict with existing ordinances ?
The motion and amended motion were approved unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- July 2,1974
Eden Farms PUD 73-01 The 185 acre site is located north of Co. Rd. 4 south of
Townline Rd. and adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The Council requested consideration
of rezoning of the PUD to Rural because the time limit for development has lapsed.
The planner infomed the Commission that the Park & Recreation Commission did not*
reach a decision because of lack of a quorum due to ; Penzel attending a Council
meeting, another member was out-of-town, the room was used for the Council meeting,
and that there are 3 vacancies on the Commission. He said that the Park & Recrea-
tion Commission will consider it next Monday and will be making a recommendation
either to the Council or Planning Commission. Thd price for the park land is now
in the $30,000.-50,000.00 range.
Motion:
Lynch moved, Lane seconded, that the Eden Farms PUD 73-01 be rezoned to Rural
because the time limit for development has lapsed.
Mr. Brown asked if the rezoning would destroy the possibility of the park. The
planner said that it might have to be condemmend -and that he felt it unfair to penalize
Shelter because the Park'& Recreation Commission cannot obtain a quorum.
Amended M6 tion•
Meyers moved, Lane seconded, to'amend the motion to include the reasons under
alternate # 1 -in the May 16,1974 staff report: . .
The City of Eden Prairie should consider:.revoking the approval of the Ederi
Farms PUD for these reasons: -
1. Due to the . interelationships of improvements in,the Eden
Farms, PUD without coordinated and phased completion of
all improvements difficulty may be. experienced in imple-- •..
menting the concept plan. For example; realignment of --
Duck Lake Trail as required in Ordinance No.221 is-required
for the construction of the single family subdivision of .
lots south of Co. Rd. 4. .:
2. The Eden Farms plan established many comprehensive rely-r -
lationships integrating open. space systems of a public and
quasi-public nature with the site devil opment plan effecting
-the housing type and, circulation systems. .
^3. The Eden Farms proposal specified-housing types as they relate to the carrying capacity of the existing site..
Other hous.ing types would requke extensive study to
determine such .densittos.
4. "The PUD concept plan approval is based-upon the brochure
Including development phasing submitted by Shelter Homes .
Corporation and is not granted to other-developers with-
out resubmission to the City." . (Resoluilon 641)
6. 'Cons i action within this PUD should be, started within 1973 _
or an extension based'upon-reasonable cause sought from
the City or the PUD approval would revert back to open�
rural classification" (T esolutlon 641) _
6. -The City of Eden Prairie's interest is.in well planned,
coordinated devdopment which will baziefft
'residents in future years , therefore the City's interest"'
1s not in artificially inflating land ..values through--
: -
• Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 2,1974
speculative planning and land use assurances. The Eden
Farms approvals created land values based upon specific _
Improvements to be made by.the City and developer &its
location . . ":related to available -'to public services and
the land uses permitted. Specific time limits, public service .
- availabiiities and land uses :.were guaranteed to Shelter
Homes Corporation who inturn agreed to proceed with certain
land Improvement and , developments within a given time.
frame. . To date these improvements have not.been made by
=Shelter Homes Corporation. The relationship between site ,
Improvements and approved land use must be carefully balanced
so as not to artificially inflat.the value of the land without
said improvements
7. The City of Eden Prairie: and Eden Prairia' School District must
be able to plan and phase its capital improvement program _
` . to meet the needg of the existing and future residents-,,.,.* herefore ' _
proper tfnsiri of rie�d pennt is required for efficient d ibery'- -'
of public services.• Shelter's inability to procesd within the
sr - iven time fraarte could reduce the ability of govern ientaV•
agencies to•provide adequate public .services- to that-site.or _ : -
- - other developing areas.
g'. . The Eden Farms PUD approvals provided certain assurances _
for the developer as well as the City of Eden Prairie. Planning for. . g
develppnatof public services such as•nelghborhbod parks,
. and conservation spaces, assumed a timetable
corresponding to the development program presented by Shelter
Homes, specifically the development of the first phase neighborhood
playground within the public open space'dedication proposed by
' Shelter Hornier Corporation. Tha provision of the neighborhood `
park. was to serve the developing Eden Farms site and
existing neighIm iwds in fm aea.. The inability to implement the open space planning and programirig within the assured
time scheduled has placed pressures upon the City related .. .. '
to park and open space&velopment for this sector of the
community.'`
The motion and amendment carried with a vote of 5 ayes ( Schee, Meyers, Lane,
Lynch , Fosnocht ) , and 2 nays ( Sorensen, Brown).
Mr. Sorensen. and Mr. Brown did not feel that another 2 weeks would have been
unreasonable.
III. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS. PUBLIC HEARINGS .
A. Opus II, Rauenhorst Corporation request PUD concept Plan approval, rezoning to
OFC, office district,and preliminary plat approval for the 20 acre parcel located
. north of Crosstown 62 and west of Co. Rd. 18.
j The planner reported that the Engineer's report is not yet comple-te , and that the
City Engineer will be discussing the project with the City of Minnetonka.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- July 2,1974
Mr. Bob Worthington said that they are requesting rezoning from Rural to PUD -OFd
for the 20 acres of land in Eden Prairie that is a part of the Opus II project . The -
primary curculation . system is all one-way streets, the secondary system is
pedestrian pathways and small vehicular movement .. He stated that Minnetonka
has granted final approval for the land uses and also preliminary plat approval .
They are seeking rezoning and preliminary plat approval for 2- lots in Eden Prairie.
Mr. Saensen asked that the areas within the project not onwed be outlined. Seven
single family homes were pointed-out. The Opus II representatives asked if Office use
was reasonable and if a variance to the City's policy on . height would. bee considered.
Mrs. Meyers stated that after the Council motion Mr. Penzel made it clear that it
would not be rigid policy.She felt that this would be a unique situation.
Mr. Sorensen suggested that the staff investigate .property trades, and asked
what the projected vehicle trips/day would be. Mr. Dave Wolsfeld answered that
there would 40,000 trips/day generated.
Mr. Sorensen ..suggested that the residents within the project area in Minnetonka
be notified as has bean the policy in other areas.
Motion: Fosnocht moved, Schee seconded, to refer the request to the staff
for an engineering report, and possible planning report and place
the item on the next agenda. The motion carried unanimously.
B. Hidden-Ponds II, by Ecklund/Swedlund requesting Phase II preliminary plat
approval for 200 lots located west of Phase I and east of T.H. 101. •
Presentation by developer and staff report.
The planner reviewed the Engineering report stating that Mr. Jullie sees no problems-
and the plat is essentially the same.
Mr. Fosnocht asked if the walkway issue had been resolved. The planner responded
that it would be specified in the rezoning approval and required in the developers.
agreement.
Mr. Dickman Knutson, of Ecklund/Swedlund, said that site grading would begin this
summer and the phasing of construction will depend on the economic picture.
Mrs. Meyers asked how many lots would front on the E/W collector. Mr.P Knutson
replied that there would be 4 lots.
-Motion:: Fosnocht moved, Brown seconded, to recommend to the Council the
preliminary plat approval as requested by Ecklund/Swedlund for Hidden
Ponds II as per the Engineer report dated June 28, 1974. The motion
carried unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- July 2,1974
Al
IV. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS.
A. Chairwoman Schee-no report.
B. Council representative Mrs. Meyer
She read the 4 recommendations from the Council regarding the Commercial
Needs Study
� a) A motion directing staff to inform Brauer & Associates that
the council has decided not to proceed with the Community
Needs Study or the Guide Plan Review at this time.
b) Motion to instruct Planning Commission to resume public
hearings on development request under Commercial Needs
Moratorium and to make recommendations to the City Council.
c) Motion to instruct the staff to conclude development data j
inventory as soon as possible for the City Council and Advisory 1
Commission's review.
d) A motion that upon receipt of.development material, the City
Council establish a series of public meetings with the Advisory
Commission to evaluate and compare development implementa-
tion procedures with Guide Plan goals and objectives, and plan
elements to assist in policy clarification,
A motion was made by Penzel seconded by Pauly that the recommen-
dations be put on the agenda for July 9, 1974. Motion carried
unanimously. "
She then reported that'the Council will be meeting the'1,2 & 4th Tuesday of every
month starting in August and suggested that the Planning Commission select another
meeting day.' Discussions followed regarding changing meeting days, location,
and frequency of meeting. Chairwoman Schee suggested that the members consider
the item and that it would be discussed at. the following meeting.
C. Mr. Sorensen-
He recommended that the Commission meet with the City attorney for a presentation
by the attorney as to what the Commission's charge and responsibility is under the
ordinance. It was the consensus of the members that 4-6 some evening would
be best and Mrs. Schee suggested that the Council is welcomed if they chose to
attend,
V. PLANNER'-S REPORT
A. Design changes to M. Z. Jones Assoicates second phase of Shadow Green, apartments
in Edenvale nseded to conform to State Building Code,
The planner reported that the State Building Code requires 2 fire exits for 3 story
buildings, so Mark Z. Jones has modified the buildings placing 2 units together
and having a corridor serve 6 units/floor. He asked if such modifications were
Planning Commission Minutes -10- July 2,1974
acceptable to the Commission . It was their concensus that there were no
objections to such modifications.
Motion: Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to recommend the design changes to the
2nd phase of Shadow Green due to the new State Building Code. The
motion carried with 5 ayes and 1 abstain ( Fosnocht ) , & lnay(Sorensen) .
B. DiscUSaionof programs for the remainder of 1974, and budget. process for' 1975 -
Not discussed.
C. Importance of Managed Growth Issue for Eden Prairie-
This was requested at the Joint Council / Planning Commission meeting and the
planner reported that alot of data has been compiled.
D. Up-coming projects - not . discussed.
VI. ADTOURNMENT.
Brown moved, Sorensen seconded to adjourn at 12:40 AM. The motion carried
unanimously.
•