Planning Commission - 04/06/1965 April 6, 1965
The Zoning & Planning Commission met on April 6, 1965 in the Village Hall
at 8 otclock P. M.
Present were:
A. W. Miller, Chairman Dr. John H. Wright
Anthony Hirt David W. Dale
Cecil Cruse James Hawkes
Ralph Nesbitt Quentin Wood
James C. Brown
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
MINUTES
There was a motion by Anthony Hirt and a second by David Dale to approve
the minutes of the meeting of March 16th as published with the following nota-
tion: The minutes included suggested changes in the platting ordinance in a
reasonably accurate manner.
Motion carried.
KERMIT POPPLER
Requested division of one lot #1 in`)Villow Creek Addition to one lot 2.6
acres and one lot 35,000 sq. ft. and a 60x159, out lot on the west side of
lot 11 for future road development to the north.
It was moved by Anthony Hirt and seconded by David Dale to approve the
preliminary proposal and recommend approval to the Council.
Motion carried.
WILLIAM BOSSART
Mr. Bossart requested rezoning of Lot 1 Block 1, Eden Heights.
There was a motion by Anthony Hirt and a second by Ralph Nesbitt to deny
the application.
Motion carried.
GREGORY REDPATH
The request for rezoning was unnecessary. The area is already zoned R-1.
BELLHURST - DON KRAL
The discussion about sewer and lots indicated non-conformance with the
Clerkts letter of March 6, 1965 so no further action was taken.
OLD COUNTY 18 NORTH OF 494
It was moved by David Dale and seconded by Ralph Nesbitt to recommend to
the Council to upgrade old #18 north of 494.
Motion carried.
April 6, 1965 Page 2
169-212
Mr. Hawkes reported the progress on the interchanges in a letter from
the Highway Department.. attached. The District Office has authorized our
going direct to the State Highway Main Office to speed up approval of plans.
It was moved by Anthony Hirt and seconded by Cecil Cruse to recommend
approval of a resolution for CSAH #61 and TH #169 interchanges.
Motion carried.
I-494, TH-169-212, CSAH-60, CH-39
It was moved by Ralph Nesbitt and -seconded by Cecil Cruse to recommend
approval of a resolution for Interstate 494, Trunk 'Highway 169-212, County
State Aid Highway 60 and County Highway 39 interchanges.
Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 11:40 P. M.
J mes C. Brown, Clerk
S M TE OF MINNESOTA
Department of Highways
April 6, 1965
Village of Eden Prairie
Route 1
Hopkins, Minnesota
ATT: 11r. Quentin K. Wood
Administrator of Public Works
Re: S. P. 2763-01 - T.H. 169
Dear Hr. Wood: In Eden Prairie
We have received your resolution No. 91 regarding the upgrading and re-
alignment of T.H. 169. In this resolution the Eden Prairie Council disproves
our proposed layout thru your village. The resolution also lists several items
to be considered before approval is granted. In meeting with members of your
Planning Commission and Pair. Hawkes, your Planning Consultant, it was agreed
that the Minnesota Highway Department would study your recommendations.
1rTe have reviewed your planner's proposal for a revision in the inter-
change at C.S.A.H. 60. Our Preliminary Design Section finds this proposal
inadequate for the following reasons:
1. The weaving distance from C.S.A.H. 60 to T.H. 169 is inadequate.
A minimum distance of approximately 1200 feet is suggested.
2. The layout provides for a 4 lane bridge and we are of the opinion
that you should consider more than the 2 lanes bridge shown on your
layout.
3. Any layout developed at this intersection should not encroach on
the radio station installation for economic reasons.
4. The ramp on the loop in the northeast quadrant appears to be in
excess of 6 percent and a preferable grade would be less than 5 percent.
Zhis does not man that an acceptable layout cannot be developed along the
lines you suggested. Would you please have your Planning Consultant consider
this further. This letter transmits a proposed layout of the interchange at
C.S.A.H. 61 which orients the interchange toward a non-existent road extend-
ing southeasterly instead of connecting to present T.H. 169. This overlay is
acceptable to the Minnesota Highway Department and we ask that you review it.
Should you desire any changes please let us know. lie should caution you how-
ever, that in checking with Hennepin County they have no plans to extend this
road as a county road. Prior to our completing the layout including the
attached overlay and submitting to our staff as well as the Bureau of Public
Roads for approval, we need a resolution from the Eden Prairie Council stat-
ing that they agree to construct a connection to this interchange prior to
or concurrently with, the construction of the interchange itself.
No construction is programmed on T; H. 169 northeasterly of Interstate
494. Our construction program predently extends thru 1968. It appears as if
construction in this area will be after 1970. 11fe do, however, have a project
programmed for grading in 1968 from Interstate 494 southwesterly to T.H. 212.
We ask then that your Council app:'ove our layout with these limits so that
we might continue with detailed plans. We have discussed at length with Itir.
Hawkes, the idea of reserving right-of--Way by Council action to provide for a
future interchange at Mitchell Road. We are unable to justify the interchange
at this location at this time.
Sincerely,
DEPAR DIEN T OF HIGHIMAYS
G. F. 1,1e lch
District Engineer
GFT,d:at