Planning Commission - 09/20/1966 Village of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55345
` f
941-2262
Date: September 16, 1966 �.
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
SUBJECT: The house Mr. Bundy wants to move into Eden Prairie.
Mr. Arthur Miller and I checked the house Mr. Bundy wants to move in on Franlo Road.
I feel that no permit should be issued to move this house in for a number of reasons:
1. The building is too old.
2. It does not conform with buildings in the area where it is to be moved to.
3. Just about everything on it is deteriorating.
4. There had been a fire in there at one time and the floor joist's are badly
burned and charred.
It would have to have new floor joists
new plaster or sheet rock
new siding
new windows and frames
new doors and frames
new roof including rafters
` new wiring
f new plumbing
new insulation
plus ✓new foundation
ti/ new sewer
new well
VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Richard J. Bren
Building Inspector
RJB/bh
IN
VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE
PLANNING & ZONINC COMMISSION
A G E N D A
Wednesday, 20 September, 1966
ITEM PURPOSE
9-7-66 Minutes 9-6-66 Approval
9-8-66 Public Hearings
1. Hepp-Peterson-Grill continued from 9-6-66
2. Greg Redpath continued from 9-6-66
3. M-2 Area along Highway 5 between Scenic Heights Road
and County Road 4.
9-4-66 C yril S. Bundy Request to move house into Village
continued from 9-6-66
9-5-66 CSAH 18-62 & 169 - 212 Report by Wood
7-3-66 Mobile Homes & Trailer Parks Reports from members
Continued from 9-6-66.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 20 September 1966
The meeting; was called to order by Chairman Arthur Miller at 8:00 P.M.
PRESENT WERE:
Arthur Miller, Chairman Cecil Cruse
Anthony Hirt David Dale
Ralph Nesbitt Albert Picha
Dr. John Wright Quentin Wood, Engineer
James Broom, Clerk
ITEM 9-7-66 MINUTES
Motion made by David Dale, seconded by Albert Picha to approve the minutes
of 9-6-66 as published with a notation that in the mimeograph copies there
was a sentence left out on the last paragraph on the last page. The official
copies are correct.
The motion carried.
ITEM 9-8-66 PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Hepp-Peterson-Grill continued from September 6, 1966.
Notes are in hearing file #20.
They presented a layout showing the proposed use of the area where they would
be using approximately 200 feet to 275 feet from the road back for their
operation and using the entire frontage in various aspects of their operation.
Motion was made by David Dale, seconded by Anthony Hirt to recommend the Council
rezoning the Hepp-Peterson-Grill property to a depth of 250 feet back from
Highway 212 along the entire frontage from POC to C-l.
By roll-call vote Ralph Nesbitt voted yes, Dr. Wright voted yes, Cecil Cruse
voted no, Anthony Hirt voted yes, David Dale voted ye s, Albert Picha voted yes,
and Arthur Miller voted yes.
The motion carried.
They also had requested permission to move the building into the Village to be
used as a commercial store. The building that they are requesting to move is
presently being used as a church by the Betheny Fellowship in Bloomington.
There was much discussion as to what or what should not be put into the contract
to move the building and what authority the Board had in granting the request.
Anthony Hirt stated that he felt that a very tight contract should be drawn
and rather then a bond, escrow money should be deposited with the Village on any
building moved into the Village so that it could be completed within a reason-
able time element or the Village would be able to immediately proceed on it.
There was some disagreement with the Building Inspector's report on the build-
ing as some of the members felt it was not in agreement with what they felt
the building was as they had seen it.
A motion was made by Dr. John Wright, seconded by Ralph Nesbitt to continue this
matter until the next meeting for a more thorough report from the Building
Inspector and further study by the Planning and Zoning Board.
PLANNING AND ZONING C0MMISSION - 2 20 September 1966
In the discussion David Dale felt that the Building Inspector's job was to
determine if the building was structurally sound and met the building code
in the Village.
Upon a roll call vote, Ralph Nesbitt voted yes, Dr. John Wright voted yes,
Cecil Cruse voted no, Anthony Hirt voted no, David Dale voted no, Albert
Picha voted no, Arthur Miller voted no.
The motion was denied.
Cecil Cruse then made a motion to reject :this building as he feels it does not
meet the code, the walls are swayed, the siding is no good, the wiring is
inadequate. There are several other points which he felt made the building
not a good building to move.
There was no second to the motion and the motion died.
Anthony Hirt then moved, seconded by Albert Picha to accept the building based
on the Building Inspector's report that it is a structrally sound building per
the code. Changes in all equipment both inside and out be detailed and approved
by the Building Inspector before the building is moved into the Village.
By the roll call vote, Ralph Nesbitt voted yes, Dr. John Wright voted yes,
Cecil Cruse voted no, Anthony Hirt voted yes, David Dale voted yes, Albert
Picha voted yes, and Arthur Miller voted yes.
The motion carried.
2. Grea Redpath
lie had received a report from the Park and Recreation which favored this land
as a park and recreation area for that particular area in the Village. As
Mr. Redpath was not in attendance, the motion was made by David Dale, seconded
by Ralph Nesbitt to continue the hearing until October 4, 1966 and contact Mr.
Greg Redpath and ask him to appear at this time as the Board at that meeting
intends to take action on his request.
The motion carried.
3. The II-2 area along Highway 5 along Scenic Heights Road and County Road;#4.
The attorney for Warren Schultz appeared before the Board asking that the
Hearing be continued until October 4th so that further information could be
presented to the Board.
A motion was made by Ralph Nesbitt, seconded by David Dale to continue the
Hearing until October 4, 1966.
The motion carried.
The Zero-Max people had presented a petition on their entire piece of property
requesting that it be considered for SI zoning. The Board had under consider-
ation the part that was presently zoned I;-2. In line with this, the motion was
made by Anthony Hirt, seconded by Albert Picha to set the Hearing on the Zero-
Max property and to include with it the balance of the Donut property North of
h+
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 3 20 September 1966
ti=
p Highway 5 and South and West of Purgatory Creek so that this new piece
--� would include all of the presently residential and POC property South and
West of Purgatory Creek and North of Highway 5 that is not now being consid-
ered. The motion carried.
ITEM 9-4-66 CYRIL S. BUNDY REQUEST TO MOVE HOUSE INTO VILLAGE
Report from the Building Inspector was read. The Building Inspector re-
commended that the house not be permitted to be moved into the Village.
Motion was made by Anthony Hirt, seconded by David Dale to accept the report
of the Building Inspector and reject the request.
The motion carried.
ITEM 9-5-66 CSAH 18-62-169-212
Mr. Quentin Wood reported on the action that had been taken on this matter
since the last Zoning Board meeting. Mr. stood was asked to check into the
possibility of doing some horse trading on the County's request.
Because of the requirements by the County, it had been taken up by the Council
09 and the Council had acted on the matter and had approved the County's request
to have the off-ramp deleted. Mr. Wood stated that the County would attempt
to get this if possible that we would be able to work with the County on other
I projects with their full cooperation for the action taken on this matter.
This information is for the Board and no action was taken on it.
ITEM 7-3-66 MOBILE HOME AND TRAILER PARK REPORT
4 The reports were received from the parties involved. There was discussion on
the reports. Mrs. Hope Lindman showed us a copy of the new Hopkins Zoning
Ordinance which now permits trailer courts within the City limits of Hopkins.
Also involved in this is a request by the Pines Trailer Court to be detached
from Minnetonka Village and annexed into the City of Hopkins. This had a
bearing on whether Hopkins would or would not accept her operation in this area.
LJ_ She stated that she would like to have some further information as to whether
Eden Prairie would or would not permit the mobile home court in the Village.
1 -1" k
She was advised that under the present Ordinances nofhomescould be permitted
and we were gathering information at this level for the Council at their re-
quest and could not tell whether or not she would ever be permitted to have a
trailer court in the Village.
A motion was made by Anthony Hirt, seconded by Albert Picha to have the reports
as gathered by the various Board members summarzied into one report and a copy
of this -report to be given to Jim Hawkes of T"idwest Planning for a report on
how this would fit in over-all planning.
The motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at a record 11:00 P.I4..
JamT C. Brown, Clerk
r � "-
t ,
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 20, 1966
TO: Eden Prairie Planning Commission
FRCM: Midwest Planning and Research, Inc. - James W. Hawks
SUBJECT: Zoning Along T.H. 5 Between County Road 4 and Creek
Large undeveloped parcels with good access onto an all-weather road within
close commuting distance to the central area of the metropolitan region are
in demand for present and future industrial development. Throughout the
metropolitan region, we have many more miles of such oriented land than the
projected need will require; however, this does not prevent an optimistic
land market from developing. Each community is the guardian over the
development of the land under its control and it has need for a multiple
number of uses. The organization of the development pattern (Comprehensive
Plan) requires consideration of utilities, traffic, rail, school location,
drainage, parks, land use relationships and a desirable mixture of uses.
Eden Prairie did designate land for industrial development and it has been
so zoned. However, a large portion of this land has no access to all-weather
roads, is at a greater distance from the high density area, is not in close
proximity to where the utilities are likely to be first available and the
topography is more varying. Thus, the locations selected by those desiring
industrial sites often did not conform to the zoning. The zoning has since
been changed and Eden Prairie has enjoyed one of the most favorable industrial
growths in the county. This growth has taken place in a rather close area
and the question before the Planning Commission and Council is, "Where should
the limits of the S-I Industrial Zone be established?"
A second question must also be posed and that is how to adjust the previously
committed land so as to maintain a proper land use propostion and mixture of
uses? The "S-I" Zoning District provides good standards of development and with
industry so constructed and operated, it should be a benefit. It is however,
important that the development take place so as to enhance the industrial complex
and also provide the benefit of an industrial tax base and employment to the
remainder of the community. When industry is concentrated, the utilities can
be planned, the traffic system can be designed to serve, the livability of the
community can be protected.
The area under consideration is a concentration and is so located that natural
boundaries can or do exist -- Purgatory Creek, Railroad, Highway 169, the one
exception being the Eden Prairie School and the residential development directly
north. This area is buffered by an elevation change but it is isolated. The
extent to which industrial development has occurred in the study area along
with the projected plans creates a situation which from a planning viewpoint
-2-
' indicates three steps.
a) Recognize the area as one of the prime industrial locations in the
community and do what is possible to acquire quality development with
sound standards.
b) Recognize that the expansion and acceptance of this area has created
the need to re-evaluate other land zoned industrial and take steps to
redesignate.
c) Recognize the excepted area as a residential development and service
area and take sufficient steps to maintain the usefulness and livability.
In the future, this area may have to be re-evaluated but today it is
an important element in the Village.
The area referred to under point (a) does not extend west of the railroad but
is bound by the railroad, east line of town road, proposed right-of-way of
Highways 169 and 212 (but not to extend south of the alignment which was
shown on the preliminary plan as submitted to the Village) and a minimum of
50 feet south of Purgatory Creek. This area has been cross-hatched on the
attached map.
The area in the immediate vicinity which is zoned Industrial that should be
re-evaluated is all of the land so zoned west of the railroad and the land
which is occupied by the golf course. The golf course and the property
immediately west of the tracks would be more appropriately devoted to resi-
dential. The parcel on which the bus business and the northeast corner of
County Road 4 and T.H. 5 would be more appropriate as commercial. The corner
parcel has a very difficult topography problem, is developed as a farmstead and
ideally should be zoned residential with a commercial designation subject to
zoning in relation to a development plan. It is realized that the bus business
has recently occupied the site, that the site has a dangerous entrance, that
the topography is difficult and that a commercial zone would make the business
non-conforming, however, considering the obligation which the Village has to
the residential land directly north, the safety of the motorist on T.H. 5, the
wide range of permitted uses in the industrial zone, the difficulty of
developing the site in accordance with the S-I standards, it appears that the
site is not best suited for industry.
I
lift"
r I- •� -- ---1 4d
Ax
x
j •�
-.` --- Mia,