HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 05/10/2021AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, May 10, 2021 - 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERS:
John Kirk, Ann Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed
Farr, Michael DeSanctis, Carole Mette, William
Gooding, Rachel Markos, Robert Taylor
STAFF MEMBERS: Julie Klima, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer;
Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. MINUTES
A. Approval of the Minutes for the April 12, 2021 meeting
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to parking stall and aisle size
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to multifamily parking requirements
B. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROUP USABLE OPEN SPACE
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to group usable open space
C. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROSS AREA SITE PER DWELLING UNIT
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to gross area site per dwelling unit
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
ANNOTATED AGENDA
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Julie Klima, City Planner
RE: Planning Commission Meet ing for Monday, May 10 , 2021
_______________________________________________________________________________
MONDAY, May 10, 2021 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE- ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A. MOTION: Move to approve the agenda.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY, APRIL 12, 2021
MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated April 12, 2021.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to parking stall and aisle size
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to multifamily parking requirements
Staff is r ecommending amendments to City Code Chapter 11 to address parking stall and aisle
dimensions and stall requirements for multifamily land uses. The parking stall and aisle dimensions
amendments would align City requirements with market trends.
Currently in City Code, all multifamily units are required to provide the same number of parking
stalls, regardless of unit type or demand. This has led to several PUD waivers for parking
requirements. The proposed amendments to stall requirements for multifamily land uses include a
separate stall requirement for studio or efficiency units in addition to adding distinction for senior
housing. Active senior living units and nursing or assisted senior living units would have different
stall requirements from general occupancy multifamily units to reflect the different parking needs of
the tenants.
Staff recommends approval.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval for Code Amendment for Parking based on
recommendations from Staff Report dated May 10, 2021.
B. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROUP USABLE OPEN SPACE
Request for:
ANNOTATED AGENDA
May 10, 2021
Page 2
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to group usable open space
In City Code, Group Usable Open Space (GUOS) is defined as land area and facilities specifically
designated and developed for group recreational or social activities. This requirement has been in
place for multifamily projects since 1969. At that time, the City was largely undeveloped and did
not provide the extensive amount of dedicated parks and trails that exist today. The lack of
developed park space and development patterns at that time were likely the reasons that GUOS
was a priority. Overtime the requirement has been applied inconsistently until recently. The City
has begun to experience an increase in the number of waivers requested to the GUOS requirement
suggesting that the standard should be reevaluated. The objectives of the amendment are to
improve the consistency and clarity of the definition and to reflect multifamily development
trends, sma ller infill development sites, and current City goals and objectives. The proposed
amendment includes a more detailed definition and reducing the amount of GUOS required.
Staff recommends approval.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval for Code Amendment for Group Usable Open Space
based on recommendations from Staff Report dated May 6 , 2021.
C. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROSS AREA SITE PER DWELLING UNIT
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to gross area site per dwelling unit
City Code includes a requirement for Gross Site Area Per Dwelling Unit. The intent of the
requirement is to regulate density. This requirement has been in City Code since 1969. Maximum
density requirements are established in Section 11.03 Subd. 2 of City Code and in the
Comprehensive Plan. The requirement for gross site area per dwelling unit is redundant and is
inconsistent with other requirements. The primary objective of the amendment is to reduce
inconsistencies between requirements and eliminate redundancies. Staff is recommending to
eliminate the Gross Site Area Per Dwelling Unit requirements.
Staff recommends approval.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval for Code Amendment for Gross Area Site Per
Dwelling Unit based on recommendations from Staff Report dated May 6 , 2021.
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, APRIL 12, 2021 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Ann Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr,
Michael DeSanctis, Rachel Markos, Carole Mette,
William Gooding, Robert Taylor
CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner ; Matt Bourne, Manager of
Parks and Natural Resources; Rod Rue, City Engineer
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Chair Farr called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER
New commission member Robert Taylor was sworn in by Klima.
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Absent was commission member Pieper.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Mette to approve the agenda. MOTION
CARRIED 8-0.
V. MINUTES
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Gooding to approve the minutes of March 22, 2021
with the correction of “Marie Wirtenburg” instead of “Murray” in Item V, as well as
some grammatical corrections. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
BOA 2021-01 – 8500 FRANLO ROAD
Request for:
• Variance from the front yard setback to place a new sign
Margaret Johnson, the applicant and resident at 8500 Franlo Road, displayed
photographs and detailed the application. The new sign would be visible from the
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
April 12, 2021
Page 2
north and the south, whereas the existing sign is only visible from vehicles
traveling south on Franlo Road. The proposed sign would be of composite rock.
There was a senior living development nearby as well as a townhouse
development across from the property with similar signs. She displayed a
photograph of the proposed sign location and displayed the existing sign.
DeSanctis asked if the berm would be sufficiently elevated above the curb line
during winter snows to allow the sign to be visible from the north and the south.
Johnson replied it would. Farr asked for and received confirmation the sign would
be facing the street and be visible from both directions.
Markos asked if a signage consultant was used. Johnson replied an owner in the
condominium project worked with the designer and she also weighed in. Farr
echoed DeSanctis’s concern about snow and urged the applicant to review the size
of the lettering.
Klima presented the staff report. The applicant was seeking a variance for a sign
with a zero-foot setback from the property line. Staff did visit the site and
determined it met the conditions for a variance, and a sign being placed beyond
the berm would make it less visible. Staff recommended approval.
Farr asked if any consideration had been given to the possibility of a taller sign
being placed back further. Klima replied from a staff perspective the concern was
the placement of the sign within a utility easement , which gave a ground-mounted
sign the advantage over a sign with height which would require an excavation.
Taylor asked for and received confirmation the new sign would replace the
existing sign. Mette noted there was a recently constructed monument sign in the
area and asked the distance the sign would be placed from the curb. Klima replied
this sign would be placed 17 feet from the curb.
Jean Haskins, of 8500 Franlo Road, stated she was a homeowner who represented
the opinion of the majority of homeowners in the area. She said they supported
this project, and Haskins urged the commission to approve the application.
MOTION: Gooding moved, seconded by Mette to close the public hearing.
MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
Higgins stated she visited the site and found it an unusual setting to navigate. She
found this proposed sign would be helpful for visitors entering the site. Mette
agreed the unique circumstances of the right-of-way and the topography of the
site merited this proposed sign. She also commended the sign’s natural stone
design. Gooding also commended the proposed sign. Kirk concurred. Farr also
stated he supported the proposal. Driving by the site he had observed a hill and
retaining walls that constricted into the right-of-way, along with mature trees, so
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
April 12, 2021
Page 3
this site had been cared for and would be served by this sign which did not
encroach upon underground utilities.
MOTION: Gooding moved, seconded by DeSanctis to approve variance 2021-01
based on information outlined in the staff report dated April 12, 2021 and findings
and conditions of Order #2021-01. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
PLANNERS’ REPORT
MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Kirk to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:24 p.m.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Sarah Strain, Planner I
DATE: May 10, 2021
SUBJECT: Code Amendment – Dimensional and Multifamily Parking Requirements
BACKGROUND
Staff is recommending amendments to City Code Chapter 11 to address parking requirements for
stall and drive aisle dimensions and multifamily housing based on the types of dwelling units. The
intention of these changes is to reflect trends in development and scale parking more appropriately to
sites to reduce large amounts of underutilized parking stalls and the number of Planned Unit
Development wavier requests.
DISCUSSION
Parking Dimensions
City staff is recommending the following amendment to the parking basic requirements table:
Parking space and aisle width dimensions in relation to
degree of parking angle
PARKING ANGLE =
O
Deg.
20
Deg.
30
Deg.
40
Deg.
45
Deg.
50
Deg.
60
Deg.
70
Deg.
80
Deg.
90
Deg.
Parking space width,
perpendicular to angle
9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9' 9'
Parking space
dimension
perpendicular to aisle
9' 14'6" 16'10" 18'8" 19'5" 20' 20'8" 20'9" 20'2" 189'
Parking space
dimension parallel to
aisle
23' 24'8" 17' 13'2" 11'1" 9'10" 9' 9' 9' 9'
Aisle width 12' 11' 11' 12' 13'6" 16' 18'6" 19'6" 24' 245'
The City has granted several PUD waiver and variance requests for the above noted drive aisle and
stall length dimensions in recent years, including Prairie Village Apartments (stall dimension),
Southview of Eden Prairie/Eden Prairie Senior Living (both stall and aisle dimensions), and Elevate
(both stall and aisle dimensions). Amending the requirements to reduce both stall length and drive
aisle width by one (1) foot reflects market trends, mirrors the standards of neighboring communities,
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Dimensional and Multifamily Parking Requirements
May 10, 2021
Page 2
2
and follows the recommendations of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) and the National Parking
Association (NPA).
Multifamily Housing
Recent and multiple waiver requests for recent multifamily housing projects prompted City staff to
review multifamily parking requirements. Staff reviewed parking standards in neighboring cities and
found the overwhelming majority of cities reviewed use the same two (2) stalls per dwelling unit
requirement Eden Prairie uses, shown in the graph below.
Staff believes the two (2) stalls per dwelling unit requirement balances the desire to reduce excess
paved parking area while ensuring sites are adequately parked for tenant and guest needs. It also
works to ensure multiple bedroom units are not de-incentivized through additional parking
requirements. This policy also acknowledges that multiple bedroom units may be occupied by
families with either children or older adults not owning or driving cars.
The current parking requirement in City Code also accounts for guest parking. Staff feels this is
appropriate, as some units will not have a need for both stalls required by City Code, and both guests
and residents come and go throughout the day to allow for turn-over. In previous review of City
parking standards, roughly eight (8) years ago, there has been enough parking on multifamily sites to
accommodate both tenant and guest needs.
While staff recommends leaving the parking standard at two (2) stalls per dwelling unit for most
multifamily housing, staff proposes reducing the requirement for efficiency or studio units to one (1)
stall per unit with half of all required stalls being enclosed. Typically, studio units are occupied by a
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Dimensional and Multifamily Parking Requirements
May 10, 2021
Page 3
3
single person, and there is not a consistent need for more than one (1) stall. The Martin Blu/Mitchell
Crossing project received a waiver request for 1.06 stalls/unit for efficiency or studio units. The
proposed code amendment would be consistent with this waiver and would read as follows:
Studio or Efficiency units – 1/D.U. Half of all spaces enclosed, rounded up.
Senior Housing
Currently, City Code does not differentiate between different types of multifamily housing. This
holds all types of senior housing units to the same parking standards as apartment or townhome
multifamily units. There is a spectrum of senior housing options and needs, and not all types require
the same parking needs. Among neighboring communities surveyed, most cities had separate parking
requirements for senior housing units to reflect the different demand. These requirements are detailed
in the charts below. For the cities that do not specify standards for senior housing (Eden Prairie and
Woodbury), the general multifamily ratio was used for comparison purposes.
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Dimensional and Multifamily Parking Requirements
May 10, 2021
Page 4
4
The proposed code amendment includes two (2) different standards for senior housing, one (1) for
active or independent living and one (1) for assisted living, nursing homes, or memory care units,
which have minimal parking needs. These changes are similar to the existing requirements in
neighboring cities. Staff proposes amending the parking requirements as follows:
Independent or Active Senior Living: 1 stall/dwelling unit, plus 0.5/DU for guest and general
parking. Half of all spaces shall be enclosed.
Nursing, Skilled Nursing, Memory Care, or Convalescent Living: 1 stall/4 Beds, plus 1
space/employee on largest shift. Half of all spaces shall be enclosed, rounded up.
For illustrative purposes, the table below details the parking information for recently approved senior
housing projects and includes the number of stalls that would be required if these developments were
constructed under the proposed requirements.
STALL REQUIREMENTS Applewood
Point
Castle
Ridge
Prairie Bluff
Senior
Southview
Senior
Parking Approved (PUD) 162 315 128 106
Current Code Requirement 200 554 276 234
Proposed Code Amendment Conditions
Independent Living Requirements 100 148 50 75
Nursing/Assisted Care Requirements NA 32 22 11
Staff on Peak Shift 0 60 17 17
Total Parking Required 150 282 114 66
Staff Report – Code Amendment – Dimensional and Multifamily Parking Requirements
May 10, 2021
Page 5
5
The proposed multifamily and senior housing parking requirements are not intended to address
parking requirements for properties zoned and guided Town Center or Transit Oriented
Development, as both of these districts have separate, specified parking requirements. The stall and
aisle dimension amendments will apply to all zoning districts.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the code amendment to parking dimension and multifamily
housing parking requirements as represented in the May 10, 2021 staff report.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Beth Novak-Krebs, Senior Planner
DATE: May 6, 2021
SUBJECT: Code Change – City Code Chapter 11, relating to Group Usable Open Space
BACKGROUND
In City Code, Group Usable Open Space (GUOS) is defined as land area and facilities specifically designated
and developed for group recreational or social activities. This requirement has been in place for multifamily
projects since 1969. At that time, the City was largely undeveloped and did not provide the extensive amount
of dedicated parks and trails that exist today. The lack of developed park space and development patterns were
likely the reasons that GUOS was a priority. Overtime the requirement has been applied inconsistently until
recently.
From a practical standpoint, the City has been allowing indoor spaces such as community rooms, fitness
centers, lounges etc. to count toward the requirement, as well as, outdoor areas and facilities.
ISSUES
The City has begun to experience an increase in the number of waivers requested to the GUOS requirement.
With any provision in the City Code, an increase in the number of waiver requests suggests that the standard
should be reevaluated to determine if the existing requirement is appropriate or if a revision is warranted. As
staff examined the waiver requests and application of the requirement in previous projects, it became clear that:
1. This portion of the City Code has been interpreted and applied inconsistently.
2. Most recent projects require a waiver for GUOS because the project cannot comply with the
requirements while providing the density required by the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Most of the more recent developments have been on infill sites with less land area to accommodate
GUOS.
4. Multifamily development styles and layouts have changed over the decades potentially leading to this
requirement being outdated.
OBJECTIVES
The proposed amendment has two objectives aimed at addressing the issues stated above. The primary
objective is to improve the consistency and clarity of the definition. . In the past, the vagueness of the
definition allowed for a wide ranging interpretation of what constituted GUOS. Amending the definition to be
more specific will lead to a more consistent interpretation and application of this standard and provide
improved communication to developers regarding what can be expected to meet the requirement. This allows
developers to create plans meeting the expectation.
Staff Report – Group Usable Open Space Code Amendments
Page 2
2
The second objective is to amend the ordinance to reflect multifamily development trends, smaller infill
development sites, and current City goals and objectives. This can be accomplished by continuing to require
GUOS, but reducing the amount of GUOS required.
PROPOSED CODE CHANGES
Definition
Staff is proposing the following amendments to the definition. Amending Section 11.02 Definitions
38. “Group Usable Open Space” - Land area and facilities specifically designated and developed for
groupoutdoor and/or indoor active recreational or , passive recreation, social activities, and leisure use.
The Usable Open Space shall be accessible to and intended to serve the residents and visitors of the
residents of the project. These may include spaces such as, swimming pools, rooftop decks, seating
areas, tot lots, sport courts, garden areas, outdoor cooking facilities, community rooms, fitness rooms,
activity rooms, dining rooms and similar spaces as approved. These areas may not include balconies,
decks, and patios; driveways; and parking areas designed for use by an individual dwelling unit.
Based on the proposed definition for usable open space, both indoor and outdoor spaces can qualify as usable
open space. This is consistent with the usable open space approved with recent projects. The proposed
definition provides more examples, and thereby more clarity about the intent of the requirement and what does
and does not meet the definition.
Requirement
Eden Prairie’s current requirements for GUOS are 1,000 square feet per unit in the RM-6.5 Zoning District and
600 square feet per unit in the RM-2.5 Zoning District . In addressing the second objective, staff is proposing
to reduce the per unit GUOS requirement. Prior to making a recommendation, staff reviewed the GUOS
approved for seven multi-family projects approved in Eden Prairie and the requirements and experiences of
several neighboring communities.
Staff reviewed the GUOS for all of the multi-family projects approved since 2014. (see Table A on following
page). The GUOS approved for these projects ranges from 28 square feet per unit to 400 square feet per unit
with an average of 210 square feet per unit. These projects were unable to comply with the current GUOS and
all received a waiver.
Staff Report – Group Usable Open Space Code Amendments
Page 3
3
Table A
As part of preparing the proposed ordinance amendment, staff conducted research on nine communities in the
metro area. All of the communities have requirements for usable open space in multifamily or mixed use
developments. For some communities the requirement is a percentage of the project area while the requirement
for other communities is a certain square footage per unit similar to Eden P rairie. The numbers range from 5
to 15% of the project area or anywhere from 200 to 2,000 square feet per unit. Although the per unit
requirements include a wide range of numbers, the majority of the requirements are at 300 and 400 square feet
per unit. Several other communities shared that it has been challenging for developers to comply with their
Usable Open Space standards. As a result these communities are reevaluating their standards and will likely be
proposing to reduce the requirement.
Staff is recommending a reduction in the GUOS requirement in both multifamily zoning districts to 150 square
feet per unit. At 150 square feet per unit, only 3 out of 7 of the previously approved projects would have
required a waiver. When analyzing those 3 projects, specific site conditions may have supported the waiver
request under the proposed reduction (ie: being part of a larger project area that included other usable open
space, property configuration or topographic conditions).
Altho ugh the recommended requirement is lower than the average for the Eden Prairie projects and the
minimum requirement from adjacent communities, the trend is allowing increased density on infill sites or sites
with less land area leaving less space to accommodate usable open space. While the amendment requires less
usable open space per unit, Eden Prairie has an extensive park and open space system providing a variety of
facilities . Eighty-two percent of the housing in Eden Prairie is within ½ miles of parkland. Access to parks and
open space allows the development to provide quality amenities that supplement the City facilities.
The recommended change involves amending Section 11.03 Subd. 2 B, Table 1. (See Table B on following
page)
Zoning Number
of Units
GUOS
Required
(Per
Unit)
Total
GUOS
Required
(SF)
Total
GUOS
Provided
(SF)
GUOS
Provided
(Per Unit)
Southview RM-2.5 116 600 69,600 14,954 129
Prairie Bluffs Senior Living RM-2.5 138 600 82,800 28,875 209
Trail Point Ridge RM-2.5 58 600 34,800 23,374 403
Applewood Point RM-2.5 100 600 60,000 40,586 405
Sheldon Place RM-6.5 10 1000 10,000 280 28
Castle Ridge RM-2.5 274 600 164,400 47,402 173
Paravel RM-2.5 245 600 147,000 32,830 134
Table B
(Section 11.03 Subd. 2 B, Table 1)
Residential
Districts
Minimum
Zone Area
(Acreage/
Sq. Ft.)
Minimum
Lot Size
Minimum Lot
Width- Depth
Minimum
Lot Width
at Right of
Way Line
Minimum Yard- Setback
Gross Site
Area Per
Dwelling
Unit Sq. Ft.
Or Acres
Group
Usable
Open
Space Per
Dwelling
Unit Sq. Ft.
Max
Floor
Area
Ratio
(FAR)
Maximum
Height of
Main
Structure
(Ft.)
Width
Ft.
Depth
Ft.
Front
Ft.
One
Side
Ft.
Both
Sides
Ft.
Rear
Ft.
Rural 10 Acres 10 Acres 300 300 300 50 50 150 50 10 Acres N/A N/A 40
R1-44 44,000 44,000 100 150 100 30 15 30 30 44,000 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-22 22,000 22,000 90 125 90 30 15 30 25 22,000 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-13.5 13,500 13,500 85* 100 85 30 10 25 20 13,500 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-9.5 9,500 9,500 70* 100 70 30 (See
Subd.
2 Item
8)
(See
Subd.
2 Item
8)
20 9,500 Park Ded. N/A 40
RM-6.5 13,000 3,000 24 100 24 30 10 20 20 6,500 Park Ded.
Plus 1000
150 Sq.
Ft./Unit
N/A 40
RM-2.5 25,000 25,000 150 150 150 35 25 50 30 2,500 Park Ded.
Plus
600150
Sq.
Ft./Unit
N/A 45
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendments to Chapter 11, Section 11.02 Definitions and Section 11.03
Subd. 2 B., Table 1 as represented in the May 6, 2021 staff report and the draft code language.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Beth Novak-Krebs, Senior Planner
DATE: May 6, 2021
SUBJECT: Code Change – City Code Chapter 11, relating to Gross Site Area Per Dwelling
Unit
BACKGROUND
City Code includes a requirement for Gross Site Area Per Dwelling Unit . The intent of the requirement
is to regulate density. This requirement has been in City Code since 1969. Maximum density
requirements are also established in Section 11.03 Subd. 2 of City Code and in the Comprehensive Plan.
ISSUES
Applying the requirements to some recent multi-family projects has resulted in the need for waivers and
prompted staff to question the intent and benefit of this requirement. As staff considered the use of this
requirement, it became clear that:
1. This portion of the City Code has not been consistently applied .
2. The requirement is redundant since maximum density is already established in the Comprehensive
Plan and in City Code Section 11.03 Subd. 2.
3. When applying the gross site area per dwelling unit r equirements on recent projects, most of the
projects required a waiver.
4. The maximum densities established in City Code Section 11.03 Subd. 2 and the gross site area
per dwelling unit requirements are inconsistent with one another .
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the amendment is to reduce inconsistencies between requirements and eliminate
redundant requirements. This can be accomplished by deleting the Gross Site Area Per Dwelling Unit
requirement . Since density is regulated in City Code Section 11.03 Subd.2 and in the Comprehensive
Plan, the application of the Gross Site Area Per Dwelling Unit requirement does not provide any benefit.
PROPOSED CODE CHANGE
The recommended change involves amending Section 11.03 Subd. 2 B, Table 1 by deleting the Gross
Site Area Per Dwelling Unit column in its entirety (See Table on following page).
Section 11.03 Subd. 2 B Table 1
Residential
Districts
Minimum
Zone
Area
(Acreage/
Sq. Ft.)
Minimum Lot
Size
Minimum Lot
Width- Depth
Minimum
Lot Width
at Right
of Way
Line
Minimum Yard- Setback
Gross Site
Area Per
Dwelling
Unit Sq.
Ft. Or
Acres
Group
Usable
Open
Space Per
Dwelling
Unit Sq.
Ft.
Max
Floor
Area
Ratio
(FAR)
Maximum
Height of
Main
Structure
(Ft.)
Width
Ft.
Depth
Ft.
Front
Ft.
One
Side Ft.
Both
Sides
Ft.
Rear
Ft.
Rural 10 Acres 10 Acres 300 300 300 50 50 150 50 10 Acres N/A N/A 40
R1-44 44,000 44,000 100 150 100 30 15 30 30 44,000 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-22 22,000 22,000 90 125 90 30 15 30 25 22,000 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-13.5 13,500 13,500 85* 100 85 30 10 25 20 13,500 Park Ded. N/A 40
R1-9.5 9,500 9,500 70* 100 70 30 (See
Subd. 2
Item 8)
(See
Subd. 2
Item 8)
20 9,500 Park Ded. N/A 40
RM-6.5 13,000 3,000 24 100 24 30 10 20 20 6,500 Park Ded.
Plus
1000Sq.
Ft./Unit
N/A 40
RM-2.5 25,000 25,000 150 150 150 35 25 50 30 2,500 Park Ded.
Plus
600Sq.
Ft./Unit
N/A 45
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendments to Chapter 11, Section 11.03 Subd. 2 B., Table
1 as represented in the May 6, 2021 staff report and the draft code language.
1
PROJECT PROFILE – MAY 10, 2021
PLANNING COMMISSION – MAY 10, 2021
1. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING by City of Eden Prairie (SARAH)
Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to parking dimensions and multifamily parking requirements
Contact: Sarah Strain, 952-949-8413
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to parking stall and aisle size
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to multifamily parking requirements
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/19/21
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date 04/21/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 05/10/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
2. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROUP USABLE OPEN SPACE by City of Eden Prairie (BETH)
Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to group usable open space
Contact: Beth Novak Krebs, 952-949-8490
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to group usable open space
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/19/21
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date 04/21/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 05/10/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
3. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GROSS AREA SITE PER DWELLING UNIT by City of Eden Prairie
(BETH)
Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating gross area site per dwelling unit
Contact: Beth Novak-Krebs, 952-949-8490
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to gross area site per dwelling unit
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/19/21
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date 04/21/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 05/10/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION – MAY 17, 2021
2
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING – MAY 18 , 2021
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – MAY 18, 2021
1. CHASE BANK – (2020-12) by The Architect Partnership (SARAH)
Proposal to demo an existing building and construct a 3,300 square foot building for a bank with drive thru
Location: 928 Prairie Center Drive
Contact: Terron Wright: wright@tapchicago.com
Request f or:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 0.61 acres
• Planned Unit Development Review with waivers on 0.61 acres
• Site Plan Review on 0.61 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 11/04/20
Date Complete 02/21/21
120 Day Deadline 05/21/21
Initial DRC review 11/05/20
Notice to Paper Date 02/17/21
Resident Notice Date 02/18/21
Meeting Date 03/08/21
Notice to Paper Date 03/17/21
Resident Notice Date 03/18/21
1st Meeting Date 04/06/21
2nd Meeting Date 05/18/21
PLANNING COMMISSION – MAY 24, 2021
1. HOLIDAY CONVENIENCE STORE & AUTO CARE WORLD SERVICE CENTER (2021-01) by R.J.
Ryan Construction (BETH)
Proposal to construct two commercial buildings totaling 16,380 square feet.
Location: Northwest corner of Hennepin Town Road and Pioneer Trail
Contact: Aaron Waller: awaller@rjryan.com
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 3.96 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.96 acres
• Site Plan Review on 3.96 acres
• Preliminary Plat of 2 lots on 3.96 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 01/11/21
Date Complete 03/29/21
120 Day Deadline 07/26/21
Initial DRC review 01/14/21
Notice to Paper Date 05/05/21
Resident Notice Date 05/06/21
Meeting Date 05/24/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
2. MORIMOTO CITY HOMES (2021-04) by Hennepin CityHomes LLC (BETH)
Proposal to construct 16 townhomes
Location: 9360 Hennepin Town Rd
Contact: Steve Furlong; 651-235-6429
3
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.84 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.84 acres
• Zoning Change from Rural to RM-6.5
• Site Plan Review on 2.84 acres
• Preliminary Plat to divide one lot into 16 lots and 3 Outlots on 2.84 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 03/19/21
Date Complete 04/09/21
120 Day Deadline 08/06/21
Initial DRC review 03/25/21
Notice to Paper Date 05/05/21
Resident Notice Date 05/06/21
Meeting Date 05/24/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION – JUNE 8, 2021
PLANNING COMMISSION – JUNE 14, 2021
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING – JUNE 15, 2021
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – JUNE 15, 2021
1. NOBLE HILL – (2021-02) by Pulte Homes (BETH)
Proposal for 50 single family homes
Location: 9955 and 9875 Spring Road
Contact: Paul Heuer: Paul.Heuer@PulteGroup.com
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 27.51 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 27.51 acres
• Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 27.51 acres
• Preliminary Plat of 3 parcels into 50 lots and 4 outlots on 27.51 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 01/19/21
Date Complete 02/19/21
120 Day Deadline 06/18/21
Initial DRC review 01/21/21
Notice to Paper Date 03/03/21
Resident Notice Date 03/04/21
Meeting Date 03/22/21
Notice to Paper Date 04/14/21
Resident Notice Date 04/15/21
1st Meeting Date 05/04/21
2nd Meeting Date 06/15/21
IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED
1. ASIAN PLAZA (2021-06) by Xing Zhao (JULIE)
Proposal for a parking waiver
Location: 12160 Technology Dr
Contact: Xing Zhao; 612-385-8898
4
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.68 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.68 acres
• Site Plan R eview for façade remodel on 4.68 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/19/21
Date Complete 00/00/21
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 04/22/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
Meeting Date 00/00/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
2. BURGER KING (2021-07) by Cave Enterprises Operations, LLC (SARAH)
Proposal to construct a new Burger King quick serve restaurant with double drive thru order lanes
Location: 16345 Terrey Pine Drive
Contact: John Kayser, 312-829-4000
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.34 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.34 acres
• Site Plan Review on 1.34 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/20/21
Date Complete 00/00/21
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 04/22/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
Meeting Date 00/00/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
3. JOHNSON RIDGE (2020-11) by Laketown Builders (SARAH)
Proposal to construct six single family homes
Location: 9995 Bennett Place
Contact: Harold Worrell, 612-501-8813
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.1 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.1 acres
• Zoning Change from R1-22 to R1-9.5 on 2.1 acres
• Preliminary Plat on 2.1 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 4/19/21
Date Complete 00/00/00
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 04/22/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
Meeting Date 00/00/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
4. CROSSTOWN CORE INDUSTRIAL CENTER (2020-11) by Sambatek, Inc. (BETH)
Proposal to construct a 64,024 square foot speculative industrial building.
Location: 10250 Crosstown Circle and 6534 Flying Cloud Drive
Contact: Erik Miller; 763-259-6687
5
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.0 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.0 acres
• Zoning Change from OFC, RURAL and C -HWY to Industrial I-2 on 5.0 acres
• Site Plan Review on 5.0 acres
• Preliminary Plat of 2 parcels into 1 Lot on 5.0 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 10/05/20
Date Complete 00/00/00
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 10/08/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
Meeting Date 00/00/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
5. PIONEER PRESERVE (2020-09) by Metro Development LLC (SARAH)
Proposal to build 8 townhome units
Location: South west corner of Pioneer Trail and Hennepin Town Road
Contact: Melanie Emery, 651-248-8457
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 3.66 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres
• Zoning District Change from Rural to RM on 3.66 acres
• Site Plan Review on 3.66 acres
• Preliminary Plat of 9 lots on 3.66 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 09/18/20
Date Comp lete 00/00/20
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 09/24/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
Meeting Date 00/00/21
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
6. CODE AMENDMENT FOR LIGHTING by City of Eden Prairie (SARAH)
Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to site lighting
Contact: Sarah Strain, 952 -949-8413
Request for :
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to site lighting
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 09/08/20
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date 09/09/20
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 09/28/20
Notice to Paper Date 09/30/20
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
7. SOUTHWEST STATION PUD AMENDMENT (2015-23) by SW Metro Transit Commission (JULIE)
Proposal for additional parking structure at southwest station
Contact: Julie Klima, 952-949-8489
6
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 11.38 acres
• Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 11.38
acres
• Site Plan Review on 11.38 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 00/00/15
Date Complete 00/00/15
120 Day Deadline 00/00/15
Initial DRC review 00/00/15
Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15
Resident Notice Date 11/20/15
Meeting Date 12/07/15
Notice to Paper Date 12/17/15
Resident Notice Date 12/18/15
1st Meeting Date 01/05/16
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/20
VARIANCES
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
TELECOMMUNICATION
1. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (2021-05TM) by Buell Consulting on behalf of Verizon (STEVE)
Location: 6341 Baker Road
Contact: Renee Fontaine, Phone: 424-386-5552, Email: rfontain@siteac-lic.com
Request for:
• Brief description of work to be completed: equipment – add 3 antenna
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/27/21
Date Complete 04/28/21
120 Day Deadline 06/25/21
Initial DRC review 05/06/21
Notice to Paper Date N/A
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date N/A
Notice to Paper Date N/A
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date N/A
2nd Meeting Date N/A