HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 03/22/2021
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, March 22, 2021 -7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION John Kirk, Ann Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed
MEMBERS: Farr, Michael DeSanctis, Carole Mette, William
Gooding, Rachel Markos
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 March 8, 2021 meeting
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. NOBLE HILL (2021-02)
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 27.51 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 27.51 acres
• Zoning 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
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, March 22, 2021
_______________________________________________________________________________
MONDAY, March 22, 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, MARCH 8, 2021
MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated March 8, 2021.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. NOBLE HILL (2021-02)
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 27.51 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 27.51 acres
• Zoning 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
The applicant is requesting approval to develop 50 single-family lots on 27.51 acres located at 9955
and 9875 Spring Road. The property is located approximately 600 feet south of Prospect Road on
the east side of Spring Road and west of the Hennepin Village neighborhood. There is currently a
single-family home on the property that will be razed. The proposed plan includes one access point
from Spring Road. Both streets in the project terminate with a cul-de-sac. The property has a
significant amount of topographic relief. Riley Creek runs through a portion of the southwest side of
the property. There are floodplains and wetlands along the creek corridor. There is also a bluff in the
southwest corner of the site. There are significant wooded areas on the property. The applicant is
requesting waivers for minimum lot width, lot size, front yard setback and cul-de-sac length. The
applicant is proposing two-story homes. The plan includes 4 outlots. Outlots A and C are proposed
to be owned by the applicant and include stormwater management facilities. Outlot B is proposed to
deeded to the City and includes a trail connection. Outlot D is proposed to be deeded to the City and
includes stormwater management facilities and environmental features.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to approval for a Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 27.51
acres; Planned Unit Development District Review wit h waivers on 27.51 acres, Zoning Change
ANNOTATED AGENDA
March 22, 2021
Page 2
from Rural to R1-9.5 on 27.51 acres and Site Plan Review on 27.51 acres based on Plans stamp
dated February 19, 2021 and the Staff Report dated March 18, 2021.
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, MARCH 8, 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
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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Commissioner Pieper was absent.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Mette moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the agenda. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: DeSanctis moved, seconded by Gooding to approve the minutes of February
8, 2021. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
CHASE BANK (2020-12)
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 0.61 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 0.61 acres
• Site Plan Review on 0.61 acres
Brian Wurdeman, the civil engineer representing the applicant, presented a PowerPoint
and explained the application. This was a proposed redevelopment of the former Baker’s
Square restaurant east of the Culver’s Restaurant and west of the Starbuck’s. It was zoned
commercial, which would fit the proposed development use. The site plan showed the
3,300 square-foot bank footprint, the location of the ATM, and the shared private
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 8, 2021
Page 2
(existing) driveway. There would be 20 parking stalls on the north and south side, with
two entrances. The north driveway would be converted to a two-way, 90-degree driveway
from a one-way. Enhanced pedestrian connections would be included as a part of the
development, as well as bike racks on the south side of the building. The new
development would have slightly less impervious surface area than the former site and
utilize an underground stormwater management system which would collect runoff from
both the bank area and the parking lot. The landscape plan would preserve three mature
trees onsite and remove one, which would be replaced, and include a compensatory
replacement of trees. Foundation plantings would be added around the parking areas, and
they would be irrigated by the onsite managed stormwater system. Another sustainable
feature was the LED lighting.
Terron Wright, the architect, explained the floor plan. There would be eight offices and a
dual entry, one north and one south. Class One materials comprised the cladding. He
displayed the building elevations and explained a waiver was being sought for the
inclusion of Class Two materials on the north and south facades. Mechanical equipment
would not be visible from the street due to the low roof design and the screening. A
single-story drive-up ATM canopy was also proposed.
Mette asked if the doors on the north and the south were intended for public access
during business hours, and if there was an additional employee entrance. Wurdeman
replied these two doors would remain open during business hours. DeSanctis asked what
lifespan the aluminum composite panels would have. Wurdeman replied they had a 20-
year lifespan. Farr asked the reason for the four accessible parking stalls, which were
above requirements and could free up green space. Wurdeman replied it was preferred to
have at least two accessible parking stalls, so the number of stalls could be reduced. Two
were typically provided.
Klima presented the staff report. The site’s proposed use was consistent with the existing
zoning and the proposed development did comply with all parking, setback, and building
height, and the only waiver requested was for the two percent of materials (ACM) that
were Class Two materials. Staff recommended approval. A condition regarding the
removal of trees was included in the staff report and could be resolved a number of ways.
Mette asked why metal panels were not considered a Class One material. Klima replied
in 2016 when the City was updating its design guidelines and building materials
requirements the City Council and Planning Commission conducted visual surveys. A
robust conversation ensued about metal panels and the consensus was while neither party
was opposed to this material they were also not ready to allow it to be a Class One,
allowed at 75 percent by right. Requiring a PUD process allowed the commission and
City Council to review and allow this material. Mette asked if the project would meet the
requirement regarding the needed caliper inches for the trees. Klima replied if the
applicant either added a tree or added a couple of inches to the existing trees, either
would meet the requirement.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 8, 2021
Page 3
Farr asked if the offsite utility runs on the east side was a suggestion of staff and/or was
acceptable by the City. Rue replied staff did not have an issue with it as long as the
applicant had permission. He would, however, like to know why the applicant requested
this. Farr also asked if the temporary fence would compromise safety during construction.
Rue replied the City would like to see a bypass plan. He anticipated a one-day closure to
install the storm sewer. Wurdeman replied the utilities were located on the east side in
coordination with the watershed and the site to the east was owned by the same entity that
owned the Baker’s Square. Other utilities would be connected in the same location as was
the case for that restaurant.
DeSantis asked if there would be any environmental hazards during the actual
construction, if the building materials would be recycled materials, and if there was a
plan for recycling the deconstructed materials. Wurdeman replied a Phase I
environmental assessment was completed, and there was a continued investigation as to a
Phase II assessment. At this time, he had not considered reused materials, but may still
review that idea with the contractor; the applicant was not yet at that point. Wright
replied the previous developments were an infill site and a parking lot, respectively, so
there was no precedent for recycling deconstructed materials. Klima added from a zoning
code standpoint this did not raise concerns.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by DeSanctis to close the public hearing. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
Mette agreed with removing one or two accessible parking stalls to save an existing tree
or replant a threatened tree. She requested the applicant use a solid, high quality metal
such as zinc rather than the proposed composite materials. She commended the cast stone
trash enclosure but suggested the gate be made to blend in. DeSanctis requested the
northwest Basswood tree that encroached on the building might not be realistically saved,
and he suggested the applicant investigate what species of tree would best fit that
cramped space.
Kirk asked for and received clarification that the material substitution Mette suggested
was a Class Two material, not a Class One. He noted the difficulty of trying to make a
company’s design standards mesh with the City’s standards. He wished to solicit
opinions from the commissioners in the construction industry on the anodized aluminum,
because he was inclined to allow it but did not know its lifespan. Farr replied he
considered the aluminum composite to be a sturdy material and in the landscaped area as
proposed by the developer, it would not be impacted as it might adjacent to the sidewalk,
for example. It came in different thicknesses, such as a six-inch rather than a four-inch.
He considered the ACM a high-class material and had no objection to it. He commended
the interior circulation plan and the two entrances. He again urged the applicant to reduce
the number of accessible stalls to gain 120-150 square feet for tree replacement.
Gooding commended the design and also approved of the aluminum composite (ACM).
He was more inclined to add larger trees than to decrease the number of the accessible
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 8, 2021
Page 4
parking stalls. Markos suggested the pavement/colored cement work near Culvers could
be carried through this development, as it added nice features with a minimal amount of
work. Mette seconded this suggested, saying it would tie the pedestrian walkway with the
rest of the site. She added she was concerned about the visibility of the pedestrian
crosswalk so that cars taking a quick corner into Starbucks will see them. Farr noted the
driveways along Plaza Drive were wide-entrance and served other businesses than the
immediate business in the sites. He stated Plaza Drive might be a greater risk area to
pedestrians than the internal traffic onsite. He suggested the City have a discussion on
this in the future.
DeSanctis he was not aware that the strip of commercial outlets to the northeast of this
proposed building had a sharply defined crosswalk to the proposed site. He expressed
concern that an assumption was being made that this secondary effect was a safe
transition,. Farr replied he preferred crosswalks not be located in the middle of the
parking lot, but he noted DeSanctis’s concern.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by DeSanctis to approve the Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 0.61 acres, the Planned Unit Development District
Review with waivers on 0.61 acres, and the Site Plan Review on 0.61 acres, based on
plans stamp dated March 3, 2021, and the staff report dated March 8, 2021. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
Klima announced new candidates for Planning Commission were recently
appointed by the City Council. Commission members Mette and Farr were
reappointed, and Robert Taylor was appointed to the vacant seat on the
commission. The terms would begin April 1.
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Markos moved, seconded by Gooding to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m.
Project
Site
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Beth Novak-Krebs, Senior Planner
DATE: March 18, 2021
SUBJECT: Noble Hill
LOCATION: 9955 and 9875 Spring Road
OWNERS: John and Carol Standal
APPLICANT: Pulte Homes
REQUEST: • 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
BACKGROUND
The applicant is r equesting approval to
develop 50 single -family lots on 27.51 acres
located at 9955 and 9875 Spring Road. The
property is located approximately 600 feet
south of Prospect Road on the east side of
Spring Road. There is currently a single-
family home on the property and a portion of
the property was used as a Christmas tree
farm at one time.
The property has a significant amount of
topographic relief. There is nearly 150 feet of
grade change from east to west. Riley Creek
runs t hrough a portio n of the west side of the
property. There are floodplains and wetlands
along the creek corridor. There is also a bluff
in the southwest corner of the site. There are
significant wooded areas along the creek and
on the bluff. In addition, the northeast corner
of the property is wooded and there is a line
of mature trees along the east property line.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 2
2
The adjacent land uses include conservation land to the south, residential to the east, conservation land
and one residential building to the west and conservation land to the north.
In 2020, Gonyea Homes proposed a 59-lot single family subdivision called The Overlook on this property.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project, but the application was withdrawn
before it was scheduled to be heard by the Council. The proposed layout of Noble Hill is very similar to
The Overlook, but has 50 lots. According to the applicant, the current application differs from the Gonyea
development in that there are 9 fewer lots, tree removal is reduced by 14%, the square footage of retaining
walls is reduced by 35%, the impervious surface is reduced by 5% and the applicant has made multiple
minor grading modifications to minimize the impact on the land.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
The property is currently guided Low Density Residential, which allows a maximum density of 5 dwelling
units per acre. The proposed project has a density of 1.8 dwelling units per acre. The property is
currently zoned Rural. The applicant has requested to rezone the property from Rural to R1-9.5, which
would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Zoning around
the property includes: Rural, Park
and Open Space, RM6.5, and R1-
9.5.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
The preliminary plat includes 50
single family lots and 4 outlots. The
applicant is proposing the main
access to the neighborhood from
Spring Road with cul-de-sacs near
the east property line and near the
south property line. Given the
topography of the site, the location
of the environmental features and the
adjacent land uses, there are limited
options to make street connections
and the cul-de-sac streets allow for
development of the property.
The proposed lots range in size from
9,075 square feet to 22,410 square
feet. The average lot size is 13,477
square feet. The majority of the lots
meet the minimum lot size with only
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 3
3
5 out of 50 lots at less than 9,500 square feet. The minimum lot width requirement in the R1-9.5 zoning
district is 70 feet along the street and 55 feet for lots completely on the bulb of the cul-de-sac. The
majority of the lots are between 60 and 75 feet wide with the narrowest being 61.15 feet. The lots around
the cul-de-sac bulb average 47 feet wide with the narrowest being 46.37 feet.
Proposed Outlots A and C will be used for stormwater management and a monument sign. These Outlots
will be privately owned and maintained with drainage and utility easements over the st ormwater
management facilities. Outlot B is proposed to include a trail connection to the trail in the City-owned
conservancy land to the south. The Outlot is proposed to be deeded to the City and the City will maintain
the trail. Proposed Outlot D will be used for open space, stormwater management, and the preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas. The 8.25 acre Outlot will be deeded to the City. This enables the City to
protect and preserve the creek, the floodplain wetlands, wetland buffers, the floodplain, and bluff in this
corner of the property.
In order to get a sense for the topography of the property and how it compares to Hennepin Village, the
applicant prepared a number of cross sections to illustrate the relationship between the two
neighborhoods. The following are examples of the cross sections provided at the neighborhood meeting.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 4
4
HOME PRODUCT
The applicant will also be the home builder for this neighborhood. The applicant provided 5 different home
floor plan layouts that will fit this neighborhood. The proposed single family homes are 2-story homes
between 3,169 square feet and 3,539 square feet. The homes will have 3 -car garages. The homes will
range in price from the high $600 thousands to the $800 thousands. The applicant is proposing to use LP
engineered wood siding on the homes. Some of the homes will include stone and other details. The home
buyer can choose a different style (i.e. Craftsman, Northern Craftsman, Euro Country, Prairie, Heartland)
with the chosen floor plan layout , which changes the exterior appearance. This provides for variety in the
homes as seen from the street. Below are some examples of some of the home styles.
ACCESS
The primary access point is from Spring Road, which is a County Road. Based on discussions with the
County, the applicant is proposing a ¾ access from Spring Road. A ¾ access allows all traffic movements
with the exception of turning left out of the neighborhood onto Spring Road. The design of the
intersection of Spring Road and the proposed road will be reviewed and approved by the County.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 5
5
The streets within the neighborhood will be public streets and designed and built to City standards.
The applicant is not currently proposing a street connection to Junegrass Lane in the adjacent Hennepin
Village development. The section of Junegrass Lane between Lilac Drive and the west property line of
Hennepin Village is a private property. The connection would require approval of an easement from the
Hennepin Village Homeowners Association as well as temporary easements for grading from the two
property owners adjacent to this area.
The proposed plan shows the street terminating with a cul-de-sac just west of the Hennepin Village
property line. The cul-de-sac is designed such that the street could be connected to Hennepin Village in
the future. A street connection to Junegrass Lane within Hennepin Village is desirable as it would provide
connectivity for residents as well as emergency and fire access. If the Hennepin Village Homeowners
Association were to grant approval for the street connection and grading, the applicant should revise the
plans to provide the street connection. If the street is connected, the street name should be revised to
Junegrass Lane from Spring Road to the current end of Junegrass Lane. If the Homeowners Association
does not approve the street connection, the City is comfortable with the cul-de-sac whether it is permanent
or temporary. The Fire Department is comfortable with the cul-de-sac provided the cul-de-sac is designed
to allow for a future connection and there is emergency access to Junegrass Lane. The proposed plans
include a 10’ wide paved trail connection to the end of Junegrass Lane for emergency access and
pedestrian access between neighborhoods. The developer and the Hennepin Village Homeowners
Association are still discussing the connection between the neighborhoods. The Development Agreement
will address the design, and timing of any connection that is agreed to by the Hennepin Village
Homeowners Association.
TRAFFIC
A traffic study was conducted on the previously proposed 59-unit single-family housing development
called The Overlook. The trip generation section of the study has been revised based on the new
proposal with 50 single-family lots. With the proposed development generating approximately 460
total daily trips and under 50 pm peak hour trips, the impact to adjacent Spring Road is low in terms
of capacity. The 2016 traffic counts for Spring Road north of Charlson were 4400 vehicles per day
and south of Charlson were 1800 vehicles per day. These sections of road are similar and have similar
capacities. Spring Road can accommodate the proposed development and still have available capacity.
Trail grading, by the developer, along Spring Road will allow the City to install a future trail and will
also improve site distance for vehicles entering and exiting the development.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS
The purpose of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as stated in the City Code is to provide for a more
creative and efficient approach to the use of land within the City; to allow variety in the types of
environment available to people and distribution of overall density of population and intensity of land
use where desirable and feasible; and provide for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental
design. The requested waivers seem reasonable because the waivers allow for a design that meets the
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 6
6
density requirements, a layout that respects the topography of the site, a design that protects and
preserves the natural features on the site, and provides trail connections to a broader existing trail
system.
As a part of the PUD process, the applicant is seeking waivers to City Code requirements as outlined
below.
Minimum Lot Size
City Code requires a minimum lot size of 9,500 square feet in the R1-9.5 zoning district. Five of the lots
are under 9,500 square feet. These lots are 9,075 square feet in size. The waiver would allow Lots 2-6,
Block 2, to be under the minimum lot size as depicted on the plans.
Minimum Lot Width
City Code requires a minimum lot width of 70 feet along the street, 55 feet on the bulb of the cul-de sac
and 85 feet on corner lots. Twenty-three of the lots are narrower than the minimum lot width requirement.
These lots along the street range in width from 61.15 feet to 68.74 feet. The lots on the bulb of the cul-de-
sac have an average width of 44 feet with the narrowest being 46.37. The waiver would allow Lots 1-5
and 15 and 16, Block 1, Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, and Lots 4-6, 13-23, Block 3 to be narrower than required
as depicted on the plans.
Front Yard Setback
City Code requires a front yard setback of 30 feet. The applicant is proposing a front yard setback of a
minimum 25 feet. This provides more flexibility on home placement to deal with potential issues with
grades. Homes on individual lots can have a setback deeper than 25 feet based on lot conditions and
preferences. The waiver would allow all of the lots to have a 25 foot minimum front yard setback.
Over length Cul-de-Sac. City Code states that a cul-de-sac shall not exceed 500 feet in length. Both of the
cul-de-sac streets exceed 500 feet. With limited opportunities for street connections, the cul-de-sac streets
provide for development of the site. The cul-de-sac terminating at the east property line is designed so that
it could be connected in the future if conditions change. If the street is connected to Hennepin V illage, a
waiver would only be needed for the Osprey Point cul-de-sac.
TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN
Although the applicant is proposing to protect several stands of existing trees, the grading on the site will
result in significant tree loss. The project requires 2,522 caliper inches of tree replacement. The Tree
Replacement Plan includes 866 caliper inches of trees leaving a deficit of 1,656 caliper inches. The
proposed plan includes the installation of trees along the east property line to provide screening between
the homes in Hennepin Village and the proposed project, in the front yards of the lots, along Spring Road
and in the outlots. The plans shall be revised to include additional caliper inches of trees. These additional
trees shall be added as follows: add a second row of trees inside of the current row between Spring Rd and
Lots 19-26 (possibly alternating both rows between deciduous and coniferous); push the trees below the
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 7
7
retaining wall of Lots 4 -6, Block 3 closer to the base of the wall onto private property and add bare root
trees on the slope of outlot D; add trees along Lark Sparrow Lane.
In lieu of planting the required caliper inches to comply with Tree Replacement, the applicant is proposing
to comply with the Tree Replacement requirements by making a cash payment for the deficit as allowed by
City Code. The Development Agreement will include language regarding the payment in lieu based on the
final Tree Replacement Plan.
The applicant has provided a phasing plan for the installation o f the trees. The majority of the trees will be
planted in the first phase. These trees are located around the perimeter of the property and in the outlots.
The trees located on the individual lots will be installed during phase 2 after homes are constructed. The
phased approach is being implemented so that the trees on the individual lots are not damaged during the
construction of the home. The landscape security will be held by the City consistent with City Code to
ensure the trees survive.
SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS
The proposed project includes a sidewalk on the east side of proposed Larksparrow Lane and on Osprey
Point. The current conservancy area to the south of the subject property contains a trail. The applicant is
proposing to provide an 8’ wide paved t rail connection through Outlot B to the existing trail on the City-
owned land. The applicant is also proposing to construct an 8’ wide paved trail on the east side of Spring
Road from the entrance to the development going north to the property line. This section will ultimately
be extended to the existing trail that terminates just south of Prospect Road. Furthermore, the applicant
will grade a pad for a trail along the east side of Spring Road from the main entrance into the development
south to just beyond the creek. In the future, the City will install the paved trail on this pad .
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The applicant is proposing stormwater management in Outlots A, C and D. The stormwater management
facilities include infiltration basins, swales, stor m sewer piping, and inlets. The applicant is required to
comply with Watershed District and City of Eden Prairie requirements prior to issuance of a Land
Alteration Permit.
WETLAND, SHORELAND AND BLUFF
The southwest corner of the property includes wetlands, Riley Creek, and bluffs, which are proposed to be
encompassed by Outlot D. Due to Riley Creek running through the property, a portion of the property is
located within the Shoreland District. The majority of the shoreland is located within Outlot D. Ho wever,
the district boundary does extend onto proposed Lots 16-19, Block 3. Within the shoreland district, the
maximum impervious surface on a lot is 30%. The Development Agreement will include language
requiring the applicant to notify the owners of proposed Lots 16-19, Block 3 that these lots are located
within the shoreland and the 30% maximum impervious surface limit is in effect.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 8
8
ENDANGERED SPECIES
The Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System was queried by the MnDNR and they indicated there
is a potential for the presence of the following on the site: a Dry Sand-Gravel Prairie native plant
community, Kitten-tail plants, t he Lark Sparrow, the Gopher Snake, and t he Rusty Patched Bumble Bee.
The Dry Sand-Gravel Prairie is located within Outlot D, which post development will be owned by the
City. The Development Agreement will include language requiring a field assessment in the spring and
what appropriate measures the applicant will be required to follow should any of these endangered species
be found on the site. The City will follow up on any necessary mitigation through the Land Alteration
Permit or other permitting.
RETAINING WALLS
Due to the topography of the site, a number of retaining walls are being proposed in order to develop the
property. Some of the retaining walls will reach heights of near 15 feet. The applicant is proposing
modular block retaining walls. The walls will be installed by the applicant and maintained by the
Homeowners Association.
PARK DEDICATION FEES
Park dedication fees are required for each unit. These fees are paid at time of building permit issuance.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
This property is subject to trunk sewer and watermain assessments with this project in the amount of
$165,120.27. Deferred assessments of $252,391.60 and connection fees of $178,416 are also applicable. A
special assessment agreement will be required.
SIGNS
The site plan includes a proposed monument sign in Outlot C near the entrance into the subdivision. The
applicant is required to obtain a sign permit for the sign prior to its installation. The sign shall comply with
City Code requirements.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
No affordability or inclusionary housing requirements are recommended to be applied to the project.
SUSTAINABLE FEATURES
The homes Pulte will be constructing will have high energy efficiency. Each home is tested using the Home
Energy Rating System (HERS) index. The lower the number the more energy efficient. A home built to
the 2004 International Energy Conservation Code has a rating of 100. The average HERS score for a
Pulte Home is 47 to 53. The applicant is proposing to incorporate the following sustainable features into
the development:
• Homes have an average HERS score of 47 to 53
• All light bulbs are LED or CFL
• All faucets and t oilets are low flow designs
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 9
9
• All windows are Energy Star compliant
• Native trees will be used
AIRPORT
The property is located within the Safety Zone C as designated in the Flying Cloud Airport Zoning
Ordinance adopted by the Flying Cloud Airport Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) on April 10, 2019.
The allowable construction height limits of the JAZB far exceed the proposed structure heights and the
construction equipment heights of this project , but the applicant will be required to submit an application
for an Airport Zoning Permit documenting the necessary information. The property is also located within
the airport buffer zone requiring noise attenuation. The Development Agreement will address disclosure of
information regarding Flying Cloud Airport, noise mitigation, and the airport zoning permit.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT
In 2005, a very similar development was proposed for the Standal property and the developer at that time
had a report prepared entitled “Report on Archaeological Reconnaissance-Level Survey Within the
Standal Property, City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota” dated June 2005. The conclusion
from the report was that the proposal at that time could proceed without any risk of adverse impact on
significant archaeological resources. As part The Overlook project, which was proposed in 2020, the
report was sent to the State Archaeologist’s Office. On March 6, 2020, staff received an email from the
State Archeologist who concurred with staff that the study is still relevant and acceptable for this proposed
development.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on February 10, 2021. Approximately 16 residents
attended the meeting. General topics discussed or asked about at the neighborhood meeting were
about height of homes/cross section view, tree removal/planting, trail access (specifically Outlot B),
trail between the two properties over by Junegrass Lane (grade, hydrant in the way, safety barriers so
a car cannot travel down the trail).
Staff has received a number of emails and letters from residents in Hennepin Village Copies of the letters
and emails are attached.
Many of the comments include concerns about the Frederick Miller Spring located just south of the
proposed project. The spring is in a small tr ibutary valley of the Minnesota River and is located
outside of the proposed project area. No changes are proposed to the spring as a part of this project.
The spring is located on property owned by the City of Eden Prairie. The spring has been in
continuous use since 1890 according to local documentation and as such has become a well-known
landmark in the area. In 1997, the City designated the spring as a local Heritage Preservation Site
which carries with it local protections through City Code.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 10
10
The public collects and uses water from the spring. The parking lot and collection site is located on the
east side of Spring Road. In 2007, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared for
several potential roadway connections west of Spring Road including the extension of Prospect Road
to Eden Prairie Road. The Prospect Road extension was constructed and is located north and west of
Miller Spring. The EAW found that the Prospect Road extension was not likely to impact Miller
Spring. A pipe from the spring carries the spring water under Spring Road to the collection location.
The EAW also found that it is likely that the Miller Spring groundwatershed is west and northwest of
the spring. Based on available evidence, further hydraulic evaluation of the spring for the proposed
development does not appear warranted at this time.
Some of the comments received suggest that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be
completed for the project area. Minnesota State Statutes includes minimum thresholds which require
environmental review. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required for a single
family detached project that includes 250 or more residential units. An EIS is required for single
family detached projects that include 1,000 or more residential units. Noble Hill falls below these
thresholds.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval of the following requests:
• 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
This is based on plans stamp dated February 19, 2021, staff report dated March 18, 2021 and the
following conditions:
1. Prio r to the 1st reading before the City Council, the applicant shall:
A. Revise the street name Larksparrow Lane to avoid duplication with an existing street
name.
B. Revise the Tree Replacement Phasing Plan to be consistent with the changes made to
the Tree Replacement Plan.
C. Revise the Typical Lot Detail on sheet 9 to show that there is typically a 10 foot wide
Drainage and Utility Easement along the rear lot line.
D. Revise the Proposed Zoning in the Site Plan Data on sheet 9 to say Proposed Zoning:
R1-9.5 PUD.
E. Revise the Lot Data in the Site Plan Data on sheet 9 to include the requirements for
Min. Lot Width, Min. Lot Depth, etc. This will clearly show where the plan complies
and where it does not comply and waivers are needed.
F. Revise the plan by removing the retaining wall from the Dr ainage and Utility Easement
on Lot 26, Block 3.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 11
11
G. Revise the Rendered Site Plan to include the trees added in Outlot D and in Block 1.
H. Revise the Tree Replacement Plan to reduce the size of the trees being planted on the
steep slopes in Outlot D. Smaller size trees will be easier to plant and establish on
steep slopes.
I. Revise the Tree Replacement Plan to include additional caliper inches, These additional
trees shall be added as follows: add a second row of trees inside of the current row
between Spring Rd and Lots 19-26 (possibly alternating both rows between deciduous
and coniferous); push the trees below the retaining wall of Lots 4-6, Block 3 closer to
the base of the wall onto private property and add bare root trees on the slope of outlot
D; add trees along Lark Sparrow Lane.
2. Prior to release of the Final Plat, the applicant shall
A. Sign special assessment agreement for City trunk sewer and water assessment fees and
connection fees and pay deferred assessments.
B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the
City Engineer and Watershed District.
C. Meet the tree replacement requirements by making a cash payment for the caliper inch
deficit from the plan. The exact number will be determined based on the revised plan.
D. Provide copies of legal documents, either in Homeowners Association format or
private covenant and agreement format to be approved by the City that shall address
the following:
• Describe the long term private maintenance or replacement agreement for the
retaining walls.
• Insertion of language in the documents that relinquishes the City of Eden Prairie
from maintenance or replacement of the retaining walls.
E. Submit a bond, letter of credit, or cash deposit (“security”) that guarantees completion
of all public improvements equivalent to 125% of the cost of the improvements.
3. Prior to land alteration permit issuance, the applicant shall:
A. Conduct a survey for endangered, rare and threatened species on the site and provide
findings to the City.
B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, wetland, utility, street and erosion control plans for
review and approval by the City Engineer that address drainage issues identified in the
Engineering DRC memo.
C. Submit a tree replacement letter of credit or escrow surety equivalent to 150% of the
cost of the tree replacement. A surety will be required for each phase of tree
replacement as shown on the Exhibit B Plans.
D. Obtain and provide documentation of Watershed District approval.
E. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading.
F. Install erosion control at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by
the City.
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 12
12
G. Submit a land alteration bond, letter of credit, or escrow surety equivalent to 125% of
the cost of the land alteration.
H. Submit a wetland protection bond, letter of credit, or escrow surety equivalent to
150% of the wetland plan requirements included in the Development Agreement.
4. Prior to building permit issuance for the property, the applicant shall:
A. Obtain an Airport Zoning Permit.
B. Pay the appropriate cash park fees.
C. Provide recorded copies of any Home Owner Association documents or private
covenants and agreements to the City following recording of the final plat.
D. Submit construction plans and project specifications for public infrastructure for review
and approval by the City Engineer. Construction plans must include either the cul-de-
sac option or the street connection through Hennepin Village; dependent on Hennepin
Village providing authorization for work within their property.
5. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the project as
indicated in the plans stamp dated February 19, 2021.
Minimum Lot Size
City Code requires a minimum lot size of 9,500 square feet in the R1-9.5 zoning district. Five of
the lots are under 9,500 square feet. These lots are 9,075 square feet in size. The waiver would
allow Lots 2-6, Block 2, to be under the minimum lot size as depicted on the plans.
Minimum Lot Width
City Code requires a minimum lot width of 70 feet along the street, 55 feet on the bulb of the cul-
de sac and 85 feet on corner lots. Twenty-three of the lots are narrower than the minimum lot
width requirement. These lots along the street range in width from 61.15 feet to 68.74 feet. The
lots on the bulb of the cul-de-sac have an average width of 44 feet with the narrowest being 46.37.
The waiver would allow Lots 1-5 and 15 and 16, Block 1, Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, and Lots 4-6,
13-23, Block 3 to be narrower than required as depicted on the plans
Front Yard Setback
City Code requires a front yard setback of 30 feet. The applicant is proposing a front yard setback
of a minimum 25 feet. This provides more flexibility on home placement to deal with potential
issues with grades. Homes on individual lots can have a setback deeper than 25 feet based on lot
conditions and preferences. The waiver would allow all of the lots to have a 25 foot minimum
front yard setback.
Over length Cul-de-Sac. City Code states that a cul-de-sac shall not exceed 500 feet in length.
Both of the cul-de-sac streets exceed 500 feet. With limited opportunities for street connections,
the cul-de-sac streets provide for development of the site. The cul-de-sac terminating at the east
Staff Report – Noble Hill
Page 13
13
property line is designed so that it could be connected in the future if conditions change. If the
street is connected to Hennepin Village, a waiver would only be needed for the Osprey Point cul-
de-sac.
6. All signage shall require review and approval of a sign permit and shall comply with Section
11.70.
7. A Steep Slope Permit is authorized through the approval of this project and plans stamp dated
February 19, 2021.
PROSPECT RD
PROSPECT
R
D CUPOLA LN PICKET DR GABLE DR SPRINGRD CHARLSONRD
P O R C H L IG H T L
PORCHLIGHT LN SPRINGR D LAC DR LITICKSEED LN TCHGRASS LN PINCHERRY LN P L U MS TONEDR ISWJUNEGRASS LN DR I N D IGO DR WILDFLOWER DR Location Map: Noble Hill Address:9955 and 9875 Spring RoadEden Prairie, Minnesota
N
Q4 R
PROJECTSITE
PINCHERRY LN
CRABAPPLE LN VERVAIN0 170 340 680 Feet ¯
D -D -------D ---------Cl
PROSPECT RD
P R O SPECTRD CUPOLA LN PICKET DR GABLE DR SPRINGRD C
PORCHL
P O R C H L IG H T
IGHT L N LAC DR LISPRINGRD TCHGRASS LN TICKSEED LN IJUNEGRASS LN SWPINCHERRY LN P LUMSTONEDR NDR I NDI
H
ARL
S
ONRD WILDFLOWER DR
LN
Q4 R
PINCHERRY LN
CRABAPPLE LN
GO DR
Guide Plan Map: Noble HillAddress: 9955 and 9875 Spring RoadEden Prairie, MN
Project Site
City of Eden Prairie Land Use Guide Plan Map 2040
Rural Industrial Flex Tech
Low Density Residential Flex Service Streams
Principal Arterial Medium Density Residential Eco Innovation A Minor Arterial ¯ Medium Migh Density Residential Industrial B Minor Arterial DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06High Density Residential Airport DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 03-01-07Major Collector DATE Revised 11-07-05 DATE Revised 06-01-07Mixed-Use DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-07Minor Collector DATE Revised 03-23-06Public / Semi-Public DATE Revised 03-01-08Parks & Open Space DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Town Center
Transit-Oriented Development Golf Course DISCLAIMER: The City of Eden Prairie does not warrant the accuracy nor the correctness of the information contained in this map. It is your responsibility to verify the accuracy of this information. In no event will The City of Eden Prairie be liable for any damages, including loss of business, lost profits, business interruption, loss of business information or other pecuniary loss that might arise from the use of this map or the information it contains. Map information is believed to be accurate but accuracy is not guaranteed. Any errors or omissions should be reported to The City of Eden Prairie. M:\GIS\Users\Departments\CommDev\Themes\Shapes\Zoning and a ll other land use information\OfficialMaps \OfficialGuidePlan.mxd Map was Updated/Created: April 18, 2008
Regional Commercial Utility & Railroad
Commercial RIght-of-Way 440 220 0 440 Feet Office CityLimits ERVVAI
D -D --D r:l2I -D -D D rzzl
D -l?ZI -D D
D D
D D -D --
Zoning Map: Noble Hill Address: 9955 and 9875 Spring RoadEden Prairie, MN
QR4
PROSPECT RD PINCHERRY LN
PLUMSTONEDR
CHARLSONR
D
P R O SPECTRD WILDFLOWERD R JUNEGRASS LN
I N D IGO DR
CRABAPPLE LN
P O R C H L IG H T LN CUPOLA LN PORCHLIGHT L N LILAC DR VERVAINDR TICKSEED LN SWITCHGRASS LN GABLE DR PICKET DR SPRINGRD SPRINGRD PINCHERRYLN Project Site Proposing to rezone the property from Rural to R1-9.5
0 0.075 0.15 City of Eden Prairie Zoning Map
Legend Miles
Rural Regional Service Commercial Shoreland Management Classifications
R1-44 One Family- 44,000 sf. min. Regional Commercial NE Natural Environment Waters R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min. TC-C RD Recreational Development Waters
R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min. TC-R GD General Development Waters (Creeks Only) ¯
R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min. TC-MU 100 - Year Floodplain
RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A. max. Industrial Park - 2 Acre Min,
Industrial Park - 5 Acre Min. Up dated through approved Ordinances #26-2008 RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A. max.
General Industrial - 5 Acre Min. Ordinance #33-2001 (BFI Addition) approved, but not shown on this map edition Airport Office Date: March 1, 2009 Office Public In case of discrepency related to a zoning classification on this zoning map, the Ordinance and attached legal description on file at Eden Prairie City Center will prevail. Neighborhood Commercial Golf Course
Community Commercial Water
DISCLAIMER: The City of Eden Prairie does not warrant the accuracy nor the correctness of the information contained in this map. It is your responsibility to verify the accuracy of this information. In no event will The City of Eden Prairie be liable for any damages, including loss of bus iness, lost profits, business interruption, loss of business information or other pecuniary loss that might arise from the use of this map or the information it
Highway Commercial Right of Way
contains. Map information is believed to be accurate but accuracy is not guaranteed. Any errors or omissions should be reported to The City of Eden Prairie. M:\GIS\Users\Departments\CommDev\Themes\Shapes\Zoning and a ll other land use information\OfficialMaps \OfficialZoning.mxd Map was Updated/Created: June 11, 2008
Airport Commercial TOD-R Transit Oriented Development - Residential Transit Oriented Development - Residential
Aerial Map: Noble HillAddress:9955 and 9875 Spring RoadEden Prairie, Minnesota
QR4
PROSPECT RD PINCHERRY LN PROSPECT
R
D
P L U MS TONEDR
CHARLSONRD WILDFLOWER DR JUNEGRASS LN
I N D IGO DR
CRABAPPLE LN
PINCHERRY LN CUPOLA LN LILAC DR VERVAINDR TICKSEED LN SWITCHGRASS LN GABLE DR PICKET DR P O R C H L IG H T L N PORCHLIGHT LN SPRINGRD SPRINGR D
PROJECTSITE
0 170 340 680 Feet ¯
From: Andrew Henley
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: 9955 Spring Road
Date: Saturday, March 13, 2021 8:27:41 PM
Hello Eden Prarie council,
I am writing to express strong opposition to approving the building development proposed for 9955 Spring Road.
For many decades, the spring and connected wildlife refuge area has been a great access to both the City of Eden
Prarie and the greater metropolitan community.
It is more apparent now that ever the great necessity to protect these wildlife habitats, especially when connected to
historic spring water facilities. Commercialization of prime real estate may have great profits, but they are often at
the expense of our future generations. Please do not approve this development. Our City needs To keep this
beautiful asset intact.
Thank you for you time,
-Andrew Henley
Andrew Henley
Principal
High Grade Systems, LLC
andrew@henleyaudio.com
10250 Crosstown Highway
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Office: 612-584-3054
Cell: 612-250-0771
www.henleyaudio.com
www.hgs-llc.com
From: Daryl Horak
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Frederick Miller Spring
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 1:49:59 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Importance: High
Hi,
I'm writing to request that the City of EP delay the approval of development plans that could affect
the Frederick Miller Spring.
My family has been utilizing this natural spring for over 30 years now. We should do whatever we
can to preserve this wonderful and vital natural resource to not only EP residents but to the
thousands of MN residents that travel to this natural spring from all over the 7 county metro area.
So many people depend on this source of clean and mineral-rich water every day for their overall
pursuit of health and wellness.
We are NOT against this development if it will NOT impact the quality of the spring’s water. But if it
will now or in the future… we ask that you reconsider moving forward with this development as it
could disrupt this WONDERFUL and HEALTY resource to so many.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
In good health,
Daryl Horak
Owner/Club Director
Master Certified Personal Trainer and Nutritional Coach – NPTI, ACPT
Anytime Fitness of Bloomington
5107 W. 98th Street
(Normandale Village Center)
Bloomington, MN 55437
Club: (952) 303-3864
Cell: (952) 292-7496
Link to Anytime Fitness - West Bloomington website
Staffed hours for tours and sign-ups:
Mon – Thurs: 10:30 AM – 6:30 PM
Fri: 9 AM – 2 PM
Sat: 9 AM – 12 PM
March 16, 2021
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
C/O Beth Novak-Krebs
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344
Dear Ms. Novak-Krebs:
Re: Noble Hill proposed development
I am writing to you today as the owner of the property at 10006 Indigo Drive, and
on behalf of myself and the property owners at 10002 and 10012 Indigo Dr. We
want to make the planning commission aware of several important concerns we
share about the planned Pulte development bordering Spring Road and called Noble
Hill. In conversations with others with property on Indigo Drive and Lilac Drive I’ve
learned that others share the concerns expressed here, but this letter is only
intended to represent the unanimous interests of the resident properties noted
above.
Background
As you know, the planned Pulte development will have an eastern boundary that
abuts a significant number of properties within the Hennepin Village (HV)
residential complex. Specifically, the planned development will share a property
boundary with approximately 40 homes along Lilac Drive and Indigo Drive in HV.
These homes have existed in Eden Prairie for as many as 15 years, and their
residents pay annual property taxes totaling more than $200,000. Since the HV
development was built and populated these homeowners have contributed over
$2,500,000 in property tax support to Eden Prairie. In the same time period, the
current owners of the property proposed for development by Pulte enjoyed a
favorable tax status and have contributed only minimally (less than the HV
homeowners contribute in one year) to tax support for Eden Prairie. I hope that
you’ll agree that our interests and concerns as HV residents deserve careful
consideration.
In support of the Pulte development, we appreciate that the property they’ve
purchased has long been the subject of development interest, and that the city of
Eden Prairie has a legitimate interest in strengthening its tax base through
thoughtful, planned development. However, we don’t understand why the city isn’t
requiring two points of access into the Pulte development when we understand that
they did for the previously proposed Gonyea development. Hopefully, that decision
by the city will be explained at the upcoming Planning Commission Public Heariing.
We accept that any new development, including this one, will bring increased traffic
flow, construction noise and inconvenience for current residents of HV, and we
concede that we must exercise patience in this regard. However, we want to
register several important overarching concerns about Pulte’s current development
plans and their apparent lack of interest in considering any changes suggested by
attendees at a virtual meeting they hosted on February 10 of this year. Those
concerns relate to the dramatic and unnecessary loss of the green space and barrier
trees that line the border between the proposed Pulte development and the existing
properties on Indigo and Lilac Drives, their lack of interest in considering
decreasing impacts due to their plan to construct two story homes by reducing the
grade on proposed Osprey Point and the serious potential environmental impacts
on the entire development to the Miller Spring and Riley Creek.
We concede the rights of developers to legally purchase and thoughtfully develop
available property, but we very strongly oppose the rights of Pulte to negatively
impact the quality of our own life and reducing the value (as well as tax base for the
city).
Specifically, the site plan submitted by Pulte calls for removal of many of the mature
trees and much of the green space that currently border the Indigo Drive properties
and the Pulte development. Proposed setbacks are minimal, and although the
elevation drop between many of the Indigo Drive homes and Spring Road is over
160’, Pulte has proposed two story properties with first floor elevations only a few
feet lower than existing Indigo Drive residences. The result for us on Indigo Drive
will be viewing home siding, vent stacks and roof shingles.
Pulte suggests that they have no options in regard to eliminating the trees and green
space that form the eastern border of their planned development. They submit that
their site plan is pushed unavoidably eastward by the requirement to respect the
conservation easement on the western border of their development, and that the
small resulting setbacks between their property and our own will not support the
dense stands of mature trees that currently form the sight barrier and green space
enjoyed by Indigo Drive residents. Instead, small stands of short, immature trees
are proposed as replacements for the fully developed stands of trees already in
place.
Our Very Important Request
We strongly request that the planning commission recognize the long-standing
contributions of the Indigo Drive residents, and take our legitimate interests into
consideration before approving the Pulte development as currently planned.
As might reasonably be expected, Pulte has designed a site plan and building plan
with optimal benefits for itself. It is not true, however, that Pulte is without other
options. Until the planning commission grants final approval, such fluid things as
number of lots, lot size, lot dimensions, lot grades and flow and placement of the
home sites within the property can all be adjusted if other compelling interests
dictate.
We believe that our interests on Indigo Drive are compelling. We request that the
planning commission require three reasonable but important changes in the current
development plan.
1. First, require more favorable setbacks from the Indigo Drive properties. At a
minimum, required setbacks should be at least 75’. Only small adjustments to
planned lot dimensions and shapes, placement of the homes within the lots,
and/or some small relief relative to the conservation easement would be
required to accomplish this.
2. Second, a sloping grade characterizes much of the planned development
property behind the Indigo Drive properties. We ask that the planning
commission require that new homes be placed low enough on the sloping grade
to allow for horizontal sight lines from Indigo Drive homes that don’t intersect
with walls, windows and rooftops in the Pulte development. If the lack of
appreciable slope simply makes this impossible for some homes, require
additional setbacks and visual barriers.
3. Finally, require that more of the current mature growth trees, and much more
of the green space and other visual barriers be preserved. Longer setbacks will
make this simpler. Pulte rightly points out that the smaller replacement trees
planned for the eastern border will look much fuller in 15 or 20 years, but many
of the current residents of the homes on Indigo Drive are retirement age people.
Those retirement age residents simply shouldn’t have to wait 15 or 20 years to
have the peace and beauty of their own views restored.
Thank you for your time and attention to this very important matter. With your
reasonable assistance and guidance we’re confident that Pulte can make the changes
we’re requesting and still accomplish its development goals. Without consideration
of these reasonable change requests, the Pulte development will negatively and
dramatically impact the lives of too many long-term Indigo Drive residents.
Sincerely,
David and Dorothy Raby; 10006 Indigo Dr.
Scott and Michelle Addyman; 10002 Indigo Dr.
Lynn O’jala; 10012 Indigo Dr.
Cc
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Board of Managers
Eden Prairie City Council
From: diane brown
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Save the Frederick spring & wooded areas
Date: Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:37:01 PM
Please save the Frederick spring, I love the trees in this area & I am a resident in the Heritage
Pines/settler's Ridge area. I hike around & often use this fresh water spring ,& see many
others filling their bottles.
Sincerely, Diane Wilder
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: Jed Hicks
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Frederick Miller Spring
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 6:42:34 AM
Hello,
Please reconsider rezoning the area around the Frederick Miller Spring.
This area is a beautiful accessible natural area. And access to Spring water is a great
natural and historic part of Eden Prairie. Please preserve our link to our past.
Thanks,
Jed
From: jlang0321
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Frederick-Miller Spring
Date: Friday, March 12, 2021 11:56:32 AM
Commissioner,
I was notified that there is a proposal going in front of the EP City Hall on the 22nd that would
allow a development company to build 50 homes on the lands next to the Frederick-Miller
Spring. I have been getting water from that spring for about 7 years now.
I'm writing to ask you that you help the community keep the quality of the spring. We know
that the development of that land will destroy the forest and the ecosytem that allows that
spring to be as clean and healthy as it is. With that and the fact that those homes will have
chemicals put in the grass, the water supply will become contaminated... for humans and
animals alike. We will also reduce the scenic beauty of the area that people want, and is the
reason people move to the EP/Chanhassen area.
There has to be at least a hundred people that go to that spring on a daily basis, with the
amount even higher in warmer months. That spring is of high value for those seeking fresh
clean water. I have met countless amounts of people that travel almost an hour to get water
from that spring! Those are people that appreciate what EP has to offer and that it's open to
everyone. That alone brings people to EP, thus adding economic influence to stores, services,
and restaurants nearby. Those are also the people that recommend others to go to EP for the
spring and whatever else we offer. That spring brings people from everywhere and provides us
exposure that is unique to the area. Those people will stop coming to this area once this
housing development comes in. They won't trust the safety and cleanliness of the water any
longer. That is a big loss for this area, financially, but most importantly the impact to our
environment will be even worse.
Please work on behalf of the citizens to stop this rezoning and protect this area so we can
continue to enjoy it, but also benefit from all things it offers. Tell the builder to find land
elsewhere. The risk is far greater than the reward.
Thank you.
Jenny L
From: Katy Sudlow
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Frederick- Miller Spring
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 6:14:20 PM
To whom this may concern,
I am writing to express my family's and friends' concern with the proposed development on
top of the Frederick-Miller Spring. We have been exclusively using water from this spring for
drinking, cooking, and fermenting foods and drinks for over six years. Initially we started
looking into water sources after the Flint water crisis was exposed. Knowing that was a
terrible event, that actually still has not been solved, but it was far from the only case of unsafe
water in the United States, made us realize we had to take our own family's health into our
hands. This is the cleanest water by far in the area, and I have met people at the Spring coming
from Northfield, or farther!, to collect water and bring back home to use for their own
families. We know even locally that the areas around the 3M plant have had contaminated
water for decades, and have not been remedied, seen by the higher cases of cancer-
particularly childhood cases- in Cottage Grove and other surrounding areas.
The Spring was meant to be protected land. It grieves us that we may lose our source of water,
yet again, for corporate interests and the financial gain of others. How many more times must
we as citizens lose out on our health for the gain of others? You may think this will not affect
the water quality, but how can you be sure? Until the water is affected to the point it will never
reclaim it's purity, corporate interests will insist it is safe. Then will they apologize? Will they
find another pure water source for us? Will they pay for the medical bills of the families this
will harm? History tells us they will do none of the above. As in the cases of Flint, the Eastern
Twin Cities from 3M, and so many other stories of negligence, greed, and harm, this will just
add to the list of the public being harmed to protect the pockets of the bigger businesses.
Besides the health factor, you may not be realizing the community and diversity that this
Spring attracts. I have grown up in diverse areas, from Chicago and here. Nothing, literally
nothing, has a chance of comparing to the diversity of this Spring. We started coming here to
gather water and met and enjoyed the company of people from all walks of life. Teenagers
come to grab a cold drink with their friends. Young business people, families, and elderly that
need assistance bringing their bottles back to their cars all regularly come to appreciate the
pure water. Some people have known no water but the water of the pure Spring in Eden
Prairie, as they have been raised for decades only drinking this water. I do not think I have
ever seen so many ethnicities and languages in one location because pure water is needed by
all people. Delivery drivers stop by just to fill up their water bottle for the day. Men in suits
come while on conference calls for their business. Little kids play in the creek while they wait
for their parents to fill their bottles. The Spring is a true community enjoyed by thousands of
people regularly- and it costs nothing, or next to nothing, to maintain. I often see people
chipping the ice off the basin, cleaning up the few items of trash left accidentally, and salting
the area in the winter. People that come here are just good, kind, and true humanitarians. One
of my pregnancies I never lacked assistance helping me bring my bottles to my car, as they
were too large for me to carry anymore by myself. This is the kind of community the spring
attracts. It would be a true shame on Eden Prairie to end this community and diversity to build
a few more houses.
Lastly, this beautiful area is a gem of the city. The majority of EP is built around the mall, and
--
although you have done a good job of creating man-made parks and selecting small areas of
the land to be unbuilt, the majority is known for being full of cars, construction, and buildings.
The area surrounding this spring is as important as the spring itself. We have spent many
hours exploring the trails around it. It is not hard to see wildlife every single time we get to
escape from the city a little by trekking up that large hill. This land is beautiful because it is
largely untouched. While a house or two would be able to have a beautiful view of the river
valley, how many more people can appreciate and love this land by keeping it public and
protected? How many more birds, deer, turkeys, and other wildlife can live in this area
instead, just as they have since the beginning of time?
Please protect this Spring, the land surrounding it for the wildlife and untouched woods, and
the community and diversity this true water source attracts. Building houses in this area would
inevitably mean you lose all of this. The water quality decrease from this will never support all
that you are losing.
Thank you for reading and please consider all my points. My dad recently died, and if I did not
have his celebration of life on the day of your meeting, you can be sure I would be there for
this discussion.
Sincerely,
Katy, Justin, Jase, and Isabelle Sudlow
Carver residents
Katy Sudlow, ACSM-EP, M-HYI
Certified Exercise Physiologist
Master Yoga Instructor
952-406-1903
From: Leo
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Protect the springs
Date: Thursday, March 11, 2021 2:06:16 PM
Hello
Please save our spring my family has been using the Fredric-Miller springs since I can remember!!! Keep if open for
the people !!! please !
Leonid Bruslavtsev
Sent from my iPhone
From: Roberto Gonzalez
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Preservation of the Frederick Miller Spring (FMS)
Date: Friday, March 19, 2021 1:11:56 AM
Good day. I have recently been notified of the potential danger to the water quality at the
FMS. Please protect what makes Eden Prairie beautiful to many people. That is some of the
freshest water, beautiful woodlands and exquisite wildlife near the FMS.
I’m a fan of creating new neighborhoods but it must be without danger to something so sacred
as a spring that has been offering many people freshwater for years.
Hoping to hear great news from you.
Thank you
From: Sandeep Sharma
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Fwd: New Pulte homes development in Eden prairie
Date: Friday, March 19, 2021 9:13:59 AM
Hello,
As a resident of Eden prairie I am excited to learn that Pulte Homes is proposing to build a
neighborhood off of Spring Road next to Hennepin Village. My understanding is that the
proposal is consistent with the City’s plans for this land as a lower density neighborhood.
The new neighborhood would create a safe environment for 50 families to live and protect
the sensitive environmental areas nearby. I believe that City’s usually require 10% of the
land for parks/green or open space and Pulte’s proposal sets aside over 30% of the land to
protect environmentally sensitive areas. Please support this proposal so that this new
neighborhood can be built. My family would be excited to live there.
Thanks,
Sandy
From: Stephanie Horak
To: Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject: Frederick Miller Spring
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 12:07:48 PM
Good afternoon,
I'm writing to plead with you to delay the approval of development plans that could affect the
Frederick Miller Spring.
Preserving our precious natural resources should be a priority for Minnesotans and we trust
those in leadership to act on behalf of citezens.
My family depends on this source of clean and mineral-rich water every day for our health and
wellbeing. It's the only water we drink and trust with guidance from our healthcare providers.
Please consider the long-term and widespread impact of potential damage to this spring for
generations of Minnesotans to come.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Stephanie and David Horak
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Sue Bennett
9992 Indigo Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55347
March 10, 2021
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
C/O Beth Novak-Krebs
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
To The Eden Prairie Planning Commission,
I’m writing to you regarding the Pulte Homes development proposal and their plans to remove
over 445 trees and the line of mature pine trees on the property line between Indigo and Lilac
drive. I’m very concern about the impact this will have on the environment, the wildlife in the
area, the soil erosion, the traffic patterns and the water quality of the Fredrick-Miller Spring area.
I’m asking that the Planning Commission complete an Environmental Impact Statement before
you consider approval of this home development project.
One of my main concerns is the line of beautiful pine trees that are at least 45 feet tall. Beyond
their maturity, beauty and privacy, these trees have added an aesthetic value to this
neighborhood. At the very least this line of trees need to be kept to maintain the overall
environment of the area. My request to keep this line of mature trees also carries forward to the
value of both the Hennepin Village and the Pulte homes.
The plans that Pulte has submitted affects over 300 tax paying homes in the Hennepin Village
Townhouse complex. I understand that change in inevitable in a growing city, but we are asking
for a fair and equitable compromise to the current construction plans. How can we preserve the
environment and the beauty of the area? Can Pulte reduce the number of homes planned to
be built to preserve the Eden Prairie land scape?
If you have any additional question for me, I can be reached at 952-334-5617 and I’m planning
to attend the public planning meeting on this subject.
Best regards,
Sue Bennett
From:bbnoter1
To:Beth Novak-Krebs
Subject:Noble Hill Project
Date:Friday, March 19, 2021 10:33:59 AM
In regards to the Noble Hills/Standal project being developed by Pulte Homes, we are
supportive of the development as proposed. We have been neighbors to the Standals for over
40 years and feel that they have the right to do anything with their property in accordance to
the regulations of the City of Eden Prairie.
Bert and Bonnie Notermann
Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS
111------I I .______I ---------'-----1 I I I I I
11 111 1 I I I I I
PROJECT PROFILE – MARCH 22, 2021
PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 22, 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 28.07 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 28.07 acres
• Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 28.07 acres
• Preliminary Plat of 3 parcels into 50 lots and 4 outlots on 28.07 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 00/00/21
Resident Notice Date 00/00/21
1st Meeting Date 00/00/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING– APRIL 6, 2021
1. SMITH DOUGLAS MORE HOUSE by Ann Schuster (BETH)
Location: 8107 Eden Prairie Road
Contact: Alex and Ann Schuster: alex@smith1877.com; ann@smith1877.com
Request for:
• Certificate of Appropriateness
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 03/02/21
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date N/A
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date N/A
Notice to Paper Date 03/17/21
Resident Notice Date 03/18/21
1st Meeting Date 04/06/21
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/21
2. 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 for:
• 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
1
II 11~1~111 Ill
11 1111-----------.;111 I 11
11 1111--------f-l I I I 11
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 00/00/21
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – APRIL 6, 2021
IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED
1. 7076-7078 SHADY OAK FAÇADE REMODEL (2021-03) by SOT G OWNER LLC (SARAH)
Proposal for exterior renovations
Location: 7076-7078 Shady Oak Road
Contact: Caroline Heinlein; 612-843-2236
Request for:
• Site Plan Minor Amendment Review on 6.31 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 03/15/21
Date Complete 00/00/00
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 03/18/21
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. CROSSTOWN CORE INDUSTRIAL CENTER (2020-11) by Sambatek, Inc. (BETH)
Proposal to construct a 64,000 square foot speculative industrial building.
Location: 10250 Crosstown Circle and 6534 Flying Cloud Drive
Contact: Erik Miller; 763-259-6687
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 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
3. 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
2
II I-----------+-------I I ,____I ______...111 11
Ill------11~1 ~111 I II
Iii-------lll~-111 11
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 Complete 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
4. 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
• 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 00/00/00
120 Day Deadline 00/00/21
Initial DRC review 01/14/21
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
5. 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
6. CODE AMENDMENT FOR GYMNASIUMS by City of Eden Prairie (BETH)
Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to gymnasiums
Contact: Beth Novak-Krebs, 952-949-8490
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to gymnasiums
3
111-------11 ~I ~I II t----________..I I
11 111 111 11
111-----------+-------111._______________1 II I------------.ii I
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
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
1. BOA 2021-01 – 8500 FRANLO ROAD by Eden Heights Condominium (SARAH)
Proposal for a variance to front yard setback.
Location: 8500 Franlo Road
Contact: Margret Thompson, 952-829-5390: maggiet41@me.com
Request for:
• Variance from the front yard setback to place a new sign.
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 03/01/21
Date Complete 03/01/21
120 Day Deadline 06/29/21
Initial DRC review 03/04/21
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
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
TELECOMMUNICATION
1. TELECOMMUNICATIONS – (2021-03TM) by Kendall Communications LLC on behalf of T-
Mobile/Sprint (STEVE)
Location: 6341 Baker Road
4
111-----------+-------I I .______I _________._____I II I------------.ii I
Contact: Rick Helmbright, 614-928-1108: rick@kendallcommuications.net
Request for:
• Brief description of work to be completed: Equipment change out
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 02/18/21
Date Complete 00/00/21
60 Day Deadline 04/20/21
Initial DRC review 02/25/21
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
5