Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 11/08/2021APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 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, Robert Taylor CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Rod Rue, City Engineer; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: DeSanctis moved, seconded by Higgins to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED 9-0. IV. MINUTES MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the minutes of October 25, 2021. MOTION CARRIED 9-0. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. SHUTTERFLY Request for: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.2 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 16.2 acres • Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres Terry Helland, of RSP Architects, presented a PowerPoint and detailed the application. The property at 11000 Viking Drive in Eden Prairie had a 12-year lease commitment providing 500-700 jobs. This application attempted to solve the building’s current parking ratio problem, reduce the pressure on the stormwater management system, and provide increased green space and additional outdoor PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 2 amenity space. The request was to demolish the current unusable west building on the three-building campus, enhance the entry and arrival experience with a wrap- around sunshade canopy, and rebuild the west façade of the Entry/Commons at the previous building connection. Landscape and site improvements were included, including a new entry walkway, an accessible patio, new lawn greenspace, parking improvements and the addition of a new sidewalk/biking trail. This project would add eight percent to the pervious area impervious reduced from 63.36 percent to 55.15 percent. Helland displayed the existing and proposed plan views, the overall landscape plan, and renderings of the final building. Consolidating the campus in this matter reduced the square footage and increased the parking ratio from 2.81 to 4.9 per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The site plan showed the proposed parking and adding landscape islands and trees on the east side. Helland displayed the lobby plan, which showed the new western wall and doors. The elevation rendering showed the three main materials: glass, brick and stucco. Mette asked how long Tempest owned the property. Helland introduced Brad Runsick of Tempus, and Runsick replied Tempus was in contract negotiations but did not yet own the property. Lifetouch, now Shutterfly, owned the building and had since 1997. Klima presented the staff report. The applicant is proposing to demolish an approximately 116,685 square foot office building at 11000 Viking Drive. The western building on the property at north of Highway 494 on Viking Drive would be demolished and native plantings established to decrease impervious surface area in the shoreland. A PUD waiver for impervious surface coverage was also requested to bring the allowable impervious area closer into compliance with the City’s shoreland ordinance. Staff recommended approval. MOTION: Markos moved, seconded by Gooding to close the public hearing. Motion carried 9-0. Gooding commended the improvement to the existing site. Kirk agreed. Mette stated while there were good components she thought it was unusual to take down a relatively new office building, though she understood the reasons why. She also thought more could be done to provide more amenities, include leaving the existing sidewalk than ran along the back of the west wing, almost reaching Viking Drive, in place to create a walking loop. The sidewalk that ran along the westernmost parking spaces to the building entrance could be extended all the way to Viking Drive. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 3 DeSanctis noted the Site Plan was dated June 10, 2019, making it the original survey, and asked if there was a plan to add more benches than what were shown. Helland replied there was no plan for that but it could be explored. There was currently a connection from the backside of the lobby to the trail. DeSanctis stated it would be good to encourage people to sit and gaze at nature, which was being improved on this site. Helland replied the first priority was making this proposal happen for Shutterfly, who was considering further improvements to the site. DeSanctis noted the 2019 revision showed the approximate FEMA flood zone and asked if this was set or flexible. Helland replied he would have to speak to his civil engineer. A wetland mitigation study had been done but he was not sure if the FEMA flood zone was decided upon. Farr stated he liked the idea of a trail looping around the Viking Drive and was glad to see a biking trail added. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Gooding to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.2 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 16.2 acres; Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres based on the information outlined in plans stamp dated November 1, 2021 and the staff report dated November 8, 2021. Motion carried 9-0. 2. THE ELLIE Request for: • Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Industrial Flex-Tech to Medium High Density Residential on 6.4 acres • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.4 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.4 acres • Zoning Change from R1-22 and I-2 to RM-2.5 on 6.4 acres • Preliminary Plat of 7 parcels into one lot and one outlot on 6.4 acres Scott Peterson, of United Properties, introduced himself and his firm. Matt Johnson, of the DLR Group, presented a PowerPoint and detailed the application. These seven parcels of single-family homes would be consolidated into 6.4 acre- site with a multifamily residential project of 239 units: 39 studio units, 97 one- bedroom units, 36 one-bedroom units with a den, and 67 two-bedroom units. The proposal included 404 parking stalls, 197 underground and 207 surface stalls. There would be an open-air surrounded courtyard with a pool, pickle ball and bocce ball courts, culinary garden beds, a patio with an outdoor kitchen, a children’s play area, lawn areas, and a fire pit. The development would preserve 20 significant trees and create pocket green roofs, provide EV charging stations, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 4 recapture stormwater to water native plant gardens, and provide higher density housing affordable units. Nathan Kaye, architect, stated the development’s name paid homage to Elizabeth Fries Ellet, who was credited with naming the City of Eden Prairie. He displayed images of the exterior color pallet which drew inspiration from the nearby new Applewood Pointe development and the Smith Coffee Shop. He displayed and explained the Ledgestone, the fiber cement panels, and the stone accents. A “plastic” look was deliberately avoided. Johnson presented elevations and renderings green roof to reduce impervious space on third floor to allow residents to see it. The intent, along with the native gardens, was to put as much green space back into the development site. Mette asked what rent level of apartments were comparable. Peterson replied the rental rates were meant to be attainable, and the average ranged from $1.70 $2.34/square foot. The average unit size ranged from 575 square feet to 1200 with an approximate average of 850 square feet. Mette noted the great outdoor amenities but asked how they compared to the indoor amenities which would be available all year, such as a community room. Peterson replied extensive research was done on the amenities package and in his opinion the amenities were overbuilt, which increased the unit price. TV rooms, theatre rooms and golf simulators were not appropriate for the audience the applicant was trying to reach. Farr commended the large windows to allow daylight inside and the balcony placement, which were staggered, not lined up in rows. He suggested larger format cast concrete for the tall, long retaining walls. Johnson stated keystone tile- type blocks were being considered for the retaining walls. Farr urged him to reconsider the choice of materials in favor of long-term durability and performance. He asked for and received confirmation the development would comply with sound ordinances. Farr asked him to expand on the pocket green spaces on the third floors. Johnson replied that residents would be able to look out from glass windows onto the green roof. It was not intended to be walked on. The stormwater treatment was not yet fully designed. Taylor asked if the green roof was not accessible, what maintenance would be done and if there were walls sufficiently high to prevent someone from falling off the roof. Johnson replied the green roof was not accessible except by an exterior lift. It was intended to be a community garden that residents could experience as a PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 5 teaching garden and change without actually walking out into the garden. Taylor asked what existed on the site presently, and Johnson replied the seven homes intended for demolition were currently still on site. DeSanctis stated he appreciated the sustainable components, but there were several healthy white pines or Scotts pines on the south side along Nathan Lane. He asked if they would be preserved. Johnson replied he believed the 20 trees to be saved was the best they could do given the grading. DeSanctis asked if he would consider planting white pines. Johnson replied he would consider that. He stated the development would plant more evergreen trees than currently existed on the site. DeSanctis asked if there were habitats or ecosystems encroached upon, and Johnson replied to his knowledge there were none. Gooding echoed Farr’s suggestions for the retaining wall. Light pollution was also a concern. He suggested turning the proposed railing into a fence with walls high enough to minimize light pollution from headlights at night. Johnson replied a fence was possible, and there would be the aforementioned evergreen screening. Gooding asked how serious solar was for the future of this development. Johnson replied the development would be PV ready, which was affordable and a lifelong goal for the project. Higgins asked the lifespan of a wooden building instead of steel, which would save costs but perhaps would not be durable. Johnson replied wood is one of the oldest building materials. It was a challenge to use lumber since it shrank, but the development was designed for shrinkage and shift to minimize cracks. Wood was a durable, resilient and quality product and it was also affordable, sustainable and renewable. DeSanctis asked how the proposed right turn lane would work with the existing sidewalk and rights of way. Johnson replied the lane would align along the sidewalk and trail. Taylor asked why the floorplan max occupancy was a two-bedroom unit instead of a three-bedroom. Peterson replied the target demographic tipping point was a two-bedroom unit; people who needed a three- bedroom unit would go to a different development altogether. Klima presented the staff report. The applicant proposed to construct a 239-unit apartment building at Lincoln Lane, demolishing seven family homes around Lincoln Lane and removing the street. There were industrial uses to the north and east, commercial and residential uses to the south and residential to the west. The development would be a 349,800 square foot apartment building, with a four- story building over one level of underground parking with surface parking around the perimeter of the site. The proposed project density would be 37 units per acre. The applicant requested an amendment of the guide plan from Low Density PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 6 Residential and Industrial Flex Tech to Medium-High Density Residential and a rezoning of the property from Industrial and R1-22 to RM-2.5. The applicant proposed to dedicate 50 feet of land across the northeast corner of the site for right-of-way allowing for the potential to extend Fuller Road to Eden Prairie Road in the future. Eden Prairie recently updated its parking requirements for efficiencies and studio units. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions outlined in the staff report. Mette asked if Klima knew the density of the PUD development to the south. Klima replied Smith Village had a density of 23 units per acre, ApplePointe 26 units per acre, and Trail Point Ridge was almost 29 units per acre. The zoning for these was also RM-2.5 with a PUD. Mette asked for and received confirmation the new City requirement was 150 square feet of usable open space per unit. Klima added this project met that and exceeded it by providing 192 square feet of usable open space per unit. Mette asked for and received confirmation that the 192 square feet included the allowable indoor open space as well. Mette noted 100 parking stalls in a row along the south and eastern edges and asked how this was allowed. Klima replied the requirement of parking islands every 20 stalls did not apply to single row parking. Farr asked for clarification on the offsite sewer connection: there was a long deep sewer connection running eastward toward Fuller Road through private property. Rue replied staff was working with the development team on this and recently came up with a plan to extend that east direction. There was an existing 30-foot easement along the north property line and the applicant would drill through a large portion of that. Farr asked if the other sewer line would be abandoned in place. Rue replied it would not be abandoned, just not used. It could be removed in the case of a future development or filled. It would be plugged at some point at the manhole cover. Farr noted a minor discrepancy in the landscaping plan, in which three significant trees will be cut, not saved as indicated. He asked if it was fair to say the applicant would recalculate the tree caliper loss. Klima replied one of the recommendations by staff was that all plans be updated and calculations reworked prior to City Council review. Farr noted the stormwater plan was well done and asked if there should be any concern of Mitchell Lake having an impact. Rue replied there were a few comments provided to the developer regarding the permeable pavement so that water was not directed into that area. Donald Hanson presented a PowerPoint on color science and theory, which was his specialty as a college professor at five universities. He lived across the street PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 7 from the project. The proposed color scheme did not represent the neighborhood or Eden Prairie and he detailed why this was so in his presentation. Mark Thieroff, representing the property owner to the north and east, stated his letter was in the commissioners’ packets. He took issue with the screening and fencing since there was a three-acre parcel of undeveloped land to the east. He was concerned about residents migrating onto the unfenced property and wanted to see the fencing for the development continue along the east side to enclose the development. He noted the proposed maple trees as screening and suggested this would be more effective. Scott Malmsten, one of the seven Lincoln Lane property owners, stated United Properties worked well with the owners of the seven homes to be demolished. Applewood Pointe was a good project with a good color scheme, and he was confident the applicant would do the same work here. Elizabeth Petry asked if there was an image of the intersection. Klima pulled up the image. Petry stated she lived on Timberlake Drive across from the entryway to this development, and this was the sole point of egress for many other residents and families in her HOA. She was concerned about traffic as there were apartments with children requiring school buses on a busy road nearby. She also expressed concern about light pollution from vehicles and the significant doubling of parking places, though she appreciated the sustainability of the development. She wanted to raise concerns of her neighbors, many of whom could not attend tonight. Jonathan Smith spoke in favor of the development. He suggested a raised crosswalk for traffic calming and safety. He found the affordability of this project to be realistic. MOTION: Gooding moved, seconded by Taylor to close the public hearing. Motion carried 9-0. Mette stated the overall idea of an apartment building here made sense but what the commission saw here was too much. The PUD development next door had only 23 unit per acre and now understanding all the other pieces she found this to be too much density for the site. Gooding stated he struggled with the same thoughts as Mette. The density was an issue but looking at the development cost became an issue as well. There was a tradeoff between what could go in and what could be done economically. He had PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 8 concluded the prospect of lower priced affordable housing in Eden Prairie was worth the price of the density. Kirk stated he had been on the Planning Commission for a long time and started out being against density, then came to the reluctant conclusion that Eden Prairie was growing. Growth would probably show up as increased density in certain areas of Eden Prairie, and this was an appropriate area for it. He admitted it would be nice to go with a less dense development but Eden Prairie needed affordable housing. The details were especially important, such as screening and fencing. He concluded this was a good project to go forward. Higgins concurred but added she wanted to see something change the way the traffic moved off the highway toward Eden Prairie Road. This was a heavily traffic area, and a short time ago there were discussions about the high school nearby, also school buses and traffic being backed up. Presently existing neighborhoods needed to be considered and she did not know how that could be approached. She had no answers, as she was also eager to support affordable housing in Eden Prairie. Pieper asked Johnson and Kaye to address the screening of the parking lot. Johnson replied a six-foot fence was not necessary but the goal was to plant and use landscape as well as they could. Peterson added there would be a combination of fencing and plant screening. Pieper asked how residents would be kept out of the unfenced wooded area to the east. Johnson replied there would be a 30-foot retaining wall, and in addition he saw no reason for residents to go down that path, as there was no amenity there. With the fence line and amenity space already built, he did not see residents going onto the neighboring wooded property. Pieper asked the applicant to address the intersection and traffic. Peterson replied a traffic study had been commissioned by the City to examine traffic up and down Eden Prairie Road. Farr stated residents should see, instead of “traffic getting worse,” the proactive service provided by the City in its foresight to provide for future needs by widening roads and replacing underground pipes. Pieper asked about the potential of a raised crosswalk. Johnson replied this could be possible. Taylor asked if a noise survey had been done or could be done. Peterson stated he did not anticipate a noise problem and his firm did not usually conduct noise studies. DeSanctis stated that studies showed a reduction in the allowable speed PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 9 limit by as little as five miles an hour showed a detectable reduction in noise. Rue replied reduction in speed would indeed show a reduction in noise. However, noise was due to engines and tires and the road in question (Hennepin County 4) was a county road with a 45-miles per hour speed limit. It would be up to the County to commission a speed study in conjunction with the state. Farr stated he found this a good project and was okay with the level of density but wanted to give due credit to Mette for raising her objections. The development initially seemed jam-packed, alarming him. One interior corridor was two-and-a- half football fields long. However, he found this development came down to transitions between zones and uses and it could not be placed in a better position in Eden Prairie given the City’s goals. No headlights would be facing west to throw light off the site into the eyes of other residents—this was just a drive aisle. The developer had done a good job buffering given the circumstances with an attractive contemporary design. Trees unfortunately had to be lost in this case but there would be plantings which would grow back. Mette added she was a developer who developed apartments like this, in fact, around the Twin Cities and she was confident the applicant could work with lower density, perhaps 30 units per acre. She wished to see something on a smaller scale. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Gooding to recommend approval for the Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Industrial Flex-Tech to Medium High Density Residential on 6.4 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.4 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.4 acres; Zoning Change from R1-22 and I-2 to RM-2.5 on 6.4 acres; Preliminary Plat of seven parcels into one lot and one outlot on 6.4 acres based on information outlined in plans stamp dated October 27, 2021 the staff report dated October 27, 2021. Motion carried 8-1 with one nay vote (Mette). PLANNERS’ REPORT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL GAS STATIONS ZONING AMENDMENT Klima presented the new proposed zoning amendment, in which the City proposed to remove new gas stations as a permitted use in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. It would allow existing gas stations to remain as permitted uses, and it also would amend the ordinance to remove reference to the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district in the performance standards section PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2021 Page 10 for gas stations. Staff was asking the commission to make a recommendation to the City Council. Kirk asked Klima to give more context on where this request came from, as he had not attended or listened to the October 26, 2021 City Council meeting. Klima replied at that meeting there had not been broader discussion on this question. Staff was directed to come back with this amendment. Discussion followed on the definition of “gas station” and “convenience store.” Kirk suggested anything that pumped gas, including a convenience store, was a gas station and would be included in this amendment. Mette lamented this would be outlawing convenience stores, and Kirk replied he did not see that in this amendment. Gooding asked how many neighborhood commercial areas in Eden Prairie could have a gas station in them. Klima stated she did not have a number. She named the multiple commercial zoning districts that would continue to support gas stations if this amendment were approved. Farr noted this amendment might become outmoded as society moved toward electric vehicles, and this appeared to be a safety ordinance rather than one that prohibited convenience stores. Mette reiterated she did not necessarily object to the amendment but this could prohibit even a small gas station at the Hennepin Town Road site. Taylor added the total number of bays were a factor and asked if this would prohibit gas stations but allow automotive service repair. Klima replied the amendment would not prohibit automotive repair businesses. Mette stated this clarification was helpful. Klima requested the commission consider the code amendment language as proposed rather than in the context of a specific application. Mette reiterated she was not necessarily opposed to the amendment but had misgivings about its consequences. Discussion followed on the scope of this amendment. MOTION: DeSanctis moved, seconded by Farr to recommend approval to the City Council of an amendment regard gas stations in the Neighborhood Commercial (N-Com) Zoning District. Motion carried 9-0. MEMBERS’ REPORTS The Commission congratulated Klima on her promotion to community development director. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Higgins to adjourn. Motion carried 9-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:16 p.m.