Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 09/09/2024APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2024 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Frank Sherwood, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Trisha Duncan, Robert Taylor, Dan Grote, Charles Weber; Phou Sivilay CITY STAFF: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Carter Schulze, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Acting Chair Farr called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL Commission member Pieper was absent. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Weber to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED 8-0. IV. MINUTES MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the minutes of August 26, 2024. MOTION CARRIED 8-0. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. WUNDERLICH-MALEC BUILDING ADDITION (2024-06)) Request for: • Planned United Development Concept Review on 5.13 acres • Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 5.13 acres • Site Plan Review on 5.13 acres Amy Schwabe, of TWP Architects, and property owner Neal Wunderlich, presented a PowerPoint and detailed the application. Wunderlich proposed an expansion of approximately 8,000 square feet to house the engineering staff over PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2024 Page 2 the current manufacturing area, preserving heritage trees. Wunderlich summarized the 40-year history of his company (Wunderlich-Malec or WM), an engineering and fabrication company building control panels. The company had outgrown its production space for fabrication due to increased demand, hence the proposed expansion. This expansion would not increase the building’s footprint and was the best and safest proposal in his estimation. Wunderlich added this was an employee-owned company. Schwabe displayed the existing and proposed site and floor plans and explained the reconfiguration of the first office floor. There would be additional landscaping in the final result. The total building square footage with the expansion would be 56,475 square feet. Exterior materials would match the existing materials. The floor area ratio would be less than 25 percent (half of the maximum allowed) and the office would use less than 50 percent of the total gross square footage. The addition would be 33 feet, less than the 40-foot height requirement. The landscaping will follow the requirements. The parking calculations were based on the square footage and occupant use requirements, 187 parking stalls required. In 1993 the developer agreement had approved 50,550 square feet and this proposal was below that. Existing trees would be maintained. The parking waiver was requested due to the fact the actual occupants on site were 161 staff, with the number decreased to 108 with staff working from home, resulting in a less intensive development than the approved 1993 agreement. There would be no impact to traffic patterns or roadway operations, and no tree loss. Barnhart presented the staff report. All specifications complied with the City code. The expansion eliminated additional stormwater management. This was the best approach given the constraints to the site. Staff supported the parking reduction waiver. This business was doing a great job of managing the needed parking on-site, and would not require use of off-site parking. Staff recommended approval subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. Farr noted this was a development agreement with opportunity for growth. He asked for and received confirmation the development agreement traveled with the property, and any additional parking in the future would require a parking deck or ramp. Taylor stated he had visited the site, and noticed the trash bins on the east side of the property were not covered or screened. Barnhart agreed the City Code required traffic receptacles inside or with a roof, and this could be addressed. Duncan echoed Farr’s concerns and asked if the PUD would ever expire. Barnhart replied the PUD ran with the land and did not expire. Duncan also asked if the disparity between 161 current employees but the existing 136 was due to 25 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2024 Page 3 employees having been hired since 2015. Wunderlich explained there were 140 staff in the Eden Prairie office, plus Oakdale staff. The most staff in the office was 100 people, most days 80 or 70, since employees traveled and conducted site visits. There were many empty parking spots every day. Schwabe added 161 stalls was her highest estimate, to cover snow handling during the winter. MOTION: Sherwood moved, seconded by Grote to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. Sherwood stated he remembered the start of this firm and was pleased to see it progress. He commended the project. Weber agreed, appreciating the project without adding parking. Kirk also agreed, commending the retention of trees. Taylor also agreed this was a great local story and project. Farr agreed. MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk to recommend approval of a Planned United Development Concept Review on 5.13 acres; Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 5.13 acres; Site Plan Review on 5.13 acres as represented in the September 9, 2024 staff report subject to the conditions listen in that staff report. Motion carried 8-0. B. COSTCO FUEL EXPANSION (2024-09)) Request for: • Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 18 acres • Site Plan Review on 18 acres Julie Anderson, of Barghausen Consulting Engineers, presented a PowerPoint and detailed the application. This requested the expansion of the Costco Fuel Facility. There were eight dispensers, three 20,000-gallon gasoline underground storage tanks, one 1,500-gallon fuel additive tank, and a 3,842-square foot canopy currently on the site, which also have an inside fuel drop lane. The proposal would add seven new underground storage tank dispensers, one new 30,000-gallon underground storage tank, a 5,361-square foot canopy (for a total of 9,203 square feet of canopy space), an outside fuel drop lane, a new controller enclosure, and would widen the eastern driveway. Anderson displayed the materials showing the matching canopy design, brick veneer columns, and the three-toned brick walls. The traffic analysis showed a small net increase in traffic due to increased demand, and she expected a 50 decrease in queue wait times, along with increased processing capacity. The site driveways were projected to continue to operate acceptably. There were also recent transportation improvements in the form of a new traffic signal at the west driveway, restriping and new turn lanes on Technology Drive, and a restriped west driveway with separate turn lanes. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2024 Page 4 Operations were consistent with existing fuel capacity, and there was always an attendant onsite. There were open to Costco members only. A red-light/green- light system would be used for dispenser availability. Duncan stated the queue solution presented had already answered one of her questions. Barnhart presented the staff report. The additional pumps and control building and expansion of canopy would result in loss of 16 parking spaces but Costco already exceeded Code requirements for parking. This was the case even with storage of snow in winter as shown. The waiver on the eastern driveway for a 46-foot width was to accommodate trucks and left and right turn lanes. Staff supported this. The materials of the addition were consistent with the Costco design. Staff recommended approval subject to the conditions of the staff report. Duncan asked if there was a timeline for the previous PUD waivers, and Barnhart replied if not acted on, they continued unless rescinded by the City Council; he did not anticipate such an action. Duncan asked if there were any current or planned EV charging stations. Anderson replied there were none at this time and no current plan to provide them. Barnhart added there was no requirement for them for this application. Kirk stated this had been brought up before but at the time it did not seem feasible and the commission did not take any specific action. Farr asked if the applicant would not be painting a crosswalk on the east driveway, as there was an existing one on the west driveway. He requested this with a dedicated safety island. Schulze confirmed this was not included, as his department did not typically require striping in private parking lots, as opposed to on streets. It was the applicant’s choice to do this or not. Duncan asked for and received confirmation from Schulze the turn lane would not be affected with the widening of the eastern entrance. Farr recalled the expansion application four years ago and asked why that was not completed. Barnhart replied he could not remember the reason but that had been a smaller project in scope. Anderson replied that expansion had been proposed before the Covid-19 pandemic, and then the project went on hold indefinitely. Costco had subsequently reevaluated its proposal to ensure the project made sense for the site, and determined a larger expansion was needed. MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Duncan to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. Kirk stated that, as a commission member who remembered the discussion from four years ago, he found this project to be a positive expansion. He stated anything that could be done to decrease the wait times was a positive, and he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2024 Page 5 supported the proposal. Weber agreed, and thanked the applicant. Farr stated the actual traffic situation counteracted his initial skepticism. Sivilay agreed. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Duncan to recommend approval of a Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 18 acres and a Site Plan Review on 18 acres as represented in the September 9, 2024 staff report subject to the conditions in that staff report. Motion carried 8-0. PLANNERS’ REPORT MEMBERS’ REPORTS VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Weber to adjourn. Motion carried 8-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:41 p.m.