Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Commission - 08/22/2016
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, August 22, 2016, 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION John Kirk, Jon Stoltz, Charles Weber, Travis Wuttke, Ann MEMBERS: Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Mark Freiberg, Tom Poul STAFF MEMBERS: Julie Klima, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE --ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MINUTES A. Approval of the Minutes for the August 8, 2016 meeting IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PRAIRIE BLUFFS SENIOR LIVING Location: 10217, 10220, 10240, 10280 Hennepin Town Road and two additional parcels (PID's: 36-116-22-11-0026 & 36-116-22-11-0003) Request for: • Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres • Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres • Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres B. VARIANCE #2016-08 Location: 11000 West 78th Street Request to: • Allow a variance for proposed exterior screening and improvements to an existing building that would exceed the maximum building height permitted by City Code. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT A. CODE AMENDMENT—FLOOD PLAIN • Request to: Recommend to the City Council that the City Code be amended to meet the standards required for participation in the National Flood Protection Program as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORTS IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT ANNOTATED AGENDA TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Julie Klima, City Planner RE: Planning Commission Meeting for Monday, August 22, 2016 MONDAY,August 22, 2016 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Move to approve the agenda. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes: A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY,August 8, 2016 V. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC MEETINGS VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PRAIRIE BLUFFS SENIOR LIVING Location: 10217, 10220, 10240, 10280 Hennepin Town Road and two additional parcels (PID's: 36-116-22-11-0026 & 36-116-22-11-0003) Request for: • Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres • Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres • Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 The applicant is proposing to construct a 138-unit senior housing project. The building will include independent units, memory care units, and assisted living units. There are two buildings connected by a skyway. The south building will be 3-stories and the north building will be 3-stories with a portion of it being 4-stories. Access to the site will be off of Hennepin Town Road with surface parking behind the buildings. The project also includes underground parking. ANNOTATED AGENDA August 22,2016 Page 2 The applicant is requesting a number of waivers. The architectural details on the building, the site amenities (i.e. patios, sidewalks, pergolas, benches, and a bird watching area), common spaces within the building (i.e. dayrooms, fitness room, and community rooms) and the plantings are all features that help off-set the requested waivers. Staff recommends approval. MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 1: Move to recommend approval of the Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres; Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres and Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres based on the plans stamped dated August 17, 2016 and the information included in the staff report dated August 17, 2016. B. VARIANCE #2016-08 Location: 11000 West 78th Street Request to: • Allow a variance for proposed exterior screening and improvements to an existing building that would exceed the maximum building height permitted by City Code. Cambria is an existing three story office building, approximately 45,000 square feet in size and was built in 1984. The property is 3.26 acres in size and is located south of I-494, east of Prairie Center Drive, and north of West 78th Street and Anderson Lake. The property is guided Office and Zoned as C-REG-SER (Commercial Regional Service District). Surrounding properties are guided and zoned primarily as C-REG-SER and Office. Cambria is planning to renovate the exterior of their existing building. The existing exterior building material is primarily glass. Cambria is working with SKD Architects, Inc. ("the applicant") and in summary; they are proposing to update the architecture of the building by adding cut stone veneer, stone detailing, and brick work to the facades of the building. The applicant is also proposing to add an aluminum louver to the top of the existing parapet of the building to provide screening for the existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment that currently extends approximately 9'4" above the existing roof. The applicant is asking for a variance to exceed the 40 foot maximum building height as permitted in the C-REG-SER zoning district to accommodate the aluminum louver and improvements as proposed and as depicted on the site plan elevations dated 7/22/16. A previous variance for the existing building height was approved in 1984 when the building was constructed. Variance # 1984-03 granted approval for the construction of an office building to allow a 15 ft. setback from the north lot line one of the property versus the 35 ft. setback required and also a variance to allow a 44 ft. building height versus the 40 ft. maximum building height requirement. The actual height of the existing building slightly exceeds the 44 ft. height as was previously approved per variance # 1984-03. Currently, the tallest portion of the building ANNOTATED AGENDA August 22,2016 Page 3 is approximately 44'6" and the tallest portion of the proposed building height is approximately 54'. The proposed improvements would add an approximate additional height ranging from 6' to 10' onto the top of the existing rooftop to include the proposed aluminum louver that would adequately screen the existing 9'4" tall rooftop, mechanical equipment. A 4 ft. building height variance was approved in 1984 and the applicant is asking for a new 14 ft. building height variance to address the screening needs for the existing rooftop, mechanical equipment. (The variance being requested is essentially seeking an additional 10 ft. building height variance to provide screening for the 9'4"rooftop, mechanical equipment). Staff recommends approval. MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing. MOTION 1: Move the approval of Final Order 2016-08 to grant a 14 ft. building height variance, subject to the information included in the staff report dated August 17, 2016, and the building height shall not exceed 54 ft. as depicted on the site plans prepared by SKD Architects, Inc. dated 7/22/16. VIII. PLANNERS' REPORT A. CODE AMENDMENT FLOOD PLAIN Request to: Recommend to the City Council that the City Code be amended to meet the standards required for participation in the National Flood Protection Program as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations. On May 4, 2016, the City of Eden Prairie received a Letter of Final Determination (LFD) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) explaining the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) had been completed for our community, as well as the rest of Hennepin County's flood study area. These maps will become effective on November 4, 2016. As a result of the LFD, our community is "required to adopt floodplain management regulations that meet the standards detailed in the Code of Federal Regulations Paragraph 60.3(d) by the effective date of the FIRM." In other words, our community must amend our floodplain ordinance to meet these FEMA standards before November 4, 2016 in order to continue participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA further advised that, without exception, a community will be suspended from the NFIP if the required floodplain ordinance is not adopted and presented to the Chicago Regional Office by November 4, 2016. If a community is suspended from the NFIP, no flood insurance policies can be written or renewed in the community. This would have a serious impact on the people exposed to flood damage, or those who are trying to purchase a home in the designated 100-year floodplain, where flood insurance is a requirement of the loan. Staff recommends the Commission move to recommend to the City Council the ANNOTATED AGENDA August 22,2016 Page 4 City Code be amended to meet the standards required for participation in the National Flood Protection Program as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations. MOTION 1: Move to recommend to the City Council approval of an amendment to the City Code to meet the standards required for participation in the National Flood Protection Program as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, based on the information included in the staff report dated August 17, 2016. IX. MEMBERS' REPORT X. CONTINUING BUSINESS XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,AUGUST 8, 2016 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Jon Stoltz, John Kirk, Travis Wuttke, Ann Higgins, Charles Weber, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Mark Freiberg, Tom Poul CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner Rod Rue, City Engineer Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — ROLL CALL Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Pieper and Poul were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. III. MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON July 11, 2016 MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Freiberg, to approve the Planning Commission Minutes. Motion carried 7-0. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CEDAR RIDGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Location: 8905 Braxton Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.19 acres • Variance to exceed the 30 foot maximum height requirement for the existing structure. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2016 Page 2 Klima said in 2010, the City Code was updated to eliminate the term public facilities and in its place public infrastructure was listed as a permitted use in all zoning districts. The definition of"public infrastructure"was limited to infrastructure and did not include schools. The adoption of the new terminology and definition unintentionally resulted in schools becoming a non-conforming use. The City Staff is proposing to remedy the situation by adding schools as a permitted use in the Public district and rezoning of certain school properties from the Rural District to the Public District. The Planning Commission previously recommended approval of a text amendment to add schools as a permitted use in the Public zoning district. The City Council is scheduled to review the amendment at its August 16th City Council meeting. Klima also stated ISD 272 owns multiple properties within the City and three of those are zoned public and the remaining 4 sites are proposed for rezoning from Rural to Public. The adopted Comprehensive Plan guides this property for Public use; and therefore, the rezoning request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is also recommending Commission to approve the variances for the existing conditions of the sites. No new development or expansions are being proposed with these requests so there will be no site plans to review. Existing conditions that require attention due to the proposed zoning change include the existing height of the buildings. The recommended variance would apply only to the existing conditions. In regards to the variance request for Cedar Ridge Elementary School, the Rural district allows a building height of 40 feet, so at the time of construction, the height of the building was compliant with City Code. The Public district has a maximum building height of 30 feet, so staff is recommending approval of the variance to allow the existing condition in order for the site to maintain its conforming use. The tallest portion of the building at this site is 37 feet tall. No setback variances are necessary for this site. Staff recommendation is for approval. Wuttke asked why we are not waiting for the Code change to be approved by the City Council. Klima said the Planning Commission is an advisory commission to the City Council and so are just giving recommendations this evening. Wuttke asked what would happen if the Council does not approve these requests. Klima said there would be follow-up with the school district and different actions would have to take place. Wuttke said he is concerned about approving these as it has not been approved by the Council. Klima said the City would like to remedy this as soon as possible so school district properties are conforming. Farr asked if schools would expand in the future, how that process would work. Klima said the schools did not discuss expanding, but if they did, they would have to go through public review as required by City Code. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2016 Page 3 Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Weber, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Weber, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.19 acres and Final Order 2016- 06 based on the information included in the staff report dated August 3, 2016. Motion carried 7-0. B. OAK POINT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Location: 13400 Staring Lake Parkway Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.05 acres • Variance to address the existing setback requirements. Klima said this variance is for parking lot setbacks and no changes are being proposed for this site. Staff recommendation is for approval. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.05 acres and Final Order 2016- 07 based on the information included in the staff report dated August 3, 2016. Motion carried 7-0. C. EDEN LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Location: 12000 Anderson Lakes Parkway Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.46 acres • Variance to address the existing setback requirements. Klima said the variance requests are for parking lot setbacks and building height. No changes are being proposed for this site. Staff recommendation is for approval. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2016 Page 4 MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Weber, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.46 acres and Final Order 2016- 08 based on the information included in the staff report dated August 3, 2016. Motion carried 7-0. D. FOREST HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Location: 13708 Holly Road Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.31 acres • Variance to address the existing setback requirements. Klima said the variance request is to allow reduced setbacks for the existing building and parking lot. No changes are being proposed for this site. Staff recommendation is for approval. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Kirk, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.31 acres and Final Order 2016-09 based on the information included in the staff report dated August 3, 2016. Motion carried 7-0. E. HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE Location: 13100 College View Drive Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 104.38 acres • Variance to address the existing setback requirements. Klima said the existing buildings and parking lots crossover the three lot lines of the properties that the Hennepin Technical College campus site occupies. There is an existing setback of 0 feet from the various lot lines. There are also other reduced setbacks from the front, side and rear lot lines of the properties. City Code requires a building setback of 50 feet from the front and rear lot lines and a minimum of 50 feet from the side lot lines and a total combined side yard setback of 150 feet in the Public District. City Code also requires a parking lot setback of 50 feet from the front lot line and a 10 foot side and rear lot line setback from the lot lines of the property in the Public District. No changes are being proposed for this site and staff recommendation is for approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2016 Page 5 Kirk asked if Hennepin Technical College was in agreement with these requests. Klima said there were no issues raised by Hennepin Technical College. Farr asked why they have multiple properties with a single building. Klima commented without the history she was unsure but stated at some point Hennepin Technical College could possibly consolidate the three parcels. Farr said he was unsure why the variance requests would go through now when they could potentially consolidate in the future. Klima said the City is recommending the variance to address existing conditions. Kirk commented if they were to do a lot consolidation they would have to invest a lot of time, research and money. Klima concurred it would take a lot of time and money to do the consolidation. Farr asked if this project was to get redeveloped for alternative use, would it get rezoned to PUD. Klima said if the properties were to redevelop there would be a separate Public process. A redevelopment for another use would require a Comp Plan Amendment and rezoning. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Higgins, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 104.38 acres and Final Order 2016- 10 based on the information included in the staff report dated August 3, 2016. Motion carried 6-1 (Farr). VII. PLANNERS' REPORT Klima said the Spirit of Eden Prairie Award Nomination Forms are on the City Website. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT Wuttke said he noticed the parks are heavy trafficked now with the Pokemon Go users and would like to encourage parents to let their kids know to be safe and also respectful of the public and private property they may be on. Higgins commented there is a lot of pedestrian traffic in the Purgatory Creek area that is causing traffic issues. Chair Stoltz asked if anything has been addressed with this issue. Bourne said the City has talked to Pokemon Go about the park rules and stated the situation is being monitored. IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2016 Page 6 MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 7-0. Chair Stoltz adjourned the meeting at 7:30p.m. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Beth Novak-Krebs DATE: August 17, 2016 PROJECT: Prairie Bluffs Senior Living LOCATION: 10217, 10220, 10240 & 10280 Hennepin Town Road and two additional parcels (PID's 36-116-22-11-0026 & 36-116-22-11-0003) APPLICANT: Kaas Wilson Architects OWNERS: Earl Street Partners, LLC and Thomas Robertson 120 DAY REVIEW: November 30, 2016 REQUEST: 1. Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres 3. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres 4. Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres 5. Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres 6. Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres PREVIOUS REVIEW & PLAN REVISIONS The Planning Commission opened the public hearing for this development at its December 7, 2015 meeting. The previous proposal included one 3-story building with 116 units on 3.37 acres. The public hearing was continued in order to provide additional time for the project proponent to address concerns identified at the December meeting including: 1. Site aesthetics; including architecture, exterior materials, and landscaping; 2. Affordability element; and 3. Open space. The proponent revised the plans and the public hearing before the Planning Commission concluded on March 28, 2016. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project and it was scheduled to go before the Council in May. However, on April 25, 2016, the proponent requested to postpone the public hearing before the Council indefinitely. At that time, there were discussions of possibly adding the Robertson property, which was likely to significantly change the project. Therefore, the proponent wanted to wait until the details were worked out before moving forward. Staff Report-Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 2 This revised proposal submitted on July 13, 2016 and subsequently revised and date stamped August 17, 2016 includes the Robertson property. As a result, the building and site layout have changed significantly. Some of the noteworthy changes from the original proposal include the following: 1. The acreage of the site has increased from 3.37 acres to 4.74 acres; 2. There are now two buildings connected by a skyway; 3. The buildings are 3 story except for a portion of the north building, which is proposed to be 4 stories; 4. The number of units has increased from 116 to 138; 5. The density has decreased from 34.7 units per acre to 29.1 units per acre; 6. Trails and walking paths have been added on the property for the residents; 7. Community rooms, days rooms and other amenities have been added; 8. There is surface parking behind each of the buildings and overall there are 29 more parking stalls; and, 9. There have been some façade improvements including the addition of balconies and other architectural features. The applicant is providing access to the City's infrastructure in the northeast corner of the site via a paved drive between the parking lots. A condition of approval is recommended that requires the establishment of this easement prior to signature of the Development Agreement. The triangular piece of MnDOT right of way south of the driveway entrance into the project area has been conveyed to the City of Eden Prairie and the excess right-of-way has been incorporated into the project. The plan includes amenities such as sidewalks,pergolas, patios, and benches within the site providing outdoor spaces and connections to the sidewalk along Hennepin Town Road. In order for these amenities to be located on what is now City's property, the proponent must enter into an encroachment agreement with the City. At the December public hearing, several questions regarding other multiple family development projects were raised. Please see below for additional information. Project Name Housing Type Density (units/acre)Parking (2 stalls/unit required) Martin Blu Multi-Family 61.83 2.0 to 1.06/unit Summit Place Senior 27.9 2.0 to 0.7/unit Lincoln Parc Multi-Family 38.5 NA Water Tower Multi-Family 39.9 NA Rolling Hills Senior 20.95 2.0 to 1.0/unit Presbyterian Senior Component 55 units/acre for 2.0 to 0.8 /unit for senior Homes Bldgs. C &D component Real Life Co-op Senior 26 2.0 to 1.5 Based on the revised unit and parking count for this project, the proposed density is 30.2 units per acre on the subject site and is 29.1 units per acre when the excess MnDOT right of way is included. The parking count proposed is 116 stalls which correspond to 0.84 parking stalls per Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 3 unit. The proposed densities and parking ratios are consistent with previously approved multifamily and senior housing projects. BACKGROUND The five northern parcels are guided as Low Density Residential and the southern parcel is guided Office. Surrounding properties are guided Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial. The five northern parcels are zoned Rural and the southern parcel is zoned Office. Surrounding zoning is Rural, R1-13.5, RM-6.5 and Neighborhood Commercial. Highway 169 and the City of Bloomington border the property to the east. The request is to reguide the property to High Density Residential and rezone to RM-2.5 for the construction of a 138 unit senior living project. The proposed project includes independent living, assisted living, and memory care units. The proposal includes underground and surface parking. Access to the underground parking is located below the skyway. The property is situated on and near arterial and collector roadways, is proximate to commercial uses and provides for a transition between existing single family areas and high capacity roadways. Multiple family development in this location could be considered an appropriate transitional land use for the following reasons: 1. Higher density housing is a transitional land use between single family and high capacity roadways. 2. The senior housing will generate less total traffic and peak hour traffic than a commercial land use. It provides for a low impact use adjacent to the existing single family development. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The following waivers are requested: 1. Building height from 45 feet to 50 feet 9 inches for the 4-story portion of the north building. The majority of the buildings (3-story portions) will have a maximum height of 39 feet 8 inches, which meets the standard. The exception is the 4-story portion which has a maximum height of 50 feet 9 inches. The 4-story portion is part of the north building and is a small percentage of the overall elevation of both buildings looking at the building from Hennepin Town Road. 2. Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 11.1 feet for the south building along Highway 169. This setback area is defined as front yard due to its frontage along Highway 169. Due to the width of right-of-way for Highway 169, the proposed structure and parking area have significant distance from the Highway 169 ramp. Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 4 3. Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 12.7 feet for the north building along Hennepin Town Road and 27' for the south building along Hennepin Towne Road. This waiver along Hennepin Town Road is reflective of the irregular shape of the parcel and is necessary due to the distance required from MnDOT property. 4. Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 2 feet for the northwest corner of the south building along Hennepin Town Road. This is a setback to the right-of-way line of the former MnDOT property, which is now land owned by the City. The triangular remnant piece of right of way is effectively being incorporated into the project. Therefore, as a practical matter, the setback is 84 feet if measured from a line that continues the right-of-way along Hennepin Town Road. 5. Parking from 276 to 116 spaces and enclosed parking from 138 to 52 spaces There are 52 underground parking spaces, and 64 surface parking spaces. Senior facilities of this nature do not utilize the number of parking stalls required in traditional RM-2.5 district development. The surface parking will sufficiently accommodate visitor and staff parking while the surface and underground parking will accommodate residents. The project also proposes the installation of bicycle racks. 6. Front yard parking setback from 35 feet to 5 feet for the north parking lot along Pioneer Trail. Parking areas must meet the required front yard setback. The lot has frontage on both Pioneer Trail and Hennepin Town Road. Rather than locate the parking along Hennepin Towne Road, it is located behind the buildings with the buildings having a strong presence along Hennepin Town Road. The waiver for the parking setback along Pioneer Trail allows some surface parking for the northerly building in an area that is not visible from Hennepin Town Road or the existing residential properties. The right-of-way along Pioneer Trail is very wide; therefore, the parking lot is set back approximately 100 feet from the road right-of-way. 7. Front yard parking setback from 35 feet to 10.7 feet for the south parking lot along Highway 169. The parking lot is set back approximately 70 feet from the Highway 169 ramp. 8. Density from 17.4 units per acre to 29.1 units per acre. The site is located near arterial and collector roadways and provides a suitable transition and buffer from the single family development to the west. Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 5 9. Site area per dwelling unit from 2,500 square feet to 1,494 square feet. This waiver is related to the total number of units proposed compared to the site area. Other high density residential projects such as Summit Place, Martin Blu, Presbyterian Homes and Real Life Co-op have been approved with a similar waiver. 10. Tree replacement from 1,457 caliper inches to 43 caliper inches. The landscaping plan includes a total of 623 caliper inches of landscaping material. The City Code provides for landscaping requirements for multi-family projects and tree replacement requirements. The landscaping plan meets the landscaping requirements for the site but falls short of the tree replacement requirements. However, in this situation, compliance with the tree replacement requirements would pose a practical difficulty upon development due to the overgrown nature of the site. As a result, the applicant is asking for a waiver for the tree replacement. The proposed landscaping plan for the site is robust. In addition to the trees, the applicant is proposing shrubs and perennials along parking lots as screening, along the building foundation to enhance the appeal of the building, along the sidewalks, patios, and seating areas to enhance the resident's experience of these outdoor spaces. The applicant is providing trees that exceed the minimum size requirements. 11. Group Usable Open Space Per Dwelling Unit from 600 square feet per unit to a total provided is 28,879 square feet or 209 square feet per unit. City Code requires 600 square feet per unit. The proposed plan provides for open space both internally in the form of community rooms, dayrooms, a theater, billiards, a library, and a fitness center. Outdoor gathering areas are provided in the form of patios, decks, bird watching area, walking trail, benches, and pergolas. These forms of usable open spaces are appropriate for a senior housing project. SIGNS All sign permits will require review and approval through the sign permit process. The proposed monument sign appears to exceed the allowable sign area. This must be modified before applying for a sign permit. SITE LIGHTING The proposed site lighting plan meets City requirements and will be confirmed at the time of building permit issuance. TREE REPLACEMENT AND LANDSCAPING PLAN The site includes a number of significant trees that are subject to the tree replacement requirements of the City Code. The applicant is seeking a waiver to the tree replacement requirements. Due to the amount of existing vegetation on site, compliance with the tree replacement requirements poses a practical difficulty upon development. The landscaping plan meets the landscaping requirements for the site but falls short of the tree replacement Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 6 requirements. The proposed landscaping plan for the site is robust. In addition to the trees, the applicant is proposing shrubs and perennials along parking lots as screening, along the building foundation to enhance the appeal of the building, along the sidewalks, patios, and seating areas to enhance the resident's experience of these outdoor spaces. The applicant is providing trees that exceed the minimum size requirements. HENNEPIN TOWN ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND TURN LANE The proponent is dedicating right of way adjacent to Hennepin Town Road at the north end of the project at Pioneer Trail. This right of way will be able to accommodate a future right turn lane from Hennepin Town Road to Pioneer Trail. The proponent will be responsible to rough grade the right of way and construct the sidewalk adjacent to Hennepin Town Road such that it will accommodate a right turn lane. The turn lane and improvements to the signal will be constructed as a City project at such time that funding is identified. SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS A 5 foot sidewalk is proposed along the west side of the lot in the right-of-way from the property connecting to Pioneer Trail. There will also be sidewalks on the property to provide pedestrian connections between patios, seating areas, buildings, and parking lots. ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS The proposed plan meets and exceeds the requirements per façade for 75/25%materials. Materials provided that are within the 75%required category include glass, cultured stone, splitface concrete masonry units, and face brick. The architecture of the building has been revised to include additional varied roof lines,building wall articulation, balconies and an updated palette of materials. All of these additional architectural details add to the character, quality and appeal of the building and offsets the number of waivers they are requesting. UTILITIES Existing public sanitary sewer and water lines are located within the property and will provide access for the proposed project. As a result of the additional fill being placed over the public sanitary sewer line a portion of this existing line may need to be reconstructed. A plan and profile of the sanitary sewer line will be required; construction must meet City standards. Bypass pumping of the sanitary sewer may be necessary and will be the responsibility of the Developer. REGUIDING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN When considering a request for a reguiding of the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission's role is to determine whether the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies. There are a number of policies in the Comprehensive Plan that support the reguiding of the subject property from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential. The most important policies relevant to this project include the following: Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 7 • create housing for seniors in very close proximity to shopping and services to eliminate the need for car travel whenever possible; • encourage higher density development(single- or multiple family, owner-occupied or rental) on Eden Prairie's remaining undeveloped land, where appropriate; • provide programs and services that meet the needs of all residents, including seniors and other special populations; • promote and encourage lifecycle housing for all ages; AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proponent has indicated that they are willing to include an affordability component in this project. The issue of incorporating affordable units into this project will be discussed in more detail at the City Council level. As discussed below, the City Council has adopted goals relating to providing affordable housing units that this development will assist in meeting by providing affordable units. Subject to City Council review and approval the proponent's willingness to provide an affordability component will be incorporated as a requirement in the development agreement to be presented to the City Council. In addition the City has available to it funding mechanisms to meet requirements for this project. There are a number of goals and policies in the City's Comprehensive Plan encouraging elderly housing and affordable housing opportunities within the community. The plan acknowledges that there is a growing demand for affordable housing in the community and seniors are a growing segment of the population which has specific needs including affordable housing. Some of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies include the following: • encourage the development of housing opportunities for seniors appropriate for the physical/mental changes they experience; multiple unit housing with common indoor/outdoor community areas that encourage inclusion and options that provide services such as nurses visits, dining options and transportation; • encourage independent and assisted living housing for seniors; • encourage elderly and affordable housing throughout the City; • promote and support the development of new affordable housing units to meet the community's share of the regional affordability housing needs as well as the City's goals; • support efforts to develop quality, affordable housing developments that are long lasting, indistinguishable from market rate housing and well-maintained and managed; and, • Ensure that a portion of the City's remaining land and major redevelopment areas, including the Major Center Area and Golden Triangle TOD, are developed as affordable housing. The City has adopted an affordable housing goals range for 2011 to 2020 of 1,198 to 1,843 units. The Plan outlines a number of resources and implementation strategies that can be used to reach the affordable housing goals. The Comprehensive Plan promotes the use of the PUD process and incentives such as density bonuses to encourage higher density developments with a greater percentage of affordable units. The proponent is asking for a waiver to increase the density from 17.4 units per acre to 29.1 units Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 8 per acre and has agreed to include affordability in the project. Incorporating affordable units within newly developed residential areas and redevelopment to mixed-use and higher density residential projects will assist in achieving the City's goals. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend approval of the following request: 1. Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres 3. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres 4. Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres 5. Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres 6. Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres This is based on plans stamp dated August 17, 2016, staff report dated August 17, 2016 and the following conditions: 1. Prior to scheduling for City Council public hearing, the proponent shall: A. Revise the plans to accommodate a future 14' wide turn lane on Hennepin Town Road at Pioneer Trail. B. Address the comments from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Hennepin County. C. Revise the plans by eliminating the proposed drainage and utility easement along the north and east side of the MnDOT remnant piece of right-of-way to eliminate the encroachment of the building on the easement. Those easements are not needed. D. Revise the Site Plan as follows: i. Provide details of the retaining walls, decorative pavers, and decorative fences. ii. Provide a sidewalk connection around the north side of the north building and connect with the sidewalk along Hennepin Towne Road. 2. Prior to Final Plat approval, the proponent shall A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. Staff Report—Prairie Bluffs Senior Living August 17, 2016 Page 9 B. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall install erosion control and tree protection fencing at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City Engineer and City Forester. 3. Prior to signature of the Development Agreement, the proponent shall provide an executed copy of an easement providing a right of access between the subject property, the property to the north and access to the City's infrastructure at the northeast corner of the property. 4. Prior to signature of the Development Agreement, the proponent shall enter into an Encroachment Agreement with the City to allow site improvements on City property, which was former excess MnDOT right-of-way along Hennepin Towne Road. 5. Prior to building permit issuance for the property, the proponent shall: A. Provide a tree replacement/landscaping surety equivalent to 150% of the cost of the landscaping plan for review and approval. B. Pay the park dedication fees. 6. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the property: A. Parking from 276 to 116 spaces. B. Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 13 feet for the north building and 35 feet to 27 feet for the south building along Hennepin Towne Road. C. Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 11.1 for the south building along Highway 169. D. Front yard parking setback from 35 feet to 5 feet for the north building along Pioneer Trail and from 35 feet to 10.7 feet for the south building along Highway 169. E. Density from 17.4 units per acre to 29.1 units per acre. F. Site area per dwelling unit from 2,500 square feet to 1,495 square feet. G. Tree replacement from 1,457 caliper inches to 43 caliper inches. H. Group Usable Open Space Per Dwelling Unit from 600 square feet per unit to a total provided is 28,879 square feet or 209 square feet per unit. 7. All signage shall require review and approval of a sign permit. Eld Eld EHE8 ,4 ParTao lksu ' **,, . FE] 7, ' ffl '.,,t , :ftr. ,i.,,44,, i iv 4, i ' El ssii .-*4 II * ,_*# ss KNIss'ss'ili, , zg AeIm la 00 0 r 7 Hennepin Town Road ' .4- 4, * ,tilm ,,z 11111111 Ens An/ 111111 � ` HI , Iwi6 ,--Lr,i..i .,,,_ ri D J\ 4tipHWY 169 o AtOltt %•, •. j► •�4 •� Pioneer Trail 41 WITImm 116 �I•I i to j . (4*44 a 4 P' SITE w 1% , w.a 1 _� 1 b,-4 4 6 * io, 11 /LE*,mi ,w4 t iii, . rk.- - 0. m P W #..' AVIIPtr 0 iii. et )011.p. / M / Pioneer Trail MI m "iiiir, City o den aerie- - Lit of Bloomington, Lee Drive Ilium. U . if l'\1\111,\1161\iihkt SIT 1 11 Highway#1691 Normandy Crest 1 FIT Hennepin Town Roadlik L ■ LIIIIIIIr Rural Residential 0.10 Units/Acre Neighborhood Commercial N Low Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Acre nip Community Commercial Streams 17.7 Low Density/Public/Open Space - Regional Commercial Principal Arterial -A Minor Arterial - Medium Density residential 2.5-10 Units/Acre ®Town Center '•i . $ +;. ,i -B Minor Arterial DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06 nMedium Density Residential/Office - Park/Open Space —Major Collector DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 03-01-07 DATE Revised 11-07-05 DATE Revised 06-01-07 EDEN I High Density Residential 10-40 Units/Acre Public/Quasi-Public DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-07 Minor Collect or DATE Revised 03-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-08 1-1 AirportGolf Course DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Office - Church/Cemetary PRAIRIE ErrAliz Y// Office/Industrial Open WaterFII EIVE•wORK•QAEAM f� Office/Public/Open Space Right-Of-Way 300 150 M 0ogamm�Me mo1.m_..„®.�..o.a, . ..0300 Feet - Industrial CICityLimits '-----------'ll‘-----.411%1411111111111111,144,*44.4 Ai City .f Bloomington, it _ MN AN Allir— Lee Drivei:‘[:- ________________ � Normandy Crest [ \ I!c- 7, i Ill 1 Highway#169 Hennepin Town Road ■ / or ,, • ilial ,----- ,: 40 10 • ii. ,_ Rural Residential 0.10 Units/Acre Neighborhood Commercial N Low Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Acre rill Community Commercial Streams 17.7 Low Density/Public/Open Space - Regional Commercial Principal Arterial -A Minor Arterial - Medium Density residential 2.5-10 Units/Acre ®Town Center '•i . $ +;. ,i -B Minor Arterial DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06 nMedium Density Residential/Office - Park/Open Space —Major Collector DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 03-01-07 DATE Revised 11-07-05 DATE Revised 06-01-07 EDEN I High Density Residential 10-40 Units/Acre Public/Quasi-Public DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-07 Minor Collector DATE Revised 03-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-08 1-1 AirportGolf Course DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Office - Church/Cemetary PRAIRIE ETA Y// Office/Industrial Open Water EIVE•wORK•QAEAM f� Office/Public/Open Space Right-Of-Way 340 170 M 0ogamm�Me mo1.m_o.„®o�..o.a, o .,0..340 Feet - Industrial =AirportBN IIP NN,,,,,,' -________ ‘..qkof, // Pioneer Trail m ,n ,1117„ /(72iti COniA9 1 i 1 1 1 1 ir El 1 Lee Drive , r /( ...\-.) Highway #169 j_Lr,,„ L-r IN. Normandy Crest I _.: *c______ J � i ‘s , Hennepin Town Road I W 0 ill" lir ,...„,• 0 Arisk AiL4ik . 4A- .,Ali ,rf4,4 tirt4aut =Rural -Regional Commercial Shoreland Management Classifications N R1-44 One Family-44,000 sf.min. -TC-C I NE I Natural Environment Waters R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min. -TC-R I RD I Recreational Development Waters R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min. -TC-MU I GD I General Development Waters(Creeks Only) . 1 1 ,f. t R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min. -Industrial Park-2Acre Min, ® 100- Year Floodplain RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A.max. ^Industrial Park-5Acre Min. -RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A.max.-General Industrial-5 Acre Min. Up dated through approved Ordinances#26-2008 EDEN Office Public Ordinance#33-2001(BFI Addition)approved,but not shown on this map edition PRAIRIE Neighborhood Commercial 1-1 GolfCourse Date:March 1,2009 Community Commercial l I Water In case of discrepancy related to a toning classitmaaon on this zoning map,the Ordinance tIVE•WOBIC•tlfi EI1M and attached legal description on file at Eden Paine Ciry Center will prevail. -Highway Commercial l I Right of Way -Regional Service Commercial QCityLimits 0 0,075 0.1 5 Milesm°au_,...m..=m._..®..g..o.a.,a ..o...ia..m ,..,,mo, Niroimim , , / . I.P., Pioneer I ,....__ Trail 4 E iii ,,, ii...... r, ,. . .._ _ _,...._. ___ . it... $ Lee Drive I !�."•... _.- ) ) - -.. . , itti ? • ,.m. so, y 2 � mg ,,,,),_ : „ , , ., ., ,, _. ..7„._ _ 1116 Highway#169 . In J •...v. of ''` •��- 4 , . Normandy Crest , , rr::- ..-. I. __, , _ L , , Hennepin Town Road mipir 1 T, y 511" IOW \ : kil:tricHrik:i A • ,Opillar'' *At .. v . , . /1 :„... , vilki . ,„,,,, i, , , , viipt.. ... ,::,, i 0,.. ii, irie7, P ‘ # . 2 ,,_ei.-..1 0 0. 11111 -:,• - N •.-1 4 , iiii* _1„ , t•-' . ''' -FP 1 a. ila, dir , L /r 44.Fp 51 I I I Ify. 1 ' - 1 1 lilt A 0 360 ''' 720 Feet , STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angie Perera, Planner 1 DATE: August 17, 2016 SUBJECT: Variance#2016-08 APPLICANT/ SKD Architects, Inc. OWNER: Logan Real Estate, LLC LOCATION: 11000 W. 78th Street, Eden Prairie, MN 120 DAY REVIEW: November 18, 2016 REQUEST: • To allow a variance for proposed exterior screening and improvements to an existing building that would exceed the maximum building height permitted by City Code. City Code permits a maximum building height of 40 feet in the C-REG-SER zoning district. BACKGROUND Cambria is an existing three story office building, approximately 45,000 square feet in size and was built in 1984. The property is 3.26 acres in size and is located south of I-494, east of Prairie Center Drive, and north of West 78th Street and Anderson Lake. The property is guided Office and Zoned as C-REG-SER (Commercial Regional Service District). Surrounding properties are guided and zoned primarily as C-REG-SER and Office. Cambria is planning to renovate the exterior of their existing building. The existing exterior building material is primarily glass. Cambria is working with SKD Architects, Inc. ("the applicant") and in summary; they are proposing to update the architecture of the building by adding cut stone veneer, stone detailing, and brick work to the facades of the building. The applicant is also proposing to add an aluminum louver to the top of the existing parapet of the building to provide screening for the existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment that currently extends approximately 9'4" above the existing roof. The applicant is asking for a variance to exceed the 40 foot maximum building height as permitted in the C-REG-SER zoning district to accommodate the aluminum louver and improvements as proposed and as depicted on the site plan elevations dated 7/22/16. A previous variance for the existing building height was approved in 1984 when the building was constructed. Variance # 1984-03 granted approval for the construction of an office building to allow a 15 ft. setback from the north lot line one of the property versus the 35 ft. setback required and also a variance to allow a 44 ft. building height versus the 40 ft. maximum building height requirement. Staff Report—Variance #2016-08 August 17, 2016 Page 2 of 3 VARIANCE REQUEST & STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a variance for the proposed exterior screening and improvements to an existing building that would exceed the maximum building height permitted by City Code. City Code permits a maximum building height of 40 feet in the C-REG-SER zoning district. The actual height of the existing building slightly exceeds the 44 ft. height as was previously approved per variance # 1984-03. Currently, the tallest portion of the building is approximately 44'6" and the tallest portion of the proposed building height is approximately 54'. The proposed improvements would add an approximate additional height ranging from 6' to 10' onto the top of the existing rooftop to include the proposed aluminum louver that would adequately screen the existing 9'4" tall rooftop, mechanical equipment. A 4 ft. building height variance was approved in 1984 and the applicant is asking for a new 14 ft. building height variance to address the screening needs for the existing rooftop, mechanical equipment. (The variance being requested is essentially seeking an additional 10 ft. building height variance to provide screening for the 9'4"rooftop, mechanical equipment). VARIANCE REQUEST Variances may be granted when they are "in harmony with the general purposes and intent of The ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." Furthermore variances may "be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." Harmony with Purpose and Intent of Ordinance The requested variance is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance as follows: • The proposed improvements are being requested to provide screening of existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment that is required to be screened per the City Code and is currently not being screened. • The applicant has demonstrated that the existing building has load limitations that can be accommodated with the open, aluminum louver parapet as being proposed while the design is lightweight and also provides screening that is an integral part of the building. • The previously approved variance # 1984-03 recognized the difficulty of the triangular shaped site with multiple frontages that limited the building footprint potential and thereby allowed a variance for reduced setbacks and an increased building height of approximately 44 ft. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan The State law requires that variances be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • The existing use of the property is Office and the variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan since the use of the property is not being changed. Reasonable Use of the Property The proposed variance is a reasonable use of the property due to the following reasons: Staff Report—Variance #2016-08 August 17, 2016 Page 3 of 3 • The previous rooftop, mechanical equipment was screened with a wooden fence that was not an integral part of the building. The proposed new screening is an integral part of the building. • The wooden fence/screening was deteriorating and has since been removed and the City Code requires screening of exterior, mechanical equipment. • The existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment is tall and is therefore difficult to screen without compromising aesthetics of the building. • The applicant has demonstrated that there are structural/load limitations that limit what can be added onto the roof of the existing building structure (for screening purposes). Circumstances Unique to the Property and not Created by Landowner The property is unique for the following reason: • Previously approved variance # 1984-03 recognized the difficulty of the triangular shaped site with multiple frontages that limits the building footprint potential and thereby allowed a variance for reduced setbacks and an increased building height of approximately 44 ft. Will not alter Character of Locality The requested variance will not change the character of the locality for the following reasons: • The proposed improvements including adding the aluminum louver to the top of the parapet, the addition of the cut stone veneer, the stone detailing, and additional brick work collectively break up the existing building mass of glass by providing visual, architectural relief(from the existing architecture of the building) on all facades of the building by also providing interest at the roof that is functional (the proposed aluminum louver provides screening) that is also an integral part of the building. • The existing building is somewhat out of character with other existing buildings in the surrounding area since it is primarily composed of glass walls. Other neighboring buildings are brick or are brick with stone veneer or stone accents as the primary exterior building material and glass as secondary; therefore the proposed exterior design and improvements of the Cambria building will be more consistent with other existing buildings in the surrounding area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the request subject to: • Subject to the information provided in the staff report dated 08/17/16 and the building height shall not exceed 54 ft. as depicted on the site plans prepared by SKD Architects, Inc. dated 7/22/16. • Conditions as outlined in Final Order#2016-08. REQUESTED COMMISSION ACTION The Commission may wish to choose from one of the following actions: 1. Approve Final Order#2016-08. 2. Approve Final Order#2016-08 with modifications. 3. Continue Variance Request#2016-08 for additional information. 4. Deny Final Order#2016-08. VARIANCE#2016-08 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER 2016-08 APPLICANT: SKD Architects, Inc. OWNER: Logan Real Estate, LLC ADDRESS: 11000 W. 78th Street, Eden Prairie, MN OTHER DESCRIPTION: Lot 2, Block 1, Welsh Addition VARIANCE REQUEST: • To allow a variance for proposed exterior screening and improvements to an existing building that would exceed the maximum building height permitted by City Code. City Code permits a maximum building height of 40 feet in the C-REG-SER zoning district. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof duly considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein does hereby find and order as follows: 1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met. (Yes X No N/A). 2. Variance 2016-08 is: granted modified denied 3. Findings and conditions are attached as Exhibit A. 4. This order shall be effective fifteen days after the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals or on September 6, 2016; however, this variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless the erection or alternatives permitted shall occur within one (1) year of the effective date unless said period of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the expiration of one year from the effective date hereof. 5. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council Review. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS N/A=Not Applicable BY: Andrew Pieper—Vice Chair Date: 08-22-16 EXHIBIT A—FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FINDINGS 1. The granting of the variance is in harmony with intent and general purposes of the ordinance and the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. • The requested variance is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and the proposed improvements since the proposed improvements are being requested to provide screening of existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment that is required to be screened per the City Code and is currently not being screened. The applicant has demonstrated that the existing building has load limitations that can be accommodated with the open, aluminum louver parapet as being proposed while the design is lightweight and also provides screening that is an integral part of the building. Also, previously approved variance # 1984-03 recognized the difficulty of the triangular shaped site with multiple frontages that limited the building footprint potential and thereby allowed a variance for reduced setbacks and an increased building height of approximately 44 ft. • The State law requires that variances be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The existing use of the property is Office and the variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan since the use of the property is not being changed. 2. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. The proposed variance is a reasonable use of the property due to the following reasons: • The previous rooftop, mechanical equipment was screened with a wooden fence that was not an integral part of the building. The proposed new screening is an integral part of the building. • The wooden fence/screening was deteriorating and has since been removed and the City Code requires screening of exterior, mechanical equipment. • The existing, rooftop, mechanical equipment is tall and is therefore difficult to screen without compromising aesthetics of the building. • The applicant has demonstrated that there are structural/load limitations that limit what can be added onto the roof of the existing building structure (for screening purposes). 3. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The property is unique for the following reasons: • Previously approved variance # 1984-03 recognized the difficulty of the triangular shaped site with multiple frontages that limits the building footprint potential and thereby allowed a variance for reduced setbacks and an increased building height of approximately 44 ft. 4. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. • The proposed improvements including adding the aluminum louver to the top of the parapet, the addition of the cut stone veneer, the stone detailing, and additional brick work collectively break up the existing building mass of glass by providing visual, architectural relief (from the existing architecture of the building) on all facades of the building by also providing interest at the roof that is functional (the proposed aluminum louver provides screening) that is also an integral part of the building. • The existing building is somewhat out of character with other existing buildings in the surrounding area since it is primarily composed of glass walls. Other neighboring buildings are brick or are brick with stone veneer or stone accents as the primary exterior building material and glass as secondary; therefore the proposed exterior design and improvements of the Cambria building will be more consistent with other existing buildings in the surrounding area. CONDITIONS: 1. Subject to the information provided in the staff report dated 08/17/16 and the building height shall not exceed 54 ft. as depicted on the site plans prepared by SKD Architects, Inc. dated 7/22/16. Area Location Map - Variance # 2016-08 Address: 11000 W. 78th Street Eden Prairie, MN 55347 / WI 1` Viking 1-494 /t1/ Dr. 1111111111Momm. im- 7. - Den Rd. 7 , _ W. 78th St. 7 Prairie Center Dr. > r j N__--- 7\ 7 1 ( 0 250 500 1,000 Feet Guide Plan Map - Variance # 2016-08 Address. 11000 W. 78th St. Eden Prairie, MN 55347 1 ___________,�,� Lake -"""--'''.111-7,:i. : ' ' 4N—g\.... i Smetana \\ 1 1-494 Viking Dr. i i IliDen Rd. r priAlr W. 78th St. "il rPrairie Center Dr. Ilk Cit of ' • e ► ' rairie Land ide . nM . • I ! ! o Rural Residential 0.10 Units/Acre Neighborhood Commercial N Low Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Acre —i Community Commercial Streams 17.7 Low Density/Public/Open Space - Regional Commercial Principal Arterial —A Minor Arterial - Medium Density residential 2.5-10 Units/Acre ®Town Center '•i . $ +;. ,i —B Minor Arterial DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06 nMedium Density Residential/Office - Park/Open Space —Major Collector DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 03-01-07 DATE Revised 11-07-05 DATE Revised 06-01-07 EDEN I High Density Residential 10-40 Units/Acre Public/Quasi-Public DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-07 Minor Collector DATE Revised 03-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-08 nAirport Golf Course DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Office - Church/Cemetary PRAIRIE Y// Office/Industrial Open Water u7,7 ve•woRK•DREAM 2 Office/Public/Open Space Right-Of-Way 575 287.5 M O ogamm�Me mo1.m_o.„®o�..o.a„ o. MBoµib7bEFeet - Industrial Q CityLimits Zoning Map - Variance # 2016-08 Address: 11000 W. 78th St. Eden Prairie, MN 55347 air Niii • 0 z O W W W 7 Viking Dr. k 1-494 , .... ,,,,„ L‘WONA RD LEONA RD IlL iii 0 Or Den Rd. ,',',' '( 11 W III W TBTrrs-r W. 78th St. I , It / 4 Prairie Center Dr. ;i onin Map' , ..( \ \,._ =Rural -Regional Commercial Shoreland Management Classifications N R1-44 One Family-44,000 sf.min. -TC-C I NE I Natural Environment Waters R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min. -TC-R I RD I Recreational Development Waters R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min. -TC-MU I GD I General Development Waters(Creeks Only) 1 1 ,f. t R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min. -Industrial Park-2Acre Min, ® 100- Year Floodplain RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A.max. ^Industrial Park-5 Acre Min. EDEN -RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A.max. -General Industrial-5 Acre Min. Up dated through approved Ordinances#26-2008 Office Public Ordinance#33-2001(BFI Addition)approved,but not shown on this map edition PRAIRIE Neighborhood Commercial 1-1 GolfCourse Date:March 1,2009 Community Commercial l I Water In case of discrepancy related to a toning classitmaaon on this zoning map,the Ordinance tIVE•WORR•ORERM and attached legal description on file at Eden Paine Ciry Center will prevail. -Highway Commercial I I Right of Way -Regional Service Commercial 0 0.1 0.2 Miles .wau_...m..=m._..®..t..o.a.,a ..o...,,ari,m ,..,,mo, Aerial Map - Variance # 2016-08 Address:11000 W. 78th St. Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347 r- . -...T.1 9 + Y ` Ln _ • i i- ^ # �.. Viking Dr ~� ..c Den' w ! Rd. � � SI� . � �z______ , _ .4 W. 78th St. .iskt_ . ...= ( 4,-ll Prairie Center Dr. i, _ ir - 1 •N •.in ...1 di:-µ ''1,� t ' �. �,�;� 0 245 •:• ` 490 9" Feet architects PO'July 21, 2016 To the Eden Prairie Planning Commission Request for Variance Cambria is planning to renovate the exterior of their existing office building at 11000 West 78th Street. They are asking for a variance to exceed the maximum building height allowed in this zoning district which is 40', but was increased by a variance in the early 1980's to 44'. The current building varies between 38'8" at the highest grade elevation and 49'4" at the lowest elevation. Because the grade changes more than 10', the lowest elevation, plus 10' sets the reference datum. The existing building height is 39'4"from the reference datum. It does not include the height of the mechanical equipment or its screening, which extends another 9'4" above the roof. The request for a new variance is for 9'6" above the 40', 5'6" above the already approved 44'. The building exterior perimeter walls now include the mechanical equipment screening. So there is really no change in overall height. The proposed redesigned exterior will extend the visual the height of the building 6' to 10' above the existing roof line. This new design and parapet provides more appropriate mechanical screening, now an integral part of the building, as compared to the previous wood fencing that was part of the original construction. It also provides a finished cap to the building, adds visual relief, and makes the building more current with a much higher level of design and aesthetic. This screening extension is a combination of an open louver type grille with composite metal columns and a metal lattice type sun screen that serves as a finished cap to the building. Existing Conditions The current building was built around 1983. There is significant slope to the property, both across the building itself north to south, and at the parking, both west to east and north to south. The driveway access to the main parking area is steep and winding. The exterior is brick with ribbon type glass on the north, west and south sides. The east elevation is an all mirrored glass curtain wall system. The building looks odd in that the east elevation (the mirrored glass), is entirely different from the 3 other sides. It is in need of replacement, so this opened the opportunities to redesign this glass façade and integrate mechanical screening with it. Also, the top of the building looks unfinished at the glass wall, and the 3 other sides of brick lack any visual relief, so any protruding mechanical equipment, stands out dramatically. The building is 3 main levels, and a small partial lower level with some garage parking. The office ceiling heights inside are typically 8'5", about 7" less than typical by today's standards. The height of the building on the east side ranges from 40'2"' at highest grade to 47'8" at the lowest. The south elevation ranges from 49'4 to 47'8". The west elevation from 39'8"to 49'4", and the north elevation 38'8"to 40'2". The Planning Department confirmed that the building received a variance to build to 44' high. In addition, the mechanical equipment is about 9'4" above the roof. There was a wood fence screen around the equipment, which had deteriorated, and was removed a couple of years ago when the mechanical equipment was replaced. The intent was to address the equipment screening in the design of a new building façade in the future, which is now. Cambria also wanted to design a more purposeful location for their current signage, now displayed on the 3 sides of the building. It was not attached to the all glass curtain wall elevation. At almost 10' above the roof, the SKD Architects, Inc. 11140 Highway 55,&ite A Plymouth,MN 55441 763.591.6115 763.591.6119 fax https://d.docs.live.net/5b6b3b6f8f86fe39/SKD on One Drive/Projects on One Drive/Cambria Eden PraineNariance Request/Cambria Eden Prairie Variance Request Revised 8-3-2016.docx page 2 mechanical equipment is an eye sore from all sides and most noticeable from 1494 where the highway is almost high enough to look on level with the 2nd floor, and the main east entry from the parking lot. Additionally, on the north side of 1494 along Viking Drive across from this building and several buildings along the south side of West 78th,just east of this building, are at least 6 significant buildings that are all 4-6 stories. That said, the proposed height change would not stand out in mass. Practical Difficulty The practical difficulty falls in working with the conditions or restrictions of an existing building that we can't control or adjust. The existing mechanical equipment on the roof is very tall, and it needs to be screened. There are significant structural limitations that limits what can be added onto the face of the existing building structure, but does allow for changes on top of existing walls. Further, the height restriction in this area does not appear to be consistent. There are many nearby properties within a reasonable distance that are much taller. It appears that this area is a small pocket that is more restrictive in building height. To improve the exterior of this building and provide proper mechanical screening, our most reasonable option is to build up. This gives us ability to create a stronger visual image more consistent with their goals as a design and style company. Cambria's goal with this building redesign is to eliminate building envelope problems, improve the quality of construction, and redevelop a strong building image that better represents the image of Cambria as a style company which is a reflection of good design and quality. This pays dividends back to the City of Eden Prairie and its image. Prior to this work, Cambria has already replaced windows on the north, west and south elevations and has developed a new west building entry. They also added stone detailing to these exterior elevations as well. Mechanical Screening The building needs a mechanical screen. A fence around equipment is like a band aid, a new element that does not fit with the exterior building image. We feel a screen that is integral with the building skin greatly improves the image and quality of the building. That said, it now counts toward overall building height, yet overall the building is not any taller than it currently is. This mechanical screen forms the finished cap to the top of the building, and it provides strong visual impact. Looking at other buildings noted across 1494, the mechanical screening is an additional height, but also strongly impacts the heights of their buildings, too. Summary Prompted by company growth and issues with the current windows and building envelope, SKD architects developed this extensive redesign of the Cambria building, correcting window issues, providing a better mechanical equipment screen, and provide a much stronger image of the company, better representing it as a style company with branding. Cambria inherited a number of existing building issues, and have been working to improve the building as it has moved from a multitenant facility to a single occupant building. The goals in the redesign of the exterior facade were to raise the height of the building to naturally provide equipment screening, introduce stone with some metal around the building, create stronger and clearer senses of entries, and create relief to the building at the roof by varying the roof heights, creating a building cap that finishes the building. Also, Cambria has used sun screens as an element in their main manufacturing facility, and they wanted to introduce consistent elements to their Eden Prairie facility, and provide better branding. A challenge is that the structural design of the current structure left little room to support increased building loads, so a more open louver parapet design was developed. The design solution eliminates all of the problematic sloped glazing. Stepped ceilings with clerestory windows with are added to maintain the open atrium feel. The entry turns to create a small outdoor plaza outside the new building front entry., A lightweight open louver type grill is added to screen out the mechanical equipment. The grille is broken up with composite aluminum metal columns and a continuous sun screen and bracket detail that extends around the entire roof, but allows for relief and interest at the roof. page 3 This new design extends the height of the building 6' in the corners and 10' in the middle of each elevation. Again, the mechanical equipment extends 9'4" above the roof. The 10' high section screens the equipment from the most vulnerable north side to 1494. From the shorter distances, the east parking area, west parking and south along 78th, the 6' screen is adequate, too. Cambria just wants to improve their building image and deal with the screening as part of the building improvements. In this location, we feel that the building fits with the context of the site, the surrounding buildings, roads and within heavy vegetation. Also, after this work has been completed, Cambria is planning to improve and rework the landscaping to further improve the image of the facility and create a new higher standard among their facilities. If you have any questions, feel free to call. Sincerely, Steve Kleineman, AIA SKD Architects, Inc. East Elevation0°4G Building Material Square Feet Percentage Windors/Doors 5,220 57.76% gAKD Brick 0 0.00% 2'-4"x1'-4" COMPOSITE ROOF Stone 1,922 21.26% ALUM. LOUVER Metal 1,432 15.84% ` T.O.COMPOSITE — 6"STONE CAP ROOF Lower 442 4,89% ,tea �� NEW PREFINISHED EL. 148' 9 3/8" Concrete 22 ❑,25�Io arc 0� 1 :., tots T.O.COMPOSITE ROOF EDGE EXISTING // EXISTING lid �� ROOF ROOFTOP UNIT CUT STONE VENEER ROOFTOP UNfr 11140 Highway 55, Suite A EL. 148' 9 3/8" ±5'-6' ±10" ALUM. LOUVER T.O.ALUM VISOR 10" -5'-6" Total 9,❑38 1❑❑,❑❑�/o Plymouth, MN 5�5441 8"x1'-4"ALUM. BEAM VISOR NEW SLOPED _ EL. 1�7' 33/�" 763.591 6115 1 TELO 144' 7 3/8'OR PREFINISHED ROOF I I. .GAF' 6 — . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLL 14a' 9 3/0" . • - 2-2"x6"ALUM. - - I I . M_ 0 TUBE SUPPORTS - - I I - in .n EXISTING • _ • . . i. - ► T.O. PARAPET —\- - _• _ - - - - - - - - - - - - . ..: .• ' .... .... .. • 4"STONE CAP _ I .. . I ' I i.. ... .. I - - _ • NEW STONE • A _ HAUNCH _ - • RELOCATED - r _ SIGNAGE �� • _ EXISTING - - 3d 00r . FLOOR : :::::::::::::.: • O : a _ ................... ............................ ............................ ............... .. ......... .............. .............. ......... . ................. .............. .............. ............. •••••••••••• ••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••• • ........... ... .... •••••••••• •••• •••.._ ••••••••• ........... I _._._. _._._._._ _._._._._ .._.__ , .._._._.. __._._._.. __._._._.. __._._._ .......... .... ..._ _ - = - - _-- . • / • (STING — _',_ . :':.::. ::•::•:•::•:•::• : ' /1,1(::: p>. _ _ -_ ___ .... _ -, ............ .............. .............. ............ . ......... .............. ............ ............. .... -1-7 r- ...... ....... ... .... ....... ... .... _ • ... ....... .............. .......... ... .... _ — . • . _ .F\Nii .........„„, „„........„, „,........„„ „,....... ...... :::::::::::::: ::::::: ::::::: """ "" "."" ""."."."" ""."."." ........ _, , __ 7 .... ....... ............... ............. .......... .... ... __ .... . ____ .............. .............. ......... _______ .......... .... ... •••• ••••••• ••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••• _ . ........ ............... ............... ......... ......... : ....... ........................ ............................"...........................".............. ............. .............. . ---- ,.-.- -' — =:,...-=7, .:.... ...J IIIII ‘........: ....:......„:1: - - — - _-- .......... ..._... ...........� .-..._.._. .. �RNCE DATUM • ► II 1, ���. . , � A. �. a„o� OWES .............. v1il//O:1 ,lam. �—. o _r,. -v1i�i11 �1 �'11 qdm' .............. .............. ........................ : . % --------.±..... �.__.� r 1 I.I V • 8 . a ■� ■�.H. �_ • 0o il CEl I ® Ct a ct > a) East Elevation 0 C West Elevation co 2 0 4 8 16 Building Material Square Feet Percentage 1 - a) 0 IAto •— Windors/Doors 3,193 33.55% ., 10 r- Brick 3,400 35.73% Stone 1,097 1 1,53% 8"x1'-4" ALUM.BEAM Metal 926 9.73% L Louver 702 7.38% ALUM. LOUVER Concrete 199 2.09% T.O.COMPOSITE T.O.COMPOSITE ROOF ROOF Total 9,518 1❑❑.❑O�/o � ¶ � EL. 148'-9 3/8" 2'_92" i5'-6,,EL 148'-9 3/8"I ^�'� COMPOSITE 1 I�-- �- I�.■i,F Arii IM �� WALL PANELS T.O.ALUM VISOR %, l-__C:News•Mi ► msomm it mi /.I11=mh -.�mati_-��I> Pt� Total Building -Ca. 0 ..�, .� ,.,., , . , .r .� ,� .� EL. 144'-7 3/8" �'� a ;=� ■ �I•. I_. Ce 1. 1 ■��� ALUM. ROOF �,— C�==�=� ==�C :�M.M.M=M� =�=��a: _ .`s ■��� EDGE/CAP rn —==— ==-- •=.-.Mr A= = =--- '• •' '• . . . . . . . in Building Material Square Feet Percentage EXISTING - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ti -- T.O_PARAPET_ I 11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111'1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I o Windors/Doors 11,738 4❑.39/o RELOCATED SIGNAGEW/NEW 4x6 ALUM. Brick 6,667 22.94% \ _ = . TUBE SUPPORTS Stone 4,934 16.98% 0 NEW STONE Louver 973 6.79% HAUNCH Concrete 271 0.93% — Total 29,059 103.03% _ EXISTING _ �_ - 3rd. FLOOR . ..... . ... . 'A' H___ = I .... .. _ . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . .. o m m 1272.00 cn EEL. iM )11 i 1 �111111111 I Date 07/22/16 _= w -_ :. �.�►,,Y. -— �VA1 Drawn / i1 �� 11 / 'ME 2ndEXISTING FLOOR o Checked _ .-- j ''' — x....,.... /1111.14.- SWF = N's!..,....,....,..i...imi r,--- _= _ _ _7 • l‘r-w ..,..:... 111 Revision I TIT IIII 2 -;,. ;: winnowt 1 '111/�,1�•1f�I11,�11f111 9 stISFLOOR 10' 0 ABOVE LOWEST -� --- <Z►t'.��V-' ^.^<Y.Z�Tic� ! tt. �'531i uri aY`teW-M `'�^,`�5 �.� =. -- -- wlEr sr t i i '�fix' -� '.� �_ v ■��■� �■■ ■ ■■ _ . Pmim • .. .lit ow r. yt•y - — a'^ / E { o - - - - EXISTING CONCOURSE ' ai I 1 U co o Q N West Elevation o ELEVATIONS a 1/8" - 1'-0" Li) a Sheet No. O 0 4 8 16 O North Elevation IP 1 Building Material Square Feet Percentage Windors/Doors 1,591 32.12% gIKI:5 Brick 1,465 29.57% Stone 881 1 7.79% Metal 555 1 1.20% Louver 414 8.36% �_ Concrete 48 0.96% ar.... 0t cts Total 4,955 103.03% 11140 Highway 55, Suite A Plymouth, MN 515441 EXISTING T.O.COMPOSITE 763.691.6116 ROOFTOP UNIT ROOF ------------------------------------ ±9' 10" =2'-101„ 1 2.-9 1.. -5'-6„ 2" EL. 148'-9 3/8" 0 / !aw ,r '�w//��\I _Jimmtw, \..*'.1 a 1 ,... .la), 1,*•,7___ A . . , T.O.ALUM VISOR 1 J '� , I) EL. 144' 7 3/8" $1.-:A ,.,.... .. . . . .... . .. . . .... . .. ... . . . EXISTING . . I mil I - `" T.O. PARAPET - - - - - �.. 1- .. . . 111 1 1111111111111111111111111III1111111111 11111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111I[I::III11111111111111111 1111111111 RELOCATED SIGNAGE W/NEW BACKPLATF BY SIGN CONTRACTOR / EXISTING 3rd. FLOOR .= 4 , T.O.COMPOSITE ROOF F-1 EL. 148-93/8 ..:..-... .. t = APPROX VISOR 1 :.. .. -...-.... .. EXISTING EL. 147'-3 3/4'NO 8x1'-4"ALUM.BEAM 1 1 M m ROOFTOP UNIT 8"x1'-0"ALUM.BEAM 6"STONE CAP 2"x8"ALUM.TUBE EXISTING _ fl 2nd. FLOOR — • T.O.CAP 0 O c` �/ 3"STONE VENEER 4"x1'-4"ALUM CHANNEL � AIR PA E ' : I...:.•::..:.l „ „ :. : S C (2)2 x6 ALUM. - COLUMN : -... • . • / DRAINAGE MAT � / �. � �:..�� i ✓ }" SHEATHING TUBE 6"ALUM. • .� �� � . -• . I_l ��&BUILDING PAPERS 8" 6" METAL STUDS - - :. C .a.�* Milli - •., ".: 'ter Sl1N � + :. T.O.BEAM /� T I5 AI A EL. 138-2 . r, I ": ' ::,:...:•. ....:....1..:.:::.z....:.....::::,...:.r."......:.:....;...., ///////////////////////////////////////'/J////////// /////i.�„�// ,�/// • -� RELOCATED • /////////////////// .� ��� • 1 // i j er � , EXISTING SIGNAGE j / jam' • . L JJ 1v�,� T. isiiiN EXISTING CAP , % ; --- / • // .%/, ` r %% r--- <_ 1. A EL. 136' 01/4" �, 'PH JJ o A 1-1 I',1 J WEEPS 3" 3y' 3" STONE SOFFIT J J J J J a � j r EXISTING ® a) , CONCOURSE L___,t_fJ • o tv r South Elevation > C/) Partial Section • North Elevation Building Material Square Feet Percentage Ilill 65 2 Windors/Doors 1,733 31,24% N. Brick 1,802 32,48% - 1 I 0 2 4 8 0 4 8 16 Stone 1,034 18,64% •o �__� CO •CD � EXISTING % v Metal 562 10,12% L. / 3rd FLOOR / ������������VA VA�������� �������������f Louver 414 7,47�/0 / //���������������j/������//.%✓i% Concrete 3 0,05�Io O O/ 4 4 /4/, /% /%%�j Total 5.548 1 DD,DD�/o ® C uj T.O.COMPOSITE EXISTING ROOFTOP UNIT ROOF IIr +2'-10'„ - 8"x1'-6"ALUM.BEAM 0in 0 CD "EL. 148'-9 3/8" ±5'-6f 2�- „ i - _9 10 Epp w 8"x1'-4"ALUM. BEAM VISOR- _ - C.0 T.O.ALUM VISOR IT% �� I . i ALUM. LOUVER 1Y 1-, r-�11WM n n n ;-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . C13.. 0 EL. 144'-7 3/8" - .,� 1� .. . 1��:1 G:�� �\..- 1 ik'ALUM. LOUVER � � ... .. 1 .�. � � � :,- ALUM. ROOF ALUM. ROOF EDGE/CAP �... �� "_U� I���jam` 1 _-_ �, ' :. 6"STONE CAP «' EXISTING ���.� • . I CUT STONE VENEER T.O. PARAPET - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1 - - - - _ - - - -.. . - - IIII II I �® �.. , 4x6 ALUM. - - ' TUBE SUPPORTS = RELOCATED SIGN GEW/NEW REUSED SIGNAGE UACKPLA1I BY 'NI CON 11EAC101< . . //, 5 EXISTING j F w r j j y �.. , 2nd FLOOR',./ / ,. / / j ,j ,j j jAl � �j � �� � �� � �j ���� ��� NEW STONE % ... HAUNCH • / / •,.-_• 0 EXISTING C� -- - - - = -_ - 3rd. FLOOR = _ _ 1. - _== • , I- _ _ - i1 = = Comm 1272.00 \, \�/1�y = 1 _ ` --_ 1T�1 Date 07/22/16 a, EXISTING f - _ - I Drawn 71- 2nd. FLOC - 1',I -_ „� - _- -_= V� -_ Checked --- 1, _ -- 11, ��, _-- I _ - _. EXISTING I: • :;..i ;�� - 11 _ _ ?:. .1 1st FLOOR _ - — — _ 1,. , ,.,:„...,..,_: / / ;t=i=u n=n ii / iA -- - _ — __ .__ — — 1 . .... .. � _ Revision , `= " -14 s ‘i rcw\.‘.wf = - .. . . ...__ N\ _ ___ - . :. . 1,„„:\ r ,_•—-= A Ai ,‘ 0 - %/!-III =n % • -- - - - \ 1 - ` — --- �J RE rce n 1 u1w I - - / . . II( ��All %11011"-'ll EXISTING �'-�" e s• •,�, I �. I I,I — is 1 ��1 ;. / 11 1st. FLOOR an c' *- I>r2�LRTES ` yZ=�^y. . ' ; ...�nunr..' .,,. °r Ali ////. --_ ���' ' ; •r ' 'G I�I 40 �%/ i% II � . `:I Or jii j � -.l�r�\�^' \'1' .I�Gi''rI� ],` 'V. q, _ "jj�j %% % .�-`T\ - _ �"c � - r` ,��\ �'.�`� :'�\may; I�I (n j / j / � .�- �1�4��:�- f: ... -. . . rN " -•• 100,,V-ti1 IJ71/a1 +� "-'7,: 1 i ///. EXISTING . �y d��i. fir..... 1 ': r Ail / �� _ 1 EXISTING 1; Al //CONCOURSE j / LY %*,t,,�///. //z iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiaa/////7 9'//i i. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii V A Q o • jjj M Section South Elevation o ELEVATIONS & SECTION 0 1/4" - 1'-0" 1/8"- 11-0"TA Cn SheetNo. 65 II C 0 2 4 8 0 4 8 16 N cN© �nnu SKD 1, ____ _____ _. ,ohl rc otects 11140 Highway 55, Suite A Plymouth, MN 55441 763.591.6115 -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- D 1 /SEARCH �x� ii: x�x 11 I -x�x _��EARCH 0.00 p2. BASSWa►. -x�X�x-x_ �� X�x x- x� +� x�x� x�x �x 1 -->) SPRUCE o 1 16' ASH x�x_x_ p,0 I Q ijai x-x 2 18' ASH �x 6� a -� 14' ASH 907 0 �xX --- �x (> �p C - - ------- g x�X_x v Qv -- _____ GU<B76� �67e _ 7611 „6• LE 0 X X�X� 7I GU -• ---- x�x -- - ---------- b� cb I CG GU 8 --- -- ASH �x (b j +�� CG` 6.eq : -i 12' SPRUCE X�X 0' 4111111114* �909 0 r� q,� ler 12' APPLE 6w 6'L3 ` t f / 411 r 20' ASH x_x�x b ' �° FFE=868, � �x \ o / V �g1 __ I� 1111J 20' ASH �X G� � S 4' SPRUCE x�X_x_x_ 17 Nix 4cp� 4� :fir "` uc I£ tF / i1 ip_ .e'ssA / Ge f o s�� if 9 ASH x=x6 C �' � � / I '9) ----------- 16' PINE � -, AS� X� I �� t6 S UC6 x x G� Opp1 GU=875.58 I _- �, 60• -------------- --- ---- �' SPR CE • PR � o � G875.49 Jr,� 18' AS� GE x x X ►rN �� \ G� SPRY �x�x 0 a 2� PQQ� C7.1 Ilr/ s �Zti ��� . D \ 1 ii Ti... � J'06 22. CGT TONWOO r 13 a �i^�A / �I� 1 ---- 014' SPRUCC= . GDTZDN "� C O/SEARCH CO /1� 7 1b !VO � r �C' 0, 0 �� 4' 5..� @' C m�o a------7 •• 911 m OTT. r. .NWDOD 0 0 ill LI ^�Z ►_ ` C /•.EAR I H ���,�2 �- 'o, orrONW "= +j L 1 aD_ ` �♦ Fa 1� ��iimm0 a TT11NW110 / /o VJE=879,2:ii*---__*,,, ue o• 0raz'co eo7 8' ASH TO/y I .. . I ue r "p C l7 �r WCOr 14' COTTONWOOD No �j m G� o0 16' AS iiiir 71 -/// MI � rft 'lirp-ii-lai`° I "e CONO �0 .29 � �8157 991 SW GU_86247 �., -' d I (/a ue C A 0 C K O �. � ' 5 •6¢9� Et °6R I ON-- 6 TTONWOODI� �QQD AS �� :...1:r �+� is CGS •1 O�ASH i" Z� • GU=874,83 -�^-'' I 11 `8 ,. �y�i o / �r�'�: -._ (��� �� G • CQj ... /1 , FFE=86767 JII ^ \` I � • ' I � 6�r9 ' ASH tQNW c° �� I @1 111� a6 �.8 QQ.Oj ELM C ? uh I IS 1 I 1l 1 co u v ,-. 86 n Eit SPRUCE__ illii VJ J� S i ,,0 IMF =,_ I ' lam] �� \ GO" b` 0b a -' P �► 6' COTTONWO� 1 CI) CZ c, yj VJ I' at) r� 'r o 52 /% 14'-SRNreVp ' E . . I I 22' PINE J �o CE �;i�ik �I I o GU=869.21 J C� �o Gil 2• 18• SP' t 1� / I / _ 1 - LM I _ MI E U J Y LL - ' '' 1114- -_ 04' ASH GU=868,77 via) o // Rijn �.__ - _ OH OH •4. COTTON O,OOc 01 - � \���': sP �y� o - - off °" C /SEARCH r' ` LL® I_- L ..1�I\ 6. SPRUGE $ - �� - OH GAS - A GU=868,11 OH GASG N aoo a �` _ /� _ �� 879,12 i e0' ASH I CCi� Q �/ �� 12' PINE _ - OHEll GAS GAS FO ��r �i, d @6j6�� II �__- �� _ - CD E �ON 0 GAS GAS FO FO LA � CO 14' ASH 00- 908 111E2 -46' FFE=86 e( ba2GAs o b C C i ou /PIN ' -------- - OH -OH GAS GAS=F❑ Fa FO FO $ �GU?87 ,02' ry GU=867,� l / ( , _ l- I 4. CI'� I r' r' / , EC GAS- FO ' FG 14 • - III QQv y GU_g58.75 CL. @Sg VJ V 6s 66N ON GAS v h a ' ��, Q C �9S 63 .�. - 6A- ` �-tiH GAS FO �g13g6 CGS I .- ' RIM=867 I_ .c ` / ���� a oa G 8,S ___ s � S_GAS- F RIM=848.58 = GV c� .,� I • °' c � ®® '���=��� •* 5� a x f �-eH �' FO INV=844.39 NE0 (� i��cy-.-A�' ri go' ASH �.[IH GAS F❑ v �� o •,5 .45 NE n n... �� 0 s .. Aso, Zhu $ -81 9°'3 @. A �� 't.�+7iellfte���. Cr �° ON -GAs GAs -FO FG I INV=844.79 S VJ,i��''�^� g��2 ��0$� �9 .% ;PI Aff `�4�=��i QQ\� G`d� _DR- UH -GAS FO FO x VJ or`3 V �a4 P -8j-6,8`2 / i� �ru GAS GAS FO ��1o• -. P - g53.62 ( I OH GAS FO \-903AI FO 0,00 1 vJ� 16` PINE �� 20' AS - `v PpP INV= _ - 014 GAS GAS FO C /SEARCH ti 16' PINE - ,ot I , « '\O 905 -GAS-FO FO v - 4r� 904 16' PINE ' f c FO s GAS FO D toa'oo r� a 9,9 p2 j6• PINE k.\t`__ ��---- . , L., -. O -� ` :�r' AS INV=861.34E 6' r �e� I RIM-869.04 J\.$ 3 �► !' as /� • 6 6' PINE F� . - -•.' j - �� INV=861.24 W �' l? J�8 $ guildin '� `J` �� ��� ' F FO F•' - RIMx=856.64 \N .Setb• = a INV=861.24 S 6., 4 a . J J • • - FO FO F0 S GAs BENCHMARK = 860,�1✓= 854.04 W GJ 5 Fo GNG� O- - F❑ '-- -GAS ..`� GAs GAs RIM=856.98 r ___--- e3 FO ��_»-»��- G=G'. RIM=861.02 INV=852.98 E --- - liginang �s 1P-6,> ` f _ .-. -_:6 G INV=855.92 NW INV=852.68 W 1048 GAs INV=851.83 E 57.27 - FO`r+�yr. 63"� v - O„ °N _•�' �._-�"' GAS-GAs RIM=865.09 INV=849.63 W - Iasi.- ter•-T"- ---- GAS O! � •• INV=856.69 NE I INV=849.53 S r /_ . ^': _ a `RIM=868. 2 ' INV=847.59 NE I 1049 �� s6 INV=847.49 S I 855,18 Ica NVff7860. r2 NWN� uw G\,@6'96 � I I Cff0//5W52 E PR❑P COR I ^ Comm 1212.00 6 � \ __ co 01/22/1\ A <,oDrawnQ086 , RIM-861.09 Checked�: INV= 845.89 N - - - c�,. 'es i � INV= 845.79 S e6) IGUB NF 6'99 Revision I Site 1 VI -30'-0„ 0 15 30 60 N 1 U 86 U a 1 U I 0 I Q N SFTE U) Sheet No. 1 j11i 111 -I ^I JJ , 1 O U PLANNERS REPORT: TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rod Rue, City Engineer DATE: August 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Code Change—Flood Plain Regulations BACKGROUND: On May 4, 2016, the City of Eden Prairie received a Letter of Final Determination(LFD) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) explaining the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs)had been completed for our community, as well as the rest of Hennepin County's flood study area. These maps will become effective on November 4, 2016. As a result of the LFD, our community is "required to adopt floodplain management regulations that meet the standards detailed in the Code of Federal Regulations Paragraph 60.3(d)by the effective date of the FIRM." In other words, our community must amend our floodplain ordinance to meet these FEMA standards before November 4, 2016 in order to continue participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA further advised that, without exception, a community will be suspended from the NFIP if the required floodplain ordinance is not adopted and presented to the Chicago Regional Office by November 4, 2016. If a community is suspended from the NFIP, no flood insurance policies can be written or renewed in the community. This would have a serious impact on the people exposed to flood damage, or those who are trying to purchase a home in the designated 100-year floodplain, where flood insurance is a requirement of the loan. CODE CHANGE: The ordinance amendment recognizes the new Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs)which have been digitized with aerial backgrounds. These maps provide a higher level of detail of flood prone areas in relation to individual parcels and structures. The Nine Mile Creek FIRM boundaries include a few differences from the old FIRMs based on newer modeling done by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The Riley Creek, Purgatory Creek and Minnesota River flood boundaries are mostly unchanged at this point in time, but changes are anticipated in the future once more accurate models have been developed. The ordinance amendment establishes Floodway, Flood Fringe and General Floodplain Districts. Each district has permitted uses and conditional uses. The City Engineer is charged with interpreting the boundary location of the various districts. By and large the proposed ordinance is in alignment with many of the review and approval requirements found in the existing ordinance. The new ordinance does recognize the floodway district as needing special protections from development as the level of risk is significantly higher than that of the floodplain. The new ordinance also allows new flexibilities through conditional uses which were not allowed in the previous ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission move to recommend to the City Council that City Code be amended to meet the standards required for participation in the National Flood Protection Program as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations. 0 . Federal Emergency Management Agency w � � "'` � Washington, D.C. 20472 �4ND SEGJ CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 19P May 4, 2016 The Honorable Nancy Tyra-Lukens Community: City of Eden Prairie, Mayor, City of Eden Prairie Hennepin County,Minnesota City Hall Community No.: 270159 8080 Mitchell Road Map Panels Affected: See FIRM Index Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344 Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens: This is to formally notify you of the final flood hazard determination for the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County,Minnesota,in compliance with Title 44, Chapter I,Part 67, Section 67.11, Code of Federal Regulations(CFR). This section requires that notice of final flood hazards shall be sent to the Chief Executive Officer of the community, all individual appellants, and the State Coordinating Agency, and shall be published in the Federal Register. On September 2,2004,the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)issued a Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)that identified the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs),the areas subject to inundation by the base(1-percent-annual-chance)flood,in your community. Recently,FEMA completed a re-evaluation of flood hazards in your community. On December 31, 2005, and August 17, 2012,FEMA provided you with Preliminary copies of the FIRM and Flood Insurance Study(FIS)report that identify existing flood hazards in your community, including Base Flood Elevations (BFEs). The proposed flood hazard determinations(FHDs)for your community were published in the Star Tribune on March 29, 2013,and April 5, 2013, and in the Federal Register, at Part 67,Volume 78,Page 8180, on February 5, 2013. The statutory 90-day appeal period,which was initiated on the second newspaper publication date cited above,has ended. FEMA did not receive any appeals of the proposed FHDs during that time. Accordingly,the FHDs for your community are considered final. The final notice for FHDs will be published in the Federal Register as soon as possible. The FIRM for your community will become effective on November 4, 2016. Before the effective date,FEMA will send you final printed copies of the FIRM and FIS report. Because the FIS report establishing the FHDs for your community has been completed, certain additional requirements must be met under Section 1361 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, within 6 months from the date of this letter. Prior to November 4, 2016,your community is required, as a condition of continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP),to adopt or show evidence of adoption of floodplain management regulations that meet the standards of Paragraph 60.3(d)of the enclosed NFIP regulations(44 CFR 59, etc.)by the effective date of the FIRM. These standards are the minimum requirements and do not supersede any State or local requirements of a more stringent nature. 2 It must be emphasized that all the standards specified in Paragraph 60.3(d) of the NFIP regulations must be enacted in a legally enforceable document. This includes adoption of the current effective FIRM and FIS report to which the regulations apply and other modifications made by this map revision. Some of the standards should already have been enacted by your community in order to establish initial eligibility in the NFIP. Your community can meet any additional requirements by taking one of the following actions: 1. Amending existing regulations to incorporate any additional requirements of Paragraph 60.3(d); 2. Adopting all the standards of Paragraph 60.3(d)into one new, comprehensive set of regulations; or 3. Showing evidence that regulations have previously been adopted that meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Paragraph 60.3(d). Communities that fail to enact the necessary floodplain management regulations will be suspended from participation in the NFIP and subject to the prohibitions contained in Section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-234) as amended. In addition to your community using the FIRM and FIS report to manage development in the floodplain, FEMA will use the FIRM and FIS report to establish appropriate flood insurance rates. On the effective date of the revised FIRM, actuarial rates for flood insurance will be charged for all new structures and substantial improvements to existing structures located in the identified SFHAs. These rates may be higher if structures are not built in compliance with the floodplain management standards of the NFIP. The actuarial flood insurance rates increase as the lowest elevations(including basement) of new structures decrease in relation to the BFEs established for your community. This is an important consideration for new construction because building at a higher elevation can greatly reduce the cost of flood insurance. jl To assist your community in maintaining the FIRM,we have enclosed a Summary of Map Actions to document previous Letter of Map Change(LOMC)actions(i.e.,Letters of Map Amendment(LOMCs), Letters of Map Revision(LOMRs))that will be superseded when the revised FIRM panels referenced above become effective. Information on LOMCs is presented in the following four categories: (1)LOMCs for which results have been included on the revised FIRM panels; (2)LOMCs for which results could not be shown on the revised FIRM panels because of scale limitations or because the LOMC issued had determined that the lots or structures involved were outside the SFHA as shown on the FIRM; (3)LOMCs for which results have not been included on the revised FIRM panels because the flood hazard information on which the original determinations were based are being superseded by new flood hazard information; and(4)LOMCs issued for multiple lots or structures where the determination for one or more of the lots or structures cannot be revalidated through an administrative process like the LOMCs in Category 2 above. LOMCs in Category 2 will be revalidated through a single letter that reaffirms the validity of a previously issued LOMC;the letter will be sent to your community shortly before the effective date of the revised FIRM and will become effective 1 day after the revised FIRM becomes effective. For the LOMCs listed in Category 4,we will review the data previously submitted for the LOMA or LOMR request and issue a new deteitnination for the affected properties after the revised FIRM becomes effective. The FIRM and FIS report for your community have been prepared in our countywide foitnat,which means that flood hazard infoitnation for all jurisdictions within Hennepin County has been combined into one FIRM and FIS report. When the FIRM and FIS report are printed and distributed,your community will receive only those panels that present flood hazard information for your community. We will provide complete sets of the FIRM panels to county officials, where they will be available for review by your community. 3 The FIRM panels have been computer-generated. Once the FIRM and FIS report are printed and distributed,the digital files containing the flood hazard data for the entire county can be provided to your community for use in a computer mapping system. These files can be used in conjunction with other thematic data for floodplain management purposes, insurance purchase and rating requirements, and many other planning applications. Copies of the digital files or paper copies of the FIRM panels may be obtained by calling our FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX),toll free, at 1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627). In addition,your community may be eligible for additional credits under our Community Rating System if you implement your activities using digital mapping files. If your community is encountering difficulties in enacting the necessary floodplain management measures required to continue participation in the NFIP, we urge you to call the Director,Federal Insurance and Mitigation Division of FEMA in Chicago,Illinois, at(312)408-5500 for assistance. If you have any questions concerning mapping issues in general or the enclosed Summary of Map Actions,please call FMIX at the telephone number shown above. Additional information and resources your community may find helpful regarding the NFIP and floodplain management, such as The National Flood Insurance Program Code of Federal Regulations,Answers to Questions About the NFIP,Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Effect that Revised Flood Hazards have on Existing Structures, Use of Flood Insurance Study(FIS)Data as Available Data, and National Flood Insurance Program Elevation Certificate and Instructions, can be found on our website at http://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/lfd. Paper copies of these documents may also be obtained by calling FMIX. Sincerely, Luis Rodriguez,P.E., Chief Engineering Management Branch Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration Enclosure: Final Summary of Map Actions cc: Community Map Repository Rick Getschow,City Manager, City of Eden Prairie CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 BY AMENDING IN ITS ENTIRETY SECTION 11.45 RELATING TO FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Section 11.45 is amended to read as follows: SECTION 11.45 FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS. Subd. 1. Statutory Authorization and Purpose. The legislature of the State of Minnesota has, in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103F and Chapter 462 delegated the responsibility to local government units to adopt regulations designed to minimize flood losses. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103F further states that communities subject to recurrent flooding must participate and maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Therefore, the City does ordain as follows: A. Statement of Purpose. This Section regulates development in the flood hazard areas of the City. These flood hazard areas are subject to periodic inundation, which may result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base. It is the purpose of this Section to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by minimizing these losses and disruptions. This ordinance is also intended to preserve the natural characteristics and functions of watercourses and floodplains in order to moderate flood and stormwater impacts, improve water quality, reduce soil erosion, protect aquatic and riparian habitat, provide recreational opportunities, provide aesthetic benefits and enhance community and economic development. B. National Flood Insurance Program Compliance. This ordinance is adopted to comply with the rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program codified as 44 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 59 -78, as amended, so as to maintain the community's eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Subd. 2. General Provisions. A. How to Use This Section. This Section adopts the floodplain maps applicable to the City and includes three floodplain districts: Floodway, Flood Fringe, and General Floodplain. 1 1. Where Floodway and Flood Fringe districts are delineated on the floodplain maps, the standards in Subdivisions 4 or 5 will apply, depending on the location of a property. 2. Locations where Floodway and Flood Fringe districts are not delineated on the floodplain maps are considered to fall within the General Floodplain district. Within the General Floodplain district, the Floodway District standards in Subdivision 4 apply unless the floodway boundary is determined, according to the process outlined in Subdivision 6. Once the floodway boundary is determined, the Flood Fringe District standards in Subdivision 5 may apply outside the floodway. B. Lands to Which this Section Applies. This Section applies to all lands within the jurisdiction of the City shown on the Official Zoning Map and/or the attachments to the map as being located within the boundaries of the Floodway, Flood Fringe, or General Floodplain Districts. The Floodway, Flood Fringe and General Floodplain Districts are overlay districts that are superimposed on all existing zoning districts. The standards imposed in the overlay districts are in addition to any other requirements in this Section. In case of a conflict, the more restrictive standards will apply. The City Engineer may review and reasonably utilize any regional flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source in determining the boundary of the Floodway, Flood Fringe, or General Floodplain District. C. Incorporation of Maps by Reference. The following maps together with all attached material are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of the Official Zoning Map and this Section. The attached material includes the Flood Insurance Study for Hennepin County, Minnesota, and Incorporated Areas, dated November 4, 2016 and the Flood Insurance Rate Map panels enumerated below, dated November 4, 2016, all prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. These materials are on file in the office of the City Engineer. Effective Flood Insurance Rate Map panels include: 27053C0319F 27053C0344F 27053C0432F 27053C0442F 27053C0338F 27053C0410F 27053C0434F 27053C0445F 27053C0339F 27053C0420F 27053C0435F 27053C0343F 27053C0430F 27053C0440F D. Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. The regulatory flood protection elevation (RFPE) is an elevation no lower than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the floodplain that result from designation of a floodway. E. Interpretation. The boundaries of the zoning districts are determined by scaling distances on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. 2 1. Where a conflict exists between the floodplain limits illustrated on the official zoning map and actual field conditions, the flood elevations shall be the governing factor. The City Engineer must interpret the boundary location based on the ground elevations that existed on the site on the date of the first National Flood Insurance Program map showing the area within the regulatory floodplain, and other available technical data. 2. Persons contesting the location of the district boundaries will be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case to the Planning Commission and to submit technical evidence. F. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this Section to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or other private agreements. However, where this Section imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this Section prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this Section are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only. G. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. This Section does not imply that areas outside the floodplain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages. This Section does not create liability on the part of the City or its officers or employees for any flood damages that result from reliance on this Section or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. H. Severability. If any subdivision, clause, provision, or portion of this Section is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of law, the remainder of this Section shall not be affected and shall remain in full force. I. Annexations. The Flood Insurance Rate Map panels adopted by reference into Subd. 2.0 may include floodplain areas that lie outside of the corporate boundaries of the City at the time of adoption of this Section. If any of these floodplain land areas are annexed into the City after the date of adoption of this Section, the newly annexed floodplain lands will be subject to the provisions of this Section immediately upon the date of annexation. J. Detachments.The Flood Insurance Rate Map panels adopted by reference into Subd. 2.0 will include floodplain areas that lie inside the corporate boundaries of municipalities at the time of adoption of this Section. If any of these floodplain areas are detached from a municipality and come under the jurisdiction of the City after the date of adoption of this Section, the newly detached floodplain lands will be subject to the provisions of this Section immediately upon the date of detachment. Subd. 3. Definitions. A. Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this Section must be interpreted according to common usage and so as to give this Section its most reasonable application. 3 1. Accessory Use or Structure — a use or structure on the same lot with, and of a nature customarily incidental and subordinate to, the principal use or structure. 2. Base Flood Elevation — The elevation of the "regional flood." The term "base flood elevation" is used in the flood insurance survey. 3. Basement — any area of a structure, including crawl spaces, having its floor or base subgrade (below ground level) on all four sides, regardless of the depth of excavation below ground level. 4. Conditional Use—a specific type of structure or land use listed in this Section that may be allowed but only after an in-depth review procedure and with appropriate conditions or restrictions as provided in the official zoning controls or building codes and upon a finding that: (a) Certain conditions as detailed in the zoning ordinance exist. (b) The structure and/or land use conform to the comprehensive land use plan if one exists and are compatible with the existing neighborhood. 5. Critical Facilities — facilities necessary to the City's public health and safety, those that store or produce highly volatile, toxic or water-reactive materials, and those that house occupants that may be insufficiently mobile to avoid loss of life or injury. Examples of critical facilities include hospitals, correctional facilities, schools, daycare facilities, nursing homes, fire and police stations, wastewater treatment facilities, public electric utilities, water plants, fuel storage facilities, and waste handling and storage facilities. 6. Development — any manmade change to improved or unimproved real estate, including buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations, or storage of equipment or materials. 7. Equal Degree of Encroachment — a method of determining the location of floodway boundaries so that floodplain lands on both sides of a stream are capable of conveying a proportionate share of flood flows. 8. Farm Fence — A fence as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section 344.02, Subd. 1(a)—(d). An open type fence of posts and wire is not considered to be a structure under this Section. Fences that have the potential to obstruct flood flows, such as chain link fences and rigid walls, are regulated as structures under this Section. 9. Flood — a temporary increase in the flow or stage of a stream or in the stage of a wetland or lake that results in the inundation of normally dry areas. 4 10. Flood Frequency — the frequency for which it is expected that a specific flood stage or discharge may be equaled or exceeded. 11. Flood Fringe — the portion of the Special Flood Hazard Area (one percent annual chance flood) located outside of the floodway. Flood fringe is synonymous with the term "floodway fringe" used in the Flood Insurance Study for Hennepin County, Minnesota. 12. Flood Insurance Rate Map - an official map on which the Federal Insurance Administrator has delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. A FIRM that has been made available digitally is called a Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM). 13. Flood Prone Area — any land susceptible to being inundated by water from any source (see"Flood"). 14. Floodplain — the beds proper and the areas adjoining a wetland, lake or watercourse which have been or hereafter may be covered by the regional flood. 15. Floodproofing — a combination of structural provisions, changes, or adjustments to properties and structures subject to flooding, primarily for the reduction or elimination of flood damages. 16. Floodway — the bed of a wetland or lake and the channel of a watercourse and those portions of the adjoining floodplain which are reasonably required to carry or store the regional flood discharge. 17. Lowest Floor—the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, used solely for parking of vehicles, building access, or storage in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor; provided, that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of 44 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60.3. 18. Manufactured Home— a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities. The term "manufactured home" does not include the term "recreational vehicle." 19. New Construction - Structures, including additions and improvements, and placement of manufactured homes, for which the start of construction commenced on or after the effective date of this Section. 20. Obstruction — any dam, wall, wharf, embankment, levee, dike, pile, abutment, projection, excavation, channel modification, culvert, building, wire, fence, 5 stockpile, refuse, fill, structure, or matter in, along, across, or projecting into any channel, watercourse, or regulatory floodplain which may impede, retard, or change the direction of the flow of water, either in itself or by catching or collecting debris carried by such water. 21. One Hundred Year Floodplain—lands inundated by the Regional Flood. 22. Principal Use or Structure — all uses or structures that are not accessory uses or structures. 23. Reach — a hydraulic engineering term to describe a longitudinal segment of a stream or river influenced by a natural or man-made obstruction. In an urban area, the segment of a stream or river between two consecutive bridge crossings would most typically constitute a reach. 24. Recreational Vehicle—a vehicle that is built on a single chassis, is 400 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection, is designed to be self- propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck, and is designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use. For the purposes of this Section, the term recreational vehicle is synonymous with the term "travel trailer/travel vehicle." 25. Regional Flood — a flood which is representative of large floods known to have occurred generally in Minnesota and reasonably characteristic of what can be expected to occur on an average frequency in the magnitude of the 1% chance or 100-year recurrence interval. Regional flood is synonymous with the term "base flood"used in a flood insurance study. 26. Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) - an elevation not less than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the floodplain that result from designation of a floodway. 27. Repetitive Loss - Flood-related damages sustained by a structure on two separate occasions during a ten-year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such flood event on the average equals or exceeds 25% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. 28. Special Flood Hazard Area — a term used for flood insurance purposes synonymous with "One Hundred Year Floodplain." 29. Start of Construction — includes substantial improvement, and means the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement or other improvement that occurred before the building permit's expiration date. The 6 actual start is either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, foundations, or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. 30. Structure - anything constructed or erected on the ground or attached to the ground or on-site utilities, including,but not limited to,buildings, factories, sheds, detached garages, cabins, manufactured homes, recreational vehicles not meeting the exemption criteria specified in Subd. 10.B.2, and other similar items. 31. Substantial Damage - means damage of any origin sustained by a structure where the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. 32. Substantial Improvement - within any consecutive 365-day period, any reconstruction, rehabilitation (including normal maintenance and repair), repair after damage, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the "start of construction" of the improvement. This term includes structures that have incurred "substantial damage," regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term Substantial Improvement does not, however, include either: (a) Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions. (b) Any alteration of a "historic structure," provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a "historic structure." For the purpose of this ordinance, "historic structure" is as defined in 44 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 59.1. Subd. 4. Establishment of Zoning Districts. A. Districts. 7 1. Floodway District. The Floodway District includes those areas within Zones AE that have a floodway delineated as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Subd. 2.C. For lakes, wetlands and other basins within Zones A and AE that do not have a floodway delineated, the Floodway District also includes those areas that are at or below the ordinary high water level as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.005, subdivision 14. 2. Flood Fringe District. The Flood Fringe District includes areas within Zones AE that have a floodway delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Subd. 2.C, but are located outside of the floodway. For lakes, wetlands and other basins within Zones A and AE that do not have a floodway delineated, the Flood Fringe District also includes those areas below the 1% annual chance (100-year) flood elevation but above the ordinary high water level as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.005, subdivision 14. 3. General Floodplain District. The General Floodplain District includes riverine areas within Zones A or AE that do not have a delineated floodway as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Subd. 2.C. B. Applicability. Within the floodplain districts established in this Subdivision 4, the use, size, type and location of development must comply with the terms of this Section and other applicable regulations. In no case shall floodplain development adversely affect the efficiency or unduly restrict the capacity of the channels or floodways of any tributaries to the main stream, drainage ditches, or any other drainage facilities or systems. All uses not listed as permitted uses or conditional uses in Subdivisions 5, 6, and 7 are prohibited. In addition, critical facilities are prohibited in all floodplain districts. Subd. 5. Floodway District(FW). A. Permitted Uses. The following uses, subject to the standards set forth in Subd. 5.B, are permitted uses if otherwise allowed in the underlying zoning district or any applicable overlay district: 1. General farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting. 2. Industrial-commercial loading areas, parking areas, and airport landing strips. 3. Open space uses, including but not limited to private and public golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, hunting and fishing areas, and single or multiple purpose recreational trails. 4. Residential lawns, gardens, parking areas, and play areas. 8 5. Railroads, streets, bridges, utility transmission lines and pipelines, provided that the City notifies the Department of Natural Resources' Area Hydrologist at least ten days prior to issuance of any permit for such uses. B. Standards for Floodway Permitted Uses. 1. The use must have a low flood damage potential. 2. The use must not obstruct flood flows or cause any increase in flood elevations and must not involve structures, obstructions, or storage of materials or equipment. 3. Any facility that will be used by employees or the general public must be designed with a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area is inundated to a depth and velocity such that the depth (in feet) multiplied by the velocity (in feet per second) would exceed a product of four upon occurrence of the regional (1% chance) flood. C. Conditional Uses. The following uses may be allowed as conditional uses following the standards and procedures set forth in Subdivision 11.D of this Section and City Code Section 11.41 and further subject to the standards set forth in Subd. 5.D, if otherwise allowed in the underlying zoning district or any applicable overlay district. 1. Structures accessory to the uses listed in Subd. 5.A and the uses listed in Subd. 5.C.2 through 5.C.7. 2. Extraction and storage of sand, gravel, and other materials. 3. Marinas, boat rentals, docks,piers, wharves, and water control structures. 4. Storage yards for equipment, machinery, or materials. 5. Placement of fill or construction of fences that obstruct flood flows. Farm fences are permitted uses. 6. Travel-ready recreational vehicles meeting the exemption standards in Subd. 10.B. 7. Levees or dikes intended to protect agricultural crops for a frequency flood event equal to or less than the 10-year frequency flood event. D. Standards for Floodway Conditional Uses. 9 1. All Uses. A conditional use must not cause any increase in the stage of the 1% chance or regional flood or cause an increase in flood damages in the reach or reaches affected. 2. Fill; Storage of Materials and Equipment: (a) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. (b) Fill, dredge spoil, and other similar materials deposited or stored in the floodplain must be protected from erosion by vegetative cover, mulching, riprap or other acceptable method. Permanent sand and gravel operations and similar uses must be covered by a long-term site development plan. (c) Temporary placement of fill, other materials, or equipment which would cause an increase to the stage of the 1% percent chance or regional flood may only be allowed if the City Engineer has approved a plan that assures removal of the materials from the floodway based upon the flood warning time available. 3. Accessory Structures. Accessory structures may be permitted,provided that: (a) Structures are not intended for human habitation; (b) Structures will have a low flood damage potential; (c) Structures will be constructed and placed so as to offer a minimal obstruction to the flow of flood waters; (d) Service utilities, such as electrical and heating equipment, within these structures must be elevated to or above the regulatory flood protection elevation or properly floodproofed; (e) Structures must be elevated on fill or structurally dry floodproofed in accordance with the FP 1 or FP2 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code. All floodproofed structures must be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement and designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls. (f) As an alternative, an accessory structure may be internally/wet floodproofed to the FP3 or FP4 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code, provided the accessory structure constitutes a minimal investment and does not exceed 576 square feet in size. Designs for 10 meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or meet or exceed the following criteria: (1) To allow for the equalization of hydrostatic pressure, there must be a minimum of two "automatic" openings in the outside walls of the structure, with a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding; and (2) There must be openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings must be no higher than one foot above the lowest adjacent grade to the structure. Using human intervention to open a garage door prior to flooding will not satisfy this requirement for automatic openings. 4. Structural works for flood control that will change the course, current, or cross- section of protected wetlands or public waters are subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 5. A levee, dike or floodwall constructed in the floodway must not cause an increase to the 1% chance of regional flood. The technical analysis must assume equal conveyance or storage loss on both sides of a stream. 6. Floodway developments must not adversely affect the hydraulic capacity of the channel and adjoining floodplain of any tributary watercourse or drainage system. Subd. 6. Flood Fringe District(FF) A. Permitted Uses. Permitted uses in the Flood Fringe District are those uses of land or structures allowed in the underlying zoning district(s) that comply with the standards in Subd. 6.B. B. Standards for Flood Fringe Permitted Uses: 1. All structures, including accessory structures, must be elevated on fill so that the lowest floor, as defined, is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures must be no lower than one foot below the regulatory flood protection elevation and the fill must extend at the same elevation at least 15 feet beyond the outside limits of the structure. 2. Accessory Structures. As an alternative to the fill requirements of Subd. 6.B.1, structures accessory to the uses identified in Subd. 6.A may be permitted to be internally/wet floodproofed to the FP3 or FP4 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code,provided that: 11 (a) The accessory structure constitutes a minimal investment, does not exceed 576 square feet in size, and is only used for parking and storage. (b) All portions of floodproofed accessory structures below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) must be: (i) adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement and designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls, (ii) be constructed with materials resistant to flood damage, and (iii) must have all service utilities be water-tight or elevated to above the RFPE. (c) Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or meet or exceed the following criteria: (1) To allow for the equalization of hydrostatic pressure, there must be a minimum of two "automatic" openings in the outside walls of the structure, with a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding; and (2) There must be openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings must be no higher than one foot above the lowest adjacent grade to the structure. Using human intervention to open a garage door prior to flooding will not satisfy this requirement for automatic openings. 3. The cumulative placement of fill or similar material on a parcel must not exceed 1,000 cubic yards, unless the fill is specifically intended to elevate a structure in accordance with Subd. 6.B.1, or if allowed as a conditional use under Subd. 6.C. 4. The storage of any materials or equipment must be elevated on fill to the regulatory flood protection elevation. 5. All service utilities, including ductwork, must be elevated or water-tight to prevent infiltration of floodwaters. 6. The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. 7. All fill must be properly compacted and the slopes must be properly protected by the use of riprap, vegetative cover or other acceptable method. 8. All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation, or must have a flood warning/emergency evacuation plan acceptable to the City Engineer. 12 9. Accessory uses such as yards, railroad tracks, and parking lots may be at an elevation lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. However, any facilities used by employees or the general public must be designed with a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area is inundated to a depth and velocity such that the depth (in feet) multiplied by the velocity (in feet per second) would exceed a product of four upon occurrence of the regional (1% chance) flood. 10. Interference with normal manufacturing/industrial plant operations must be minimized, especially along streams having protracted flood durations. In considering permit applications, due consideration must be given to the needs of industries with operations that require a floodplain location. 11. Manufactured homes and recreational vehicles must meet the standards of Subdivision 10. C. Conditional Uses: The following uses and activities may be allowed as conditional uses, if allowed in the underlying zoning district(s) or any applicable overlay district, following the procedures in Subdivision 11.D and City Code Section 11.41. 1. Any structure that is not elevated on fill or floodproofed in accordance with Subds. 6.B.1 or 6.B.2. 2. Storage of any material or equipment below the regulatory flood protection elevation. 3. The cumulative placement of more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill when the fill is not being used to elevate a structure in accordance with Subd. 6.B.1. D. Standards for Flood Fringe Conditional Uses. 1. The standards listed in Subds. 6.B.4 through 6.B.10 apply to all conditional uses. 2. Basements are subject to the following: (a) Residential basement construction is not allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation. (b) Non-residential basements may be allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation provided the basement is structurally dry floodproofed in accordance with Subd. 6.D.3. 13 3. All areas of nonresidential structures, including basements, to be placed below the regulatory flood protection elevation must be floodproofed in accordance with the structurally dry floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code. Structurally dry floodproofing must meet the FP 1 or FP2 floodproofing classification in the State Building Code, which requires making the structure watertight with the walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effects of buoyancy. 4. The placement of more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or other similar material on a parcel (other than for the purpose of elevating a structure to the regulatory flood protection elevation) must comply with an approved erosion/sedimentation control plan. (a) The plan must clearly specify methods to be used to stabilize the fill on site for a flood event at a minimum of the regional (1% chance) flood event. (b) The plan must be prepared and certified by a registered professional engineer or other qualified individual acceptable to the City Engineer. (c) The plan may incorporate alternative procedures for removal of the material from the floodplain if adequate flood warning time exists. 5. Storage of materials and equipment below the regulatory flood protection elevation must comply with an approved emergency plan providing for removal of such materials within the time available after a flood warning. Subd. 7. General Floodplain District(GF) A. Permitted Uses: 1. The uses listed in Subd. 5.A are permitted uses in the General Floodplain District. 2. All other uses are permitted subject to the floodway/flood fringe evaluation criteria specified in Subd. 7.B. Subd. 5 applies if the proposed use is determined to be in the Floodway District. Subd. 6 applies if the proposed use is determined to be in the Flood Fringe District. B. Procedures for Floodway and Flood Fringe Determinations: 1. Upon receipt of an application for a permit or other approval within the General Floodplain District, the City Engineer shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any regional flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state, or other source. 14 2. If regional flood elevation and floodway data are not readily available, the applicant shall furnish additional information as needed to determine the regulatory flood protection elevation and whether the proposed use would fall within the Floodway or Flood Fringe District. Information must be consistent with accepted hydrological and hydraulic engineering standards and the standards in Subd. 7.B.3. 3. The determination of floodway and flood fringe must include the following factors, as applicable: (a) Estimate the peak discharge of the regional (1% chance) flood. (b) Calculate the water surface profile of the regional flood based upon a hydraulic analysis of the stream channel and overbank areas. (c) Compute the floodway necessary to convey or store the regional flood without increasing flood stages more than one-half (0.5) foot. A lesser stage increase than 0.5 foot is required if, as a result of the stage increase, increased flood damages would result. An equal degree of encroachment on both sides of the stream within the reach must be assumed in computing floodway boundaries. 4. The City Engineer shall review the submitted information and assess the technical evaluation and the recommended Floodway and/or Flood Fringe District boundary. The assessment shall include the cumulative effects of previous floodway encroachments. The City Engineer may seek technical assistance from a designated engineer or other expert person or agency, including the Department of Natural Resources. Based on this assessment, the City Engineer may approve or deny the application. 5. Once the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries have been determined, the City Engineer shall process the permit application consistent with the applicable provisions of Subdivisions 5 and 6. Subd. 8. Land Development Standards. A. In General. Recognizing that flood prone areas may exist outside of the designated floodplain districts, the requirements of this Subdivision 8 apply to all land within the City. B. Subdivisions. No land may be subdivided which is unsuitable for reasons of flooding or inadequate drainage, water supply, or sewage treatment facilities. Manufactured home parks and recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds are considered subdivisions under this Section. 15 1. All lots within the floodplain districts must be able to contain a building site outside of the Floodway District at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. 2. All subdivisions shall have road access both to the subdivision and to the individual building sites no lower than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation, unless a flood warning emergency plan for the safe evacuation of all vehicles and people during the regional (1% chance) flood has been approved by the City Engineer. The plan shall be prepared by a registered engineer or other qualified individual, and shall demonstrate that adequate time and personnel exist to carry out the evacuation. 3. For all subdivisions in the floodplain, the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries, the regulatory flood protection elevation and the required elevation of all access roads shall be clearly labeled on all required subdivision drawings and platting documents. 4. In the General Floodplain District, applicants shall provide the information required in Subd. 7.B to determine the regional flood elevation, the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries and the regulatory flood protection elevation for the subdivision site. 5. If a subdivision proposal or other proposed new development is in a flood prone area, any such proposal must be reviewed to assure that: (a) The proposal is consistent with the need to minimize flood damage within the flood prone area, (b) All public utilities and facilities, such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems, are located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage, and (c) Adequate drainage is provided to reduce exposure of flood hazard. C. Building Sites. If a proposed building site is in a flood prone area, all new construction and substantial improvements (including the placement of manufactured homes) shall be: 1. Designed (or modified) and adequately anchored to prevent floatation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy; 2. Constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage; 3. Constructed by methods and practices that minimize flood damage; and 16 4. Constructed with electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities that are designed and/or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. Subd. 9. Public Utilities,Railroads, Roads, and Bridges A. Public Utilities. All public utilities and facilities such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply systems to be located in the floodplain must be floodproofed in accordance with the State Building Code or elevated to the regulatory flood protection elevation. B. Public Transportation Facilities. Railroad tracks, roads, and bridges to be located within the floodplain shall comply with Subdivisions 5 and 6. These transportation facilities shall be elevated to the regulatory flood protection elevation where failure or interruption of these facilities would result in danger to the public health or safety or where such facilities are essential to the orderly functioning of the area. Minor or auxiliary roads or railroads may be constructed at a lower elevation where the City Engineer determines that failure or interruption of transportation services will not endanger the public health or safety. C. On-site Water Supply and Sewage Treatment Systems. Where public utilities are not provided: 1) On-site water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and are subject to the provisions of Minnesota Rules Chapter 4725.4350; and 2) New or replacement on-site sewage treatment systems (i) shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters, (ii) shall not be subject to impairment or contamination during times of flooding, and (iii) are subject to the provisions of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080.2270. Subd. 10. Manufactured Homes, Manufactured Home Parks, and Recreational Vehicles. A. Manufactured Homes. New manufactured home parks and expansions to existing manufactured home parks are prohibited in any floodplain district. For existing manufactured home parks or lots of record, the following requirements apply: 1. Placement or replacement of manufactured homes is prohibited in the Floodway, Flood Fringe and General Floodplain Districts. B. Recreational Vehicles. New recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds and expansions to existing recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds are prohibited in any floodplain district. Placement of recreational vehicles in existing recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds located in the floodplain shall meet the exemption criteria below or be treated as new structures meeting the requirements of this Section. 17 1. Recreational vehicles are exempt from the provisions of this Section if they are placed in any of the following areas and meet the criteria listed in Subd. 10.B.2: (a) Individual lots or parcels of record. (b) Existing commercial recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds. (c) Existing condominium-type associations. 2. Criteria for Exempt Recreational Vehicles: (a) The vehicle must have a current license required for highway use. (b) The vehicle must be highway ready, meaning on wheels or the internal jacking system, attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities commonly used in campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks. (c) No permanent structural type additions may be attached to the vehicle. (d) The vehicle and associated use must be permissible in any pre-existing, underlying zoning district. (e) Accessory structures are not permitted within the Floodway District. Any accessory structure in the Flood Fringe District must be constructed of flood-resistant materials and be securely anchored, meeting the requirements applicable to manufactured homes in this Subd. 10.B.2. (f) An accessory structure must constitute a minimal investment 3. Recreational vehicles that are exempt under Subd. 10.B.2 lose this exemption when development occurs on the site that exceeds a minimal investment for an accessory structure such as a garage or storage building. The recreational vehicle and all accessory structures will then be treated as new structures subject to the elevation and floodproofing requirements of Subd. 6. No development or improvement on the parcel or attachment to the recreational vehicle is allowed that would hinder the removal of the vehicle should flooding occur. Subd. 11. Administration A. City Engineer. The City Engineer or other official designated by the City Manager shall administer and enforce this Section. B. Permit Requirements. 18 1. Permit Required. A permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer prior to conducting the following activities in the Floodway District, Flood Fringe District, or General Floodplain District: (a) The erection, addition, modification, rehabilitation, or alteration of any building, structure, or portion thereof. Normal maintenance and repair also requires a permit if such work, separately or in conjunction with other planned work, constitutes a substantial improvement as defined in this section. (b) The change of use of a building, structure, or land. (c) The construction of a dam, fence, or on-site septic system, although a permit is not required for a farm fence as defined in this Section. (d) The change or expansion of a nonconforming use. (e) The repair of a structure that has been damaged by flood, fire, tornado, or any other source. (f) The placement of fill, excavation of materials, or the storage of materials or equipment within the floodplain. (g) Relocation or alteration of a watercourse (including new or replacement culverts and bridges), unless a public waters work permit has been applied for. (h) Any other type of"development" as defined in this Section. 2. Application for Permit. Permit applications shall be submitted to the City Engineer on forms provided by the City Engineer. The permit application shall include the following as applicable: (a) A site plan showing all pertinent dimensions, existing or proposed buildings, structures, and significant natural features having an influence on the permit. (b) Location of fill or storage of materials in relation to the stream channel. (c) Copies of any required municipal, county, state or federal permits or approvals. (d) Other relevant information requested by the City Engineer as necessary to properly evaluate the permit application. 19 3. Certificate of Zoning Compliance for a New, Altered, or Nonconforming Use. No new or altered building, land, or structure shall be occupied or used in any manner until a certificate of zoning compliance has been issued by the City Engineer stating that the use of the building or land conforms to the requirements of this Section. 4. Certification. Upon completion of activities covered by a permit issued under this Section, the permit holder shall submit to the City Engineer certification by a registered professional engineer, registered architect, or registered land surveyor that the finished fill and building elevations were accomplished in compliance with the provisions of this Section. Floodproofing measures shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or registered architect. 5. Record of First Floor Elevation. The City Engineer shall maintain a record of the elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new structures and alterations or additions to existing structures in the floodplain. The City Engineer shall also maintain a record of the elevation to which structures and alterations or additions to structures are floodproofed. 6. Notifications for Watercourse Alterations. Before authorizing any alteration or relocation of a river or stream, the City Engineer shall notify adjacent communities. If the applicant has applied for a permit from the DNR to work in public waters pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245, this will suffice as adequate notice. The City Engineer shall submit a copy of the notification to the Chicago Regional Office of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 7. Notification to FEMA When Physical Changes Increase or Decrease Base Flood Elevations. As soon as is practicable, but not later than six months after the date such supporting information becomes available, the City Engineer shall notify the Chicago Regional Office of FEMA of physical changes that increase or decrease base flood elevation in the City by submitting a copy of the relevant technical or scientific data. C. Variances. 1. Variance Applications. An application for a variance to the provisions of this Section will be processed and reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 and City Code Section 11.76. 2. Adherence to State Floodplain Management Standards. A variance must not allow a use that is not allowed in the underlying zoning district, permit a lower degree of flood protection than the regulatory flood protection elevation for the particular area, or permit standards lower than those required by state law. 20 3. Additional Variance Criteria. The following additional variance criteria of the Federal Emergency Management Agency must be satisfied: (a) The City shall not issue variances within any designated regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. (b) The City shall only issue variances upon (i) a showing of good and sufficient cause, (ii) a determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant, and (iii) a determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. (c) The City shall only issue variances upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 4. Flood Insurance Notice. The City Engineer shall notify the applicant for a variance that: 1) The issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the base flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as $25 for $100 of insurance coverage; and 2) Such construction below the base or regional flood level increases risks to life and property. Such notification shall be maintained with a record of all variance actions. 5. General Considerations. The City shall consider the following factors in granting variances and imposing conditions on variances and conditional use permits in floodplains: (a) The potential danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments; (b) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others; (c) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems, if any, and the ability of these systems to minimize the potential for disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions; (d) The susceptibility of any proposed use and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; (e) The importance of the services to be provided by the proposed use to the community; 21 (f) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location; (g) The availability of viable alternative locations for the proposed use that are not subject to flooding; (h) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future; (i) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and flood plain management program for the area; (j) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (k) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 6. Submittal of Hearing Notices to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The City Engineer shall submit hearing notices for proposed variances to the DNR sufficiently in advance to provide at least ten days' notice of the hearing. The notice shall be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 7. Submittal of Final Decisions to the DNR. The City Engineer shall forward a copy of all decisions granting variances to the DNR within ten days of such action. The notice shall be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 8. Record-Keeping. The City Engineer shall maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and shall report such variances in an annual or biennial report to the Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, when requested by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. D. Conditional Uses. 1. Administrative Review. An application for a conditional use permit under this Section will be processed and reviewed in accordance with City Code Section 11.41. 2. Factors Used in Decision-Making. In deciding whether to grant a conditional use permit, the Council shall consider all relevant factors specified in Subdivision 11.C.5 of this Section and in City Code Section 11.41. 22 3. Conditions Attached to Conditional Use Permits. The Council may attach such conditions to the granting of conditional use permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Section. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Modification of waste treatment and water supply facilities. (b) Limitations on period of use, occupancy, and operation. (c) Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. (d) Requirements for construction of channel modifications, compensatory storage, dikes, levees, and other protective measures. (e) Floodproofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code and this Section. The applicant for a conditional use permit shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the floodproofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. 4. Submittal of Hearing Notices to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The City Engineer shall submit hearing notices for proposed conditional uses to the DNR sufficiently in advance to provide at least ten days' notice of the hearing. The notice shall be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 5. Submittal of Final Decisions to the DNR. The City Engineer shall forward a copy of all decisions granting conditional use permits under this Section to the DNR within ten days of such action. The notice shall be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. Subd. 12. Nonconformities. A. Continuance of Nonconformities. A use, structure, or occupancy of land which was lawful before the passage or amendment of this Section but which is not in conformity with the provisions of this Section, including historic structures as defined in Subd. 3.A.31, may be continued subject to the following conditions. 1. A nonconforming use, structure, or occupancy shall not be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a way that increases its flood damage potential or degree of obstruction to flood flows except as provided in Subd. 12.A.2. Expansion or enlargement of uses, structures, or occupancies within the Floodway District is prohibited. 23 2. Any addition or structural alteration to a nonconforming structure or nonconforming use that would result in increasing its flood damage potential shall be protected to the regulatory flood protection elevation in accordance with any of the elevation on fill or floodproofing techniques (i.e., FP1 thru FP4 floodproofing classifications) allowable in the State Building Code, except as further restricted in Subd. 12.A.3 and 12.A.7. 3. If the cost of all previous and proposed alterations and additions exceeds 50 percent of the market value of any nonconforming structure, that shall be considered substantial improvement, and the entire structure must meet the standards of Subdivisions 5 or 6 for new structures, depending upon whether the structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe District, respectively. The cost of all structural alterations and additions shall include all costs such as construction materials and a reasonable cost placed on all manpower or labor. 4. If any nonconforming use, or any use of a nonconforming structure, is discontinued for more than one year, any future use of the premises must conform to this Section. 5. If any nonconformity is substantially damaged, it may not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this Section. The applicable provisions for establishing new uses or new structures in Subdivisions 5 or 6 will apply depending upon whether the use or structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe, respectively. 6. If any nonconforming use or structure experiences a repetitive loss, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this Section. 7. Any substantial improvement to a nonconforming structure requires that the existing structure and any additions shall meet the requirements of Subdivisions 5 or 6 of this ordinance for new structures, depending upon whether the structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe District. Subd. 13. Penalties and Enforcement. A. Violation Constitutes a Misdemeanor: Every person who violates the provisions of this Section or fails to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional use permits) is guilty of a misdemeanor and will be punished as permitted by law. B. Other Lawful Action. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. If the responsible party does not appropriately respond to the City Engineer within the specified period of 24 time, each additional day that lapses shall constitute an additional violation of this Section and will be prosecuted accordingly. C. Enforcement. Violations of the provisions of this Section will be investigated and resolved in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.79 of this Chapter. In responding to a suspected violation of this Section, the City Manager may utilize the full array of enforcement actions available, including but not limited to prosecution and fines, injunctions, after-the-fact permits, orders for corrective measures or a request to the National Flood Insurance Program for denial of flood insurance availability to the guilty party. The City shall act in good faith to enforce these official controls and to correct violations of this Section to the extent possible so as not to jeopardize its eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Subd. 14. Amendments. A. Floodplain Designation — Restrictions on Removal. The City shall not remove the floodplain designation on the Official Zoning Map from floodplain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error or that the area has been filled to or above the elevation of the regulatory flood protection elevation and is contiguous to lands outside the floodplain. Special exceptions to this rule may be permitted by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) if the Commissioner determines that, through other measures, lands are adequately protected for the intended use. B. Amendments Require DNR Approval: The City shall submit all proposed amendments to this Section to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for approval prior to adoption. The Commissioner must approve the amendment prior to adoption by the City. C. Map Revisions Require Amendments: This Section shall be amended from time to time to incorporate any revisions by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the floodplain maps adopted in Subdivision 2.C. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled"General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effort from and after its passage and approval and publication, as required by law and/or charter. 25 FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 2016, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 2016. City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 2016 26 it MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CENTRAL OFFICE 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD, BOX 25 SAINT PAUL,MN 55155 A N DP R 651-296-6157 V V V f 1 888-646-6367 August 9, 2016 The Honorable Nancy Tyra-Lukens Mayor, City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 CONDITIONAL STATE APPROVAL OF FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE &REQUIRED NEXT STEPS Dear Honorable Mayor Tyra-Lukens, The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) received via email on August 5, 2016, a draft floodplain management ordinance for the City of Eden Prairie from Public Works Director Robert Ellis. This ordinance is being adopted in order to incorporate the Flood Insurance Study, Hennepin County, Minnesota and Incorporated Areas and the accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Map panels with an effective date of November 4, 2016. The city should consider a couple of minor amendments to Subdivisions 3 and 4(A) to add clarity to the ordinance. These revisions are detailed in the relevant pages of enclosed draft. Apart from the above items, the draft floodplain management ordinance is in compliance with the state floodplain management rules (MR 6120.5000 to 6120.6200) and,to the best of my knowledge, with the floodplain management standards of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Therefore, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103F, I hereby give conditional state approval of the draft floodplain management ordinance, provided the above - mentioned revisions are made. This approval is valid upon adoption of the draft ordinance by the city and receipt by this office of one (1) copy each of the adopted ordinance(signed and stamped with the community seal), the affidavit of publication, and the completed "Ordinance Certification Checklist"that I have enclosed. Please forward these documents to Ceil Strauss, the DNR's State NFIP Coordinator in St. Paul at the address above in the header. Upon receipt and verification, Ms. Strauss will transmit one copy of these materials to Mr. John Devine at FEMA's Chicago Regional Office. 411 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CONTAINING A mndnr.gov 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD•SAINT PAUL,MN 55155 MINIMUM OF 10%POST-CONSUMER WASTE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Please remember, FEMA must receive a signed, certified, and in-effect ordinance no later than November 4, 2016. To allow sufficient time for processing and transmittal, we request that you submit the requested materials to the DNR no later than November 1, 2016. If FEMA has not received the documentation by the map effective date, FEMA will suspend the City from the National Flood Insurance Program. Please be advised that any future amendments of this ordinance or change in the designation of flood prone areas require prior approval of the Commissioner. In addition,you are required to send copies of hearing notices and final decisions pertaining to variance, conditional uses, and ordinance amendments to this agency. Please send those to State NFIP Coordinator Ceil Strauss at the above address. Should you have any questions on this ordinance or related matters, please contact Ms. Strauss at (651) 259-5713 or ceil.strauss@state.mn.us. While our office in St. Paul will continue to be the main contact for the ordinance update,your DNR Area Hydrologist will continue to be your main contact for day to day assistance with administering your floodplain management ordinance and questions about other DNR water-related programs and permits. Your Area Hydrologist is Kate Drewry, who can be contacted at 651-259-5753 or kate.drewry@state.mn.us. The DNR greatly appreciates your community's cooperation and initiative in providing for the reduction of flood damages through the adoption and administration of this ordinance. Sincerely, . z Jennifer Shill Coji Land Use Section Supervisor Enclosures: Ordinance Certification Checklist Draft Ordinance with suggested revisions ec: Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, Water Resources Coordinator - City of Edina Terri Yearwood, DNR Eco-Waters' Regional Manager Jeanne Daniels, DNR Eco-Waters' District Manager Kate Drewry,Area Hydrologist PROJECT PROFILE - AUGUST 22, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 22, 2016 1. VARIANCE #2016-08 by SKD Architects, Inc. (ANGIE) Location: 11000 West 78th Street Contact: Steve Kleineman, 763-591-6115 Request for: • Variance to exceed the 40 ft. maximum building height by 14 feet. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 07/22/16 Notice to Paper Date 8/11/16 Notice to Paper Date n/a Date Complete 00/00/16 Resident Notice Date 8/12/16 Resident Notice Date n/a 120 Day Deadline 11/18/16 Meeting Date 8/22/16 1st Meeting Date n/a Initial DRC review 07/28/16 2nd Meeting Date n/a 2. PRAIRIE BLUFFS SENIOR LIVING(2015-17)by Albert Miller (JULIE/BETH) Proposal to develop a 3 and 4 story, 138 unit senior housing and assisted living project Location: 10217, 10220, 10240, 10280 Hennepin Town Road and two additional parcels (PID 36-116-22-11-0026 & 36-116-22-11-0003) Contact: Albert Miller—612-386-6260 Request for: • Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres. • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres • Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres • Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 07/13/16 Notice to Paper Date 08/04/16 Notice to Paper Date Date Complete 08/02/16 Resident Notice Date 08/05/16 Resident Notice Date 120 Day Deadline 11/30/16 Meeting Date 08/22/16 1st Meeting Date Initial DRC review 07/28/16 2nd Meeting Date 1 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING - SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 1. CEDAR RIDGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (2016-06)by City of Eden Prairie (ANGIE) Location: 8905 Braxton Drive Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.19 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A _ Notice to Paper Date 07/21/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date 07/25/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 08/08/16 1st Meeting Date 09/06/16 Initial DRC review 06/30/16 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/16 2. OAK POINT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (2016-07)by City of Eden Prairie (ANGIE) Location: 13400 Staring Lake Parkway Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.05 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A Notice to Paper Date 07/21/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date 07/25/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 08/08/16 1st Meeting Date 09/06/16 Initial DRC review 06/30/16 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/16 3. EDEN LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (2016-08) by City of Eden Prairie (ANGIE) Location: 12000 Anderson Lake Parkway Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 23.46 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A Notice to Paper Date 07/21/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date 07/25/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 08/08/16 1st Meeting Date 09/06/16 Initial DRC review 06/30/16 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/16 2 4. FOREST HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (2016-09)by City of Eden Prairie (ANGIE) Location: 13708 Holly Road Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 28.31 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A Notice to Paper Date 07/21/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date 07/25/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 08/08/16 1st Meeting Date 09/06/16 Initial DRC review 06/30/16 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/16 5. HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE (2016-10)by City of Eden Prairie (ANGIE) Location: 13100 College View Drive Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 104.38 acres. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A Notice to Paper Date 07/21/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date 07/25/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 08/08/16 1st Meeting Date 09/06/16 Initial DRC review 06/30/16 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/16 CITY COUNCIL CONSENT - SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 1. CODE AMENDMENT by City of Eden Prairie (JULIE) Amend the City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.35 to add schools as a permitted use in the Public Zoning District. 2. TELECOMMUNICATIONS File#2016-08L Lease by Sprint(c/o—John Deecher- Pyramid) Contact John Deecher Office# 315-796-4481 (STEVE) (Approved 00-00-16) Review time ?? Days. Incomplete as of 00-00-16 Location: 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, MN Request: Re-establishment of Lease. Property zoned Public. Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 03/11/16 Notice to Paper Date N/A Notice to Paper Date N/A Date Complete 00/00/16 Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 90 Day Deadline 06/09/16 Meeting Date N.A fist Meeting Date 00/00/16 Initial DRC review 03/17/16 2nd Meeting Date N/A 3 3. WHITETAIL BLUFF (2016-05)by Premium Construction LLC (BETH) Proposal for a two lot single family subdivision Location: 10065 Eden Prairie Rd Contact: Robert Schmidt—612-760-9461 Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.48 acres • Preliminary Plat of one lot into two lots on 2.48 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 05/13/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/16 Notice to Paper Date Date Complete 06/14/16 Resident Notice Date 00/00/16 Resident Notice Date 06/27/16 120 Day Deadline 10/11/16 Meeting Date 00/00/16 1st Meeting Date 07/19/16 Initial DRC review 00/00/16 2nd Meeting Date PLANNING COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 12, 2016 CONSERVATION COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING - SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 1. CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO LOADING FACILITIES,MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, SITE LIGHTING AND TRASH AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURES (JULIE) Public hearing to amend City Code Chapter 11, relating to loading facilities, mechanical equipment screening, site lighting, and architectural requirements for trash and recycling enclosures. Contact: Julie Klima, 952-949-8489 Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted N/A Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/15 Date Complete N/A Resident Notice Date N/A Resident Notice Date N/A 120 Day Deadline N/A Meeting Date 12/07/15 1st Meeting Date 00/00/15 Initial DRC review N/A 2nd Meeting Date CITY COUNCIL CONSENT - SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT by City of Eden Prairie (JULIE) Amend the Comprehensive Plan relating to development densities and process for medium &high density residential developments. 4 IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED 1. CHICK-FIL-A (2016-02)by Oppidan Investment Company(JULIE) Proposal for free standing restaurant with drive thru Location: 8460 Franlo Road Contact: Drew Johnson, 952-540-4180 Request for: • Zoning District Change from Rural to Reg-Com-Sery on 2.58 acres • Preliminary Plat of 3 lots into 2 lots on 2.58 acres • Site Plan Review on 2.58 acres Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 02/12/16 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/00 Notice to Paper Date 00/00/00 Date Complete 00/00/00 Resident Notice Date 00/00/00 Resident Notice Date 00/00/00 120 Day Deadline 00/00/00 Meeting Date 00/00/00 1st Meeting Date 00/00/00 Initial DRC review 00/00/00 2nd Meeting Date 00/00/00 2. 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 Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15 Notice to Paper Date 12/17/15 Date Complete 00/00/15 Resident Notice Date 11/20/15 Resident Notice Date 12/18/15 120 Day Deadline 00/00/15 Meeting Date 12/07/15 1st Meeting Date 01/05/16 Initial DRC review 00/00/15 2nd Meeting Date 5 3. MARTIN BLU TRAIL (2015-21)by Eden Prairie Development, LLC (JULIE) Proposal for relocation of a trail. Location: 14301 Martin Drive Contact: Rob Bader, 952-540-8643 Request to: • Amend Development Agreement to reflect revised trail location within the Martin Blu project Application Info Planning Commission City Council Date Submitted 10/28/15 Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15 Notice to Paper Date 1 12/17/15 Date Complete 10/28/15 Resident Notice Date 11/20/15 Resident Notice Date 12/18/15 120 Day Deadline 06/23/16 Meeting Date 12/07/15 1st Meeting Date 01/05/16 Initial DRC review 11/05/15 2nd Meeting Date APPROVED VARIANCES TELECOMMUNICATION PROJECTS 6