HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 09/11/2017AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 11, 2017 - 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERS:
John Kirk, Charles Weber, Travis Wuttke, Ann Higgins,
Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Mark Freiberg, Michael DeSanctis,
Christopher Villarreal
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 14, 2017 Meeting
IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS
V. PUBLIC MEETINGS
VI.PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO SELF STORAGE FACILITIES
Request to:
•Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to self-storage facilities
VII.PLANNERS’ REPORT
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, September 11, 2017
_______________________________________________________________________________
MONDAY, September 11, 2017 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
A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 2017
MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated August 14, 2017.
V. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS
VI. PUBLIC MEETINGS
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO SELF STORAGE FACILITIES
Request to:
• Amend City Code, Chapter 11, relating to self-storage facilities
Current City Code does not provide a definition for self-storage facility or list self-storage
facility as a permitted use in any specific zoning district. The lack of a definition or specific
zoning district for self-storage facility invites ambiguity in determining the appropriate
zoning district to locate the use. Historically self-storage facilities have been directed to the
Industrial zoning district (I-2) and in one occasion to the commercial zoning district. The
purpose of this amendment is to define self-storage facility and formalize the specific
zoning districts to locate self-storage facilities. Staff recommends that self-storage facilities
be added as a permitted use in the Industrial General (I-Gen) zoning district. The existing
self-storage facilities would become non-conforming and may continue to operate in
accordance with the non-conforming provisions of City Code Chapter 11.
Staff recommends approval.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval to amend City Code, Chapter 11, related to
self-storage facilities based on the information included in the staff report dated September
6, 2017 and its attachments.
ANNOTATED AGENDA
September 11, 2017
Page 2
VIII. PLANNERS’ REPORT
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 14, 2017 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Travis Wuttke, Ann Higgins, Charles
Weber, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Mark Freiberg,
Michael DeSanctis, Christopher Villarreal
CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner
Randy Newton, Assistant City Engineer
Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Vice Chair Farr called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Absent were commission members Kirk, Pieper, and Weber.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Klima announced the original copy of the July 10, 2017 minutes the commission received
were inadvertently the unapproved version, and latest changes, asked for at the July 24,
2017 meeting, were reflected in the goldenrod copy distributed to the commission
members.
MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded Freiberg, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-
0.
IV. MINUTES
July 10, 2017 – MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by DeSanctis to approve the
minutes of July 10, 2017 with the revisions indicated on the goldenrod pages. Motion
carried 6-0.
July 24, 2017 – MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded by Freiberg to approve the minutes
of July 24, 2017. Motion carried 6-0.
V. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 2
VI. PUBLIC MEETINGS
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
Request for
• Planned Unit Development amendment on 10.06 acres
• Site Plan Review on 10.06 acres
Klima presented the staff report: this was a request to amend the PUD and a request to
amend the site plan. The existing development was approved in the 1970s and was in
compliance with City Code and City approval at the time of construction. The current
request was to expand the existing footprint and do some internal remodeling. This
expansion is consistent with City Code requirements with regard to architecture, height,
and materials, and there were no waivers requested. There are a few site amenities that
are nonconforming, primarily the parking lot and trash enclosure, due to recent changes
in design standards. This project does not include any expansion or renovations to the
parking areas. Staff recommended a condition be included in the development agreement
that would require the property owner to submit a plan to address these nonconformities
at the time of future projects.
The landscaping plan conforms to city code requirements, and would connect sidewalks
and trails along Duck Lake Road as well as providing bike racks on site. Staff
recommended approval of the development.
Farr asked in the interests of full disclosure for staff to articulate the legal arrangements
with the community gardens on the western quarter of this property. Klima referred the
question to Bourne, who stated the City has a lease with Assembly of God Church for the
use of the land for public gardens for residents, churchgoers, and nonprofits, and as part
of that lease the City maintains those gardens. Farr asked for and received confirmation
this development would not impact those gardens, nor limit any future parking expansion.
Applicant Dr. Jack Perrin, senior pastor at Assembly of God Church, summarized the
church’s support of the community for the last 18 years, and stated church attendance
ranged from 400-500 people on a week up to 600-700 people. The church needed
additional educational space.
Architect Nicole Thompson, of Station 19 Architects, presented the expansion project
goals: to strengthen the church’s identity and curb appeal, to expand the educational
facilities for all attendees, to expand the gathering and hospitality space, and the expand
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 3
accessibility to the building. This development would add 12,000+ square feet in a two-
story addition with classrooms.
Farr asked for clarification of the disparity between 400-500 attendees currently, and the
600-700 record attendance with regard to the parking requirements of the church. Perrin
replied the church presently has three services, keeping parking requirements stable, but
he did foresee a time when the church would come back before the commission to bring
the existing parking lot into compliance due to increased attendance, as well as to
upgrade the storm water services. At only one time did the church ask permission to have
worshippers park along Duck Lake Trail for an event that would likely not be held again.
Farr mentioned Perrin’s comments at a recent neighborhood meeting and asked him to
put Perrin’s phrase about the project being “scaled back” into context of the future
improvements that may be proposed. Perrin explained the budget was 4.3 million,
keeping it conservative. The church also realized there would be a future need for an
expanded administrative area and increased sanctuary size, but he thought the compliance
of the parking area and the trash enclosure were the top priority. In five years he expected
to be back before the commission with a parking plan. Therefore, the applicant and
architects made the budget adjustment, divided the project into phases, and withdrew
some development items.
Farr asked Perrin to summarize the neighborhood meeting. Perrin replied one person
attended the meeting and was present in the audience, and another stopped by Station 19
Architects who couldn’t come to the neighborhood meeting. The latter person’s main
concern was the 60-foot trees along the property’s south border. This development would
not impact the trees; they would only be replaced as they aged. Nicole Thompson added
she spoke to this gentleman personally, and he was concerned with the scale of the
project, particularly with the possibility of the infiltration basin impeding or affecting the
neighborhoods to the south of the property. The size of the infiltration basin had been
reduced in size to avoid impacting the trees and properties along the south end.
DeSanctis asked the architects to explain the type and the technical aspects of the exterior
lighting. Dan Torgerson, of Station 19 Architects, explained the lighting would consist of
LED downward facing lights. No extra lighting was being added beyond what is required
by building code.
Farr observed there were a limited number of light fixtures on the façade, as the project
retained the existing lighting on the parking lot. However, there were also two flood
lights facing vertically into the residential area along the north side of the property
illuminating the church’s two driveways. He noted this was an existing condition. He
asked staff to comment on this nonconformity. Klima replied the lighting that exists is
not proposed to change. Staff has received no negative feedback from the neighborhood.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 4
The nonconformities in the parking lot largely consisted of the lack of parking lot islands
and other design guidelines recently adopted by the commission. This proposal was not
specifically intended to address the lighting requirements; however, the church may look
at the lighting design in future proposals.
Wuttke noted the infiltration basin was oversized by three percent and asked if this was a
measure to proactively accommodate a future parking expansion. Klima replied there
were several discussions with the church as to how to address the infiltration area as a
part of the proposal review. The design is a proactive approach and the church is trying to
be responsive to the City and the watershed district requirements. The church was
hopeful what is being proposed now will accommodate future proposals.
Wuttke asked if there had been ghost platting of the infiltration basin and utilities
locations and the size and scope of the development. Perrin replied this had not been done
as yet, but had data from some core studies done years before, and were open to planning
as a part of the next stage of the development. He added the three percent over could even
be inadequate in the future, but the church’s intent was to “do it well” and over-
accommodate a bit. The church is taking this step by step and allowing each stage to meet
the requirements.
Higgins asked the status of the early release of permits under the grading and utilities
section on page two. Klima replied grading/land alteration permits were usually not
issued until the development agreement is signed. However, with the approach of autumn
it was not out of the ordinary for a developer to request an early release of a grading
permit before the development agreement is signed. Any work done as a part of that is at
the developer’s own risk and the City Council would need to authorize such work.
Usually the Planning Commission doesn’t see these requests at this time, but in this
instance staff wanted to let the commission know this was part of the request. No
particular action was needed on the grading permit by the Commission.
Wuttke noted the bike racks at the northeast corner of the existing parking lot where three
pathways intersect. He suggested setting that offsite, further away from the walkways.
Thompson replied the architects could look at that. Perrin added the Fire Department
supports the project because sprinklers will finally be put into the church.
Farr opened the public hearing.
Resident David Ziggler of 16729 Baywood Terrace stated he and his neighbors had no
objections to the addition, but were in favor of the BMPs to improve the water quality
and address the runoff issues. All neighbors favored not impacting the trees along the
south end of the property, as lights from cars parking could shine into house windows,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 5
and were reassured to hear this development would not remove them. He said he and his
neighbors also favored as much distance as possible between the infiltration basin and the
south propert y line. The original design showed a southeast location, and they wanted to
see the tree buffer kept, and a long thin infiltration basin along the south parking lot to
not disturb the tree roots. He added the sidewalk would help.
DeSanctis asked for the caliper and species of the six existing trees that could be
impacted. Perrin replied three were flowering crabapple trees which could not be moved,
a possibility he had explored. These would be replaced with fairly mature trees.
Thompson replied two maples, three crabapples, and six arborvitaes would be removed.
The crabapples would be replaced. Farr asked for and received confirmation Ziggler was
satisfied with this answer.
Resident John Lafontaine, of 1639 South Manor Road asked when construction supposed
to begin, if the church would remain a polling place during construction should an
election be held during construction and if the church’s membership keeps increasing will
the City find it necessary to put a traffic light on Duck Lake Trail and Eden Prairie Road.
He added turning left onto Eden Prairie Road from Duck Lake Trail is difficult at present.
Perrin replied the sanctuary would be able to serve as polling place. Thompson said the
construction would begin in October, 2017, with completion in May, 2018.
Farr asked for comment from commission and staff. Newton noted this was a county road
with county control. He added the times that the church is busy did not normally coincide
with busy traffic times. Farr noted this development did not have a traffic report, and
asked if future proposal might require a traffic study. Newton replied a future one would;
however, this one did not due to there being no expansion of the parking lot and/or
sanctuary.
Higgins urged the developer and Hennepin County be mindful of the traffic while
construction is underway. The way that Eden Prairie Road curves at the intersection of
Duck Lake Trail makes that intersection approach difficult to navigate.
DeSanctis asked whose jurisdiction it would be to adjust the speed limit on County Road
Four, Hennepin County or the City engineer. Newton replied the State of Minnesota
monitors speeds, whereas the city could write a resolution to request a speed study.
However, history shows such a request tend to result in MnDOT recommending an
increase in speed, so the city reserves those requests when a lower speed is the likely
result. Farr suggested an intersection improvement rather than a speed reduction at that
intersection. Newton replied the City could continue to look at the County Road Four
corridor which is a rural unimproved roadway for ways to suggest improvements;
however, that suggestion has been made to Hennepin County, and improvements there
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 6
are not a priority with the county at this time. Farr asked for and received confirmation
from Newton the bottom line was that corridor performed at a level that is acceptable at
the levels of the city, county, and state.
Wuttke asked if the residents had as a part of the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Plan online
mapping system had commented on that intersection. Newton replied he would have to
double-check the results, but was not aware of that intersection being the target of
comments.
Farr closed the public comments section. Farr asked for questions or comments from the
commissioners. Hearing none, if a crosswalk warranted on the north side of Duck Lake
Trail to connect the proposed sidewalk to the trail there. Newton replied such an
intersection is a legal crosswalk whether marked or unmarked and would function as one
either way, and the current pedestrian volume wouldn’t warrant a marked crosswalk.
Farr noted there was a comment by the architect naming accessibility a design goal, but
the accessible parking stalls in the parking lot remain unimproved, and there is no
accessible route from those stalls into the building. He wished to make this a condition,
and noted the building inspector would likely make this a condition of the building
permit. Farr observed another proposed sidewalk along parking lot to the north side of the
structure leading to new entrance and exit doors for that north addition that would remove
a 20-inch maple tree, and he suggested such some dialogue on moving the sidewalk
around the tree. Perrin agreed with the avoidance and remarked it was easier and more
aesthetic to move the sidewalk than to take down the tree.
Farr stated he was concerned about the new landscaping concentrated around the
addition, whereas the existing large monument sign along Eden Prairie Road is
unadorned with landscaping, along with the sanctuary building, being a large structure,
also has little landscaping. He urged the developer to look more holistically at the
landscaping and invited commissioners’ remarks. The sanctuary southeast corner has
between three and five HVAC air condensers which are not screened. He wished to make
that a condition of approval. Higgins voiced support for Farr’s comments regarding the
accessibility issue, as she had driven around the area that day. DeSanctis asked for and
received confirmation there was no emblazoned crosswalk at the intersection of Duck
Lake Trail and Eden Prairie Road, and added it behooved the City to look at that more
carefully and demark it explicitly. Farr replied crosswalks were always a good idea, and
this would connect to the two trails along Eden Prairie Road from the north and south
sides of Duck Lake Trail and provide no entrance to the church. Anyone walking or
biking to the church from the north on Duck Lake Trail would cross it and take the new
sidewalk. Those coming from the south would have to cut across the grass, which could
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 7
be a problem needed a redesign. Villarreal remarked he saw someone on a bike cut
through the southeast corner of the property into the parking lot.
Farr moved the discussion to the topic of the building architecture and materials, and
asked if the materials board reference in the staff report was available. Klima presented
the materials board. Farr noted the drawings depict the existing sanctuary as having no
new work in this development. Thompson replied they planned to keep the existing wood
siding, and reinstall wood siding in the future.
Klima passed the materials board to the commission. Farr observed the uniclad 500 metal
panels proposed were a low grade lightweight sheet metal rather than something more
durable and pleasing to the eye. He said the entire roof at the location of the barrel vault
articulation at the front door is rubber-clad EPDM, which should function only as a
membrane, i.e., not be visible, and he urged the use of a more suitable cladding material.
Farr also voiced concern the development introduced brick, precast concrete, modular
retaining walls, and the aforementioned metal panels, which he felt are not cohesive or
integrated with the existing building, which was already nonconforming. He expressed
concern about the quantity of new materials and their lack of relationship to the existing
structure or the potential remodel of the sanctuary. Farr said the new exit stairway from
the second floor was not in keeping with the existing stairwells: it was exposed, not
concealed or decorated. He found the design to be disjointed. He asked for other
commissioners’ comments. There were none, and Farr invited the architects to respond.
Thompson replied there was a full master plan for the project, which included future
parking and worship expansion. This development was Phase One. Use of the pre-cast
was cost-effective for a two-story addition. Station 19 Architects has used the UC500
panel as a cost-effective solution. She appreciated the comments and would take them
into consideration. She added the architects do share Farr’s concern about the north
stairway and would look at that as the drawings are finished. Wuttke asked if the master
plan had been worked on privately with the applicant, and if was of the entire site.
Thompson replied both were true, and it included future parking on the south and north
sides of the building and potential infiltration basins that were not sized in order to be
cognizant of the shoreland boundary. There would also be a western building expansion
for a lobby and administration, and recladding of the entire building. Farr asked for and
received clarification that the exterior would be restucccoed.
Wuttke asked for and received clarification future development would include more
landscaping. He asked if this master plan had been relayed to staff, and Thompson replied
it had. Wuttke asked if the commission should look at this specifically as a Phase One
development, or take the master plan into consideration. Klima replied this development
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 8
request pertains to what is shown in the plans. Future improvements would go through
another public hearing and public review process. For this current request there would be
a development agreement drafted for the City Council to review, and it would include
language to set expectations for future development.
Farr asked for comments from the commissioners. Higgins expressed concerns about
construction activity during the winter and runoff, and asked for City supervision of the
construction. Farr replied a review of the City’s erosions controls would be sufficient.
Newton replied the City would implement a standard review and the developer would be
required to get a land alteration permit prior to any construction, and erosion control
would be part of that.
Wuttke noted there was presently a runoff issue on the property, and was not convinced
this would not be an issue in the future. Newton replied the plan in front of the
commission did not address all of the run off issues on the property but did capture and
treat some of it, which was an improvement and could be monitored and reviewed.
Wuttke urged the possible impact on the neighborhood north of Duck Lake Trail be a part
of this review, and Newton agreed.
Farr asked the architect to address the runoff issue with regard to the applicant’s
“aggressive” permit request and the need to get the BMPs installed before foundations
are dug. Torgerson replied the best management practice was to have a permit before
construction begins. The storm water basin was designed to hold four inches of water for
24-48 hours, preventing standing water, and was moved from the southeast corner to the
south side of the site. Required soil borings throughout the site were done. Farr replied
this answered his question, and observed the storm pond appears to take drainage solely
from the parking lot, not the roofs, asked if the roof storm water drained to grade and
found its way to the new basin. Torgerson replied the basin was design to treat the new
runoff from the site; some of the roof runoff would drain to grade, but the total volume of
water needed to be treated would be.
Wuttke asked if there would be natural vegetation such as low-mow fescue/deep root
structure plants with high filtration on the eastern low side swale. Perrin replied there was
a full basin planned in the master plan.
Villarreal asked if it would be simpler having the landscaping completely finished as
opposed to having it done in two phases. Klima replied the landscaping plan being
discussed tonight was reflective of the current expansion, and the recommendations
included the provision of a landscaping plan and the security for that. She confirmed
when the applicant returned with a Phase Two development, the city would review that
landscape plan based on the current requirements at that time, receive landscaping
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 9
security, go through inspection again, etc. The applicant originally came in with a broader
plan and decided to scale back. It was staff’s opinion it was better to look at what
landscaping can be done with the applicant’s capabilities, rather than have a master
landscaping plan that takes more time to implement, risking a change to standards in the
meantime and removal of newly installed landscaping to accommodate development
plans.
Farr stated his primary concern was the lack of cohesiveness or integration of the new
materials with the existing structure without the premise of the completion of the master
plan. He saw what looked like two projects with the new project abutting an old building
with no relationship. The applicant was willing to adopt some additional conditions such
as saving the 20-inch maple tree, installing screening in front of HVAC units, and
perhaps improving the northern stairway, but these did not add up to substantial
architectural improvements in his opinion.
DeSanctis asked for a description of dimensions and material for the wall signage.
Torgerson replied it would consist of box lettering, flat-back-lit signage, with some pit-
mounted signage. The size was undetermined but would fall within City Codes.
Wuttke stated he understood Farr’s concerns; however, staff had recommended approval
and the commission to his mind had no legal standing to withhold approval of this
development. The development agreement could correct nonconformities during the
second phase of the development. Freiberg expressed concern putting up too many
roadblocks to development would drive businesses and churches from Eden Prairie, and
while he wanted the materials concerns to be considered, he did not see integration of
materials as sufficient to vote against the proposal.
MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded by DeSanctis to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 6-0.
Farr urged he did not wish to derail the project but said the project did not draw details
from the current building or from the area in Eden Prairie. He feared the budget does not
support the program. Higgins stated she had some reservations but would approve the
project. She added the architect may want to add value by taking into consideration the
concerns raised in this meeting. DeSanctis asked Farr by what means he recommended
the applicant address the material integration. Farr replied there were two ways forward:
the commission could recommend approval with conditions, and have the City Council
listen to deliberations on the materials, or recommend a continuance. He asked Klima to
confirm or correct this. Klima replied since the public hearing was closed alternatives
include tabling any recommendation and provide specific direction to the applicant and to
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 10
city staff; Recommend approval subject to conditions presented or added by the
Commission; or to recommend denial of the project.
Wuttke asked Farr if the commission had seen the master plan with the phases set out if
that would have alleviated his concerns, and Farr replied he would have had concerns
either way. He would have liked to have seen the master plan, but what was indicated for
a second phase was not acceptable to him. DeSanctis noted the greatest inertia to
overcome is beginning with regard to a project, and suggested amendments to the
development proposal. Wuttke asked if any commission members had concerns about
staff recommended conditions on page four; none did. Freiberg asked Farr if there was
any language that could be inserted in a motion to address his concerns, and Farr replied
there was not. Higgins reiterated her support for the project despite sharing Farr’s
concerns, and asked Farr to articulate the conditions he would like to see other than the
issue of materials.
Farr listed the four conditions he had for the project outside of the materials concerns: 1)
save the 20-inch maple tree and reconfigure the sidewalk north of the building; 2) comply
with the Minnesota Accessibility Code regarding southeast parking stalls; 3) landscaping
in front of or screening of HVAC units on the southeast corner of the sanctuary; and 4) he
had a concern about the lack of perimeter plantings around the existing sanctuary.
Discussion followed on how to craft language to address these concerns. Klima stated
City staff could help the commission craft language. She repeated the alternatives for the
commission were to approve with the conditions represented in the staff report or with
amended conditions, to table action on this item, or recommend a denial to the City
Council. However, a denial required specific reasons, and staff could also assist with this.
Tabling rather than a continuance was the option because the public hearing had been
closed.
MOTION: Freiberg moved, seconded by Higgins to recommend approval of the
Planned Unit Development Amendment on 10.06 acres and Site Plan Review on 10.06
acres based on plans stamp dated August 4, 2017 and the information included in the staff
report dated August 11, 2017 and its attachments. Motion carried 5-1. Farr dissenting
VIII. PLANNERS’ REPORT
IX. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
X. CONTINUING BUSINESS
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 14, 2017
Page 11
MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by DeSanctis to adjourn. Motion carried 6-0.
Vice Chair Farr adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Durham, Planner II
DATE: September 6, 2017
SUBJECT: Code Amendment – Self-Storage Facilities
BACKGROUND:
Self-storage facilities, also known as mini-storage, have historically been permitted the Industrial zoning
districts under the permitted use of warehouse. Currently there are three (3) self-storage facilities in the
I-2 zoning district all developed prior to 2000. One (1) self-storage facility is located in the Commercial
Regional Service (C-Reg-Ser) zoning district. City Code does not define self-storage nor specifically
identify as a permitted use where self-storage facilities may locate.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has conducted a regional and local review of city codes related to self-storage facilities. The term
self-storage facility is the preferred terminology noted in city codes and in the self-storage industry. The
local and national research reveals self-storage facilities generally occur in the industrial and/or
commercial districts as determined by local controls and there are varying degrees of architectural and
exterior building material requirements again as determined by a city.
The traditional self-storage facilities developed in Eden Prairie in the 1970’s, 80’s and 90’s generally
have industrial type architecture and building materials with overhead doors. Industrial I-2, I-5 and the
commercial zoning districts do no permit outdoor storage for items such as recreational vehicles,
automobiles, etc. The one facility located in the commercial zoning district was designed to have
architectural features and exterior building materials of commercial character and is vertically designed
with elevators and drive-in bays for loading and unloading.
This code amendment proposed to define and list self-storage facility as a permitted use in the Industrial
I-Gen district in order to preserve commercial properties for the highest and best commercial use. The I-
2 and I-5 Industrial Districts would be preserved for office/high tech uses.
Staff recommends the following self-storage facility definition:
“Self-Storage Facility” - A building or group of buildings designed and used for the leasing of
compartmentalized individual storage space to tenants who have controlled and secure access for the
sole purpose of storing personal property which is not held or offered for current or future sale.
2
If this amendment is approved, the existing four (4) self-storage facilities would become non-
conforming, but would be able to remain and be maintained, but not expand consistent with the non-
conforming use language in City Code and State Statute. The existing property owners of self-storage
facilities have been notified via US mail and letter of the proposed code change.
Attached is a map locating the existing self-storage facilities locations and the I-Gen sites within the
City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the following: Amend Section 11.02 Definitions to include a definition
for Self-Storage Facility; Amend Section 11.30 Industrial District include Self-Storage Facility as a
permitted use in the Industrial (I-Gen) district, as represented in the Planning Commission Staff report
dated September 6, 2017.
§¨¦494
§¨¦494
£¤169
£¤169
£¤212
")62
")101
")5
")62
OP1
OP4 OP62
OP39 OP61
OP60OP4OP101
")5
OP61
OP61 OP62
OP4
£¤212
£¤212
£¤212
Existing Self-Storage
Facility
Existing Self-Storage
Facility
Existing Self-Storage
Facility
Existing Self-Storage
FacilityI-Gen
I-Gen
I-Gen
I-Gen
¯0 1 20.5 Miles
DATE: 09-06-17
Existing Self-Storage Facilities
Properties zoned I-General
1
PROJECT PROFILE – SEPTEMBER 11, 2017
PLANNING COMMISSION – SEPTEMBER 11, 2017
1. CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO SELF STORAGE FACILITIES 2017-14 (STEVE)
Public Hearing amending City Code, Chapter 11, related to self-storage facilities
Contact: Steve Durham, 952-949-8491
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 07/14/17
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review 08/03/17
Notice to Paper Date 08/24/17
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 09/11/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 00/00/17
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/17
CONSERVATION COMMISSION – SEPTEMBER 12, 2017
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION – SEPTEMBER 18, 2017
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – SEPTEMBER 19, 2017
1. EDEN HEIGHTS EAST – PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL EXTENSION
2. CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO PARKS ZONING DISTRICT 2017-11 (BETH)
Public Hearing amending City Code, Chapter 11, to amend Parks Zoning District
Contact: Beth Novak-Krebs, 952-949-8490
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 05/12/17
Date Complete N/A
120 Day Deadline N/A
Initial DRC review N/A
Notice to Paper Date 07/06/17
Resident Notice Date N/A
Meeting Date 07/24/17
Notice to Paper Date 08/17/17
Resident Notice Date N/A
1st Meeting Date 09/05/17
2nd Meeting Date 09/19/17
PLANNING COMMISSION – SEPTEMBER 25, 2017
2
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – OCTOBER 3, 2017
1. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD (2017-13) by Station 19 Architects. (ANGIE)
Proposal for a 12,423 sq. ft. one and two story addition and a 4,270 sq. ft. remodel of the main and lower level
on 10.06 acres
Location: 16591 Duck Lake Trail.
Contact: Dan Torgerson – 612-623-1800
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Amendment on 10.06 acres
• Site Plan Review on 10.06 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 07/07/17
Date Complete 07/07/17
120 Day Deadline 11/04/17
Initial DRC review 07/13/17
Notice to Paper Date 07/27/17
Resident Notice Date 07/28/17
Meeting Date 08/14/17
Notice to Paper Date 08/17/17
Resident Notice Date 08/18/17
1st Meeting Date 09/05/17
2nd Meeting Date 10/03/17
2. ELEVATE (2017-08) by Timberland Partners. (JULIE)
Proposal for a six story, 222-unit apartment building with mixed use on first floor on 2.93 acres
Location: 12900 Technology Dr.
Contact: Bob Fransen – 952-893-1216
Request for:
• Guide Plan Change from REG-COM to TOD and text amendment to include TOD
language on 2.93 acres
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.93 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.93 acres
• Zoning District Change from C-Reg-Ser to TOD-R on 2.93 acres
• Site Plan Review on 2.93 acres
• Preliminary Plat of two lots into one lot on 2.93 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 04/07/17
Date Complete 06/14/17
120 Day Deadline 10/12/17
Initial DRC review 04/13/17
Notice to Paper Date 06/22/17
Resident Notice Date 06/23/17
Meeting Date 07/10/17
Notice to Paper Date 07/20/17
Resident Notice Date 07/21/17
1st Meeting Date 08/08/17
2nd Meeting Date 10/03/17
3
IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED
1. EDEN BLUFF 4TH ADDITION (2017-12) by Pope Architects. (BETH)
Proposal is a two phase approach: Phase 1 to construct surface parking of 252 spaces on 11.67acres; Phase 2
will include a new 3 story, 120,000 square foot office building with additional 530 parking spaces.
Location: Charlson Rd & Liatris Ln.
Contact: Paul Holmes – 651-642-9200
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 11.67 acres
• Site Plan Review on 11.67 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 06/26/17
Date Complete 00/00/17
120 Day Deadline 00/00/17
Initial DRC review 06/29/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
Meeting Date 00/00/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
1st Meeting Date 00/00/17
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/17
2. WINDSOR PLAZA – FED EX (2017-15) by Windsor Plaza LLC. (ANGIE)
Proposal to complete the interior of the existing vacant space within Windsor Plaza for a retail use instead of
a restaurant use.
Location: 11993 Singletree Lane E
Contact: Matt Karl – 952-324-8900
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 0.24 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 0.24 acres
• Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service District on 0.24
acres
• Site Plan Review on 0.24 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 08/10/17
Date Complete 00/00/17
120 Day Deadline 00/00/17
Initial DRC review 08/17/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
Meeting Date 00/00/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
1st Meeting Date 00/00/17
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/17
4
3. ARBY’S (2017-16) by Arc Vision, Inc. (BETH)
Proposal to complete a minor interior remodel, exterior façade improvements, parking lot repaving and
landscaping.
Location: 560 Prairie Center Drive
Contact: Samantha Igou – 314-415-2400
Request for:
• Site Plan Review on 1.15 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 08/25/17
Date Complete 00/00/17
120 Day Deadline 00/00/17
Initial DRC review 08/31/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
Meeting Date 00/00/17
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/17
Resident Notice Date 00/00/17
1st Meeting Date 00/00/17
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/17
4. SOUTHWEST STATION PUD AMENDMENT (2015-23) by SW Metro Transit Commission
(JULIE)
Proposal for additional parking structure at southwest station
Contact: Julie Klima, 952-949-8489
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 11.38 acres
• Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on
11.38 acres
• Site Plan Review on 11.38 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 00/00/15
Date Complete 00/00/15
120 Day Deadline 00/00/15
Initial DRC review 00/00/15
Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15
Resident Notice Date 11/20/15
Meeting Date 12/07/15
Notice to Paper Date 12/17/15
Resident Notice Date 12/18/15
1st Meeting Date 01/05/16
2nd Meeting Date
APPROVED VARIANCES
TELECOMMUNICATION PROJECTS