Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 04/13/1998 APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 13, 1998 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Beverly Alexander, Kenneth E. Clinton, Laurence Dorn, Jr., Randy Foote, Bill Habicht, Rebecca Lewis, Douglas Sandstad STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Kyle Halvorson,Adam Hupp STAFF LIAISON: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner, and Barbara Anderson, City Recorder MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Habicht I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-ROLL CALL Chair Clinton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Clinton noted the agenda should be amended to add the swearing in of the new Planning Commission members Laurence Dorn, Jr., and Rebecca Lewis. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote, to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried 6-0. A. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSIONERS LAURENCE DORN, JR., AND REBECCA LEWIS Kipp administered the Oath of Office to Laurence Dorn, Jr., and Rebecca Lewis who were officially installed as members of the Planning Commission. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Alexander moved, seconded by Foote to approve the Minutes of March 23, 1998 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0-2. Dorn and Lewis abstained. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. WYNSTONE by Jasper Development. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 6.95 acres, Rezoning from R1-22 to R1-13.5 and RM-6.5 on 9.01 acres, Preliminary Plat on 9.01 acres into 31 lots and Site Plan Review on 6.95 acres. Location: 7102, 7126 & 7128 Baker Road. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 2 Jim Jasper and Larry Harris gave a presentation on the project. Harris noted this project was not approved in 1997 because the City Council determined there was no compelling reason to change the guide Plan. The plans have been revised to reflect the changes requested by the City and the residents of the area and are detailed in the staff report. The landscape plan has been revised and the site has been redesigned to meet the goal of the City to have more life cycle housing. The development will be housing for seniors or people 55 and over and features one level housing and no maintenance exteriors. This project will meet the goals and desires set forth by the City of Eden Prairie in it's long range housing plans. There will be a private non-through street for the project. There will be a good deal of landscaping and the housing will be constructed as townhomes with only one common wall between each unit. He described the common areas and noted there will be a Homeowners Association for the maintenance of the property. Prices of the units will range from$170,000 to about$210,000 per unit. Harris reviewed the landscape plan and the plantings around the perimeter of the site and within the site itself. He noted the improvements they have made to this plan from the previous plan. He noted the project has been redesigned and is being specifically marketed to meet a specific need identified by the City, and the Planning Commission must determine if it is appropriate for this site. Kipp gave the staff report and noted that the total number of units has not changed from the previous plan. However, staff recommends approval of Alternative I as outlined in the staff report. Foote asked about the amount of tree loss and Kipp responded that it is about 57% and this was similar to the tree loss for the Maple Hill development where the topography was such that it was difficult to avoid substantial tree loss in order to develop the property. Dorn asked where the tree loss would occur and Kipp responded it would be over the entire property. Dorn noted that it appeared they would end up losing most of the trees on the property whenever it was developed. Clinton asked if the project would have some identification as a senior housing project. Jim Jasper responded that they would not specifically designate it as a development for seniors, but their marketing strategy would be directed towards people in this age group. They have found that when most of the homeowners are in this age group it tends to discourage younger people from buying in the same development. The Public Hearing was opened. Jim Brandser, 7238 Vervoort Lane, stated he was opposed to the development because the density has not changed from the previous plan and he felt it would be a detriment to those homes that are already in the area. He was concerned about the drainage plan and how it would impact the property to the south. He believed the density proposed was too high and there was no compelling reason to change the guiding on the property. He was also concerned about increased traffic from the development. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 3 John Mallow, Forest Hill road, stated he agreed with Mr.. Brandser that the density was too high, and was unchanged from the previous proposal. He was concerned about whether the project would be sold as senior housing and that there were no restrictive covenants on the property which would guarantee that was how these lots would be sold. He commented the proposal was a community unto itself and he was opposed to this because he wanted to see sidewalks connecting their neighborhood with Forest Hills school so the children do not have to walk along Baker Road to get to the playgrounds there. He commented he had been told that this was a private development and the city cannot require the proponent to construct a sidewalk. He felt this was very serious and there would be children within the new development. These neighborhoods should be connected to allow access between them. He was concerned about the home that is adjacent to the site being moved onto Forest Hill Road and not being a part of this development, and he thought it should be included. Terry Willmsen, 7265 Vervoort Lane, stated he was concerned about the density which was too high and the amount of tree loss which would occur on the site. He would prefer to have single family homes constructed on the site. If the Guide Plan is changed for this site it will set a precedent for fizrther guide plan changes throughout the City. Scott Ringhand, 7270 Vervoort Lane, stated he felt the density was too high and he was told it would be developed as single family housing when he purchased his home. He was concerned about the substantial amount of tree loss and noted the view would be buildings instead of trees as it is now. He commented it will take 40 years for the trees to grow back the way they are now. He was concerned about how the children in his neighborhood would be adversely impacted by this development. Wayne Zeien, 7246 Vervoort Lane, was concerned about the landscaping plan which was not as complete as he would like to see and he wanted to know if it would be changed. The plan was not that much different from the earlier one. He was concerned about the drainage and how the development would impact the drainage flow to the south. He was concerned about how it would be marketed as being for "empty nesters" because there were no covenants requiring that it be marketed that way. He was also concerned about the amount of tree loss, he felt the density was too high, and the Guiding was for single family housing and he felt it should remain that way, and was opposed to changing it. M. Eshmawy, 8724 Crest Road,Bloomington, submitted a letter noting he was the owner of the property directly south of the proposed development. He stated he was opposed to the project because the drainage will go across his lot and ruin his property. He asked the City of Eden Prairie to re-route the drainage from going across his land. Kipp stated the proponent will have to work with the property owner to resolve this issue prior to any permit approval for this project. Marty Camp, Project Engineer,reviewed the drainage plans as they were of such concern to the residents. He noted they plan to install a NURP pond in the central portion of the town house development which will provide water storage and it will be discharged from this NURP pond at the same rate as the existing runoff. This runoff will flow into the existing storm drainage system, at the same rate as presently exists on the site. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 4 Ron Harris, 7262 Vervoort Lane, was concerned about the density of the project, and noted the trees that would replace the existing trees would be much smaller in size. He asked what size tree would be used in the landscape replacement process. He was concerned about children playing in the cul-de-sac and what the impact of this development would be on their safety. He was concerned about the traffic that would be generated from this development. Lyndon Moquist, 13772 Candice Lane, was concerned about the density which was too high, and noted he built his home there because he had been assured by City officials that the land adjacent was guided for single family residential. He thought the value of the townhomes was too little for Eden Prairie and it would adversely impact the adjacent property values. He was opposed to changing the zoning or the Guide Plan to permit this development. He noted there were approximately 150-200 townhomes available in Eden Prairie now, and he did not believe they should be building more when so many were currently available. He felt the need should revolve around the buyer rather than the seller. Foote asked if the proponent had a cross-section which would show the view from the adjacent properties, and Valerie Rivers, the landscape architect for the project, stated that the trees they intend to use for the project would be ten feet tall when planted and they were guaranteed for a year, or they would have to be replaced. They will use 2.5-3" caliper shade trees, and it will be screened significantly more than the previous plan. There will be the grade change to break up the view. Sandstad commented he was concerned about how much flexibility in the design there was as they often pass things as they are presented. He was also concerned about the density and the buffering and the amount of screening around the project, as well as the drainage onto an adjacent property. He commented the average home valuation in Eden Prairie was not $300,000 to $400,000, but concurred that diversity in housing types was desired in Eden Prairie. Foote stated he felt the project was needed but the density was rather high. If one unit were removed it would not change the view from the west much and it would bring the density down. Even single family residential development would be visible from the adjacent properties. He was not comfortable with the drainage plan. The premise could work but the plan needs to be reworked. Alexander commented the City needs more senior housing but it was not specified that this development would be senior housing. She felt the density was rather high, and she was concerned about the drainage onto an adjacent property. Dorn commented that the City could not specify a certain type of housing or enforce covenants to that effect. The developer can build a project that the younger people of Eden Prairie want to buy if he so desires. He asked about the house on top of the hill and how much of the hill would be removed. The Engineer reviewed the existing topography on the site and noted that it flows from north to south and the existing high point on the south part is at the 908 elevation. The foundations for the garages will be at about the 902 elevation. They will take off about ten feet on the north and about five feet on the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 5 southern portion of the site. Dorn inquired if the proponents intended to secure an easement for drainage over the property to the south, and the engineer responded that the existing storm system along Baker Road flows into catch basins along Baker Road and St. Andrews Road. They will be required to discharge drainage from the NURP pond at the predetermined rate of not more than goes out now. Discussion ensued regarding the needed easement for the existing storm sewer system as well as the proponent's drainage plan. Jasper stated that water is being discharged onto private property without benefit of an easement and they have been required to resolve this problem with M. Eshmawy. Lewis commented she concurred there was a need for senior housing in the City but was concerned about this development being used for that purpose. She was also concerned about the drainage issue as well as the density. Kipp noted staff checked with the City Attorney regarding the issue of requiring the developer to declare the property as a senior housing project and had been advised that to do this would not violate any civil right the developer has as age was not held to be a discriminating element in the area of housing. Sandstad commented he was not concerned about this project being purchased by other people and he did not want to get into requiring them to sell to a particular market. He believed that the type of housing built would determine who would buy it. Jasper concurred with Sandstad and noted the developer of a project does things required by the City that will appeal to a certain type of homeowner. He did not want to have a requirement put on an approval that would limit the product to a certain type of homeowner. Jasper discussed the issue of the density and commented that in order to provide affordable housing for this age group, it was necessary to construct the units at a level that made it possible for the development to succeed. If the Planning Commission felt the density was too great for the site then there was no point in discussing it further. This housing was meant to allow people 55 and older that want to scale down to have some affordable housing that is in the vicinity of where they presently reside. They believe the landscaping plan is excellent and he did not know what more the City could want,. He noted the drainage issue can be resolved, and they are willing to consider changes. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote, to continue the Public Hearing for 30 days to allow the proponent to resolve the issues of density, to provide cross sections of the views from adjacent properties from the south, west, and north, and resolve the drainage issue with the property owner to the south. The issue of pedestrian safety should be reviewed, and the proponent should consider connecting sidewalks to Candice Lane. Motion carried 6-0. Sandstad commented there are at least four parties involved in the drainage issue, and it might take longer than 30 days to resolve it. B. SETTLERS RIDGE by Settlers Ridge Limited Partnership. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 6.2 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 112 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 112 acres, Rezoning from rural to RM- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 6 6.5, R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 on 112 acres, Site Plan Review on 5 acres and Preliminary Plat on 112 acres into 227 lots. Location: South of Pioneer Trail and west of Riley Creek. Dan Herbst, Westwood Planning and Engineering, introduced Dwight Jellie, the project planner and Mark Anderson from Lundgren Bros. Herbst reviewed the plan noting they have now added the Vogel and Dorenkemper properties. He noted the plan will include single family homes and town homes. He described the traffic circulation pattern throughout the development. He discussed the housing types, topography, drainage plan and ponding which will occur on the site. He noted they have proposed to have cul-de- sacs within the development with only one access to Pioneer Trail. There will be a homeowners association and a trail to the Richard Anderson conservation area which will be connected to the City trail system. The density of this project has not increased significantly, and he noted that cultural resources within the development are being protected. They are preserving the architectural features from the past, hence the name "Settlers Ridge". Sandstad commented he was concerned about the traffic circulation both within the site and also on Pioneer Trail, and he asked if it would be possible to change the shape of the cul-de-sac so that it would run into the corner of the Wier property. Herbst responded they cannot control when that property will develop and they have satisfied the concerns expressed by the City Engineering Department regarding traffic circulation on the site. They are trying to create individual neighborhoods within the development, which seems to be what people want. Sandstad stated that 90% of the traffic will gain access from Pioneer Trail and he felt that it would be better to have a little more of the traffic go through a possible connection through the Wier property in the future. He commented there were a lot of houses on one drive. Herbst showed the graphic depicting the entrance monument and described the berming and landscaping which will be used at the entrance along Pioneer Trail. Kipp gave the staff report and reviewed the changes to the plan from the original submittal. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the stipulations listed in the staff report. Staff is also requesting that the proponent connect Street H to Street B to improve traffic circulation within the site. Sandstad asked about a conservation easement along the bluff line. Kipp responded it will be reviewed by the Park Commission and these issues will be addressed at that time. The conservation easement is usually made at the top of the bluff. Sandstad inquired how the easement over the Williams Pipeline that runs between the two housing types will be treated. Herbst responded it is a flat area now but Williams has such strict regulations regarding what can be done on it, it is doubtful they can do much in the way of alteration. Herbst stated there are no variances requested for the bluff lots and they want to be sure they can put the houses on the lots and they asked for this to be considered. They are also opposed to making the street connections recommended by staff because they believe it will create a disruptive traffic flow within the development. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 7 Foote asked if warning sirens were available in this area and Kipp responded it was not something he knew but would check with the Police Department. A resident commented there was a siren located at Dell Road and Pioneer Trail. The Public Hearing was opened. Paul Offerman, 9614 Westwood Terrace, asked if the setback from the creek was still 150' and Kipp responded single family housing can be within 100 feet and they cannot go onto the bluff area. Lynette Wheelock, 9576 Crestwood Terrace, stated she was concerned about the development being within the vicinity of the creek. Herbst stated they have given this area adjacent to the creek to the City and the townhouses are not in the outlot of the creek and it will not be impacted. Wheelock asked why the single family housing was not located on the creek side of the development and Herbst responded that it would not be possible to do that as they cannot construct on grade in that area and the single family homes would not be constructed at that depth. Wheelock was concerned about the traffic on Pioneer Trail and asked about an upgrade in the future. Herbst responded they are dedicating the right-of-way for an upgrade to Pioneer Trail which would be done by the County. Wheelock asked about the staging of the project and Herbst responded that sewer and water will be put in by August of 1998. Wheelock asked about tree loss and Herbst reviewed the landscape plan and noted the erosion control measures that will be taken during construction. Wheelock commented she owned one of the 5 acre parcels and was opposed to having any high density housing constructed in this area of Eden prairie. John Zatoni, 9576 Crestwood Terrace, stated the traffic on Pioneer Trail is bad now and he was very concerned about what it was going to be like when this development was completed. He noted the hill in this area makes it extremely difficult and during bad weather it will be very hazardous at this intersection. He asked how they were going to deal with the curve when the road was upgraded and Herbst responded they do not have the plan together yet but will deal with that at the time that Pioneer Trail is upgraded. Zatoni was concerned about the view from his property towards the townhomes and the density and felt it would cause problems in the future. Lewis asked what the height of the town houses would be and Herbst responded that they will be both one and two story town homes in order to give people a mix of housing types to choose from. Thomas Wier asked if Herbst could change the roadway to go into his property and Herbst responded they could do that but they have tried to create separate neighborhoods within this development. Wier discussed the potential alternative access points which could be gained by incorporating a portion of his property into this development. Greg Halvorson commented he lives on the shore of Lake Riley, and traffic is very bad on Pioneer Trail at present and he did not see how it would be improved by this development, but rather would incur serious problems in the future. Alexander asked if the developer could put the two story town houses further west to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 8 lessen the impact on the adjacent property owners. Herbst responded they will look at that but they need to be careful of the bluffs also. Dorn asked about the location of the Indian mounds and the other issues that were discussed from the previous plan and if that was going to require revision of the plan. Herbst responded they have hired Christina Harrison who will determine if there are really burial mounds on the site and if it turns out that there are burial mounds they have a backup plan. They will have this resolved prior to final plat approval. Foote commented he liked the plan and the layout. He commented the roads could not be changed because the Wier property was not developed or included in the project. He thought connecting Road H to Road B would improve the internal circulation somewhat. Sandstad stated he liked the plan and the location of the town houses along the creek. He thought multi-story town houses would be fine along the creek and he supported the plan with the road connections recommended by staff. Lewis concurred and commented she felt they did a good job of preserving the natural resources within the site. Clinton commented he also liked the concept and with 112 acres in the plan they will know what it will look like when it is completed. MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Alexander to close the Public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Alexander to recommended to the City Council approval of the request of Settlers Ridge Limited Partnership for Comprehensive guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 6.2 acres, Planned Unit Development concept Review on 112 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 112 acres, Rezoning from rural to RM-6.5, R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 on 112 acres, Site Plan Review on 5 acres and Preliminary Plat on 112 acres into 227 lots based on plans dated April 10, 1998 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 10, 1998. Motion carried 6-0. C. FLYING CLOUD OFFICE BUILDING by Mount Properties. Request for Zoning District change from C-Hwy to office on 1.26 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Site Plan Review on 1.26 acres and Preliminary Plat of 1.26 acres into 1 lot. Location: 6608 Flying Cloud Drive. Bob Soffeld and Steve Michaels representing Mount Properties were present. Bob Soffeld reviewed the plans for the corner of Shady Oak Road and Flying Cloud Drive with an office building. He showed renderings of the proposed building and discussed the project. He stated they propose to build an office building for one or two tenants. He described the materials which will be used on the exterior of the building. There is a large quantity of landscaping material proposed for the site. He requested approval of the project. Sandstad asked if there was any large truck access and Soffeld responded there was no truck dock with this building and deliveries would be made through the front door. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 9 Clinton asked about the HVAC equipment and Soffeld responded it would be located on the rooftop and screened from view. Kipp gave the staff report and discussed the poor soils on the site which necessitate variances for setbacks. There is an excessive right-of-way on this site and the building will appear to be farther back than the ordinance requirements. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. Foote commented he thought the developers had proposed an attractive building and he supported the setback waiver. He felt the building would fit into the area very well. Alexander asked what would be done with the existing building and Soffeld responded it would be demolished. Lewis concurred with Foote. Dorn commented he thought it was a good project, well designed, which would be an asset to the neighborhood. He commented this was a very complete submission and he wished to commend the proponents. Clinton concurred with Dorn. MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Lewis, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Lewis, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Mount Properties for Zoning District change from C-Hwy to Office on 1.26 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Site Plan Review on 1.26 acres and Preliminary Plat of 1.26 acres into 1 lot based on plans dated March 26, 1998 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 10, 1998. Motion carried 6-0. V. PUBLIC MEETING VI. MEMBERS REPORTS VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS Alexander commented on the letter she received from Mayor Jean Harris regarding the Vision 2001 meeting with the Commission and noted she will be gone that week. Kipp suggested she contact Natalie Swaggert in Human Resources to reschedule the meeting. VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS A. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Clinton nominated Alexander for the position of Secretary. Sandstad seconded the nomination. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 13, 1998 Page 10 MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Sandstad that Beverly Alexander be elected Secretary of the Planning Commission. Motion carried 6-0. Sandstad nominated Habicht for the position of Vice-Chair, noting that if he objected to serving in that capacity they could reconsider the nomination. Foote seconded the nomination. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote, that Bill Habicht be elected to the position of Vice-Chair of the Planning Commission. Motion carried 6-0. Alexander nominated Foote for the position of Chair. Clinton seconded the nomination. MOTION: Alexander moved, seconded by Clinton, that Randy Foote be elected to the position of Chair of the Planning Commission. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote, to congratulate Ken Clinton for his service as Chair of the Planning Commission for the past two years, noting he had done an excellent job of performing those responsibilities. Motion carried 5-0-1. Clinton abstained. B. 1998 PLANNING COMMISSION HANDBOOK ADOPTION Kipp noted that the new handbooks for Planning Commission members needed to be adopted. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission concluded this item should be deferred to the next agenda. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote, to delay action on adoption of the 1998 version of the Planning Commission Handbook until the next meeting. Motion carried 6-0. C. CANCELLATION OF 5/25/98 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Kipp noted that the May 25th Planning Commission meeting had three items scheduled for it, and inquired if the Planning Commission was interested in canceling the second meeting in July. It has been traditionally canceled, and after a brief discussion, the Planning Commissioners concurred that it should be canceled unless it appeared that the next agenda would become overloaded with projects. Kipp noted staff would keep the Commission apprised of that situation. X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Sandstad to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.