Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 11/09/1998 APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,NOVEMBER 9, 1998 7:00 P.M. 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 REPRESENTATIVE: Kyle Halvorson STAFF MEMBERS: Mike Franzen, City Planner, and Barbara Anderson, City Recorder I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-ROLL CALL Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Habicht arrived at 7:20 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Clinton,to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Alexander moved, seconded by Clinton,to approve the Minutes of the October 26, 1998 Planning Commission as submitted. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PERKINS SUBDIVISION by James Perkins. Request for Preliminary Plat of 3 acres into 3 lots with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: 7010 Willow Creek Road. James Perkins, 7010 Willow Creek Road, requested approval of the subdivision plan. He reviewed the changes to the approved 1989 plan. Sandstad asked why the approved plat was not recorded and Perkins responded that they did not feel that was the appropriate time to do it and when they decided to build on it they decided to revise the plat. City Attorney Rick Rosow noted there was not a time limit regarding filing a final plat with Hennepin County but there were time limits regarding how long it could be between preliminary and final plat approval by the City. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 9, 1998 Page 2 Perkins showed photographs of his current home and described how the proposed plat would impact the existing trees and vegetation on the property. Franzen reviewed the staff report and noted that Attachment A was the plan which was approved in 1989. If the proponent wants to adhere to the approved plan there is no further action required by the Planning Commission. The proponent is requesting modifications to the approved plan and staff is recommending approval of Alternate A. Franzen described the impacts which would occur with each of the alternative plans. The Public Hearing was opened. Mark Wisser,Attorney representing Stuart Nolan,reviewed the reasons why his client was opposed to granting variances to the shoreland ordinance for lot area requirements, which were presently set at 5 acre lots. They believed it would be precedent-setting, and out of character with the existing neighborhood. The .62 acre lot will be very detrimental to the neighborhood and the City. He discussed the differences between the 1989 approved plan and the present proposed plan. The 1989 plan was reviewed as being a family compound development and that may no longer be true. He noted that variances should not be granted based on hardships created by the developer's own making. The septic system is not adequate for three lots and does not meet ordinance requirements. Given the soils in the area,the proposed drainage field is inadequate to support the number of bedrooms proposed for these three lots. They requested further study of this issue, and noted the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)was opposed to this project and the septic system was one of the reasons cited for their opposition. Septic system failure would be devastating to the other residents in the area because of the use of well water and the proposed lots being located on the lake. There was not adequate room to move the footprints of the houses and still meet the setback requirements. He discussed the time limit for filing a final plat and they have pointed out that the filing of the final plat should be required within a timely manner so that everyone knows what plats are approved. Stuart Nolan, 7020 Willow Creek Road, stated his property was immediately adjacent to the subject property. He noted that the City records go back to 1973 and he discussed the history of the project up to 1989. He was opposed to the project in 1989 when the Freebergs and Perkins said the plat was for a family compound and not a public development. He submitted a petition signed by 20 residents in opposition to the proposed plat. The road leading into the present neighborhood was not up to the current standards and if this plan was approved there would not be any reason to preclude further lot subdivisions for other homeowners in the neighborhood who wanted to make some money. He did not feel the 1989 plan was legal and the family compound premise does not exist today. There were many reasons to deny the plan and he requested the Planning Commission to deny the request for preliminary plat approval. Foote noted the proponent had an approved plan from 1989 and the Planning Commission could not reverse that decision. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 9, 1998 Page 3 Foote asked if the drain field met the requirements, and Franzen responded that staff had requested the proponent to submit information showing how the drain fields would be adequate. Swedlund,who is the contractor that installs these drain fields, says that the plan will work and staff has not received confirmation of whether that is the case or not. Perkins commented that Swedlund has looked at the proposed septic system and has designed a system which will work for these two houses. He described how this process will work, and noted that this septic system has a backup which is something that none of the other houses on Bryant Lake have. He discussed the capacity of the septic system and explained why the smaller system will work because of delayed pumping from one holding tank to the smaller tanks to the drain field. They feel the septic systems will work. He noted that the 1989 plat was intended as a family compound, their children have now grown up and moved away. Tom Klingen, 7042 Willow Creek Road, stated he has just moved into his home,but they believe the neighborhood will be negatively impacted by this proposed plat. Tom Hanson, 7030 Willow Creek Road, stated he had researched the area before purchasing his home and because the plat was not recorded at Hennepin County, it did not show up on the plat maps, and so he did not know about this development. He requested that the Planning Commission deny the application, and noted he had signed the petition in opposition to the project. Sandstad asked if he had looked at the plat maps at City Hall and Hanson responded negatively,noting he had ordered a plat through his title company,believing that to be accurate. Joseph Doctor, 7032 Willow Creek Road, stated he had recently purchased his home and did not know about the plans for this development. He had not gone to City Hall and their realtor had told them there were no plans for further development. He would like to keep the neighborhood like it is now. Ron Clark,Ryan Clark Construction, stated he was the builder who would most likely build these homes which are being planned for these lots. They would like to refine the plat to make this the best development possible. The revised plan moves the homes farther away from the neighboring houses. He met with Swedlund regarding the drain fields and septic system and he was convinced the proposed system is the best possible system that could be installed with three separate tanks. Dorn asked about the large tank which will be very deep and where would the bottom be in relation to the OHWM of the lake. Clark responded that Swedlund has the elevations and it has to meet the requirements established by State law. Dorn stated he was concerned about a rupture in the large tank and what would happen. Clark responded it was unlikely that would happen,because it was the same as the smaller tanks, only larger. Foote asked if this was a legal plat. Rosow responded it was a legal plat and the proponent has the right to building permits for those three lots. Nolan asked if the City required the application to be signed by all the property owners and Rosow responded that he had been shown a Contract for Deed just preceding the meeting which indicated that the back taxes were paid and the document was in order. The bank will co-sign the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 9, 1998 Page 4 application prior to City Council review as the lendor for the property but that is not sufficient reason to deny the request this evening. Sandstad commented this was confusing because the proponent had an approved plat, and yet was making a new request. Perkins stated they left the signed mylar at City Hall for five years and did not pick it up or take it down to Hennepin County to be filed. Sandstad commented he was uncertain about the workability of the proposed septic system. He felt the project should be continued until these issues were satisfied. Habicht concurred with Sandstad, and while some changes may be beneficial there was a smaller lot size requested that could be precedent-setting. Lewis agreed,noting it does not feel right and there were too many unresolved issues. She encouraged the proponent to revisit these issues and work it out with his neighbors. Dorn commented he did not support the plan as he was concerned about the lake. He felt anything built closer to the lake than allowed by the ordinance should be denied. He noted that the DNR did not support the proposed plat, and neither did he. Alexander concurred,but stated she was comfortable with the proposed septic system. Clinton commented that if they approved the plan and sent it to the City Council he was not sure what they would be approving. He felt they needed more information and a better understanding of what it was they were forwarding. Foote did not like the 1989 plan, and he was in favor of Attachment B which would eliminate some waivers but would increase tree loss. He would prefer to see some refinements to it,but he did not support the plat as proposed. Habicht commented he would support either a continuance or denial of the request. Discussion ensued regarding what direction to give the proponent. Sandstad commented City staff needed to develop an ordinance which would limit the amount of time a developer had before being required to file a final plat with Hennepin County before the plat was void. Perkins commented he wanted to work with the neighbors to get this project done in a way they can all live with. Foote commented his two main concerns were the amount of tree loss, and the shoreland setback should be maintained. Sandstad commented the septic system should be detailed on the plans and staff should review them. Dorn was concerned as to whether the proposed septic system fit in with City requirements for septic systems. Franzen commented that the PCA was the group that put the ordinance together, and it was not up to the City to determine if it met the law. He asked the Planning Commission to be specific in their direction if they continued the project. He noted it was not possible to eliminate all the variances or reduce the tree loss significantly. Rosow suggested that something in writing from the PCA stating this system met the requirements would be appropriate for the proponent to submit to the City. Regarding the issue of easements, the law does not allow private easements to be shown on a plat but the private easements could be required to be recorded prior to filing of the final plat in the Developer's Agreement. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 9, 1998 Page 5 MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Alexander,to continue the request of James Perkins for Preliminary Plat of 3 acres into 3 lots with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals until the December 14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting to allow the PCA to draft a letter regarding the septic system and allow the developer to revise plans to reduce tree loss, adjust the housing footprints to minimize variances. Motion carried 7-0. Foote commented he would like the proponent to keep as close to the 100 foot setback as possible. V. PUBLIC MEETING VI. MEMBERS' REPORTS VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS Sandstad requested staff to work on drafting an ordinance to set a time limit for standard zoning procedures. Rosow commented that two years is usually the limit for a rezoning or other changes to be valid and after that it is subject to the requirements that were originally on that property. The City may choose to void a plat after a certain time frame it has not been filed with Hennepin County but staff will look at this to see what is the best way to resolve this issue. Discussion ensued regarding the tax issues which could be incurred if plats were not filed. IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Habicht to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:43 p.m.