Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 03/22/1993 EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1993 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COMMMSION MEMBERS: Tim Bauer, Ken Clinton, Cynthia Clish, Katherine Kardell, Doug Sandstad, Edward Schlampp, Mary Jane Wissner. STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE: Lisa-Marie Gualtieri STAFF MEMBERS: Mike Franzen, Senior Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL Bauer absent. H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0-0. Wissner asked when election of officers for the current year would be placed on the Agenda. 41 Franzen replied that typically having a full commission present was preferred. Sandstad asked that it be placed on the Agenda for the next meeting and if a full commission was not present it would be removed until the full commission was present. III. MEMBERS REPORTS Sandstad reported that the Natural Resource Committee had met and 7 sites recommended to be acquired by the City. A physical site review was planned when the weather would permit. Wissner stated that Eden Prairie had been complimented for its progressive action. Kardell asked when this was to be concluded. Wissner replied June or July. Clish asked if anyone else beside the committee members would be able to tour the proposed sites. Sandstad replied that he would check. Kardell reported that the housing goal recommendations had been presented to the City Council and the Human Rights and Services Commission. The City Council supported the recommendations and were eager to see more specific recommendations. iSandstad stated that he was please to see that the local paper had noted that the City Council was supportive of the recommendations. 1 IV. AIUIUTES MOTION: Kardell moved, seconded b Clinton to approve the Minutes of the February 22 1993 Planning Y PP az'Y � g Commission meeting as published and corrected as follows: Page 3, Paragraph 3, Sentence 9, should read: Eden Place Apartments.... Motion carried 5-0-1. Schlampp abstained. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued item from 3-8-93 VILLAGE KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION by Wooddale Builders. Request for PUD Concept and PUD District Review with waivers on 34 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the existing Rl- 13.5 Zoning District on 19.1 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 19.1 acres into 44 single family lots. Location: East of the Intersection of Homeward Hills Road and Silverwood Drive adjacent to Purgatory Creek. Franzen reported that at the last meeting the Planning Commission had approved the PUD and Zoning requests with the understanding that the proponent would report back to the Commission on the items requiring revisions. Franzen stated that the main concern had been on the portion of the site to the north. The proponent would add an addition 75 feet to the outlot. The vegetation would be maintained and the trail would still be developed. Due to the elimination of the lot only one drive would have direct access onto Homeward Hills Road. There would be no encroachment into the flood plain area with the elimination of the lot. Schlampp stated that he had spoken with council member Pidcock, who also recalled that the water had been over the road. Franzen reported that a solution for the Ziesman property had not been agreed upon at this time. Clinton asked if handicap access would be provided to the park. Franzen replied that all park facilities needed to be upgraded to meet ADA standards and the necessary curbing would be installed in all of the cities parks. Schlampp believed that the logical area for a N.U.R.P. pond would be in the location of the 42" storm sewer pipe. Schlampp believed that Staff was hesitant to require the recommendation for the location of a N.U.R.P. pond and further believed that the location should be determined before the City Council presentation. Schlampp noted that N.U.R.P. ponds would be required by law soon. Franzen replied that it was not a question of not having a solution; the question was how the pond would be maintained and by whom and the exact location. Franzen added that if the N.U.R.P. pond was located within the 100 year flood plain it would be the City's responsibility to maintain the pond. The proponent or the City needs to be able to provide for rebuilding the pond if necessary. Staff has been operating under a policy from the City Council 2 to require N.U.R.P. ponds. Franzen stated that the Planning Commission could recommend the requirement for a N.U.R.P. pond. Schlampp replied that would be acceptable if it is a mandated requirement of the Planning Commission. Norm Ziesman, 10087 Horseshoe Trail, stated that the erosion and Swale issues had not been addressed at this time. Ziesman said that he had spoken with Mrs. Dawson, his neighbor to the south, who also agreed to wait to resod their lot if the drainage and swale issues would be resolved soon. MOTION A: Clish moved, seconded by Clinton to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2• Schlampp moved, seconded by Clinton to Add Item 7 to the Staff Report recommendations that prior to City Council approval a N.U.R.P. ponding system be designed to handle storm water run-off. Motion carried 6-0-0. B. KINGSTON RIDGE 2ND ADDITION by Leland Kottke. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.76 acres and Preliminary Plat of 2.76 acres into 6 lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Kingston Ridge, west of Starring Lake Parkway. Ron Krueger, representing the proponent presented the plans for the 2.76 acre site to be developed into 6 lots. Krueger stated that the original cul-de-sac concept would be . followed. Sandstad asked how the Kottke's would obtain access to their home. Krueger replied that an easement had existed for years. Franzen replied that Dave Olsen from the engineering department was tracking the easement through City records. Sandstad asked how wide the City's property was in this area. Franzen replied approximately 200 feet. Clish asked if any existing buildings would be removed. Krueger replied that a shed would be taken down. Schlampp stated that this site was on a knoll and the cul-de-sac was located at the high point of the knoll. Schlampp question how the water flow to the south would be affected by the loss of approximately 25% of acreage to homes and driveways. Schlampp questioned what would happen to the waterflow and if it needed to be controlled. Krueger replied that the watershed would run onto the road and drain down to Victoria. Clinton asked how erosion would be controlled in the area to the north during construction. Krueger replied that hay bails or silt fence would be installed. Franzen replied that this area had a history of erosion from the slopes. Franzen stated that the single row of hay bails was a past method to control erosion. He added that current Pollution Control Agency practices would be used. Franzen noted that this was a small project and the construction time would be short. 3 Schlampp stated that there were erosion problems currently in this area and the hay bails would definitely not handle the erosion problem. Kardell noted that the Staff recommendation required that a satisfactory erosion control plan be submitted to Staff. Franzen stated that two issues needed to be clarified; the existence of an easement for access to Kottke property and Oudot A maintenance. Clinton asked if a time frame had been established for these items to be resolved. Franzen replied prior to City Council review the items should be taken care of. Rob Kay, 9172 Victoria Drive, asked what the time frame was for the project to begin. Krueger replied the project would begin in the spring of this year if approved. Kay asked if there would be grading on his property. Krueger replied that the street had been left unfinished and the proponent would need to meet with Kay to discuss grading on his property. Kay stated that he had an irrigation system installed which needed to be addressed. Franzen replied that when grading occurred on adjoining property the developers agreement would stipulate that the proponent be required to provide grading which meet with property owners approval. Clinton recommended that clarifying language be used regarding erosion control methods. He added that because of the topography in this area there was a potential for an erosion problem. Erosion control should be more than the normal methods used to insure proper control. MOTION 1: • Kardell moved, seconded by Clish to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2: Kardell moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Leland Kottke for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.76 acres based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993 with the addition that the City Engineer require the most stringent erosion control methods to preserve the slope. Motion carved 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Kardell moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Leland Kottke for Preliminary Plat of 2.76 acres based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993 with the addition that the City Engineer require the most stringent erosion control methods to preserve the slope. Motion carried 6-0-0. Schlampp requested that Staff return to the Planning Commission with a report on the erosion control methods to be used on this project. 4 QloAfrl C�«► ��s,av� 3-2Z-93 C. BEARPATH PHASE 2 by Sienna Corporation. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Quasi-Public on 235 acres, PUD Concept Review on 419.5 acres, PUD 0 District Review on 419.5 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 112.8 acres, Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 on 19.8 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-9:5 on 9.2 acres and Preliminary Plat of 419 acres into 226 single family lots and 95 multi-family lots. Location: East of Riley Lake, north of Pioneer Trail. Rick Packer, representing the proponent, reported that the number of units had been changed to 234 single family units and 65 multiple family units. Packer questioned the reasoning to change the zoning to R1-13.5, but the proponent did not have a problem with doing so. Packer stated that 1.4 acres of wetland would be filled in. In addition the remaining wetlands would be redeveloped. Packer noted that the wetlands had been degraded over the years and the Grade 3 wetland would be revegetated. The Grade 2 wetlands would be expanded and reconnected to the Grade 3 wetlands. The wetlands would be connected so that all the wetlands would function as one wetland area. Packer stated that the lots would be a minimum of 10,500 square feet. The lots would be approximately 70 feet wide with building pads of 55'x 85'. Rather than 5 foot and 10 foot setbacks the proponent recommended 7.5 and 7.5 setbacks to guarantee a minimum of 15 feet between the homes. Packer stated that a traffic study had been conducted for the north entrance, but was labeled incorrectly. Adequate stacking distance has been provided. Schlampp asked who would maintain dead-end at Bearpath North (Street J). Packer replied that if the streets were taken over by the City the City would maintain the cul-de-sac and the drive would be maintained by the owners. A common ownership of the drive would be through easements for the three landowners and it would not be maintained by Homeowners Association. Schlampp believed that ownership should be noted. Packer noted that the Club House was a concept approval only. The proponent was having difficulty finding an appropriate place for the maintenance building. At this time the maintenance building would be located across from Riley Park; however, the final location was still being looked at. The building in the present location would be screened from both the park and the golf course. Packer questioned the need to have a sidewalk constructed on both sides of Riley Lake Road. He added that Riley Lake Road had been redesigned so that it would not be a main collector road. Packer stated that the proponent would like to continue to work with Staff regarding conservancy easement. A grading plan had been submitted. Packer presented the concept plan for the Club House. Packer stated that the proponent had revised the plan to save the masses of trees. The tennis courts would be developed out of the tree area. The club house was proposed as a two story building. The first floor would be restaurants and kitchens and the second floor would handle all of the golf functions. Sandstad asked if a conservancy easement was recommended for the Riley Creek one site for Lots 13 and 14 as an archeological site. 5 Franzen replied that a field survey would be needed. Packer replied that all conservancy easements would be shown by meets and bounds and legal descriptions and would not show on the actual plat. Schlamppasked if the Light Rail Transit lane would be a public access and if it would be g protected by trees. Packer replied yes. Schlampp stated that holes 5, 6, 7 and 8 would fall into the LRT lane and questioned who would be liable if someone was hit by a ball. Packer replied that it would be a concern until the final plan was drafted. Packer added that there was a grade difference. Packer added that the proponent had tried to orient the tee blocks to minimize the problem. Schlampp stated that hole 8 would be wide open. Schlampp stated that some of the wetlands were actually bodies of water and questioned if they would be deeded to the City. Packer replied that the lots would be platted to within 25 feet of the wetland. Packer added that the association would maintain the 25 feet between the homes and the wetland areas. Schlampp noted that the location of the N.U.R.P. ponds were not shown on the map and questioned how the ponds would be maintained because dredging could not take place within a wetland area. Packer replied that the N.U.R.P. ponds would need to be maintained not the wetlands. Packer added that the water would actually be cleaner than what is there today with the addition of the N.U.R.P. ponds. Packer stated that no area in the golf course would drain into the wetlands. Schlampp asked what would happen when all of the wetlands were at the same level. Packer replied that all of the wetland areas were essentially at the same level now, the proponent was proposing to reconnect the wetlands. Schlampp noted that Riley Creek was navigable and no tree protection was provided for this area. Schlampp asked if a storm drainage plan would be presented for the N.U.R.P. ponds. Franzen asked what Schlampp wanted to see. Schlampp replied that the locations should be noted on the plans. Packer showed Schlampp the locations on the plans. Packer added that the proponent had placed them on the plan to make sure there was enough room for N.U.R.P. ponds. Sandstad asked how close the fence would be to the corridor. Packer replied that he did not know at this time; however, the proponent did not want to put a fence in the wetland areas. Wissner asked how the proponent had been able to sell lots if the exact location of the lots was not know. Packer replied that what the people were buying was a reservation for a lot and the lots were on a first come - first serve basis. Franzen reported that the main issues were R1-9.5 zoning, the entrance design, traffic, and storm drainage. Franzen stated that a consultant looked at the design for the gate entrance. Staff did not want cars backing onto Dell Road and, therefore, a proper stacking distance would need to be provided. The north entrance was more of a concern than the south entrance. Franzen stated that two lanes would make sense for the north entrance. Franzen said that R1-9.5 zoning was originally developed to provide starter homes and questioned if the Planning Commission wanted to allow large houses on small lots. Franzen noted that R1-13.5 zoning would require specific criteria. Franzen stated that the number of units was not the issue. A valid reason would be needed for a waiver. Schlampp stated that he had seen golf courses developments in Florida which had large homes on small lots. 6 Kardell asked for clarification on the storm drainage issue. The wetland mitigation plan shows 27 N.U.R.P. ponds. Franzen believed that the proponent followed the concept plan well. The road system remained the same as the original concept plan. The question is how does the plan meet with City ordinance requirements. Franzen stated that originally a 60" pipe had been discussed to handle storm water. The current plan would be for most of the water to stay on the site and the drainage pipe would only be 12". The storm water drainage issue needs to be discussed further with the Engineering Department. Franzen asked Packer what the time frame was to have the gateway and drainage issues resolved. Packer replied that he would not have a problem coming back to the Planning Commission. Packer added that the conceptual entrance design showed that traffic would not back onto Dell Road. Packer believed that both the proponent and Staff had planned ahead so that a time crunch would not become a problem. Packer stated that the storm water drainage plan originally followed the Southwest Study recommendations. He added that the only other solution at this time was to redirect the water into Riley Lake. Packer stated that he wanted both the City engineer and the proponent's engineer to agree that the proposed plan will be a positive solution for both parties. Schlampp believed that the drainage plan was very vague. Packer replied that he would be willing to return to the Planning Commission with detailed plans for the N.U.R.P. ponds. Schlampp asked what would happen to the wetlands. Packer replied that wetlands would have pretreatment and a 25 feet vegetation strip to preserve edge vegetation. Sandstad asked for clarification on sidewalks and taxes. Sandstad asked if the City was requesting sidewalks from Pioneer Trail along Riley Lake Road. Franzen replied that sidewalks were designed to allow residents to get from point A to B. A bike trail would be constructed by the City. East of the creek the developer would be responsible for the sidewalk and West of the creek the City would be responsible for the sidewalk. Sandstad asked how the land other than the house lots was taxed. Franzen replied that he was not sure about taxes but would talk with the City Assessor. Sandstad questioned if the homes were taxed more than the golf course property. Packer replied that he was sure that the golf course would pay some taxes. Sandstad questioned if the number of homes was reduced and the lots sizes reduced if the tax revenue would be less for the City. Franzen replied that property was taxed on location,view, trees, etc. Sandstad asked if it would be an accurate statement that lot size did not affect taxes. Franzen replied that he was not sure and needed to ask the assessor. John Bushey, 9000 Riley Lake Road, believed that the recommendation in the Staff Report to have Riley Lake Road and County Road 1 intersect at right angles was a good idea. Bushey did not believe that the intersection would meet sight line requirements when trying to turn onto Pioneer Trail. Franzen replied that the developer or the City would need to make improvements to meet the design speed for this highway. Franzen added that the County would also review an access entrance permit. Bushey-asked if Scenic Heights Road would no longer extend through. Franzen replied yes. Bushey asked if the conservancy easements had been changed from the original agreement in June 1992. Franzen replied that the wetland outlots had been enlarged other areas such as along . the creek and historic sites. The easements are recorded so that the owner would know what was required. 7 Bushey asked if there was still a plan for a bike trail along Pioneer Trail. Franzen replied that the City policy required a sidewalk on one side and an 8 foot bituminous trail on the other side for collector roads. Franzen added that the Park Department would not leave a gap in the current system. Packer stated that Pioneer Trail was a county road. Bushey asked for clarification on pedestrian access, which had been discussed at a previous meeting. Packer replied that access for bikes and pedestrians would be through the entrance gate. Bushey asked if access would be allowed from the LRT lane crossing. Packer replied that he had not thought about it at this time; however, something could possibly be worked out for this area. Clinton questioned if a precedent for R1-9.5 zoning would be established with allowing the larger homes on the smaller lots. Clinton did not necessarily believe that the larger lots would solve the problem either. MOTION 1: Clinton moved, seconded by Clish to close the public hearing. Kardell stated that she was not willing to set a precedent for larger expensive homes on small lots. She added that the Planning Commission and City had gone to great lengths to provide affordable housing in the community. Wissner stated that she did not understand why R1-9.5 was being considered when the proponent did not have a problem with R1-13.5 zoning. Clish stated that she was comfortable with allowing the developer and Staff to further refine the gate entrance and storm water drainage issues. Clish believed that this project had nothing to do with affordable housing. Schlampp concurred with Clish that affordable housing was not an issue for this project. Kardell believed that the project as proposed would provide large density in a small area. Clinton stated that he was moving toward favoring R1-13.5 zoning. Franzen stated that the number of units in any project was not the issue; it was the impact of the units on the site. Franzen noted that the overall plan was low impact. Franzen added that R1-13.5 zoning would require waivers for street frontage. Sandstad stated that he was not comfortable with R1-9.5 zoning except in the townhouse area. Packer stated that the proponent would go along with R1-13.5 zoning with the necessary waivers. Packer added that the R1-9.5 zoning would provide for more maintenance free housing. Sandstad stated that R1-13.5 zoning could be influenced by tax information being requested. Franzen stated that if this is zoned R1-13.5 an average lot size should be attached to the project of 30,000 square feet and a density of .76 units per acre as a qualifier for over 400 acres and a golf course. 8 Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2: Clinton moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Sienna Corporation for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Quasi-Public on 235 acres based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Clinton moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Sienna Corporation for PUD Concept Review 419.5 acres based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 4: Clinton moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Sienna Corporation for PUD District Review on 419.5 acres with waivers, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 122 acres, Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 on 19.8 acres, based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 5: Clinton moved, seconded by Clish to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Sienna Corporation for Preliminary Plat of 419 acres into 234 single family lots and 65 multi- family lots based on plans dated March 12, 1993, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 19, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. VI. OLD BUSINESS VU. NEW BUSINESS A. Mining, Land Alteration and Environmental Preservation revisions to Section 11.55 of the City code adding requirements for N.U.R.P.ponds and M.P.C.A. Urban Best Management Practices. Franzen reported that the Metropolitan Council would not approve the Bearpath proposal until the City Code was revised to include N.U.R.P. pond requirements. Franzen noted that this was a house keeping item. 9 MOTION: Wissner moved, seconded by Clinton to approve revisions to Section 11.55 of the City code as outlined by Staff regarding the use of N.U.R.P. ponds and M.P.C.A. Urban Best Management Practices. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION: Wissner moved, seconded by Clinton to add policies to Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan as outlined by Staff. Motion carried 6-0-0. VHL PLANNERS' REPORTS Franzen stated that each new Commission has a focus on issues that need to be addressed on all projects. A new emphasis seems to be on drainage and erosion. Franzen asked if the Commission would like to have a representative from the Engineering Department come to a meeting and speak on wetland, drainage, and erosion issues. Sandstad stated that he was comfortable with how issues were addressed in the Staff Reports. Clish stated that she would like to have a general discussion on the water quality issues, but was comfortable with how issues were identified with choices on solutions. Clinton stated that traffic area impacts should be addressed as infill projects are more frequent. Franzen asked if the Commission would like to see technical memos from other departments. The Commission concurred that technical memos would be helpful but should be summarized in general terms in the Staff Report. IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Clish moved, seconded by Wissner to adjourn the meeting at 10:35 PM. Motion carried 6-0-0. 10 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, March 22, 1993 7:30 p.m. COMMISSION MEMBERS: Tim Bauer, Kenneth E. Clinton, Cynthia Clish, Katherine Kardell, Douglas Sandstad, Edward Schlampp, Mary Jane Wissner STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE: Lisa-Marie Gualtieri STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development; Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner; Donald Uram, Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE--ROLL CALL U. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MEMBERS REPORTS IV. MINUTES V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Project Continued from 3-8-93 Meeting VILLAGE KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION by Wooddale Builders. Request for PUD Concept and PUD District Review with waivers on 34 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the existing Rl- 13.5 Zoning District on 19.1 acres,and Preliminary Plat of 19.1 acres into 44 single family lots. Location: East of the Intersection of Homeward Hills Road and Silverwood Drive adjacent to Purgatory Creek. iB. KINGSTON RIDGE 2ND ADDITION by Leland Kottke. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.76 acres and Preliminary Plat of 2.76 acres into 6 lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Kingston Ridge, west of Starring Lake Parkway. C. BEARPATH PHASE 2 by Sienna Corporation. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Quasi-Public on 235 acres, PUD Concept Review on 419.5 acres, PUD District Review on 419.5 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 112.8 acres, Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 on 19.8 acres,Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 on 9.2 acres and Preliminary Plat of 419 acres into 226 single family lots and 95 multi-family lots. Location: East of Riley Lake, north of Pioneer Trail. VI. OLD BUSINESS VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Mining, Land Alteration and Environmental Preservation revisions to Section 11.55 of the City code adding requirements for N.U.R.P.ponds and M.P.C.A. Urban Best Management Practices. B. Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan adding policies regarding the use of N.U.R.P. ponds and M.P.C.A. Urban Best Management Practices. VIII. PLANNERS' REPORTS IX., AD TOURNMENT