Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 02/12/1979 AGENDA Eden Prairie Planning Commission Monday, February 12, 1979 7:30 PM, City Hall ' COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, William Beaman , Richard Lynch, Liz Retterath, Oise Martinson, Matthew Levitt, George Bentley STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director; Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner; Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call 7:11-0 I. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER GEORGE BENTLEY 7:35 II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA 7:40 III . MINUTES OF JANUARY 15 1979 l 1 7:45 IV. ML74BERS REPORTS: A. Chairman B. Others i V. REPORTS AND RECGMMENDATIONS 7:0- A. Saint Andrews Church, request to rezone 3. 5 acres rom Rural to PUBLIC for construction of a church building. The site is located within the Edenvale PUD, in the northwest quadrant of the irvtersection of Valley View Road and Mitchell Road. A public ceeting. 8:15 S. Sha!jy teak PUD by D. H. Gustafson & Associates , Inc. request for revised PUDconcept approval of Highway 6ommercial , Office, and multiple family uses or a 108 acre site, (previously PUD 71-02) . the site is located south of Crosstown 62 , east of Co. Rd. 61 , and west of US 169/212. Continued from January 22, 1979. And approval of E.A.W. 8:45 C. 01 is Hills , Sixth Addition by Olympic Hills Corporation and the Preserve. Request to rezone approximately- 67 acres from Rural to R1-13. 5, preliminary plat approval of 89 single family lots and 7 outlots upon the entire III acre site, and approval of Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The site is located west -~ of the Olympic Hills Cl ubhous_e, east of Sunnybrook Road , and south of Neil Lake. A public hearing. 9: 10 1). Discussion of Shoreland Management Ordinance 9:30 E. Discussion for setting special Guide P1 n Mtipj. V I . P!r I TT 1 7 RENE STS AND CMIMUNICATI(AS is Vi I . 6 0 Wl1,NESS V1 I I 1UT S N T M. PLANNER'S REPORT 9: 45 X. ADJOURNMENT ..: ,...� _••._MT;., F^r i_''� :r.::tea.-�,.a*.,,.a:. r. .�....,. .,....�_.�. __..----- - •i dli EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES HONDAY9 FEBRUARY 12. 1979 approved 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chairperson Richard Lynch, Willim Bearman, Liz Retterath, Oke Martinson, George Bentley C"ISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Rod Sundstrom and Matthew Levitt STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call I. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER GEORGE BENTLEY City Planner Chris Enger administered the Oath of Office to tht r" Planning Commission member, George Bentley. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bearman moved to approve the agenda as published. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously. III ,- MINUTES OF 3ANUARY 15 1979 MEETING NOTION: Bearman moved to continue the minutes of January 15, 1979 � until additional member arrived or until the next Planning Commission meeting. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously. • IV. MEMBERS REPORTS A. Chairman - None B. Others - None V. REPORT: AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Saint Andrew Church, request to rezone 3.5 acres from Rwal to PUBLICor construction of a church building. The site is located within the Edenvale PUO, in the northwest quadrant of tht intersection of Volley Vie! Road and Mitchell Rwd. A public ftet%q. City Planner Enger introduced Pastor Anderson and Lloyd Ber"ist, of RNBR Architects. Mr. Berouist presented the clans for the site . using graphics to illustrate the placement of the parking lot and landscaping. Ne explained that the first unit Worship Center was planned at 68M sq. -ft. with future addition additions planned for 15,000 to 20,MO sq. ft. � 3'�1i'y-�7 "-EG' '•9 .� Tii��i�. .lr,�.'"i.-0"'.. _ ,wa�.Y.,. .�. approved Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - February 12 , 1979 A. St`drew Church public meeting (cont'd) Berquist discussed the parking lot plans for off-street parking of 80 cars , which exceeds the requirement for the first unit Worship Center, . He presented a graphic and specifications of the light standards which they intended on useng on the north and south side of the parking lot. The building entrance and parking lot entrance will ,f also be lighted, as well as the cross. He explained that the elm trees in the lot will be removed , and that new plantings will be added on the west boundary and on the north property line between parking lot line, with a 10' open square with plantings in the parking surface. The parking will be cut into the slope and excess fill from this would be used to partially berm the parking lot and north property line. Berquist expressed favor with working 0 0—, ttie staff and property owners to resolve the concerns so it is acceptable to them and also economically feasible for the congregation. Vice-Chdirperson Lynch inquired about the time of lighting and whether the larger part of a parking lot situation such as this would be normally lit. Berquist explained that the lighting would not be on except at the time of activities but would have security lighting at the entrance to the building. Lynch questioned what the feelings of the property owner to the north were. Berquist responded that they are working with tor. Peter Gisselbeck, realtor 'with the Golf Vista Condiminiums , to try to resolve the question of screening. Bentley -,-'squired if the entrance security light would be the only lighting illuminating the parking lot at the times when no services were beinc_ held. Berquist re!%ponded they would also have an additional element i r; the form of a cross . Bearman inquired who the owner of the property presently was _ Berquist explained that the present owner was the Board of American Mission of the Lutheran Church in America , and that eventually the congregation will own the property. The depth of the existing 24" water main lying under temporary Mitchell Road was questioned, and the Planner explained that it had been placed ` there several years ago and that the depth is not positively known , but the Engineerin-9 �lepartrwlit believed it was at 8' . City Planner Enger summarized the plan, explaining that the land use is acceptable, referring back to the original PUD in 19716 . He felt that a closer look would have to be taken at grading plans and light- ing , and that *an interruption of the sight lines from the north of 20 to 25' in height was necessary in order to screen the parking effectively from the cond miniums. :approved Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - Feb. 12, 1979 A. St. Andrew Church. . . .public hearing (cont' d) The future of Mitc.hPll Road was discussed and its bea rina on the pro- posed project. Enger explained that the City only has an easement from the Lutheran Church of America on the present alignment of Mitchell Road north of Valley View which will be unconditionally removed subse- quent to July 1 , 1782 . and that the City anticipates Hennepin County's ' improvement of the diagonal connection between 0P i;1tersection of Baker Road and Valley View Road north of the site end Valley View as existing Mitchell Road, south of the site to be made prior to abandonment of the easement. Mr. Peter Gisseiberk, Realtor, representing the property owners in the Golf Vista Condominiums , expressed favor To working with the proponent in working out the problems. Acting Chairperson Lyndiasked whether it would be acceptable to the pro- ponent to come back to the next Planning Commissi meeting after resolving these concerns. Berquist responded that this wou � �6e acceptable, but would li !:e to be able to start construction thi - . - i1-1g. Mr. Gi 1 derhus , member of the congregation , i nqui red whether there were any directives to the owners of the condominiums to screen their buildings from the Church. The Planner explained that the screening requirements come from the City Ordinance 135 for parking areas other than single family residential , where five or more parking spaces are anticipated they must be screened from differing land uses. Berquist explained that because of the 24" water main, they were unable to put the parking lot any lower, and felt that this. plan was a compromise. The Engineering Department had advised them not to cut any further. MOTION: Bearman movd to continue the St. Andrew Church request to the February 26, 1979 Planning Commission meeting to allow the proponent to respond to the concerns outlined in the staff report of February 7 , 1979. Bentley seconded, Motion carried unanimously. B. Shady Oak PUD, by D.H. Gustafson & Associates , Inc. ,request for revised PUD concept approval of Highway Commerical , Office, end Multiple family uses on a 108 acre site, (previously PUD 71 -02) . The site is located south of Crosstown 62, east of Co. Rd. 61 , and west of US 169/212. Continued from January 22, 1979. And approval of E.A.W. IJ The Planner briefly summarized the background of the proposal and its continuance by the Planning Commission action taken Novemter 27 , 1978 in order to allow the proponent time to work out more sensitive site treatment. They have withdrawn their request for preliminary plat and re- zoning in order to resolve land use questions . He referred to material included with the staff report February 7 , 1979. -�)0. approved Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - February 12 ,, 1979 B. Shady Oak PUD, by D. H. Gustafson & Associates Inc. cont'd Beaman inquired whether the 9 acres to the east would be a good area for a park. Gustafson responded that 10. 2 acres in the cei, Ler of the P.U. D.will be designated as scenic easement and would be used fcr passive type recreation . He pointed out there would be a smaller amount of children living in apart- ments and there would be less of a need for a neighborhood type park. Gerald Steelman, 6601 Golden Ridge Road , explained their property was 35' above the proposed site and he was opposed to 90 acres of asphalt development, the lighting , and truck traffic that would be generated. He felt that it was a 90 acre deviance from the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Planner explained that thrOLIgh the Planned Unit Development process the Guide Plan was amended to show housing , open space and commercial uses . He asked Gustafson to reply to the advantages of their present plan. Gustafson explained the use would not be industrial , but 12' high 1 story office use , and that at the tine of the approval in 1971 of office use the residents were roorein favor of office use than multiple residential . He explained further that within the past 7 to 8 yrs. there has been more need for office space on the first floor and convenience to their sources. There were 1000 residential units originally proposL e .n 1971 , which has been reduced to 400 units. Gustafson explained further that there is a greater desire on the part of companies , conscious of their image, to move out and huild their own of`ices to provide better amenities to their employees . Mr. Hakon Torjesen , 6605 Rowland Road, inquired whether there was any way this site could be screened from Mr. Steelman' s house. The Planner responded that the site plan as drawn would not allow effective screening of all parking areas , but that by plaC—Ing two story buildings out towal•d Shady Oak Road I arking could be accommodated behind them to the east as an effective screen. entley asked what the income ranges of the apartments would be . Gustafson responded all ranges , and that there were low and moderate income requirelients from 1971 and that there will be a demand for medium and upper income range. Mrs. Jan Gerecke, 6622 Golden Ridge Drive, was opposed to changing the Guide Plan , pointing-out that the northern area was indicated 3s commercial and the south portion was indicated as multiple. in referring to the Guide Plan, she was in favor of development that would keep the tax money in Eden Prairie, rather than Eden Prairie having to contribute 40% of tax collected into Metro Pool . - Gustafson responded that their main concern was to create a balance of uses , errploy sent and places fcr people to live. Lynch pointed-out that they were discussing concept here, and that zoning and platting would precipitate much more specific review. - MOTION: Bearman moved to recomiiend the closing of the public hearing . Retterath seconded , motion carried unanimously. �.. r. ,.,'-..t.r ... morals�:.�. .., r.+�_.Y":Y�.._n''�s.`ri..: ":r�.it`��.>ie--_ _afrs�+�f'�.'�Je.lx�_�Y' _��" •- _ Planning Commission Minutes - 7 - Feb. 12 , 14979 C. Olympic Hills , Sixth Addition. public hearing (cont 'd) Tile r+oiiule► explained the neea to receive information on the normal high water marl.: for "'C i le L a.kA marsh from the Department of Natural Resources . Bearman questioned the 6000' cul -de-sac , and felt it was for in excess of the 500' specified by the ordinance. The Planner explained that the road system in this area , the completion of Anderson Lakes ?arkway ana the extention of Homeward Hills Road , would provide i,wo way access for this area. Lynch questioned hove the traffic could be prevented on Sunnybrook Rd . , noting that there tipre approximately 20 homes presently on Sunnybrook, and that the additional 89 proposed homes would generate considerable more traffic. The Planner explained that if a pla` was to be acceptable in this area , substantially less grading was desirable. Lot sizes shown along Neil Lace marsh may not be appropriate after inform. a+ion is received from theDNR on the normal high eater mark. Ringrose agreed to work out the concerns with tiie staff, and explained that their prime need was for development of the golf course rather- tian the lots . Mrs. Libby Hargrove, 12640 Sunnybrook Road , expressed concern for the treatment of Sunnybrook Road, access to Highway 169 , and the additional traffic that would be generated by this development. M.- Hakon Tor,iesen , 6605 Rowland Road , expressed concern that %he pri vatP road being tied in with a public road was not apprcpriate. McGlynn explained that they do not want a lot of traffic . because of pedestrians and golf carts , making the prime access off Anderson Lakes Parkway and Co. Rd. 1 . McGlynn requested meeting with the staff to resolve the issues discussed. MOTION : Beaiman moved to continue the public hearing on Olympic Hills Sixth Addition , allowing the proponent to redesi;r the plat to meet the concerns and ordinance requirements outlined in the staff report of Feb. 7, M9 , with the following additions to the staff report: 6) What proposals are anticipated for Sunnybrook Rd: for the future 7) What are Public Safety concerns with the mile and one-half cul -de-sac proposed. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously. - 'McGlynn agreed to points 2 and 4 of the staff report of February 8, 1979 b. Discussion of Shoreland Management Ordinance F City Planner referred to the memo of February 2, 1979 and graphics and explained that this information is the outcome of the October 16, 1978 meeting with the Parks. Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. t There was discussion on lake classifications and PJD process. . W► �o. L . W A are approved Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - Feb. 12, 1979 B. Shady Oak PUD, by D. H. Gustafson & Associates Inc. (cont' ) Mr. Dan Gustafson, representing the D. H. Gustafson and R . L. Johnson investment Co. , presented the P.U. D. request and outlined briefly the background of the oroiPct and their nrPCPnt attampt at meeting the concerns expressed bythe Planning Commission during the November Planning Commission meeting. He explained that R. L . Johnson Construction Co. is now proposing a Regional -Office on the north side of the site containing a one story office building. 3 story residential units and townhouses in the east center section , and a single user type of use such as a corporate headquarters on the center west side of site. They proposed a loop road which has been moved 240' to the iourth in order to preserve all of the ponds in the center of the site , and pointed out the open space defined in the area around the existing ponds. He explained that some filling would be done in the north part of the site. The utilities would run along the west property line of Shady Oak Road, and will be contained within public right-of-way except for one line through the center of the site. Gustafson explained that thn proponent has reviewed the staff report of Feb. 7, and feel the recommendat4ons of the staff are consistent with their planning. The plan he felt was consistent with the original P.U.D. in existence presently. S2-rman inquired what the total populationthey are anticipating for this area was. Gustafson responded that according to the demographic report done for the original P.U.D. , about 3200 people were expected, but that figure has been diminished to 700 to 1200. He fel': that the commercial-oftice would furnish a balance of trips as far as traffic wds concerned. Bearman inquired whether the City Engineering Department has looked at the traffic potential for the project. The Planner explained that the Engineering Department has not looked at it in great detail because it is a concept at this time. He pointed out that this area is surrounded by very good access , but that detailed intersecti,m geometrics would have to be studied at the time of rezoning. Bearman asked what the total coverage oft-the site would be. The Planner responded 60 to 65b because of physical constraints and large amount of pond and wooded area, as compared to the city ordinance, which would allow 90% coverage. Lynch questioned what would happen to the land locked land owner to the east. Gustafson responded there were two ways to get to this 9 acre piece, the project' s east property line and his north property line, as the area is cut in half- by a steep slope. a± L.,n., ,.{ .,,.�;fi..,,t: l th.,.. ....,Mr ..,.,,�,ae~ing for the two residential areas in the north part of the site. Gustafson explained threy were considering family type residential for office employees working in the area, as well as the potential for low and moderate income units. . Bentley inquired what available park land is planned for a neighborhood park: facility in this area. The Planner responded there is poor proximity tQ a neighborhood park site in the area. Recreation facilities would have to be provided by the developer. 1 ,approved Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - Feb. 12 , 1979 = B. Shad Oak PUD o D. H. Gustafson Y _Y b .Associates Inc . (, ont d) MOTION #2: Beaman move' recommend to the City Council approval: of n-%I, ref-- A of _A, ., _ , v "••` �••,.�, VYn 1 e uIII'eV V�I It, urVr 1 UNf11t!11. UdLea January, 1 9/9 as an amendment to the previous PUD 71 -02 as per the staff report of Feb. 8, 1979, with Jig. following recommendation : No. 14 i I nvest i gate the possibility s i bi 1 i ty of acquiring the extra 9 acres adjacent to this property as a possibility as a. park site in this area. Retterath seconded , motion carried unanimously'. C. Olympic �ills , Sixth Add-1tion, by Ol,mmpic Hills Corporation and The Preserve. Request to rezone approximately 67 acres i-rom Rural to R1 -13.5 , preliminary plat approval of 89 single family lots and 7 outlots upon the entire 111 acre site, and approval of Environmental Assessment- Worksheet: The site is located west of the Olympic Hills Clubhouse, east of Sunnybrook Road, and south of Neil Lake. A public hearing. The City Planner briefly summarized the concerns of the staff on the pro- ject, mainly the excessive amount of grading necessary to accommodate approximately 10 units tpward the center of the plat Mr. Don Ringrose, or Bather, Ringrose, Jarvis , Gardner Inc . , representing Olympic Hills Corporation and The Preserve, made the presentation on the project, explaining that this development will be similar to the develop- ment taking place in this area. The main reason for the proposal was for the purpose of modifying the golf fairway along the southeastern part of Neil Lake. The land along the dike will oe linked with Preserve land. He discussed the grading plans , explaining that theYe will be additional grading when the homes are built and additional trees taken down. the homes will be relatively expensive and designed for the lot, pointing out that working with seep Slopes has been done . in other communities , and they did not feel the severe grading was unreasonable. As far as the private roadway, the proponent wants tc preserve within the area a sense of privacy. Bentley inquired about the Sunnybrook Road access 4roni the west. Ringrose responded that a portion of Sunnybrook Rd. will ha4e to be constructed following construction of sewer, and that their feeling is that this should wait until development of the houses. Lvn•-h asked whether Sunnybrouk Road was an improved road. The Planner res- ponded that it is a gravel groad and that the access to Highway 169 is very poor. Ringrose explained that if the access becomes a major issue,, the developer will concede on this point. Bearman inquired what the extent of the cul -de-sac was, and who was liable if the Homeowner Association disbanded. Ringrose responded 1 .4 miles , ex- plaining that the HOA is a legal body. Removal of elm trees and the planting of new trees during the post 10 years was explained by Mr. Don McGlynn, Olympic Hills Corporation. ' Planning Co mission Minutes - 8 - Feb. 12 , 1979 0. Discussion of Shoreland Management Ordinance (cont'd) HOTiuii: Bearman moved to recommend to the City Council , approval of the Shoreland Management Ordinance incorporating the memo dated Febl-nary 7 , 1979. Bentley seconded, motion carried unanimously. Beaman requested a final copy of the ordinance before submission to the Council . Mr. Nakon Tor,jesen , i;605 Rowland Road, suggested that a definition of lake classification�, -be added to the ordinance. E. Discussion for setting special Guide Plan meeting A special meeting was set for Monday, February 169th, at 7:00 for the purpose of completiny discussion on the Guide Plan. V. PETITIONS,_ REQUESTS, AND COWUNICATIONS None. VI. OLD BUSINESS - None. VII . NEW BUSINESS, - None III . PLANNER' s REPORT - None. U. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Beaman moved to adjourn at 10-15 PM. Martinson seconded, motion carried unanimously.