Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 10/04/2016 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY,OCTOBER 4,2016 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Ron Case, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow,Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, City Planner Julie Klima, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. All Council Members were present. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. OPEN PODIUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. COMMISSIONER JAN CALLISON Hennepin County Commissioner Jan Callison gave an update on Hennepin County and noted the budget will decrease in 2017,but the county will require more property tax revenue. They will be hiring additional staff,due in part to the large increases in child protection cases which require additional case workers and staff. She said the county property tax base has recovered from the 2008 recession, primarily due to development and apartment growth. Butcher Wickstrom asked about the additional office space required for all the new employees. Ms Callison replied they are reconfiguring their office space to allow office sharing for some employees as well as adding satellite offices. Tyra-Lukens thanked Ms Callison for her presentation. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 2 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried 5-0. VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,SEPTEMBER 20,2016 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to approve the minutes of the Council workshop held Tuesday, September 20, 2016, as published. Motion carried 5-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,SEPTEMBER 20,2016 MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved,seconded by Nelson, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, September 20, 2016, as published. Motion carried 5-0. VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS&COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. APPROVE SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO.24-2016 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.45 RELATING TO FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.2016-109 APPROVING PUBLICATION OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2016-103 APPROVING CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF CSAH NO. 61 (FLYING CLOUD DRIVE)FROM CHARLSON ROAD TO CSAH NO. 101 IN CARVER COUNTY C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2016-104 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR HENNEPIN YOUTH SPORTS FACILITIES GRANT DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF DRYLAND TRAINING FACILITY D. AWARD CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL ATRIUM TO GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2016-105 APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGES AND STUDENT ELECTION JUDGES FOR NOVEMBER 8,2016, GENERAL ELECTION MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved,seconded by Case, to approve Items A-E on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 3 A. PRAIRIE BLUFFS SENIOR LIVING by Albert Miller. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential on 4.74 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.74 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.74 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5 on 4.74 acres, Site Plan Review on 4.74 acres and Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot on 4.74 acres. Location: 10217, 10220, 10240, 10280 Hennepin Town Road and two additional parcels (PID 36-116-22-11-0026 & 36-116-22-11- 0003) (Resolution No.2016-106 for Guide Plan Change; Resolution No.2016- 107 for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change; Resolution No.2016-108 for Preliminary Plat) Getschow said this is a senior living housing proposal. The original application for this project proposed one three-story building with 116 units and was reviewed by the Planning Commission on Dec. 7, 2015, and March 14, 2016. The Planning Commission recommended approval of that proposal with a 6 to 0 vote. The developer requested to postpone the public hearing before the Council because there were discussions of possibly adding the Robertson property to the project. If that property were added,it would be likely to significantly change the project and would necessitate a new review by the Planning Commission. At its Aug. 22, 2016, meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval on a 5-1 vote of a new plan for the property, which incorporates the Robertson property and increases the project area to 4.74 acres. Getschow said the proponent is requesting to rezone the property to RM-2.5, which allows multi-family developments. A senior living development has characteristics unique from a typical multi-family project. Therefore, the proponent is requesting a number of waivers for the proposed project. The waivers being requested include: building height for the four-story portion of the north building; front yard structure setbacks; parking reduced from 276 spaces to 112; front yard parking setbacks; density increased from 17.4 units per acre to 29.1 units per acre; and tree replacement reduced from 1457 caliper inches to 55 caliper inches. Link Wilson, President of Kaas Wilson Architects, said the project will develop housing for senior citizens who have some type of health concerns. He noted the metropolitan area is and erbuilt for the existing senior demographics, and that will become even more of an issue over time. The proposal is for two buildings that will include a total of 138 units and will include independent living, assisted living and memory care units. He said this is a challenging site because of the topography and shape of the property. A small road runs through the property to provide access to the City's pumps and generators on the east side of the property. He reviewed the site plan for the project and noted there will be 60 underground parking stalls. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 4 Mario Cocchiarello, representing Maple Development Company, reviewed some of the issues raised at the Planning Commission meeting, including the assertion that senior properties devalue a neighborhood; the project would produce intolerable traffic for the neighborhood; the extreme loss of trees on the property; and whether a senior property should be built in the middle of an existing neighborhood. Mr. Wilson then continued his review of the site plan for the proposal. He noted there will be four apartment units built in the bridge between the two buildings. The area of the individual units will range from 2500 square feet to 1494 square feet,and 37% of the space in the building will be common area. He reviewed the waivers they are requesting. Tim Beutell, 9890 Lee Drive, commented there would not be as many people at this public hearing if the proponent had continued with the original plan. The addition of the second section and the fourth floor have made the project too large for that particular corner. He especially objected to the four-story building because that brings the structure too close to the neighbors' backyards. Steve Mohn, 9812 Lee Drive, said the project is simply too much for this piece of land and too big for the neighborhood. The four-story part is right behind his neighborhood. The setback for the project is closer to the road than any of the houses in the neighborhood. He liked the project but would like to see changes to the height and the setbacks. Annette O'Connor, 10444 Fawns Way, distributed pictures taken from her neighbor's deck with concept drawings of the project superimposed into the view. She said the original plan was a smaller building and took only a few trees, and that would be more acceptable. She noted this is the first such project coming into an established single family neighborhood in Eden Prairie. She wanted to see the project completed but with a lower profile. She said traffic in the area will be increased by the proposed Hy-Vee and drive-through Starbucks projects. She objected to the number of variances they are requesting. Eric Barton,9902 Lee Drive, said the back of his house faces the project. He was concerned about the number of waivers that are being requested and believed the rezoning should be carefully considered. He wanted to protect the feel of their neighborhood and to maintain the resale values. He was concerned that parking will be forced onto the residential streets because the parking waivers requested will limit the number of spaces available for drivers living in the building units, deliveries, visitors and staff.He noted trees are important to break up the visibility of the buildings and to provide sound control. He believed the neighbors are united that the project is just too big and asked that the Council have the proponent return with a scaled down project. A resident on Tuscany Way expressed concern the project will change the peaceful feeling along Tuscany Way and Hennepin Town Road. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 5 James Running, 10435 Fawns Way, said building this project in the back area near his property will disturb the view of the pond and the project should be changed. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved,seconded by Aho,to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Nelson asked if the part guided for office space is on the north end of the site. Getschow replied it is the south end.Nelson then asked if the north end could have townhouses. Getschow said the north parcel is guided for lower density residential. Nelson listed several of her concerns and suggestions: • Expand the underground parking by 20 spots because the building staff would have cars and would need parking on the site. • Add bushes that flower longer than the lilacs shown in the plan. • More sidewalks and benches for residents so they could walk around the building. • Whether the fourth story on the building is necessary because it is so near people's homes. • Provide large enough units for those people who are transitioning from larger homes • Keep some of the bigger and more significant trees that are on the property. Mr. Wilson said they could work with staff to mark the trees on the property that they feel could be preserved. He said all the new trees planted along Hennepin Town Road will be large, tree-spade trees, and several trees will be saved along Hwy 169. There are ten units on the fourth floor that are larger and designed for aging in place. He believed there is a market for large senior living apartments. He said residents would be able to walk around the smaller building. It would be difficult to put a path on the end of the larger building by Hwy 169;however, they could work with the landscape architect on that. They would be open to planting types of bushes other than lilacs. Twenty additional underground parking spaces could be added,and there will be valet service available at holiday time. Nelson said it would be good to make sure there is adequate staff parking as well as parking for visitors and deliveries. Case expressed concern about needing more trees to screen the buildings as the trees mature. He would like to add more trees now and also to hold some in a sort of escrow to be available if more would be needed to fill in some areas at a later date.He suggested a lot more trees could be put on the hill along Pioneer Trail. Rosow said the City frequently does proof of parking to hold in reserve parking spaces that might be needed in the future at the discretion of the City planners. He said the development agreement could have a category to hold a place for more trees for a certain period of time. Case said he would like to hold them for at least three or four years out.Rosow said he was thinking more long term like 25 years. Case asked what would happen if in 15 years or so the project fails and becomes condominiums that would need more parking. He thought we should consider CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 6 proof of parking as part of the project approval in case the buildings are repurposed. Jeremiah said there will be a definite long term need for senior housing in Eden Prairie, and we are also seeing less parking being included in apartments units built in more urban areas. Case suggested that staff look at how this project would function as an apartment building and what the parking requirements might be for that. Rosow replied we have some experience with recent developments where there were concerns expressed by the Council about adequate parking if repurposing were to occur with a different mix of usage. In those developments we have had restrictions in the development agreement to come back through the process should that situation occur. That concept might be used to answer the question of the amount of parking needed on the site. Case said the fourth story is probably a nice addition for this kind of a building, but he considered the site to be problematic. He noted the Council must consider what is best for all the residents of Eden Prairie and must help to mitigate the impact of a project on the contiguous neighborhoods. He believed the additional landscaping would help to mitigate the impact. He suggested reconfiguring the fourth story units to remove the five units facing the west side so there would be fourth story units only on the back side of the building facing Hwy 169. He thought there could be five or six units added onto the southern end of the building to compensate for those removed from the fourth floor. Mr. Wilson said his company has done something similar with another building to reduce the impact of the building height, so that would be workable. While he liked the idea of adding five units on the south end,that would make the setback waiver look worse. They have been very concerned about the setback requirements if the building were to be extended to the south. Butcher Wickstrom said her primary concern was the building height. She believed this is a good proposal, and it is important to consider that this stretch of land could be used for a lot of different things. The plan has some wonderful attributes, and no one can deny the need for more senior housing. She suggested we look for a way to make the building seem less imposing and agreed that thee should be additional parking stalls underground. She asked how the residents would be able to access the amenities across Pioneer Trail. Ellis replied sidewalks will be installed with the project, and there will be push buttons on the signal lights for a walls light. The timing of the lights might need to be adjusted.He noted the proponent discussed having van service available. Butcher Wickstrom asked about installing annunciator technology to enhance the crosswalks. Ellis said staff could discuss this more with the proponent and then with MNDoT to see if there is a means to install that technology or perhaps count down timers. Butcher Wickstrom said she was concerned that the seniors might be intimidated by the crossing. Aho said he met with some of the neighborhood residents on the site. Most of the objections seemed to relate to the size of the project, and some of the suggestions made tonight would help to bring the project down to three stories in some areas. He asked if there would be an opportunity to do any berming along Hennepin Town Road because that and the landscaping would help to soften the effect of the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 7 building's size. Mr. Wilson replied placing a berm along the north end might mean eliminating the sidewalk and would present a challenge for people wanting to get to the shops across Pioneer Trail. Aho thought a berm could be incorporated in that area but still maintain the sidewalk, especially on the north end of the site. It would lower the impact on the area. He thought this is a great project that would provide a sound break from Hwy 169 for the neighborhood. City Planner Julie Klima said the Planning Commission reviewed the landscaping along Hennepin Town Road in the project and recommended the size be increased. The plans provided tonight do include increasing the size of the landscaping along that corridor. She said staff could continue to work with the proponent on landscaping of the site. Tyra-Lukens suggested some of the grade increase at the southern end of the site could be saved to serve as a buffer. The landscape plan does not specify the type of material for tree replacement and specifies replacement at 3 caliper inches. She asked if we can change the wording to 3 inches or larger to make sure there are larger trees. Klima replied City code does require a minimum size but staff could work on additional language. Tyra-Lukens thought this is a really nice plan, but she felt the entrance doesn't look really welcoming and would like to see something more inviting. She asked if the proponent planned to add balconies on the memory care units. Mr. Wilson replied the memory care units are on the first and second floor, but there will be no access to the balconies from those units. Tyra-Lukens commented most of us in Eden Prairie have variances in our neighborhoods. The proponent's request for variances gives the City an opportunity to ask for enhancements. One of the issues for seniors is affordability, and she did not see that issue addressed in this project. Albert Miller, project proponent, said they would not be opposed to a certain amount of affordability. They do want to make sure people don't have to move because it is difficult for seniors to move. They plan to reserve units so that residents do not have to move in order to receive additional care. Tyra-Lukens said having affordable units is important to her and noted there are units in Eden Prairie that have those units. Jeremiah said typically senior projects do come in with affordability included in the project. Tyra-Lukens thanked the residents present tonight for all their emails and noted those have been very helpful. She said the job of the City Council is to try to make the development of land as easy as possible. She agreed that senior housing here is a great option and will have a minimal effect on the traffic. She did understand the height issue, but we do have large senior housing units in other parts of the City. The four-story building at Summit Place backs up to single family homes. She added she would also like to save as much of the current landscaping as possible. Case noted that the fourth story could be chopped on one side, which would lose the gables facing the neighborhoods and would cut down on the appearance of height. He said he was concerned about the traffic impact and the right turn lane CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 8 from Hennepin Town Road onto Pioneer Trail. The project will have some traffic impact, and the current situation there needs a right turn lane onto Pioneer Trail. He would like to make the turn lane part of this agreement and have it built sooner rather than later. Ellis said it could be done. The intersection operates at acceptable level of service now,but we will see further developments completed in this area. Staff could work with MnDOT and Hennepin County to install the turn lane with the project construction. It would require relocating some traffic signal poles, but we have done that with other projects through the use of special assessment agreements. Case noted he would like to see this turn lane installed as part of this project. The turn lane is needed now and this project would exacerbate the need. Nelson asked about wording the motion granting first reading in light of the Council comments. Rosow said the Council could approve first reading because the Council has been very articulate about the conditions that have been stated tonight.Normally such conditions would be included as part of the City Council motions. The proponent can work with staff with respect to height, berms and setbacks, and those would be conditions on first reading. The decision would be made before the next meeting as to whether second reading should be on the Consent Agenda or on the regular agenda. Case reiterated the suggestions and comments made: the fourth floor on the west side should be removed and 5-6 units added on the southern end of the building; establish a tree "escrow;" add 20 additional covered parking stalls; add the turn lane onto Pioneer Trail with use of a special assessment agreement; review the berming and landscaping issues; add more benches; and add more flowers. Case said it is very difficult in Eden Prairie to address the concerns of Hennepin County regarding affordable housing without committing funds,and we can't discuss this at every development. He appreciated proponent's comment that they won't boot you out of the housing; however, this is a business and they need to have a business model. Tyra-Lukens asked when we will include affordability if we don't include it in this project when they are asking for a lot of variances. Getschow noted this is the first senior housing to be built in the City in some time. There are 138 units, and the Met Council says there should be 20% of the number of units that are affordable. Case asked about the definition of affordability. Jeremiah replied there are requirements about affordability,and affordable housing is housing available to people who make up to 80% of the median income. TIF financing has a more stringent requirement of 60% of income. An individual's assets are generally not included. Case noted the senior housing near Kowalski's was subsidized housing. He didn't feel comfortable that this is the time to force the issue of affordability, but he would be okay with including five units of affordable housing in the project. Tyra-Lukens said it is not realistic to have 20% affordable units in this project. The Planning Commission minutes reflect that 5-10% might be more in the range of something doable.Five units would be 5%. Aho suggested we focus on the senior CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 9 waiver component. It is very disruptive for seniors to move after they have burned through their assets. He believed having the senior waiver would be preferable to specifying a number of affordable units. Butcher Wickstrom said she would like to know how the senior waiver would work. Case said affordability may not be applicable here,but he would like more information. Tyra-Lukens said she would like to know more about the senior waiver and what the guarantees are. Mr. Miller replied it is very complicated, but they could offer five units on that program. The five units would be the smaller ones. He explained the senior waiver program is paid for by the Federal government through the State and down to the County level. There are buckets of money available to cover those who have run out of money. Case asked if the funds would cover services or the housing units. Mr. Walker said there are two buckets of funding available for those who do not have the assets or the income required, one bucket covers services and the other covers the housing. He said five senior waiver units would be more doable in a project of this high caliber. He said he was concerned about having to add 20 parking spaces that won't be needed and asked if the five senior waiver units could be added in lieu of the extra parking underground. Case said he was okay with getting rid of the 20 spaces if we have proof of parking. He would like to add the five senior waivers. Butcher Wickstrom said she was not comfortable with this level of negotiation and would like to have the project come back with additional information from staff. Getschow noted staff has a good list of the suggestions made by the Council. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 2016-106 amending the Guide Plan from Low Density Residential and Office to High Density Residential; to adopt Resolution No. 2016-107 for a Planned Unit Development Concept Review; to approve the 1st reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District review with waivers and a Zoning District change from Rural and Office to RM-2.5; to adopt Resolution No. 2016-108 for a Preliminary Plat of six lots into one lot and one outlot; and to include the Council conditions as represented in the discussion. Motion carried 5-0. B. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 RELATING TO LOADING FACILITIES,MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING,SITE LIGHTING AND ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TRASH AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURES Getschow said this is essentially a housekeeping item. In 2015, at the direction of the City Council, staff proposed a number of minor text amendments to Chapter 11 to address consistency in code language relating to loading facilities, mechanical equipment screening, site lighting, and architectural requirements for trash and recycling enclosures. The proposed amendments were presented to the Planning Commission on December 7, 2015, and the Commission recommended that the City Council approve the amendments. The amendments have not yet been considered for CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 10 approval by the Council. Staff wanted to hold off on presenting the amendments to the Council until final action was taken on the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) ordinance because minor amendments would be likely be needed to provide consistency between the overall ordinance and the TOD section. The TOD ordinance was recently approved, and the changes to Chapter 11 resulting from its adoption have been identified. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved,seconded by Aho,to close the public hearing and to approve first reading of the ordinance amending City Code Chapter 11 relating to loading facilities, mechanical equipment screening, site lighting, and architectural requirements for trash and recycling enclosures and other standards. Motion carried 5-0. X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the payment of claims as submitted.Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Aho, Butcher Wickstrom, Case, Nelson and Tyra-Lukens voting "aye." XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS XII. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 4, 2016 Page 11 XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 9:21 PM.