Loading...
Planning Commission - 03/25/2024APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 25, 2024 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Frank Sherwood, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Carole Mette, Robert Taylor, Dan Grote, Charles Weber; Phou Sivilay CITY STAFF: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Carter Schulze, City Engineer; Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Acting Chair Kirk called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL Commission member Taylor was absent. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Weber to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED 8-0. IV. MINUTES MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Sivilay to approve the minutes of February 12, 2023. MOTION CARRIED 7-0 with one abstention (Farr). V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. EDEN PRAIRIE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - UNFI Request for • Approval for Guide Plan Changes to Public/Semi-Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres • Approval for Zoning Change to Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres Sherwood recused himself. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 25, 2024 Page 2 Kyle Fisher, Safety Director at Eden Prairie Schools, displayed a PowerPoint and detailed the application. The application requested a change to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District of approximately 60.91 acres to facilitate the use of the existing office building for educations programming by the Eden Prairie School District. He played a video of the proposed TASSEL program which served students 18-22 years old. At the end of the summer the program’s lease would not be renewed in its existing building and the applicant proposed to move this program to the office building in question. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District was involved and had a positive response to the proposal. Dirk Tedmon, executive director of marketing and communication for Eden Prairie School District, explained the “Designing Pathways” process and explained the need for a large property to respond to perhaps 200 students’ needs, which included the issues of increasing enrollment and the need to outsource some teaching opportunities. He explained the community outreach done toward this end. Kyle Fisher explained the development involved 165,000 square feet on Bryant Lake and stated this was a great opportunity to work with the Watershed District to provide nontraditional learning. The school buildings were almost at capacity This would have a centralized warehouse area in the lowest level. Farr asked for and received confirmation the purchase agreement was contingent on District approval. Other uses included environmental learning outdoor spaces, a play area, et cetera, and program were not set in stone but could evolve. There would also be programs for the community and special events with enough parking for all. Fisher stated this was like any other program at Eden Prairie Schools. Farr noted enrollment was not dropping in Eden Prairie. He asked if the westernmost driveway off Valley View required a shared access agreement. Fisher replied his understanding there was conversation on the use of this as a second drive. Unfortunately the design engineer was not able to attend tonight’s meeting. Farr anticipated questions from the public regarding taxes. Students did not pay tuition so he asked how it was funded. Tedmon replied there was a lease levy purchase for less than a dollar a month, with no major tax impact. A bond referendum was possible in the future. Shawn Hoffman-Graham, community education, detailed the funding. She was the first connection to events, many of which were fee-based, and the schools would be able to find expanded learning for students, filling the voids and gaps for Eden Prairie citizens. Grote asked if there were any plans to use Bryant Lake. Fisher stated there was no official plans and did not know in what capacity it would be used. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 25, 2024 Page 3 Barnhart presented the staff report. This was a map change in the Comprehensive Plan and land use guidance. This was a unique request; typically, some construction is anticipated. Any changes to the exterior or to the landscape would be subject to city review. There were certain stipulations and conditions on the use of the lake (docks, moorings, et cetera). There were no lakeside or lake improvements proposed at this time, and any change to that would also have to go through a review process. The proposed use was also in keeping with environmental conditions with no negative impacts. Staff supported the change to the Comprehensive Plan. Sivilay asked for Phase I environmental assessment results. Fisher replied one was completed and the only potential concern was an underground 10,000 gallon storage tank. Subsequent tests were not yet back, but at this time no leakage was indicated. Farr asked if the traffic would increase as the program evolved and grew. Schultze replied the study’s goal was to document the existing condition, and compare it to the demand, and did not see an increase of traffic even if the program were to triple. Any major increase would also go through the public review process. MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Kirk to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. Mette spoke in support of the project, not finding traffic a concern. She noted this would take a tax-generating property off the tax rolls, and she suggested the school district to explore selling off the excess land in order to help put money back on the payroll and raise funds for major renovations. Kirk seconded Mette’s support and stated he saw no real downsides. The public processes in the future would allow appropriate input. Sivilay stated his only concern was the recommended mediation in Phase II. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Weber to recommend approval for Guide Plan Changes to Public/Semi-Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres and for Zoning Change to Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres as represented in the March 25, 2024 staff report. Motion carried 7-0 with Sherwood and Grote abstaining. B. CODE AMENDMENT – OFFICE USE IN INDUSTRIAL FLEX TECH Request for • Approval for Guide Plan Changes to Public/Semi-Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 25, 2024 Page 4 • Approval for Zoning Change to Public and Parks and Open Space on 60.91 acres Barnhart presented the staff report. This was to incorporate the goals of Aspire 2040 applied to the industrial area known as the Industrial Flex Tech area, specifically the I-2 and I-5 Zoning Districts. The change would remove the 50 percent cap for office uses in those districts. Over the years there have been a handful of waivers for extensions and this would remove an unnecessary regulation that did not gibe with the Plan’s goals. It would add more employment and aid to the business community without negative impacts. The commission might see more parking waivers because office parking was greater than warehousing or manufacturing. . This did not change the I-Gen use distribution where there was still the 50 percent cap; heavier industrial uses being more appropriate in these areas. Staff recommended the change as proposed in the staff report. MOTION: Mette moved, seconded by Kirk to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. Farr stated he could vouch for the demand for this change. Kirk also voiced his support. Mette agreed; to her it reiterated why the Flex Industrial Zone was created in the first place. MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Sherwood to recommend approval for the text amendment to Chapter 11.30 as drafted in the March 25, 2024 staff report. Motion carried 8-0. PLANNERS’ REPORT MEMBERS’ REPORTS Pieper announced this was Mette’s last meeting. Mette thanked the commission members and bid them farewell. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mette moved, seconded by Kirk to adjourn. Motion carried 8-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m.