Planning Commission - 01/08/1996 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 8, 1996 7:00 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Kenneth E. Clinton, Randy Foote, Ismail Ismail,
Katherine Kardell, Douglas Sandstad, Edward
Schlampp,Mary Jane Wissner
STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner
Scott Kipp,Planner
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
III. MINUTES
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. KINDERCARE - SHADY OAK ROAD by Tandem Corporation. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.7 acres, Site
Plan Review on 1.7 acres and Preliminary Plat of 4.83 acres into 2 lots. Location:
City West Parkway and Shady Oak Road.
B. ROGER'S COMMERCIAL GUIDE PLAN CHANGE by Roger Lindeman.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Neighborhood
Commercial on 1.91 acres. Location: 9125 Flying Cloud Drive.
C. BEARPATH 1996 PUD AMENDMENT by Bearpath Limited Partnership.
Request for PUD Amendment and Zoning District Amendment on 15 acres.
Location: Bearpath Trail and Dell Road.
V. MEMBERS' REPORTS
VI. CONTINUING BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
VIII. PLANNERS' REPORTS
IX. ADJOURNMENT
APPROVED MINUTES
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
January 8, 1996
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Katherine Kardell, Kenneth E. Clinton,
Randy Foote, Ismail Ismail, Douglas
Sandstad, Edward Schlampp, Mary Jane
Wissner
STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D.Franzen, City Planner, and
Barbara Anderson,City Recorder
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-ROLL CALL
Chair Kardell called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Schlampp moved, Wissner seconded, to approve the agenda as published.
Motion carried 7-0.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Schlampp noted a typographical error on page 9 and Commissioner Sandstad's name was
spelled incorrectly.
MOTION: Clinton moved, Foote seconded, to approve the Minutes of the December 11,
1995 Planning Commission meeting as corrected. Motion carried 6-0. Kardell abstained.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. KINDERCARE - SHADY OAK ROAD by Tandem Corporation. Request for
Zoning District change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.7 acres, Site
Plan Review on 1.7 acres and Preliminary Plat of 4.83 acres into 2 lots. Location:
City West Parkway and Shady Oak Road.
Franzen introduced Erik Johnson of RLK Associates in Minnetonka.
Johnson reviewed the history of the site and the surrounding property. He discussed
the grading and drainage plan for the site and the traffic figures which were provided
by Benshoof and Associates. He discussed the site design and traffic circulation
patterns and reviewed the landscaping plan,which will provide transition between this
site and the adjacent properties. He noted that the play areas would not be located
adjacent to Shady Oak Road. He reviewed the access and the parking for the site.
Greg Ryder of Kindercare was also present to answer any questions from the
Commissioners.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 2
Sandstad inquired about the 10 foot retaining wall on the site and how high it would
be. Johnson responded that it will be at least ten feet in height but they intend to
break it up and use plantings in between the sections to soften the view. Sandstad
inquired about the grades on the private drive, and Johnson reviewed those figures.
Ismail inquired if there was another day care center in this area and how this would
affect the business. Johnson responded that there was a New Horizon Day Care
Center in the area,but the Kindercare would be a more modern facility which would
cater to a larger age range of children. Ismail commented he was unsure that this
location was the best location for this type of facility.
Schlampp inquired about the exterior building finish and the location for the proof of
parking spaces on the site. Johnson responded they have proposed a brick exterior
finish for the building and the proof of parking spaces were located in the play area,
which could be converted to parking spaces if the building were sold and converted
to another use.
Franzen reviewed the staff report and noted that staff supported the proposal and
recommended approval, subject to the recommendations in the staff report. He noted
N that staff recommended the addition of large conifer plantings between the outdoor
play area and Shady Oak Road.
Ismail inquired if the developer had agreed to the conditions imposed by staff.
Johnson indicated they were in agreement with the staff recommendations.
Wissner inquired if there was a stop sign at the intersection of Chase Pointe and City
West Parkway. Franzen responded that there was not one presently,but perhaps it
should be considered.
MOTION-Wissner moved, Clinton seconded,to close the Public Hearing. Motion
carried 7-0. The Public Hearing was closed.
Foote expressed concern about similar uses being located adjacent to each other.
Kardell commented it appeared there was sufficient need for.this type of use, and
compared it to a McDonald's and a Burger King being located in the same vicinity.
MOTION: Wissner moved, Clinton seconded, to recommend approval of
Kindercare for Tandem Corporation for Zoning District change from Rural to
Neighborhood Commercial on 1.7 acres, Site Plan Review on 1.7 acres and
Preliminary Plat of 4.83 acres into 2 lots, located at City West Parkway and Shady
Oak Road subject to the conditions as set forth in the Planning Commission Staff
Report dated January 5, 1996.Motion carried 7-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 3
B. ROGER'S COMMERCIAL GUIDE PLAN CHANGE by Roger Lindeman.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Neighborhood
Commercial on 1.91 acres. Location: 9125 Flying Cloud Drive.
Roger Lindeman stated he was the owner of Roger's Body Shop and he had initially
purchased this property with the idea of expanding his business onto this site.
However, he had decided that it was too close to his present location to open an
additional body shop and he requested a change from Industrial to Neighborhood
Commercial to allow for another business to be located on this property.
Lynn Eichman stated they are proposing that it become a commercial use because the
existing Body Shop services the area adequately. They propose that a convenience
store/gas station be located on the site which would be advantageous for the traffic
on Highway 169. He noted that the property to the north was zoned Industrial and
they believe the proposed use would fit in well with this zoning classification.
Wissner asked about the access to the site. Franzen reviewed the City's plan for a
road to connect from Damel Road to Sunnybrook with an access onto Highway 169
opposite from the Hennepin Technical College intersection.
• Franzen gave the staff report and noted that there are two gasoline/convenience store
operations located within a half mile of the site, and staff believed that another similar
use would not be the best use of the property. Staff recommended denial of the
request based on the reasons listed in the staff report.
The Public Hearing was opened.
Jim and Sherry Simchuck, 9145 Flying Cloud Drive, noted they live immediately
adjacent to the site on the south. They expressed concern about the station being a
good neighbor as it was proposed to be open for 24 hours a day. Sherry stated she
was not in favor of looking out her window at people filling their cars with gas, and
did not want to have a gas station as an immediate neighbor.
Kardell asked now the street might develop and Franzen responded that it was
originally discussed when the body shop use was proposed. The road would extend
east to a Darnel court extension.
Schlampp inquired if the applicant could construct a body shop now and Franzen
responded yes. Schlampp asked what reasons there were to deny the request.
Franzen referred to the StaffReport. Franzen added that the proponents did not have
to show a site plan for the property in order to make the guide plan change request.
If the gas station/convenience store had not been included in the plans, staff would
have assumed any commercial use could go onto the property. Schlampp expressed
concern about the reasons for denial recommended by staff.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 4
Sandstad commented he saw other problems with the request in that gas
station/convenience stores have canopies over the pumps which are very brightly lit
and have a large amount of light spillover onto adjacent properties creating an adverse
effect. He did not support the proposed use on the site.
Wissner commented she believed that the proposed use was not needed since there
were two other existing gas/convenience stores in the area.
Clinton stated he did not believe that the proposed use was needed,but if a different
commercial use were proposed in the future he would consider it.
Foote stated he could not support the proposal from a traffic perspective and he was
opposed to granting the reguiding request.
Schlampp commented that since the proponent had approval for an industrial use he
did not support the proposed use for the property.
MOTION: Sandstad moved,Foote seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion
carried 7-0.
MOTION: Sandstad moved, Foote seconded to recommend denial of the request
of Roger Lindeman for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to
Neighborhood Commercial on 1.91 acres located at 9125 Flying Cloud Drive based
on the reasons listed in the Staff Report dated December 5, 1996. Motion carried
7-0.
C. BEARPATH 1996 PUD AMENDMENT by Bearpath Limited Partnership. Request
for PUD Amendment and Zoning District Amendment on 15 acres. Location:
Bearpath Trail and Dell Road.
John Vogelbacher and Ron Hardy were present representing Bearpath Limited
Partnership. Vogelbacher stated that the golf course had been designed to quality
standards when the PUD was approved and they have no-maintenance properties they
call villas and some townhomes which are on smaller lots adjacent to the golf course.
They are requesting the waiver to the front yard setback requirement to accommodate
the smaller units. He explained that the design of the villa units incorporates a
courtyard design with the garage located on the front part of the house,pushing the
living portion of the house farther back on the lots. This brings it into closer
proximity to the golf course, unless they are allowed to decrease the front yard
setback to 20', which will allow them to maintain the size of the living space of the
house and still keep the 30'rear yard setback from the golf course.
Clinton inquired if this problem of golf balls coming into the yards had not been
anticipated when the project was developed and Vogelbacher responded that the style
of house and driveway had not been designed when the initial PUD approval was
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 5
requested.
Sandstad commented he supported the PUD concept and felt that the project would
not suffer if the Planning Commission were to approve the reduction in the front yard
setback requirements. However,he stated he was surprised to find gates had been
erected across the Hennepin County right-of-way along the LRT Corridor trail.
Vogelbacher responded that the gates operate to control traffic onto Bearpath Trail
but do not restrict pedestrian access to the trail.
Wissner inquired if the homes were custom designed with different builders, and
Vogelbacher responded affirmatively, except for the townhomes which are all
constructed by the same contractor. Foote inquired if the lot sizes were the same as
originally approved, and Vogelbacher responded affirmatively. Kardell commented
that from a visual perspective it made sense to have the garages sideways on the lots,
and she supported that concept.
Franzen reviewed the staff report and stated that staff recommended of the request
based on the conditions set forth in Alternative#2. Regarding the issue of access into
the community, it had been understood that the pedestrian access would not be
restricted. At the time of approval it was uncertain if it would be used for LRT or as
a pedestrian trail. If pedestrians using the LRT trail want to enter into Bearpath they
can signal the clubhouse and the gates would be opened and people can enter the
development. Vogelbacher stated that pedestrian access is still available because the
gates will be opened to pedestrians who wish to enter the Bearpath development.
Kardell stated she understood that the LRT trail was not going to be cordoned off and
she was very surprised when she saw that gates had been erected.
Clinton recalled that it was originally proposed that a fence would be constructed
along the trail but it would not be closed off. Sandstad stated he was uncomfortable
with having the gates up and perhaps they should be removed. Wissner inquired if the
City Council had granted original approval of the project with the idea that the trail
would be open to the residents. Schlampp recalled this was correct, but it did not
have anything to do with the present request before the Commission.
Foote inquired when these gates would be shut and Vogelbacher responded that at
present the security gates are not operational. He commented that they may have
misunderstood,but the Development Agreement states that pedestrian access to the
site will be allowed to the public. They are allowing access to the public but they
believe they have the right to request that access be gained through the gatehouse or
through access through other gates which can be opened by the guard at the
gatehouse. Their intention is to have all traffic enter the development through the
gatehouse, as they want to know who is coming into their community.
The Public Hearing was opened.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 6
Reed Johnson, 9166 Breckenridge Lane, described the location of his house, and
noted this is an area which would be impacted by the amendment to the PUD. He
stated that the Planning Board of Bearpath had been relatively consistent in enforcing
the setbacks. He was unsure he supported having garages 20' from the front property
lines as he believed this could create a tunnel effect on the streets. He questioned if
this would apply to all lots within the development or only those indicated in yellow
in the plans submitted by the developers.
Franzen stated that the City Code has all setback requirements for all residential
districts established and to change those requirements requires a variance,which can
be granted by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The Planned Unit
Development designation is used for projects in which the development is constructed
in phases. As part of the PUD process the City has the authority to grant waivers
from standard setback requirements if it will improve the quality of the development.
Vogelbacher stated that the setback waiver would be applied to construction of
courtyard-driveway type homes. They have a 30' rear yard setback for homes
adjacent to the golf course, and this will not be used for all the homes in the
development. It is to provide flexibility for those homes that wish to use this type of
architecture.
Bob Engelke, 9214 Breckenridge Lane, stated they live on the west side of
Breckenridge Lane. His home is constructed with this style of architecture and is
located 30'from the road. He stated he was opposed to granting the waiver as he felt
the setbacks should be uniformly enforced for all the residents of the development.
He understood that the gates across the trail should be up and operating by now, and
he supported having all traffic, vehicular and pedestrian, entering the community
through the gatehouse.
Bill and Dolores Reimer, 9190 Breckenridge Lane, stated they supported the
comments made by the two previous homeowners. They purchased their lot with the
understanding that the front yard setback requirements were 30 feet and they did not
support this change. They believed there would be an adverse impact on the streets
in the neighborhood if the waiver were to be granted. They wanted to have the
setbacks consistent on both sides of the street.
Mark Heffelfinger,9196 Breckenridge Lane, stated they have gotten a few golf balls
in their back yard,but none through the plate glass windows yet. He has seen other
developments of homes surrounding golf courses and he did not feel that safety was
a major factor in the setback issue. He thought that if they got much more snow that
they would need more snow storage space. He liked the idea of a variety of design
throughout the development but he felt that the setback should be kept at the 30 foot
idistance. If there was a specific need for a variance it should be considered on an
individual basis.
Rodney Hardy, Principal and an owner of Bearpath Development, 5300 Oaklawn
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 7
Avenue, stated that every plan goes before a 5-member committee and they have
followed the guidelines as set forth in the PUD Agreement. Most lots are sold and
having seen where the golf balls have been found they are concerned that if they use
the setbacks in the PUD standards they should have an alternative for those homes on
lots which would be impacted by the fairways. If they have to come before the
Planning Commission on a lot by lot basis,it will take up a lot of time for everyone
concerned. They felt that this would be the best means of achieving this because the
Architectural Committee has the ability to make decisions on a lot by lot basis.
Regarding the issue of the gates on the trail,it was the represented that the corridor
was going to be fenced off which provided the need for the gates. The pedestrian
gates will be manually controlled by the gatehouse and can be opened by the operator.
Sandstad commented he appreciated the work that the Architectural Committee had
done on the project but he did not recall the gates being approved. He believed that
the Bearpath development should hold a neighborhood meeting with all homeowners
present to discuss this request, as it was evident that all homeowners did not agree
with the variance request. He believed the item should be continued to resolve the
gate issue, allow the proponents to hold a homeowners meeting,including those who
owned property but had not yet built homes, and to determine exactly which lots
would be affected by the reduced front yard setback variance.
Discussion ensued regarding the gates across the right-of-way and how other gated
communities are operated. Vogelbacher stated that pedestrian and bicycle traffic is
allowed through the gatehouse, but the development was private property and the
owners had the right to know who was coming into the development. He emphasized
that this was not public property, no uses of public funds had been made in its
construction, and they have the right to provide security for those people who live
within this development.
Sandstad stated that these were matters which impacted the present request as far as
he was concerned, and the idea of being grilled by a gatehouse attendant in order to
gain access to a neighborhood was offensive. He wished to table the request until the
next Planning Commission meeting to allow staff to research the original approval
request, provide copies of minutes, etc. to Commissioners and determine whether
gates had been approved at the present locations.
Foote inquired who provided police and fire protection for the community and
Vogelbacher responded those were provided by the City of Eden Prairie. All streets,
street lighting, utilities, trails, etc. had been paid for and were maintained by the
developers. The issue of security for the residents of the community was an important
one, and residents needed to feel that their community was safe and secure.
MOTION: Sandstadt moved, Clinton seconded,to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 7-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 8, 1996
Page 8
MOTION: Sandstad moved, Clinton seconded, to recommend Continuance of the
PUD Amendment and Zoning District Amendment on 15 acres for Bearpath Limited
Partnership for two weeks to allow staff to research the history of the development
and provide the Commissioners with Minutes,Plans, etc. which were approved by the
Planning Commission and City Council, and to allow the proponents time to hold a
neighborhood meeting. Motion carried 7-0.
V. MEMBERS' REPORTS
Kardell reported on the progress the City Council had made regarding the revision of the
process of appointing citizens to serve on the various Boards and Commissions of the City.
The Housing, Transportation and Social Services Board will be working with staff to devise
plans to change policies and draft an action plan for dealing with housing and transportation
issues.
VI. CONTINUING BUSINESS
None.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
Ismail requested a performance report from staff on the Planning Commission for 1995
regarding actions taken as to how the City Council had acted. He also requested that some
feedback from the Council be given regarding how they believed the Planning Commission
had performed. Kardell noted that the Council had discussed appointing a liaison to each
Board and Commission.
VIII. PLANNER'S REPORTS
Franzen stated that new projects proposed in 1996 included hotels, very large office and
industrial buildings, and large multiple-family projects.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Clinton moved, Ismail seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0.
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.