Loading...
Planning Commission - 06/26/1995 ;APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION June 26, 1995 COMMISSION MEMBERS: Tim Bauer, Kenneth C. Clinton, Randy Foote, Ismail Ismail, Katherine Kardell, Edward Schlampp, Mary Jane Wissner STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner; Donald Uram, Planner; Elinda Bahley, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chair Katherine Kardell. Absent were Tim Bauer; all other members were present. H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Wissner, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0-0. M. MINUTES MOTION: Schlampp moved, seconded by Wissner, to approve the Minutes of June 12, 1995 as amended: page 8, fourth paragraph should read: Schlampp indicated that stucco would look nice, but vinyl is used around in Eden Prairie in very expensive homes. Motion carried 5-0-1 with one abstention by Kardell. IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. KNOB HILL ESTATES by Knob Hill Homes. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 7.0 acres and Preliminary Plat of 7.0 acres into 16 lots. Location: Sunnybrook Road. Kardell noted that the applicant is withdrawing the project. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Foote, to close the public hearing and return the development plans to the proponent without prejudice. Motion carried 6-0-0. B. FOREST HILLS 8TH ADDITION by Taurus Properties. Request for rezoning from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 9.1 acres and Preliminary Plat of 9.1 acres into 20 lots. Location: West of Baker Road south of Theresa Place. Franzen noted that at the last meeting, the Commission directed the developer to look at a revised concept plan. The new plan indicates no connection to Forest Hills Road. There is one less lot along the west property line. A sidewalk or trail connection is possible within City right-of-way and between two lots to make the connection between Forest Hills Road and Theresa Place. The Commission also asked Staff to look into any past traffic studies or traffic counts that have been done in the area. In June of last year, there were traffic counts done at 3 intersections. One was at Valley View Road and Golf View Drive, one at the intersection of Golf View Drive and Kingston Drive, and one was at Holly Road. Most of the traffic was concentrated down at Golf View Drive and Valley View Road because that's where the highest density is. Over the course of a 24 hour period, about 1400-1450 vehicles went over the meter, and about 40% of those cars would be during peak hours, at 7:00 or 8:00 in the morning. Another busy time period was between 4:30 and 6:00 in the afternoon when people are coming home from work. The traffic count for Golf View and Kingston is about 750 cars over the course of the day. Duane Dietrich, representing Taurus Properties, reviewed his project with the Planning Commission. He noted that they have removed a lot and are down to 19 units. The lots average about 16,000 square feet each. Tracy Keibler, residing at 6995 Mariann Driver. commented that the developer has worked very nicely with the residents, and has provided a good transition. She said that even though the one lot near her end is being removed, she was concerned about the fact that it's just going to be rezoned to 13.5. There are 3 lots that are even less than 13.5 that are in the 12,000 range. She is very concerned about the density issue. Evelette Bjornsen, residing at 6975 Mariann Driver, expressed concern that there are two many houses in such a small area, that it's too tight. She feels that all the homes will be crammed in together. Mike Zimmer, 6923 Kingston Driver, expressed concern that road, as it connects to Golf View and Holly, has truly become a thoroughfare. He was concerned about cars speeding and running stop signs. His concerns are for the safety of the small children. Glen Bowen, 7025 Mariann Drive, was concerned that the preservation of trees is critical in providing a satisfactory transition for the new neighborhood with respect to their lot. The trees extend across a substantial portion of their . lot, and it would also benefit new adjacent lots in the development. Larry Steinblock, residing at 13710 Theresa Place, thanked the developer for listening to the neighborhood concerns. He is concerned about bringing traffic into an area that was never meant to receive traffic. Foote was concerned about the removal of trees according to the letter from Glenn Bowen. Dietrich replied that he will do whatever he can to save the trees. The ordinance is such that if they are significant trees, they would have to replace them. The trees that are 30 feet on the back of the Lots 1, 2, and 3 will remain. Kardell noted that for the benefit of the audience, only a conceptual plan is being reviewed this evening. The developer is required to come back with a full set of plans which will include a tree inventory. The Commission's experience is that trees are a resource. Clinton expressed concern about the connection of Forest Hills to Baker. He feels that people are creatures of habit and will continue to use Kingston to get down to Golf View. Wissner was concerned about sidewalks being put in if the cul-de-sac is removed. She is in favor of the cul-de-sac. She has no problem with the amount of homes. She also noted that the developer made an effort to revise the plan for a better transition. Dietrich commented that it doesn't make sense to put one sidewalk in one block. He said to do it right and sidewalks are needed on other roads in the area. Wissner suggested a sidewalk only if it became a major thoroughfare. Kardell suggested that the neighbors who live on Kingston and Golf View work with the Engineering Staff, and bring their concerns forward to help with the traffic problems. MOTION 1: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote, to recommend that the project be continued until the July 10, 1995 meeting with direction that the developer provide the required information on grading, drainage, utilities, ponding, tree replacement, sidewalks, and the asphalt path from Theresa Place. Motion carried 6-0-0. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PRESERVE VILLAGE CENTER by Semper Holding, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the Community Commercial Zoning District on 9.46 acres, Site Plan review on 9.46 acres and Preliminary Plat of 9.46 acres into one lot. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and C.S.A.H. 18. • Howard Bergerud, developer, introduced John Kohler, architect for the project who reviewed the project with the Planning Commission. He noted that the site is about 9 1/2 acres. It's unique because it's a two step process that takes into consideration, Anderson Lakes Parkway as it exists today, and the future design for Anderson Lakes Parkway with C.S.A.H. #18 upgrading. The proposal is to demolish the north end of the building, which is 24,000 square feet, and construct a 13,905 square foot free-standing Walgreens. Overall, this would reduce the square footage. The buildings and parking areas meet the minimum setbacks required in the C-COM zoning district. The design depicts 378 usable parking spaces and 40 proof-of-parking spaces. Per staff recommendation, 7 additional stalls will be placed in proof-of-parking to improve circulation. Clinton was concerned about access to the west when leaving Walgreens parking lot. Bergerud replied that you would have to utilize the frontage road. Clinton asked if the hardware store would be relocated or would it disappear completely. Bergerud replied that the hardware store would no longer be there. Wissner was concerned about where the tenants would be while the renovation is taking place. John Kohler, architect, replied that everybody is going to • remain as they are, or they will be moving around a little bit. They all have exterior entrances, so those on the outside may shift around. Wissner expressed concern about the tenants continuing business while the renovation is taking place. Bergerud replied that everyone will be able to continue their business, and they are all very pleased that the renovation is taking place. Schlampp was concerned about whether actual arrangements have been made with the tenants. He was concerned about their businesses not surviving. Bergerud replied that here is a space for every tenant and there is a little extra space right now. Every tenant will have a space during the renovation. Uram commented that the City welcomes this project because the shopping center really needs to be renovated. The City is'concerned about the businesses economically. This is a very good step in the right direction. Staff is recommending approval subject to the recommendations in the Staff Report. John Lunzer, residing at 9702 CIark Circle, expressed concern about the lighting standards. He was also concerned about the yard and drainage area on the other side of the fence. He said it is faulty and needs repairs. It's part of the center property. Uram noted that one of the requirements for the Staff Report were to have all the utilities inspected and repaired if necessary. After analysis of the situation, if repairs are needed, it would be the responsibility of the developer. Staff will also do an analysis of the pole height to see what kind of illumination they can get, and they are proposing to have bronze, 25 foot high, downcast, cut- off luminars pointing downward. Bergerud commented that they will be taking care of all necessary repairs like a fence, or a retaining wall that needs to be put in. All of those things will be part of the renovation for the center, inside, outside and to the property itself. Royal Provost, residing at 9622 Clark Circle, expressed concern about the height of the lighting and the downcast. He was concerned about people on the back end of the property looking over the berm, and having to look at those lights. He also expressed concern about the traffic situation on Garrison Way. Foote asked if there was any other way out of that neighborhood other than Anderson Parkway. Uram replied that that's the only way out. Jane Larson, residing at 9672 Clark Circle, expressed concern about the lighting standard. Right now she gets the lights from the shopping center in • her bedroom window, and there's noise from the parking lot. She would like to see the lights come down from 25 feet. Even if they are pointed down, it will still shine in her rooms and yard. She also expressed concern about the foot traffic at the property line from C.S.A.H. #18 across the vacant lot and through the easement. She suggested a fence be put in to eliminate the foot traffic. This is also a security issue and noise issue for her. She was concerned about the people that speed in that area. Dave Oliver, residing at 9661 Clark Circle, was concerned about the truck deliveries early in the morning. He suggested that Walgreens take the center and the other tenants take the ends. He feels this would eliminate the traffic problem. Bergerud indicated that Walgreens today works only with free-standing buildings. The reason they do this is because they now have drive-thru windows for people to pick up prescriptions. They need to be able to have transportation go around the building. Foote noted that he drove over there and was concerned that people have a hard time exiting. Schlampp was pleased to see the renovation take place, but was concerned about the small tenants. Cindy McKee, owner of Snips Salon, noted that she was very excited about the renovation. Many of her clients have commented about the condition of the mall. She was concerned about the lighting conditions in the back being unsafe for her employees to leave. Clinton shared the concerns about the physical condition of the mall, that it needs to be upgraded. He also agrees with the lighting conditions not being safe, and also shares the concerns with the neighbors about the lights shining in their homes. He was also concerned about the traffic getting in and to the residential area, versus getting traffic in and out of the retail. Ismail expressed concern about the lighting conditions, and suggested studies to be done around the surrounding area. Uram indicated that Staff will require the developer to do a lighting analysis. City Code requires that there be no offsite glare. Staff will do what is necessary. The traffic analysis has been done, and he just needs to find out the results. He will put a copy in the packets or write a memo for the Commission regarding the results. Kardell feels that the project is definitely needed, and very much likes the feature of the drive-thru. She does not think this project exasperates the traffic situation. This project is not adding traffic, but reducing the density on the site by about 10,000 square feet. She would like updates of the traffic studies that have been done there. Foote asked if there would be stoplights at the frontage road. Uram replied that there will be a signal there. MOTION 1: Wissner moved, seconded by Schlampp, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2: Wissner moved, seconded by Schlampp, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Semper Holding, Inc. for Zoning District Amendment in the Community Zoning District on 9.46 acres based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, and that a lighting study be done on the lighting for the parking lot for the shopping center. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Wissner moved, seconded by Schlampp, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Semper Holding, Inc. for Site Plan Review on 9.46 acres based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, and that a lighting study be done. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 4: Wissner moved, seconded by Schlampp, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Semper Holding, Inc. for Preliminary Plat on 9.46 acres into 1 lot based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, and that a lighting study be done. Motion carried 6-0-0. B. KINDERCARE by Kindercare. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 2.75 acres. Location: Hwy. 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. John Dietrich, consultant, RLK Associates, reviewed his project with the Planning Commission. He understands that Staff is recommending an alternative site plan. They have looked at that and considered what else they could do to have a safe site. They feel the site plan functions to the highest level that Kindercare puts on each and every one of their sites. By centralizing the access and having multiple accesses exiting out of the parking lot, it's going to have a good traffic flow through the site. The are proposing a berm as a result of the safety issues arising from Highway 169. They will put in the correct amount of landscaping and replacement for caliber inches. Kindercare has the experience committed to developing quality care, qualities including safety and the welfare of the children. Schlampp asked how high is the berm on the west side of the lot. Dietrich replied that there's a berm that comes up about 3 feet above the roadway, and then it will be dropping back down into the site. Schlampp asked if there's a berm on the south side of the lot. Dietrich replied that it is not a berm. It's more of a flat sidewalk and it moves down at a 3:1 slope. Schlampp was concerned about the safety of the children and suggested moving the parking lot to the front and the playground to the rear. He said the City is recommending that also, and that it's logical. Ismail inquired about the age of the children that will be at the Kindercare. Greg Eswine replied that the ages will range from 6 weeks old up to 12 years old, 180 children maximum. Ismail asked what was different about the other alternatives for the building location. He mentioned that other plans have not been shown to the Commission. Dietrich replied that they have looked at alternatives for the building location. When the building was in the center, you have dead end parking. In terms of centering locating it, the need to have the play areas for the way the Kindercare has structured their facility. This was the best solution for how they set up their operation in terms of the different levels of play, and the access point to the building. Wissner expressed concern about the safety of the children being so close to 169. Foote shared the same concerns as Wissner and Schlampp did. He also would not want children to hear the noise of a crash, if it did happen. He would like to see the play area placed around the back. Greg Eswine stated that there are over 1200 Kindercares around the country. Day care is now viewed as commercial instead of residential. Franzen reviewed the Staff Report with the Commission. He noted that the main question is whether or not the Commission is comfortable with the plan as proposed, or should they explore different plans with a different location for the building, the playground area and the parking. Mike Hodges,residing at 12575 Creek Court, expressed concern about the tree replacement. Franzen replied that the City has an ordinance on tree preservation. A significant tree is based upon the species and diameter of the tree. For example, an oak or maple tree, greater than 12 inches in diameter, would be replaced as a percentage of those trees that are removed. The developer can not touch any trees in the wetland area. All the trees that are coming out are higher up on the property. Mike Hodges expressed concern about the holding pond that he see from his house. He can see it very clearly when there are no trees. He was also concerned about what type of fencing would go around the play area. Schlampp asked where the wetland drains. Franzen replied he thought it flows easterly over towards a wetland area on the south side of Anderson Lakes Parkway. Dietrich noted that all of the play areas will have a 4 foot green chain link fence surrounding the entire site. Ismail indicated that he would like the developer to go back and work on a convincing argument about why this specific design is really the best. He would also like the Staff to take care of the concern of Mr. Hodge's about drainage. Wissner commented that she is very uncomfortable with the plan and is not sure about this site for a day care center as a landuse. She asked the developer to come back and prove that this site will work for a daycare. Clinton indicated that he would like a more convincing argument that this site will work for a day care center. He was concerned about the noise that small . children must endure. Kardell commented that the primary concern with the site plan is safety. She did not hear from Mr. Dietrich why this plan was preferred, especially since Staff expressed concern from the beginning about the safety and noise issue. She was also concerned about the parking since it is not clear if there is a shared parking agreement with the office building. She would like to see that issue addressed. She would like to see the Staff work with Kindercare on a better site plan, if possible. If not, she thought this Commission is not convinced about a day care on this site. She noted that a 3 foot berm and 4 foot chain link fence is not going to stop semi-trailer trucks at that intersection. Franzen indicated that he would get the resident's phone number and get someone from the Engineering Department to call him directly. MOTION 1: Clinton moved, seconded by Schlampp, to continue the public hearing to the July 24, 1995 meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0. C. HARTFORD PLACE - OFFICE DEPOT by Ryan Construction Company. Request for Site Plan review on 4.43 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 4.43 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 4.43 acres. Location: Lot 2, Block 1, Prairie Lakes Business Park. Franzen noted that Ryan Companies is requesting the Planning Commission to approve an alternative plan for the development of Site 1, of the Hartford Place project. The approved plan was for two small restaurants and an office building. The current proposal is for a 30,000 square foot Office Depot. This is a site that has a Commercial Zoning. This is a site that can be done office, restaurant or general retail. Staff is comfortable with either use of the property. Janine Crone, of RLK, reviewed the alternative plan and the approved plan. She noted that the new plan building is taller that the one already approved, and for that reason there will be more trees on this site. There will be 187 caliber inches, and on the approved plan there was 127 caliber inches. Two 6 foot retaining walls in the back will be needed to make the grade on this site. Ryan Construction has agreed to replace the existing City sanitary sewer pipe with a 10 inch iron pipe which would be required for the extra fill. The architecture will remain the same on the outside as previously approved. Staff recommended a rooftop mechanical screening plan with a 3 foot high parapet wall. Ryan Construction's architect came up with another alternative. They proposed that a screening wall to enclose all the mechanical equipment. That wall would be 5 feet tall. The advantage of this would be that it would not be visible from Prairie Center Drive. It would establish screening and would also avoid making the building look taller than it already is, which is about 23 feet tall. Kardell was concerned about this being less advantageous or more advantageous in the loss of existing trees. Crone replied that they have saved a few significant trees on the site. There are not that many on the site. There are a few in the middle. Wissner asked if an Office Depot was definite. Tom Palmquist, Ryan Companies, replied that it's a probable alternative to the property.Kardell commented that the issue of screening of the mechanical equipment has come up fairly often in the past. They are very sensitive to that, but if Staff is comfortable with it, she expects that it be consistent within the balance of the projects. Franzen noted that if they approve the mechanical equipment of a certain height that matches the building, he wants that same application on all other building projects. Palmquist asked if he means material or just from the overall color. Franzen replied material and color. Foote commented that the project looks good and he has no problem with it. Regarding the parapet wall, he wondered how they can do this on one and enforce it on the other ones. Franzen replied that the City ordinance requires screening from public roads and adjacent land uses. The actual solution depends upon the project and the circumstances. Wissner indicated that she supports the project. Schlampp supports the project. Kardell supports the project. She indicated that the intent is that Staff will work out the mechanical screening issue with them, and whatever is determined will be consistent on the balance of the commercial property as well. MOTION 1: Wissner moved, seconded by Foote, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2: Wissner moved, seconded by Foote, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Ryan Construction Company for Site Plan review on 4.43 acres based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, with the addition of the fact that the parapet would be on this building and in all other buildings consistent to each other. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Wissner moved, seconded by Foote, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Ryan Construction Company for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 4.43 acres based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, with the addition of the fact that the parapet would be on this building and in all other buildings consistent to each other. Motion carried 6- 0-0. MOTION 4: Wissner moved, seconded by Foote, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Ryan Construction Company for Zoning District Amendment in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 4.43 acres based on plans dated June 12, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated June 23, 1995, with the addition of the fact that the parapet would be on this building and in all other buildings consistent to each other. Motion carried 6-0-0. VI. MEMBERS' REPORTS Temporary Replacement of Tim Bauer Clinton noted that at the last meeting there was a recommendation to generate a memo concerning the temporary assignment of someone to fill Tim Bauer's • term. It was recommended that the person perhaps would be Doug Sandstad. The Commission suggested making a recommendation to the City Council regarding a process for appointing members to the Commission. Clinton indicated that he has not done it yet, but he will do that tomorrow. Tree Preservation Committee Foote gave an update of what has happened at the meetings. A further discussion was held regarding the efforts of the Tree Committee. Chamber of Commerce Wissner noted that she is a member of the Chamber of Commerce and they are putting together an image book from Illinois and Michigan, and the people were very impressed with Eden Prairie. She was on the committee to talk about Eden Prairie on how unique they are in comparison to other places. She thanked the Staff and the Commissioners for helping to make Eden Prairie what it is. VII. CONTINIMG BUSINESS Training for Commissioners Ismail reminded Staff that he would like something put together to help train Commissioners. Franzen responded he would put together an outline for July 24th. VIII. NEW BUSINESS MESSAGE BOARD Wissner commented that she likes the message board, but suggested that leveling off the berm a little bit would help people see it clearly coming from the south. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Ismail noted that he received a memo on May 22nd from Mike Franzen regarding the affordable housing project. He asked about the status of the project. Franzen indicated that this project is on County Road 4, and the project is by Rottland Homes. The Commission will look at this in the last part of July or the first part of August. IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS Franzen gave a list of projects scheduled for the next meeting. There are two restaurants, possibly another Kindercare project, and a Holiday gas station convenience store, and a project for small lot single family homes in the range of$200,000 to $275,000. X. ADJOLWiMENT MOTION: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. 12 EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 26, 1995 7:00 p.m. • COMIVIISSION MEMBERS: Tim Bauer, Kenneth E. Clinton, Randy Foote, Ismail Ismail, Katherine Kardell, Edward Schlampp, Mary Jane Wissner STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner Don Uram, Economic Development Manager Scott Kipp, Planner I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MINUTES IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. KNOB HILL ESTATES by Knob Hill Homes. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 7.0 acres and Preliminary Plat of 7.0 acres into 16 lots. Location: Sunnybrook Road. B. FOREST HILLS STH ADDITION by Taurus Properties. Request for rezoning from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 9.1 acres and Preliminary Plat of 9.1 acres into 21 lots. Location: West of Baker Road south of Theresa Place. V. PUBLIC HEARING A. PRESERVE VILLAGE CENTER by Semper Holding, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the Community Commercial Zoning District on 9.133 acres, Site Plan Review on 9.133 acres and Preliminary Plat of 9.133 acres into two lots. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and C.S.A.H. 18. B. KINDERCARE by Kindercare. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 2.75 acres. Location: Hwy 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. C. HARTFORD PLACE - OFFICE DEPOT by Ryan Construction Company. Request for Site Plan Review on 4.43 acres and Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 4.43 acres. Location: Lot 2, Block 1, Prairie Lakes Business Park. VI. MEMBERS' REPORTS VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS • IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS X. ADJOURNMENT