Loading...
Planning Commission - 08/28/1995 ;APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION August 28, 1995 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 Elinda Bahley, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chair Katherine Kardell. Clinton was absent; all other members were present. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Wissner to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote to approve the Minutes of August 14, 1995 as published. Motion carried 5-0-1 with one abstention by Ismail. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ABRA AUTO BODY by Abra Auto Body. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Community Commercial on 1.1 acre, Rezoning from 1-2 to Community Commercial on 1.1 acre, Site Plan review on 1.1 acre, Preliminary Plat of 2.36 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Location: Northeast corner of Hwy. 169 and Aztec Drive. Alan Stowe, developer, reviewed his development proposal with the Planning Commission. The proposal is to build a new Abra Auto Body across the street from where they currently lease space from Modern Tire Company. The building will be approximately 8,760 square feet, which is typical of an Abra Auto Body facility. It will be an all brick building. 1 The property is approximately 1.1 acres. It is the westerly parcel of a two lot platting request. The construction of Aztec Drive disected the underlying parcel into two lots. Kardell was concerned about the trash receptacles. She wanted to know if it was sufficient enough and would be completely enclosed. Stowe showed her on the map the location of the dumpsters, and noted that they will be completely enclosed with a roof. It will be large enough to handle three separate dumpsters. Kipp reviewed the Staff Report with the Planning Commission. He noted that the main issue is whether or not to change the Guide Plan to Community Commercial. After reviewing the site and the surrounding land use, Staff feels that Community Commercial is the appropriate use for the site. The site is adjacent to Highway 169. As a Community Commercial use, the area will have a better architectural design, and the site will provide for a more desirable land use in the future should Abra Auto Body sell the site in the future. Community Commercial land use is more appropriate than Industrial adjacent to residential. It will allow the application of the higher building material standards, including 75% facebrick and glass. The Staff Report's recommendation is to add landscape screening on the north side of the building to block the view of the parking. Staff recommends approval of this proposal. Ismail was concerned about what their previous site would be used for. Kipp indicated that Abra Auto Body has been leasing from the Modern Tire facility, and Modern Tire will remain there. Wissner indicated that she supports the project. Kipp noted that a neighborhood meeting was held on the property, and two residents did attend and felt that a commercial land use would be more appropriate. 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 Abra Auto Body for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Community Commercial on 1.1 acres, Rezoning from I-2 to Community Commercial on 1.1 acres, Site Plan Review on 1.1 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 2.36 acres into two lots and road right-of-way based on plans dated August 1, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of 2 the Staff Report dated August 25, 1995. Motion carried 6-0-0. B. PIONEER RIDGE 2ND ADDITION (1995) by Rottlund Homes. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 12.18 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 19.03 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 12.18 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 on 12.18 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 12.18 acres into 43 single family lots. Location: County Road 4 and Pioneer Trail. Franzen indicated that'tonight's meeting is for review of the concept and the Comprehensive Guide Plan change. Detailed plans would be reviewed at a subsequent meeting. Tim Witten, architect and Vice-President of Rottlund Company, reviewed his development proposal with the Planning Commission. The market focus is on empty nesters and senior citizens. There is little opportunity for this in Eden Prairie right now. The price range of the homes are from $120,000 to $150,000. The need is for one level living, maintenance free, which is critical for the buyer's needs and wants. There will be a homeowner's association to maintain the grounds. The proposal is for 43 single family detached homes, with two car garages. There are four plans of which two are two bedrooms, and two are three bedrooms. The two bedroom plans offer an opportunity for a front porch and also for a side garage. There are two different elevations with three color palettes. The plans range from 1360 to 1580 square feet. There is a similar product of this in a development called Arbor Pointe. The homes are angled at 30 degrees to the street to create the variety of a different texture to the street, and to create the opportunity for some of the sidewalk conditions. It will also allow a greater private area at the entry way. The location of these homes has access to major roads and amenities, which is a great advantage to the buyer. It will act as a transitional residential use to the existing single family where these busy roads act as a buffer to that residential use for transition. There is a pond as a buffer to the existing single family to the north. There is extensive landscaping that buffers the county roads, and the existing single family lots and homes. They plan to retain the fence to buffer the residents. Schlampp suggested using berms and then landscape to buffer the area. Witten replied that the landscaping will be maintained, but a berm is something they would entertain. 3 Wayne Tower, consultant, noted that this is not a full proposal. This is a concept plan and they do intend to do some berming, but they don't have a grading plan. They can do berming all around except at the southwest corner where the wetland is. Ismail was concerned that the houses seem to be very crowded. Witten replied that it's part of the way of satisfying a certain price range in that particular market. They would be working their way out of that price range if they were to reduce the number of units. Wissner noted that she visited the Pines development and commented that she was very impressed with the site. She was concerned about the distance between the units. Witten indicated that this plan is exactly the same as the Pines, 15 feet apart. Wissner asked for an explanation of empty nesters because there is a need for starter homes or for the single professional person. Witten replied that they build homes and develop property for all those different buyers, and it's very hard to focus on such a broad range. Empty nesters is just because of the need. It's never to say that it can only be empty nesters. There is a need for people that are moving out of single family homes looking for maybe that last purchase, and they want that purchase to be very adaptable to their needs. Wissner was concerned about the homes all being one level. Witten noted that they are very confident that they are satisfying a buyer market that has these needs. Foote asked if it was possible to put basements in these homes. Witten replied that they have not discussed it at this point. They are finding that people don't want basements. The buyers are looking for one level and rather not pay for the extra level. Sandstad was concerned about the sidewalk and trail connections. Witten replied that presently there is a proposed trail on County Roads 1 and 4. As far as connecting to them, they are not proposing anything on the public street. Franzen noted that the key question is whether there is a compelling reason for changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Page 2 of the Staff Report has a list of potential reasons to changing the plan. Page 3 has a list of reasons for not changing the plan. Staff recommended alternative #2 because they have some concerns about the architectural diversity within the project. Staff is also concerned about the relationship to the uses surrounding the property, and the uses that are on the east end. The property owners on the north side of the project moved into this area with the expectation of the property developing 4 consistent with the Guide Plan. Al Krause, residing at 15911 Cedar Ridge Road, indicated that he is the president of the homeowner's association immediate to the north of this site. He was concerned about the Guide Plan being stable and not changed. The smallest lot in his development is 3/4 of an acre. He was concerned about all the homes looking similar. He does not feel this is a site for seniors because the nearest store is two miles away, and seniors like to walk to the store. He was concerned about the increase of cars at County Road 4 and Cedar Ridge Road because of the double car garages. He was also concerned about the treatment pond and who is going to maintain it. He would like the Planning Commission to consider recommendation #3. Tower noted that once the treatment pond is built and the utilities are in, it's the City's responsibility to maintain the pond. Jennifer Schroer, residing at 15820 Corral Lane, noted that she shares the same concerns with Mr. Krause. She also expressed concern about the access to County Road 4 because of the abundance of traffic. She was concerned about the blending of this development with the existing developments because there will be three very different types of properties coming together. She commented that the walking trails are not on the perimeter of this property, but are across the two highways. Franzen noted that when the City looked at the 25 unit plan, there was a requirement that the access of Azalea Trail to County Road 4 would not occur until County Road is upgraded. Regardless of what is built on this property, until that road is upgraded, everybody must go back out the other way. Regarding the sidewalks, the Parks'Commission required a-sidewalk to go on one side of Azalea Trail, and that would be built by the developer with the project. Ken Lindeman, residing at 15901 Corral Lane, noted that he lives directly north of the proposed development, right next to the pond. He doesn't understand why the developer is back when they were approved for the 25 unit plan. He was concerned about the pond being dangerous for the neighborhood because the empty nesters may not have children, but they do have grandchildren. He expressed concern about the density, the architecture being boring, and there not being enough parking for visitors. He asked where the association office was on the plan. Witten indicated that there would be a separate building for the association. It's a cooperative effort among all the residents, and they would just meet in someone's home. Lindeman asked who is going to administer this project. 5 Witten replied that it's administered by the Rottlund Company. Lindeman expressed concern that the administrator would not being living on the premises, and will know nothing at all about what's going on. Kathleen Lindeman, residing at 15901 Corral Lane, expressed concern about the pond being dangerous and someone could drown. She noted that the eastern side of the pond is where the biggest part of the pond is with the highest elevation. Tower indicated that this pond is slightly larger than the original pond that was proposed with the 25 single family lots. There will be some grading over there but it will be graded in the same safety standard that the original pond was graded at. Kathleen Lindeman commented that they can not discriminate a family with children from moving in there, and she was concerned that there is not enough room between the homes for children to play. She was also concerned about shrubs being planted near the windows because that would be an easy target for burglars. She commented that this site is not giving seniors very good access to their neighborhood, and it would be dangerous for them because of the shrubs near the windows, the homes so close together, and the high flow of traffic at Cedar Ridge Road. Barb Koch, residing at 9071 Palmetto Drive, was concerned about when Eden Prairie Road is going to be improved on so that Azalea can be opened up to that. Franzen noted that the last he heard from the County, it would be completed in 1996. Koch commented that she was concerned about the traffic on Palmetto being a safety hazard. She was also concerned about the transition, that it will look ridiculous next to their $250,000 to $300,000 homes, and it will decrease the value. She encouraged the Planning Commission to lower the density. Richard Smith, residing at 9087 Palmetto Drive, commented that he shares the same concerns as his neighbors have stated. He noted that he bought his house based on the long term plans of the 25 single family lot plan. He expressed concern about the buffering, the high density of traffic, and the parking. Larry Leman, residing at 8947 Eden Prairie Road, commented that he can't believe that they are here again. He expressed concern about the density, and does not feel the homes blend with the neighborhood use. 6 Richard O'Brien, residing at 15785 Cedar Ridge Road, reiterated the concerns that his neighbors have expressed. He commented that the issue really before the Planning Commission is whether or not there is a compelling reason to change the Guide Plan. Robert Gartner, residing at 15769 Cedar Ridge Road, commented that this plan does not fit the neighborhood. He was concerned about a traffic light being put in at the intersection if this plan is approved. He was also concerned about there not being enough parking. Bob Waldron, residing at 15710 Corral Lane, was concerned about street lighting shining into his bedroom, and about the wildlife in the area. He commented that a couple of weeks ago a child died in the lake, and he was concerned about a fence around the pond. Virginia Gartner, residing at 15769 Cedar Ridge Road, was concerned about whether there was going to be a covenants that says you can only sell your house to senior citizens. Witten commented that there would be no requirements that senior citizens live there. It's targeting towards a certain market that doesn't have the opportunity in the traditional development, and it happens to be senior citizens and empty nesters. Sandstad commented that his parents live in a development like this and they love it. They sell very quickly and have a high resale value. They have an association and most of the residents seem to be elderly. There are never any kids around because they are mature owners. He also commented that there isn't anything like this in Eden Prairie. Richard Smith commented that a more logical site for this would be next to the senior center. Kathleen Lindeman commented that if anyone took a look at their other development, they have to keep in mind that Eden Prairie does not have the transportation systems that they have in Dakota County. Eden Prairie's traffic does not flow the way their traffic flows. Ron Soren, residing at 15810 Corral Lane, noted that he lives across the street from the pond. He was concerned about the trees that would be lost due to berms, that he would like to have more neighbors and not look at the back of hills. He expressed concern about the density of the homes, that he would like them spread further apart. He feels those homes are unprotected and are a good target for burglars. He commented that he is not against the project,just 7 the location. Wissner expressed concern about the snow removal, that there will not be enough space for the snow. Witten replied that there will be enough space and he pointed it out on the map. Schlampp was concerned about why the developer switched the project from 25 units to 43 units. Ron Helmer, RH Development, replied that the 25 units was a totally unsuccessful market. There was no interest in it and the marketing would not work. Schlampp commented that this price range of homes is very needed in Eden Prairie, but he was uncomfortable with the type of buffering going in there. He doesn't see it satisfying the transition. He supports the 25 unit plan. Foote noted that he agrees with Schlampp to some degree, although he can see this working. He feels the density has to be dropped a little bit to make it work. He would like to see this project with more uniqueness, more character, maybe multi levels, different fronts, side loaded garages, and sidewalks to be connected up to the existing trail system. Wissner supports the concept plan, but not the site. She was not comfortable with the transition, or the fact that people bought their homes knowing the first plan and then it changed. She was concerned about the density, the parking, and the safety issue of having shrubbery next to the house. She supports recommendation #3. Ismail commented that the neighborhood has a lot of concerns and he feels communication between the developer and the neighborhood is lacking. He suggested that they have meetings in order to work together. He supports alternative #2. Sandstad commented that he likes this type of housing at this location. The more you start tinkering with the density, the more they raise the price on the homes. The transition clearly has not been clearly handled to the north or the east where there is adjacent existing houses. He was concerned about the traffic and the lack of real creativity in design. He supports alternative #2, but the developer needs to rework on specific details. Kardell noted that she was concerned about the compelling reason to change the Guide Plan. She could support alternative #2 because she shares the same concerns as Sandstad regarding lowering the density, that it would increase the cost of the homes. However, she doesn't feel tinkering with this plan is going to get them a better plan that they have already approved on the site with the 8 25 lots. She supports alternative #3 with the understanding with Rottlund Homes that she likes the project, but not at this site. MOTION 1: Sandstad moved, seconded by Foote to continue the public hearing for 30 days. Motion carried 6-0-0. The Planning Commission directed the developer to come back with revised plans that depict lower density, sidewalks, more side loaded garages, possibly multi level houses, more architectural diversity, better transition, possibly berms, a combination of berms and landscaping to the north and to the east, and more communication with the neighbors. Witten commented that it wasn't their intent to avoid a lot of the issues raised. They wanted to get a sense of what everyone feels and they didn't get into that kind of detail, but they certainly will. Richard O'Brien encouraged the developer to interact with the neighbors so they don't come back in 30 days and not know what's going on. He also asked that the Planning Commission request from the developer, when they resubmit their plans, that they have a written compelling reason to deviate from the plan. Kardell noted that they will add that to the list of directions. C. AMOCO CAR WASH by New Image Construction & Development. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Hwy Zoning District on 0.9 acres, and Site Plan Review on 0.9 acres. Location: 8100 Flying Cloud Drive. Joe Kiesling, representing New Image Construction & Development, reviewed his development proposal with the Planning Commission. The proposal is to put a new car wash addition on the south side of the existing building and convert the existing car wash bay into a third service bay. There is an issue regarding the storm sewer that runs underneath their addition. They don't believe that it actually runs right where it's showing and believe it is farther to the south. They will verify the pipe location prior to the City Council meeting. The building addition will conform to the existing architecture and materials. Any existing or proposed rooftop mechanism equipment will be physically screened. Ismail was concerned if it is self-washing or mechanized. Kiesling replied that they are getting away from mechanized units and going with high pressure brushes and chemicals. They are "environmental friendly". 9 Sandstad was concerned about loosing the pine trees on the south side of the building due to a possible sewer line relocation. Kiesling replied that they should not be losing any plantings right now. If they need to move the sewer line, they will machine move the trees back once the work is completed. Kipp commented that the concern Staff has with the project is the verification of the sewer line location, and they want to verify that prior to the City Council meeting. Staff does recommend approval. Wissner was concerned about how many cars go through the car washing a day. Mark Cappella, owner, replied that it's seasonal. Once the new equipment is installed, it will speed up the process. During peak time, it's approximately 125 washes a day. Norris Nelson, residing at 11995 Singletree Lane, president of the Northwestern Technical Institute, noted that the school is adjacent to Amoco. His main concern is parking. Amoco does not have adequate parking. They want to be a good neighbor to Amoco. They have notified Amoco many times not to use their parking lot during the week. There is no school on Fridays or the weekends, and Amoco is free to use their parking lot then. However, they may not use it from Monday through Thursday. Kardell was concerned about whether the 13 required parking spaces includes the employee parking. Kipp replied that it does. Kardell asked if adding a service bay would effect the parking requirements. Kipp replied that code requires 10 spaces plus one space for every service bay, and that's 13 spaces in total. The addition of this bay could increase the turnover of spaces available. According to code, it meets the parking requirements. Staff is willing to work with them to see if they need more parking on site. Franzen commented that it's not uncommon for retail uses to have a greater parking demand. Most businesses, regardless of what business it is, the amount of parking on the property is critical for the business in order to survive. Cappella commented that he received one letter from Mr. Nelson which he in turn sent a letter to all of his managers and staff people about the parking situation. He will follow up with this again to his managers. He noted that he spoke with the bank across the street about having six or eight parking spaces in the bank lot for his people for security and safety, to be able to get to their cars in full view of the other employees. They granted him verbal permission to do so. They have obtained additional insurance for that and have been doing it for two years or better. 10 Wissner asked if there was a certain turn around time for the parking lot. Cappella replied that cars brought in the morning are picked up by 5:00. Those that come in the afternoon are picked up at 10:00. At 11:00 at night, the lot only has five or six cars unless it's in the dead of winter where there are emergencies. Schlampp suggested that Mr. Cappella get a letter from the bank stating this information about the additional parking, and that it will show the gentleman from the school that Amoco is trying to take care of any parking problems. Cappella indicated that he would. Kardell suggested that Staff take a look at this letter, and take a look at busy days when traffic is the worst before it goes to the City Council. MOTION 1: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 2: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of New Image Construction & Development for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Hwy Zoning District on 0.9 acres based on plans dated August 18, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 25, 1995, including the letter from the bank and the traffic review. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of New Image Construction & Development for Site Plan review on 0.9 acres based on plans dated August 18, 1995, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 25, 1995. Motion carried 6-0-0. V. MEMBERS' REPORTS None. VI. CONTINUING BUSINESS None. VII. NEW BUSINESS None. 11 VHL PLANNERS' REPORTS Franzen indicated that at the next meeting the continuation of the Dell Road Highway 5 project will be on the agenda, and a 32 unit development on the west side of Franlo Road. The Planning Commission needs to elect a new Vice President because Tim Bauer has left. The Commission decided to wait until the next meeting when all the members are present. IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Schlampp moved, seconded by Foote to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. 12 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, August 28, 1995 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 H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MINUTES IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ABRA AUTO BODY by Abra Auto Body. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Community Commercial on 1.1 acre, Rezoning from I-2 to Community Commercial on 1.1 acre, Site Plan Review on 1.1 acre, Preliminary Plat of 2.36 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Location: Northeast corner of Hwy. 169 and Aztec Drive. . B. PIONEER RIDGE 2ND ADDITION (1995) by Rottlund Homes. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 12.18 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 19.03 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 12.18 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 on 12.18 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 12.18 acres into 43 single family lots. Location: County Road 4 and Pioneer Trail. C. AMOCO CAR WASH by New Image Construction & Development. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Hwy Zoning District on 0.9 acres, and Site Plan Review on 0.9 acres. Location: 8100 Flying Cloud Drive. V. MEMBERS' REPORTS VI. CONTINUING BUSINESS VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. PLANNERS' REPORTS IX. ADJOURNMENT