Loading...
Planning Commission - 02/11/1991 AGENDA .-DEN PRAIl2IE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, February 11, 1991 7:30 p.m. COMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Christine Dodge, Tim Bauer, Julianne Bye, Robert k Hallett, Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Doug Sandstad. STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don Uram, Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary. Pledge of Allegiance -- Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA H. MEMBERS REPORTS M. MIlVUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. WELTER'S PURGATORY ACRES 6TH ADDITION (91-4-Z-P) Request of Peter Andrea Company for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.95 acres with variances to • be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Preliminary Plat of 10.95 acres into 7 single family lots, 1 outlot and road right of way to be known as Welter's Purgatory Acres 6th Addition. Location: north of Welter's Way and south of Sunnybrook Road. A public hearing. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. PLANNER'S REPORT VII. ADJOURNMENT EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1991 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Christine Dodge, Tim Bauer, Julianne Bye, Robert Hallett, Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Doug Sandstad. STAFF MEMBERS: Scott Kipp, Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary. ROLL CALL: All Members Present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Ruebling to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0-0. U. MEMBERS REPORTS *III. MINUTES MOTION: Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to approve the Minutes of the January 28, 1991 as published and amended. CORRECTION: Page 7, Paragraph 1, Sentence 3 & 4 should read: Groeper replied that the majority of trucks would deliver during the late evening hours. Groeper noted that Cub Foods peak hours of business were from 7PM to 10PM and weekends, which should not interfere with the office traffic in the area. Motion carved 5-0-2. Bauer and Dodge abstained. IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. WELTER'S PURGATORY ACRES 6TH ADDITION (91-4-Z-P) Request of Peter Andrea Company for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.95 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Preliminary Plat of 10.95 acres into 7 single family lots, 1 outlot and road right of way to be known as Welter's Purgatory Acres 6th Addition. Location: north of Welter's Way and south of Sunnybrook Road. A continued public hearing. Planning Commission !February 11, 1991 Page Two Kipp reported that this item had been continued from the January 28, 1991 Planning Commission meeting to provide more detail on a through-street design, tree loss, fire protection, and roadway assessment for existing structures. Jim Ostenson, representing the proponent, presented the plan to extend Welter's Way to a 1500 foot cul-de-sac. Six lots would surround the cul-de-sac and one lot would extend from Sunnybrook Road. The density would be approximately .64 units per acre on the 10.95 acre site. Ostenson stated that the proponent had met with the existing neighbors and had taken their concerns into consideration with the plan. Outlot A would be donated to the City and used for access to Purgatory Creek. Ostenson noted that development needed to be pushed to the west due to poor soil conditions close to the wetland area. Ostenson presented an alternate plan to extend the road through to Sunnybrook Road as requested by the Planning Commission. This plan depicted 14 lots with no variances in lieu of the 7 lots of the original plan. The alternate plan would create several problems; approximately 500 caliper inches of additional trees would be lost, road cost would increase from $90,000 to approximately $200,000. In addition a retaining wall would be required and the grades would be difficult. Ostenson stated that the existing home which was presently sheltered would become • a corner lot. Ostenson believed the additional 7 lots would cause drainage problems for the wetlands. He stated that the neighbors were concerned about the value of their homes and the integrity of the neighborhood. Ostenson stated that with the original plan a deer corridor would be protected. Ostenson noted that Staffs main concern was response time for emergency vehicles and providing an extra entrance to the neighborhood; however,, these were not major issues for the neighborhood. Ostenson believed that the City's policy on cul-de-sacs was in conflict with the Tree Preservation Ordinance. Ostenson quoted from the ordinance related to it's intentions and believed that the original proposal by the proponent was in the spirit of the Ordinance. Ostenson reported that a petition was being passed throughout the neighborhood to support a cul-de-sac and would be completed and presented to the City Council. Kipp reported that it had been the City's policy to work around cul-de-sacs when possible and it was on this basis that.Staff had recommended taking a look at a through-street design and had developed the comparison. He added that when Welter's Purgatory Acres had been approved originally a future through-street design was anticipated for this property. Kipp believed that there were ways to reduce the tree loss for a through-street design. He added that 12 additional trees would be lost with a through-street design, with only 1 of these trees being considered a significant tree according to the City Tree Preservation Ordinance. Kipp noted that approximately 85% of the trees on the site would be lost with either road design. He stated that a portion of the deer corridor would be preserved with either plan along an easement within the imost southerly proposed lot. `Planning Commission February 11, 1991 Page Three Kipp noted the memo from the Engineering Department which stated-that the existing homes would not benefit from the road improvement and, therefore, would not be assessed. Kipp mentioned the memo from the Fire Department in support of a through- road design. Staff did not believe that a through-road design would create a short cut for traffic. Kipp believed the main issue for a cul-de-sac design is if valid.reasons had been presented by the proponent for one. Ostenson stated that Staff was correct in that if the road were straightened out trees could be saved, but the proponent did not want to straighten the road out which Ostenson believed would create a race track. Ostenson believed that the assessment issue was merely a call on the City's part. He stated that the proponent would pay the assessments for the entire project. Kipp replied that he could not speak directly to the assessment issues. Kipp also stated that the design by Staff did provide curves in the road which moved away from the trees. Ostenson stated that with the through road design it was questionable if two of the lots could be developed because of soil conditions. Dodge asked what the cost would be per lot for the developer for a through-street design. • Ostenson replied that the road cost would double and the grading costs were questionable. Ostenson added that the proponent only wanted to develop 7 lots. He stated that he felt an obligation to the existing homeowners in the entire Purgatory Acres Project. Ostenson believed that the only issue was environment versus road. He stated that at the last meeting he had named approximately 15 cul-de-sacs in Eden Prairie which were longer than the 500' length maximum allowed by City Code. Bill Pearson, 11727 Sunnybrook Road, stated that he had lived in Eden Prairie since 1985. Pearson believed that the designs with more homes would decrease the property value of the existing homes. He was concerned about$150,000 homes being next to homes costing$250,000 and up. Pearson believed that because the fire station was so close, response time was not an important issue. Ruebling clarified that response time was not the only concern. He added that the City preferred to provide more than one access to homes so that emergency vehicles could get in and out easily. Bill Wells, 11824 Welters Way, questioned the driving issue behind a counter plan by Staff for a through-street design. Wells wanted to see as little development as possible. He added that he had become accustomed to lots with trees and was concerned about the proposed track homes. Wells preferred that the homes be consistent with the existing neighborhood. Wells believed that aesthetics was more of an issue than the money. Kipp replied that Staff was analyzing the through road option because of the City Council motions when Welter's Purgatory Acres was • approved. This would allow the Planning Commission and City Council to make the final decision. Planning Commission OFebruary 11, 1991 Page Four Robert Solohub, 11760 Welters Way; supported the proposal with the cul-de-sac design. Solohub was concerned for the safety of the small children in the neighborhood. He wanted to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood and the value of the existing homes. Solohub believed that the environment, wetlands, and tree preservation were important issues. Solohub believed that the neighborhood and developer are in concurrence with what they want for the neighborhood. Don Bolvin, 11839 Welter's Way, stated that he had looked for a wooded lot and wanted to preserve the natural aspects of the area. Bolvin believed that the proponent's plan for 7 lots was the plan which best preserved the environment. Sandstad asked when the sign was posted which stated that this was a temporary termination. Bolvin replied that the sign was posted approximately 3 weeks ago and had not been present before that time. The builder of the Bolvin home stated that he had been concerned about the possibility of 17 lots being developed on this property and, therefore, had contacted Ostenson. He believed that the City needed to readdress the definition of a significant tree. The builder stated that he was • present this evening to keep a promise he had made to the Bolvin's, that extensive development was not possible on this property because of the poor soils. Karen Wells, 11824 Welter's Way, stated that,she had called the City when she saw bulldozers coming onto the property and had spoken with Steve in the Planning Department. She stated that when they had bought their home they had been told that there would not be construction close to their property because of the poor soil conditions in the proposed development area. Wells added that when she spoke with Steve he had assured here that a development proposal was not planned at this time, but that he would check this out further. Steve reported back to Wells after a field inspection that a potential developer was doing soil testing. Wells stated that Steve had told her he would keep her informed of any further development. Wells believed that too many homes were being proposed for the area and was concerned about a significant increase in traffic. Wells stated that most of the homes had 2 to 4 children. She added that most who had purchased homes in this area believed that the road was a permanent dead-end. Kipp said he could not speak for Steve but that it is common for soil testing to take place prior to development proposals being received by the City. Kipp also noted that the neighborhood was notified of this proposal when the City received the proposal request. Ruebling believed that there was a sign posted at the dead-end when the original project was approved. Bill Wells stated that since he had purchased his home in 1988 no sign had been posted until the last 3 weeks. Planning Commission Oebruary 11, 1991 Page Five Kipp stated that it was unfortunate; however, last June a list of roads which needed to be posted as temporary dead-ends was developed and it was merely a-coincidence that a sign was posted at this site only 3 weeks ago. Kipp added that the signs were being posted due to another project in which concern for a road extension raised neighborhood concern similar to this project and wanted to let potential homeowners who buy homes on temporary dead-ends know of future planning. Ruebling asked how the front footage for existing lots compared with the proposal for a through- street. Ostenson replied that the front footage for the through-street was approximately 90 feet. Bolvin replied that his front footage was approximately 130 feet. Ostenson did not believe that it would be economically possible to develop a through-street and added that he personally did not want to be involved in a development with a through-road road design. Ostenson believed that the motions from the original proposal,had been intended to leave options open for the City and provide an access to the adjacent property but not to specifically develop a through-road. MOTION 1• Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. Ruebling questioned if it was a given that the value of the homes to be constructed would be of lesser value with a through-street design. Ostenson replied that the lots were not very deep and the homes would naturally be smaller. Ruebling believed that from the Wells home the neighborhood would appear the same with either design. The same number of homes were planned in the immediate area next to the Wells home. Ruebling further believed that with a cul-de-sac design all the traffic would come down through Welter's Way. Wells stated that if Ruebling was not familiar with the property he should not speak for how it would appear. Wells added that with the trees being removed he would be able to see all the homes. Wells added that this was a quality issue. He believed that the homes should be consistent with what presently existed and further believed that the developer would have no choice but to build more homes to recover the added cost of the road. Ruebling stated that the City had a code regarding lengths for cul-de-sacs. Dodge noted that the public hearing had been closed and the discussion was to remain among • Commission members. She added that the Planning Commission was aware of the neighbors Planning Commission Oebruary 11, 1991 Page Six concerns after hearing the previous comments from the public this evening and from the January 28, 1991 meeting. Karen Wells stated that she was concerned for the people who would be buying into these 17 lots because of potential problems. She was concerned that too many homes would constructed on poor soil. Ruebling noted that there were only 14 lots proposed. Norman believed that the discussions were based on emotional issues and needed to be directed back to the issues. Norman stated that she had become a Commission member to promote larger lots in the City. Norman questioned if a through-street was more important than environmental issues. Dodge asked Norman to express her opinion regarding safety issues versus environmental issues. Norman replied that she did not believe that safety was a major issue in this area and restated that she preferred larger lots. Hallett questioned if the.preservation of the deer crossing in this area was of major importance and believed that the City needed to take a closer look at this in the years to come. Hallett stated that it was unfortunate that the temporary road sign had never been posted. He believed that it was important for residents to know if a road were to be extended or if it were a permanent dead-end. Hallett asked if sidewalks were planned for either road design. Ostenson replied that there was an existing sidewalk which would be extended into the cul-de-sac. Kipp replied that the sidewalk would be extended approximately 210 feet into the project with the proponent's design and would be extended to Sunnybrook Road if a through-street design were used. Hallett was concerned about children walking long distances to catch the school bus with a cul-de-sac design. Hallett stated that this area would develop eventually. Kipp concurred that it was unfortunate that the road had not been posted. He added that now the developers of a property with temporary dead-ends are required to post them. This is part of the Developer's Agreement process. Bye stated that the City had developed a policy related to the use of cul-de-sacs and in the past had not set neighborhood integrity as a valid rationale to support the need for a cul-de-sac. Bye believed that it was important for the Planning Commission not only to consider the residents who lived here today but also to consider the residents who would live in the neighborhood 20 years from now and to plan today to provide a safe neighborhood. Bye recommended that the City Council set more specific guidelines for the policy. Planning Commission *'February 11, 1991 Page Seven Bauer stated that he had been persuaded that safety issues and school bus issues were important. Bauer added that this was a difficult decision; however, he favored a through-street based on safety.issues. Norman believed that there should be very compelling reasons to develop a 14 lot subdivision in this area. Ruebling did not believe that developers' economic concerns should be a determining factor in City Planning. Sandstad stated that he supported a through-street design. Sandstad did not believe that aesthetics should be balanced against safety. Dodge stated that she personally liked larger lots; however, in this instance the safety issues outweighed the lot size. Dodge added that the proponent's plan was the City's dream proposal, but the safety issues were important. MOTION 2• • Sandstad moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Peter Andrea Company for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.95 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 10.95 acres into seven ( ) single family lots, and road right-of-way for Welter's Purgatory Acres 6th Addition, as depicted in plans dated January 14, 1991, and based on the following findings: 1. The length of the cul-de-sac is beyond the maximum allowed by Code of 500 ft. 2. There is no alternative access provided for fire and other safety vehicles and school buses. 3. Recommend to the City Council that the policy regarding cul-de-sacs be clarified. Motion carried 5-1-1. Hallett voted "NO", Norman abstained. V. OLD BUSINESS Hallett asked for further information regarding the Airport. Kipp replied that MAC was presenting a noise abatement plan to the City. He added that MAC wanted to work with the City. The abatement proposal would be reviewed at the February 19, 1991 City Council meeting. Kipp noted that the City Planning Commission Webruary 11, 1991 Page Eight Council did not believe that the original plan presented was a strong plan and had requested revisions. Hallett asked if the southern runway was to be extended. Kipp replied that this was part of the Master Plan by MAC in which the City passed an unfavorable Resolution and was not related to the noise abatement plan. Hallett then asked if there would be any public input. Hallett was concerned for the residents which lived or owned property in the area adjacent to the airport. Kipp stated that the noise abatement plan proposal has been in review for about a year and that a public meeting on the plan was held in February, 1990, at the Eden Prairie High School. Kipp added that this latest version of the plan was based on comments from that meeting and previous City Council review of August of 1990. Hallett asked why the road design for Dell Road was being adjusted to stop at Scenic Heights Road. Kipp replied that it was the first phase of the road and that the City wanted to be able to review the Southwest Area Study again before the second phase. Hallett believed that the new proposal would allow property in a northern section which was not within the Musa Line to develop before the area to the south which was within the Musa Line. Hallett questioned why the Planning Commission had not been informed of a change in a major road. Kipp replied that this was the next logical area to be • developed. Hallett questioned if it was to late to reorganize the Citizens Committee to bring the City, developers, and homeowners together for discussion. Ruebling also questioned why some studies were never given to the Planning Commission. Uram replied that typically the Planning Commission did not review feasibility studies. Hallett requested that the Planning Commission be updated on the Dell Road issues. MOTION: Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to request Staff to review the feasibility study for Dell Road with the Planning Commission. Motion carried 7-0-0. VI. PLANNER'S REPORT VH. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Norman to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 PM. Motion carried 7-0-0.