Loading...
Planning Commission - 11/04/1991 AGENDA EDEN PRAEM PLANNING COMNIISSION Monday, November 4, 1991 7:30 p.m. COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Charles Ruebling, Tim Bauer, Robert Hallett, Karen Norman, Doug Sandstad, James Hawkins and Katherine Kardell 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 II. MEMBERS REPORTS M. MINUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. RICE MARSH LAKE PUD (91-28-Z-SPR-P) by Pemtom Company. Request for a Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 129.8 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review on 129.8 acres with waivers; • Zoning District Change from Rural, R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 24.8 acres and to R1-13.5 on 105 acres; Site Plan Review and Preliminary Platting of 129.8 acres into 204 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way for construction of a residential devleopment to be known as Rice Marsh Lake PUD. Location: North of Rice Marsh Lake, just east of the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie city limits. V. OLD BUSINESS VII. ADTOURNIVIENT VI. PLANNER'S REPORTS VII. ADTOIiRNMENT EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMiVIISSION • APPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1991 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COMIVIISSION MEMBERS: Tim Bauer, Robert Hallett, James Hawkins, Katherine Kardell,Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Doug Sandstad. STAFF MEMBERS: Don Uram, Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary ROLL CALL: Hallett and Hawkins absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 4-0-0. H. MEMBERS REPORTS • III. MINUTES MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to approve the Minutes of the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting as published. Motion carried 4-0-0. IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. RICE MARSH LAKE PUD(91-28-Z-P-PUD)by The Pemtom Company for a Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 129.8 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 129.8 acres with waivers, Zoning District Change from Rural, R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 24.8 acres and to R1-13.5 on 105 acres, and Preliminary Platting of 129.8 acres into 204 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way for construction of a residential development to be known as Rice Marsh Lake P.U.D. Location: North of Rice Marsh Lake, just east of the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie city limits. Ruebling arrived at 7:35 PM. • Uram reported that this project had first been looked at as early as 1987 and was approved by the Planning Commission in 1989 as the Schroers Development. Uram noted that Al Gray from the City Engineering Department was present to answer any engineering questions. Dan Herbst, representing the proponent, introduced Mike Black, Ed Hasick, and members of the Schroers family, which were all available to answer questions related to the project. Herbst stated that the slate was being wiped clean related to the Schroers Development approved in 1989 and a fresh look had been taken of the site. He noted that the site had been agricultural for over 45 years and the topography of the land had played an important part in the layout of the proposal. Herbst reported that the project had recently been renamed "Windfield" and there would be three separate developments; Windfield North, Windfield Meadow, and Windfield on the Lake. Herbst noted that recently storm water runoff had become an equally important issue as saving trees and, therefore, 8 N.U.R.P. ponds would be developed on the property. The entrance to Windfield North would have a special monument sign. Herbst added that there would be two additional entrances to the project. Herbst believed the eight N.U.R.P. ponds and the lake would enhance the property. This development would help complete the Eden Prairie trail system by making a connection to Miller Park and a connection from the Chanhassen Park along Rice Marsh Lake. Herbst stated that 33 acres would be deeded to the City for open space. • Herbst noted that the proponent had proceeded to the DNR and the Watershed District with the proposal and had favorable feedback. Lundgren Brothers would be the builder for the Windfield North and Windfield Meadow projects and the 49 lots for Windfield on the Lakes would be constructed by custom home builders. Uram asked Herbst to address the phasing of the project and zoning. Mike Black, representing the proponent, replied that R1-9.5 zoning was proposed for approximately 25 acres and the balance of the property would be zoned R1-13.5. The lots in the R1-9.5 zone would be approximately 14,600 square feet and the lots in the R1-13.5 zoning approximately 17,000 square feet. He noted that the Natural Environment Class required 40,000 square foot lots and 150 foot width and setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark. Black stated that the lots would be within the 150 foot setback from the water mark; but the proponent was requesting smaller than 40,000 square foot lots and a width of approximately 100 feet. Black said that the rationale was that the City would benefit from the dedication of the public land along the lakeshore and, therefore, would not have individual homeowners making special variance requests. Black also noted that the building pads would be larger and wider to accommodate the larger home construction for the lake shore lots. Black stated that there were a total of 204 lots proposed for 129 acres with a density of approximately 1.5 units per acre. Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 3 Kardell asked Black to address the phasing of the project. Black replied that the project would develop from east to west with the 1st Phase of 56 homes being developed along Dell Road. He added that Phase 2 would contain 59 homes, Phase 3 64 homes in the center portion of the project, and Phase 4 would have 25 premium lots. Sandstad asked if detailed landscaping plans had been developed at this time along the Chanhassen border. Ed Hasick, representing the proponent, reported that approximately 860 caliper inches of tree loss was expected and the proponent would be replacing approximately 1467 inches, which was above the 1220 inches required by City Code. He added approximately 30% of the screening would be along Dell Road and the Chanhassen border. Hasick stated that there would also be intensified plantings along the ponds and entrances. He added that extra screening had been planned for areas with potential headlight problems. Sandstad asked if there would be boulevard trees planted or a tree on every lot. Hasick replied no. Sandstad asked if there was anything within the City • Code which required boulevard trees or a tree on every lot. Uram replied that presently there was nothing in the City Code to address this issue; however, the City Council had requested that this be looked at. Uram noted that the N.U.R.P. ponds would take up a lot of space and limit the area for plantings and screening. Norman asked if Rice Marsh Lake was more of a marsh than a lake and if it would be used as a recreational lake. Uram replied that it would not be used as a recreational lake. Gray replied that it was a waterfowl habitat lake. Uram reported that in 1990 the City had submitted a request for a MUSA Line expansion and added that at the next City Council meeting the Council would review a proposal to expand the MUSA Line further to include this entire project area. Uram stated that the majority of the grading and tree loss would occur in the cul-de-sac area to the south. The total tree loss was projected at approximately 52%. Uram noted that in order to develop this property at all, tree loss would be incurred. To offset some of the tree loss, Staff recommended 25 foot front yard setbacks and individual grading for each lot. Hasick replied that he did not object to this being added. • Sandstad said that he did not find a specific recommendation on individual • Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 4 grading of each lot. Uram replied that the proponent would not object to having this added to the recommendations. Norman asked if the normal front yard setback was 30 feet. Uram replied that the normal setback was 30 feet from the property line and another 11 feet from the curb. He added that on a short street with only six homes, 25 feet would be acceptable. Bauer stated that it would have been nice to have seen the minutes from the prior of approval of the project to see any objections raised at that time. Norman asked why so many variances were allowed. Uram replied that the Shores Project was before the Planning Commission 3 times. He added that the main issue of discussion was the MUSA Line expansion and if it was the appropriate time to develop the southwest area at all. Ruebling added that there had been extensive discussion on the variances along the shoreline. Uram replied that the proponent was dedicating over 30 acres to the City. He noted that the proponent was not required to dedicate any property to the City and Staff believed that it was appropriate to make trade-offs in exchange for the dedication. Uram asked the proponent how many lots would require a lot width variance. Black replied that all of the lots along the lakeshore would require a variance. Bauer asked if there had been resident concerns at the previous meetings on the Shores Development. Uram replied no. Sandstad recalled that the project was considered to be a good project at that time. Norman was concerned about the lot width variances. Uram noted that this was the first residential project which required N.U.R.P. ponds and added that these ponds took up extensive property. Ruebling believed that given all the trade-offs, it would seen appropriate to make concessions. Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 5 Kardell asked how the Dell Road improvements were progressing. Al Gray replied that the City Council had approved a feasibility study for Dell Road and the City had approved a plan for improvements in 3 phases. He noted that property owners were apprehensive about improving Dell Road without development. Gray stated that the City needed to work out an agreement with Chanhassen. The project could begin as early as Spring of 1992. Ruebling believed that the center access to the project would need to be right-in and right-out. He asked if a u-turn could be possible to go back north. Gray replied that would be a protected south bound lane. Ruebling believed that R1-9.5 zoning was appropriate if used for affordable housing. Uram replied that the City Council had questioned if R1-9.5 was being used as originally designed. He noted that $250,000 homes were being constructed in R1-9.5 zones. • Norman asked if there were any restrictions on the value of R1-9.5 homes. Uram replied no. Bauer believed that the value of homes on R1-9.5 lots should be addressed separately from this project. Uram believed that R1-9.5 zoning was appropriate for this project. He added that it in many cases, the land has become so expensive that the price of the homes is higher. Bauer believed that the issue of the larger homes on R1-9.5 lots should be dealt with. He added that the homes have no yards left then there is a need for more park area and maybe it was appropriate for developers to dedicate more land. Bauer did not believe that it was appropriate to change the rules in midstream and, therefore, this should not be an issue with this project. Sandstad stated that he was concerned about a lack of balance in housing. Ruebling asked if the proponent was making provisions for construction traffic with the phasing going from east to west. Hasek replied that a street needed to be developed for emergency vehicles. Gray replied that • to develop the western lots first would be too expensive for the developer Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 6 to develop the infrastructure. Ruebling believed that it was important to manage the traffic. Hasek added that if the Jacques property developed, there would be another four roads to serve the property. Norman asked where the nearest park would be. Hasek replied that Rice Marsh Lake Park in Chanhassen would be closest. Norman believed that this would be a long way for the eastern residents of the project to go to a park. Hasek replied that Miller Park would be closest for those residents on the eastern border. Uram noted that the City was looking for land to the south of this project to develop a park. Norman was concerned because the tot lots have been done away with. Uram replied that the cost of the tot lots and the amount of usage they were getting had resulted in the elimination of the requirement. Norman asked if a tot lot could be developed in the outlot on this project. Uram replied that this proposal had not been reviewed by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission at this time. • Kardell asked when the proponent would propose to start construction. Hasek replied that Phase I and II would be constructed in 1992 and Phases III, IV, and V would be developed during 1993 through 1995. George Schroers, property owner, believed that the City had the cart before the horse. The property had been rezoned and then assessed heavily. Schroers requested that the property not be zoned unless development was ready to go. He said the taxes would go up if rezoned residential. Uram stated that any action tonight would not rezone the property; it would need to be approved by the City Council. MOTION 1: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to close the public hearing. Norman questioned how the City could not pass the proposal since it had already been passed in 1989. Norman was not in favor of allowing the variances for lot widths. Uram replied that the Planning Commission could disapprove if they believed that action was appropriate. Uram replied that many of the lots vary in width from 100 to 130 feet. Ruebling stated that if this project were on a lake where more activity • Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 7 would occur, he would be more concerned about the lot width. Norman asked what the widest lot was. Black replied approximately 220 feet. Hasek replied that because of the area being taken up by the N.U.R.P. ponds it was critical to the project to have the lake lots developed. Hasek added that the trend in home building was to go back to smaller homes and larger yards. He stated that if the trend continued the emphasis would be more on quality than on size. Hasek noted that the homes along the lake would be custom built. Norman understood that it was economically necessary; however, it was not aesthetically good planning. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 2: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to recommend to the City Council . approval of the request of Pemtom Company for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 129.8 acres to be known as Windfield P.U.D. based on plans dated November 1, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 1, 1991 with the addition of Recommendation #3 to require individual grading on lots to minimize tree loss. Norman stated that she was happy to see the dedication of the land to the City; however, the lot size would be approximately half of that required. Norman did not favor the 100 foot wide lots. She believed this was going too far in the opposite direction. Motion carried 4-1-0. Norman voted "NO". MOTION 3: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Pemtom Company for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 129.8 acres to be known as Windfield P.U.D based on plans dated November 1, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 1, 1991 with the addition of Recommendation #3 to require individual grading on lots to minimize tree loss. • Planning Commission November 4, 1991 Page 8 Motion carried 4-1-0. Norman voted "NO". MOTION 4: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Pemtom Company for rezoning from Rural, Rl- 9.5 and R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 24.8 acres and to R1-13.5 on 105 acres to be known as Windfield P.U.D., based on plans dated November 1, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 1, 1991 with the addition of Recommendation #3 to require individual grading on lots to minimize tree loss. Motion carried 4-1-0. Norman voted "NO". MOTION 5: Bauer moved, seconded by Kardell to recommend to the City Council • approval of the request of Pemtom Company for Preliminary Plat of 129.8 acres into 204 single family lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way to be known as Windfield P.U.D. based on Plans dated November 1, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 1, 1991 with the addition of Recommendation #3 to require individual grading on lots to minimize tree loss. Motion carried 4-1-0. Norman voted "NO". V. OLD BUSINESS VI. PLANNER'S REPORTS VU. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Norman moved, seconded by Kardell to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 PM. Motion carried 5-0-0.