Loading...
Planning Commission - 04/23/1990 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, April 23, 1990 7:30 p.m. COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Christine Dodge, Tim Bauer, Julianne Bye, Robert Hallett, Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Doug Sandstad. STAFF MEMBERS: Chris -Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary. Pledge of Allegiance -- Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA II. MEMBERS REPORTS III. MINUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 7:45 A. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD, (90-10-Z-P) by Shea Architects, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser and Site Plan Review on 8. 2 acres with outside storage variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 24. 6 acres into 4 lots for construction of an automobile dealership. Location: North of Plaza Drive, west of Crown Auto. A continued public hearing. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. PLANNER'S REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT AG040990.MMR EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1990 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: Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary. ROLL CALL: Hallett and Sandstad absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 5-0-0. • II. MEMBERS REPORTS III. MINUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD, (90-10-Z-P) by Shea Architects, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser and Site Plan Review on 8.2 acres with outside storage variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 24. 6 acres into 4 lots for construction of an automobile dealership. Location: North of Plaza Drive, west of Crown Auto. A continued public hearing. David Shea, architect for the proponent, presented the plans a two-story masonry structure. The location of the building had been determined based on the location of a large sewer line which runs the length of the property frontage. Parking would be spread out around the facility, display areas would be raised elevations, a berm would be provided, and 3 rows of • 1 • conifer trees would be added along the southern corner of the property. Concentrated screening would provided around the overload car storage area. Shea noted that the use for the Outlot had not been determined at this time. Shea added that a survey crew had reviewed the elevations related to Highway 5 today. Shea stated that the lighting proposed for the project would be consistent with other retail facilities in Eden Prairie. Shea stated that the lighting architect had taken readings from businesses presently in Eden Prairie, compared these readings to the lighting requirements recommended for a car dealership, and averaged out the candle footage presented `on the proposed plan. The lighting would be more intense close to the building and become less intense in the perimeter area of the property. Shea stated that the lighting would be downcast and would not spill off the site. Shea noted that Ford wanted to construct a premier car dealership and wanted to emphasize the necessity to have some of the cars seen by potential customers. He added that the rooftop mechanical units would be screen with metal enclosures. Shea stated that the proponent was willing to work within the • City Ordinances requirements regarding the use of ' special advertising techniques. The proponent also wanted to maintain the natural amenities of the wetland area. . Shea noted that the final drainage planed and utility plan were not completed at this time and requested that the proponent be allowed to continue to work with Staff regarding these issues and because of the short building season be allowed to proceed to the City Council, with the understanding that these final issues would be resolved prior to the City Council meeting. Franzen recommended that the first item to be considered was if the Planning Commission believed that the land use as proposed was appropriate for the site. Franzen noted that .the area around Menard's was regional commercial. Franzen reported that the display area would be limited based on the base area ratio 'of the building. He added that because of the size of the site and its visibility from Highway 5 berming and screening would be issues which needed careful consideration. Franzen stated that the berming could not be as high as Staff desired and recommended that the proponent investigate the use of mass plantings for screening. Staff had not recommended a specific height or spacing for the plantings; however, Franzen believed the plantings should be 12-15 ft. apart and 8-10 feet in height. • 2 • Franzen stated that the 7.5 foot candle might be acceptable close to the building, but recommended that .the perimeter of the site be at approximately one foot candle. He added that it was important for Staff to see a more detailed lighting plan. He noted that the foot candle readings supplied by the proponent on other retail sites were general and spot readings and could not be considered as accurate readings of light intensity. Staff has detailed foot candle plans for the Crosstown Athletic Club which is lighted to a 3.5 foot candle average whihe he felt was bright and tht the Ford lighting plan would be compared with this. The grading plan is a critical piece of information; that has not been provided. The elevations of the parking lot as related to the berm and Highway 5 should be looked at carefully and the proponent needed to be aware that additional plantings could be required, depending on the final grading plan if berming cannot be constructed high enough to block sight lines. Franzen believed that Staff and the proponent had made significant progress in arriving at the current site plan. Franzen presented the Planning Commission photos of areas surrounding the site and other auto dealerships in the Twin City area. Ruebling asked how each of the areas would be used and where the display areas would be located. Shea replied that the storage area would be used to store the overstock of cars, the service area would be located at the rear of .the building, and customer parking would be available on the side and rear of the building. Shea added that the display area would be • located in the front of the building and would display 4 to 5 cars at any given time. Shea stated that a limited amount of parking spaces would be available in front of the building. Bye asked how many parking stalls would be provided for- the customers along the rear of the building. Shea replied that 27 to 30 spaces would be provided and added that this was the number recommended by Ford based on their past experience. Bye believed that more spaces should be provided. Shea added that service was a big part of the auto dealership business today and Ford wanted to make the service as convenient as possible. He stated that some . of the cars would be stored inside. Ruebling asked where the employee parking would be located. Joe Dotty replied that the dealership would have a total of '50, employees and 15 to 20 would be working at any given time. Related to Commissioner Bye's concern regarding adequate • 3 • parking, Dotty added that approximately 20 to 24 additional cars could be parked in the service bay area inside the building. Franzen stated that the parking was in compliance with City Code. Norman was concerned about the appearance of the backside of the building and the fence, which ran along the back of the property. Norman asked how visible the outside display would be from Valley View Road. Shea replied that the fence belonged to Menard's. Shea added that the proponent hoped that the view would be channeled to the natural "setting of the wetlands by the additional landscaping being provided. Franzen added that a large berm and -plantings and future buildings along Valley View Road should provide screening. Shea noted that a large amount- of soil would be removed from the building area and would be used to construct the berming. Dotty stated that the proposed site was actually 6 feet lower in elevation than Menard's. Ruebling asked for additional information regarding the lighting. Mike D1Blasimde, lighting architect, replied that the average candle foot reading would be 7.5, the brightest • area would be at a 15 foot candle reading, and some areas would only have a 3 foot candle reading. The poles would be 30 feet high and the lights would have flat lenses. The color of the lighting would be similar to that at the Flagship Athletic Club. D1Blasimde stated that for security reasons certain areas should not have less than a 10 foot candle reading. The Robert Larsen Development Company would be the best example of the intensity of the lighting proposed for this development. Bye asked if the lighting would be at the same intensity at all times. D1Blasimde replied that the lighting would be on a timer. Shea added that the lighting would be directed toward the building. Norman asked if fencing would be used in any other areas to protect the cars. Shea replied no. Dotty added that the terrain would help reduce vandalism. Franzen asked what the readings would be at the perimeter of the property. D1Blasimde replied that the reading at the perimeter would be approximately .5 foot candle. Ruebling believed that the lighting as planned seemed reasonable; however, actual design plans were necessary for final approval. • 4 • Bauer asked where the used cars would be displayed. Dotty replied that the used cars would be wholesaled out on a daily . basis; however, there would be a minimum amount of top quality used cars on site. Bauer asked for the proponents response to Staff s position on the use of gimmicks for publicity, such as the large balloons. Dotty replied that the proponent intended to be a good neighbor in the community and would abide by the rules and the laws of the community; however, in order to be successful people need to be able to locate the dealership. Bye believed that the building had a nice architectural design and the land use was appropriate, but the plans needed to be more refined before final approval. Norman asked what color scheme would be used for the lighted signs. Dotty replied blue, white, and some red. Shea added that the final colors had not been approved at this time. Ruebling asked if female mechanics would be employed and if space was available in the future to provide separate locker rooms or whatever was necessary. Dotty replied that at the present time the a female was the service manager and space could be made available if necessary. Shea noted that all discrimination factors had been addressed. . Franzen asked the proponent to comment on trash enclosures. Shea replied that the trash areas would be contained within the building or would be in an enclosed area. Bauer asked if body work would be done on site. Dotty replied no. Ruebling asked how delivery trucks would be handled. Dotty replied that the delivery of the cars would be early in the morning or late at night and would not be a problem during regular business hours. Shea requested that this item be forwarded to the City Council as soon as possible because of the short building season. He asked the Planning Commission to consider acceptance of the plans as presented this evening and to authorize Staff to continue to work with the proponent on the fine details, so that this item could be heard at the next City Council meeting. Bye believed that the plans should come back .to the Planning Commission again for final review, but did recommend that the item could be published for the next Council meeting. • 5 Franzen believed that there were some critical areas, such as lighting and berm elevations for screening of the outdoor sales area which should be reviewed more thoroughly before passing the plan on to the Council. Ruebling stated that he was uncomfortable passing the plan on without another final review. He added that this plan was important because it was the first car dealership in Eden Prairie and was not just a. routine item. Ruebling believed that the lighting, screening, and signage issues needed further review. Doug Tenpas indicated that it was his perception that a screening and lighting issues were very close to what the Commission would recommend. He added that when there is just a day between the Planning Commission and City Council meetings that the City Staff has historically been good at conveying what the Commission had wanted. He said he thought the Council was watching this item very closely because it was a new land use. He indicated that unless there was something significantly wrong, that within an additional two weeks these details could be resolved. He added that he understood the Commission wished to see the final plans with issues resolved before passing it on to the City Council. . Commissioner Bye indicated that additional review by the Planning Commission is necessary because the proposal. is a significant departure from the City Code for outdoor sales and display. Commissioner Bauer indicated that the City has historically directed uses with outdoor sales and display towards the Menard's area. He added that if the City was going to contemplate uses with outdoor storage that this would be the appropriate area in the community for such a use. Commissioner Bye indicated that if this item was passed on to the City Council, Council members will not have benefit of approved Planning Commission minutes. Dodge believed that the plan should come back to the Planning Commission for further review. David Shea representing the proponent indicated that he felt that these were details that they could resolve with the Staff within a two week time period. He added that if the project came back to the Planning Commission, and issues were not resolved with the City Staff or the Planning Commission then he would not be uncomfortable with the Planning Commission continuing action until the next available meeting and postponing a review at the City Council. • 6 Commissioner Ruebling indicated that this project has been going on for over a year now and was surprised that everything has to be completed by the proponent within the next two weeks. Ruebling added that he understood that the construction season was short, but didn't see that as a reason to circumvent the normal review process. David Shea representing the proponent indicated that the project could have been before the Planning Commission about one month earlier, however, he thought that the plan was one that might not receive a favorable reaction by the Planning Commission and so chose to take the additional time to continue to work on the screening, lighting, and sign issues. He added that the additional time spent prior to review by the Planning Commission resulted in what he felt was a better site plan. He added that the Commission has an option of denying the project and passing -it directly on to the City Council. He added that his preference though was to have a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Norman to continue the public hearing for the Eden Prairie Ford to the May 14, 1990 Planning Commission meeting and to publish this item for the May 15, 1990 City Council meeting,. returning the -plans to the owners for their commitment to the following: 1) Revision to the landscape plan for additional berming and heavy mass conifer plantings to screen the outdoor sales and display. 2) Revision to the lighting plan so that the intensity of the. lighting does not exceed one foot candle at the perimeter of the site. (The display area could be lit to a five foot candle intensity. ) 3) Agreement by owners not to use oversized balloons, banners, search lights, tethered ropes with flags, temporary signs, nor operate with extensive use of patriotic flags. Ruebling stated that he was not comfortable with this being published for the Council meeting to follow so quickly after a Planning Commission meeting. He added that this did ' not allow enough time for the Council to have the benefit of the Planning Commission minutes. • 7 Bye recommended that Planning Commission members attend the City Council meeting to present any concerns. Franzen indicated that Staff could prepare a status memorandum for the City Council. Motion carried 5-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. PLANNER'S REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Ruebling to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 PM. Motion carried 5-0-0 g