Planning Commission - 05/29/1990 • AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, May 29, 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
7:35 A. VILLAGE KNOLLS, by Argus Development. Request for
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 42.7
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review
• with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District
Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single
family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a
residential development. Location: East of Homeward
Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. A continued public
hearing.
8:05 B. HOLTZE EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE, by Holtze Brothers
Development Company. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on 33 acres, Planned
Unit Development District Review with waivers on
5.6 acres, Zoning District Change from Office and
C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser on 5. 6 acres, Site Plan Review
on 5. 6 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 7.2 acres
into one lot and one outlot for construction of a
220 unit hotel development. Location: Southwest
corner of Valley View Road and Office Ridge Circle.
A public hearing.
8:45 C. BENTEC ENGINEERING. Request for Zoning District
Amendment and Site Plan Review within the Office
Zoning District on 1.85 acres, with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals for ocnstruction
of a 1,900 sq. ft. addition to the Bentec
Engineering Building. Location: 130-50 Pioneer
Trail. A public hearing.
V. OLD BUSINESS
AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, May 29, 1990
Page 2
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. BUILDING HEIGHT ORDINANCE. Amending City Code
Chapter 11 regarding definition and regulations for
building height.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION .
.APPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, MAY 29, 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; Don
Uram, Planner; Scott Kipp, Planner;
Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary.
ROLL CALL: Sandstad absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Hallett to approve the Agenda as
published. Motion carried 6-0-0.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
•III. MINUTES
MOTION:
Hallett moved, seconded by Bye to approve the Minutes of the May
14, 1990 Planning Commission meeting as published. Motion carried
5-0-1. Bauer abstained.
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. VILLAGE KNOLLS, by Argus Development. Request for Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning
District Amendment within the R1-13 .5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42 .7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2
outlots and road right-of-way for a residential development.
Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. A
continued public hearing.
Brian Olson, representing Argus Development, stated that the
plans had been revised to eliminate all variances for the
Hustad portion of the project and to reduce the number of
variances necessary for the Argus Development portion by one-
half. A few lots still encroached on the conservancy area;
however, these lots had been widened. Hustad had reduced the
project by one lot. A cul-de-sac from Homeward Hills was
proposed in the northern portion of the Hustad project. The
road was moved further away from the conservancy area. Two
flag lots with a shared driveway were proposed to replace the
cul-de-sac.
Ruebling asked if the conservancy area was within the 150-foot
setback. Olson replied that the building pads would not
infringe on the conservancy area.
Norman asked how many driveways would come onto Homeward Hills
Road. Olson replied 2.
Dodge asked if the cars would have to back onto Homeward Hills
Road from the driveways. Olson replied that space was
available for turnarounds.
Franzen reported that the revised plan was a better site plan
than previously presented and was acceptable to Staff. He
added that the Parks, Recreation,. & Natural Resources
department was recommending a reforestation plan. Franzen
stated that some minor revisions in the plan were still
necessary; however, the project could proceed to the City
Council as per the Staff recommendations. Franzen noted that
the number of variances had been reduced from 16 to 8.
Bauer requested clarification on the Staff report, Page 4,
Access, in relation to the minor collector road. Franzen
• replied that in order to retain the existing home in the Argus
portion of the project a shared driveway would be necessary.
The proposed driveway would intersect directly opposite with
the street on the other side of Homeward Hills Road, which was
acceptable. Franzen added that the 2 driveways proposed for
in the northeast corner of the Hustad portion were a
compromise due to the topography of the area and the location
of the creek. Franzen stated that the site lines were good in
this area and, therefore, the driveways would be acceptable.
Norman concurred with Staff that the revised plan was a better
plan; however, believed that 7 accesses onto Homeward Hills
road in such a short distance was excessive.
Hallett asked if the City owned trail access coming from
Homeward Hills Road. Franzen replied that this would have to
be a gift or a dedication from the developer. Hallett stated
that if this plan were approved as planned the residents would
not have access to the trail system. Franzen replied that the
Parks, Recreation, & Natural Resources department had
requested that a trail access be constructed at a 10o grade;
however, actual plans were not available at this time.
Hallett asked if a plan would be available prior to City
Council review. Franzen replied that the trail issue would be
reviewed at the Parks, Recreation, & Natural Resources
Commission meeting. Hustad added that presently there was a
50-foot strip shown on Attachment A.
Ruebling asked if the lot lines were adjusted if additional
variances could be eliminated. Franzen replied that the
• number of lots could be adjusted to meet Code - but the lots
would have unusual shapes and less building pad area due to
narrower frontages.
MOTION 1:
Bauer moved, seconded by •Bye to close the public hearing.
Bye asked if Phase II, the Hustad portion, could be changed at
a later date to be developed as townhouses if the market so
warranted since this was a concept approval only. Franzen
replied that changes could be made at the time of preliminary
plat review; however, a guide plan and rezoning would be
required.
Bauer wished to go on record as being uncomfortable with the
driveway accesses onto Homeward Hills Road.
Hallett stated that he was uncomfortable with the overall
plan; however, not to the point to recommend denial.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Planned Unit
Development Concept on 42.7 acres for Village Knolls, based on
plans dated May 23, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
.the Staff Reports dated May 11 and May 25, 1990. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Planned Unit
Development District Review, with waivers, and Zoning District
Amendment within the R1-13.5 District, all on 8.7 acres, for
Village Knolls, based on plans dated May 23, 1990, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated May 11 and May
25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Preliminary
Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, two outlots,
and road right-of-way for a single family residential
development to be known as Village Knolls, based on plans
dated May 23, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Reports dated May 11 and May 25, 1990. Motion carried
6-0-0.
8:15 B. HOLTZE EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE,_ by Holtze Brothers Development
Company. Request for Planned -Unit Development Concept
Amendment on 33 acres, Planned Unit Development District
Review with waivers on 5.6 acres, Zoning District Change from
Office and C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser on 5.6 acres, Site Plan Review
on 5.6 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 7.2 acres into one lot
and one outlot for construction' of a 220 unit hotel
development. Location: Southwest corner of Valley View Road
and Office Ridge Circle. A public hearing.
Peter Beck, representing the proponent, presented a picture of
a prototype facility, which the family-owned business, had
constructed in Denver. The Denver facility averages an 850
occupancy rate. The proponent wished to create a residential
environment for the long-term guests. The project would
consist of 119 suites which could be converted to 2 regular
hotel rooms. A complimentary breakfast would be served in the
club house. The concept was to circle the suites around the
club house area. 'Beck stated that the request was to rezone
the parcel from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser and to replat to 1 single
lot with 1 outlot. Beck added that the plan was consistent
with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. He believed that the
impact to residential areas would be minimal.
Beck presented the floor plans. The suites surrounding the
entry court would be marketed to short-term guests, while the
suites surrounding the pool would be marketed for the long-
term guests. Parking would be distributed around the site.
Landscaping exceeded that required by the City.
• Beck noted that 4 variances would be required. A request for
a .47 floor area ratio would be similar to other ratios
granted to other facilities within the City. Beck stated that
this project had more land than actually required. The Denver
project had a floor area ratio of 5.5 and the land was
currently zoned for an office facility with a floor ratio of
5. 0. Beck stated that the architecture was designed to give
a residential character with a 12 point pitch to the roof.
The site lines sloped down from Valley View. Cross easements
and parking agreements with surrounding businesses were
presented which Beck believed would compliment each other.
Beck stated that the proponent concurred with 14 of the 16
Staff recommendations. The proponent objected to a
requirement of a pedestrian sidewalk in the present location.
a The proponent wished to internalized the pedestrian traffic to
the center courtyard area and did not -believe that a sidewalk
was necessary. The second objection related the requirement
of 750 or better brick exterior. The proponent requested' a
50%' brick or better exterior. Beck noted that this was not a
cost issue, but rather the desire of the proponent to create
the residential character. The proponent proposed brick
exterior on the 4 buildings and the clubhouse, with siding on'
the long-term guest buildings. Beck stated that the view from
Valley View Road would be the all brick .facilities. Beck
• noted that the condominiums to the east of the .proposed
project, had all redwood siding. He added that the adjacent
property owners supported the use of siding and believed this
would provide a good transition. Beck believed that a 50-50
mix would not be out of character in the neighborhood. Beck
stated that the proponent believed that this request was
critical to the success of the project.
Franzen reported that Staff believed that a . hotel-type
facility on this site would blend well with surrounding land
uses. Franzen noted that, the outstanding issues were the
construction of the sidewalk and the exterior building
material. ' He added that the plan for the sidewalk was part of
the overall PUD. for this area. Franzen stated that Staff
recommended that the ordinance regarding exterior building
material be enforced and that 75% brick or better exterior
building material be required. Franzen noted that 3 other
hotels had been approved in the past and all had requested
variances regarding exterior building material. He added that
the ordinance had been enforced in all 3 cases. Franzen
believed that the 75% requirement would accomplish equitable
treatment. He added that there would be visibility of the
project from Highway 494. Staff was requesting an increase in
the height of the berm and additional conifers be planted to
screen the parking. The proponent also needed approval from
Hennepin County for a left turn access onto Valley View Road.
Ruebling asked if there were any traffic issues related to
Valley View Road. Franzen replied that a comparison had been
done between the proposed project and that of an office
complex. The result of the comparison was that an office
• complex would generate more traffic. Ruebling then asked if
Staff believed that a problem would exist related to Hennepin
County approval of the left turn lane. Beck replied that a
median cut was already present at Super-Yalu.
Ruebling asked Franzen is the 75% requirement for brick or
better was based on a, building by building basis or by an
overall project basis. Franzen replied that the ordinance was
specific that the requirement was 75% of each building.
Norman asked where the statistics came from to substantiate
the preference for siding. Beck replied that the proponent
had conducted market research and guest profiles. Eric Holtze
added that extensive focus group interviews were conducted
with major customers. Holtze stated that the overnight guest
business was minimal and that the average stay was 2• weeks.
Holtze added that this was why he was concerned about creating
a residential atmosphere. Holtze noted that each building was
designed to look like 2 smaller buildings. Holtze believed
that brick gave a cold appearance and the whole concept was to
create a warm, homey atmosphere. Holtze stated that the
Denver facility had the highest occupancy rate in the area and
he did not want to vary too far away from a concept which had
proved very successful.
Hallett recommended using siding on the interior of the
• buildings facing the pool and courtyard area and to have brick
on the outside of the buildings. Hallett concurred that brick
gave a cold appearance.
Brian Cluts, 7520 Market Place Drive, representing the
Lakewood Office Building, stated that the project as proposed
• would be a welcome addition to Eden Prairie and the business
area. Cluts believed that -the buildings would give a
consistent appearance if each of the buildings had some brick
and some siding, rather than some buildings all brick and some
buildings all siding.
Ruebling believed that the sidewalk was important in this area
because it was part of the original PUD. Ruebling supported
the requirement for 75% brick or better. He did not see any
reason to shift from the present ordinance.
Bye supported the ordinance requiring a 75% brick or better
exterior.
Hallett supported some flexibility in the present ordinance
for 75% brick or better exterior.
Bauer concurred with Hallett's recommendation on some
flexibility and using siding on the interior of the project
and brick on the exterior side of the project. Bauer believed
that upkeep was a major concern and that brick was easier to
maintain.
Norman believed that the, City needed to be consistent and,
therefore, supported the present ordinance related to exterior
• building materials.
Dodge noted that the other hotels previously approved had been
denied a request for a variance on the exterior building
material and believed that it was important to remain
consistent.
Hallett asked if families would be residents in the complex
and if school buses could pick the children up safely. Beck
replied that a full-sized cul-de-sac would accommodate a bus.
Hallett asked that Staff check on this item prior to City
Council approval.
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Holtze Brothers Development
Company for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 33
acres for the Holtze Executive Residence hotel, based on plans
dated May 9, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated May 25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Holtze Brothers Development
Company for Planned 'Unit Development • District Review, with
waivers, and Zoning District Change from Office and C-Reg to
C-Reg-Ser, all on 5.6 acres, based on plans dated May 9, 1990,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May
25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City
Council_approval of the request of Holtze Brothers Development
Company for Site Plan review on 5. 6 acres for construction of
a 220-unit hotel to be known as Holtze Executive Residence,
based on plans dated May 9, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 25, ' 1990.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 5:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request Holtze Brothers Development
Company for Preliminary Plat of 7.2 acres into one lot and one
outlot for construction of a 220-unit hotel to be known as
Holtze Executive Residence, based on plans dated May 9, 1990,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May
25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
. C. BENTEC ENGINEERING. Request for Zoning District Amendment and
Site Plan Review within the Office Zoning District on 1.85
acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals
for construction of a 1,900 sq. ft.' addition to the Bentec
Engineering Building. Location: 13050 Pioneer Trail. A
public hearing.
Bob Smith, representing the proponent, presented the plans for
a building expansion. The proponent proposed to consolidate
2 lots into 1 lot. The additional parking requirement was
shown as proof-of-parking at this time. The wooded area to
the west of the project was to be maintained in its present
state. The proponent would connect to City sewer, but would
continue to use the existing well. Pines would be planted to
screen the overhead door proposed for the west side of the .
building. The exterior of the additions would be in face
brick. A variance will be required regarding the front lot
setback along Highway 169 due to the hardship from the taking
of right-of-way for the highway expansion.
Kipp reported that the buildings did meet the 75% brick or
better exterior. Staff recommended approval of the plan as
proposed. Kipp added that the proponent was requesting Final
Plat Approval from the City Council.
Ruebling asked how far away the road- would be from the
building. Smith replied that the exact location was not known
at this time. Kipp replied that the existing highway location
would be the north bound lane of the new upgraded highway,
therefore, minimal highway encroachment would take place.
Norman asked if the back side of the buildings would be
visible from Highway 169. Smith replied that adequate
• screening would be provided.
MOTION 1:
Bye moved, seconded . by Bauer to 'close the public hearing.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bye moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Bentec Engineering for Zoning
District Amendment within the Office District, with variances
to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, for construction of a
1,900 sq. ft. addition to the existing structure, based on
plans dated May 24, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated May 25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bye moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Bentec Engineering for Site Plan
Review within the Office District for a 1,900 sq. ft. addition
to the existing structure, based on plans dated -May 24, 1990,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May
25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
• V. OLD BUSINESS
Hallett stated that the letter written by Staff to the Tower Square
Shopping Center was well done. Hallett asked if a letter had been
written to the Water Products Company. Kipp replied that he was
still working with the State ,regarding the Water Products Company.
Dodge asked Franzen if the letter to Tower Square Shopping Center
should have City Council approval before being mailed. Franzen
replied yes. "
VI. NEW'BUSINESS
A. BUILDING HEIGHT ORDINANCE. Amending City Code Chapter 11
regarding definition and regulations for building height.
Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator, presented the amendments
proposed for the City Code related to building heights.
Johnson stated that the reason for the change was the
increased height of the homes being constructed today. She
noted that the number of basement coarses had increased, as
well as the ceiling heights. The City was now reviewing more
tri-level and multiple-level homes. The Building Department
estimated that 90% of the. homes were two-story. Staff had
reviewed the Uniform Building Code and information from other
cities in the metropolitan area. Johnson believed that the
Building Code and the Zoning Code should be the same.
Dodge believed that the change made sense based on the change
in home designs.
Hallett asked Johnson 'if the request was to increase the
height from 30 feet to 40 feet. Johnson replied yes.
Bye asked when the Uniform Buidling Code had last been
changed. Johnson replied in 1973.
Norman asked if consideration was given to the elevation of
the lot. Johnson replied that this was not done currently and
would be difficult to enforce.
MOTION:
Bye moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council
approval of the proposed amendment to City Code Chapter 11,
regarding definition and regulations for building height.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
Hallett moved, seconded by Norman to adjourn the meeting at
9:45 PM. Motion- carried 6-0-0.