Loading...
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.