Planning Commission - 07/10/1989 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, July 10, 1989
7:30 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Julianne Bye, Richard Anderson, Christine Dodge, Doug
Fell , Robert Hallett, Charles Ruebling, Douglas Sandstad
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording
Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance -- Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
*NOTE: THE TIMES LISTED BELOW ARE TENTATIVE, AND MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY EARLIER, OR LATER
THAN LISTED.
(7:35) A. DENWAL FORD, INC., by Eden Prairie Auto Properties, Inc. Request for
Planned Unit Development Concept Review and Planned Unit Development
District Review on 16.93 acres with waivers, Zoning District Change from
Rural to C-Reg-Ser on 10.28 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the C-
Reg-Ser District on 2.17 acres, Preliminary Plat of 16.93 acres into 1 lot
and 1 outlot for construction of an auto and truck dealership. Location:
North of Plaza Drive, south of Valley View Road, east of the Prairie View
Shopping Center. A continued public hearing.
(7:40) B. SHORES OF MITCHELL LAKE, by MR-USHOT. Request for Zoning District Change
from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 94.8 acres with Shoreland variances to
be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Site Plan Review and Preliminary
Platting of 94.8 acres into 175 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road
right-of-way, Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review on 94.8 acres for
construction of residential development. Location: South of State
Highway #5 and west of Mitchell Lake. A continued public hearing.
(8:10) C. SCHROERS PUD, by BDD Partnership. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Amendment for the relocation of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA)
line to include an additional 32.2 acres of property, 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 to R1-9.5 on 24 acres and from Rural to R1-13.5 on 8.2 acres, Site
Plan Review, Preliminary Platting of 129.8 acres into 77 single family
lots, 3 outlots , and road right-of-way, Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Review on 129.8 acres for construction of a residential development.
Location: North of Rice Marsh Lake, just east of the Chanhassen-Eden
Prairie city limits. A continued public hearing.
Agenda
July 10, 1989
Page Two
(8:40) D. EDEN PRAIRIE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT (FESTIVAL CENTRE) , by Curt Johnson
Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment and
Planned Unit Development District Review on 16.2 acres with waivers.
Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 16.2
acres and Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres for development of a 153,756
square foot commercial retail and entertainment complex. Location: East
of Plaza Drive and south of Valley View Road. A public hearing.
(9:10) E. LAMETTRY CENTER, by Richard A. Lamettry. Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to C-Regional Service on 1.88 acres , Site Plan Review,
and Preliminary Plat of 1.88 acres into 1 lot for construction of a 32,698
square foot auto body repair facility. Location: West of Plaza Drive,
southeast of Menards. A public hearing.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI. PLANNER'S REPORT
VII. ADJOURNMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, .July lot 1989 7::30 PM CITY HALT, COUNCIL CHAMLERS
7600 Executive Drive
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Julianne Bye, Richard
Anderson, Christine Dodge, Doug Fell,
Charles Ruebling, Douglas Sandstad
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Hallett
STAFF MEMBERS : Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don
Uram, Assistant Planner; Alan Gray,
City Engineer; Deb Edlund, Recording
Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION
• Sandstad moved, seconded by Fell to approve the Agenda as
published . Motion carried 4-0.
II . MEMBERS REPORTS
III . DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. DENWAL FORD, INC. , by Eden Prairie Auto Properties, Inc.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review and
Planned Unit Development District Review on 16 .93 acres
with waivers, zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-
Ser on 10 .28 acres, zoning District Amendment within the
C-Reg-Ser District on 2 .17 acres, Preliminary Plat of
16 .93 acres into 1 lot and 1 outlot for construction of an
auto and truck dealership. Location: North of Plaza
Drive, south of Valley View Road, east of the Prairie View
Shopping Center . A continued public hearing.
Franzen reported that after discussions with the proponent
it was determined that several issues were still
unresolved. The need for Army Corps of Engineer permits
regarding the wetland area and further investigation for a
possible different orientation for the location of the
building needed to be completed by the proponent. Franzen
recommenced that the project be returned to the proponent,
• without prejudice . He added that by returning the project
the proponent, new notice5 would be mailed out when the
project returned to the Planning commission.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 July 10, 1989
MOT I ON;
Dodge moved, seconded by Ruebling to close the public
hearing, returning the item to the proponent, without
prejudice . Motion carried 5-0-0 .
B. SHORES OF MITCHELL LAKE, by MR-USHOT. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13 . 5 on 94 .8
acres with Shoreland variances to be reviewed by the Board
of Appeals, Site Plan Review and Preliminary Platting of
94. 8 acres into 175 single family lots, 3 outlots, and
road right-of-way, Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Review on 94 . 8 acres for construction of residential
development. Location; South of State Highway 45 and
west of Mitchell Lake. A continued public hearing.
Franzen reported that the proponent was present tonight to
update the Planning Commission on the changes which have
been made to the plan currently and to receive input from
the Planning Commission on further recommendations and/or
direction. The new plans being presented were not
available in time to be included in the Commission's
packet or for Staff to make recommendations.
Anderson arrived at 7 . 45 PM.
Lee Johnson, presented the revised plans . Johnsen stated
that after meeting with the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Staff the plans had been revised to show the
dedication of two sections of property to the City. The
first parcel was located on the north slope of the wooded
knoll of the northern bay. The Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Staff had indicated that it would like
to have the southern bay of Mitchell Lake enclosed to
create a park . A grove of trees located on the edge of
the southern bay would provide a natural barrier between
the subdivision and the park . The lot widths would vary
in some areas from 120 feet to 150 feet . Johnson
commented that some of the lots on the other side of the
lake had 90-foot lot widths and; therefore, believed that
the 120 foot lot widths should be considered adequate.
The revised plan depicted that 150-foot setbacks could be
maintained. The subdivision had been reduced by 3 to 4
lots . A path was shown which would have a. major
north/south connection to existing trails . The roads were
reconfigured to reduce the number of cul-de-sacs required.
Sandstad asked if the Street marked as "D" was based on
City Staff recommendations . Johnson replied that the
street had been reconfigured to eliminate a cul-de-sac and
• still provide a connection to other developments in the
future, based on Staff recommendations . .
Fell asked how long the cul-de-sac marked as• 114311 was.
Planning Commission Minutes 3 July 10, 1989
• Johnson replied that the cul-de-sac would be approximately
550 feet long due to the significant grade change in this
area.
Franzen noted that the major changes pertained to the
lakeshore . He added that Staff had not received the plans
in time to review the new road configuration. Franzen
believed that one of the question for the Planning
Commission would be how the City would benefit from the
lakeshore revisions . Franzen believed the revised plan to
be a better development of the lakeshore . The significant
tree loss had been in the area which would now become part
of the park and; therefore, the tree loss would be reduced
to approximately 26%. The average density would be one
unit per 44, 000 square feet.
Ruebling asked what the dimensions of the smallest
lakeshore lot would be. Johnson replied the smallest lot
would be approximately 210 feet by 150 feet . Ruebling
asked how much of drop-off there was between the plateau
area and the lakeshore along portions of the shoreline in
the southern area . Johnson replied that the drop off was
up to 14 feet in some areas . Ruebling then asked how
large the park area would be . Franzen replied that the
total between the two sections of property to be Medicated
• to the City would be approximately 5 acres. Franzen noted
that the dedication of the property would be for a passive
recreation area and for lakeshore protection.
Fell contented that he would have liked to have seed the
revised plan in the Commission's packet. He added that he
was not comfortable giving a proponent recommendations for
further changes or to comment on the present changes,
after only having seen the plate at the meeting.
Sandstad asked what had t.yken place regarding the noise
level study. Johnson replied that noise level readings
had been taken; however, a grading plan had not been
completed which could affect noise levels.
Bill Kidney, 17651 West 78th Street, stated that he owned
the corner property to the north of the proposed
subdivision. He said that he understood the need for a
trail; however, he was not happy that the trail would be
almost at his back door . Kinney said that he had always
enjoyed the privacy of the property and was concerned
about the location of the trail .
Anderson asked Kinney if he would prefer to see the trail
along the lakeshore . Kinney replied that if the only
• choice was between a trail along the lake and a trail as
presently proposed use would }refer the pre5ant propo6als
Sandstad asked what the distance would be between the
Planning Commission Minutes 4 July 10, 1989
• Kinney ho#itma and the propo and trail and it any 5er@@ning
was present at this time . Kinney replied that the
distance between his home and the trail would be
approximately 100 feet and there were some trees and
screening on his property. Sandstad asked if
consideration could be given to provide a landscape buffer
between the trail and the Kinney property.
Kinney stated that he did not object to the project and
added that he believed the proponent was actually
dedicating some of the prime lakeshore property to the
City.
Bye recommended that Mr . K inney's comments regarding the
trail be given to the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Staff and Commission.
Bye stated that she believed that the changes presented
tonight had improved the plan; however, she was not sure
that this was the best plan.
Sandstad believed that the proponent was heading in the
right direction.
Ruebling stated that the variances had not been clearly
. addressed yet and added that clear justification for the
variances would be necessary. Ruebling requested that
staff include information on how this project compared
with other projects on the lake .
Johnson stated that the noise issue and the staging were
also yet to be resolved.
MOTION:
Dodge moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue the public
hearing to the August 14, 1989 Planning Commission
meeting, pending receipt and Staff evaluation of revised
plans from the proponent as discussed at this meeting.
Motion carried 6-0-0 .
C. SCHROERS PUD, by BDD Partnership. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for the relocation of
the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) line to include
an additional 32 . 2 acres of property, 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 to R1-9 . 5 on 24 acres
and from Rural to R1-12 . 5 on 8 .2 acres, Site Plan Review,
Preliminary Platting of 129 .8 acres into 77 single family
• lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way, Environmental
Assessment Worksheet Review on 129 .8 acres for
construction of a residential development. Location:
North of Rice Marsh Lake, just east of the Chanhassen-Eden
Planning Commission Minutes 5 July 10, 1989
iPrairie city limits . A continued public hearing.
Mike Black, presented the revised plans . The plan had
been changed to have approximately 60% of the project
zoned R1-13. 5 and approximately 40% of the project zoned
R1-9 . 5. The plan had been reduced by 3 lots, leaving a
total of 36 R1-9 .5 lots and 134 R1-13 .5 lots. The roads
had been realigned to accommodate 501x70 ' building pads
along Rice Marsh Lake. The buffer and screening to the
north was still being negotiated with Data Sery and the
city Staff of Chanhassen to have a joint effort between
this project and Data Serv. A minimum of 150 foot lot
depth would be provided on the lots to the north. The
entrance islands had been eliminated. Black believed that
the seven remaining cul-de-sacs could be justified. The
subdivision road system consisted of 3 north-west streets,
3 east-west streets and 1 loop street, which Black
believed provided adequate traffic circulation. Black
stated that the proponent would abide by the
recommendations of the Southwest Area Study regarding the
alignment of Dell Road. The plan depicted 100 foot right-
of-way for Dell Road . Black stated that additional
property could be provided for right-of-way dedication.
Sandstad asked Black about the drainage issues along Dell
• Road. Black replied that the Corps of Engineers had an
existing wetland that would be protected . Sandstad noted
that the plan did not depict the area as a ponding area.
Uram added that the city Engineering Staff had not made
comment on the plans at this time .
Dick Feerick, proponent, stated that legal counsel had
been obtained to address the MUSA Line issue and to
provide a report as to the status of the Metropolitan
Council . Feerick added that the proponent was still
looking at the alternatives of either an exchange of
property or a request for an amendment to the MUSA Line .
Feerick introduced George Scherers, owner of the property
for over 45 years .
Scherers stated that he had purchased the property in 1946
and had met with the Metropolitan council regarding the
property over a year ago. Scherers stated that he did not
understand why these two parcels had not been able to use
the sewer and develop these parcels .
Bye explained that the philosophy of the city and the
responsibility of the Planning commission was to provide
an orderly development of the City and yet allow the
property owners to develop property. Bye noted that
several agencies were involved in this process because of
the MUSA Line. Bye added that the city tried to balance
the needs of everyone .
Planning Commission Minutes 6 July 10, 1989
9and5tad comytiontod that it was not an @a5y ta§k to provift
long term planning.
Anderson asked Uram if there was any benefit to the City
by the reduction in the right-of-ways . Uram replied that
the standard right-of-way was 50 feet in residential
areas .
Bye believed that this two main issues to be addressed
were: A) the MUSA Line, and B) the proposal itself. Bye
requested more detail on the phasing of the project.
Fell asked if the property would be considered in the
Southwest Area Study. Uram replied that Staff believed
that if the project were to be approved, the number of
lots to be developed would be governed by the
recommendations of Phase I, outlined in the Southwest Area
study. Uram added that 250 total units would be allowed
to develop in this area.
Anderson asked what type of sidewalk system would be
provided. Black replied that sidewalks would be provided
along the perimeter of the development and along the lake
corridor .
Fell believed that the MUSA Line and the projects affect
on the Southwest Area Study needed to be addressed .
Patton stated that the MUSA Line had originally proposed
to have the sewer trunk run along Mitchell Lake, this was
not the eventual outcome . Currently, connections were
necessary from outside the MUSA Line to provide service
for area within the MUSA Line. Patton added that he
believed that the sewer trunk needed to be accommodated.
Dodge stated that she would like a consensus on the MUSA
Line issue . She believed that the MUSA Line was to be
used as a tool for the City to control its growth as
predicted by the Metropolitan Council for the year 2000;
however, the City's predictions for growth appeared to be
more accurate and several things had changed since the
location of the line had been determined. Dodge also
believed that if the MUSA Line was changed that the area
should be included in the Southwest Area Study and that
due to the newness of the study, the study should be
revised at the developers expense .
Ruebling believed that the issue of the relationship of
the project to the Southwest Area Study should have
priority over the MUSA Line issue . Ruebling believed that
• the project if approved should proceed along the
guidelines of the Southwest Area study. Ruebling stated
that another major concern was the possibility of the
request for variances . Ruebling questioned if more R1-9 .5
Planning commission Minutes 7 July 10, 1989
. could be Justified for the area, how was the City of Eden
Prairie progressing toward a balance of development, and
how many more R1-9 . 5 developments did the City want to
approve.
Anderson stated that his concern was the number of R1-9 r 5
lots with R1-13 . 5 homes constructed on them.
Ruebling understood that based on the infrastructure the
City had approved, projects had already been approved by
the City Council to cover the 250 unit limit set by the
Southwest Area Study. Uram replied that at this time only
1 house had been constructed in the approved Cheyenne
Place subdivision and only 2 houses in the Fairfield
subdivision. Ruebling then asked if the numbers of units
was going to be controlled by the issuance of building
permits . Franzen replied that the control of the number
of units would be through the Final Platting process .
Anderson noted that no totlots had been provided for the
subdivision and that a sidewalk system would not be
available in all directions.
Bye concluded that the following issues needed to be
resolved:
• 1. The proponent provide a good defense for the MUSA
Line change .
2 . The projects relationship to the Southwest Area
Study be specifically defined.
3 . Specific requirements of the project be addressed
after issues 1 and 2 had been resolved.
MOTION:
Dodge moved, seconded by Fell to continue the public
hearing to the August 14, 1989, Planning Commission
meeting pending City receipt and evaluation of revisions
to the plans as discussed at this meeting.
D. EDEN PRAIRIE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT (FESTIVAL CENTRE) , by Curt
Johnson Properties . Request for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment and Planned Unit Development District
Review on 16 . 2 acres with waivers . Zoning District
Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 16 .2
acres and Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres for development
of a 153,756 square foot commercial retail and
entertainment complex. Location: East of Plaza Drive and
south of Valley View Road. A public hearing.
The proponent had submitted a written request for a 30-day
continuance.
Planning Commission Minutes 8 July 10, 1989
• MOT i ON
Anderson moved, seconded by Fell to continue this item to
August 14, 1989 . Motion carried 6-0-0 .
E. LAMETTRY CENTER, by Richard A. LaMettry. Request for
Zoning District change from Rural to C.-Regional Service on
1.88 acres, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat of 1. 88
acres into 1 lot for construction of a 82,698 square foot
auto body repair facility. Location: West of Plaza
Drive, southeast of Menards. A public hearing.
Richard LaMettry, proponent, stated that he was a resident
of Eden Prairie and intended to be the sole operator of
the facility, leasing space to two tenants . He added that
he operated an auto body shop in Richfield for
approximately 15 years and wished to move the business to
Eden Prairie . The proposal was for an upscale collision
facility.
John Smith, architect for they proponent, stated that
design had been a critical part of the project. The first
problem had been where to store the vehicles while they
were being worked on. A lower level was, therefore,
installed to store the vehicles . The second problem was
. how to give the facility a retail appearance . A canopy
was proposed for the front face of the facility which tied
to a stair tower penthouse where the office for the
business would be housed. Smith stated that twice the
recommended amount of landscaping was being proposed .
Smith believed that the finished design was beyond that of
a typical retail business .
Sandstad asked what the on-site parking spaces would be
used for . Uram replied that the parking would be used for
employees, visitors, and customers stopping in to receive
estimates .
Fell was concerned that the lower level would be used for
work areas, reducing the parking space available inside
and then the cars would be parked outside. LaMettry
replied that the cars were either being worked on or
returned to the owner. There would not be cars sitting
around. LaMettry added that the parking area did not
encompass the entire lower level and areas could be used
to work on cars if necessary. Uram replied that the
parking requirements were based on the possibility of the
property turning over to 100% retail . Uram added that
outside storage of the vehicles would be prohibited by
City Code .
Planning commission Minutes 9 July 10, 1989
go MOTION 1•
Fell moved, seconded by Anderson to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2 `
Fell moved, seconded by Anderson to recommend to the City
council approval of the request of Richard A. LaMettry for
zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial-Regional-
Service and Site Plan Review on 1. 88 acres for
construction of a 82,508 square foot auto body repair
facility, based on plans dated ,July 5, 1989, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 7,
1989 . Motion carried 6-0-0 .
MOTION 0 •
Fell moved, seconded by Anderson to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Richard A. LaMettry for
Preliminary Plat of 1. 88 acres into one lot for
construction of a 32,508 square foot auto body repair
facility, based on plans dated July 5, 1989, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 7,
1989 . Motion carried 6-0-0.
• IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI . PLANNER' S REPORT
VII . ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
Anderson moved, seconded by Fell to adjourn the meeting at
9 : 00 PM. Motion carried 6-0-0 .
•