Planning Commission - 02/22/1988 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 22, 1988
7:30 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Ed Schuck, Richard Anderson, Julianne Bye,
Christine Dodge, Doug Fell , Robert Hallett, Charles Ruebling
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Sue Anderson,
Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. MINUTES
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
(7:35) A. A TO Z RENTAL, by A to Z Rental . Request for Zoning District Change
from Rural to C-Reg-Service on 1 .67 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 3.59 acres
into one lot and one outlot for construction of a 15,500 square foot
retail facility. Location: Southwest corner of Valley View Road
and Plaza Drive.
(8:05) B. WOODDALE CHURCH, by Wooddale Church. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on 31 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review and Zoning District Amendment with the Public Zoning
District on 31 acres with variance for structure height to 200 feet,
and Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review for the construction
of 200,000 square feet of church and educational uses. Location :
Southwest corner of Shady Oak Road and Bryant Lake Drive.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI . NEW BUSINESS
A. Review of DNR Protected Waters Permit No. 88-6186 and No. 88-6208
for temporary drainage and control structure improvements to Little
Grass Lake.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII . ADJOURNMENT
*NOTE: THE TIMES LISTED ABOVE ARE TENTATIVE, AND MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY EARLIER,
OR LATER, THAN LISTED.
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 22, 1988
7:30 PM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Robert Hallett, Christine Dodge,
Julianne Bye, Charles Ruebling, Richard Anderson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ed Schuck, Doug Fell
STAFF PRESENT: Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don Uram,
Asst. Planner; Sue Anderson, Recording Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Bye and seconded by Ruebling to approve
the agenda as printed.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None
III. MINUTES
Motion was made to approve the minutes of the February 2,
1988, Planning Commission meeting with the following
corrections: Page 5, Insert after Paragraph 7 to read:
Ruebling mentioned that if any vehicles currently being
stored on lots that could comply with the ordinance should
comply. Page 5, MOTION: Line 3 1) should read: 1) the
grandfathering be stipulated to specific vehicles and if they
can comply with ordinance they should do so.
Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Bye to approve
the minutes as amended. Motion carried 3-0-1.
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. A TO Z RENTAL, by A to Z Rental. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Service on 1. 67 acres
with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals,
Preliminary Plat of 3 .59 acres into one lot and one
outlot for construction of a 15,500 square foot retail
facility. Location: Southwest corner of Valley View
Road and Plaza Drive.
Uram reported the proposed use on this site would include the
A to Z Rental Center along with an outdoor storage facility
and additional retail space. The building consisting of
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -2- February 22, 1988
15,500 square feet would be a combination of retail and
warehouse space. The outdoor storage would be for trucks and
other heavy equipment. The proponent has submitted an
application for a variance for outdoor storage. A to Z
Rental received approval for a variance for outside storage
in 1984 to exceed ten percent of the floor area of the
building in which they are currently located.
Roman Roos, representative for proponent, presented the
preliminary plat indicating Phase I, II and III. He stated
the elevations of this site permitted outside storage with
adequate screening. He pointed out the planned screening in
all phases of the project, whereby the landscaping would
screen the parking lot without hiding the facility. A zero
lot line setback on the rear property line has been applied
for through the Board of Appeals.
Parking for the two story building was based on 1 space per
2000 sq.ft. for warehouse and 6 spaces per 1000 sq.ft. for
retail. He stated that all trucks would be parked on the
back side of Phase I. If Phase II and III did not go forward
as planned, they would finish the end of the building and add
a berm along the north property line for screening.
Roos indicated to the Commission that approval of all phases
at this time was essential to the primary lender who has
requested the City's assurance the project would continue
whereby Phase II and Phase III would be developed.
Uram pointed out three areas of concern on the project. The
outside storage site plan was 12 ' lower than Plaza Drive and
would need a variance. The zero lot line setback question
would be addressed by the Board of Appeals. Mr. Way would
move into Phase I immediately. They have agreed to a bond
for the amount of the berming if Phase II does not occur.
They would construct a berm until Phase II and III are
completed. As was indicated in the Staff Report 75% brick
face was recommended and required by City Code and at present
there was 72% on this project.
Uram reported that Staff Recommendations prior to Council
review are: 1) revise the landscape plan to reflect a
combination of six and eight-foot evergreen trees along the
south property line in order to screen the storage areas and
to reflect a combination of evergreen and overstory trees
along Plaza Drive; 2) revise the architecture of the proposed
building to reflect the continuation of the front side
architecture partially along the rear of the building and to
demonstrate that the mechanical equipment would be screened;
3) submit building material samples and colors for review
which should be the same color family as Menards; 4) submit a
Phase I grading plan which depicts a berm along the north
side of Phase I screening the outdoor storage from Valley
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -3- February 22, 1988
View Road; 5) submit a north building elevation for Phase I
which depicts all face brick; 6) submit easements for the two
accesses from Plaza Drive (these have been submitted) ; 7)
submit site sections which depict the views from Valley View
Road and Topview neighborhood for both the Phase I grading
plan and final building construction; 8) submit an overall
signage and lighting program with the size of letters and
colors; 9) submit the usual utility plans for review by the
City Engineer, and erosion control plans for review by the
Water-shed District; 10) apply for and receive approval of
the variance required for outside storage and zero lot line
setback to the rear property line; 11) concurrent with
building construction, a 5-foot concrete sidewalk shall be
constructed along the west side of Plaza Drive; and 12) the
submittal of a rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan.
Ruebling stated that screening the outside storage along
Valley View Road has always been a problem, and inquired how
the proponent intended to fully screen this area. Proponent
replied there was a 12 ' elevation difference and with the 6
and 8 foot evergreens, the storage area should be well
screened.
Hallett inquired about rooftop screening. Proponent stated
there was plenty of room to screen mechanical rooftop
• equipment.
Ruebling inquired if berming would take place prior to Phase
II and III thereby raising the elevation line. Proponent
replied affirmatively. Ruebling countered that it was
difficult to visualize how it would be totally hidden.
Franzen stated that in his experience of screening projects,
from some angle they are always visible. On this project, it
might be visible due to the higher elevation of Valley View
Road. However, he felt, berming and landscaping would block
most of the view.
Proponent inquired what the difference was between having 75%
face brick and 73%. Staff replied that 75% was City Code, and
once it is an ordinance it should be complied with because it
is a minimum city requirement.
Dodge stated that the face brick requirement was an ordinance
and that she felt other commercial projects have conformed.
Roos stated that proponent would add 3% brick to comply with
City Ordinance.
There were no comments from the audience.
•
Eden Prairie Planning commission -4- February 22, 1988
Hallett inquired of Staff if notices were mailed. Uram
replied that 500 residents were contacted, and one phone call
was received regarding the project.
Bye asked for clarification of Phase I. Proponent replied
that Phase I would contain A to Z rental party goods and
medium to small equipment. The 3500 ft. retail area would be
for two potential tenants. Phase II would be all inside
storage.
Hallett inquired about the variance of more than 10% outside
storage. Uram replied it may be appropriate in this
instance in view of the fact that it was granted previously
in 1984 and the overall project would bring about an enhanced
situation that what was presently on the existing site.
Uram stated that the Commission could consider, because Phase
I received a variance of the 10%, that no additional outside
storage be requested in Phase II and III.
Ruebling stated he was comfortable with the plan and endorsed
the limitation to outside storage in Phase II and III.
Franzen stated that a variance was being requested for A to Z
Rental not the retailers in Phase III. The tenants in Phase
III would have to come before the Board of Appeals for more
than 10% outside storage.
MOTION 1;
Motion was made by Bye and seconded by Anderson to close public
hearing.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2 :
Motion was made by Bye and seconded by Anderson to recommend
to the City Council approval of the request of A to Z Rental
for Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Service on
1.67 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals, based on plans dated February 2, 1988, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 19,
1988, amended to include: 1) plans for mechanical screening be
submitted prior to Council review; 2) variance request be
applied to Phase I and Phase II regarding outside storage;
and 3) Phase III would be allowed its own 10% outside
storage.
Motion carried 4-0-0
MOTION 3 :
Motion was made by Bye and seconded by Anderson to recommend
to the City Council approval of the request of A to Z Rental
for Preliminary Plat of 3 .59 acres into one lot and one
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -5- February 22, 1988
outlot for construction of a 15,500 sq. ft. retail facility,
based on plans dated February 2, 1988, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 19, 1988.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
B. WOODDALE CHURCH, by Wooddale Church. Request for Planned
Unit Development Concept Amendment on 31 acres, Planned
Unit Development District Review and Zoning District
Amendment with the Public Zoning District on 31 acres
with variance for structure height to 200 feet, and
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review for the
construction of 200, 000 square feet of church and
educational uses. Location: Southwest corner of Shady
Oak Road and Bryant Lake Drive.
Franzen introduced the project and the proponents representa-
tive John Uban who in turn introduced Reverend White who gave
the history and mission of Wooddale Church.
Uban presented the proposed project as a regional church
site and felt they were meeting the goals of the City with
regard to meeting the peoples needs not only on the commercial
side but the spiritual side as well. He indicated that the
Golden Ridge subdivision has been in the area for a long time
and the church has been sensitive to their concerns. This
project would necessitate the removal of cottonwood trees to
allow for the storage pond and access to the parking lot.
The master plan to be approved would consist of 166,700 sq.
ft. of floor area. 75 ' to the top of the sanctuary and 200 '
to the top of the spire. The size of the sanctuary would
accommodate 2, 000 seats. Parking proposed would be 2,250
spaces requiring an EAW and an indirect source permit from
the PCA.
Uban spoke to the issue of a parking deck and shared parking
with neighboring businesses. They want to live with proposed
parking plan in Phase III and IV, and before Phase V assess
the parking needs and address additional needs at that time.
Bob Virto, architect for proponent, stated this was a
building of special quality consisting of the best acoustics
and a strong presence. He stated the building was a
measurable artistic experience with regard to the steeple.
They felt the spire was scaled in accordance with the FAA,
the project has 75% face brick, and meets the requirements of
the City as set forth and meets the recommendations of the
Staff.
Franzen stated the City was dealing with policy issues on the
land use, the size of the church, and the height of the
is church. The traffic study reported there are no traffic
problems. A building of this height was usually found in a
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -6- February 22, 1988
• major center area. The church desires to become a regional
church in a low-profile area. The City was concerned that
there be enough parking and that a great loss of trees does
not occur in the creation of parking lots. The Staff
declined making an outright approval or denial but presented
pros and cons to be reviewed. These are listed in the Staff
Report dated February 19, 1988.
Ruebling inquired that the original request for an 1800 seat
sanctuary was only being increased by 200 seats. This did not
seem to be much of an increase in view of the square footage
being requested in the project. Proponent responded that the
square footage would cover classrooms for sunday school and
adult education in order to expand the educational program.
A small chapel and a gymnasium are also included.
Bye inquired if those facilities were approved prior to this
phase. Franzen replied affirmatively that they were approved
in the last phase.
Anderson commented that this was a low-intensity area and he
was concerned with this becoming regional use.
Ruebling stated he did not have a problem with the height or
size as long as the surrounding neighborhood did not object.
He would like as many trees saved as possible in the area.
He felt a two deck parking ramp would supply parking needs at
a later date.
Dodge inquired about the 2250 parking spaces, if this was
enough. Franzen commented that the code requirements for
parking was based on the number of seats which would mean
667 spaces. The churches demand for parking is more than code
would require.
Proponent stated they would like to address the parking with
each phase.
Anderson felt the variance could be approved if there was no
other area for a regional use, but the City does have other
areas available for regional uses.
Ruebling stated the whole character has changed in the area.
The people who work in the seven story office building do not
live in Eden Prairie and therefore it is a regional use. In
that light, if people are coming to the church from other
areas, it would be classified as well as regional.
Franzen commented that the church was not in the middle of a
residential area but rather on the edge.
Hallett expressed support due to the traffic not being a
problem on Sunday. He felt there possibly could be a
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -7- February 22, 1988
• better area but the church was already there. He was
concerned about the parking and removing trees.
Franzen reported that replacement of trees would be based on
a percentage of significant trees removed on the property.
Hallett inquired how City can protect itself if Phase V was
built and no parking added. Franzen responded that neighbors
may complain and Staff would address the issue and attempt to
resolve it with the church. Or, City Staff may observe
parking problems and would then contact the church. Since
the church is a PUD they would have to come back before the
Planning Commission and indicate how they would be addressing
the parking problem.
Ruebling and Anderson inquired about the possibility of shared
parking.
Proponent responded they are presently share parking and want
to use adjoining sites before having to build a parking deck.
Hallett inquired how City could tie the church into a parking
ramp in the future. Franzen responded that language in the
development agreement could require decks to be constructed
concurrrent with or prior to Phase V and that church must
return to the Planning Commission with each subsequent phase.
Five years down the road the church may know more accurately
about their parking needs.
Bye and Anderson felt the change in the zoning to regional
would dictate change in the area.
Ruebling had no problem in defining it as a regional.
Dodge was concerned with the parking and inquired if there
was not enough parking why not scale down the size of the
building to be in accordance with parking available. She
suggested the alternative of granting this proposed project
with the stipulation of no further expansion in the future on
this site.
Franzen summarized options available such as parking decks,
scale down the church activities, and shared parking. He
added that Phase IV and Phase V would come back before the
Planning Commission for consideration and parking projec-
tions would be assessed.
Dodge stated on site parking was preferred instead of decks.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Bye to close the
public hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -8- February 22, 1988
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Bye to return
proposal to proponent with request that parking plan be
restructured with an attempt to save additional trees on this
site and revise the phasing plan to resolve the parking
demand/provision issue so parking problems would not occur.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Bye to amend
Motion 2 to state proponent shall return to Commission on
March 28, 1988 and subject to review shall present proposed
project to City Council on April 5, 1988.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
V. OLD BUSINESS
None
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Review of DNR Protected Waters Permit No. 88-6186 and No.
. 88-6208 for temporary drainage and control structure
improvements to Little Grass Lake.
Franzen introduced Ed Crozier of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, who would be addressing the land alteration to
control rough fish population, encourage aquatic plant growth
and to improve the habitat for waterfowl through water level
management by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Crozier stated the work would consist of the installation of
two control structures to allow control of water levels on
Big and Little Rice Lake. One of the structures would
replace a beaver dam on the outflow stream, and the other
would be a ditch that would be dug to connect Little Rice
Lake to a stream 120 ' to the east that flows into the
Minnesota River.
Hallett inquired ii public hunting was allowed on the land.
Crozier responded negatively to adult hunters but stated that
there would be training on the site for younger children. The
Peterson property was however leased to hunters.
Hallett inquired if public hunting was in the long-range
plan. Crozier responded that possibly goose hunting when the
fowl population increases in the future.
Eden Prairie Planning Commission -9- February 22, 1988
MOTION:
Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Bye to recommend
to the City Council approval of the request for a temporary
drainage and control structure improvements to Little Grass
Lake as represented by DNR Protected Waters Permits No. 88-
6186 and No. 88-6208, based on plans dated February 15, 1988,
subject to the recommendations of the Engineering Staff
Report dated February 18, 1988, and the approval of the
Watershed District and the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
VII. PLANNERS REPORT
Franzen commented that six projects are scheduled for the
next meeting. Normally three projects are scheduled for
review, but at this time of year the City was faced with a
rush of projects. In order to balance the load, Staff
suggested the agenda could be increased to four standard
items, and one housekeeping item.
Hallett stated Commission could consider scheduling an
additional Monday evening instead of hastily reviewing
projects due to the late hour of the meeting.
• Anderson commented he would be comfortable with an extra
meeting in the month of March.
Franzen informed Commission that Christine Dodge and Julianne
Bye had been reappointed to the Commission by the City
Council.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion was made by Bye and seconded by Anderson to adjourn the
meeting at 10:31 PM.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
•