Loading...
Planning Commission - 03/28/1988 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, March 28, 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. WOODDAL E 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. A continued public hearing. (8:05) B. WINDSONG TWO 2ND ADDITION, by Koosman and Rice Company. Request for Preliminary Plat of 0.35 into four lots. Location: North of Windsong Drive. A public hearing. (8:20) C. BLOSSOM RIDGE 2ND ADDITION, by G. William Pearson. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 6.32 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 6.32 acres into 14 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location : South of Blossom Road, east of Windsor Terrace. (8:40) D. HIWAY 494/CROSSTOWN RACQUET, SWIM AND HEALTH CLUB, by Northwest Racquet, Swim and Health Club, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Community Commercial on 2.2 acres and Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial District on 9.73 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 6.4 acres into one lot, one outlot, and road right-of-way for construction of a 13,375 square foot addition to the health club and an additional parking lot. Location: East of Baker Road, north of Holasek Lane. A public hearing. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS 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, March .28 , 1988 7:30 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Christine Dodge, Douglas Fell, Charles Ruebling, Richard Anderson MEMBERS ABSENT: Ed Schuck, Robert Hallett, Julianne Bye, STAFF PRESENT: Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don Uram, Asst. Planner; Sue Anderson, Recording Secretary I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Fell to approve the agenda as printed. Motion carried 4-0-0. II. MEMBERS REPORTS None • III. MINUTES Motion was made by Fell and seconded by Anderson to approve the minutes of the March 14, 1988, Planning Commission meeting as published. Motion carried 3-0-1, Ruebling abstaining. IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. 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. A continued public hearing. Franzen stated this item was continued from the February 22nd Commission meeting in order for proponent to review the plans with respect to issues involving structure height, parking and other technical matters. An amendment to the Wooddale Church packet was distributed to Commission members which detailed the meeting of exterior material codes. The key t Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988- Page 2 • issues with the project were the site plan, land use and height of the church, and would the granting of such variance set off a precedence. The proponent representative, John Uban, stated the church has acted responsibly in the past and has worked to meet the recommendations by the Staff and the Commission. The model presented indicated the strong identity for a church giving a strong image for the community. Uban summarized the issues worked out with staff as follows: 1) All entrances were enlarged to 281 , except for an original access road to the rear parking lot which was 241 . This could be torn up and redone at 28 ' if Commission so requested. 2) Ponding has been calculated to meet the requirements of the .Watershed District. 3) Parking lot enlargement has been reduced, thus enlarging the setback and open space providing a better shield from Hwy. 169 and Bryant Lake Drive. There would be a 100' separation from the road. 4) Reforestation would be minimized with less cottonwood removal. What was removed would be replaced in other areas. 5) With Traffic Engineering recommendations the parking has been reduced to 2002, decreasing one acre of trees being removed. 6) Speaking to the issue of the 200' spire, proponent stated it was a very narrow silhouette not a tall building. • Franzen stated Commission had previously directed the Staff to iron out seven different technical issues and they have addressed them and incorporated the changes which were acceptable to the Staff. The question before the Commission was should the church be allowed, through PUD Amendment, give variance approval for 200' height. Franzen stated the previous Staff Report spoke about the pros and cons for the variance resulting in four questions: 1) Is the height acceptable? 2) Would the granting of variance set a precedence for future buildings in Eden Prairie? 3) Have the proponents provided compelling reasons for the height variance? 4) What are the height impacts and can they be mitigated? Franzen added that another way to look at the variance would be in two stages. First phase would be a 75' height for the sanctuary and after construction, the City could view the church height in relationship to the neighborhood. The second phase of building would include the spire. Fell inquired if decreasing the parking was a concern to the Staff. Franzen replied they were satisfied with the number of parking spaces. Before constructing any new phases they would come back to the Commission to review parking. The proposed parking meets the ordinance. • Franzen stated that proponent should supply a color board for City Council meeting. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1-988 Page 3 • Mitch Wonson, 14007 Holly Road, stated he did not appear at the previous hearing due to his not knowing about the meeting. He spoke to the spire height of 200 ' and felt it would be the highest structure and higher than any land elevation in the City. He felt this was not a localized issue for zoning change, but rather the City would have to consider the height variance limit. He lived 2 miles from the church but at 200 ' he would see the spire. It would visually impact him, and felt it would visually impact most of Eden Prairie. He felt it was aesthetically detrimental. He quoted the requirements for granting of variance, and expressed to Commission that the proponent must prove the undue hardship or that it would not alter the character of the site before granting the variance. If the Commission did grant the variance, it would be hard pressed to not grant similar requests in the future. In summary he opposed the 2001 church spire due to the visual impact and if the allowance of 200 ' would be discretionary he was even more opposed. He reiterated that the Church did not meet the criteria for granting of variance under City Code. Jerry Steelman, 6601 Golden Roadway, lived on the top of the hill from the church. He stated in the past the church has been very considerate to the neighbors. However, he was • opposed to the 100' spire, and also inquired if the spire would be lit at night. The spire would be 150 ' above his home. He felt it was a drastic visual impact. It was a very big concern and 3/4 of Eden Prairie would see the spire as well part of Edina. The proponent responded that the need for the spire was for a religious identity. He stated the original church was very low profile and surrounded by large hills sitting in a valley. This site suffered from visibility. When designing the building they looked at the surrounding area such as the radio broadcast tower, the Wilson Learning Center and they were not nestled into a valley giving 30 to 40 ' relief. They did not feel there would be a negative impact on the City. The church decided not to have bells and loudspeakers but rather a silent identity. It would have soft architectural lighting in the lantern structure creating a shadow effect. The City has ordinances to control glare lights from residential areas and they would sensitive to that issue. Franzen inquired what the comparison of lighting would be to the Edina Colonial Church. Proponent responded that it would just create a shadow of the spire, not a blasting flood light on the surface. Proponent continued that this could be addressed in the final plans, and added that if the lights did prove intrusive, they could be turned off. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 4 • Wonson stated the lighting described would make the 200 ' height even more obtrusive to the community than just the spire unlighted. Proponent replied they were trying to build light within the structure and meet City standards. Anderson indicated he felt the same about the variance as at the previous meeting which was that the church was a regional church in a low profile area and would be more appropriately located elsewhere. He was opposed to the variance. Fell inquired what material the spire was constructed. Proponent replied it would be pre-coated steel. Fell inquired about granting the variance in stages. Proponent replied that the spire was very heavy and has to be incorporated in the construction of the worship area. Costs would not be justified without knowing if the City decided to grant the variance. Fell inquired if any other alternatives were available to make the church unique than going upward. . Milo Thomas, architect for proponent, stated that many options were explored. Due to the many requirements they arrived at the present design. The requirements were the seating of 2000 people in a compacted form, and high quality acoustics for the pipe organ. A large volume with height was necessary for the acoustic situation. The spire would give a strong presence in the community. Instead of creating a box like structure, they felt the spire would give instant recognition of a church. They look at it as a beauty mark or landmark quality, and it compliments the architecture of the building. Fell inquired if the height could be altered, and proponent responded that if it were changed, they would be designing a very different building. If the spire was denied it would not be a complete expression of the church. Fell was not in favor of height because of precedence setting. He was concerned about the work already done on the project, but felt proponent knew the restriction before they came before the Commission, and the church can be expanded without the spire. Ruebling stated he had no problem with the height. He gathered that lighting would be like a window light instead of flood lights. He inquired of proponent the comparison of the top of the spire and top of lantern to Mr. Steelman's home. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 5 • Proponent responded that the church was sitting down from the road. The people would see the roof line of the main sanctuary. They would not see the gravel on the roof. The lantern and steeple would be upward. Ruebling inquired of horizontal distance. Proponent replied approximately 7001 , with the closest being 4751 . Ruebling summarized that as far as the aesthetics of the spire they would not be noticeable from a distance compared to a 200' building with greater width at that height. He also felt that the present location on Hwy 169 and among the commercial buildings already placed the church in a regional area. In terms of literal relationship in regard to variance, whether or not there was a hardship - the hardship for an organization - maybe recognition. He had no problem with the height or location, and felt it would be an historical piece of architecture for the community. Fell questioned proponent if the spire could be scaled down to meet a certain height recommendation. Proponent replied at what certain point would he consider appropriate. At present it was correct architectually as they took into account the FAA restriction under 200 ' to avoid elaborate lighting system. Fell inquired of Staff if other cities in the area prohibit or limit spire heights for churches. Franzen responded that he is unaware if other communities prohibit spires or steeples. Anderson did not see compelling reasons to justify the height except for advertising purposes to be seen from the road. Dodge inquired if the spire did not indeed have a function, why could it not be scaled down. Dodge felt the proponents have not provided a justification for the height variance and was concerned about setting a precedent. Fell inquired of proponent the need for the spire. They replied it was a traditional symbol and had no attached function. It would be a symbol of this church in this community and to provide form for this facility arranging things in an architectural way. Franzen pointed out that variances can be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, or addressed through the PUD requiring the Commission to recommend to City Council. If the variance is approved or denied the Commission should state these reasons. He referred to the pros and cons for variances in the Staff Report. Consideration should be given to impact on peoples and if it was intrusive, the aesthetics of the structure, justification for the variances and would a precedent be set. Eden Prairie Planning Commission .March 28, 1988 Page 6 MOTION 1; Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Ruebling to close public hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0. MOTION 2: Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Fell to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Wooddale Church for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 31 acres for construction of a 200, 000 sq. ft. addition to the church and educational facilities, based on revised plans dated March 25, 1988, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated February 19, and March 25, 1988 based on lack of compelling reasons to justify the height, that it would set a precedent and that the height impacts were not mitigated. Motion carried 3-0-1, Ruebling opposed to denial. MOTION 3: Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Fell to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Wooddale Church for Planned Unit Development District Review, with variance • for structure height to 200 feet and Zoning District Amendment within the Public District on 31 acres for construction of a 200,000 sq. ft. addition to the church and educational facilities, based on revised plans dated March 25, 1988, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated February 19, and March 25, 1988, based on lack of compelling reasons to justify the height, that it would set a precedent and that the height impacts were not mitigated. Motion carried 3-0-1, Ruebling opposed to denial. MOTION 4: Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Fell to recommend to the City Council adoption of a finding of significant impact for Wooddale Church for construction of a 200, 000 sq. ft. addition to the church and educational facilities, based on revised plans dated March 25, 1988, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated February 19, and March 25, 1988, based on lack of compelling reasons to justify the height, that it would set a precedent and that the height impacts were not mitigated. Motion carried 3-0-1, Ruebling opposed adoption of findings. Ruebling opposed denial because the height was for a significant symbol based on the facility and would be • appropriate for the facility of this nature, and could be approved. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 19-88 Page 7 • Fell stated the reason for denial was the lack of compelling justification for the height of the spire. There was a functional need for the sanctuary and lantern. The spire above that does have an impact on the neighbors and would setting a precedence. It would be dangerous to grant variances on aesthetics alone. Anderson felt the church would continue to be successful regardless of the height of the spire and granting of variance would indeed set a precedence. Ruebling stated granting of variance would only set a precedent for this type of structure, and give direction to church spire restrictions. Dodge stated that if the precedence would be set on church organizations, the City would still have to deal with existing churches and their expansion proposals. Proponent asked for point of clarification that from hearing the discussion of the Commission, the building plans and traffic engineering would be acceptable. The only item they were disagreeing with was the height of the spire. Commission confirmed that clarification. • B. WINDSONG TWO 2ND ADDITION, by Koosman and Rice Company. Request for Preliminary Plat of 0.35 acres into four lots. Location: North of Windsong Drive. A public hearing. Uram reported that the request was to plat two 5 unit buildings into 4 lots in order to meet certain mortgage requirements. The five unit buildings have too many units per lot for the type of mortgage the proponent has. Uram continued that City Code allows zero lot line subdividing within the RM Zoning Districts where a wall common to two or more dwelling units was situated on a lot line. The Staff was recommending approval of plat request of .35 acres into four lots. Presentation by proponent was not required. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Anderson to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0. MOTION 2 : Motion was made by Ruebling and seconded by Anderson to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Koosman and Rice Company for Preliminary Plat of 0.35 acre Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 8 • into four lots for Windsong Two 2nd Addition, based on plans dated March 11, 1988, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 25, 1988. Motion carried 4-0-0. C. BLOSSOM RIDGE 2ND ADDITION, by G. William Pearson. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13 .5 on 6.32 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 6.32 acres into 14 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Blossom Road, east of Windsor Terrace. Uram directed Commission to the memo on this issue dated March 25, 1988 addressing the unresolved issues of tree loss, grading and road connection to Meade Lane. He continued that with the development of this area, including the Bluestem Hills project, a road connection had been envisioned. Many alternatives are available, and Staff was attempting to follow the Commissions and City Council direction, to eliminate unnecessary cul-de-sac's and to reduce tree loss when possible. Frank Carderelle made suggestions on the road connection and pointed out the sensitive area was where the trees are and • the high wooded hills which was the view overlooking Bluestem Addition. The road location he proposed was not reducing trees as it was currently a pasture. The property owners to the east were not interested in developing the land at this time. The road proposed by Staff would result in the loss of the garage by the one property owner, but it would save trees. The present owners want a cul-de-sac, so he has come to the Commission for direction on this proposal before proceeding further. In summary Carderelle felt there were many options. Carderelle felt the topography had to be redone regardless to fill in the hole between the hills and reduce the water, but plans have not been developed for that matter. Anderson stated that perhaps not enough discussion had taken place with Staff. His feelings were to save the trees and to work with staff recommendations. Dodge stated that the Commissions direction has been to save the trees and eliminate the cul-de-sac. Ruebling concluded that there would always be negatives to some parties. Carderelle felt they were in a box, but Staff felt a road could curve providing access to the north which would be important to the property owners. They must attempt • to fit all the criteria of everyone. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 9 • Anderson stated if there was no way to come to a decision, then its to early to develop the area. He added that the Commission was operating under the direction of the Council, and until that changes, procedures would remain the same. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Ruebling to continue the public hearing for Blossom Ridge 2nd Addition to the April 25, 1988 Planning Commission meeting pending resolution of the tree loss, grading, and road connection issues on the property. Motion carried 4-0-0. D. HIWAY 494/CROSSTOWN RACQUET, SWIM AND HEALTH CLUB, by Northwest Racquet, Swim and Health Club, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Community Commercial on 2 .2 acres and Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial District on 9.73 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 6.4 acres into one lot, one outlot, and road right-of-way for construction of a 26,570 square foot addition to the health club and an additional parking lot. Location: East of Baker Road, north of • Holasek Lane. A public hearing. Uram reported that under the Developer's Agreement dated July 15, 1986, it was stated that, "should any parking shortages occur, the developer shall provide additional spaces on the property to accommodate the increased parking demand under the conditions described in the letter from the developer attached hereto as Exhibit D and made a part hereof. " The proposed project would be for parking lot expansion and a building addition. Alan Kimpel, representative for the proponent, requested direction from the Commission regarding increasing the amount of parking at the club and creating additional space for membership lockers at the club. He spoke of the history of the Club and how the original estimate for parking, which was based on other clubs in the area, has proved inadequate due to the success of the club. They came before the Commission previously for a plan to build an outdoor swimming pool and sixty parking spaces. The club sold out of lockers within two months, and parking became a problem. The City recognizing the problem, agreed to the Club using the tennis court as parking for the winter season creating 94 parking stalls. The problem was not 100% taken care of and a shuttle service was instituted. The records that have been kept show 50 to 60 cars are parked on the other lot on an average. • Since initiating the shuttle service, parking problems have been eliminated in the residential streets. Kimpel continued Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 10 . that the project being proposed would be south of the tennis court and it would require the replatting and subdividing of land. The City owns the property between the clubs entrance and the newly acquired land. One of the problems was that the Club was given one access to Baker Road. This culminated at the time that construction began on Crosstown and the straightening of Baker Road. The Club is also faced with the problem of having a waiting list of 2000 for lockers. Kimpel itemized the needs of the Club and addressed the Staff Reports. They did not have a problem with recommendations for the lighting, and felt that the screening would be an issue that could be worked out. Questions remain regarding the overall parking and traffic issues. Uram reported that the Staff Report addressed three major issues. The number of variances being requested, such as BAR and FAR, building setback, lot size variance, and lot width variance, the exact number of parking stalls required was unknown and the screening of the parking lot from the single family homes being built to the south. Uram concluded that the Staff Report suggested a number of recommendations including the submittal of additional information regarding • traffic and parking demand. Anderson commented that Eden Prairie was fortunate to have such- a successful operation but questioned the original parking study. He. stated someone did not conduct an accurate survey. He felt if you expand the locker availability, you will create more demand and thus another parking problem. Perhaps membership should be capped. Fell inquired what the building was designed for in terms of total membership numbers. Proponent responded that it was a multi-use- facility and did not know the total membership figures. Fell inquired about security in the parking lots, and noted that when the lots are screened heavily, they also prevent the police from monitoring the lots. Fell stated he would like to see a traffic study done and information submitted regarding potential membership totals. Ruebling commented that this did not appear to be a very good solution to a successful operation. The traffic impact at peak times should be addressed, as should the relationship to the people or property to the south, if there would be an opportunity to swap the driveway with the City. Uram stated • that Gene Dietz, Director of Public Works , had stated that the swap would be unacceptable. The Commissions conclusion was for the proponent to get a better handle on the traffic and parking demand. Eden Prairie Planning Commission March 28, 1988 Page 11 Ruebling inquired what projected membership was in the beginning. Proponent was not aware of a set number. Dodge inquired if the outdoor pool was already constructed, and if the building expansion would include exercise space facility. Proponent replied yes to both questions. Arvid Schwartz, 10182 Trotter's Pass, stated he was the developer of the land to the south. He was concerned about the traffic during school bus arrival time which would greatly affect the single family home dwellers in the area, and was concerned with safety. He felt if the project would solve the parking problem it would be great, but he felt this would only bring in more people. There was not adequate access for fire engines. He commented also that screening is very important to the homeowners with headlights flashing in the evening. Commission stated that a membership quota should be addressed. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Fell to continue the public hearing until May 9th in order collect information requested and the traffic study. Motion carried 4-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS None VI. NEW BUSINESS Franzen announced to the Commission that an orientation for new members of boards would be held and they were invited to attend this opportunity to meet the new people. VII. PLANNERS REPORT Franzen briefly outlined upcoming projects for review for next few months, and the stages of readiness of the projects. Anderson commented that projects presented that were not in line with staff recommendations, should be delayed for 45 days. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Anderson and seconded by Ruebling to adjourn the meeting at 10:14 PM. Motion carried 4-0-0.