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.