Planning Commission - 02/13/1984 AGENDA
Monday, February 13, 1984
School Board Meeting Room
8100 School Road
7:30 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett,
Stan Johannes, Dennis Marhula, Ed Schuck, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael D. Franzen,
Senior Planner; Kate Karnas, Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. MINUTES
A. January 9, 1984, Meeting Minutes
B. January 23, 1984, Meeting Minutes
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. VALLEY VIEW MANOR HOMES, by Sunrise Properties. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 and Preliminary
Plat of 20 acres for 120 units in 15 condominium buildings.
Location: North of Valley View Road, 1/4 mile East of
Mitchell Road. A continued public hearing.
B. WILSON RIDGE, by Wilson Ridge Joint Venture. Request for
Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 60.85 acres;
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Industrial
for 11 .6 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and
Zoning District Change from Commercial Regional to I-2 Park,
with variances, for 11.6 acres and from Commercial Regional
to Office, with variances, for 18.64 acres; and Preliminary
Plat of 60.85 acres for three lots and four outlots
Location: North of Valley View Road and East of Highway
#169. A public hearing.
C. EDENVALE APARTMENTS 2ND ADDITION, by Bar-ett Construction
Co./Edenvale Apartments Partnership. Request for Compre-
hensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium to High Density
Residential and Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5
for 4.98 acres for a 70-unit apartment building. Location:
Northeast Quadrant of Baker Road and Valley View Road. A
public hearing.
(over)
AGENDA
February 13, 1984
Page 2
D. KINDER CARE LEARNING CENTER. Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service and
Preliminary Plat of 0.71 acre for a Day Care Facility.
Location: Northeast quadrant of Singletree Lane and Glen
Lane. A public hearing.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 13, 1984
School Board Meeting Room
8100 School Road
7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Hakon Torjesen (7:50), Virginia Gartner,
Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes, Ed Schuck
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman William Bearman, Dennis Marhula
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael D. Franzen,
Senior Planner; Kate Karnas, Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Hallett, to adopt the agenda
as printed.
Motion carried--4-0-0
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
III. MINUTES
MOTION:
Motion was made Schuck, seconded by Hallett, to approve the minutes
of the January 9, 1984, Planning Commission meeting as printed.
Motion carried--4-0-0
MOTION:
Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Johannes, to approve the
minutes of the January 23, 1984, Planning Commission meeting as
printed.
Motion carried--4-0-0
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. VALLEY VIEW MANOR HOMES, by Sunrise Properties. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 and Preliminary
Planning Commission Minutes 2 February 13, 1984
Plat of 20 acres for 120 units in 15 condominium buildings.
Location: North of Valley View Road, 1/4 mile East of
Mitchell Road. A continued public hearing.
Staff reported that the proponent was requesting 'additional time to
complete plan changes for the site, based on the Commission concerns
of the January 23, 1984, meeting and the recommendations of the
Staff Report of January 20, 1984. At this time, the proponent
requested postponement to the February 27, 1984, meeting.
MOTION•
Motion was made by Johannes, seconded by Hallett, to continue the
public hearing to the February 27, 1984, Planning Commission
meeting.
Motion carried--4-0-0
(Acting Chairman Torjesen arrived at 7:50 p.m.)
B. WILSON RIDGE, by Wilson Ridge Joint Venture. Request for
Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 60.85 acres;
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Industrial
for 11 .6 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and
Zoning District Change from Commercial Regional to I-2 Park,
with variances, for 11 .6 acres and from Commercial Regional
to Office, with variances, for 18.64 acres; and Preliminary
Plat of 60.85 acres for three lots and four outlots
Location: North of Valley View Road and East of Highway
#169. A public hearing.
Mr. Wallace Hustad, representing the Wilson Ridge Joint Venture,
reviewed the history of the development proposals on the site. He
explained the impact of extensive mining operations on the property
and discussed difficulties encountered by the soil borings in
various locations.
Mr. Hustad stated that it was proponent's intent to work from the
industrial use of Lee Data to the north into an office type use on
the south with the business campus of Wilson Learning Center,
thereby creating a mixed use Planned Unit Development.
Mr. Darrell Anderson, proponent's architect, reviewed the site
design characteristics, landscaping, preservation areas, building
elevations, etc.
Mr. Dennis Doyle, Welsh Construction Company, one of the proponents,
stated that, of the 60+ acres, only 30 acres would be developed. He
pointed out that jogging/walking trails were part of the plan, with
proposal for a picnic area and volleyball courts. Mr. Doyle noted
that there were several corporate headquarters in the vicinity,
including Lee Data, Super Value, Gelco, etc., and now Wilson
Learning Center with this proposal . He stated that he felt it would
Planning Commission Minutes 3 February 13, 1984
Is be important to have a mix of the smaller uses in order for the
larger corporate uses and the smaller uses to service each other.
Mr. Doyle suggested that this Planned Unit Development would be the
location for that mix of uses.
Mr. Doyle stated that, after discussion with the Staff, it had been
determined that more work would be done on the site plan to mitigate
some of the concerns listed in the Staff Report. Also, based on a
series of soil tests made in the area, the plans would require
revision to avoid the bad soils with the buildings and road.
Therefore, an amended plan was necessary.
Planner Enger reviewed the conclusions of the Staff Report of
February 10, 1984, with the Commission. After recent discussions
with the proponents, Staff had emphasized the need for
reconfiguration of the buildings proposed for the office/warehouse
uses, as well as the desirability of elimination of the "double"
loading area. He pointed out that some of the current difficulties
of the site resulted from the amount of square footage of structures
proposed. Planner Enger referred to the previously approved Thorn
Creek Place Planned Unit Development which supported a total of
300,000 sq. ft. of structure, while the current proposal showed
342,000 sq. ft. of structure in the first phase alone.
With respect to the road, Staff explained that the Thorn Creek
proposal had placed the road further east on the site, at the toe of
the slope. In the current location proposed by Wilson Ridge, the
concern was for the amount of retaining walls necessary for
construction in this location. That amount of retaining wall was
not necessary with either of the previous proposals.
Parking concerns were noted, involving a lack of necessary spaces to
meet Code requirements for the uses proposed. If expansion was
planned of any of the uses, it was suggested by Staff that the
number of parking spaces also be taken into consideration for such
expansions so that proof of parking could be shown on the site.
Planner Enger stated that these were issues which must be addressed
in the new plans by the Wilson Ridge Joint Venture.
Acting Chairman Torjesen stated that he was concerned about a lack
of supportive information for the Guide Plan Change requested for
the project.
Schuck stated that the Wilson Learning site appeared to fit well on
the site and to be appropriate for this area.
Hallett asked if the tree inventory would be necessary in all areas
of the site. Planner Enger responded that it would be in those
areas where trees would be removed, but not necessarily for the
entire site. He stated that in some areas, the trees were at least
18 inches in diameter, in which case the City would have concerns
about their removal.
Planning Commission Minutes 4 February 13, 1984
Johannes stated that he was supportive of the proposed industrial
use on the site and agreed with the need for cross-fertilization of
uses within an area such as this. He added that he agreed with
Schuck regarding the Wilson Learning site and its suitability for
the area.
Acting Chairman Torjesen asked for comments and questions from
members of the audience.
Mr. Richard Enblom, 10610 Valley View Road, stated that he was
basically satisfied with two of the three exposures of the site to
his property, which was located immediately east of the proposal.
The trees in these areas were proposed to remain and would provide
adequate buffer on the south and west sides of his property. Mr.
Enblom expressed concern for the development of Outlot C as its
final use was not yet known. He stated he would reserve judgment
until a plan was final. Mr. Enblom added that some of the trees in
the area were as large as 30 inches in diameter, particularly on the
central knoll of the site.
Regarding Valley View Road, Mr. Enblom pointed out that utilities
and right-of-way were restricted in the area which his family had
previously dedicated for park. He pointed out that this may affect
the traffic patterns for the future, as well as utility extension
and that the proponent should keep this in mind for the future.
Ms. Clara Heath, 7665 Smetana Lane, stated that she was concerned
about the grading of the southeast knoll of the site and asked that
as little as possible be done to change its character. She also
expressed concern about potential storm water run-off from the
parking areas around the Wilson Learning site as it may affect her
property. Mr. Greg Struve, Welsh Corporation engineer, explained
the design of the storm water system and showed how the drainage had
been designed to drain away from her property.
Mr. Doyle added that, based on the soils information they had
recently received, it may not be possible to move the road much
further to the west. However, they would inform the City of the
results.
Hallett and Gartner stated that they agreed with the other
Commission members about the suitability of the Wilson Learning site
and its appropriateness for the property.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked if proponents would be prepared with
revisions to the project in time for the Staff to review the changes
prior to the next Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Doyle stated
that he would try, as the time constraints on the project were
stringent.
The Commissioners emphasized the need for Staff having adequate time
to review the project revisions prior to the next Commission
meeting.
Planning Commission Minutes 5 February 13, 1984
Ms. Susan Hustad, Hustad Development Corporation, restated the need
to be at the next Commission meeting to meet their time
requirements.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Johannes, seconded by Hallett, to continue the
public hearing and return the item to proponents, pending
modification per the Staff Report of February 10, 1984.
Motion carried--3-2-0 (Acting Chairman Torjesen and Gartner
against)
Acting Chairman Torjesen and Gartner stated they were against due to
the number of items already scheduled for the next agenda and the
need to provide adequate time for discussion of a project this size.
They also restated concern that Staff have adequate time to review
any changes to the project.
C. EDENVALE APARTMENTS 2ND ADDITION, by Bar-ett Construction
Co./Edenvale Apartments Partnership. Request for Compre-
hensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium to High Density
Residential and Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5
for 4.98 acres for a 70-unit apartment building. Location:
Northeast Quadrant of Baker Road and Valley View Road. A
public hearing.
Ron Erickson, Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson, architects for the
proponent, reviewed the request, pointing out significant site
features and the characteristics of the design of the project as it
fit the site.
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the
Staff Report evaluating the request, noting, in particular, the
suggestion for shifting of the building closer to the Valley View
Road frontage to allow for a greater amount of space for buffering
the parking area from the adjacent road and residential project to
the east.
Johannes asked if the building materials for this addition were
planned to be the same as those used for the existing Edenvale
Apartments to the west. Mr. Erickson stated that the quality of the
materials would be the same; however, the design of the building was
different from that of the existing structures.
Acting Chairman Torjesen expressed concern about the screening of
the parking area from the Valley View Manor Home project to the
east. Staff responded that the landscaping would be checked prior
to building permit issuance to be certain that the final landscaping
plan would adequately screen the parking area. It was pointed out
that the proponent had agreed to shift the building further to the
south, which would allow for more room between the parking area and
street to increase the area which would be used for screening of the
parking area.
Planning Commission Minutes 6 February 13, 1984
Acting Chairman Torjesen asked why proponents were requesting a
Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Medium Density Residential to
High Density Residential, noting that the projects east and west of
the development were Medium Density Residential . Staff explained
that the project had been evaluated as to its impact upon the
adjacent uses. The open space provided, the view from Valley View
Road, the design of the building, and underground parking all
contributed to a use which had been designed to have a minimum
impact upon the area. Also, the density proposed was at 14.4 units
per acre, which was greater than the density allowed within the
Medium Density Residential guiding.
Planner Enger stated that Staff's opinion was that there was no
negative impact upon the adjacent uses, nor upon Valley View Road,
as a result of this project design.
Hallett asked what the square footages of the units would be. Mr.
Erickson explained that they would range from 850-1,100 sq. ft.
Acting Chairman Torjesen asked for comments and questions from
members of the audience. There were none.
MOTION 1 :
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to recommend to
the City Council approval of the request of Bar-ett Construction
Co./Edenvale Apartments Partnership for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Amendment from Medium Density Residential to High Density
Residential, based on plans dated December 27, 1983, and subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 10, 1984.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to recommend to
the City Council approval of the request of Bar-ett Construction
Co./Edenvale Apartments Partnership for Zoning District Change from
Rural to RM-2.5 for 4.98 acres for 70 apartment units, based on
plans dated December 27, 1984, and subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated February 10, 1984.
Motion carried--5-0-0
Planning Commission Minutes 7 February 13, 1984
D. KINDER CARE LEARNING CENTER. Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service and
Preliminary Plat of 0.71 acre for a Day Care Facility.
Location: Northeast quadrant of Singletree Lane and Glen
Lane. A public hearing.
Mr. Bob Fors, representing proponent, reviewed the plans for the day
care facility with the Planning Commission. He explained that the
design of the building was one used in many locations within the
United States.
Staff reviewed the recommendations of the Staff Report, pointing out
concerns about the cupola/bell tower and its compatibility with the
other uses within the Eden Glen Planned Unit Development and that
development's approved design framework manual .
Schuck asked what the purpose of the cupola was to the design of the
building. Mr. Fors 'stated that it was part of the foyer/entry way
design.
Hallett stated that he agreed with the Staff regarding the cupola,
that it did not meet the design framework manual requirements for
the Eden Glen Planned Unit Development.
Gartner stated that she, too, agreed that the conditions of the
design framework manual should be adhered to in this case. She
stated that she felt the proponent had not offered any compelling
information for a change to allow the cupola.
Johannes stated that the standards within the design framework
manual had already been applied to four other projects within the
Eden Glen Planned Unit Development, and that he felt the City should
not change direction at this time.
Gartner asked if the pitched roof design met the criteria of the
design framework manual for this Planned Unit Development. Staff
responded that a pitched roof would be more appropriate in a
residential area as it was a common roof stile for residential
developments. However, the majority of the buildings in commercial
areas had flat roofs. Staff added that there were no other
restrictions regarding roofs in the design framework manual, but
that the majority of the buildings in the area had flat roofs.
MOTION 1 :
Motion was made by Johannes, seconded by Schuck, to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Johannes, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request for Zoning District Change from
Planning Commission Minutes 8 February 13, 1984
Rural to Commercial Regional Service for a day care facility for
Kinder Care Learning, based on plans dated January 9, 1984, and
February 7, 1984, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated February 10, 1984.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3
Motion was made by Johannes, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request for preliminary plat for 0.71
acres for a day care facility for Kinder Care Learning, based on
plans dated January 9, 1984, and February 7, 1984, and subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 10, 1984.
Motion carried--5-0-0
V. OLD BUSINESS
Valley View Manor Homes
Planner Franzen reviewed some of the changes made to the Valley View
Manor Homes project since the previous Planning Commission meeting,
pointing out the improvements made to the site to make it "less
tight" in its interior relationships, adding more parking spaces and
garages (as options), and improving upon the elevations of the rear
sections of the buildings. It was Staff's opinion that the changes
had created a better site plan for the development. The proponent
would be returning to the February 27, 1984, Planning Commission
with a completely revised set of plans for Commission review.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Hallett, seconded by Schuck.
Acting Chairman Torjesen adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
V�
Kate Karnas
Recording Secretary