Loading...
Planning Commission - 11/25/1985 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, November 25, 1985 7:30 p.m. COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Ed Schuck, Julianne Bye, Christine Dodge, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes, Dennis Marhula STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA II. MEMBERS REPORTS III. MINUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS (7:30) A. MENARDS EXPANSION, by Menards, Inc. Request for Zoning Amendment within C-Regional Service District for the construction of an accessory building. Location: Menards Building, adjacent to Plaza Drive. A continued public hearing. (8:00) B. CITY WEST REPLAT, by Ryan Properties. Inc. Request for Preliminary Plat of 19.5 acres into three lots within the City West Business Center. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of City West Parkway. A public hearing. (8:10) C. DOUGLAS CORPORATION HEADQUARTERS, by Opus Corporation. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on approximately 68 acres for construction of 320,000 square feet of office/warehouse. Location: Highway #169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. A public hearing. (9:10) D. EDEN SQUARE, by Commercial Partners, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development Amendment Review and Zoning Amendment on 9.59 acres and Preliminary Plat of 11.73 acres into three lots for construction of a 83,500 square foot commercial mall . Location: Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. A public hearing. (10:00) E. ARTEKA NURSERY, by Arteka, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change of 0.5 acres of excess right-of-way from Rural to Community Commercial within the Arteka Nursery. A public meeting. 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, November 25, 1985 School Board Meeting Room 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ed Schuck, Julianne Bye, Virginia Gartner (7:40 p.m.), Robert Hallett, Dennis Marhula MEMBERS ABSENT: Christine Dodge, Stan Johannes STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Bye, to approve the agenda as • printed. Motion carried--4-0-0 II. MEMBERS REPORTS None. III. MINUTES MOTION: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Hallett, to approve the minutes of the November 12, 1985, Special Planning Commission meeting as printed. Motion carried--4-0-0 (Gartner arrived at 7:40 p.m.) IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. MENARDS EXPANSION, by Menards, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Service District for the construction of an accessory building. Location: Menards Building, adjacent to Plaza Drive. A continued public meeting. it Mr. Mary Prochaska, representing Menard's, reviewed the changes in the plans, responsive to Commission concerns from the meeting of October 28, 1985. Planning Commission Minutes 2 November 25, 1985 Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report regarding the proposed changes. He noted that proponents had met every concern of the Commission mentioned at the previous meeting reviewing the project, with the exception of the storage materials located against the brick wall on the west side of the building. Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION: Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Menard's for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Service District for construction of an accessory building, based on plans dated November 19, and November 25, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated October 25, and November 22, 1985. Motion carried--5-0-0 B. CITY WEST REPLAT, by Ryan Properties. Inc. Request for Preliminary Plat of 19.5 acres into three lots within the City West Business Center. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of City West . Parkway. A public hearing. Planner Enger reviewed the request of the proponents for relocation of a lot line between two properties in order to provide additional parking for one of the lots. He stated that the only manner in which this could happen was through a preliminary plat process. Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 2: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Ryan Properties, Inc., for Preliminary Plat of 19.3 acres into three lots, all within the City West Business Center, based on plans dated November 4, 1985. Motion carried--5-0-0 C. DOUGLAS CORPORATION HEADQUARTERS, by Opus Corporation. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on approximately 68 acres for construction of 320,000 square feet of office/warehouse. Location: Highway #169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. A public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes 3 November 25, 1985 Mr. Arlyn Gruessing, representing Douglas Corporation, gave a brief history of the company, its functions, and its products. He provided examples of the product manufactured by Douglas, explaining that they manufactured nameplates for identification purposes for many types of products. Mr. Gruessing stated that Douglas currently had over 500 employees all scattered around the Twin Cities Area in various buildings. He noted that one of the purposes for purchasing such a large site was to consolidate all the uses and to allow for any future expansion needs for the company at least to the year 2000. Mr. Gruessing stated that there were other factors involved in the corporation's selection of this site, including proximity to Flying Cloud Airport, the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, I-494, and Highway #169. In addition, Mr. Gruessing stated that Douglas Corporation felt it would be a mutual advantage to be located so close to the Hennepin County Vo-Tech for purposes of training and availability of employees. Regarding the park facilities shown at the southern end of the property, Mr. Gruessing noted that they had held preliminary discussions with the Vo-Tech to discuss the school 's needs for park facilities. The facilities shown were intended to be shared between Douglas Corporation and the Vo-Tech. Mr. Greg Nook, Opus Corporation, representing proponent, reviewed the site characteristics and discussed the design of the development with the Commission. He stated that all of the concerns of Staff, including the number of parking spaces for the development, screening of mechanical equipment, etc., had been reviewed by the proponent and that these matters could be dealt with in greater detail as the plan proceeded through the review process. He stated that proponents were willing to work with the City in all these matters. Mr. Mitch Wonson, Benshoof and Associates, traffic consultants for proponent, stated that, based on studies performed on the proposed development, the amount of traffic generated from this use would be less than half of the amount that would be generated by the current land use designations for the site. Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and conclusions of the Staff Report of November 22, 1985, with the Commission. He stated that, by comparison, this proposed development appeared to be similar to other industrial uses within the community, noting the massive view of the structures, as an example. The development proposed 87% industrial use within the structures and 13% office use. It was noted in the Staff Report that this proposed industrial use would be visible from Staring Lake and the Ridgewood West neighborhoods, visually impacting both areas. The site plan for the development did not convey the typical business campus image with special site features such as heavy landscaping, recreational amenities, office-type architecture. The site plan indicated large and numerous mechanical units and that there would be significant truck traffic involved with the development. The Staff Report also dealt with the concern for a balance of uses within the Comprehensive Guide Plan, noting that the proposal would eliminate a significant amount of land for housing purposes within the community. The proposal represented a 1,000-1,200 unit decrease in the number of housing Planning Commission Minutes 4 November 25, 1985 i units for the community. Gartner stated that she felt the project was potentially a good one for this site, given that the development would be owner-occupied. She expressed concern that the recreational space at the south end of the development be properly controlled so as to make sure the recreational uses were permanent. Bye concurred that the site design was a good one. She stated that her overriding concern was the impact of converting so many acres designated for residential use to industrial use. She questioned how many times this had been done in the past and whether the City's housing stock would be strongly impacted by such a conversion. Marhula stated that he was aware that the City had converted a substantial amount of property from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential over the years. He stated that the City had, at those times, acted on the best information available. Planner Enger explained that the City had set a goal to have a balance between the number of jobs in the community and the number of households in the community so that people working in the City could live in the City. He stated that the elimination of this area as a housing designated use would be significant and would impact the existing balance of the Comprehensive . Plan. Chairman Schuck stated he was concerned about the power and utility requirements for such a large manufacturing use. He also expressed concern about the amount of industrial use that would be within the community compared to other communities. Chairman Schuck noted that Eden Prairie already had a larger percentage of industrial use than many of its surrounding neighbors. Mr. Gruessing stated that not all 95 acres were proposed for conversion from residential to industrial use, but less than 30 acres were proposed to be so converted. He stated that the remainder of the property would be proposed for Open Space, or Office, use. Marhula asked if the proponents had considered moving the proposed industrial facility closer to Highway #169, thereby eliminating less of the residential use of the existing Comprehensive Guide Plan. Mr. Gruessing stated that this had been considered; however, it had been determined, that the north-south collector street was too important to circulation for the site in general to be relocated, or even eliminated, as would happen with shifting of the industrial use closer to Highway #169. Bye asked if it would proponents knew when they may need to expand their facilities into the proposed recreation area at the south end of the property. Mr. Gruessing stated that it would likely be after the year 2000. Marhula asked if the north-south collecter street paralleling Highway #169 was necessary for traffic circulation. Planner Enger replied that the road was considered necessary based on existing Comprehensive Guide Plan designations of the property. He stated that it may not be necessary with the plan proposed by Douglas Corporation. Planning Commission Minutes 5 November 25, 1985 Marhula stated that he would like more information on the impact of the proposed land use change on the balance of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. He stated that he had the same concerns as those listed in the Staff Report regarding the balance of uses. Marhula added that he did feel the plan, as presented, had merit, however. Other Commissioners concurred. Hallett stated that he felt it would be important to have a "permanent" dedication of the property at the south end of the proposed development for use as open space. Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Gartner, to continue this item to the December 9, 1985, Planning Commission meeting pending additional information from Staff regarding the balance of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Motion carried--5-0-0 D. EDEN SQUARE, by Commercial Partners, Inc. Request for Planned Unit • Development Amendment Review and Zoning Amendment on 9.59 acres and Preliminary Plat of 11.73 acres into three lots for construction of a 83,500 square foot commercial mall . Location: Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. A public hearing. Mr. Peter Jarvis, BRW, representing proponents, reviewed the site characteristics and design of the development with the Commission. He also reviewed the proposed development in relation to the adjacent major roads already in place. Mr. Harold Skjelbostad, BRW, landscape architect for proponents, reviewed the landscape plan with the Commission, explaining the screening which would be accomplished by the planted materials. Mr. David Shea, Shea Architects, representing proponents, reviewed the architecture of the development as it related to Highway #169 and the interior parking area of the site. Planner Franzen explained the findings and conclusions of the Staff Report of November 22, 1985. He noted that, since the report had been completed, the proponents had amended their plans to be in compliance with the issues of concern described by Staff in the report. Planner Franzen stated that, with the changes made by proponents, Staff would recommend approval of the plans, subject to the following conditions: grading, drainage, utility, and erosion control plans were to be submitted for review and approval by the Watershed District; utility easements, as determined necessary by the City Engineer, were to be dedicated to the City; Cash Park Fees were to be paid prior to building permit issuance; proponents were to notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours prior to grading; ,details and examples of materials for exterior materials, lighting, and signage, were to be Planning Commission Minutes 6 November 25, 1985 submitted to Staff for review and approval prior to building permit issuance; and proponents were to receive review and approval of the requested variance for the number of parking stalls for the property from the Board of Appeals. Bye stated that she felt this was a cornerstone site within the community and expressed concern about signage. She stated that she felt the signage should be well integrated into the design. Planner Enger explained how the signage would be integrated into the architecture of the site to blend with the design of the buildings. Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 2: . Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Commercial Partners, Inc., for Planned Unit Development Amendment Review and Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Sery District for 9.59 acres for construction of an 83,500 sq. ft. commercial mall to be known as Eden Square, based on plans dated November 22, and November 25, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 22, 1985, and the conditions of approval stated at the Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1985. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 3: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Commercial Partners, Inc., for Preliminary Plat approval for 11.73 into three lots for construction of an 83,500 sq. ft. commercial mall to be known as Eden Square, based on plans dated November 22, and November 25, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 22, 1985, and the conditions of approval stated at the Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1985. Motion carried--5-0-0 E. ARTEKA NURSERY, by Arteka, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change of 0.5 acres of excess right-of-way from Rural to Community Commercial within the Arteka Nursery. A public meeting. Mr. Peter Stalland, attorney for proponents, stated that the request before the Commission was for rezoning from Rural to Community Commercial of a small parcel of property which had been deeded back to the property owners by the County because the County had determined that it was excess right-of- way. Planning Commission Minutes 7 November 25, 1985 Planner Enger explained that the majority of the site was already zoned as Community Commercial and that there was a proposal for a tennis club to be built on the property, which would be reviewed at the Commission's next meeting. He noted that this rezoning would be subject to all the standard conditions of any rezoning processed through the City, including the execution of a developer's agreement. Marhula noted that there appeared to be an overlap in the legal descriptions for the properties involved. Mr. Stalland explained that the County was aware of this problem and was in the process of correcting it. Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Arteka, Inc., for Zoning District Change of 0.5 acre of excess right-of-way from Rural to Community Commercial within the Arteka Nursery. Motion carried--5-0-0 V. OLD BUSINESS None. VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. PLANNER'S REPORT None. VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye. Chairman Schuck adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.