Loading...
Planning Commission - 05/12/1975 Eden Prairie Planning Commission Monday, May 12, 1975 *Next Planning Commission Meeting is Thursday. May 22 7:30 PM City Hall Invocation --- Pledge of Allegiance --- Roll Call INCOMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Don Sorensen, Herb Fosnocht, Norma Schee, Richard"Feerick , Dick Lynch, loan Meyers, Roger Boerger STAFF MEMBERS: Dick Putnam, Chris Enger, lean M. Egan I. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. I3�. MEMBERS REPORTS. A. Chairperson Don Sorensen B. Council Representative loan Meyers 1. Community Growth Council 2. Comprehensive Guide Plan 3. 4/5 Study 4. MAC Airport Expansion - C. Fosnocht & Boerger. D. Others. III. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. Edengate Townhouse Project, located north of Duck Lake Trail and east of Lochanburn on a 120 acre site. The proposal is for 206 units , 78.9 acres of community park and 6 acres of neighborhood park. $ . Magnum Land Corporation, requesting rezoning from Rural to RM 6. 5 for 3.62 acres and Community Commercial for 5. 74 acres. The site is located in the southwest corner of Duck Lake Trail and Co. Rd. 4. !l. Modern Tire, rezoning from Rural to Highway Commercial for the construction of a 50'x100' addition to the existing building. The site is"1/2 mile north of Flying Cloud Airport at 9051 Flying Cloud Drive. D. Holte, requesting rezoning from R1-22 to RM 6.5 for Lot 1 Block 1 , Lincolnwood ! Addition for the construction of a tv,70 family dwelling. "E . Parkview Apartments , request by'Eden Land for PUD Development Stage approval ' and rezoning to RM 2.5 in accord with the Mitchell Heights PUD Concept Approvai. Continued Public Hearings. F. Olympic Hills, requesting PUD Development Plan approval, rezoning of the first phase from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval. The site is approxi- mately 28 acres of land located west of Franlo Road and surrounded by the Olympic Hills Golf Club Grounds. G. Area G of The Preserve Commercial Plan requesting PUD Concept approval for retail, financial/ office , restaurant and office uses and preliminary platting for Area G. Area G is located north of the Ring Road and 169/212 intersection. IV PETITIONS AND REQUESTS. A. Edes Anx»co Station, rezoning request from Rural to Highway Commercial for a service station. The site is located south of Crosstown 62 and between Shady Oak Road and Highway 61. Public Hearings, B., Areas B,C,D of The Preserve Commercial Plan, request for PUD Development Plan and preliminary platting for uses of office, commercial and multiple for Area G of the Preserve Commercial Plan. V. PLANNER'S REPORT A.Cardarelle Rezoning B. Area A of the Preserve Commercial Plan VI. _ADJOURNMENT, MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION _approved • Monday, May 12, 1975 7:30 PM City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Don Sorensen, Norma Schee, Joan Meyers, Herb Fosnocht MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Lynch, Roger Boerger, Dick Feerick STAFF PRESENT: _Planning Director Dick Putnam, Planning Secretary jean Egan I. MINUTES OF THE MAY 28, 1975 PLANNING . COMMISSION MEETING. P.1 #4 - sp: of laudable P.3 last F - delete" under and " P.5 Discussion 3rd F - should read , Pautz said 10% ( 20-25 units ), could be . P. 6 sp. of deleted P. 7 Motion should read - and preliminary plat approval of 64 lots pursuant . P. 8, B, delete paragraph beginning with Meyers. Schee moved, Meyers seconded, to approve the minutes as published and corrected. The motion carried 3:0:1 with Fosnocht abstaining. II. MEMBERS REPORTS. A. Chairperson Don Sorensen. Sorensen reported the Board of Appeals approved the sign and front yard setback requests on their last two agendas. He then informed the commission 'that the Housing Assistance Plan .Was deleted from the agenda by his request. B. Council Representative Joan Meyers • 1. Community Growth Council. Meyers reported the Community Growth Council met at the Vo-tech School on May 7, 1974 and discussed growth promotion, taxes and bonding- information with Dacember ,, 1975,,:set as the deadline br computing the goals of the .Growth Council. Sorensen requested the minutes and reports of the Community Growth Council be distributed to the City to serve as-an avenue of communication. 2 . Comprehensive Guide Plan. Meyers reported the staff is to prepare an outline to be submitted to the Planning Commission and recommendations for the review processae to bet the Council 3. 4/5 Study. by the end ofJune. Meyers read Resolution 986 that was adopted by the Council on May 8th making the 4/5 Study Report a reference. 4. MAC Airport Expansion. Meyers reported the expansion has been tabled' for 120 days and the Planning Commission has been asked to review the study. It was agreed that the review of the MAC Airport Expansion should be placed on the commission's next agenda. C. Fosnocht & Boerger. Fosnocht suggested the discussion of agenda 'and report formats be continued to the following meeting because of the length of the May 12th agenda and the absence of Mr. Boerger. D. Others. • Sorensen inquired what became of the City's decision to post rezoning signs On' property within the City requesting rezoning. The planner said that even though the City feels the posting of signs-is desirable it, -has budget and time con- �stralnts-. Sorensen asked the staff to investigate the status of-.posting rezoning signs. iapproved Planning Commission Minutes -2- May 12, 1975 II. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A.Edenaate Townhouse Project, located north of Duck Lake Trail and east of • Lochanburn on a 120 acre site. The proposal is for 206 units, 78.9 acres of community park and 6 acres of neighborhood park. The planner referred the commission to the engineering report and Mr. Pautz's May 9th letter. Mr.. Berg, engineer of the project, said the project has been reduced. to 196 units _ which results in 5. 19--units/acre and 9% land coverage , -The area west of the development is to be dedicated to the public or an easement granted., Mr. Pautz stated the units could be _offset and different,. colors used to vary the appearance of the units and parking spaces have been reduced • Mr. Pautz further stated that phasing as suggested by the City engineer would be unfeasible. and the traffic,whether phased .over. 3-4 years or hat all at one time,will ultimately go on Duck Lake Trail because the parkway construction is 3-5 years off. He added that a skating rink, playground and 3 tennis courts will be made public. Mr. Bellefeville , 16599 Baywood Lane, asked for clarification of the statement that Duek Lake Trail can accommodate the additional traffic. Mr. Pautz replied that the planning staff report stated Duck Lake Trail with improvement can • accommodate the traffic- . The planner said he believes Duck Lake Trail can handle the additional traffic based upon the reasons in the staff report, but the.desirability of the additional traffic is debata-ble . Larry Reynolds asked if the road would need lights or stop -signs in addition to the road improvements already mentioned. The planner did not feel _it would be necessary. Mr. Robert Mavis asked if the reshaping of curves from Ticonderoga to Highway 101 as - mentioned by the planner are necessitated by the Edengate project. The planner felt the road needed such improvements regardless of the Edengate project. Paul Brown stated that 2 years ago residents were told Duck Lake Trail would not be a major thoroughfare.and inquired if most of the traffic on Duck Lake Trail Is anticipated to be traveling east or west. The planner agreed that Dubk Lake Trail is not intended as a thoroughfare , but todate it is the only substantial road in northwestern Eden Prairie until the new north/south and east / west roads are constructed. • approved Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 12, 1975 • Mr. Sorensen mentioned the following concerns submitted by Mr. Febrick : - the density and parking spaces should be reduced - the parkway location should be resolved, and - the recreation space -proposed is a positive addition. Meyers did not feel the additional open space area was usable open space. She suggested the 2 units with parking oriented toward the single family area be removed, and felt the parking spaces reduced were overflow parking spaces. Pautz said the parking could be modified to meet the commission's concerns. Sorensen asked whatihe developer thought about the Park & Recreation Commission's recommendation for cash in lieu of land dedication. Pautz felt the recreational uses he proposes to dedicate exceed the city standards established. The planner said the planning and park & recreation: departments feel the park plan as proposed is adequate. Patuz suggested relocating the . snits whose parking orient toward the single family or adequately screening the units as suggested in the planning staff report. Motion: Fosnocht moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the Council approval for rezoning to RM 6.5 withholding approval of the site plan until additional proposals • are submitted related to the commission's concerns on location of buildings A & B, splitting of the 8 unit buildings, and approval of the existing special. assessments to be waived pending staff and developer resolution. Discussion: Fosnocht expressed the concern that the breaking up of the 8 unit buildings into 2 buildings approximately 11 feet apart does not respond adequately to the commistions' concerns regarding the mass of the units. He added that the motion did not recommend approval of a set number of units. Sorensen agreed with Fosnocht 's concern regarding the method the developer used in breaking up the 8 unit buildings. Sorensen asked if the motion's intent is to be based on the reports and offers made by the developer. Fosnocht said he intended the motion to include all agreements and reports made todate. Tom Erickson stated the developer and engineer have not yet agreed upon the cost of the parkway , and differing estimates are contained in the reports. Vote: The motion failed 2:2, (Schee & Fosnocht voted aye, Sorensen & Meyers voted nay ) . Meyers felt the project should be phasedand the play areas within the buffer decreases • the buffer's effectiveness. Sorensen suggested continuing the item to the May 22nd meeting. No motion to that affect was made. The planner felt the plan meets the 400 foot setback as he understands the orignal PUD approval and felt the recreational uses in the buffer as recommended by the staff were appropriate. Further discussion was curtailed by the Chairman. approved Planning Commission Minutes. -4- - May 12, 1975 B. Magnum Land Corporation, requesting rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5-for 3.62 acres and Community Commercial for 5.74 acres. The site is located in the • southwest corner of Duck Lake Trail and Co. Rd. 4. ` The planner showed graphics to illustrate the site's location. He then introduced Mr. Nelson. Mr. Nelson stated the request is aimilar to the ` Eden Farms proposal that has since been rezoned to Rural and he stated the owner desires :community commercial even though a shopping center will be located at Co. Rd. 4 and T.H. 5. The planner stated the previous Eden Farms PUD did not include community commercial and the staff does not support the Magnum Land rezoning' i.request. He said the use does not conform to the Guide Plan and does not prgvide suitable transition between uses. Mr. Bill Mc Kewan , 16730 Baywood TerracE) read a petition signed by 280 persons who are against the rezoning request. The petition will be filed at Council level. Motion: Fosnocht moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the City Council denial of the rezoning request from Rural to Community Commercial and RM 6.5 based upon the recommendations on page 3 of the staff report dated May 8, 1975. The motion carried unanimously. • C.Modernr Tire, rezoning from Rural to Highway Commercial for the construction of a 501x100' addition to the existing building. The site is 1/2 mile north of Fl ying Cloud Airport at 9051 Flying Cloud Drive. The Planner referred the commission to Don Brauer's report which recommends a joint private/public study of the area surrounding the Modern Tire site for the benefit of the property owners and City. Sorensen inquired how the previous permits were issued since permits can not legally be issued to non—conforming uses and unzoned property. Mr. Crouch, attorney for Modern Tire, said through negotiations between the City and the Duvick brothers it was agreed in the Fall of 1969 that the property would£ retain a Rural classification if the owners were allowed to construct a building. Mr. Crouch stated that Modern Tire's building permit was issued prior to the adoption of Crdinance No. 135. Sorensen felt allowing improvement of non-conforming uses could damage the goals of the City's Guide Plan. The planner felt Brauer's recommendation offered a good solution to the problem • in this case. s iapproved Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 12 , 1975 Mr. Crouch informed the commission that Dick Bren ( Building Inspector during • 1967) , suggested Modern Tire apply for a Special Use Permit not rezoning in 1967. Mr. Jim Duvick said he is willing to participate in future planning and costs, but would like to build soon and not have the study delay the construction of the addition past the 1975 building season. The planner suggested that a study of the area-,could be a part of the Guide Plan update and suggested the City attorney investigate the possibility of allowing the addition in this case without rezoning. Sorensen felt_ the granting of a building permit for non-conforming uses is not allowable in Ordinance No. 135, Sections 16 & 17. Motion 1 Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the City, Council a;M%ni- Sector study for the area to be outlined by the staff before_the Council and that the Sector study be completed and through the commission with recommenda- tions to the Council within 45 days . Vote: The motion carried unanimously. Motion 2 Fosnocht moved, Schee seconded, that the Modern Tire request be placed on the commission's next agenda and the staff be directed to ask the City • attorney his opinion on the possibility of permitting the addition to the building under the present conditions and that the attorney's . opinion be presented at the commission's next meeting. Vote: The motion carried unanimously. D. Holte, requesting rezoning from R1-22 to RM 6.5 for Lot 1, Block 1, Lincolnwood Addition for the construction of a two family dwelling. The planner reported the engineering report states the proposed plan does not meet the necessary setbacks from Co. Rd. 4. He said the planning staff recommends denial of the proposed plan. Schee asked if the unit could be redesigned to meet the required setbacks. Holte replied he could redesign the unit and added that when he previously submitted the plan to the Building Department he was not informed of any specific setbacks. Sorensen asked if the existing duplex in Lincolnwood was prior to the Zoning Ordinance. Holte responded affirmative. Sorensen then asked who platted,the Lincolnwood Addition. Holte said he had platted the addition. Sorensen asked If he objected to the R1-22 zoning given the addition in 1969. Holte responded -he.' had not objected. Motion 1 . Schee moved, Meyers seconded, to place the item on the following agenda to allow Mr. Holte time to redesign the unit. approved Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 12, 1975 Discussion: • Sorensen said he felt the rezoning request was somewhat of a variance situation .and spot zoning. Vote: The motion failed with 2,ayes ( Schee, Meyers ) , and 2 nays ( Sorensen , Fosnocht ) . Fosnocht moved, Sorensen seconded, to deny the rezoning request based upon the recommendations in the planner's Letter of Transmittal. The motion carried unanimously. E. Parkview Apartments, request by Eden Land for PUD Development Stage approval and rezoning to RM 2.5 in accord with the Mitchell Heights PUD Concept approval. The planner reported the Bather-Ringro s e-Wolds f eld ( BRW ) , report recommends denial of the project because of the building type, excessive grading, the number of units, :the - road alignment and it does not conform to the Redrock Plan. Peterson said they are willing to discuss the parkway alignment depending on the assessment policy. He said the 2.2 acre parcel in the northwest area Niue to high assessments it is not suitable for multiple use . He then_ suggested approval -:of the first phase and the density and unit type of the:other phases could. be handled in the future. He felt the type of unit proposed is very marketable in Eden Prairie and the area is capable of supporting a community commercial center. • Discussion followed relative to the distribution of assessments over the project area. Mr.T:-Stundahl , Atherton, said he and otherresidents strongly oppose the project and are concerned that a "jungle of apartments" are developing in that small area of the City. Fosnocht inquired why 1 parking space`iri is not proposed. Peterson said the project has 3/4 spaces in and such a ratio is considered proper for a rental project. Peterson said the PUD was approved' at 10 units / acre and the project has 9.2 units/ acre. Meyers expressed the concern that the grading is excessive and the project appears to be slab buildings . Motion: Fosnocht moved, Meyers seconded, to continue the item to the May 22nd Planning Commission meeting, The motion carried unanimously. approved Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 12, 1975 Continued Public Hearings. F. Olympic hilla , requesting PUD Development Plan approval, rezoning of the first • phase from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat approval. The site is" approxi- mately 28 acres of land located west of Franlo Road and surrounded by the Olympic Hills Golf Club Grounds. The planner referred the commission to the staff report by BRW. Sorensen asked for the planner's response to the treatment of the wildife path. The planner felt the wildlife path wouldbe more affective if 2 units on the cul-de-sac were eliminated. Mr. Don McGlynn suggested moving the units back, not eliminating.them. The plannerre3d from page 2 of the BRW staff report regarding the elevations and grading involved with the plan. Mr. Bruce Knutson felt a misunderstanding had occurred between the project planners and- BRW and said the site's contours do not necessitate extensive grading. Knutson suggested they review the grade again with BRW. Motion Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to continue the item to the May 22nd meeting and to direct the staff and developer to modify the site plan for Phase I as per the concerns stated in the BRW staff report and the planner's letter of Transmittal. • The motion carried unanimously. G. Area G of the Preserve Commercial Plan, requesting PUD Concept approval for retail,, financial/office, restaurant and office uses and preliminary platting for Area G. Area G is located north of the Ring Road and 169/212 intersection. Area G was handled under IV, B, along with Areas B,C, & D. IV. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS. A. Edes Amoco Station, rezoning request from Rural to Highway Commercial for a service station. The site is located south of Crosstown 62 and between Shady Oak Road and Highway 61 . The planner reported the Brauer staff report recommends denial of the rezoning request because it is not consistent with the Guide Plan and suggests a study could be done for the area iii .conj unction with the Guide Plan update. Sorensen inquired what the minimum acreage requiranent is for Highway Commerical. The planner responded 5 acres. Mr. Edes said he bought the piece of land from the County and feels the piece is unique because it is surrounded on 4 sides by roads. • The planner felt approval of the request would create problems and the County's policy of selling land-adjacent to highways should be explored. approved Planning Commission Minutes -8- May 12, 1975 Motion - • Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to recommend to the City Council denial of the rezoning request because the site in question would be an isolated commercial use on a site below the 5 acre minimum requirement of Ord. 135 and the proposal is inconsistent with goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan which prcfvides for locations with more potential ( multiple use ) for Highway oriented commercial services and recommend that the area from Crosstown 62 to 169 along Shady Oak. Road be given priority consideration in the Guide Plan update. Vote: The motion carried unanimously. Public Hearings. B. Areas B,C,D of The Preserve Commercial Plan, request for PUD Development Plan and preliminary platting for uses of office, commercial and multiple for Areas B,C,D of The Preserve Commercial Plan. Galpin said the city engineer will be taking the grading request for Area G before the Council and they would like the Planning Commissions's recommendation on the .grading involved for Area G. He added that they would like staff reports on Areas B,C&D of the commercial plan. Mtion Schee moved, Meyers seconded to continue Areas B,C,D,B, & A to the June 9th agenda. The motion carried unanimously. • Mr. Giesler said the fill required will be taken from the site and they would appreciate an earlier consideration of Area G's grading than June 9th. The planner suggested the Planning Commission receive the-grading plans at their May 22 meeting , thereby allowing the council to handle the request at. their 27th meeting. Motion 2 Schee moved, Fosnocht seconded, to consider the grading plan for Area G on the commission's May 22 nd agenda. The motion carried unanimously. V. PLANNER'S REPORT A. Cardarelle Rezoning. The planner reported that Brauer's had not , "received the material they requested to make a more comprehensive review of the rezoning request. B. Area A of The Preserve Commercial Plan , the planner said that reports on areas of The Preserve Commercial Plan.are expected soon. VI. ADTOURNMENT. I Schee moved, Fosnocht seconded to adjourn the meeting at 1:17 AM. The motion carried unanimously. Respectively Submitted, • jean M. Egan, Planning Secretary