Loading...
Planning Commission - 09/29/1975 AGENDA Eden Prairie Planning Commission - Monday, September 29, 1975 7:30 PM, City Hall COMMISSION MEMBERS:Don Sorensen, Richard Feerick, Norma Schee, Richard 'Lynch, Joan Meyers, Herb Fosnocht, Roger Boerger STAFF MEMBERS : Dick Putnam, jean Egan, Chris Enger Invocation --- Pledge of Allegiance --- Roll Call PM 7:35 I. MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 7:45 II. MEMBER'S REPORTS. A.Chairperson Don Sorensen. 1 . October 13th meeting date, ( Columbus Day ) B.Council Representative Joan Meyers C.Others. 8:00 III. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. 169 Mini-Sector Study, staff report on alternative road alignments and Garden King Market site. 8:a B. Mitchell Lake PUD Revision, request by Pemton for` revision to the approved 1971 residential PUD. The PUD is located east of Mitchell Lake and west of Co. Rd. 4. 9:10 C.Prairie Lawn & Garden, request by Stanley Riegert for Development of a small engine repair, lawn mower sales, and garden store. The site Is about 1 acre and is located.north of T. H•. 5.across from Fuller Road'-s. intersection with T. H. 5. 9:45 D.Parkview Apartments Phases 2 & 3, discussion of concept plan revisions for the second and third phases from the 1972 PUD. 10:15 E.Area .5a , The Preserve, Amsden Hills, request for prbliminary platting and rezoning for 51 single family lots. The' area is located off Franlo Road south of theEast/West Parkway and east of Olympic Hills A public hearing will be held es 'soonva.s .possible. 10:50 F. Presentation by Wallace Hustad "PUD 1975". 11:30 IV. PLANNER'S REPORT. A.Planning Checklist-Mr. Fosnocht. B. Guide Plan Update. , C,Planned Study District 11:45 V. ADJOURNMENT. MINUTES A EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, September 29, 1975 7:30 PM' City Hall I MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Sorensen, Feerick, Schee, Meyers , Fosnocht , and Boerger MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Lynch. STAFF PRESENT: Dick Putnam Director of Planning I. MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. P. 3, Motion la.- add the sentence"Subject . . . Sector" , that appears at the end of # 8. 4. should read 1 or 2 story office buildings. . . P. 4. B. heading should read . . - to install 3 retail gas pumps . . . P. 5, Motion 1. should read - with a roof of material compatible . . 4. should read- of the maximum three pumps . . . Boerger moved, Meyers seconded to approve the minutes as written and amended. The motion carried 3:0 with Feerick, Fosnocht and Schee abstaining. MINUTES OF ,AUGUST 25, 1975 , PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Meyers moved, Schee seconded, to reconsider the August 25rd Planning Commission Minutes. The motion carried 6:0. *Byers indicated that on page 5 no motion was shown for Motion # 3. It was suggested the motion should be inserted as follows; Schee moved, Meyers seconded- To recommend adoption of the 169/ Mini-Sector Study with the exceptions listed in the first two motions, that of the east/west road alignment and the Garden King Market site... The insertion was acceptable to all members. II. MEMBERS REPORTS. A.Chairperson Don Sorensen. 1. Mr. Sorensen indicated that October 13th will be a legal holiday and the regular scheduled meeting should be rescheduled. The Commission decided that Wednesday, October 8th, 7:30 PM, at the City Hall would be the A. next Planning Commission meeting date. 2. Sorensen expressed concern about-the Eden Prairie development process and the results of planning in Eden Prairie today. He ques- tioned •. 'if ' the _' , City has . been .following the adopted policies of the Comprehensive Guide Plan , and .,if specific • actions'-- -•C have, been violating policies;-of the Guide Plan and Ordinance 135. i He cited spot zoning, approving developments directly in contradiction with the Guide Plan and existing PUDs, approving of blanket lot variances,and the method of Commission involvement in City land uses decisions. Rconcern wars the City'should. view the total impact of its decisions upon the overall development of the City,! approved Planning Commission Minutes -2- Sept. 29, 1975 Mr. Boerger agreed with Sorensen regarding Eden Prairie's development future. He indicated concern over the confusion that many, including himself, feel about the City's development policies and "that an updating of City policies and Council direction in updating City policies Is badly needed. Mrs. Meyers said the concern regarding direction is shared by the City Council and that the Guide Plan update should provide direction. Sorensen questioned whether there is a severe.,City financial problem. He felt the national economy and development in general is suffering from the economic recession . He did not believe the City should alter its long term policies to accommodate short term economic conditions. Meyers said some members of the Council felt the economic slow down warrants flexible City policy application. Feerick expressed a concern about the degree of support for the Guide Plan by the City Council , and also the degree of support for the 1968 Guide Plan by the community. He believed a .Plan' update ` was needed to clarify policies and objectives for the Commissions and Council. Schee expressed her concern about who are we as a Planning Commission and what value do our recommendations .have to the Council Her concern was that the Planning Commission's work and input to the Council was not being given review either in the public meetings or by the Council. Boerger felt the Council when making policy changes regarding the Commission's role , staff role , or citizen role in City policy should clearly define those to all concerned. He felt that either the Planning Commission today was not reflecting the Council policies or the Commission did not understand the changed policies from the Comprehensive Plan. He felt that today on many inbtances the Commission and Council seem to be adversaries rather than members of the same team. Sorensen agreed with Boerger that the current situation makes the Planning Commission's job very difficult. He questioned what the Planning Commission could do to help bridge the gap and make the Commission and Council more effective in providing leadership . Sorensen felt the last . year produced a number of differences in policy and operating procedures that the Commission does not understand. �Boerger indicated that percentage wise the Commission should agree with the Council most of the time , otherwise we are not understanding the Council's policies or we disagree with the Council. -approved Planning Commission Minutes -3- Sept. -29, 2975 Meyers indicated that the Commission should not take individual actions by the Council and readinto them major direction changes by the Council. She also felt the Commission and Council are mostly in agreement and that there is not a concensus related to development policies , comprehensive planning , etc. , by the Council members themselves. Again Sorensen asked what can the Commission do to be more effective? Boerger questioned how does the Council receive Commission recommendations; and does the staff , as the Commission's representative, have an opportunity to convey adequately the Commission's recommendations. Sorensen indicated that the Planner is in a difficult position as he works for 3 masters-the Commission, Council, and City Manager. Meyers said most of the time the Council chooses to have the Planning Commission and staff recommendations presented. The planner said - the Council has adopted a different set of operational procedures -whereby staff input at -Council meetings is kept to a minimum. He indicated that at the Council's discretion staff reports or Commission recommendations are :.verbally . -presented . He said this was the pErogative of the Council to adopt procedures for conduct of their meetings. Sorensen asked if there would be any value in , having a joint meeting between the Council and Commissiom to discuss problems and to evaluate ways to improve the communication and understanding. Boerger agreed that such a meeting would be helpful and necessary. Feerick questioned what could be done at this stage, but hoped that meetings would prove helpful. Fosnocht hoped that such meetings would be more productive than the last meeting, and that members.Would :empress `specific 6oncerns -and be r'ea'dy to discuss them in a direct manner. Schee suggested to the Commission that the Planning Commission Chairman draft a memo stating their concerns to the Council at the earliest opportunity and suggest a meeting between the Commission and Council be held in the near future. The suggestion by Schee was acceptable to all the Commission Members. Sorensen asked the staff planner to make the City Manager aware of the discussion andcOMP n5so that he may convey those concerns to the Council. Planning Commission Minutes -4- approved Sept. 29, 1975 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. 169 Mini Sector Study, staff report on alternative road alignments'and Garden King Market area. The planner discussed the recommendations made in the September 12 , 1975 staff report concerning the Garden KingMarket site and the northern Votech School entrance . He outlined the recommendations listed in the report and the, reasoning that Brauer & Associates and the planning staff used in formulating their recommendations. Members of the audience expressed concerns relative to the following Mr. Simchudk , across from the northern Votech entrance J was concerned about the north access road and its' impact upon his property. He questioned if the Modern Tire. and Energy System's cul-de-sac might provide a reasonable relocation of the east/west collector Toad. The planner respondedthat it had been considered , but due to proximity to the parkway and the significance of the northern Votech School access that the major access point should occur at the Votech School access rather than to the north by Modern Tire. Simchuck expressed his feelings that any road decisions and construction would have tremendous impact upon his home and possibly his business ( trucking ), and that he was not- in complete agreement with the road on his property. Mr. Perkins, owner of the Garden King Market, expressed a concern for safety of the curve and that of the Votech School access. He stated that people turn around in his driveway, and that the curve is very dangerous because of the heavy truck traffic and proximity to his business. Mr. Gene Hansen, owner of Cleen Sweep, expressed concern relative to the heavy truck traffic and safety along 169 , Motion: Schee moved, Meyers seconded, to amend the 169 Mini-Sector Study by Brauer & Associates as follows; 1 . Retain the Garden King home site and adjacent lots as residential property not commercial. 2. Enforce the requirements of Ordinance 135 pertaining to non- conforming uses and clearly identify the fruit market as such a use. 3. At such time as sewer and water are provided to the Sunnybrook area, platting and zoning of the Garden King home site and adjacent lots should be considered to an appropriate single family detached residential district. 4. Close Sunnybrook Road when alternate access is available. 5. Give further study, to the impact of cul-de-sating Creek Knold Road. 6. That the east/west collector road is necessary to allow •, orderly and compatf ble future development of the total area. approved Planning Commission Minutes -5- Sept. 29, 1975 7. That the east/west collector should connect with the northern Votech access road because of spacing from other streets, property served by the streets location, and connection with a major intersection. 8. That the long term use of lots, 3,4,5 and 6 should be non-residential as described in the 169 Study. The collector road design and alignment should be planned with this in mind. 9. That the timing of the east/west collector street should not be in advance of the need created by either . the residential development east or the industrial development of parcels 3,4 and 6. 10. That alternates B, C, D are possible at a future date as a way of extending the east/west collector street. 11 . That at the east/west collector street improvement, cost vs. benefit comparisions be prepared on the various alternatives . Discussion Perkins questioned what was being approved and it was indicated to him by the Commission that it was the . recommendations included in the September 12th staff report. Perkins expressed his concern about his livel1hood and that decisions made by this body .effect his business and family . He said his business had been at the same location for 47 years and that he saw no reason to change . He did not believe his property should be viewed as residential and he Doped that his fruit and garden market could continue in the future. The planner explained that because of the safety hazards (which Perkins was also,, concerned about ), the limited size of the parcel,and condition of the building, that a residential use in conjunction with the adjacent properties would make the most sense. To indicate the parcel as commercial and rezone it to a commer- cial use would in the planner's and Brauer's opinion, not be in the best interest of all parties and that the commercial zoning would be applicable to other uses — not just the fruit market. Libbey Hargrove, resident on SunnybrookRo ad , asked why the Garden King Market is different than the Modern Tire request for rezoning and how did Cleen Sweep gain its operation. The planner responded that the Modern Tire request for rezoning is considerably different than the Perkins Garden King Market. Rrst the building condition and investment is substantially different, likewise the parcel size of Modern Tire and Energy Systems is of sufficient size to permit reasonable industrial development within the City Ordinance requirements. The- Garden King site ' would not provide adequate space for industrial development. Secondly , the Cleen' Sweep operation started by using the barn when the Hansen home was purchased for park along Staring Lake. The existing barn was used for storage and then an addition to the barn was constructed --n o City approvals , such as zoning, have been issued. The planner asked Hansen to further � explain the circumstances Hansen felt' the planner outlined the history correctly. approved Planning Commission Minutes -6- Sept. 29, 1975 Amend ment Meyers moved, seconded by Schee, to amend the motion by amending recommendation # 4 to read; that the timing of the east/west collector street • should not be in advance of the need created by either the residential development east or the industrial' developmentof parbels 3,4 and 6 as defined on page 3 of the September 12th staff report. Vote: 5:1 , Sorensen voted nay. Sorensen indicated his no vote was based upon his disagreement with the non.-residential uses of 3,4 5, and 6 , but did agree with the staff report indicating a residential use for the Garden King Market site. B. Mitchell Lake Pud Revision, request by Pemton for revision to the approved 1971 residential PUD. The PUD is located east of Mitchell Lake and west of Co. Rd. 4. The planner indicated staff members Mr. jessen, Mr. Enger, and himsElf had visited the site and had some reservations about development on the peninsula of about 12 acres proposed for 15 single family lots. He believed that it was the staff's responsibility to inform the commission about the significance of the island or peninsula area. He suggested that the Park and Recreation and Planning Commission members visit the site and determine for themselves whether the City should consider acquisition .-of the 12 acres for its scenic habitat and recreation potential. The planner explained in his opinion this site is totally unique and of. significant value that the City should consider investigating possible funding sources for acquisition of the area. He expressed a concern about development as proposed in the original PUD of single family attached ( townhouses ), and those proposed in the revision for 15 residential lots. He believed the impact would be significant in changing the character of the area and that the time to give it consideration is now prior to approval of any development. He indicated some options may not interfere the with the orderly process of the PUD revisions proposed by Pemton. He believed if the City felt the area is appropriate for open space acquisition that that area could be placed in a defered platting arrangement for a definite period of time. Mr. Hill felt the use of that property for single family development is very valuable and important to the implementation of the Mitchell Lake Plan. He asked that the Commission use all haste in determining what action it wishes to take so that they may proceed with the development in the • other areas. The Commission suggested that a tour might be possible at 6:30 PM , September 30th , this was approved and the planner . was asked to set up the tour. Motion: �Feerick moved, Schee seconded, to . continue this item to the October 27th agenda with a staff report prepared at that time. Mr. Hill requested the October 27th date as he would be out of town on October 8th. The motion carried unanimously. approved Planning Commission Minutes -7- Sept. 29, 1975 C.Prairie Lawn & Garden, request by Stanley Riegert- for Development of a small engine repair , lawn mower sales, and garden store. The site is about . 1 acre and is located north of T. H. 5 across from Fuller Road's intersection with T.H.S. Mrs. Riegert explained their concern about the staff report of September 18, 1975. She indicated they did not feel a metal building as proposed was inappropriate and she did not think the City had the right to restrict the type of building. She questioned the access . and how they would reach their site. Also, she felt the needs of the City of Eden Prairie should be accommodated and that if a masonry building has to be constructed it would be difficult for them to do. The planner responded that the zoning ordinance restricts metal buildings and it is applicable to all builders in the City. He stated that the access as indicated in the staff report, alternate 1 , would be taken from the east side of their property at the base of the hill off of the gravel road entrance that presently exists. The planner believed that all developments should be evaluated equally, and that other builders and businesses were required to have certain building standards and Prairie Lawn & Garden should be no exception. Sorensen indicated concern about the need for sites for neighborhood business ,Sorensen that he could not justify commercial use in industrial areas as outlined in Ordinance 135. Motion: Fosnocht moved, Feerick seconded, to recommend alternative 1 contained in the September 18, 1975, staff report. \� The recommendations'of the 4/5 Study pertaining to access and land use enables the Planning Commission and City Council to consider rezoning the entire 18 f acres as illustrated on the 4/5 land use concept plan to I-2 Park requiring platting and design review for the industrial park prior to issuing building permits other than the Riegert property. This alternative will allow phased development of the 18 acre area j perhaps beginning with the existing land uses which are now industrial office, or related minor commercial This alternative would meet the terms of Ordinance 135 pertaining to I-2 Districts except for the minimum , zoning area provision which requires .40 acres. This however, could be waived based on the site constraints , adjacent land use south of " Highway 5 which is industrial , and the conformance with the reference 4/5 Study Report. Mr. Riegert's land use as a small engine repair business storage of parts and equipment, potential nursery,and mower sales, may be interpreted as an acceptable industrial use .as it fits under Subdivision 8.2 , Permitted Uses, Subd, a and b. Also, the building should be designed to meet the :standards of the I-2 District which would not permit a metal approved Planning Commission Minuses -8- Sept: 29,1975 ` building unless it meets provisions of Ordinance 135 , Subd, 2 .7, Special Requirements, Design, # 4, which states; "Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction if the panel material be any of the those na:Yied above. ;glass prefinished metal, (other than unpainted galvanized iroO,or plastic"•. • This means the panel metal construction such as used in the Homart Shopping Center and not the metal pole building with a corrugated sheet metal siding as proposed. The building should be designed to provide for future industrial uses as well as the Riegert Lawn. & Garden business. The sketch provided in the application of the site showing direct access to Highway 5 should - be revised to accommodate a revised road location acceptable with. the City Engineering Department 'and the -Minnesota.Highway Department to group the Fuller- Road and access to the 18 acre industrial park at one location. This would eliminate the individual access of Prairie Lawn & Garden to Highway 5. " Vote: 3:3 , (Schee, Boerger, Sorensen - nay }, ( FeerIck, Meyers, Foanocht -yes ) The commission was divided with 3 favoring alternanate 1 and 3 favoring alternate 3. Alternative 3 : The third alternative would be to deny the application by Prairie Lawn and Garden for commercial zoning as it is not consistent with the Comprehensive . Guide Plan indicating a residential use at this site. D. Parkview Apartments Phases 2 and 3 discussion of concept plan revisions for the second and third phases from the 1972 PUD- The planner informed the Commission the Council asked the Commission to reconsider the Parkview PUD and the Resolution # 505 approving the PUD, Mr. Peterson objected to the proposed change as it would be unnecessary and would require consideration of the assessment levied on the PUD . He also indicated Eden Land Corporation has no plans to do anything with phas es 2 and 3 at this time. Meyers stated she has concern relative to %the density requirements listed in Resolution 505 and that they should be changed to the guidelines of the Red-Rock Sector Plan Sorensen agreed with Meyers suggestion. Peterson said the City would have a review opportunity at a later date for development stages , but did not see any reason why the Planned Unit Development should be changed. V approved Planning Commission Minutes -9- Sept. 29, 1975 The planner pointed out the numerous occasions where-specific approvals of planned unit developments have been applied by the developers to a specific development proposal. Motion: Schee moved, Sorensen seconded, to recommend revision to Resolution 505 to be drafted by the City Attorney in a legal manner which would change Res. 505 as follows: ( delete 1-4, and insert the following #s land 2 ) 1. Concept be approved for the 59.3 acre site with an overall density to comply with the Red Rock Sector Plan. 2 . That varied building types be used on the later phases of the project to fit the terrain Vote: 5:0:1, with Fosnocht abstaining. The question was asked if the Council would consider the 14 acre site adjacent to Mitchell Road currently zoned Rm 2. 5. The concensus of the Commission was yes this was intended and that the Council might consider such a change. E. Area 5a The Preserve, requestfor preliminary platting and rezoning for 51 single family lots. The area is located off Franlo Road south of the East/West Parkway and east of Olympic Hills. The plan- was presented by Don Hess with questions relative to trailways; grading,and lot variances asked by the Commission. The Commission was also concerned about the price of the lots and the need for lot size and setback variances. Hess explained the lots would be similiat in size to those of Highpoint- ranging from approximately 9,000-25,000 sq. ft. Boerger and Feerick were concerned that the City was making marketing judgements without basis when discussing the merits of higher priced homes on smaller lots, and that this is a market decision rather than a City perogative . They also felt it was reasonable in the market place for today's housing market. Motion: Boerger moved, Feerick seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Amsden Hills 50 f lots for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 with variances in lot sizes to permit lots of 8,000-25,000 sq. ft. at a density of 2. 6 du/acre , & frontage variances less than 90 feet and setback variances as follows. 5 feet 1 story garage 10 feet 12 - 1 story houses 15 feet . 2 story or greater 20 feet houses built on corner lots. 2.That a trailway corridor be established between the 7 acre public park adjacent 0 to Franlo Road connecting with the Prairie East corridor. 3.That the internal walkways provide access along Amsden Way or through the off street trail corridor leading to the public park at.Anderson Lakes and the Franlo Road trail. approved Planning Commission Minutes -10- Sept. 29, 1975 Ab.The Preserve work with Hustad Development Corporation to investigate connecting the cul-de-sac street in Prairie East with Amsden Way for a loop road configuration along the Lutheran Church and Preserve common boundary. Vote The vote was 2:3 with Fosnocht , Meyers, Sorensen voting nay; and Boerger and Feerick voting aye. Schee had left the meeting and , did not vote, the motion was defeated. F. Presentation by Wallace Hustad, " PUD 1975 ". Continued to the October 8th meeting at which time it would be at the beginning of the agenda. IV. PLANNER' S REPORT The planner reminded the Commission of the Guide Plan interviews the following evening and the tour of Mitchell Lake PUD. V. ADfQURNMENT._ The meeting adjourned at approximately 1:00 AM Respectively Submitted Richard Putnam Planning Director ( Acting Secretary )