Loading...
Planning Commission - 07/08/2002 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MONDAY,JULY 8, 2002 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8050 Mitchell Road STAFF MEMBERS: Ken Brooks, Frantz Corneille, Randy Foote, Vicki Koenig, Kathy Nelson, Fred Seymour, Paul Sodt, Dave Steppat and Ray Stoelting Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Mike Franzen, City Planner Alan Gray, City Engineer Carol Pelzel, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by Chair Corneille at 7:00 p.m. Board members Nelson, Seymour and Stoelting were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Foote moved, seconded by Koenig, to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried, 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. PUBLIC MEETINGS V. PUBLIC HEARING A. CRESTWOOD PONDS By Terry Vogt Homes, Inc. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.32 acres and Preliminary Plat of 5.32 acres into six lots and road right-of-way. Location: 9617 Crestwood Terrace. Dave Kunstel, the consulting engineer for the project, stated that he is representing Terry Vogt Homes. They are proposing six residential lots on Crestwood Terrace ranging in sizes from 25,400 square feet to approximately 40,000 square feet. He explained that they are in full compliance with the City zoning regulations. Franzen presented the staff report explaining that the Comprehensive Guide Plan shows the property as low density residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The density Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 2 is .88 units per acre. All of the lots meet the dimensional and lot size requirements for the R1-13.5 zoning district. Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the conditions set forth in the July 5, 2002, Staff Report. L. Wheelock, 9576 Crestwood Terrace, asked that the developer walk through the project and discuss what is being proposed so that everyone is familiar with it. Terry Voght explained that Crestwood Terrace is a 5.6 acre site. They are proposing to divide it into approximately six equal sized lots. It is a very simple project from an engineering standpoint. They will be extending Crestwood Terrace Road to the property line. The asphalt drive, curb, water, sewer and storm drainage will be extended. Wheelock asked how far the house would be from the curb and if there is a landscaping plan. Vogt responded that the house will be set back 30 feet from the curb which is the minimum distance allowed. They do have a tree preservation plan and are not removing any trees from the site. It will be the homeowners responsibility to add trees. Franzen pointed out that the house would sit back between 40 and 45 feet from the curb because of the green area between the property line and the curb. Also, he explained that in a single-family zoning district the City does not have a landscaping requirement. Wheelock stated that originally discussion included City sewer and water only going as far as the end of the Welter property. She questioned if there is a plan to expand both sewer and water beyond that point. Wheelock said it is difficult to make plans for the family homestead if they continually receive ever-changing information. The original plan was to place the sewer and water through the middle of the property and they are now proposing to extend it through the entire property. Wheelock stated that she owns a five-acre parcel and at the present time has no interest or need to have her land rezoned or to acquire sewer and water. She asked if they will be required to hook up to City sewer and water or would they be grandfathered in. Gray, City Engineer, explained that the extension of sewer and water is part of a City project. In order for the developer to utilize the remaining property to the north, they are proposing to install additional sewer and water. That installation will be done at the expense of the developer. This plan is consistent with the development practices of the City. Gray further explained that in areas where utilities are available, many property owners want to extend it for their use and the City does allow this. The Welter property is located on the west side of this property. That developer sought development plan approval and is waiting for the utility extension which is now part of the City project and has some impact on the Crestwood Terrace property. Wheelock asked how this is going to impact her property taxes. Gray responded that he cannot respond to that question. He indicated that he has no opinion on what the impact will be on the valuation of her property. The market is increasing the value of land in Eden Prairie. Wheelock said the neighbors have been informed that their Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 3 assessments would be similar to other properties in the area, which have been revalued at $100,000 per one-half acre. She asked for the name of the City staff person that could give them answers about property taxes. Even though sewer and water is available, it does not mean that she wants it or needs it. Franzen suggested that Wheelock contact Steve Sinell, City Assessor, on how their property taxes will be affected by this development. Paul Offerman, 9614 Crestwood Terrace, explained that this development would have a direct impact on their property. Based on the plan shown three months ago, the developer was proposing 2.5 lots on the far end of the property directly across from the Welter property. As of last Wednesday, they received notification that there is a whole new plan for six lots covering the majority of the property with sewer and water. Offerman pointed out that they have installed large wells and septic systems and they plan to retire on their property. They are not developers or realtors. All of a sudden someone wants to make a lot of money and presents a new proposal with an impact on the neighboring properties. Offerman stated that based on the City Assessor's estimations, taxes would probably triple. They have noticed a significant difference since the Settler's Ridge development. There are cans, plastic and paper thrown in the area and they are also experiencing erosion since this development. Now there is a new proposal across the street from their property. Offerman said he could live with 2.5 lots as was originally planned. This development would make their property unaffordable. G. Kanduth, 9601 Crestwood Terrace, explained that she moved to this property about 15 years ago. This is a beautiful area that is growing too fast. The person who sold her property to the developer indicated that she was going to be assessed $80,000 for sewer and water. Since she was unable to afford that she had no other option but to sell the property. They are now going to have six homes right next door. Kanduth said they couldn't afford taxes that will triple. She asked where they go from here. Offerman said it is his understanding that this proposal is to change the zoning from Rural to R1-13.5. This is a significant difference in lot sizes and the number of lots. He asked if the development would meet rural requirements as well. Franzen explained that the current requirement in a Rural District is for a minimum lot size of ten acres. Some of these five-acre parcels were created prior to 1982. There was a one-acre requirement in 1959. The lot size requirement has consistently gone up over the years. He further explained that this piece of property could easily be zoned R1- 22. Many of the lots in the Crestwood neighborhood are zoned R1-22. The proposed lot sizes fit into the neighborhood. Franzen pointed out that the City's 1982 Comprehensive Plan shows all of Eden Prairie having sewer and water. Brooks said it is not easy when land is developed. He said he will be faced with a similar situation when a six-acre parcel next to his home will some day be developed. There will be a point and time when all of the City's residents will be required to Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 4 hook up to sewer and water and those residents will be assessed accordingly. Gray explained that there would be no new assessments proposed on neighboring properties as a result of this development. The assessment the neighbors are speaking of is their property valuation or market value. They believe that this project will result in significant increases in their market value; therefore, their share of property taxes will increase. Brooks said he thinks the $80,000 assessment mentioned earlier seems excessive. Gray explained that there are no actual special assessments proposed as a result of this project. Brooks pointed out that the zoning requested for this proposal has less density than what the developer could have requested according to the Guide Plan. Sodt asked for clarification on a comment made by one of the neighbors regarding the reclassification of their property from homeowner to developer. Franzen said he was not aware of conversations the property owner has had with the City's Assessing Division. He stated that he was not sure what Assessing uses in valuing property. Franzen said he assumes they look at sales of similar homes in the area. There are parts of the community that are fully developed and the market value does continue to go up. Offerman explained that based on discussions with the Assessing Division, their property would be classified as developable property and their value would be based on comparable sales. It has been indicated that half-acre sized lots have sold for $100,000. If their value were based on this information, their taxes would triple or quadruple. As long as their property has access to sewer and water, they would have a different property classification. Koenig asked if Offerman saw an increase in his property taxes when the Settler's Ridge development occurred. Offerman answered that they did not. Foote pointed out that if the main reason for the possible increase is because sewer and water is available, the property owners could theoretically subdivide their property. Wheelock asked if sewer and water is available, would they be required to hook up to it. Gray responded that the City currently does not have such a requirement. Wheelock asked who determines the requirement or if it will be changed. Gray said it would require City Council action. Wheelock asked if it is feasible to have the water line go by her property and not require her to hook up to it. Gray said that is feasible, however, he does not think this sanitary sewer line would be extended further to the north than what is proposed with this development. It will depend on the property owners who request it. Wheelock asked if there is a plan for development north of Pioneer Trail. Gray said he has not seen a plan. Wheelock said if she does not hook up to sewer and water, would she be assessed a fee for it. Gray explained if the City receives a petition from one or more property owners for the extension of the sewer and water as a City improvement, there would likely be an assessment proposed whether the homeowner uses it or not. Wheelock asked if the rezoning of this Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 5 property would affect the zoning of surrounding properties. Franzen stated that the only way property can be rezoned is through a public hearing process. The property owner would have to bring a request to the City or give consent for rezoning. Brooks said he is sensitive to the property owners' issues here tonight. However, the proposed project is within City requirements so he is not sure how they can stop development of this site. Foote said this project is a good project and they are not proposing to remove any trees or wetlands. The lots are twice the size they need to be. Foote said he understands the concerns and sympathizes with the surrounding homeowners but it is a good project. Steppat said what he sees is a clash of two different life styles. One person wants the City to remain as it was 20 years ago and others want to develop it. Steppat said the proposal is well put together and meets City guidelines. This is a difficult direction that the City is going. Stoelting pointed out that the people they have heard from this evening live adjacent to the property. In looking at a map of the area, there are a number of lots the size of what is being proposed. Stoelting asked the developer if he has talked to others about the extension of the sewer and water. He asked if there has been any discussion with the people to the east of this proposed development. The developer responded that he has not. Gray explained that there is no feasible alternative to providing utilities to this project other than what is shown. If they came from the east, they would have to construct utilities through wetlands. Ultimately utilities will serve both sides. Stoelting asked what kind of service is being provided to the smaller lots to the east of this property. Gray responded that that is the City project. Koenig indicated that originally the plan was going to be 2.5 lots on the entire property but the plan evolved and it became six lots. Gray explained that the number of lots evolves from the City feasibility study for the extension of utilities half way up this property. They assigned three lot units of assessment for the feasibility study. Gray pointed out that the drawings in the feasibility study were for the purpose of determining assessments for the City project and these three units of assessment. This was not an actual development plan. It was only a concept of what units would benefit from the City project. It is an assessment calculation, not a development calculation. Dave Kunstel, engineering consultant for the developer, explained that the owners of this project would like to discuss the necessity of the wetland being dedicated to the City as an outlot. They do not feel that this is the only way to protect the lake. Franzen pointed out that this requirement is based on the City ordinance for protection of the wetlands and the best way to do this is to put it in an outlot. Dave Kunstel said they Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 6 disagree. It is more of a lake than a wetland. The developer feels it is not necessary to dedicate this to the City in order to conserve it. MOTION: Brooks moved, seconded by Sodt, to close the public hearing_ Motion carried, 6-0. Corneille pointed out that they have gone back and forth with this development and he understands the property owners' position and the developer's position. He said one issue he sees is that the development meets all of the City's requirements. The issue of assessments is out of this Commission's control. Corneille asked that staff give this Commission some future direction on how to deal with these types of issues, particularly the valuation of land. They need to be more educated on values and property classifications. From the development standpoint, this is a good project and meets the requirements of the City. Koenig said she sympathizes with the surrounding homeowners and it is difficult to see this area developed. However, as a Commission they have to have legal reasons for denying this proposal. From a development standpoint, this is a good proposal. As long as the project meets the zoning requirements there is not much this Commission can do. Sodt pointed out that what is being proposed is within what has been a long planned guide for City property throughout the area. What is being requested is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The only thing they are asking for is a change of zoning to be within that Guide Plan. Foote said one of the bigger issues he has with the comments made this evening is the property taxes being tripled. This is something that the City needs to look at very closely. The City Assessor or City Council will have to address this. Corneille asked staff to give this Commission some guidelines on property values and assessments. He stated that there seems to be some miscommunication with property owners regarding assessments. MOTION: Brooks moved, seconded by Foote, to recommend approval to the City Council of rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.32 acres and preliminary plat of 5.32 acres into six lots based on plans dated June 28, 2002, and the staff report dated July 5, 2002. Koenig asked if there were any possibility that the developer could consider larger lots on this development. Terry Vogt responded that current zoning allows seven lots, they are proposing six lots. To have fewer lots would not be feasible. The motion carried, 6-0. Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 7 B. HOUND DOG PET HOTEL by David Hansen and Karen Jackson. Request for planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.56 acres, Planned Unit, Development District Review with waivers on 1.56 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 1.56 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.56 acres. Location: 13013 Valley View road (east of Children's World Daycare) David Hansen, developer, presented a brief history and background of the project. He explained that he has had 40 years of experience in the commercial construction and management business and in the animal industry. Karen Jackson has been involved with canines for some time and she is one of the best handlers in the Midwest area and one of the finest groomers in the United States. Hansen said they feel this is a very needed facility in Eden Prairie. Approximately 70 percent to 75 percent of the residents are pet owners. They are looking at an area that would suit this type of business extremely well. The proposed area is commercial with no residential within 500 yards of the property. Hansen explained that it is their intent to make this a state-of-the art facility that will be soundproof. The proposed building will be single story constructed of brick and glass. There will be blue awnings over the main windows and the sign will be red. Franzen presented the staff report stating that staff recommends approval based on recommendations as outlined in the staff report. Corneille opened the public hearing. Foote asked if the only exercise area would be inside the building. Hansen responded that there will be exercise areas on both the east and west sides in a fenced in area. The fence will be six to seven feet in height. The animals will be hand exercised. In response to a question from Sodt, Hansen explained that there would be four outside kennels on the backside of the building with six units for the quiet customers. Steppat pointed out that the proposed facility is next door to Children's World and a busy street. He asked how they intend to contain the animals. Hansen responded that everything is fenced. The exercise area is totally fenced and there will be two entrances on the building; an enter and an exit. Steppat said he counted 116 kennels and questioned how waste will be disposed. Hansen explained that they will pick up the waste three to four times a day and bag it and place it in special containers. Brooks asked if the outdoor kennels and exercise areas would have a wood fence. Hansen said they would, however, they do not feel they need a wood fence behind Rainbow Foods. They are proposing a heavy chain link fence to make sure no animal gets loose. Brooks said he would hate to see any animals whether in a kennel or walking area get loose since both of the roads in that area are heavily traveled. He pointed out that this is a City setting and feels it is important that the facility all be fenced. Hansen said that would not be difficult to do. Planning Board Minutes July 8, 2002 Page 8 Sodt asked the applicant to comment on his discussions with the Day Care Building and with the property owners to the east regarding median free access. Hansen explained that access is another issue. They have discussed this with staff and will continue to work with the City and County on the access road. Depending on what other business comes in next to this facility will depend on what type of problems they have with the frontage road. They will be fine as long as a normal business comes in. A fast food restaurant would increase traffic on that road. Hansen said they will definitely work with the City on this. Sodt asked if they have had any discussions with the Day Care Center. Hansen responded that they have not. Sodt asked if they are aware of this proposal. Hansen said he believed they were. MOTION: Brooks moved, seconded by Steppat, to close the public hearing. The motion carried, 6-0. MOTION: Brooks moved, seconded by Sodt, to recommend to the City Council approval of PUD Concept Review on 1.56 acres; PUD District Review with waivers on 1.56 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 1.56 acres and Site Plan Review on 1.56 acres; based on plans dated July 2, 2002, and subject to the recommendations of Staff's July 5, 2002,report. Sodt asked if they would be having dog-handling classes or if it is strictly a hotel. Hansen explained that training is done elsewhere and this facility would be a hotel. There will be grooming facilities for the animals that stay there. The motion carried, 6-0. VI. MEMBERS REPORTS VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. PLANNERS' REPORTS X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Sodt moved, Brooks seconded, to adjourn the meeting_The motion carried, 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.