Planning Commission - 01/24/2000 APPROVED MINUTES
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY,JANUARY 24, 2000 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chamber
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Kenneth Clinton, Marvin Cofer, Frantz
Corneille, Randy Foote, Katherine Kardell,
Vicki Koenig, Rebecca Lewis and Ray Stoelting
STAFF: Michael Franzen, City Planner
Krista Flemming, Planner I
Stu Fox, Manager of Parks & Natural Resources
Alan Gray, City Engineer
Donald Uram, Community Development/Financial
Services Director
Ric Rosow, City Attorney
Deb Meuwissen, Recording Secretary
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members Lewis and Kardell
were not in attendance.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Koenig, to approve the Agenda. Motion carried
5-0.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Minutes of the November 22, 1999 and December 13, 1999 meetings were tabled until
the next meeting of the Community Planning Board due to a lack of quorum required for
approval.
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Cofer, to approve the Minutes of the January 10,
2000 Community Planning Board. Motion carried 5-0.
IV. PRESENTATION
Uram provided a brief presentation of the duties and responsibilities of the Community
Planning Board (the "Board"), as well as its strategic initiatives.
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 2
JANUARY 24,2000
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SOUTHWEST CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL by Southwest Christian High
School. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Church/Cemetery to
Secondary School/Church on 11.62 acres, PUD Concept Review on 11.62 acres, PUD
District Review with waivers on 11.62 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the Public
District on 11.62 acres, and Site Plan Review on 11.62 acres. Location: 17850 Duck Lake
Trail.
Franzen related the Public Hearing was an informational meeting in which the applicant
would provide an overview of the proposed project, comments from the neighborhood
would be heard, and a discussion of how the property may be developed in order to provide
direction to the developer. The Board would then determine whether the project would be
continued to revise the plan to provide for a better transition or close the public hearing and
recommend that the church and preschool alternative would be the appropriate use for the
property.
Brian Anderson, Board Member of Southwest Christian High School, provided a brief
history of the property and its use. The proposed project included building a new school
facility for grades 9-12 beginning in Spring or Summer 2000. The new school would
provide an educational alternative for families.
Denny Wallace, architect, reviewed the site plans for the project. The school would house
400 students along with staff, a gym, cafeteria, etc. The structure had been designed on a
more residential scale. Approximately 200-225 parking spaces would be provided. An
earlier proposal included the retention of the existing building, sanctuary and gym, and the
building of a new facility to the south of Duck Lake Trail. That plan had been discussed at
neighborhood meetings and to the Staff, and it had been determined additional buffering
and parking would be needed, as well as the need to address setback and height issues. The
original property totaled 58,000 s.f. with a combined square footage of 77,000-78,000 s.f.
After two meetings with residents and Staff, three options for development of the site had
been proposed. Wallace indicated Southwest Christian High School would operate as a
four year high school with the same school calendar as public schools. It would not operate
as a boarding school. A detailed comparison of the Southwest Christian High School to
other public schools in Eden Prairie was provided.
Clinton asked about the placement of the pond, which had originally been placed along the
southeast end of the property in the plan and had been moved to the north and northeast end
of the property. Wallace indicated in the original proposal, a storm drain was located at the
street. Staff determined that location was not adequate and the drainage area was provided
just above the wetland area.
Koenig requested information on transportation of students. Wallace indicated parents, car
pools and students driving would transport students. There would be no bus transportation
provided except one bus for activities and events.
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 3
JANUARY 24,2000
Corneille asked that plans for event parking be described. Wallace responded the
Assembly of God Church and other sites had been considered for overflow parking in order
to avoid on street parking.
Franzen indicated the Board would have to determine if the property should remain as
permitted by City Code as a Church/Cemetery, developed as a Church/Pre-School, or
developed as the applicant had requested, or any of the alternative plans presented for the
property and the impact these alternatives would have on the surrounding land use.
Howard Wiebold, 6817 Lorena Lane, expressed concern with respect to increased traffic
and street parking, as well as changes to the Comprehensive Plan necessitated by the
project. Conveyed that twelve residents of the neighborhood would address the Board but
their remarks included the concerns of approximately 200-225 residents in the
neighborhood.
Pat Richard, 7983 Lorena Lane, addressed the waivers and variances requested by the
applicant for the proposed project including height variance, side yard setbacks and lot size
variance. Concerned with the view the building would provide to family members
regardless of screening or plantings.
Bill Gibson, 6770 Boyd Avenue, voiced concern with the building size and the impact it
would have on the view from his residence.
Sarah Cheesman, 6830 Boyd Avenue, related the comparison Southwest Christian High
School provided was only to elementary schools and not high schools. Based on
information obtained from the Department of Education guidelines, the project met
guidelines for an elementary school but not a high school.
Lester Stanley, 17678 W. 67h Street, expressed concern with the amount of traffic which
would be generated by the proposed plan. The Church primarily had weekend traffic with
some week night meetings. With the proposed school, not only would Church traffic
remain the same but the additional traffic generated by school staff, students, deliveries and
general school activities would increase the amount of traffic which would impact the
safety of children in the neighborhood.
Chad Koebnick, 6811 Boyd Avenue, indicated the lack of planning with respect to parking
would negatively impact the neighborhood. An adequate plan for overflow parking had not
been developed. If not addressed correctly, believed streets would be used for overflow
parking which would create safety issues.
Randy Nielson, 6818 Boyd Avenue, voiced concern with traffic in and around the proposed
school. He believed no traffic impact study had been conducted by the City or the
applicant. He questioned what road improvements would be necessitated by the project
and expressed concern for children in the neighborhood who would be playing or walking
to nearby parks among traffic generated by the proposed school.
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 4
JANUARY 24,2000
Tracy Morrison, 18181 Duck Lake Trail., conveyed concern with respect to the additional
traffic which would be generated by the proposed school. Stop signs and crosswalks
currently were not adequate for the area. The average speed was 45 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h.
zone. She indicated providing wider streets did not equate with safer streets.
Leslie Schroeder, 17851 Duck Lake Trail, indicated widening of the streets or addition of
turn lanes would impact the value of residents' homes since any increase in width would
require a reduction in lot size. The cost of any road expansion would impact the residents
and the City since funding from the State could not be guaranteed. Opposed guideline
change to construct a high school on the site. Concerned with safety of children in the
neighborhood due to increase traffic.
John Blankenship, 6782 Boyd Avenue, expressed concern with the impact the proposed
project would have on Purgatory Creek. The drainage pattern for the property would be
substantially altered increasing the quantity of mosquitoes and would pose a hazard to
children to would go sledding on the hills. Noise would be increased, as well as trash not
only during the construction phase but due to the general operation of the high school.
Construction of the high school would also impact view as one-third to one-half of the
current view would be lost.
John Goergen, 6805 Lorena Lane, conveyed the proposed project was being requested in an
area that had been residential for many years. The applicant at some point should analyze
revenue due to potential abandonment of the property. He indicated the applicant had not
looked at other potential sites. Several residents received delayed notification of the
meeting. Neighbors had been told no waivers or variances were being sought. Goergen
indicated project would dramatically reduce property value in the area and asked the Board
to reject the proposed plan.
Pat Walter, 6796 Lorena Lane, provided a summary of the information presented by the
previous speakers.
Mike Chapman, 17312 Duck Lake Trail, indicated he lived approximately one block west
of the proposed school and was also a member of the board of directors of the school. He
stated problems with traffic in the area were due to drivers speeding and not stopping at
stop signs. Also stated alternative sites had been considered.
Dr. Arthur Hill, 10316 Meade Lane, member of the board of directors of Southwest
Christian High School, indicated the proposed school was not an overwhelming school.
Only one playing field was being provided. The land was currently zoned public and
would like to have the option of a private religious school.
Paula Richard, 6793 Lorena Lane, related three separate incidents at the school which had
been reported to the Police Department.
Allen Erps, Southwest Christian High School task force member, indicated neighbors had
been sent meeting notices using labels provided by the City. During the meetings the
neighbors had attended, neighbors had addressed issues regarding screening but not size of
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGES
JANUARY 24,2000
the building. In addition, neighbors had been invited to attend task force meetings which
had been held each Tuesday since June 1999.
Gray addressed the concerns with traffic that been raised. He indicated no traffic study had
been completed and reiterated the meeting was an informational meeting to identify such
issues. The roadways in the area were narrow and based on existing neighborhood traffic,
would propose they be widened regardless of the completion of the proposed project. The
proposed drainage plan would meet standards.
Foote asked how improvements to Duck Lake Trail would be funded. Gray indicated state
funds would be sought regardless of whether the proposed project would be completed or
not. The City did not assess on property for county roads. Some assessment may be
proposed but they would be different from assessments on residential streets.
Clinton asked for clarification of the requirement for the need to have 25 acres for a
private school. Franzen responded the requirement had been set in 1987 due to the
International School project, which had been a new type of use for Eden Prairie since it
included boarding facilities for a private school.
Corneille asked what guidelines were established for a high school versus an elementary
school and how it related to the current project. Franzen indicated the city code
requirements would be the same. The issue is not private versus public, it is school land
use as compared to a church land use. Impacts are based on building size, not the number
of students. Prior to 1987, public schools did not have to go through any approval process.
The code was then changed to require all uses except single family would require a site
plan review.
Clinton voiced concerns with the amount of parking available and with any impact the
project may have on Purgatory Creek.
Cofer indicated his concerns with respect to the amount of available parking and the visual
impact of the proposed project on the surrounding neighborhood.
Koenig indicated a more detailed plan to accommodate overflow parking should be
developed. Although the concerns of the neighbors with respect to loss of their view could
be appreciated, since the property was zoned public, other projects could be considered for
the site and the view would still be lost.
Corneille also related concerns with respect to parking, both during school and any after
school events, and indicated a more detailed plan for parking would need to be developed.
Stoelting voiced concerns with respect to the availability of adequate parking and the
environmental impact the project would have.
Foote indicated that it appears there were no compelling reasons to change the guide plan at
this time. Traffic, parking, drainage and visual impacts need to be addressed before
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 6
JANUARY 24,2000
moving forward with this project to the City Council, and asked if the applicant would be
able to resolve these matters.
MOTION: Frantz moved, seconded by Koenig, to continue the public hearing until the
February 28, 2000 meting of the Community Planning Board. Motion carried 6-0.
Franzen indicated the City Council had a legal requirement to act upon any application
within 120 days and asked if the applicant would agree to an extension of that period to
May 18, 2000. Wallace indicated the applicant would agree to the extension.
B. IVERS ADDITION by Jerry Klooster. Request for PUD Concept Review on 4.41
acres, PUD District Review with waivers on 4.41 acres, Zoning District Amendment with
waivers in the R1-22 Zoning District and Preliminary Plan on 4.41 acres into 3 lots.
Location: 17221 Terrey Pine Drive
Franzen related that due to the relative simplicity of the project, Staff would make a brief
presentation on behalf of the developer. The proposed project was a subdivision of two
existing lots and one outlot into three new lots in order to settle the estate of Tom Ivers.
Staff recommended approval of the project.
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Cofer, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 6-0.
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Koenig, to recommend to City Council approval
of the request of Jerry Clooster for PUD Concept Review on 4.41 acres, PUD District
Review with waivers on 4.41 acres, Zoning District Amendment with waivers in the R1-22
Zoning District and Preliminary Plan on 4.41 acres into 3 lots, based on plans dated
December 30, 1999, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated January
21, 2000, with the following modification: Any additions to the existing home on lot three
can be no closer to the lake than the existing house. If the existing house is torn down, any
new house must met the 150 foot shoreland setback. The existing house must be torn down
within months of the date of building permit issuance for the new house. Bonding will be
required for the removal of the existing house. Motion carried 6-0.
C. LIBERTY PLACE by Liberty Property Limited Partnership. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Industrial/High Density Residential to Office
on 3.9 acres, and from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on 2.58 acres,
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 55.08 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 16.88 acres, Zoning District Change from RM-2.5 to I-2
on 5.47 acres; RM-2.5 to Office on 7.12 acres; I-2 to Office on .41 acres; Zoning District
Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 3.78 acres, Site Plan Review on 16.88 acres,
and Preliminary Plat on 55.08 acres into 3 lots and 2 outlots and City right-of-way.
Location: Smetana Lane and Valley View Road..
David Jellison, Vice President, Liberty Property, provided a brief history of the proposed
project including changes requested by Staff for development of the site into mixed use
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 7
JANUARY 24,2000
property. The current proposal included a 9-story — 172 unit residential apartment
complex, 82,000 s.f. office building, 93,000 s.f. industrial building and dedication of 35
acres to the City for a park and right-of-way. The applicant concurred with Alternative 1 of
the Staff Report.
Flemming reported the property owned by Liberty Property was the last significant
property around Lake Smetana. The project provides an opportunity to meet city housing
and transportation goals and to reduce traffic in the area. Staff agrees with the land use as
proposed.
Franzen related the conclusion section of Staffs Report and discussed the philosophy of the
City with respect to housing and traffic.
Bill Griffith, attorney representing Real Life Cooperative, 1500 Norwest Financial Center,
Bloomington, Minnesota, related the applicant had discussed and worked with Real Life
residents on the proposed project. The residents of Real Life were not opposed to the
development of an office complex or residential complex but were concerned with the scale
and magnitude of the proposed project. The apartment complex would be 3- 5 times the
size of other projects currently existing around Lake Smetana. Due to the fact the revised
plans and specifications, as well as the Staff Report, had only been available to residents of
Real Life for a short time, they agreed with Staffs recommendation to continue the project.
Dick Brown, #418 Real Life Cooperative, 10785 Valley View Road, expressed concern
with the size of the apartment building. Asked that notices of future meetings be sent to all
residents of Real Life Cooperative since most residents had not seen the most current plans
Lloyd Wiley, #123, Real Life Cooperative, 10785 Valley View Road, indicated he was not
opposed to apartments or other housing for the area. Concerned with aesthetic impact of
the size on surrounding developments and the amount of traffic that would be generated.
Jack Berry, #415, Real Life Cooperative, 10785 Valley View Road, expressed concern
with the size of the apartment building and believed the applicant needed to work with
others in the area to develop the property.
Stoelting asked for clarification of the future development indicated on the plans. Franzen
responded the applicant did not have finalized plans for the apartment building, which
would not be constructed at this time. The applicant was asking for approval for the
concept plans but with the understanding that the Board would have to approve final plans.
Stoelting asked if the trail system would be continued along the lake. Fox indicated the
trail system that began with the Real Life Cooperative project would be continued around
the lake, which consisted of an 8 ft. wide trail based on City standards.
Cofer asked about the park plans for the peninsula. Fox indicated this area would be
dedicated to the City for a mini-park, which would include picnic tables, benches, etc., but
no ball fields.
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 8
JANUARY 24,2000
Cofer asked the height above sea level for the proposed apartment building and that of the
Real Life Cooperative. Franzen indicated the Real Life Cooperative property was 870 ft.
above sea level and the apartment building would be approximately 50- 60 ft. higher.
Foote asked if signalization would be required at Valley View Road and Smetana Lane.
Gray indicated the traffic analysis indicated the level of development would not require
signalization. An area of concern would be cross-access between sites. Most of the
employee base would prefer to use the Golden Triangle area. Some, however, may prefer
to use the proposed site. If cross-access was a problem, as a residential use this could be
controlled via access cards. Signalization could be necessary in the future. Foote asked if
residents of the apartment complex would exit out Smetana onto Valley View Road. Gray
indicated replacing office with some residential would help traffic. Exiting in the evening
hours would not be a problem with residential since in-bound traffic would be the primary
traffic generator. The more residential in the Golden Triangle area the better the traffic
flow would be.
Clinton indicated support of the guide use plan changes and in favor of going forward with
the plan with the concerns and issued being addressed.
Jellison indicated the applicant did not have final plans developed for the entire project.
Staff had asked that a residential component be included in the overall plan. He developed
a conceptual plan, which included a residential component. Asked that the Board approve
the conceptual plan with the understanding that the final plans for the residential portion
would have to be approved.
A general discussion ensued among the Board with each member voicing concern with
respect to the height of the apartment building. The applicant was asked to provide a
pictorial view of the property in relationship to the overall lake area and if there was any
opposition to a two week continuance to address the issues and concerns raised. Jellison
indicated the pictorial could be provided and there was no opposition to the continuance.
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Corneille, to continue the public hearing until the
February 14, 2000 meeting of the Community Planning Board. Motion carried 6-0.
Franzen indicated the City Council had a legal requirement to act upon any application
within 120 days and asked if the applicant would agree to an extension of that period to
May 18, 2000. Jellison indicated the applicant would agree to the extension.
C. EATON CORPORATION PUD by Eaton Corporation. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on 25.37 acres, Planned Unit Development District
Review with waivers on 25.37 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 Zoning
District, and Site Plan Review on 25.37 acres. Location: 14165 Lone Oak Road.
John Machio, architect for the project, presented a brief overview of the project. The
existing structure would be utilized as a corporate headquarters for Eaton's hydraulic
division. This would require upgrading and remodeling the interior of the building into
office space and the addition of more parking spaces.
COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PAGE 9
JANUARY 24,2000
Staff recommended approval of the project.
Cofer asked if the connection between the project site and existing Eaton sites was part of
the proposal. Machio responded that a connection between the sites was being considered
but was not part of the current proposal.
Foote asked if an acceptable traffic demand management plan had been submitted. Bill
Lange, Eaton Corporation, indicated the company encouraged carpooling at its other sites,
which had some success.
MOTION: Corneille moved, seconded by Clinton, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 6-0.
MOTION: Corneille moved, seconded by Clinton, to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Eaton Corporation, for Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment on 25.37 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on
25.37 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 Zoning District, and Site Plan
Review on 25.37 acres, based on plans dated November 4, 1999, and subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 21, 2000. Motion carried 6-0.
VI. PUBLIC MEETING
VII. MEMBERS' REPORTS
VIII.CONTINUING BUSINESS
IX. NEW BUSINESS
X. PLANNERS' REPORTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Koenig, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried
6-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m.