Loading...
Planning Commission - 06/12/2000 - Workshop APPROVED WORKSHOP MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MONDAY,JUNE 12, 2000 6:00 p.m., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS: Ken Brooks, Kenneth E. Clinton, Frantz Corneille, Randy Foote, Vicki Koenig, Kathy Nelson, Susan Stock, Ray Stoelting STAFF MEMBERS: Krista Flemming, Planner I Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Mike Franzen, City Planner Alan Gray, City Engineer Scott Kipp, Senior Planner Leslie Stovring, Environmental Coordinator Donald Uram, Community Development/Financial Services Director I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Corneille called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Brooks, Clinton, Corneille, Koenig, Stock, and Stoelting. Staff: Fox, Franzen, Gray, Uram. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Stoelting, seconded by Koenig to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0. III. MINUTES IV. WORKSHOP TOPICS A. Planned Unit Developments, Waivers, and Density Transfer Franzen said the city staff and boards will consider the city's potential returns when granting a waiver. An example was moving a building to a different part of a property like the Bryant Lake building. The waiver from 200 to 148 feet allowed more trees to be preserved. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD WORKSHOP MINUTES Page 2 June 12, 2000 Corneille asked if during consideration of the concept plan the developer does not have or need approval of all specific engineering details of the plan, what are appropriate questions for the developer? Franzen said the board could ask such questions as whether there is enough capacity in the roads to handle the development; if the developer has provided transition in the project; whether the developer is preserving the land's natural features; the density of the project as related to surrounding area and related buffer zones. Franzen cited another waiver example with a wetland parking setback for the Wingate Hotel. There was an increase in the buffer zone setback in exchange for parking moved closer to the street. Brooks asked for clarification on the setback for wetlands. Franzen said in this case the developer agreed to preserve trees, created more buffer than the minimum. There were retaining walls close to the buffer; the developer did not want to damage the wetland buffer. The city is more restrictive on high quality wetlands and less restrictive on low quality. For the buffer zone on the ADC parking ramp, the developer slid buildings from a 75 foot setback to 35 feet to preserve the wetland and create a buffer next to residential. The building came close to the road, there are industrial uses on either side of road. The city could have required a 75 foot setback and a large buffer zone but that would have reduced the size of the building. Developers may also use a PUD waiver as a density bonus if the city is trying to encourage a particular type of housing. One example is increased density to 28 units/acre for more senior housing for Eden Shores. Some units are owned, some are assisted living, the units were made affordable by the increased density. It was important to fulfill housing goals by the Senior Issues task force but also to make the housing compatible with the surrounding residential area. Corneille asked whether in cases such as ADC and Wingate, there was a mechanism to share with the community the logic behind the board's actions and decisions. Franzen said the public meetings and the Eden Prairie News Newspaper. Franzen said density transfer was moving density from one part of a project to another. He cited the north side of 494. In 1996 with a master plan amendment the developer built taller than the ordinance and closer to the lake COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD WORKSHOP MINUTES Page 3 June 12, 2000 but in exchange did not build on the hill. As a result, the 12 acre hill was preserved. Koenig asked why developers included water bodies or wetlands in density measurements when they can't build on them without a waiver. Franzen said density is calculated by ordinance on the gross acres. The gross density can be transferred to a net area provided all other code requirements are met. Koenig asked if a PUD was approved in 1990, then would they be obligated to comply with current ordinances? Franzen stated the developer must comply with current ordinances. PUD approval from city does not mean the city is obligated to rezone. The PUD provides a general view. The Dell Road and Hwy 5 had PUD approval for commercial. The traffic level was higher than expected, so the city decided not to approve the project. B. Performance Standards of the City Code Franzen explained how the landscape ordinance was created. He added that the city requires a landscape guarantee to make sure landscaping survives with a cost estimate of replacements of 150%. Franzen then described how Home Depot met performance standards of the city code. Brooks said if developers are consistently coming in with 20-30 percent greater landscaping than required, the city could change requirements to greater landscaping. Franzen said since the city was 90 percent developed, changing the requirement for the remaining 10 percent would not be significant. Stoelting asked about zoning requirements for sidewalks? Franzen said sidewalks are required along collector roads and minor residential streets. Franzen showed the exterior material sample board of acceptable building materials. Plain concrete block is not an acceptable alternative. Brooks noted that Office Depot facing Highway 212 has plain concrete block. Franzen said the exposed plain concrete is an expansion wall and would be face brick on the addition as required in the approved plans. V. ADOURNMENT MOTION by Clinton seconded by Stock to adjourn. Motion carried, 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.