Loading...
Planning Commission - 04/24/2006 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 24, 2006 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Jon Duckstad, John Kirk, Vicki Koenig, Jerry Pitzrick, Frank Powell, Peter Rocheford, Fred Seymour, Ray Stoelting, Jon Stoltz STAFF MEMBERS: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Al Gray, City Engineer Scott Kipp, Senior Planner Regina Herron, Planner Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoelting called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent: Koenig, Pitzrick and Stoltz. II. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBERS • Frank Powell • Jon Duckstad Chair Stoelting thanked the past members for all their work and dedication to the Planning Commission. The past members included, Larry Kacher, Kathy Nelson, and William Sutherland. Scott Kipp recited the swearing in statement with commissioners Powell and Duckstad. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0. IV. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 27, 2006 MOTION by Seymour, seconded by Koenig, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 2- 0. Kirk and Stoelting abstained. Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 2 V. PUBLIC MEETING VI. INFORMATIONAL MEETING VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BANEBERRY HOLLOW by Lake West Development. Request for: Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.06 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.51 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.51 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 2.06 acres; Preliminary Plat of 2.51 acres into 12 lots and right-of-way. Location of property is 10015 and 10065 Pioneer Trail. Thomas Fretham, of 4930 Baker Road, Minnetonka, and representing Lake West Development,presented the proposal. He pointed out that the City Staff has helped them reach the requirements that were set forth for this project. He stated that the requirements are thoroughly outlined in the City Staff report. Mr. Fretham said that tonight he would like to take the opportunity to explain their plan to the neighbors of this development and any concerned residents. He stated that they are proposing to combine two parcels of land. They are located at 10015 Pioneer Trail, which is an owner occupied home, and 10065 Pioneer Trail, which is a rental unit owned by Lake West Development. The proposal is for a density change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and a rezoning change to RM-6.5. Currently the site is guided Low Density Residential for up to 2.5 units per acres. The surrounding land uses are Medium Density and Low Density Residential to the north across Pioneer Trail, Low Density Residential to the east, a park to the south and Medium Density to the west. The site is zoned Rural. Land to the north is zoned RM-6.5 and R1-9.5, Rural to the east and south, and RM-6.5 to the west. Mr. Fretham stated that the density change would allow for 12 units of twin homes on 2.51 acres. At this time, they would only be constructing 10 units of the 12 unit project. He also stated that access to this project is proposed from Lee Drive and that this project would eliminate the current driveway access to Pioneer Trail. He also pointed out that the proposed cul-de-sac meets City standards. Mr. Fretham utilized the overheard projector to show access into this project. He also showed the sewer and drainage systems located on the project. He stated that there would be numerous rain gardens developed to handle all of the storm water. Mr. Fretham pointed out that they are in compliance with tree replacement per City requirements. He stated that there are numerous trees that are dying in this area and it would be a benefit to the neighborhood to have them replaced. He stated that the first phase of the project would be the removal of the home and construction of the roads and utilities. Stoelting asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated that on February 27, this project was first reviewed by the Planning Commission at the Informational Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 3 Meeting and at that time the Staff was comfortable with the proposal. The only concern at that time was that access to Pioneer Trail would be eliminated and issues of construction traffic using Pioneer Trail. Kipp pointed out that there would be some waivers with this project but that they would be temporary in nature. He also pointed out that the City felt that there would only be a modest increase in traffic flow. The Staff recommendation is for approval. Powell asked Kipp if there would be walkways adjoining the areas on both ends of Lee Drive. Kipp stated that there is nothing in place at this time. Fox stated that there is a protective wetland issue between the two Lee Drive neighborhoods. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Debbie Smaby, representing Autumn Ridge Association on Arrow Wood and Lee Drive, stated that their main concern was the water draining into the park. She stated that after rainfall there is a substantial amount of water located on the baseball field. Ms. Smaby stated that they were initially told that the proposed units would be in the price range of the low $200,000. She asked Mr. Fretham if that was correct. Mr. Fretham stated that the houses would be around the $400,000 range. Ms. Smaby asked how construction traffic will move for the construction of the 11th and 12'h units. She also stated that the trips went from 150 a day to 70 and the density has not changed and asked what that meant. She also asked what will happen to the fencing on Lee Drive and Pioneer Trail. Merlyn Jacobson, of 10211 Lee Drive, representing the association on Lee Drive stated that they have the same concerns as Debbie Smaby. He also pointed out that they are very concerned with the trees on the northeast section of the property. He utilized the overhead projector to show location of the trees. Stoelting summarized the issues brought forth. They are as follows: 1. The concern of water flow and water backing up into the park area. 2. Traffic access when units 11 and 12 are being constructed. 3. Validate that there would be a sidewalk on Lee Drive. 4. Address the tree issue and the trees located on Pioneer Trail. 5. Why did the trips per day go down from 150 to 70. 6. What will happen to the fencing on the left side of the project. Mr. Fretham utilized the overhead projector to show were the tree removal would take place. He pointed out that the areas behind the homes would not be impacted, and especially the mature trees. He stated that in regards to the fence, they do not know who put it up or who it belongs to but that part of it will have to come down during construction. As far as the fence on Lee Drive, they can take it down or leave it up. Mr. Fretham pointed out that the sidewalk will be extended from Lee Drive to Pioneer Trail. He stated that as far as construction flow there seems to be some confusion. He stated that they will not be putting up all 10 units at once and that they would like to leave the driveways there for construction Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 4 purposes. He stated that as far as the construction traffic, 96 trips would be accurate for 12 units, 70 trips would be accurate for 10 units, and 150 trips when the neighboring property to the east develops. Mr. Fretham said that are far as ponding in the park, they are directing it away from the park and creating rain gardens. So in actuality, the park would remain drier. Stoelting asked Gray to verify this. Gray stated that this project would be able to handle its own water drainage. Koenig asked Fox if this project had a 78 percent tree loss. Fox stated that was correct. He pointed out that the tree loss is always high on projects that are building roads and houses,but that the builders will mitigate trees in the area. Fox stated that the project proponent is complying with the City in regards to tree mitigation and replacement. Stoelting asked Kipp if there are temporary waivers involved for lot 12. Kipp stated that was correct since it will remain in the rural zoning district at this time and that the project proponent would have to submit a detailed plan for lot 12 in the future. Kipp also stated that in regards to any access concerns on Pioneer Trail, the contractor will have to go through the City and County. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Duckstad, to approve the Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.06 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.51 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.51 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 2.06 acres, Preliminary Plat of 2.51 acres into twelve lots and road right-of-way based on plans stamped dated April 19, 2006, and the staff report dated April 21, 2006. Developer will work the City and County in regards to access on Pioneer Trail. Motion carried 6-0. B. GANDER MOUNTAIN by Oppidan Investment Company. Request for: Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Regional Commercial on 4.69 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.69 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review on 4.69 acres; Zoning District Change from I-2 to Regional Commercial Service on 4.69 acres; Site Plan review on 4.69 acres; Preliminary Plat of 4.69 acres into one lot. Location of property is 12150 Technology Drive. Dennis Crow, representing Oppidan Investment Company, presented the proposal. Mr. Crow pointed out that this project would be located next to the Xcel Energy substation. He also stated that Gander Mountain is a sporting business that has its roots in Minnesota and now there are over 98 stores throughout the United States and that Oppidan Investment Company has been Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 5 partnering with Gander Mountain in the development of these sporting goods stores. Mr. Crow said that this unit will be unique because it will have underground parking. He also pointed out that this site has some challenging characteristics; its triangular shape and the easements from the Xcel Energy substation. He said that because of these issues, it dictated the location and footprint of the building. He said that the architectural design of the building is that of a north woods structure. Mr. Crow addressed some of the issues that Staff addressed in the staff report in regards to recommendations. In regards to the wetland issue,he saw this area as not having an issue and felt that in the future this area would eventually dry up. He also said that they have submitted an application to wetland delineation. Mr. Crow said that they are not opposed to adding a sidewalk to Technology Drive. He said that they will also be eliminating the retaining walls and in regards to the landscaping plan, they will be working with Staff to revise this. Mr. Crow pointed out that they will be asking for a parking waiver. He stated that in all of the Gander stores, they have parking spaces at a ratio of 4 spaces per 1000 gross square feet of building or 5 spaces per 1000 gross square feet of building and have met the surge for traffic. Stoelting asked Herron to review the staff report. Herron stated that Staff recommends approval based on recommendations on page 5 and 6 of the staff report. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Chan Ellie,representing American Baptist Homes, at 11985 Technology Drive, asked what the plans are for improvements on the north side of Technology Drive. She stated that she is concerned about erosion problems in this area; especially in their parking lot. Stoelting asked Gray to address this issue. Gray stated that Gander Mountain will be responsible for their area on Technology Drive and pointed out that this development many not improve the Baptist Homes parking lot,but it would certainly not harm the current drainage situation. Koenig asked Staff to address the issue of parking and would there be an issue with it during peak days. Mr. Crow stated that all of the other Gander Mountains have not had any problems with parking and he does not see any parking issues with this Gander Mountain. Herron stated that she does agree with Mr. Crow and does not feel that parking would be an issue. Stoelting asked Mr. Crow to discuss traffic flow in and out of Gander Mountain. Mr. Crow stated that there are two entry points into the parking lot of Gander Mountain and that the main entrance is off of Technology Drive. He stated that'/a of all of the parking will be located in the underground garage. Mr. Crow said that the underground parking area is a very secure area. Kirk stated that this style of parking is very effective and sited Best Buy in Eden Prairie as a good example of underground parking. Kirk did ask a question Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 6 regarding shoreline waivers on a recreational lake and asked if these were common waivers. Herron stated that it is common and sited Costco as a good example of this. Seymour asked if this site was originally planned to be an office complex because it is on the north end of Town Center and earlier in the year the plan had that area as being office. Herron stated that the plan that was presented earlier in the year for the Major Center Area Study is a guide and that could be subject to change. She also stated that this location is not included in the "Town Center"but rather north of it. Seymour stated that he has a concern for this area and is not sure if this is the right development to go into the area next to Town Center. Stoelting asked Staff if this development is what was envisioned for the Town Center area. Kipp stated that Commission should look at the bigger picture. He reiterated that the study is a guide for development of the entire MCA and is subject to change. Kirk stated that he understood Seymour's concerns but also feels that this project needs to be looked at holistically and that since this project is right on the edge of Town Center it is a pretty good use of the property. Duckstad commented that it would be a positive addition to the area but asked if this land use was permissible in an I-2 District and also questioned why zoning would be changed. Herron stated that this project is a 100 percent commercial which is not permitted in an industrial zone; therefore it needs to be changed. Koenig asked if the elevator was ADA accessible. Mr. Crow responded that is was ADA accessible. Koenig asked if more parking spaces could be added to the underground parking. Mr. Crow stated that there would be no possible way that more spaces could be added to the underground parking. Koenig asked Mr. Crow if the company still plans on purchasing Wetland in Sibly County. Mr. Crow stated that they have a purchase agreement in effect to meet the 2-1 mitigation based on original wetland delineation defined back in November. Koenig asked if they could come back to the Planning Commission after they purchase the Wetland. Mr. Crow stated that would not be feasible because they want to open the store before Thanksgiving. Koenig asked Fox about the decorative fencing as part of the mitigation. Fox stated that numerous factors have to be taken into account such as trees and wildlife and this decorative landscaping would provide some screening on Technology Drive. MOTION by Duckstad, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Duckstad, seconded by Kirk, to approve the Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Regional Commercial on 4.69 acres, Planned Unit Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2006 Page 7 Development Concept Review on 4.69 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review on 4.69 acres Zoning District Change from 1-2 to Regional Commercial Service on 4.69 acres; Site Plan Review on 4.69 acres; Preliminary Plat of 4.69 acres into one lot based on plans stamped dated April 17, 2006, and the staff report dated April 21, 2006. Motion carried 5-1. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORTS Koenig stated that she attended the 2nd Wetland Rally this past Saturday and the different groups attending discussed obtaining funding for water quality and she would like to see something on the referendum in November in regards to this matter. IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS XI. PLANNERS' REPORTS Kipp stated that there will be two items on the agenda for the May 8, meeting. There is a variance for a setback on an addition to a home and a development proposal for the Eden Bluffs Business Park within the Hennepin Village development. Kipp also advised the commission regarding a joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop scheduled for May 19th during the day to tour some of the Town Square development in the metro area. XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.