Loading...
Planning Commission - 07/10/2006 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,JULY 10, 2006 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD 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 Mike Franzen, City Planner Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoelting called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent: Duckstad, Pitzrick, and Rocheford. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0. III. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 12, 2006 MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PUBLIC MEETING V. INFORMATIONAL MEETING VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE#2006-06 by Anthony Lissick. Request: To permit a garage and house addition 8.85' from the side lot line. City Code requires a minimum of 10' side yard setback with a total of 25' both sides. Location is at 17159 Trenton Lane. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 2 Anthony Lissick presented the proposal. He stated that he was granted this variance back in 2003 to build a garage addition but did not build within a year so the approval to the variance became null and void. He would now like to rebuild his garage and is here for a variance request. He pointed out that he had talked with his neighbors and they are in favor of the variance. He said he would like to rebuild the garage to extend it into three stalls. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that a three stall garage fits in with the character of the neighborhood and the staff report identifies reasons for approval. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Seymour, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Seymour, to approve the garage and house addition 8.85' from the side lot line based on plans stamped dated June 1, 2006, and the staff report dated July 7, 2006. Motion carried 6-0. B. VARIANCE#2006-07 by Douglas and Anne Steen. Request: To permit a gazebo addition 10' from the rear lot line. City Code requires a 20' rear yard setback. Location is at 9764 Linden Drive. Douglas Steen presented the proposal. He stated that they would like the variance for a 10' setback from the lot line. He said that he had talked with his neighbors regarding the position of the gazebo and they are all in favor of the variance request. Mr. Steen pointed out that they do not want to put a free standing gazebo into their yard because it would not fit in with the character of the neighborhood. He also stated that the gazebo would fit into the proposed location without destroying any mature trees. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that the staff report identifies reasons for approval. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to approve the gazebo addition 10' from the rear lot line based on plans stamped dated June 2, 2006, and the staff report dated July 7, 2006. Motion carried 6-0. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 3 C. KLUGE RESIDENCE by Richard and Kelsey Kluge. Request for: Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 1.98 acres. Location is 7260 Willow Creek Road. John Boyer, of Boyer Building Corporation presented the proposal. He stated that the lot contains a small cottage and detached garage. The homeowner would like to tear these both down and rebuild on the site. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that staff recommends approval based on page 3 of the staff report. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Koenig asked if the cottage had any historical significance. Franzen stated that it is not identified as a structure,but has been documented. MOTION by Stoltz, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Stoltz, seconded by Kirk, to approve the Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 1.98 acres based on plans stamped dated June 6, 2006, and the staff report dated July 7, 2006. D. OAK CREEK AT HENNEPIN VILLAGE, by Hennepin Village Limited Partnership. Request for: Guide Plan Change from Public Open Space to Medium Density Residential on 3.1 acres and from Medium Density Residential to Public Open Space on 3.2 acres; Planned Unit Development concept Review on 73.7 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review on 73.7 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 73.7 acres; Preliminary Plat of 73.7 acres into 90 lots and one outlot. Dan Herbst, of the Pemtom Land Company,presented the proposal. Mr. Herbst gave a brief history of the property and used the overhead projector for illustrations. He pointed out that the first plan in 2001 had 4 parcels on it. Phase 1, which was parcel A, had 125 homes on it. In 2002, the density was raised on Site A from 125 to 144 homes. He also stated that part of the overall plan was to give the City open space, which would constitute 8 acres in Site B, and 10 acres in Sites C and D. Mr. Herbst stated that this evening they would like to address Site B and reduce the housing from 167 to 93 homes,plus 3 homes across the street. He also said that they would like to donate the bluff area to the City. Mr. Herbst pointed out that infiltration bases would be added to this area, along with added trails and landscaping. He also said that the homes would be styled after the new version of Ryland homes. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 4 Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that in looking at the diversification of housing on the property and the development of the area, the staff report recommends approval of the modification of the planned development. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Michael Boland, of 13579 Berkshire Lane, stated that his concern, as well as some other residents that were present in the audience, was the extension of Prospect Road. He first pointed out that he felt that the water infiltration system was better than expected. He stated that he would like to do his presentation in three steps. First would be a video, second would be some additional speakers, and third would be a PowerPoint presentation. He introduced Jeff Strate, of 1501 Summit Hill Drive, as narrator of the video. The first part of the video showed Millers Creek, Lions Tap, and Miller Spring. The second part of the video showed the trout springs in Riley Creek. Jeff Strate showed where the addition of Prospect Road would go to. He also showed on Eden Prairie Road and Lake Riley areas where the silt fences were broken down and ineffective runoff systems were found. He stated that the point of this video was to demonstrate how important natural resources are and recommends the strongest precautions in this new development. Mr. Strate also pointed out that old Dell Road is eroding into the creek,but the water temperature of the lower creek is still healthy enough to house trout. Michael Boland introduced John Lankas, of 9752 Cupola Lane, to address some additional issues in the area. Mr. Lankas stated that he moved into the area two years ago and was told about Prospect Road at that time. He pointed out that his concern is if Eden Prairie Road is closed at the point where it goes into Highway 212, that this would create another problem. He feels that the slope that starts at Pickett Lane would be very steep and slippery in the winter. Mr. Lankas pointed out that there is a serious blind spot at Pickett Road and Prospect Road and can be very dangerous if coming up Prospect Road from the creek. He stated that public safety should be the first concern and preservation of wildlife needs to be the second concern. Michael Boland gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding environmental impacts. Some of these impacts include preserving Miller Spring; maintaining the trout basin in Riley Creek, east of Eden Prairie Road; and the impact that the extension of Prospect Road would have on the storm water runoff. In summary, Mr. Boland stated that the Prospect Road extension would contaminate Miller Spring; the impact of bringing all of this fill into the area would be catastrophic; and the slope of the road and size of embankment would be a hazard. David Carroll, of 9776 Cupola Lane, stated that he has concerns about how the Prospect Road extension would impact the traffic at Cedar Hills Park. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 5 Jan Mosman, of 15117 Scenic Heights Road, stated that she feels the issue should be preservation of natural areas and suggests that Prospect Road be a gravel or grass road. Dean Edstrom, of 10133 Eden Prairie Road, stated that he believes when the City allowed development in the area is when natural resources were lost and damage to the area occurred. He stated that he believes that the infiltration ponds would contaminate the area and that the overall density has had a negative impact on the environment. He stated that keeping the access at 212 was not a good idea because of all of the accidents and deaths at the intersection. Stoelting summarized some of the important issues that were presented. They are as follows: 1. Legal precautions protecting Miller Spring and lower Riley Creek. 2. Public safety and the steep grade from Cupola Lane. 3. Parking concerns on Prospect Road. 4. Blind spots and emergency vehicle access and slope of the road on Prospect Road. 5. Rain water runoff. 6. Traffic on Prospect Drive. 7. Suggestion of gravel or grass on Prospect Road. Gray stated that public safety is the top issue. He stated that the entire area will see 300-350 residential units and that areas of this size should have multiple accesses and that the extension of Prospect Drive would solve this. Gray stated that they could continue to access Eden Prairie Road to Highway 212,but the cost to make grade 10% for this area would be very expensive. Gray also believes Prospect Road would be much safer. He stated that by not building Prospect Road, it would not eliminate water quality. An example of this would be to look at the area around Riley Creek and Grace Church and how it has not has not significantly affected the water run-off. Gray pointed out that Prospect Road would shorten the distance into the area in regards to emergency vehicles. Gray suggested that in regards to Miller Spring, tests of soil in the area should be completed to determine if there would be a problem with water run-off. Gray also felt that selecting Prospect Road as a secondary road would be a much better solution all around and that it would not turn into a busy road. Mr. Herbst stated that in regards to parking, there should be ample space in the parking garage. Mr. Herbst introduced Dwight Jelle to discuss water infiltration. Mr. Jelle stated that Ryland has put in 4 storm water treatment systems into the area. He illustrated where these would be located on the overhead projector. He said that portions of Prospect Road would go into the NURF pond, and then into the creek. He said that the first 3/a" of rain water will go into infiltration. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 6 Kirk asked if there would be any traffic issues with the old Highway 212 and the new Highway 212. Gray stated there would be no significant impact. Koenig stated that she feels the project proponent is getting a better trade off than the City in regards to open area. Fox stated that the developer asked if we would like the old clubhouse facility and the City felt it could be a building that the City might utilize as an art center. Seymour asked how old the building is and would it be a significant amount of expenditure that would go into renovation. Fox stated it would be minimal. Stoelting asked Franzen if this proposal consists of 2 guide plan changes. Franzen confirmed that it does. He said the Commission members should ask themselves. First if changing from a 180 to 96 unit plan for more conventional single family housing is acceptable, then ask if the site plan is acceptable. Koenig suggested that a broader look into the area may have to be taken. Stoltz stated that he is concerned with the lots on Lot C. Stoelting said that he received an e-mail from Jerry Petzrick and one of his concerns was the land swap of open space. Mr. Jelle stated that their company have some visual studies into this project and the newly built houses are very well protected with the use of retaining walls and water drainage systems. After some discussion with the Planning Commission Members, Stoelting came to the conclusion that most of the Commission Members were not comfortable with the guide plan and PUD changes. Franzen suggested that more time should be given in making a decision on this proposal. Stoelting asked Mr. Herbst if he would be willing for a continuance. Mr. Herbst stated that he would be willing to come back on August 14, 2006. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to continue request to the August 14, 2006 meeting and to revise the development plans according to the staff report and other requirements as identified by the Commission; including guide plan issues relating to swap of property, more information on Prospect Road and Highway 212 and how it would impact development information from the City as to use of swapped property. Motion carried 6-0. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 7 E. WILLIAM SMALL PROPERTY by Pemtom Land Company. Request for: Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.01 acres; Preliminary Plat of 5.01 acres into 9 lots and road right-of-way. Dan Herbst presented the proposal. He stated that the original plan for Hennepin Village that was approved in 2001 was a 249 acre mixed land use project. There were four phases in the master plan. Phases A, C, and D have been approved for rezoning and subdivision and that building permits have been issued for these sites. He pointed out that Site B has a concept approval for approximately 180 units, a mix of small lot single family and townhouses. The proposed change would be from 180 single family and townhouse units to 93 single family units. The proposed net density is 5.18 unites per acre. He pointed out that waivers from the City code are for lot size, lot dimensions and setbacks. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that this project conforms to all the standards and Staff recommends approval. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Travis Wutke, an Eden Prairie resident who resides on Flying Cloud Drive, stated that the issue regarding the street is with connectivity. Mr. Wutke illustrated this by using the overhead projector. He stated that the residents in that area do not want to impact Beverly Drive with additional traffic. He pointed out on the diagram that Street A should be eliminated to the south of where it connects with Street B. Mr. Wutke pointed out that this would also create larger lots in the area. Robyn Smith, who resides on 9765 Sky Lane, stated that he, along with other residents in the area, are concerned with the development along Prospect Road and thought Prospect Road was a better solution than improving Eden Prairie Road at 212. Stoelting asked Gray to address the issues of Street A and assessments to the area. Gray stated that without Street A extended, it would have to be redesigned and would require a variance, because it would not meet City Code. Gray addressed the issue of assessments and stated that for the current plan it would be approximately $9500; to connect Eden Prairie Road with Highway 212, it would be a substantial assessment. Stoelting stated that the road needs to be addressed in more detail to substantiate this variance request and suggested this request be continued. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Seymour, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. Planning Commission Minutes July 10, 2006 Page 8 MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Seymour, to continue request to the August 14, 2006 meeting and to revise the development plans according to the staff report and other requirements as identified by the Commission; including a resolution of the Prospect Road issue and the impact on sewer connection to the property and to address the issue of road assessments for Eden Prairie road and its connection or non-connection to Highway 212. Motion carried 6-0. VII. MEMBERS' REPORTS IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS A. 2008 GUIDE PLAN PRESENTATION BY SRF CONSULTING GROUP Julie Wischnack, of SRF Consulting Group gave a short presentation of the 2008 Guide Plan. She stated that the plan is projected to be completed in September of 2007. They will make presentations to the Planning Committee throughout that time and the first presentation will address the issue of housing. XI. PLANNERS' REPORTS Franzen stated that there will be two variances for the July 24 meeting. One will be for a rezoning for office and the other will be a guide plan update. XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Stoltz, seconded by Seymour, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m.