Loading...
Planning Commission - 04/14/2008 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 14, 2008 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Cadman, John Kirk, Katie Lechelt, Jerry Pitzrick, Peter Rocheford, Kevin Schultz, Fred Seymour, Ray Stoelting, Jon Stoltz, STAFF MEMBERS: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Scott Kipp, Senior Planner Regina Herron, Planner II Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Vice Chair Kirk called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent: Stoltz. Rocheford arrived during Variance Request#2008-03. II. SWEARING IN NEW MEMBER—ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE Kipp conducted the swearing in of Commission Members Cadman and Lechelt. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Seymour, seconded by Schultz, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. IV. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 24, 2008 MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Seymour, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Cadman and Lechelt abstained. V. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC MEETINGS EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 2 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE#2008-02 Request for: Rear yard setback variance from 20 feet to 17 feet to reconstruct a deck. Thomas Cartier presented the proposal. He stated they purchased the property three years ago but he and his family have not moved in yet. Shortly after purchasing the home they noticed a water intrusion problem with the home, especially with the deck. He pointed out by putting up a new deck they will lessen the encroachment into the setback area. The new deck is 253 square feet, of which 37 square feet is within the setback area. The original deck had approximately 65 square feet in the setback area. The new deck would consist of stone and wood construction. He stated they did seek alternative placements for the deck but due to the unusual shape of the lot, this was the only alternative. Kirk asked Herron to review the staff report. Herron stated there are four options on page 2 of the staff report the Commission Members should consider. Kirk asked Mr. Cartier to identify his hardship with this project. Mr. Cartier stated the new deck would be much smaller and attractive than the original deck. If it were moved elsewhere on the property, trees would have to be removed. Kirk opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Pitzrick wanted to clarify if there were only two support posts on the deck. Mr. Cartier stated that was correct; there would only be two support posts on the deck. Lechelt asked if turf would be placed below the deck. Mr. Cartier said they were going to use wetland plants underneath the deck. MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Stoelting, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Stoelting, to recommend approval of a rear yard setback variance from 20 feet to 17 feet to reconstruct an existing deck based on plans stamped dated March 28, 2008, with the following findings: The proposed deck is setback 17 feet from the property line as compared to the original deck which was 15 feet from the lot line. The proposed deck is 37 square feet in the rear yard setback. The original deck was 65 square feet into the rear yard setback. The original deck setback encroachment was not created by the current owner. An alternative deck location may require tree removal. Motion carried 7-0. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 3 B. VARIANCE#2008-03 Request for: Fence height variance from 6 feet to 12 feet for a chain link fence to enclose ground mounted mechanical equipment. Dave Schneider, of Concur Technology, presented the proposal. He stated currently there is a 6 foot fence around the mechanical equipment and what they would like to do is place a 12 foot fence around it to protect the air conditioning units from vandalism and deer. Mr. Schneider pointed out there are many deer in the area who could jump the existing fence. He stated it would be catastrophic to their business if the air conditioner units were to shut down due to damage or vandalism. Mr. Schneider utilized the overhead projector to illustrate the current fence. He pointed out the fence can really only be viewed from the north side of the property. The majority of the fence is blocked by trees. The proposed fence would be meshed covered. Kirk asked Herron to review the staff report. Herron stated there are four actions on page 2 of the staff report that Commission Members should consider. Kirk opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Stoelting asked Herron why the City has a 6 foot fence code. Herron said this is a standard height requirement within the neighboring cities. Since, 1969, there have only been a few requests for taller fences. Stoelting asked if any of these requests were granted for security reasons. Herron stated there have not been any requests granted for security reasons. Kipp concurred with Herron and also added there has not been any type of vandalism in the area. He said the Commission Members should consider if by granting this variance, would it set precedence for the future. Stoelting asked the project proponent if they would be using barbed- wire on the proposed fence. Mr. Schneider said they would be using barbed-wire, because it would deter anyone from jumping over the fence. Cadman asked Herron if the 6 foot limitation on the fence was due to residential factors. Herron stated it was not due to residential factors. Cadman asked if there could be two standards; one for residential and one for industrial. Herron stated this has never been an issue in the past because they have had such few requests, but the City could look into it. Pitzrick asked if there was a security wall built around the mechanical equipment, would it require a variance request. Herron said they would have to get a building permit and it could be considered an option. Lechelt asked Mr. Schneider if the request was not approved, would the barbed- wire still be placed on the fence. Mr. Schneider said it would still be placed on the fence. Some of the cyclone fence would be taken down to accommodate the EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 4 barded-wire. Lechelt asked Herron if there was anything in the City Ordinance stating the use of barbed-wire. Herron said there is nothing in the City Code that says barbed-wire cannot be used. Pitzrick asked if there are any industry wide standards set up for security for this equipment. Mr. Schneider said there is not,but they felt the 12 foot fence would make it more secure. Stoelting asked Mr. Schneider how high the fence line was around military or government structures. Mr. Schneider said he did not know. Cadman asked if the project proponent's hardship was vandalism and deer jumping over the fence. Mr. Schneider said his hardship was vandalism and deer jumping over the fence. Cadman asked if these hardships were unique for this property. Mr. Schneider stated he was unsure if it was unique to the property and stated they are only trying to protect their property. Seymour asked if the security video was monitored 24 hours a day. Mr. Schneider stated it was monitored 24 hours a day. Seymour pointed out someone would know right away if the property was being vandalized. Mr. Schneider concurred that was correct. Seymour asked if the equipment is also monitored; such as, if there was a system failure. Mr. Schneider stated it was monitored. Schultz said he does concur with Mr. Schneider in that it would be catastrophic if something were to happen to the equipment on this property. He also would like Staff to work on having a different fence ordinance for residential and industrial areas. Pitzrick said he is moving towards denial of this project. Stoelting said he would like the fence to be somewhere in between 6 to 12 feet. Stoelting asked Mr. Schneider if he would be willing to lower the fence. Mr. Schneider said the posts are already set for a 12 foot fence. Stoelting asked Staff what would happen to the variance if the business were to move out. Herron stated the variance is usually associated with the land but could be tied to the business. Kirk asked the Commission Members to make comments on this request. Rocheford said he is familiar with high fences protecting air conditioning units. He said this fence is designed to protect the equipment and granting this request would not set precedence. Pitzrick believes no hardship has been proven. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 5 Schultz said he would approve the variance request. Lechelt said different options should be looked at. She stated it would not matter if the fence was 6 feet or 12 feet high, if vandals were to get in, they would. She asked the project proponent if he had talked with his neighbors in regards to this variance request. Mr. Schneider said he had just talked to the neighbor on the north side, where the fence would be visible, and they were okay with it. Kirk asked if proper notification was sent out. Herron confirmed it was. Seymour said he is not in favor of approval because he believes the system is monitored completely. Cadman stated he is not in favor and asked if other options were considered; such as putting a cover over the fence. Stoelting stated he understands the concerns of the project proponent,but does not feel the need for a 12 foot fence. He would like to see a fence between 6 feet and 12 feet. Mr. Schneider asked if that would be an option to lower the fence. Kipp said that would be an option to discuss it now or come back to the next meeting with a different plan. Kirk suggested a continuance to allow time for the project proponent to discuss this project with Staff. Herron concurred with Kirk. Stoelting asked Commission Members if they would be in favor of a middle ground. Kirk asked Commission Members what they felt would be the middle ground. Cadman said he would have to listen to the proposal. Seymour feels they have other options and would not approve variance request. Lechelt said she would be in favor of a 6 foot fence. Schultz said he would be open to compromise. Pitzrick asked the proponent if this was not approved tonight, would he just cut down the fence to 5 feet and put up 1 foot of barbed-wire fence. Mr. Schneider concurred that is what he would do. Pitzrick suggested keeping the fence at 6 feet and just adding 1 foot of barbed-wire to it. Rocheford said he would be up for compromise but believes a 6 foot fence is not high enough. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 6 Kirk said he would be willing to compromise and believes they need a fence higher than 6 feet. He said there are three alternatives to consider. The first one being denial of the request. The second alternative would be a compromise; which could be to keep the fence at 6 feet and add 1 foot of barbed-wire to the fence. The third one would be a continuance. It appears there is opposition to compromise from Commission Members, which would lead to only two alternatives. Those alternatives would be a denial, or a 6 foot fence,plus 1 foot of barbed-wire. Stoelting asked Mr. Schneider how he would feel about a 6 foot fence with barbed-wire on top. Mr. Schneider asked if the Commission would be willing to go to an 8 foot fence. Stoelting suggested he would have to make a continuance and come back to present an 8 foot proposal to the Commission. Kirk said he felt the Commission Members would be in favor of a compromise between a 6 and 12 foot height. Stoelting asked the project proponent if he was ready for a vote from the Commission. He stated he was. Rocheford asked if they would need a variance to put 1 foot of barbed-wire of fence on top of the current fence. Kipp said they would need a variance to put up the additional foot of fence. MOTION by Pitzrick, seconded by Seymour, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. MOTION by Pitzrick, seconded by Stoelting, to recommend approval of a variance for a fence height from 6 feet to 7 feet for a chain link fence to enclose ground mounted mechanical equipment based on plans stamped dated March 13, 2008, with the following findings: The fence would not be visible from adjacent land uses or public roads. The fence is required for security reasons. There was some discussion as to what the 7 foot fence would include. The Commission Members concluded the 7 foot fence would include 6 feet of chain link fence with 1 foot of barbed-wire on to. Motion carried 7-1. C. KONA GRILL Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 4.44 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.44 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service District on 4.44 acres; Site Plan Review on 4.44 acres. Adam Meyer, architect representing Kona Grill, presented the proposal. He utilized the overhead projector to show the location of the restaurant. He pointed out Kona Grill is a chain of restaurants based out of Arizona. This will be the first one of its kind in Minnesota and will include a dining and bar area. He pointed out they will not be altering anything from the footprint of the design. The only EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 7 change would be the enclosure of the patio. This would increase the square footage of the restaurant. The front yard setback would change from 35 feet to 24 feet. He stated Windsor Plaza would be building the retaining wall. He pointed out the entrance to the restaurant is adjacent to the patio; which would be convenient to the customers. Kirk asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp said the Staff recommendation is for approval, based on recommendations in the staff report, including a PUD waiver for frontyard setback from 35 feet to 24 feet and floor area ratio from .69 to .70. Kirk stated there is no change to the original footprint of the project, only that this variance request it just to accommodate the patio. Kipp concurred that was correct. Kirk opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Stoelting asked Mr. Meyer where the sidewalk would be located. Mr. Meyer utilized the overhead projector to show where the sidewalk would be located. Stoelting asked how high the retaining wall would be. Mr. Meyer said it would be approximately 12 to 14 feet high. MOTION by Pitzrick, seconded by Rocheford, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. MOTION by Pitzrick, seconded by Schultz, to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.44 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.44 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service District on 4.44 acres; and Site Plan Review on 4.44 acres; based on plans stamped dated March 26, 2008, and the staff report dated April 21, 2008. Motion carried 8-0. VIII. PLANNERS' REPORT Kipp stated the next meeting will be May 12, 2008. The Boards and Commissions Banquet will be held on April 28, 2008. IX. MEMBERS' REPORT X. CONTINUING BUSINESS XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2008 Page 8 MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Stoelting, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 8-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:32 p.m.