Loading...
Planning Commission - 06/08/2009 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,JUNE 8, 2009 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Katie Lechelt, Jacob Lee, Alexander Martin, Jerry Pitzrick, Peter Rocheford, Kevin Schultz, Jon Stoltz, Travis Wuttke STAFF MEMBERS: Scott Kipp, Senior Planner Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Pitzrick and Rocheford were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Schultz, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. III. MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 11, 2009 MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Wuttke, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Lechelt and Stoltz abstained. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Variance 2009-01 Request to: • Permit a rear yard deck setback of 14'. City Code requires a 20' setback. Location: 15194 Woodhill Trail Nanette Missaghi,homeowner,presented the proposal. She stated they have an irregular lot and that is the reason for the variance request. The house was built in EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 2 1997. The new deck would hide the retaining wall. She pointed out the neighbors are in favor of the request. Stoltz asked if she had photos of the proposed project. Ms. Missaghi illustrated photos of the proposed deck utilizing the overhead projector. She reiterated the extension of the proposed deck would hide the unsightly retaining wall. Stoltz asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated they looked at hardship, unique circumstances and neighborhood character. The unique circumstances were in place before the homeowners purchased the home. This proposal would not alter the character of the neighborhood because there are other homes with decks similar to this one, and the fact that it is not encroaching a significant amount into the setback area. If the project is approved there are findings on page 2 of the staff report the Commission should consider. Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Schultz asked the project proponent if other neighbors in the area were notified. Ms. Missaghi said they have not talked to the neighbors to the right,but will do so. Lechelt asked the project proponent if the only reason she was extending the deck was to hide the retaining wall. Ms. Missaghi said they wanted to cover it up but to also extend the area of their backyard. Lechelt asked Ms. Missaghi to illustrate how much of the deck would be going into the setback area. Ms. Missaghi used the overhead projector to show how much of the deck would be going into the setback area. Lechelt asked if she considered other designs. Ms. Missaghi said one option would be to rip out the retaining wall but it would be very expensive. The other option would be to leave it as is. Lechelt said she has a hard time approving this request without seeing more photos. Schultz asked Kipp if there would be any other alternatives. Kipp stated the most outside corner on the deck could be cut back so as not to extend farther than the retaining wall, thus minimizing the variance. Kirk said he does not have a problem with this variance. Schultz concurred with Kirk. Lechelt does not see enough of a hardship to grant this request. She pointed out the deck is 100 sq ft more than the largest deck in the neighborhood, and does not believe it fits into the character of the neighborhood. Lee concurred with Lechelt. Martin would like to see a more detailed plan of the deck,but would still approve this project. MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Martin, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 3 MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Kirk, to recommend approval of the variance to permit a rear yard deck setback of 14',based on plans stamped dated May 1, 2009 and the staff report dated June 5, 2009 and based on the following findings. • 32 square feet of the deck addition or 16% encroaches into the setback. • The average deck setback is 19.67 feet. • The property has an unusual shape. • The rear lot line is not parallel to the front lot line. • There are other decks of a similar size in the area. • The lot abuts an open space lot of approximately 1 acre. Motion carried 5-2. B. T-MOBILE CELLULAR TOWER—EP HIGH SCHOOL Request for: • Site Plan Re4view on 67.33 acres. Location: 17185 Valley View Road Stoltz asked Kipp why the Commission is reviewing this again. Kipp said on April 27, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project. It was discovered after this meeting and after the City Council mailing notices were sent out, that the Planning Commission public hearing notices were not mailed to the residents. Due to this error we are reviewing this request again. Wade Hanson, representing T-Mobile, presented the proposal. He said they are here tonight to propose the 120 foot tower that had been previously recommended for approval. Lee asked the project proponent if they considered raising the 70 foot light poles in the area to 90 feet. Mr. Hanson said they did consider it but it would not meet their goals. He also said the school wants them to have this pole raised to 120 feet. Schultz asked Mr. Hanson about the placement of the antenna, and did they look at relocating it to the southwest side of the school. Mr. Hanson said they did consider it but the school did not want a new pole erected but rather a modification of the pole in the area. Schultz asked Kipp if he was familiar with recommendations of construction of the pole on the southwest side. Kipp said it had been addressed. He said he had not spoken with the School District. Since the School District owns the property, ultimately they decide where they think it should be located. The City has jurisdiction in approving the project. Stoltz asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated staff recommends option one on page 2 of the staff report. Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Lee asked Mr. Hanson if other service providers could be leased on the pole. Mr. Hanson said yes, it could be an option. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 4 MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Schultz, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Schultz, to recommend approval of the Site Plan Review on 67.3 acres,based on plans stamped dated April 17, 2009 and the staff report dated April 24, 2009. Motion carried 7-0. Kirk left the meeting. C. AT&T CELLULAR TOWER— OLYMPIC HILLS Request for: • Site Plan Review on 23.44 acres Location: 12100 Pioneer Trail James Ries and Peter Campbell, representing AT& T, presented the proposal. They said they would like to put this tower up on the northwest corner of the parking lot that is at the rear of the church. It would be a 100 foot stealth tower. Stoltz asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp said there are two staff recommendations on page 3 and 4 of the staff report. Option 1 is for approval. Option 2 is a recommendation of continuance to the June 22, 2009 meeting with direction to revise the plans as follows. A. Relocate the monopole and mechanical equipment building to the northwest side of the church building. B. The exterior elevations for the mechanical equipment building shall be in face brick to match the church building. Staff recommends Option 2. Mr. Ries stated they could put up brick fagade to match the church. He pointed out if the site was moved 80 to 100 feet east, there are too many power lines in that area and it would not be advisable to put the tower next to them. He stated they have been working with Pax Christi to come up with this current plan and are all in agreement. Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. Terry Nerhus, of 9495 Homeward Hills Road, stated he is located east of the pole and would not be in favor of this project and believes it would decrease the value of his home. Matt Kleffner, of 9559 Woodridge Circle, stated he lives to the west side of the project and said he has health concerns in regards to this project. He also said the visual impact would be very obvious. He felt the tower could be placed in the dumpster area of the property. He submitted a letter to the Commission. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 5 Ken Reineccius, of 12100 Pioneer Trail, is the Director of Operations at Pax Christi. He utilized the overhead projector to show the proposed site of the project. He showed where the church would like to build a playground on site and stated the project is currently on hold due to the economy but in the future they would like this area to be used for the playground. They do not want to move the tower because currently it would be out of range of the proposed playground and basketball area. Kipp stated they would like them to move the tower back a portion as to have the building screen it. Lee asked with this stealth pole if other providers could co-locate on it. Mr. Campbell stated one other service provider could co-locate on the tower. Alexander asked if the pole could be lowered and not have the option of co- locate. Mr. Campbell said Code requires them to be able to have another carrier co-locate on the pole. Alexander asked if this was cost effective to have another carrier co-locate on the pole. Mr. Campbell stated it was cost effective. He also stated the community as a whole would benefit from this tower because it would increase the coverage area. Mr. Kleffner asked, regarding other alternatives, if there were other poles in the area, such as the one by Allied Waste, or light poles, that could be turned into a tower. He stated Option 2 seemed to be the best option for this project. Stoltz asked Mr. Reineccius if Pax Christi was against moving the tower on their property. Mr. Reineccius said it would sour them because they wanted to keep that area for the day care center. Mr. Nerhus stated the neighbors would like to see the tower moved. Pax Christi is getting the revenue but the neighbors have to look at it. Schultz asked if the project proponent spoke with airport authorities and asked why they did not select the area by Allied Waste. Mr. Ries said that would be moving away from the coverage area. Schultz said if there has not been any dialog with MAC, than he has a problem with approving this project. Lee asked the project proponent what level of communication they had with Xcel Energy. Mr. Ries said his conversation with Xcel was limited,but safety was Xcel's main concern and denied our request to locate on their power line. Schultz said he would like the parish at Pax Christi to come back with a compromise and to recommend that AT&T have more dialog with MAC to see if something can be put up in that area. Mr. Campbell asked if they were to move the tower would the Commission approve the request. Stoltz said the Commission would be more agreeable if the following were met; conversation with MAC about relocating, discussing with City Staff about building materials, and talking with neighbors in the area and to come back to the June 22 Planning EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 6 Commission Meeting with the results. Kipp said in order for them to come back to the June 22 meeting, they would have to have everything completed and turned in by June 17th or 18th. Mr. Campbell suggested a Planning Commission Meeting in July, so as not to rush this. MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Wuttke, to recommend a continuance to the first meeting in July for the proponent to have further dialogue with Metropolitan Airports Commission regarding existing pole facilities, specifically at 9813 Flying Cloud Drive. Also, to have further communication with the Pax Christi Church Council or representatives for further compromise, and to meet with local residents that attended this public meeting to further compromise with and between the proponent, Church, and immediate residents in the area, and the project proponent have dialog with Hennepin County as it relates to the reconstruction of Pioneer Trail and seek recommendation through Hennepin County if there are any possibilities to co-exist with any future pole or tower structures the County may have. Motion carried 6-0. D. Wetland Protection Code Amendment This is a code amendment for Sections A and B of City Code Section 11.51, Subdivision 11, entitled "Special Requirements for Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Services" addressing the need for an applicant to complete and provide to the City an application for any wetland delineation, wetland determination, or no- loss determination. This will be an easy way to determine if all the various requirements are met before schedu7ling a review of the report. Some additional editorial changes are also proposed. Kipp stated this is basically an administrative change to the code and would help Staff and consultants to know what type of information needs to be submitted for a particular action or request. Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Wuttke asked if there was any substantive change in the ordinance. Kipp stated there was not. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Schultz, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Schultz, to accept the staff recommendations to the Wetland Protection Code. Motion carried 6-0. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT Kip stated there will be one public hearing on a proposed variance request for the June 22' meeting. EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 8, 2009 Page 7 VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Schultz, seconded by Wuttke, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:02 p.m.