Loading...
Planning Commission - 08/23/2010 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,AUGUST 23, 2010 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Jon Stoltz (Chair), Kevin Schultz (Vice Chair), John Kirk, Katie Lechelt, Jacob Lee, Jerry Pitzrick, Travis Wuttke STAFF: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Michael Franzen, City Planner Rod Rue, City Engineer Heidi Wojahn, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Commissioners Pitzrick and Schultz were excused from this evening's meeting. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. III. MINUTES Kirk proposed changing the following typo in the July 26, 2010 minutes: p. 5, fourth paragraph, fourth line— change "Stoltz" to "Schultz" explaining Stoltz was not in attendance at the last meeting. MOTION: Lechelt moved, seconded by Lee, to approve the amended minutes. Motion carried 3-0-2 with Kirk and Stoltz abstaining. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE#2010-05 by Randy's Bobby & Steve's Auto World (a continued item) Location: 8100 Flying Cloud Drive (a continued public hearing) PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 2 Request: Variance Request#1 — To permit a dynamic display area of 34.5 square feet for proposed Sign#1 V6. City Code permits 35% of 80 square feet or 28 square feet. Variance Request#2—To permit a dynamic display area of 15.6 square feet for proposed Sign#2 V2. City Code permits 35% of 36 square feet or 12.6 square feet. Variance Request#3— To permit the distance between two free-standing signs (proposed Sign#1 V6 and proposed Sign#2 V2) at 245 feet. City Code requires 300 feet. Variance Request#4— To permit proposed Pylon Sign#1 V6 with a setback of 10 feet' from the property line. City Code requires 20 feet. Variance Request#5— To permit proposed Pylon Sign#2 V2 with a setback of 2 feet from the property line. City Code requires 15 feet when parking occurs within the required front yard setback. Variance Request#6— To permit proposed Pylon Sign#2 V2 at 80 square feet with dynamic display of 34.5 square feet and sign setback of 2 feet. City Code permits the second free-standing sign at 36 square feet, a dynamic display area of 12.6 square feet and a sign setback requirement of 15 feet. Stoltz read a letter dated August 19, 2010 from Jim Hoeft on behalf of Steve Williams requesting a continuance on this variance request. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Lechelt, to recommend a continuance to the September 13, 2010 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. B. VARIANCE#2010-06 by Bahman Razmpour Location: Eden View Estates, Lot 1, Corner of Dell and Turnbull Road Request: • To permit a porch 6 feet from the front yard lot line of Dell Road. City Code requires 50 feet in the Rural Zoning District. • To permit a house 21 feet from the front yard lot line of Dell Road. City Code requires 50 feet in the Rural Zoning District. • To permit a garage 35.3 feet from the front yard lot line of Turnbull Road. City Code requires 50 feet in the Rural Zoning District. • To permit a main structure height of 52 feet. City Code requires 40 feet from the lowest grade point to the midpoint of the corresponding roof. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 3 Stoltz read a letter from the applicant requesting a continuance on this variance request and asked Franzen if he and other City staff were okay with the December 8, 2010 extension and review period date mentioned within. Franzen replied affirmatively and stated notices were sent informing residents of the continuance to save them a trip to tonight's meeting. MOTION: Lechelt moved, seconded by Lee, to recommend a continuance to the September 13, 2010 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. C. NINE MILE CREEK WATER RESOURCE CENTER (2010-05) by Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Location 12800 Gerard Drive, 12776, 12782 and 12784 Gordon Drive. Request for: • Code Amendment to add Governmental Office as a permitted use in the Public Zoning District. • Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Parks/Open Space on 4.24 acres. • Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Public/Quasi Public on 1.1 acres • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.32 acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review on 5.32 acres. • Zoning District Change from R1-22 to Public on 5.32 acres. • Site Plan Review on 5.32 acres • Preliminary Plat of 5.32 acres into one lot Kevin Bigalke, District Administrator for the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (District),briefly reviewed the plan for tonight's proposal. He introduced District representatives in attendance, explained engineering and legal advisors were on hand to field questions, and turned the microphone over to property owner, Barbara Kaerwer, for opening comments. Kaerwer gave background on how her husband's career in the agriculture industry brought them to Eden Prairie in 1949. She values her responsibilities as a citizen and as a steward of the land and feels the District will be a wonderful ally in helping residents access and respect her land for years to come. Donating her land and home to the District would be useful to the community so everyone can take educational and recreational advantage of beautiful space in an area of Eden Prairie otherwise lacking in parkland. The home itself would become a modest two-person office and an indoor/outdoor library for people to learn about conservation, soil erosion, and land/water pollutants. A specialist would be on hand to educate visitors. Her wish is interpretive signage be put in place near the trail explaining how her particular land has been and will be protected from erosion. She extended an invitation to the commissioners to visit her property and home to see how this unique opportunity can develop into a perfect City-District relationship. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 4 Bigalke presented the proposal for the Nine Mile Creek Water Resource Center which would primarily serve residents of Eden Prairie and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed (covers 50 square miles in the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Richfield). He gave a background of the District mentioning over$2.5 million worth of completed water resource projects in Eden Prairie on which the District and City worked closely. He reviewed the history of the proposal made possible by Kaerwer's donation which is contingent on approval of the proposal by the City. He stressed the importance of wanting to be compatible with the neighborhood and the adjacent Cardinal Creek Conservation area. He then presented the Land Development Application which includes a number of requests needed in order to make this a compatible use. The area in the third request consists of the building, driveway, and parking area. Requests four and five are in place to continue use of existing building materials and architectural features of the home as well as use green materials for the parking surfaces to meet stringent District standards of water quality and retention. The proposed site plan includes two additions to the home, one to the north (approximately 25 x 30 feet) to be used as a meeting/conference facility, and a small addition to the west(bumping out the existing wing about 10 feet) which would serve as additional workspace for staff. They are minimally intrusive and blend in well with the lay of the land. The existing driveway is all gravel and would be resurfaced either completely in permeable asphalt or part conventional asphalt,part porous asphalt or pavers. The ten stall overflow parking area would be grass paver system made up of a geotextile plastic grid system set on a base of granular material and crushed rock so grass can take root. It can sustain the weight of emergency vehicles and is cold-climate hearty. The preliminary plat calls for the consolidation of six separate parcels under Kaerwer's ownership into one contiguous lot which is how it is currently managed. The property is underneath a conservation easement with the Minnesota Land Trust and would continue that way under ownership/management of the District. Of the 850+ significant trees on the property, approximately eleven would be impacted (151 caliper inches). Eight inches of tree would be replaced by planting three red oaks in an area where buckthorn removal has occurred. Two traffic studies have been completed. The impact analysis based on square footage (34-44 daily trips) may not be relevant because numbers are based on businesses with substantially larger buildings and far more employees. The analysis based on number of employees is more realistic at 7-10 daily trips, in line with the average for a single-family home. The District hosts two standing monthly meetings with about 10-15 attendees each. Any public hearings or other larger meetings with more than 15-20 anticipated attendees would be held in an alternate location. There may be 1-2 additional education events per month open to the public. School groups may express interest in utilizing the property—it is expected these will primarily be from Eden Prairie schools. Should schools outside Eden Prairie show interest, the District would generally go to them PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 5 because it is District philosophy to have students experience water resources in their own communities. There would only be 1-2 buses at a time on the property because there isn't sufficient staffing to allow for any more than that. After making a few summarizing comments, Bigalke turned the microphone over to Kaerwer's representative, Tom Casey of 2854 Cambridge Lane in Mound, for closing remarks. Casey said he's worked with Kaerwer since five years prior to the start of the donation process when the conservation easement came into play. Kaerwer donated money so property preservation will be enforced perpetually by a third party. The easement serves as a legal restriction guiding the property forever while adding another layer of protection in terms of the impact to the neighborhood and on the land itself. Kaerwer wants very much to work with the neighbors and resolve any issues so it can be a win-win situation. She understands there is a planning process involved that needs to be worked through and wants to alleviate any concerns the City may have. Franzen presented the staff report on the project. In terms of the legal status of the property as it exists today, there are three sets of restrictions: the Comprehensive Guide Plan and R1-22 Zoning (both public), and the private Conservation Easement. The combination of these restrictions essentially means the property can only be used for a single family home with some potential expansion and conservation of the land. His research concluded the extinguishment of a conservation easement is rare and only allowable via judicial proceedings. The easement can be amended but because it is private, it does not require consent of neighbors or the City. If the easement was extinguished the worst scenario is a building permit could be pulled and houses built on the three remaining lots on the property, or the entire parcel could be subdivided adding 6-8 houses and a cul- de-sac which is consistent with the neighborhood zoning pattern and Guide Plan. The combination of rezoning the property to Public and the conservation easement allows only the District office, the Park Plan Administration Center, a similar community center, or some other use related to parks,recreation, and conservation. Staff recommends either of two acceptable alternatives: 1) to approve the request or 2) to deny the request, with a preference for the latter. Alternative#1 is less desirable because it introduces a business element into a residential neighborhood. If the private conservation easement were ever to be extinguished, the property would have rights under the Public Zoning District. These uses could potentially have a greater impact than the proposed use. A way to prohibit this is to require a deed restriction in favor of the City be recorded against the property limiting the use of the property to the District and the current number of employees, meetings, and programs identified in the application. If Council were to approve the request and direct the addition of the deed restriction, it would be included as part of the development agreement. Alternative#2 is preferred because it would be aligned with the basic principle of how the City was planned and zoned with large areas reserved for residential, commercial, and industrial, with uses in these areas compatible, and incompatible areas separated by distance, roads or natural PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 6 barriers. In an industrial area, such as Golden Triangle, the watershed office would be located amongst similar uses and any business growth could be accommodated on site and not impact traffic patterns in the area. Stoltz asked what would happen if the District decides to sell in the future. Franzen said if sold to an entity materially different than the City's deed restriction, the City would have to lift that restriction after going through a public process. Stoltz asked Casey if any language in the legal document states what would happen with the property should the District choose to sell or no longer use the premises (i.e. would the property convert back to Kaerwer at that point). Casey replied once the closing occurs, there are no strings attached by his client. Bigalke addressed some of the points brought up by Franzen. Once the property is conveyed from Kaerwer to the District, the conservation easement cannot go away. Kaerwer is the only one who can remove it. They are amenable to discussing and working with the City on the recommended deed restriction. It is probably fair to compare them more to a park and open space area than an industrial area. Lechelt asked which portion of the property was zoned Parks/Open Space from 2002-2008. Franzen explained the Parks/Open Space was not on the property itself, but rather refers to the Cardinal Creek Conservation area. Lee asked if there had been any middle-ground consideration such as donating the land and keeping the home residential. He also wanted to know if any other land had been donated to the District in the past several years. Casey said no to both questions stating the house is an integral part of the property. Bigalke added the District often acquires conservation easements either through donation or acquisition for some of its projects. They are not a landholder. When the project is complete, the easement will be conveyed over to the City for management. Stoltz opened the meeting to public input. Stan Koehler, of 7131 Topview Road, lives across the street from Kaerwer. He does not think the site plan shows the elevations very well, and his only concern is the grading of the driveway. His bedroom windows are right in line with the driveway and given the current elevation, car headlights coming out of the driveway at night shine right into the windows of his home. In addition he believes it is a hidden driveway explaining it is very difficult to see either east or west on Gerard when exiting the driveway with the grade as is. This presents safety concerns for the City and the District because Gerard is a relatively quick street. He would propose reorienting the driveway to the east with the entrance off the Gordon Drive cul-de-sac. Lulu Mosman, of 15117 Scenic Heights Road, is a graduate of Eden Prairie High School and voiced support for the proposal. In her work as an intern with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as a watercraft inspector, she finds the public to be very curious about and interested in water and other PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 7 environmental issues. This project would be beneficial in providing Eden Prairie with a beautiful natural area while educating the public. Pete Rasmussen, of 13100 Roberts Drive, said he is strongly in favor of the project. He feels it would be an asset for Eden Prairie and the environment, keeping green space within a city that has seen tremendous growth during his residency. He told the Council he hoped they could share Kaerwer's vision. Keith Kapitan, of 12838 Gerard Drive, said he and his wife support everything Kaerwer stands for in terms of preservation and conservation of the land and are in favor of the project. He expects traffic would be greatly increased if homes were built on the land. He studied the plans in great detail and feels the elevations are clearly notated. Ms. Moser, of 7263 Topview Road, stated this is a very generous gift and supports the proposal. When she first moved to the area, it was pristine with a lot of fields. She would like to see this property preserved rather than having more homes developed on it to help hang onto a piece of land reflective of how it was when she first moved here. Stoltz read a letter submitted to the Commission by Gina Dinehard. The letter stated Dinehard was withdrawing her approval of the proposal since she did not realize the home was to be used for the District's headquarters. She cited concerns about the traffic and non-residents coming in and out of the neighborhood. Bigalke stated he had spoken with Mr. Koehler regarding his concerns about the driveway. They are amenable to making adjustments to the driveway to be conducive to the neighborhood and the District's needs. Some options have already been considered but were not included in the presentation because they wanted to solicit feedback prior to making any changes. Solutions include realigning the driveway with Topview Road to avoid the headlight issue and adding vegetative screening to both sides of it. This could also help make it a safer intersection. He then submitted a list of approximately 20 names from neighboring residents in support of the proposal. Wuttke asked Rue if there was a low visual impact possibility of realigning the driveway with Topview and, along with the grade changes of Gerard, if there is an opportunity for a controlled two-way east/west assuming there are concerns for traffic and sightline visibility around the radiuses of those curves. He also asked for clarification on the proposed width of the driveway. Rue responded realignment was considered and initially deemed unnecessary, but that can be revisited given the concerns brought up this evening. Staff recommends the driveway be widened to 25 feet and paved with either pervious or bituminous materials. Bigalke added the initial plan was to have as minimal disturbance to the property as possible. The 25-foot recommendation is debatable,but the driveway can certainly be widened to allow for two-way traffic and to increase safety. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 8 Lee stated he could get behind the project with the recommended deed restriction. He believes having that in place would be in the neighbors' best interest, as well. Lechelt also supported the project citing great support from the residents. In particular, she noted the increase in traffic if converted to single-family homes was a great example. She would like to see safety addressed in the area, perhaps installing a stop sign to help alleviate neighbors' concerns. Kirk also expressed favor for the proposal. He initially had traffic concerns but concurred with Lechelt about the substantial traffic increase additional homes would bring to the neighborhood. He stated the City should do whatever it can to maintain any additional green space. Stoltz asked if City staff agreed with the traffic impact analysis. Franzen said yes. The conclusion was traffic patterns would not necessitate any widening of the roads or adding turn lanes or signals. Basically the only change would be different types of traffic coming in and out of the area at different times of the day. Stoltz said he wasn't sure he would normally give this type of project his full support for reasons of wanting to protect the residents, children, and homes in the neighborhood by keeping it a safe place. After hearing tonight's presentations and comments,however,he believes all of those things will be preserved. He thinks it would be good for the City and expressed appreciation for Kaerwer's willingness to give such a generous donation to the District. Lee asked if the other commissioners supported the deed restriction or if he was the only one. Stoltz and Kirk concurred they both felt it was necessary to have that in place in accordance with alternative#1. Lee inquired if there was a way to put in the restrictive covenant that the City would have right of first refusal should the District want to sell the land. Franzen replied yes. Bigalke suggested it would generate scrutiny if one public entity tried to sell to another public entity. If the District were to sell, they would look for someone who would be interested in caring for the property similar to how the District plans to and how Kaerwer has done it. It would not be a profit-making venture for the District. Stoltz suggested perhaps Casey include that in the final letters of recommendation. There were some questions from Bigalke, Wuttke, and Kirk concerning the language of the deed restriction and how it would be reflected in the motion. Franzen explained the concept of the deed restriction is what's being considered. If Council approves the project with a deed restriction, staff will be directed to draft a development agreement. The staff prepares the document and then it is sent to the watershed for signatures. After it is signed and executed then it will be included in City Council packets for final approval. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Wuttke, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Wuttke, to recommend approval of the Code Amendment to add Governmental Office as a permitted use in the Public Zoning District, Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 9 Residential to Parks/Open Space on 4.24 acres, Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Public/Quasi Public on 1.1 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.32 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 5.32 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to Public on 5.32 acres, Site Plan Review on 5.32 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5.32 acres into one lot,based on plans stamped dated August 19, 2010 and the staff report dated August 20, 2010. Motion carried 5-0. Stoltz offered congratulations to Kaerwer calling it a big win for the City and the District. D. CODE AMENDMENT —PAVEMENT MATERIALS Franzen reported the Conservation Commission concluded discussion on pavement materials and voted 5-0 to change the draft code amendment to include the words "to dispose of or infiltrate all area surface water." Staff recommends approval of the code amendment. The proposed code language would replace the current code in its entirety and reads as follows: "Parking areas, loading areas, and driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, natural stone or other types of concrete stone and pavers and graded to dispose of or infiltrate all area surface water without damage to private or public properties, streets, or alleys." Wuttke inquired if the proposed code language would allow any existing non- pervious pavement to be replaced by pervious pavement systems. Franzen said yes, this gives property owners other options besides concrete or bituminous materials. Wuttke asked if there was anything in the grading guidelines or fill and infiltration permits specifying contractors be certified. Franzen responded no, it is up to property owners to hire knowledgeable contractors. Lechelt suggested adding language along the lines of"to current industry standards" or"to ATSI standards" to ensure proper drainage. Franzen said the most efficient way to address that is to make available a how-to handout listing current specifications. Since those are likely to change over time, it is easier to update the handout rather than amending the code. MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Wuttke moved, seconded by Kirk, to recommend approval of the code amendment for pavement materials. Motion carried 5-0. VII. PLANNER'S REPORT No report PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2010 Page 10 VIII. MEMBERS' REPORTS Stoltz congratulated Franzen, City staff, and the commissioners on their efforts in helping Eden Prairie be named "Best Small City in the Nation", a two-year recognition by Money Magazine. IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS None X. NEW BUSINESS None XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Lee moved, seconded by Lechelt, to adjourn. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Stoltz adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.