Planning Commission - 02/10/2014 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, FEBRURAY 10, 2014 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Jon Stoltz, Katie Lechelt, Travis
Wuttke, Steven Frank, Ann Higgins, Mary Egan
STAFF MEMBERS: Mike Franzen, City Planner
Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
Rod Rue, City Engineer
Julie Krull, Recording Secretary
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Egan and Higgins were absent.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION by Lechelt, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0.
III. MINUTES
A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 27, 2013
MOTION by Frank, seconded by Wuttke, to approve the minutes. Motion
carried 4-0. Kirk abstained.
IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS
V. PUBLIC MEETINGS
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VARIANCE#2013-11 by Olympic Hills Golf Club
Location: 10625 Mount Curve Road, Eden Prairie, MN
Contact: Jake Schmitz (952-941-6139)
Request for:
February 10, 2014
Page 2
• To permit an Accessory Structure (range poles and netting) a height of 80'.
City Code permits a maximum height of 30' in the Golf Course District—
Table 5-Section 11.03, Subd. 2, B. l l-lle
Jake Schmitz, Superintendent of Olympic Hills Golf Club, presented the
proposal that included poles and netting for the driving range. Mr. Schmitz
pointed out because of the technology of golf clubs the players have been hitting
golf balls further than ever before. There are two houses on the south side and
they would like to protect the homes and property. Different locations were
looked at for the driving range but this was the best one because they are limited
by land and course design.
Chair Stoltz asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen said this request
meets the three part test for reasonable use, unique circumstances, and
neighborhood character. Staff recommendation is to approve Final Order
#2013-11.
Kirk asked Franzen to address homeowner notification or feedback. Franzen
said they targeted the south area for notification and did not receive any
comments.
Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input.
Wuttke asked if there had been a discussion on limited flight golf balls. Mr.
Schmitz said a person really cannot practice effectively with these types of golf
balls, and this is from a golfer's perspective. He did say they discussed it,but
felt the net would be best for the residents.
Frank said the net would have visibility in the neighborhood and asked the
project proponent if he had any thoughts on that. Mr. Schmitz said they are
putting in two piece poles, 50 feet and 30 feet so there will be some flexibility in
regards to pole height.
Kirk asked if the net would be up all year long. Mr. Schmitz said it would, and
that the net is made to withstand ice.
Wuttke asked if wind would create noise. Mr. Schmitz said he was not sure but
they would look into it.
MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Lechelt, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0.
MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Frank, to recommend approval of the Final
Order 2013-11. Motion carried 5-0.
February 10, 2014
Page 3
B. VARIANCE#2013-12 by Stephen and Denise Wagner
Location: 8547 Crane Dance Trail, Eden Prairie, MN
Contact: Stephen or Denise Wagner(612) 720-3288
Request for:
• To permit an accessory structure (pool) with a side yard setback of 8.6 feet.
City code requires a 10 foot minimum side yard setback in the R1-13.5
Zoning District—Table 2, Section 11.03, Subd. 2, B. 11-1lb
Brice Helgeson presented the proposal. He the lot with the house on it is sold,
to sell the other lot they would most likely have to fill the pool. For closing on
the lot that has been sold, the variance will need to be granted.
Chair Stoltz asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen said the variance
meets the three part test for reasonable use, unique circumstances, and
neighborhood character. There is a final order on this and a resolution so that it
can be filed against the property.
Chair Stoltz asked if this variance was not passed, would the home sale be null.
Franzen said yes.
Wuttke asked about the timeline for the final order. Franzen said the final order
goes into effect 15 days after the Commission takes action.
Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input.
Wuttke said he is concerned at the way the Final Order is written. He does not
want to put undue pressure on a homeowner who would purchase this property.
Franzen said that was a good point and in number 4 of the staff analysis, the
Commission could extend the time line beyond 12 months.
Kirk said in regard to having a non-conforming structure on this piece of land,
he feels 1 year is appropriate to deal with the pool, given they have a plan B,
and plan to fill the pool.
Wuttke said he was concerned with the time frame because it would be in
winter when the 12 months would be up.
Mr. Helgeson said he is okay with extending the time,but they do plan on
filling the pool this summer. Wuttke said if they are going to do something next
summer, then he is fine with the time frame.
MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 5-0.
February 10, 2014
Page 4
MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Frank, to recommend approval of the Final
Order#2013-12 and Resolution 2014-01. Motion carried 5-0.
C. VARIANCE#2014-01 by David Steen Jr.
Location: Outlot A, Bryant Lake View Estates Addition
Contact: David Steen Jr. (952-944-4080)
Request for:
• To permit a residential dock to extend into Bryant Lake at a length of 180'.
City Code permits 75' — Section 9.60, Subd. 11, B, 1.
• To permit a residential dock setback of 7' from the north lot line, as
extended into Bryant Lake. City Code requires 15' — Section 9.60, Subd.
11, B, 1.
• To permit a residential dock setback of 10' from the south lot line, as
extended into Bryant Lake. City Code requires 15' — Section 9.60, Subd.
11, B, 2.
• To permit boats moored on the north side and south side of the proposed
dock to encroach into another authorized dock use area. City Code does not
encourage dock design to unnecessarily require or encourage boats using
other authorized dock use area—Section 9.60, Subd. 11, C.
• To permit a residential dock of 1,192 square feet. City Code maximum is
450square feet—Section 9.60, Subd. 11, E.
David Steen presented the proposal. He utilized the overhead projector to show
photographs of the dock. He stated the dock in the photo is 100 feet out and the
water at that point is only 1 feet deep. They need a greater distance to get into
the lake. There is also a problem with weeds. Mr. Steen pointed out this would
not affect any neighboring places and would not encroach on anyone on the left
side. He pointed out they did get an approval notice from the school and they
said they were fine with the dock. Mr. Steen said the bull rushes are about 80
feet out and they need to get past them. They would need 2 feet of water to put
boats in.
Chair Stoltz asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen said the variance
meets the three part test for reasonable use, unique circumstances, and
neighborhood character. Staff recommendation is to adopt Final Order#2014-
01.
Frank asked how the length was decided upon. Mr. Steen said they measured
the lake and how deep it was this past summer. Frank asked if there would be a
potential for more shrinkage. Mr. Steen said no, he and his dad have lived there
for over 20 years and have not seen this happening.
Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input.
February 10, 2014
Page 5
Wuttke asked how many docks in the City have 3 prongs on the end. Franzen
said there are some and this is not uncommon for property having several types
of boats.
MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Frank, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 5-0.
MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Frank, to recommend approval of the Final
Order 2014-01.
D. VARIANCE#2013-10 by Allegis Group
Location: 6640 Shady Oak Road, Eden Prairie, MN
Contact: Sean Coatney (651-307-1951)
Request for:
• To permit a 176 square foot building identification wall sign on the north
elevation.
• To permit a 176 square foot building identification wall sign on the south
elevation.
• To permit a 50 square foot building identification wall sign on the east
elevation.
City Code permits one building identification wall sign per wall per street
frontage not to exceed 50 square feet. Section 11.70, Subd. 4, C, 12 (a)
Sean Coatney, representing Areotek, presented the proposal. He said with this
variance they want to have a 50 foot sign on the east end of the building.
Kelly Eisele, Director of Business Operations at Areotek, said she relocated to
Eden Prairie from Madison. Their company puts people to work in the area.
They would like a sign on the building so people can find them. They chose
Eden Prairie and love the building. They would like to stay there but they want
signage on the building.
Chair Stoltz asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen said there are two
bank signs that are on the building. It is unusual for a variance to be granted for
a tenant. The two signs currently on the building would not meet the 3 part test.
A sign is for identification not advertising; the current signs are a total of is 200
sq. ft. larger than what is permitted. The current final order prohibits additional
signs.
Mr. Coatney said they have talked to the bank that has the sign on the building
and they will not take it down.
Ms. Eisele said they do not want to advertise but just identify themselves.
February 10, 2014
Page 6
Kirk said this is a frustrating circumstance. He said it gets into the issue if the
Commission approves the variance for this building, are they opening a can of
worms. But on the other hand,he said he can see where the tenant is coming
from, and said he is on the fence with this request.
Frank said he did not feel the sign would be intrusive. It looks innocent and is
leaning towards this request being fine.
Wuttke said the Commission should be taking a look at the language of the
Code that was written long ago.
Chair Stoltz asked when the Code was updated. Franzen said codes are updated
periodically as a federal or state mandate, or from direction by the City Council
or commission.
Ms. Eisele said she has gotten to know the Vice President of the bank and he
said the floor they are on right now sat empty for years. She said they would
not have selected this location knowing they could not put up a sign. The
property management does not want the signs to come down.
Kirk said to the project proponent that they were misrepresented in this ordeal.
The Commission is in a dilemma because the project proponent wants us to fix
it,but the party that misrepresented them is not willing to do anything, and that
is frustrating.
Frank said this is a unique situation. He asked if the Commission were to
approve the new sign, now they would be setting precedence.
Lechelt asked the project proponent if they considered a monument sign. Mr.
Coatney said they already have one,but it is not visible from Highway 212. He
said there are trees on the first floor and that is why is does not work in that
location.
Franzen said with this Final Order, this will remove the bank name tied to the
176 sq. ft. signs. Frank commented there are two existing Central Bank 176 sq.
ft. signs that have never been approved. Franzen concurred. Frank asked if it is
fair that these two signs ruined it for someone to come in and have a conforming
sign.
Chair Stoltz asked if the City has the right to go back and have the bank take
down the signs. Franzen said the City has right to enforce compliance with city
code and final orders.
February 10, 2014
Page 7
Chair Stoltz suggested the project proponent talk to the bank and tell them what
was talked about tonight and that there are no permits for these signs on file and
maybe they would take them down; otherwise the City would come out.
Ms. Eisele said she does not want to create bad feelings with the bank.
Chair Stoltz suggested continuing this and have Central Bank come to the
meeting to discuss this. Frank said the party that needs to be talked to is the
owner of the building, in regards to solving this situation.
Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input.
Chair Stoltz asked for Commission feedback. Wuttke said he thinks this is a
great opportunity to address the City Code for signage and would recommend a
continuance. Lechelt said she is in favor of a continuance and feels the best
action would be for the owners to come to the meeting. Kirk agrees with the
discussion with the building owner, but would be in favor of signage for the
new tenants after the discussion at the continuance. Frank agreed with what
Lechelt said and said what they are asking for is legitimate,but it is also a
different circumstance. Chair Stoltz said he would vote for a continuance.
Ms. Eisele asked what if the property owner does not show up. Chair Stoltz
said he feels they will show up because it is an opportunity to meet and talk
with the tenants.
Kirk also added that if they do not come to the meeting, the City could go out
and take the signs down.
Franzen said the next meeting will be February 24t.
Wuttke said he likes the idea of this discussion versus using authority of the
City to go out there and have them take the signs down.
MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Frank, to recommend a continuance to the
February 24, 2014 meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
VII. PLANNERS' REPORT
Franzen said for the next meeting there will be a site plan review of the aquatic center
and a continuation of Variance#2013-10.
VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT
February 10, 2014
Page 8
A. CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE—LIGHT RAIL
No update
IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS
X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Lechelt, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried
5-0.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.