Loading...
Planning Commission - 05/23/2016 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, MAY 23, 2016 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Jon Stoltz, John Kirk, Travis Wuttke, Ann Higgins, Charles Weber, Andrew Pieper, Ed Farr, Mark Freiberg, Tom Poul CITY STAFF: Beth Novak-Krebs, Senior Planner Rod Rue, City Engineer Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Vice Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Stoltz was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Higgins, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 8-0. III. MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 9, 2016 MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Farr, to approve the Planning Commission Minutes. Motion carried 8-0. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PRAIRIE VIEW ENCLAVE Location: 12701 Pioneer Trail Request for: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 10.71 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 10.71 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.71 acres • Preliminary Plat of 18 lots and 1 outlot on 10.71 acres PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2016 Page 2 Ian Peterson, representing the owner, presented the proposal. He stated they would like to develop 18 single family units on approximately 10 acres. Mr. Peterson said there were a few concerns raised from the May 3rd neighborhood meeting. The concerns were related to traffic and it was requested to look into the possibility of having additional access from County Highway 1 (Pioneer Trail). Because of this request, they have been working with Hennepin County and City Staff to discuss the possibility of full access or right in/right out onto County Highway 1. There was also a concern regarding storm water. There is an existing easement on site and they will have a catch basin on site tied to the sewer system; they will have to remove a portion of the fence and a tree. Mr. Peterson said he reviewed the staff report and they are in agreement with everything except the continuance. Farr asked the project proponent is he could show the alternative accesses. Mr. Peterson utilized the overhead projector to show the extension to Surrey Street, the right in/right out option off of County Highway 1 and stated if the MAC proposal would go through this would change to full access on the MAC property with a connection to this project. Poul asked if there were other impacts to development if this was continued. Mr. Peterson said yes, it would be a delay in construction because there is only one council meeting in June. Vice Chair Pieper asked Novak-Krebs to review the staff report. Novak-Krebs said this is an 18 lot single family subdivision with 2 cul-de-sacs that provide access. Both cul-de-sacs are longer than what is allowed by the City so that is why the proponent is asking for a waiver. On May 17, the proponent gave City Staff a potential solution for the secondary access point onto County Highway 1. Staff would like additional time to review this with the County. Staff is recommending a continuance of the public hearing until June 13, 2016 to allow time for further discussion and review of this issue. Kirk asked if this secondary access would be permanent or temporary. Rue said it would be temporary until things would change with the MAC property. Farr commented this proposal was submitted in February but not completed until the end of April, and asked if that was applicant or City error. Novak-Krebs said there were a number of issues that delayed this proposal. One issue was the field verification of the wetland delineation, which could not be looked at until the spring when the snow melted. Traffic issues with the secondary access also delayed this. Farr asked if there were changes to the design. Mr. Peterson said there were no changes to the design. He said they had to wait until April 23rd so the wetlands could be verified. They have continued to work with the storm water issues. Tonight they would like to be granted approval with the access out of County Highway 1 to keep the project moving. Farr asked Staff what choices of actions the Commission has this evening. Novak- Krebs said it can be moved forward in regards to the secondary access but City PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2016 Page 3 Staff would like a little more time to work with the County and the other option is that is can be continued. If it is continued, the public hearing can be opened tonight and left open until the next meeting, which is on June 13th. Vice Chair Pieper opened the meeting up for public input. John Fedora,residing at 9820 Tree Farm Road, said traffic in this area is a huge issue and commented if we can do a right turn in and right turn out that would help and it should be a permanent solution. hi regards to safety zones by the airport, the topic of the distance of 1,000 from the radar has never been discussed. Also, traffic should be the main concern with this project and is should be continued so this gets addressed. Vice Chair Pieper asked staff to address the issue of the safety zones and distance from the radar. Novak-Krebs said this plan was sent to MAC for review and comment and they did not say anything about it. She stated she can specifically ask them about this situation. Clark Wicklund, civil engineer working on this project, said they made an application with the FAA, who in turn, will provide review and commentary in regards to this project. Padina Bandanpalie, of 9692 Tree Farm Road, stated she has concerns about the storm water issue because they will be digging 20 to 25 feet by her house. They will be digging up her property and she would like them to replace the sprinkler and fence and any other damage they do. Mr. Peterson showed the location of the sewer connection and where they would be digging. It would impact the fence and lilac bushes in the area. He said the disturbance will be minimal and they will be replacing a portion of the fence, sod and the irrigation system. Kelly Artz, of 9636 Ridgewood Drive, said he had a question about the traffic counter that was placed in the area and asked what the results were. Rue said a counter was set up and there were 172 weekday trips anticipated with the 18 lots. Existing traffic was looked at and with 72 units traffic was counted for two days with a total county of 804. This was slightly over what was anticipated, which was around 700. With the additional units, it would be 172 more a day. Kevin Johnson, of 9672 Ridgewood Drive, said he is concerned about traffic and safety and pointed out there is a neighborhood to the east that uses the same access road to avoid the light. He commented, having the additional traffic coming in is a lot. The right hand turn coming into the development should be a minimum, but a full access would be best. Kirk asked in regards to the MAC intersection, can anything happen until that is developed. Rue confirmed nothing can happen until MAC would like to develop on the property. Kirk said what would be acceptable to the neighbors is the right in and right out and confirmed the City needs more time to develop. Rue confirmed PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2016 Page 4 that the City has more work to do on this project and needs more time in order to present it to the County. Mr. Peterson stated that is not completely accurate. They have been in contact with the County in regards to the right in and right out. In regards to access points, Homeward Hills has full access and there are many additional access points out there. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the County said the right in right/out option would be best located furthest to the west. He also stated it seemed unfair that the picture that is painted is there is a lot of work still left to do and pointed out they were discussing the issues just this morning and the County was agreeable to the access issue. Vice Chair Pieper asked if the Commission puts a condition on the right in and right out, would that impact anything. Rue said it would not impact anything but the City would like more time to discuss the access issues. Farr asked the project proponent to show the entire neighborhood on site, including the four access points already there and asked if they were on the margin and if a fifth access point is required. Rue said when this project came in months ago; it was discussed to have a secondary access point. After the neighborhood meeting, the project proponent was asked to address this. Farr stated he did not want the applicant to be charged with solving traffic issues in the area. Mr. Peterson said when they started the project and up until the neighborhood meeting, everyone knew traffic would be an issue. He stated they are where they are today from the direction giving by the City since August 3rd of 2015. They have been working on it and are here tonight seeking approval. The reason they are in a PUD situation is because of an over length cul-de-sac. They were forced into a PUD because Staff said there would be no access point to Pioneer Trail. Kirk commented it had been a good public hearing and the Commission needs to put a balance between staff, developers and neighbors. What he is hearing from the neighbors is that they would like a secondary access off of County Highway 1. The question for the Commission is to continue the project or move it on to City Council. He point out this is only an advisory decision to Council. Freiberg asked how long it would be for the County to get back to the City and project proponent in regards to the secondary access. Rue said they have a meeting every Tuesday but will need more detail to approve the connection. Vice Chair Pieper asked Freiberg where he was in regards to approving this project. Freiberg said he acknowledges the need for a continuance but would like to see what can be moved on gets moved on to City Council. Farr commented he does not want to see the secondary access be forced. Wuttke stated he cannot see the rational for the right in/right out access with all of the other access points so close to each other and does not think it is reasonable. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 23, 2016 Page 5 Higgins stated she is satisfied with the conversation tonight and does not want to hold up the project but said she wanted the City Council to be aware there may be an issue with the right in/right out access. Kirk also agreed to move the project forward and let the City Council know there may be discussions in regards to the secondary access. Poul said he is in favor of moving forward but is not in favor of the secondary access. Novak-Krebs said if the Commission decides to move this project forward to the City Council, they have conditions for the City Council. Novak-Krebs distributed a sheet to the Commission listing all of the conditions. Kirk commented it would have been advantageous to have these conditions prior to the meeting. MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Freiberg, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 8-0. MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Poul, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 10.71 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 10.71 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 10.71 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 10.71 acres into 18 lots, 1 outlot and road right of way, based on plans stamped dated April 29th, 2016 and a recommendation to the City Council that a secondary vehicular access from the development to Pioneer Trail be provided if feasible and approved by City Staff and Hennepin County; as well as the 5 conditions itemized in the City Staffs written report distributed to the Planning Commission. Motion carried 7-0-1 abstention. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Wuttke, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 8-0. Vice Chair Pieper adjourned the meeting at 8:33p.m.