Planning Commission - 06/10/2019 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY,JUNE 10, 2019 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Charles Weber, Ann Higgins, Andrew
Pieper, Ed Farr, Michael DeSanctis, Christopher
Villarreal, Carole Mette, Balu Iyer
CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer;
Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
Commission members Villarreal and Higgins were absent.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Iyer moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the agenda. MOTION CARRIED
7-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by DeSanctis to approve the minutes of May 28,
2019. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SHELDON PLACE TOWNHOMES
Request for:
• Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.01 acres
• Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.01 acres
• Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 1.01 acres
• Site Plan Review on 1.01 acres
• Preliminary Pat of one lot into 11 lots on 1.01 acres
Tim Brown, partner and President of Schaefco Development, LLC. introduced
partner and Vice-President Dan Schaefer and presented a PowerPoint of the
application. The developer specialized in both urban and suburban residential
infill multifamily attached and detached developments. The application involved a
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 10, 2019
Page 2
long and shallow one-acre property currently zoned rural. The goal was to
mitigate the onsite urban impacts of the project. Wells and septic systems would
be updated and historical uses, including a filling station, would be mitigated and
improved through creative engineering and architectural components. The soil
would be tested.
The target market was the empty-nester profile as well as the young professional
buyer attracted to an urban community. Site constraints impacted the parking,
storm water management, access, and setbacks. The housing product would be
attached twin and triplex two-story homes without basements and with two-car
garages and two-car guest parking areas. The primary living areas would be on
the second floors, accessible from the parking area via an elevator if needed in the
future. The average unit size was between 2,500 and 2,800 square feet. Brown
displayed the elevations and explained the dimensions. The site plan minimized
impacts on utility easements and the front yard setback ranged from 20 feet to 36
feet. A private below ground infiltration chamber system would handle the
stormwater. The utilities would be routed in and around the drive lane. Snow
removal would be handled by a vendor. The landscape plan included the removal
of eight significant and one heritage tree, and replacement trees along with
perennials would be planted. Included would be an integrated common seating
patio area within a landscape garden. Brown detailed the sustainable
considerations and the project's connectivity to ADA-compliant trail systems
giving access to Miller Park. He explained the PUD request and the benefits of
this.
DeSanctis asked how deep the core sample went for the testing of low level of
diesel-range hydrocarbons and for the breakdown of specific hydrocarbons. He
wanted to be sure there was no tetraethyl lead and wished to see a detailed
environmental impact statement on the core samples. Brown offered to provide
the detailed memo prepared by the sampling vendor. Mette asked for the price
point and if this development was exclusively for a 55-plus community. Brown
replied the development was not exclusive to residents aged 55 and over but
would be marketed to any age range, and the price point ranged between
550,000.00 to 700,000.00 dollars. Iyer noted the many waivers on this medium-
density plan and asked if the number of units could be lowered. Brown replied it
was not possible to remove all the waivers due to the constraints of the site; only
the density could be altered.
Farr asked for the results of the community meeting. Brown replied eight people
attended out of the 120 invitations sent to townhome residents. The main
comments were positive. The only concern was the height of the development.
Farr asked if a more direct connection was brought up between the development
and the trail and Brown replied it was not mentioned. Farr noted the garage doors
were actually set back farther than the fagades, creating a possible arched
doorway effect. He asked for context on the elevator design: if they had been built
before. Brown replied his firm had built eight developments with the capacity for
an elevator,but none had gone ahead with the elevator. It would be an enclosed
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 10, 2019
Page 3
elevator. Farr asked for and receive confirmation there would be no further
topographical changes for the garages to inconvenience wheelchair access.
Klima gave the staff report. The request was for a PUD, rezoning, preliminary
plat and a site plan. There waivers requested, especially regarding the density and
the group usable open space per unit, were mostly interrelated. The setback
applied to both the buildings and the parking. These waivers therefore may not
have the impact they first appeared to have. The landscaping and tree replacement
were two separate and distinct requirements. The proposed landscaping plan met
City requirement contained extra caliper inches that could be deducted from the
tree replacement requirement. The applicant could pay cash in lieu of tree
replacement. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions listed in the staff
report.
Mette asked for the setback of the parking of the Common Bond development
across the street, and Klima replied she believed it was 15 feet for the entire
parking area, whereas in the current development only five parking stalls would
encroach upon the grassy area. DeSanctis asked what would change at the western
boundary and how this would impact the residents in that area. Brown replied the
existing treescape would be removed except for three or four and the existing
screening replaced with a higher quality product at a height of between eight and
15 feet tall. It was not possible to replace trees in certain areas. The white vinyl
fence would continue along the western boundary. Farr asked for and received
confirmation from Klima there was review of fire truck access. Farr asked if a
denser zoning district might be more appropriate. Klima replied the property
behind this development was zoned RM-6.5 so this development was
appropriately and consistently zoned. The Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance outlined that any density over 6.5 units per acres and up to 10 required
a PUD. Farr asked if staff had encouraged the applicant to replant with larger
caliper trees, and Klima replied staff had this conversation with the applicant;
however, there was a tipping point after which trees became too large to thrive in
the long term.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by DeSanctis to close the public hearing.
MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
Mette commended the unique guest parking solution. She also wanted to see the
environmental review and also called for a passive vapor mitigation system
installed beneath these townhomes for radon. Brown replied these were required
by code and would be installed. DeSanctis asked for the location of the
underground pipe that connected Mitchell Lake to Red Rock Lake in relation to
this property. Rue replied the chain of lakes storm sewers were at the interchange
of County Road 4 and Highway 212.
Kirk also noted the many waivers; however, he acknowledged the site which was
one among many infill sites to come before the commission represented a
challenge. He also commended the parking solution. Kirk found the plan beautiful
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 10, 2019
Page 4
and saw no improvements to be had by reducing the number of waivers; this
achieved a balance. Iyer stated his concern with the waivers involved the soil
analysis depth at which it needed to be done, considering there was a gas station
on site in the past.
Pieper asked Klima to explain the process of vetting an environmental assessment
report. Klima explained the report was reviewed by Engineering, and Building
Inspections staff. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) also
reviewed the report. A condition in the staff recommendation included having an
engineer on site during construction. Iyer commended the project and the
architecture. Farr also commended the project for its density, which he found
appropriate for this location. He stated he was comfortable with the City's and the
State's safeguards on the environmental impact, which was a process he had
undergone in the past. Mette concurred, saying there were several triggers that
would guide the development under the supervision of the MPCA. DeSanctis
agreed this project improved the aesthetics of this parcel of land and the soil
testing would be rigorous and further reviewed on site.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Farr to recommend approval of the Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 1.01 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 1.01 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to
RM-6.5 on 1.01 acres, Site Plan Review on 1.01 acres and Preliminary Pat of one
lot into 11 lots on 1.01 acres based on the plan stamp-dated June 7, 2019 and staff
report dated May 7, 2019. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
B. VARIANCE#2019-02
Location: 12580 Technology Drive
Request for variance to permit a fence height of 10 feet. City Code maximum
fence height is seven feet.
Roth Trulson, program manager Xcel Energy, presented and PowerPoint and
explained the application. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
required the height of the fence in the interest of security. Two security towers
with security camera would be installed. He showed the security fence and
lighting examples. Pieper noted the foot-candles put out by the lighting would be
quite low. Trulson replied the motion-activated lighting would be a deterrent
rather than for illumination.
Mette noted the numerous substations in Eden Prairie and asked why this was
needed. Trulson replied FERC laid out certain requirements which Xcel had to
fulfill. Mette asked if this had to do with the 5G wireless antenna approved at an
earlier Planning commission meeting. Trulson replied it did not; the two projects
were scheduled together to utilize the same resources. Iyer asked for and received
clarification this was based on federal standards and asked for the reasoning.
Trulson replied Xcel's standard for any fence was automatically ten feet in height
due to FERC's requirements. Xcel utilized both mesh fence and extruded fence to
delay a breach until law enforcement could arrive.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 10, 2019
Page 5
Klima gave the planner's report. Eden Prairie City Code and building code had a
maximum but federal requirements would trump those. The recommended
approval met the three-part test as outlined by state statute: reasonable use of the
property, unique circumstances, and character of the neighborhood.
Farr asked if there was a federal mandate why any local government would have
jurisdiction over a site like this. Klima replied since there was a federal mandate
the applicant was not obligated to come before the commission but chose to give
the local government a voice in the public process.
MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Iyer to close the public hearing. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
MOTION: DeSanctis moved, seconded by Kirk to recommend approval of the
variance request#2019-02 based on information in the staff report dated June 5,
2019 and in the finding and conditions in the final order#2019-02. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
VI. PLANNERS' REPORT
Klima updated the commission members on the Parks and Open Space Zoning District.
Staff held an informational meeting and 9,000 residents within 500 feet of city parks
received a notice. This request will likely be scheduled for Planning Commission review
for later in July.
Kirk asked for comments from residents. Klima replied staff fielded 50 calls and 100
residents were in attendance at the meeting. Once residents understood there were no
essential changes to parks there were no concerns with the rezoning. Independent
concerns arose which city staff were following up on individually.
Pieper asked for the use of more natural "plain language" in the City's communications
to residents. Klima replied staff was working on refining the letter for public notice and
the City's Development Project Map.
VII. MEMBERS' REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Mette to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:58 p.m.