Loading...
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.