Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/12/1985 - City Council SpecialMINUTES OF A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION & EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 12, 1985 A special joint meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission and Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, December 12, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Bea Blomquist, Councilmembers Smith, Egan and Wachter, Planning Commission Chair Hall, Members Wold, Trygg, Wilkins, and Harrison. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, City Planner Dale Runkle, Assistant Planner Jim Sturm, Consulting City Planner Voss, Parks Director Ken Vraa, Planning Intern Steve Schwanke, and City Attorney Paul Hauge. The meeting commenced at 7:00 p.m. and Mayor Blomquist announced that the purpose of the meeting was to continue the discussion between members of the City Council and Advisory Planning Commission, primarily regarding commercial planning issues and in particular, the Comprehensive Plan Guide update. BLACKF,WK PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Dale Runkle reviewed some updated information submitted by Ed Dunn, the developer of Blackhawk Park Planned Development, with the report dated December 12, 1985..The report included comparison 'between the residential and commercial uses in the north and south sectors between the 1977 Agreement computations and 1985 proposals by Mr. Dunn. One of the primary reasons for the planned development being returned for consideration was the fact that updated information had no* been received at the last joint meeting and it was noted that certain changes hs `taker.. pl c: since 1917. These changes included the Limited Business for the proposed CTC Business Campus, the shift from Neighborhood Business to R-3 on the south side of Diffley Road, and the removal of the Neighborhood Business designation to Pilot Knob Road and County Road #30 (Diffley Road). Also, Thomas Lake Elementary School has been constructed and it is expected the civic center site along Pilot Knob Road, will not develop. In addition, the neighborhood business center proposed on the north side of Deerwood Drive more than likely will not be completed, in addition to the civic center site on the west side of Thomas Lake Road, on the south portion of the planned development, it is expected will not be developed. The most substantial change is that I-35E has been constructed on a substantially revised alignment, compared with that proposed in 1977. Mayor Blomquist was concerned about the comparison in the densities which appeared prior to 1977, and noted that the comparisons submitted in the recent report did not include those computations. 1 Joint APC & Council Minutes December 12, 1985 A number of overheads were displayed and also the detailed report that was prepared by John Hohenstein, particularly covering the events during the planned development process prior to 1977. Chairman Hall inquired whether there was not sufficient information available to act on the annual review at the present time, but Mayor Blomquist stated that it is important to determine how the densities will fit into the overall parcel. Also, it was requested that conflicts on the map should be clearly identified and corrected.- The Zoning Ordinance changes and density designations have caused some need for specifying the revision. Councilman Smith stated that the important issue is what the 1985 computations should consist of. Councilman Wachter was concerned about possibly increasing the amount of single family development in the PD. Member Wilkins recommended firm recommendations as to the new uses where revisions along I-35E had taken place, should be included. The acreage within the I-35E corridor has increased substantially and Councilman Egan requested that other uses be comparably revised. A question was raised as to whether the planned development agreement was revised due to the CTC Business Campus proposal, and further whether the actual rezoning was implemented. Ed Dunn was present and took the position that the 1977 agreement was valid and binding upon the City and the developer. He indicated, however, he could not completely explain the historical background and the reason for inconsistencies, but noted that an agreement was entered into with HUD in 1980 and also an EIS was prepared at that time. He further stated that actual development has been well below the planned development densities of 1977, and reviewed the proposed reduction in densities in 1985. He iatrcduced an exhibit dated October 1976 and mentioned that there are no substantial changes since that time, and further that the developers have dedicated a* tantial amount of right-of-way for streets and utility easement purposes to the City. 61 acres of land have been dedicated for parks, according to Mr. Dunn. He noted that there are about 3 sites in the north planned development where essentially flat land provides for development due to the heavy slopes of 18% and greater in much of the area. He indicated that the reason for the slowness in development primarily was because of the uncertainty of the I-35E location. Member Harrison mentioned that I-35E has changed the planned development substantially and suggested the planned development agreement may no longer be in effect. Councilman Smith stated the purpose should be to amend the 1977 contract to the satisfaction of all parties. Chairman Hall indicated that City staff should not do the planning, but the developer should prepare the proposals and submit them to the City for approval. After lengthy discussion, Egan moved, Wachter seconded the motion to continue consideration of the application for annual renewal with the understanding that the following steps will be taken prior to the next meeting: 1. The staff should not do further research of the pre-1977 planned development file. 4 Joint APC & Council Minutes December 12, 1985 2. The County's intent as to Pilot Knob Road around Fish Lake, should be reviewed. 3. Cancellation of the CTC development should be reviewed, including whether there should be a credit for residential revision. 4. Staff should review the changes including I-35E, the civic center site and school site, and to determine whether there should be losses and reductions of densities in the development. 5.. The review of potential additional R-1 development should be considered.. 6. The layout of specific uses for the planned development, particularly north of Deerwood Drive within the I-35E corridor should be provided. 7. The neighborhood business parcel on Deerwood Drive should be considered. 8. The R-3 and R-1 development along the east side of I-35E should be reviewed. 9. The community center parcel on the south portion of the planned development should be replanned. 10. Legal clarification of the planned development should be considered. All councilmembers voted yes. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL PRUFILE Dale Runkle introduced the _ commercial and industrial zoning and development summary dated 1985, and prepared by the City Planning office and John Voss. They included several tables with acreages for various zoning categories, the development summary as of September 1985, the regular current rate of development and projected rates of development for commercial and industrial uses within the City. John Voss reviewed the survey that had been prepared and dated March 18, 1985 consisting of a commercial/industrial area study, and noted that the average commercial/industrial zoning within most cities is substantially less than that of Eagan for commercial and industrial purposes. He further noted a substantial increase in the office development since 1979 with 846,000 square feet in 1979 and 1,993,000 square feet in 1985. Industrial square footage has increased from 4.1 million square feet to 5.6 million square feet from 1979 to 1985. The Metro Council projects a 40% decrease in residential development in the 1980's, but an increase in commercial/industrial construction. Mr. Voss further noted that Eagan is expected to absorb about 30% of the commercial development in the South St. Paul sector under the Metro Council guidelines, but that all commercial designations will not include the same specific definitions. The reasons include the high-tech office and Blue Cross type developments within the City. 3 Joint APC & Council Minutes _ December 12, 1985 He mentioned that the philosophy for Limited Business and Neighborhood Business may change, including availability of neighborhood services, and also the demand for major commercial services which are being requested. Most commercial/industrial land is already designated in the Comp Guide and indicated that the Agriculturally zoned property more than likely will not change substantially to industrial/commercial uses within the City. Dale Runkle noted that the commercial/industrial growth seems to be following the designations fairly closely in the 1980 Comp Guide, and that in 1982, nine commercial/industrial permits were issued for $38,000,000.00 in value, while in the year 1985 through November, 73 permits were issued with a total valuation of $179,000,000.00. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES The City planning staff isolated certain issues that have developed within the City in recent years requiring more discussion by the planning commission and council and in addition, some decision making for future development purposes. 1. Landscaping Requirements. Jim Sturm reviewed the landscaping policies of the City and noted that substantial revisions are being implemented to make certain that the landscaping requirements are fulfilled by developers. Preparation of a complete landscape plan, landscape bond requirements, green space specifications and parking lot landscaping are issues that are being concentrated on by staff members. The landscape boud has been based on reasonable value of landscaping within a development, rather than a flat $2,000.00 landscape bond. A question arose as to how to enforce the landscape policy and it was noted that the staff has been reviewing implementation of landscaping in much more detail. The staff was directed to enforce landscape policies more strictly and that it not release the bond until the plans have been completed or sufficient time has elapsed to implement the landscaping required. It was also noted the policy recites minimum requirements only and Chairman Hall recommended one full growing season be provided before the landscape bond is released. 2. Land Use Issues. The size and number of parking stalls was reviewed and it was noted that generally the Council had allowed reduction in.the width of parking stalls to 9 feet within the employee parking lots but that where retail and customer parking is provided, the widths remain at 10 feet. The depth will be based upon the total depth of the parking lot from 62 to 65 feet, rather than specific depths for individual parking spaces. The number of parking stalls can be determined partially on the basis of intended use, and consideration for snow storage, but there is a need to consider the change to buildings with a higher percentage of office and lower warehouse uses in the future. 4 Joint APC & Council Minutes December 12, 1985 In addition, there should be provision for revisions in the parking requirements in the event that a higher percentage of the building is being used for office. 3. Service Stations. There was continuing concern for services, including service bays within service station developments. The general welfare and safety of the residents and business persons in the City is important, including the location of gas pumps in parking lots. To arbitrarily provide for gas pumps within parking lots creates safety problems, and generally, the planning commission and councilmembers favored no change in the service bay policy for gas stations. Chairman Hall suggested the City should review the safety function and the propriety of location, and member Wold stated it was improper for the City planning commission and council to make economic decisions regarding service station needs. The general consensus was, however, that there be no change in the policy at the present time. 4. High Tech and Office Warehouse Uses. There was discussion concerning the specific zone designation for high tech and office warehouses, whether LB, or Industrial. It was noted that basically they are an industrial use within the Industrial category and the consensus generally was to allow such uses within that category with possible conditional uses in certain other commercial designations. 5. Limited Business and Neighborhood. Business Zoning Designations. It was recommended that the staff, planning commission and council review certain areas within the- City periodically, and also designate locations within Agriculturally zoned areas for Limited Business and Neighborhood Business purposes befori:: th< development ".s actually determined. Y REVALUATION OF SPECIFIC LAND -USE DESIGNATIONS There was a brief discussion about the possibility of revaluating specific land uses within certain areas. Ray Williams was present on behalf of the M. G. Astleford properties and requested that more specific designations be provided along the I-35E corridor. NEXT JOINT MEETING The next joint meeting of the Advisory Planning. Commission and City Council was scheduled for January 23, 1986 at the Municipal Center at 7:00 p.m. to again discuss Comprehensive Plan and general planning issues. 5 Joint APC & Council Minutes December 12, 1985 ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the. meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. All voted yea. City Clerk Secretary - APC PHH G