Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-06-26 Planning Commission Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 2002, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET ___________________________________________ _____________________ MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Geof Workinger, Lorelei Bergman and Stephen Brown MEMBERS ABSENT: David Byron STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the May 29, 2002, meeting were filed as submitted. NEW BUSINESS: C-02-4 St. Peter’s Lutheran Church and School 3721 West Fuller Street Operate a Child Day Care Center   Mr. Larsen informed the Commission St. Peter’s Lutheran Church and School owns the house located at 3721 West Fuller Street and is requesting to use that house for child day care. Mr. Larsen pointed out the subject site is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District and day care is a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district. Mr. Larsen concluded staff supports the proposal as submitted. Repres entatives from St. Peter’s Lutheran Church were present to respond to questions. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Larsen what the present use of the house is. Mr. Larsen explained at present the house is vacant. He added in the past the church has used the house as rental property, and at times for church storage. Commissioner Runyan questioned if the church is presently operating a child day care program. Mr. Larsen responded at this time he is not aware if the church is presently operating a day care. He added at one time the church did operate a day care program, reiterating he is unsure if that operation is still occurring. Concluding, Mr. Larsen commented that a majority of churches within the city currently operate day care facilities as permitted conditional uses. Commissioner Workinger asked Mr. Larsen if any home in the R-1 district could operate as a day care facility. Mr. Larsen said that is correct. A residential home in Edina is permitted to operate a day care facility. Mr. Larsen added the number of children served depends on the type of license issued by the state. Commissioner McClelland moved Conditional Use Permit approval. Commissioner Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. P-02-2 Final Development Plan Frauenshuh Companies Northeastern quadrant of I 494/169   Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission the property was rezoned in 2000 to Planned Office District, POD-2 to allow the construction of a seven-story office building with a floor area of 168,258 square feet. To support the office building a seven-story parking structure was also approved. Construction of the approved plan was not undertaken and at present the site is vacant. Mr. Larsen said at this time Frauenshuh is proposing a revised development plan for review. The revised plan calls for an eight-story building supported by a five level parking structure and a two-story building supported by a surface parking lot containing 185 spaces. Continuing, Mr. Larsen explained the plan illustrates the ability to add an additional 42 spaces east of the proposed two-story building. Mr. Larsen noted the proponents plan to develop the site in phases with Phase One containing the two-story office building and surface parking area. Mr. Larsen pointed out Phase One provides 185 spaces plus 45 spaces are suggested for a Proof of Parking Agreement. Mr. Larsen said Phase One requires either a 76 or 34 space parking variance. Mr. Larsen concluded the proposal is very similar to the plan approved in 2000. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Final Development Plan subject to: Proof of Parking Agreement Excel Energy approval of Phase One parking plan Watershed District Permits MNDOT permits, if required The proponent, Mr. Dave Frauenshuh was present to respond to questions. Also present were Gene Holderness and Steve Doughty. Mr. Holderness addressed the Commission and explained Allina is proposing to construct a facility at this location similar to the facilities they have in Lake Elmo and Sartell. Mr. Holderness explained the proposed facility would be different than Allina’s Centennial Lakes facility. Mr. Holderness said the proposed facility brings to the suburbs the option of “quick day” surgeries. Mr. Holderness explained the medical business is changing. He pointed out many medical surgical procedures are “same day” surgeries, or stays under 23 hours. He explained it is the opinion of Allina that parking demands will be lower because of the flexibility of surgery hours and “stay” time. Mr. Holderness added this type of facility would not have the “peak hour” problems found in straight office use because patients, doctors, and staff come throughout the day. The facility is also staffed 24 hours a day, which “spreads” out trips over a longer period of time. Concluding Mr. Holderness acknowledged the proposed suburban surgery clinic is a “new creature” and the parking demand is not yet known, but he believes what is proposed will satisfy the demands of employees and patients. Chairman Johnson asked how this building relates to the medical building on 55/494. Mr. Frauenshuh responded the Allina building at 494/55 is a traditional medical office building. The one proposed is quite different. Mr. Frauenshuh said the trend in medicine today is to bring the services to the people. He pointed out many suburbs are underserved and people living in the suburbs have had to go to traditional hospitals for same day surgery procedures. This facility offers “common” surgeries to be performed with limited stay without the patient being “admitted” to a major hospital. Mr. Frauenshuh said in his opinion what makes cities and communities great are their schools and medical facilities, and in his opinion Edina has excellent schools and now offers the next step in the future of medicine. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if this building is higher than the building that received previous approval. Mr. Larsen said the building that received previous approval was 7 stories and this proposal is for an 8-story building. Mr. Larsen said in actuality this building is shorter. Commissioner McClelland said she has a difficult time when it appears developers want to build on every square inch of land in the City. Mr. Larsen said the proposed building may be an 8-story building but it is lower. Mr. Larsen said in his opinion the proposed building is an improvement. Commissioner McClelland commented there isn’t anything this tall around. She asked Mr. Larsen why the building is shorter if it is a story larger. Mr. Larsen explained the building design is different with lower ceilings. Commissioner McClelland asked the proponents if they have a time frame between construction of Phase One and Two. Mr. Frauenshuh responded at this time there is no definite time frame. He added it depends on the success of Phase One. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr. Frauenshuh if he knows the number of parking spaces each of the facilities Lake Elmo and Sartell have. Mr. Frauenshuh responded he is not sure of the exact number of parking spaces each facility has. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr. Frauenshuh if he knows the number of patients seen each day at the Lake Elmo and Sartell facilities. Mr. Frauenshuh answered he is not sure on the number of patients seen each day. Commissioner Lonsbury said it would be easier to study this proposal and make an educated decision if the Commission had those numbers. Commissioner Lonsbury asked where the proponents believe the majority of patients will come from (what area?). Mr. Frauenshuh responded to a degree that could depend on the physicians. Continuing, Mr. Frauenshuh said it is believed the serving area for the proposed facility is Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Richfield, and Minnetonka. Mr. Frauenshuh said he couldn’t say for certain that patients may not come from farther away. Commissioner Swenson commented she has a concern that parking demands will not be met especially during construction of Phase Two. Mr. Doughty responded that during the construction of Phase Two it is possible a shuttle service will be used for employees to minimize impact. He stated parking would not be compromised during Phase Two construction. He explained major expansions now occur while buildings are still occupied with different parking scenario’s put in place. He reiterated adequate parking would be provided during all construction phases. Mr. Frauenshuh pointed out parking will still be available (especially for employees) on Lot 2. Chairman Johnson noted the street system is not completed and asked if the roadway system will be operational before occupancy. Mr. Larsen said the roadway system should be completed in the next few weeks. Commissioner Runyan asked if any commercial space is available in the proposed building. Mr. Doughty responded it is possible an eyeglass store will be available. He added at this time he is not sure if other commercial services will be provided. Commissioner Runyan questioned if the proposed ramp in Phase Two will be able to accommodate more levels than what is depicted. Mr. Doughty said the structure would support 6 levels. 5 are depicted. Commissioner Runyan asked the number of vehicles per ramp level. Mr. Doughty responded the proposed ramp holds 154 vehicles per level. Commission Lonsbury commented it would be interesting to know the trip generation difference between a traditional medial office vs. the concept proposed. Mr. Larsen responded as mentioned previously this is a new medical concept and staff doesn’t really know exactly what the trip generations would be. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr. Larsen if he knows which generates more trips, a medical office facility or a non-medical office facility. Mr. Larsen responded in his experience medical use generates 5-10% more trips. Mr. Larsen pointed out medical trip generations are distributed throughout the day with traditional office buildings having more peak time trips. Commission er Lonsbury asked Mr. Larsen if he believes the proposed use is a better land use for this site then the general office use previously approved. Mr. Larsen responded in his opinion the proposed use better suits the site, and reiterated medical facilities spread trip generations over a longer period of time. Commissioner McClelland pointed out if you travel anywhere near 494/169 during peak times you would have a problem. She pointed out doctors and nurses, etc. will also contribute to peak hour traffic congestion. Mr. Larsen responded he is not saying this use solves all traffic congestion problems during peak times; however doctors and nurses traditionally don’t work 9-5. He pointed out many doctors operate with flexibility, and patient visits are throughout the day. Commissioner McClelland asked if any signalization is planned in this area. Mr. Larsen said at this time that is being looked at. He added a real effort is being made to move traffic to West 78th Street. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Frauenshuh if he believes this building(s) would operate like a hospital. Mr. Frauenshuh said his understanding is that this will be a jointly owned surgery center combined with other medical services. It may operate in a similar fashion, but will also be different. Commissioner Brown said he is very familiar with this type of operation and believes this use (Phase One) will be less dense than a general office use, and will generate fewer trips. Commissioner Brown said he has no problem with Phase One as proposed. He added his larger concern might be with Phase Two. Mr. Holderness told the Commission in his experience, acknowledging this concept is relatively new, that more and more medical procedures will be done in surgery centers like the one proposed. Surgery centers provide lower costs to the consumer vs. the cost of a hospital stay. Commissioner Swenson asked the proponents if any thought has been given to an accessory use like an eating establishment. She pointed out employees, patients and their family members need a place to eat, especially during an extended stay. Mr. Larsen added the City encourages large office buildings to provide a cafeteria (or some form of eating establishment) for their employees and visitors. Mr. Doughty said the layout of the facility provides some flexible space, which may be used for a cafeteria or restaurant type facility. Mr. Doughty said there would of course be an employee eating area and he believes there will be some type of vending machines available for employees and visitors, etc. Commissioner Swenson pointed out Kincaids is located in an office building and that “co” use appears to work well there. Mr. Doughty said the development team would look into the concept of a cafeteria or restaurant. Commissioner Swenson stated in her opinion the concept is good, but she is uncomfortable with the parking. She said she believes the ramp should be constructed with Phase One. She said that would eliminate parking problems during the construction of Phase Two. Commissioner Lonsbury asked the proponents if there is a time frame when construction would begin. Mr. Frauenshuh responded the development of this site has been on hold, and he would like to begin construction as soon as possible. He explained part of the delay has been waiting for the road to be finished. Continuing, Mr. Frauenshuh told Commissioner Swenson he understands her concern with regard to adequate parking during construction and explained the problem with constructing the ramp along with the Phase One clinic is the rent for the space in the clinic would be pushed to the max. Mr. Frauenshuh stressed he believes parking needs will be adequately met during the construction of Phase Two and the parking provided in Phase One in his opinion is adequate. Commissioner Runyan moved to recommend Final Development Plan approval subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Lonsbury interjected and stated it is important to him when making decisions to look into the future and look at the entire picture. He added he feels uncomfortable making a decision on this proposal when he does not have all the facts. He said the Commission is being asked to approve a parking variance and variances as a general rule are not in the City’s best interest. Commissioner Lonsbury stated at this time he cannot support the proposal as presented. He stated he does not have enough information i.e. the number of trips generated at the two similar facilities, and the number of parking spaces at the two similar facilities, to make an educated decision. Mr. Frauenshuh said he also has a concern with parking, adding he would not propose to construct a building where parking demands could not be met. Commissioner Runyan commented projects wouldn’t work if parking is a problem and he believes the proponents are aware parking demands need to be met and the proposed Proof of Parking Agreement is a good contion of approval. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Runyan, Workinger, Bergman, Brown, Johnson, Nays; Lonsbury, Swenson. Motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS: Tree Removal Ordinance Mr. Larsen told Commission Members the Council has expressed interest in the possibility of a tree removal ordinance on residential properties within the City. Continuing, Mr. Larsen asked Commission Members to hold on to the reference materials (examples of tree removal ordinances in other communities) that were in their packet for future study. Mr. Larsen said he will keep the Commission posted on what direction the Council may be heading with regard to tree removal. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Lonsbury moved for adjournment at 8:55 p.m. ______________________________ Jackie Hoogenakker