Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-08-17 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUGUST 17, 2011 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Grabiel called the meeting of the Edina Planning Commission to order at 7:00 PM. II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were Commissioners Carpenter, Platteter, Staunton, Potts, Stefanik, Rock and Chair Grabiel. Absent from the roll call were Commissioners Scherer, Schroeder, Fischer. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Meeting Agenda was approved as submitted. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS Chair Grabiel ordered the minutes of the July 27, 2011, meeting filed. All voted aye; minutes approved as submitted. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During “Community Comment,” the Art Center Board will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight’s agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. No comment. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS During “Public Hearings,” the Chair will ask for public testimony after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to testify on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your testimony is relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Chair may modify times as deemed necessary. Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. In order to maintain a respectful environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. ______________________________________________________________________ B-11-05 Variance St. Peter's Lutheran Church/JMS Homes 3713 and 3717 Fuller Street Lot Width Variance Chair Grabiel reported that this item has been continued to the August 31, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting. _________________________________________ _____________________________ 2011-0004.11a Subdivision One Corporate Center 2 LLC 7401 Metro Boulevard Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that One Corporate Center 2 LLC is requesting to divide their property at 7401 Metro Boulevard into two lots for the purpose of selling the new lot for future development. No building is proposed at this time. Teague explained that the specific request is for a Preliminary Plat to divide the property. The applicant has provided a site plan showing how the property could be developed with an 11,500 building. Continuing, Teague noted that based on the size of the existing building on the site, 454 parking stalls are required. The site contains 557 stalls. If an 11,500 square foot building were added to the site, 498 stalls would be required. With a new building, 64 stalls would be lost, and therefore, 493 stalls would remain. However, there would be room on the new site to add 5 stalls to meet the City’s parking requirement. Additionally, the applicant provided a parking study that concludes that there would be more than enough parking spaces on the site. Specifically the study indicates that 309 is the peak parking demand for the site, therefore, there would still be an excess of nearly 200 stalls. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat for One Corporate Center 2 LLC to divide their property at 7401 Metro Boulevard into two lots for the purpose of selling the new lot for future development. Approval is subject to the following findings: The existing roadways would support the proposed new lot. There would be adequate parking to support future development. And approval is also subject to the following Conditions: 1. Site Plan approval is required for development of the new lot. 2. Park dedication fee of $7,100 is due prior to the City's release of the signed Final Plat mylars for recording with Hennepin County. Appearing for the Applicant Mike Grant, MFRA. Mr. Grant said he was available to answer any questions the Commission had. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Planner Teague if the "new lot and building" would have enough parking if it were sold to another party. Planner Teague responded if the new lot was sold separately the new lot wouldn't have enough parking; however, the City would require a shared parking agreement between the two parcels. Commissioner Forrest asked Planner Teague if he would explain what the required setbacks would be for a new building (if built). Planner Teague explained that any building would be required to meet established setback standards which are taken from the perimeter of the site. Teague also asked the Commission to note that because the two parcels are similarly zoned there would be no setback from the common lot line. Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague if the City would require parking cross easements. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. The City would require filed and recorded cross easements. The cross easements would also need to be filed and recorded for both properties; not just the new lot. Chair Grabiel noted if the parcels are owned by the same party the parking issue probably wouldn't be a problem; but if sold that could become an issue; pointing out with the potential for sale to a different party the easements should be addressed ASAP. It was suggested by Commissioner Staunton that filing and recording the parking cross easements should be required as a condition of plat approval for both parcels. Planner Teague agreed, adding it would be in the best interest of the City to require that the cross easements are filed and recorded with the County as a condition of plat approval. Chair Grabiel opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue. Commissioner Carpenter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter said in his opinion the request is reasonable and if parking was addressed as a condition of approval he could support the subdivision. Motio n Commissioner Carpenter moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including the additional condition that shared parking cross easements be filed and recorded with Hennepin County at the time of plat approval. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS Sket ch Plan Review 6996 France Avenue South, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is being asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to redevelop the property located at 6996 France Avenue. The site is currently zoned Planned Commercial District-4 (PCD) and is an existing Sinclair Gas Station. The applicant would like to rezone the site from PCD-4 to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Teague noted that the present zoning only allows automobile service centers, car washes and gas stations. Teague explained that the subject property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential – OR" which allows for limited retail use. Continuing, Teague said because of that land designation uses allowed within the PCD-1 zoning district would seem more appropriate here. Planner Teague explained that the proposal requires a rezoning whether it is to PUD, PCD-1 or to PCD-3. Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan shall be made by the City Council. With graphics Teague presented a compliance table of City standards for the PCD-1 zoning district. Planner Teague concluded that the proposal would be an improvement over the existing building and use on the site. Staff would have a concern however in conventional rezoning (PCD-1 or 3) of the site without a specific use proposed. You may recall the building that was approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit at 69th and York; In that case, initially two small retail buildings were proposed up close to the street, similar to the proposed building. However, after a year of the site siting vacant, a CVS went into the site, in a single building that looked nothing like the originally proposed buildings. However, through the use of the PUD zoning, the City could provide some protections in ensuring that the building proposed is actually constructed. The PUD Ordinance was not available when the 69th & York Site was approved for development. Appearing for the Applicant Dean Dovolis Discussion Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague his reason (if rezoned) for recommending a PCD-1 zoning classification vs. a PCD-3 zoning classification. Teague responded his preference would be PUD; however, if only rezoned a PCD-1 zoning classification would be best. Limited retail would tie in with the newly configured West 70th Street and would also maintain limited retail west of France Avenue. Chair Grabiel clarified that this issue is for site plan review; no action from the Commission is required; just comments and ideas. Planner Teague agreed adding that the applicant can go before the City Council with the sketch plan review on September 6th. Applicant Presentation Mr. Dovolis addressed the Commission and illustrated the vision of a possible redevelopment of the existing Sinclair Gas Station. Dovolis said this vision compliments the pedestrian friendly reconstruction of West 70th Street. Continuing, Dovolis said the project would be a single-story 6,600 square foot retail building with parking to the rear. Dovolis said the building would be oriented toward France Avenue and West 70th Street with the parking tucked behind. Dovolis said the goal was to create an evolution; noting this is a strong corner that needs to be redeveloped correctly. Concluding, Dovolis said that leasing for this project would not be an issue; interest has already been expressed if the project moves forward. Commissioner Carpenter asked what the buildings were to the south of the subject site. It was reported that the buildings to the south were an office building and bank respectively. Chair Grabiel asked Mr. Dovolis if he has any thoughts on a PUD designation for the project. Mr. Dovolis responded that in his opinion the PUD classification was logical, adding working with the City to the guide the project would be beneficial. Dovolis reiterated that this is a strong corner and any redevelopment needs to be done right. Commissioner Potts asked Mr. Dovolis if he thinks the proposed parking on one side only of the building could be a detrimental to retail. Mr. Dovolis responded that the market is starting to become more open to the 2-door building. Mr. Dovolis said the proposed building would have both rear and front entrances/exit. A discussion ensued on parking and circulation with the following comments. Controlled intersection-acknowledge there would be periods when stacking would occur Right in only access on France Avenue and elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection. Acknow ledge that potential for vehicles to navigate the proposed round-about and circle the block. Commissioner Forrest said that she has a concern with amending the Comprehensive Plan; however, was comfortable with handling this redevelopment through the PUD process if the project moves forward. Forrest pointed out that currently what's proposed is a "no-no; it doesn't meet the Comprehensive Guide Plan for west of France Avenue. The discussion continued focusing on the proposed change in retail use from a full scale service station to limited retail and the impact that change in use would have on traffic. It was acknowledged that even without seeing any traffic counts a limited retail use would generate less traffic than a full scale gas station. Chair Grabiel said he was familiar with the service station; adding that although the Sinclair site wasn't a Holiday or SA it still generates business. Commissioner Forrest commented on the building design and asked Mr. Dovolis if he believes the proposed building could be easily adapted to an office building if the need to do so arose. Mr. Dovolis responded in the affirmative. He said the building foot print would service both. Commissioner Staunton said he would like to echo Commissioner Forrest's concern on the Comprehensive Plan and retail west of France Avenue. Staunton also acknowledged the reference in the staff report indicating that this redevelopment could trigger a small area plan, adding he is a little uncomfortable with that. Continuing, Staunton said the Commission should proceed cautiously with any redevelopment west of France. Chair Grabiel noted that retail is the primary use along France Avenue, adding if one looks at the plain language of the Comprehensive Plan this redevelopment works. Planner Teague informed the Commission that this project would not be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan – limited retail use is a permitted use on this site. Mr. Dovolis added that he believes limited retail is the appropriate use for this site. Commissioner Forrest commented that in her opinion reviewing this project as a PUD would be useful. Commissioner Carpenter asked Mr. Dovolis if the rendering of the building presented to the Commission would be what was built. Mr. Dovolis responded in the affirmative, adding what was indicated on the drawings would be what's constructed. Continuing, Dovolis reiterated the importance of this corner, adding the design presented is specific to this corner. Concluding, Chair Grabiel and the Commission thanked Mr. Dovolis and the development team for bringing this concept before them. The general consensus was support for the project and that the upgrading of this corner was a good thing. Approaching this redevelopment through the PUD process was also reasonable. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Grabiel acknowledged receipt of the Council Connection. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague for an update on the chiller at York Gardens. Planner Teague reported that the City Council approved the new chiller location and also directed York Gardens to immediately install noise reduction materials. Commissioner Staunton asked Planner Teague if the sports dome gets the "nod" would the Planning Commission review the plans. Teague responded that both the Commission and Council would hear this as a Conditional Use Permit. Staunton commented that keeping abreast of future City plans is of benefit during the Grandview Small Area Plan process. Commissioner Staunton updated the Commission on the ongoing Grandview Small Area Plan process, adding that work continues on developing a work plan and retaining consultants. Staunton said a different approach was taken in retaining consultants. Consultants were directed to provide the Executive Committee with a 6-page or less narrative. Staunton said from the responses the Committee hopes to cobble together a good team. Staunton reported that the Committee meets again tomorrow evening (8/18) to hammer out the details. X. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Teague reported that at last evenings Council meeting the Council granted preliminary plat approval for the property located at 5829 Brookview Avenue by a 4-1 vote. Teague asked the Commission to recall that they approved that subdivision by a 4-3 vote. Teague said two new houses would be built on the lots. XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Potts moved meeting adjournment at 8:00 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried. Jackie Hoogenakker Respectfully submitted