HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-02-12 Planning Commission Regular Meeting PacketAgenda
Plan n ing Com m ission
City Of Edina, Minnesota
City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th Street
Wednesday, February 12, 2020
7:00 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda
IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A.Planning Commission Minutes: January 29, 2020
V.Community Comment
During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission 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/Commission Members to respond to their
comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for
consideration at a future meeting.
VI.Public Hearings
A.B-20-4, A 5.1 foot +rst ,oor height variance for a new home at
4805 Sunnyslope Road West
B.Parking Stall Variance and Amendment to an Approved Final
Development Plan; 4500 France Avenue for Orion Investments
VII.Reports/Recommendations
A.Zoning Ordinance Amendments - Introduction
VIII.Correspondence And Petitions
A.Correspondence Submissions Regarding 4500 France Ave.
IX.Chair And Member Comments
X.Sta9 Comments
XI.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortable being part of the public
proc ess . If you need as sistance in the way of hearing ampli+c ation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or s om ething els e, pleas e c all 952-927-8861
72 hours in advanc e of the m eeting.
Date: F ebruary 12, 2020 Agenda Item #: I V.A.
To:P lanning C ommission Item Type:
Minutes
F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist
Item Activity:
Subject:P lanning C ommission Minutes: January 29, 2020 Ac tion
C ITY O F E D IN A
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED:
P lease approve minutes as amended.
I N TR O D U C TI O N:
AT TAC HME N T S:
Description
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes : January 29, 2020
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 1 of 6
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Planning Commission
Edina City Hall Council Chambers
January 29, 2020
I. Call To Order
Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM.
II. Roll Call
Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Thorsen, Strauss, Melton, Nemerov, Lee, Douglas and Chair
Olsen. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Emily Bodeker, Assistant Planner,
Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist.
Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Velavuli, Miranda, Berube, and Bennett.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the January 29, 2020, agenda. Commissioner
Douglas seconded the motion. Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A. Minutes: Planning Commission, January 8, 2020
Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the January 8, 2020, meeting minutes.
Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried.
V. Community Comment
None.
VI. Public Hearings
A. Preliminary Plat with Variances – 5928 Ashcroft Avenue
Director Teague presented the request of Nathan Raich for a Preliminary Plat with Variances . Staff
recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with Variance at 5928 Ashcroft Avenue, as requested subject
to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report.
Appearing for the Applicant
Mr. Nathan Raich, 3122 117th Avenue, Blaine, introduced himself and addressed the Commission.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 2 of 6
Public Hearing
Chair Olson indicated the Commission has received all of the correspondence from the residents.
Mr. Paul Lang, 5917 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated he was against the
approval.
Ms. Jennifer Lee, 5921 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated she was against the
approval.
Mr. Jason Ablitner, 5916 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated he was against the
approval.
Ms. Patty Crater, 5924 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated she was against the
approval.
Mr. Barry Crater, 5924 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated he was against the
approval.
Mr. Mike Dubios, 5936 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission and indicated he was against the
approval.
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial to the City
Council of the proposed two lot subdivision of 5928 Ashcroft Avenue as outlined in the staff
memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Douglas seconded the
motion. Motion tied 3 ayes (Douglas, Lee, Olsen), 3 nays (Strauss, Nemerov, Thorsen).
B. Variance Request B-20-2 – 4630 Edgebrook Place
Assistant City Planner Bodeker presented the request of a 4630 Edgebrook Place for a Variance . Staff
recommends approval of the Variance Request, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed
in the staff report.
Appearing for the Applicant
Ms. Angie Wingate, Rehkamp Architects, introduced herself and addressed the Commission.
Public Hearing
None
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 3 of 6
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission approve the Variance request at
4630 Edgebrook Place as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein.
Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Variance Request B-20-1 – 6000 Beard Ave
Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request of 6000 Beard Ave for a Variance. Staff recommends
approval of the Variance request, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff
report.
Appearing for the Applicant
Mr. David George, Homeowner at 6000 Beard Ave, introduced himself and addressed the Commission.
Public Hearing
None
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
Mr. Lee Olson, builder introduced himself and addressed the Commission.
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission approve the 2.3-foot north side
street and .8 front yard setback request for a teardown-rebuild on the existing foundation on
property at 6000 Beard Ave. as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings
therein. Commissioner Douglas seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 ayes, 1 nay (Lee).
D. Variance Request B-20-3 – 7318 Claredon Drive
Assistant City Planner Aaker presented the request of 7318 Claredon Drive for a Variance . Staff
recommends approval of the Variance request, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in
the staff report.
Appearing for the Applicant
Mr. Garret Grev, 7318 Claredon Drive, introduced himself and addressed the Commission.
Public Hearing
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 4 of 6
None
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
Good examples of growing family needs
Seems justified
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission approve the 1.3-foot side yard
setback variance for the north property line at 7318 Claredon Dr. as outlined in the staff memo
subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
E. Site Plan Modification Review – 3121 W. 69th St.
Director Teague presented the request of 3121 W. 69th St for a Site Plan Modification. Staff recommends
approval of the Site Plan Modification, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff
report.
Appearing for the Applicant
Mr. Rick Fieleck, General Contractor, introduced himself and addressed the Commission.
Public Hearing
None.
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved that the Planning Commission approve the Site Plan Modification
as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner
Douglas seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
F. Preliminary Plat – 7101 and 7151 Metro Boulevard
Planner Teague presented the request for a Preliminary Plat . Staff recommends approval of the
Preliminary Plat, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report.
Commissioner Thorsen recused himself from this matter.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 5 of 6
Public Hearing
Mr. Karl Ganske, 5024 West 70th Street, introduced himself and addressed the Commission with his
concerns.
Mr. Eric Anderson, 6501 Indian Hill Road, introduced himself as the applicant and addressed the
Commission.
Commissioner Strauss moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Lee seconded the
motion. Motion carried.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
New occupants might experience an uptick in the traffic
Any new development would warrant a traffic study
Motion
Commissioner Douglas moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council of the Preliminary Plat as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and
findings therein. Commissioner Nemerov seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
VII. Reports/Recommendations
Chair Olson asked if anyone has commented on the Better Together Edina link. Staff indicated there were 35
views but only one comment.
VIII. Correspondence and Petitions
None.
IX. Chair and Member Comments
Commissioner Thorsen explained why he recused himself.
Commissioner Nemerov asked for a recap on road construction in the City. Mr. Teague updated the
Commission on this item.
X. Staff Comments
Planner Teague updated the Commission on projects reviewed by the City Council.
XI. Adjournment
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: February 12, 2020
Page 6 of 6
Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the January 29, 2020, Meeting of the Edina Planning
Commission at 9:06 PM. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Date: F ebruary 12, 2020 Agenda Item #: VI.A.
To:P lanning C ommission Item Type:
R eport and R ecommendation
F rom:Kris Aaker Assistant P lanner
Item Activity:
Subject:B-20-4, A 5.1 foot firs t floor height variance for a new
home at 4805 S unnyslope R oad Wes t
Ac tion
C ITY O F E D IN A
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED:
Approve the variance as submitted.
I N TR O D U C TI O N:
A 5.1 foot first floor height variance from the allowable 1 foot increase to elevate the basement floor a minimum
of 2 feet above the F E M A flood plain elevation of 888.2 for a new home that will comply with all other zoning
ordinance requirements.
AT TAC HME N T S:
Description
Staff Report with attachments
STAFF REPORT
Date:
To:
From:
February 12, 2020
PLANNING COMMISSION
Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner
Subject: B-20-4, A 5.1 foot first floor height variance for a new home at 4805 Sunnyslope Road West.
Information / Background:
The applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 5.1 feet higher than the allowable I foot
increase in first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 4805 Sunnyslope West. The property is
20,209 square feet in area and is located on the south east side of Sunnyslope West, and is within the
floodplain. The City of Edina's Engineering standards require the basement elevation of any new home to be
2 feet higher than the FEMA base flood elevation. The existing home was built in 1952 prior to the first
FEMA floodplain study conducted in 1979 to determine flood risk areas.
A variance is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation
of the existing home by more than one foot. The current home on site has a basement elevation of 887.2'
and a first floor elevation of 895.5' feet above sea level. The established floodplain elevation is at 888.2' with
a required protection elevation of 890.2'. The minimum basement elevation must be no less than 2 feet
above the flood elevation so the minimum basement elevation required is 890.2' with a minimum low
opening requirement of 890.9. Both the existing home and new home are walk-outs. The existing walk-out
is at 887.2, 3.5 feet below the required 890.9 low opening elevation. The new basement low opening will
comply with the minimum low opening requirement established for the property. The new walk-out
basement will be brought up to low opening requirement and will provide a ceiling height of 8'- I I 1/4 ". The
proposed first floor elevation of the house is at 901.6', which will be 5.1' higher than the I foot increase
allowed by ordinance, (a 6.1' total increase).
Surrounding Land Use s
Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential
Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R- I and guided low-density residential.
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
STAFF REPORT
Page 2
Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential.
Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential.
Existing Site Features
The existing 20,209 square foot lot is located on the south east side of Sunnyslope West. The property is
within a flood hazard area. The existing rambler is to be removed and replaced with a two story home,
which will be elevated out of the flood zone. The home's basement will be elevated out of the flood zone to
an increase from 887.2' to 890.7'. The first floor height will be increased a total of 6. I', however, the
maximum allowable over-all height measured from average existing grade will comply with the height
restrictions. The maximum ridge height from grade allowed is 39 feet, with the new home ridge height from
existing grade at 38.91 feet, slightly lower than the maximum allowed. The regrading of the site will create a
flood plain mitigation area in the back yard to address flood issues. The existing home is nonconforming
regarding front yard setback at 32.5 feet from the front lot line. The required front yard setback for the
property is 37.2 feet which is the average front yard setback of the homes on either side. The new home
will be moved 4.7 feet farther back from the street, (from where the existing home is located), to conform
to the minimum front yard setback requirement.
Planning
Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential
Zoning: R- I , Single-Dwelling District
Grading & Drainage
The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in
their memorandum. Grading for the property and drainage will be primarily directed to a mitigation
area created in the rear yard.
Per Engineering: The stormwater management plan is in general compliance with the City of Edina
Building Policy SP-003. Swales are proposed to divert water to either the street in the front or the
floodplain mitigation area in the backyard.
The required lowest floor elevation is 890.2' (FEMA I% annual chance event elevation of 888.2'+
2'). The required lowest opening elevation is 890.9' (local I% annual chance event elevation of
888.9'+2').
STAFF REPORT
Page 3
The proposed basement floor is 890.9'. Applicant to include the proposed lowest opening elevation
on the proposed survey.
A modification to the existing easement for the storm sewer (dated June 12, 1990) will be
required to add new terminal catch basin, and remove section of pipe and existing catch basin.
Compliance Table
City Standard Proposed
North Side —
East Rear -
South Side —
West Front —
10 feet
25 feet
10 feet
***Existing 32.5 Feet /
37.2 feet required
10.7 feet
51.7 feet
13.9 feet
37.2 feet
Building Coverage 25% 24.57 %
Basement Elevation
First Floor Elevation
Building Height
***Existing 887.2 / 890.2
Min
890.9 Min low Opening
***Existing 895.5 / 896.5
Max
39 Feet
890.9
901.6*
38. 91 Feet
*Requires a variance ***Existing condition
STAFF REPORT
Page 4
PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION
Primary Issues
• Does the proposed new home meet the criteria for approval of variances with a
with a first floor elevation higher than the existing home?
Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first floor elevation 6.1
feet higher than the existing home with a variance of 5.1 feet as requested for the following
four reasons:
I . The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning
standards, with exception of the new I st floor elevation height. The proposed home design elevates
the lowest level of the dwelling two feet above the 100-year FEMA flood elevation of 888.2
removing it from the flood zone. It is a goal of the city to remove flood prone properties when
given the opportunity from the flood plain since many homes in Edina were built prior to the first
flood plain study conducted in 1979 and are nonconforming with basements lower than the flood
elevation.
2. The variance allows the new home to be elevated out of the flood zone and maintain the required
distances from the neighbors to the north and south. It provides the required elevated basement
while still complying with the maximum allowable height as measured from existing grade. The
existing home is nonconforming regarding front yard setback. The new home will comply with the
required front yard setback and be 4.7 feet farther back from the front lot line than the current
home. The home will comply in all respects with the exception of the Ist floor height.
3. The proposed home design reflects the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass.
The maximum height from existing grade will conform even given the increase in 1st floor elevation.
The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and similar to surrounding properties. The new
home will be an improvement to the existing flood zone conditions and will enhance the property.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the variance, subject to the findings listed in the staff report above,
and subject to the following conditions:
I The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans:
• Survey revision, February, 4, 2020.
• Building plans and elevations date stamped: January 3, 2020.
2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo
dated: February 7, 2020.
DATE: February 7, 2020
TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director
FROM: Zuleyka Marquez – Graduate Engineer
RE: 4805 Sunnyslope Rd W - Variance Review
The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm
water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review
was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the
time of building permit application. Plans reviewed include the proposed grading & erosion control plan and
certificate of survey dated 2/05/20.
Easement
A modification to the existing easement for the storm sewer (dated June 12, 1990) will be required to add
new terminal catch basin, and remove section of pipe and existing catch basin. Applicant to perform work at
their own cost.
Grading and Drainage
The site drains to Minnehaha Creek via an existing catch basin in the backyard and Sunnyslope Road W. in the
front yard. Existing drainage paths are generally maintained, even as the grades onsite are increased. While the
proposed footprint of the structure is extended into the backyard, the net storage in the backyard is
maintained.
Stormwater Mitigation
The stormwater management plan is in general compliance with the City of Edina Building Policy SP-003.
Swales are proposed to divert water to either the street in the front or the floodplain mitigation area in the
backyard.
Floodplain
The required lowest floor elevation is 890.2’ (FEMA 1% annual chance event elevation of 888.2’ + 2’). The
required lowest opening elevation is 890.9’ (local 1% annual chance event elevation of 888.9’ + 2’).
The proposed basement floor is 890.9’. Applicant to include the proposed lowest opening elevation on the
proposed survey.
Erosion and Sediment Control
An erosion and sediment control plan was reviewed and is generally consistent with City of Edina Building
Policy SP-002.
Street and Curb Cut
A driveway entrance permit will be required, as the applicant proposes to extend the driveway entrance.
Sunnyslope Rd W is scheduled to be milled and overlaid in 2025. Bituminous roadway patching Standard Plate
543 applies.
Public Utilities
Water and sanitary sewer are served from Sunnyslope Rd W. Per City of Edina Building Policy SP-024, a one-
inch water service line is required from the curb stop to the dwelling.
O ther Items
A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit will be required. A final grade as-built survey and inspection will
be required to verify compliance with the approved stormwater plan.
If retaining walls greater than 4-feet are proposed, submit drawings, cross-section and calculations prepared
and signed by a Minnesota licensed professional engineer and apply for a retaining wall permit.
No records of a well onsite. The original home was constructed in 1952 and water main was installed in 1938.
Berglund Variance
We are requesting a variance in order to achieve a full height basement with the construction
of our new home. The height difference in total from the existing first floor elevation to the
proposed first floor elevation would be 6.1' higher. Since the lot is under a mix of flood risk
from local and regional flooding, code requires the lowest opening elevation to be no lower
than 890.9. Given this code, we would only be left with a very shallow crawl space under the
main floor, and as you can understand, that is not very desirable nor is it functional for our
family. We have owned and lived at the property for a few years now and we are finally ready
to demo and build our new family home. With regards to the other codes and requirements
that are applicable with planning and zoning for the City of Edina, we are within or under all
others considered, such as overall height, hard cover, and setbacks, and we are also meeting all
the requirements as designed by an engineer from Advanced Engineering and Environmental
Services, Inc. (AE2S) for the storm water management plan specific to our site.
We look forward to living in Edina and raising our family for many years to come and would
appreciate your consideration of this variance request to help us achieve our dream home as
designed by Alexander Design Group, and hopefully to be built by City Homes, LLC,
Sincerely,
David & Anna Berglund
Berglund Variance- 4805 Sunnyslope Rd. W, Edina
*Our proposed variance will relieve practical difficulties by allowing the clients to achieve a full
height basement, while still staying at the lowest opening elevation 890.9, per code. A full
height basement would not be possible otherwise, and the clients would end up with a very
shallow crawl space. Our use is reasonable, as having a basement is the most economical way
to maximize space without increasing the footprint.
*This property faces an extraordinary circumstance, as it is in a floodplain, and therefore has to
adhere to the specific codes addressing floodplain.
*We respect the intent of the zoning ordinance, and therefore are not asking for setback or
height variances. Our variance does not disrupt the harmony of the zoning ordinance, and we
are meeting all other zoning codes.
*Our design and proposal does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. In
reference to our street scape elevation, the house to the South (4809) is taller. We feel this
design fits well with the neighboring houses, and is a classic, traditional design that fits the
neighborhood, as well as Edina overall.
Thank you,
David and Anna Berglund, Alexander Design Group, City Homes
JAN 0 ?O`i.0
2/5/2020
4805 W Sunnyslope Rd - Google Maps
Gor .gle Maps 4805 W Sunnyslope Rd
4805 W Sunnyslope Rd
Minneapolis, MN 55424
Directions Save Nearby Send to your Share
phone
•
• • • WM83+G5 Edina, Minnesota •
Photos
ht
\ ...... I ,_
- •sso
lie".....u, 14'
WV ' 1........ \
N'2.3/17;::•Ots,,;,:.7
/Sz, 0
4
w,
...pr.
' ,.... :VI>.
.... ....„...........07Aor; ...AP,.
.0, \ 'A...,,.... .....
tor .i.r
„..- ,... ..t • io
sses.5 Mr.
—,” ' • /3 . A re •
------....L•21,1s —dz.., ..,
\ ----tr-L-- _ , ..r, P.M] 1
KOWA ,........P.......it . ,
1 ....../...' f I if 'pm).
4'0
ssr
AL
o
/
fax FENCE
O
7.;
472i- •osa.
ib-nt
MAI
RAO
. ,
/
/
/
r '
PI? •.es.
••• , 2 g Vs7g s I
sat" I
,,,,
MU
Ras
ars
IRR
1 •
MEI
SKI
me"
•Ter
sem-inns, or moss, svros
ss 1160 Limo' starssucnossousnsmussortrims........ pisusorosmsss.
-1 I 00,V AAA\
11 Mr 110,P,TAVP Wed, 11.0•A
MAI rAmAAAAAA pope, AAA, A MLA, lareA1A,A•AsAmv,,i,,,,101,A A11,1bm10.,ACums•My Pt.:ALCUALMAre Jue pA,A*0.01:01 PIAA Aa AAA.: ostsoms
hemmed E.o.m.
1=11=m" PPAS
1.4,to - AL-400
l*An• „
:urn
PUKE WAN V.I.
A row 44.00
1 ; 117.1:tre nt71171:10141
MAE. boned on.
top 25,
CAA., 25,PAPP AAA AA
WOE WALKOUT ELLYASON
FTE MOT FLOM V.010.4
CIE GRACE FLOOR VASEN
TOF TOP OF TONDATON OSP.
LOC LOWEST EmENND SOK
CONMETE
SAW.
..CmC NM. WI
—EN— MU Tv
FAPPAPP CONCRETE CLOP
KI FOAM MD MERCK 4.. -PAK_ COO. 0001NC
TwEE 04werN010
TIME DEVON.
MI COMA. ROONO — Pr — TLC
TR= DECIDUOUS KNOWS —Ks— ELECT= LNDEPEN1.0
4-0110 COMP. PROPOSED
WARD KAFL
RENCK WM= — — FENCE
TODNOx[PECESTAL N— npOt CATE LNDERCROLPO
—wo— CAS LNOCKOOUND
OVERNE0 LOOPY
rvys- evvw TPIE UNE
—a— SANITARY WON
'Taw SONS
1019140NE LNOCREACUNO
.ccws- 0000. RENAME WAN.
—un— UMW uNDENCROLND
— I — WATERY.
Na— MOO VENAL
-1-114-1.4-14-1 RAILRON4 TRAMS
a
CAST IRDN MOAN. PRODOMNIN
RCN PIPE YONLIONT Y..14 POWER POLE
ROY POE ROMAN. PLO4D CUT 111PE
CNSTIED TNT WOW. NT LIFT SEATON
CA10 N. FROM ROOF DRAIN
OWL= 'ST 1404111100 EOM E0 SANITARY UNIN.
MAR
NM.
LOALMOIT MAO 0 :MAURY
PK NAIL WrOMENT FT00 2 DRAM
PK 1404ANNT SET ITO. PAM.
PK SAL W/ AUAortm ROC
SAWN A/c COMM POPO
VAT
CAME TY PEDESTAL
0.6110C TRAMEORMS
ELECTRIC BANN=
ELECT= NETER
.CTRIC MILT
WED WO
CENT Ku ma OPTIC IOW.
sac DEPT. NOW UP
FLAC POLL
FUS. P.M
KUM TANK
PROPANE TANK
CAS MOEN
CAS VALVE
CAS MANN.
LISOLOOR
COMO POST
10ND NCLE
bon ROB
=sir now&
=UT, VAULT
SAMOAN MANI=
WATER NOW
VIA. SPIGOT
• WELL ▪ PONTORINC AEU.
O ORB STOP
CATE vALRE
11 ANT
• IRRICATO. VALVE .w. sENAL
19 POST POICATDF VALVE 0- RALROAD SwITOI Q SAMPITE DON
OD SOL mos wETLANO NEM SEX
TWPOBAGEZASEC 1B
Senna. Cow
EDINA,
MINNESOTA
SEW.
140.04103
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAR PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT IMP A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE UWS OF
INE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
RAM, SEPANI, P.E.
0014. 01-0120 LN N. 26147
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
ISO ROUT, BROADWAY WAYZATA. MN. 5.5301 (952)476.0000
WWW.SATHRECON
En.
EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED CONDITIONS
0.wim mem. Penne. coon
ComPANONNA 1.083.0.
2D 0 a lo
REALE WEENY
.
1
.. •
. k..,14 ki .... „.. ,i(,..v. ' ,
rri,...) .:,
. - , ,, - • ,......„,,..._______. ,:.,0,,•..,.4 ..,.. 44 ....,_
nu SURVEY LEGEND
,151.0 '0 0,1 ONG CO CATIAMMOAPPPAOR cossorts A,µo, A00pop•vpm,AvrAA
MIALV1210 MAP, MO 0A00M0 APA
WNW WOOL PRWAL [ASV
BASUJENT ALICAT GLCULAPON
DAPIACur mossr ux. AMMO
MAPCO POP, BACK APP,PrOAP
IPPL1,000•AU
GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN
PREPARED FOR:
CITY HOMES, LLC
Ct.
JPA
OBP
OM.
0040020.10
IMMO
.070020
1/0.20
10•2020
sn000
•LAPORAPAOHCONSATUlt0•N ILIZAAVAVA.P.A10 WW1 VAPPAV moms, sosnrsrsoom,ssor ut 0 L1TV. csoRoossLIPP• AMA. Loss...LT.0o LISCIPPOTS LOP OP PAPA 1.00A,PLOPOP510, FOX CAMACCV 1.050£1 CAULANG rsou ILLECATOALit 110.
EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED CONDITIONS
"
Gm..
Pn
1 1 + • . I -
0400 0011100,
Nowerot We. 4,10000
fromlio „nn„d10 incesme wynl
reet0000.00014
naff01140
Sao,.
Cow K1000Arimma
occtsrmio
.1i2010
10020
1/7/26.
1100O20
FILLD 0nv
CI.00
OOP
OATS
110111100
CITYCOMMENTS
c0A0ATED.R0YARDOMAINNON0
uOvLD CARACC 00WALL EAST
OACCUENTHEIONTC..CULATION
eu,[1.404THCiCHTCALGREVORD
MOvCONou0 00,40,0041•6000
.ENVICUSAIMA
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
PREPARED FOR:
CITY HOMES, LLC
It7,1=47=II.II50SAI:C=1""""'"'""""""—"m""°"'"°0.5555'000
0S 01.45 de or bcr. 019.
00.00..
0 D.r.mSaw PLR T 0
Rem001/ .000,1
TW1,2041GE.24-SEC 10
lianneyln CDURIY
EDINA,
MINNESOTA
FILE .0.
1.1800-002
20 10 0 10 20 AO
SCALE NEM
IOIr
a
' 4'
1
',111c.
.,,. c
1 i
- 1 ---.'
I
10* \‘-..- .
1 jkATI Ay* , 7:7
Pk
„
9'ke” Asc
NM,
vt.
RON FINCE
RA1
war.'
IRO
N,
`F„'-'"°
4fi:A.. •
/
0.114
• 11.1•3
IRON FENCi'P0.
100,1,TIONOIVROInrrVVIIVIVril
1300 1.5UNNYStoPe 40CTIONC00.1T0 CLLRINSTRICT.sca00..000
umrH 040.041-100nCou0.
010101.1110V01.,
It SINAelnrew 41100.018.0.1,0.00.0.2.1.
dA05.c. „At,
/
ni"a= ,====41:7'
Ao.A.A.ArAmoAmarAn,7=*A..”7.7=70. "=„Z--11 .lm. 1140.0go Are wrollay 0010,00.0 MeCall
000.0..00 0.004 01001000,011.0.10..11000 000.(wol wunlwriko.,1,00,0010.10,00.0.
Owl PIA0 Volumes
Lo—
;; raunT
F~ON NR
;I:ral
GA MOW la locslod on.
SURVEY LEGEND
KC 0100 CLSVATION
FR FIRST FLOOR =WIC.
CIL CARADE FLOOR EILVATIC.
:Van' LIGAMENT ST a LIFT STIVON LOC LOY= C0NOIC ELL,
TV TOP 0 FOUNDATION ELM
01320 0. MOAN,. FOND CD SANDARY MANN. F -• 1 CONCRETC
111.4CNT FOUND 17.,..• sArrA7 01
,
47.1T I 11101100 RE0
DOLMA KAACN WC PK WL 1.0004T POND ili STORM OWN _..,_ c,,,nr 0
PK NAIL 1.I/ AIWA. DISC • CATCH OASIN
ORM CONTROL PONT 4 FLARED END mcncx -- --ft_ — ZAWcasnAc A/c ucr * tl/CE ccAnAcca -.— cocram Accrosoc CARLE TV PECCST. 0 TREE OCODYOUS CTARD R.L
10.11110C TRANSFORMER * TREC CON6210.6 ROIDVED —....— 000 TO.Z 001RIC MANHOLE .0. TRIM DIODUCLS ROWED —Ms— LUC'S. UNDOWOLIND
ELECTRIC METER 0 =PRONE MANHOLE -.-N.-- MCC
ELECTRIC MUT M TELEPHDRE PEDESTAL —IS — FIRER WM UNDERGROL.0
YARD ULM 0 01110 MANHOLE — CAS UNOOMR0010 LICHT
OPTIC F1KR OPTIC MANHOLE
101 IIIIUTY PEDEST. —0 OM= UTILITY
FIRE OPT. HOOK UP 0 WATERMAN 1,4040LC —.— SANITARY SEMII
FLAC PDS • 0.01 HETCR —0 STORY SOW
WATER SPCOT —A— TELEPHONE um
e ons 00000x• RET0INC WALL 10 uocromc WELL —Un— =um 1.110EROMIND
CD CMS STCO — I — WATERMAN
DA 0TE VALVE 0.2•. 110.119C SIGNAL
17 MONT '4 RAILROAD TRACMS
MD IRRIGATION VALVE 0 PALROAD SICNAL El POST ROCATCR VALK 0- RAILROAD SWTPCN
$10 Q SATELLITE OW Eno sat. some v. 1,2,010 ASTER NW
CAST MK 1.0004 0 roctoccnct
IRON PIPE 1.101.0101T SET POWER MC RON PIPE UDAMCNT FOUND < Off WIRE
ED rum TANK PROPANC TANK
0 CAS NMI
1111 CAS VALVE
0 CAS WIN. TO LwERATCR =Am row
110 NAND WE a MAIL WS
13
AR
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA.... MCI (052)4,043000
WWW.SATHRECOLI
,J0e1INWCCOCOPVINO.DISTRIOUTONAHMON COAVCYANCSOFINFORMA710100103PRCOUCTKI STRETLYPHOHONISD W1000 OAMADaNDCASIO.
ATrZtAlr"0'40AsImagracfrn=e.A10' SHALL THFRF00000,MTHRF.RFROCIL0ST.INC.Of
VerVirt ITOL.D"1"Lr'''' "O'N'""'" LLOALL,COPONSIOLEFORDAA=000.0701. RESULTOD rRom IUPCITNATL UAL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 'an
Sunnyslope Road
3D Conceptual Illustration ALEXANDER
DESIGN GROUP
Copyright 2019 12,17•19 nne3
CITY OF EDINA
CITY OF EDINA
AAR)
•111\ 41\1\I \\ I I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ALEXANDER
DESIGN GROUP
Sunnyslope Road
3D Conceptual Illustration
JAM 0 3 ZOZO
Copyright solo 124,19 rt232
CITY OF EDINA
ALEXANDER
DESIGN GROUP
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 2020
Sunnyslope Road
3D Conceptual Illustration
mva Copyright 2019
4,401
111111 Ir
.1111 EH 1110
1 11 RIP Mink
11111111°
11 1;09"
CITY OF EDINA
'11
/111111 "II 1111111 RI R
.111M 11:""III
001°11 ''j 00141
ALEXANDER 1111
DESIGN GROUP
Sunnyslope Road
3D Conceptual Illustration
Copyright 2019
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 2020
CITY OF EDINA
VNICI3 JO ALIO
020Z t0 NW'
IN31411.11Va0 ONINNYld
• C.161.11.rg
61oz 1q2pAdoo
uopeilsniu prwlazuop GE
pool' adoisAuuns
df10d9 N91930
2:13CINVX31V
.....srwassrmarr
NAYZATO41191 /MS
rieer.112471.171
1,..1.41,1021
U
6 2
IOFXX \
e-2
.^
e-2
••
xuam ww rot ea.
41,40RC[1,0•000 Me WV*
OM DIMR•riC mli RAM'.
MU. na.3130...OHI, tan.
\ RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
2,•• rpm= me
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 2020
CITY OF EDINA
IMMO!
Xectiftill
sa.s. err.anNIAT
mucw_Lenteaormy•wortra•
1.11.4.1 swum
WI62.151,100 &WM 0.111T111..••
41.1004,84. WAN LAP rne ant,.
oft nserc motranav•
1.1041.1.9. mos I 04.1..14C.SVI,
(T\ FRONT ELEVATION
Ce..ALL
scoonom
19.P_NZIA
e-2
ISI 1.1
740
III Ili
111111111, r..
1111111 11111 11111111111111 111111111111111 111111111111111 111111111111111
C01,034T 70111 406./0111t VIDIMTO ONICUP.
INN OE
NMI
EEE
N U
EEE • RII/Atal ;feints_
.4."1.4.1•100/16
,10,M12/1..MINDIIA,DrofINIIIIEM 0 LEFT SIDE ELEVATION Z.=
HAMS MEI en. I BAC. 1.0101M1
.1,10.I • 0.1.114011C IMMO. MT 61IN
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
e*-2
mew
JAN 0 3 2020
zz
6 • > CITY OF EDINA
=
E
;
n ill • e•-2
JF
1111
1M1
MR Tile
War 11.6401.
d• 110011.0.1.01.141111V•
COM. BOK. Ellreif
...Yd. Mt TAW f1018108,01.121Y0
41•11.1.90 raw°. MM... --4
411114STLAKIIIIIVIT
IVAITATA.11,4 JON
III.e.111.4111.11/7
II.10141.731732
0
rc
M REAR ELEVATION
arra ve.r.e.
COPTII.Zoll WM. ALEXANDER DES'al CAL,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 ;:02t1
CITY OF EDINA
LL.x.ANDLR
.1.1.111.01311.1
W....MM. I
mac •11.41M
1.00.1.41
n
1172t
hark
If
-c.64,121"
ISI
1.7
LOUR LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
O
1
00,114.11. ALOCANDER DCWRIN CAC, Ka
Lail. poor.<
'Est.
tag AtnNY•
V41"
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 0 3 7.0n
CITY OF EDINA
r • • • 1300[9111MVAIA. VIP
II I I I t
I ;
i0 ,NV= I ---
1.
1 ' . . . .;
i IC
IC.,1- l'. 1- ---;
1.----- 1-- .14 L J
(9 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
'Sow*
jl
1 1
; •• 04 4/..—.44
CIE 1: -.
0
ir
1 1
;
1 1 1 1 11
1 1
1 1
trIATASC1HII rue. 0124111/77 LUC11,1471012
I
MLA( et.
70,1,..4[1.44011.11.14.1440, NC
$, ,•1 1;;/- .• , • f • • • - • , , ; ~fL~I IlI~G1
Berglund
3D Conceptual Illustration
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 2 4 2020
CITY OF EDINA
ALEXANDER
DESIGN GROUP
Copyright 2020 0.1-20 OS
ALEXANDER 711
01.4-2011S
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 24 2070
CITY OF EDINA
Berglund
DESIGN GROUP 3D Conceptual Illustration
Copyright 2020
MANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 2 4 ?Mg
CITY OF EDINA
ALEXANDER Berglund
DESIGN GROUP 3D Conceptual Illustration
Copyright 2020
ox24-2o HS
ALEXANDER
DESIGN GROUP
Berglund
3D Conceptual Illustration
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAN 2 4 2020
CITY OF EDINA
Copyright 2020
.5110Z•Ft-lo ozoulipiitlop
prildapuoD as dnoao N91S3C]
VNIC13 dO 4119
puniatag ei3CINVX31V
DM NV(*
IN3Vilkiddat ONINNVld
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ALEXANDER Berghind
DESIGN GROUP 3D Conceptual Illustration JAN 2 4 2020
Copyright 2020 IIS
CITY OF EDINA
Date: F ebruary 12, 2020 Agenda Item #: VI.B.
To:P lanning C ommission Item Type:
R eport and R ecommendation
F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director
Item Activity:
Subject:P arking S tall Varianc e and Amendment to an
Approved F inal Development P lan; 4500 F ranc e
Avenue for O rion Investments
Ac tion
C ITY O F E D IN A
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED:
R ecommend the C ity C ouncil D eny the proposed parking stall variance and amended final development plan.
I N TR O D U C TI O N:
Orion Investments is requesting a parking stall variance and amendment to their approved final development plan
(site plan) to increase the seating capacity of the approved restaurant from 35 seats to 110 seats in the new
development under construction at 4500 France Avenue. T he approved restaurant space in the 2018 approved
plan was 3,587 square feet in size, with two retail spaces being 2,960 square feet in site. T he proposed new
restaurant space would increase to 3,731 square feet, while the retail space would decrease to 2,680 square feet.
T here are no other changes proposed to the approved plans.
T he project currently under construction will have 45 units of housing, an enclosed surface parking lot with 39
stalls, and underground parking containing 71 stalls. T hree of the 39 stalls are designated for resident parking;
therefore, 36 stalls are available for the retail and restaurant. T he surface parking lot has a public parking
easement over it, to allow retail customers in the 44th and F rance district to park.
AT TAC HME N T S:
Description
Staff Report
Engineering Memo
Parking & Traffic Study
Site Location
Applicant Narrative and Applicant Area Restaurant Study
Proposed Restaurant & Retail Space
2018 Floor Plan for the Restaurant & Retail Space
Minutes from the City Council Approval 10-8-18
Minutes from the Planning Commis s ion 8-29-18
2018 Res olution approving the Project
February 12, 2020
Planning Commission
Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Parking Stall Variance and Revised Final development plan for 4500 France Avenue.
Information / Background:
Orion Investments is requesting a parking stall variance and an amendment to their approved final
development plan (site plan) to increase the seating capacity of the approved restaurant from 35
seats to 110 seats in the new development under construction at 4500 France Avenue. The
approved restaurant space in the 2018 approved plan was 3,587 square feet in size, with two retail
spaces being 2,960 square feet in size. The proposed new restaurant space would increase to 3,731
square feet, while the retail space would decrease to 2,680 square feet. There are no other
changes proposed to the approved plans.
The project currently under construction will have 45 units of housing, an enclosed surface parking
lot with 39 stalls, and underground parking containing 71 stalls. Three of the 39 stalls are
designated for resident parking; therefore, 36 stalls are available for the retail and restaurant. The
surface parking lot has a public parking easement over it, to allow retail customers in the 44th and
France district to also parking on site.
Primary vehicle access points would be off France Avenue and Sunnyside Road. The access
road off of France is on the adjacent property to the south, which is owned by the
applicant.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Surrounding Land Uses
Northerly: Retail uses; zoned PCD-1, Planned Commercial District and guided NN,
Neighborhood Node.
Easterly: Retail uses in the City of Minneapolis.
STAFF REPORT Page 2
Southerly: Retail & Office uses; zoned PCD-1, Planned Commercial District and guided NN,
Neighborhood Node.
Westerly: Single-Family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low
Density Residential.
Existing Site Features
The subject property is one acre in size, and a mixed use retail and housing structure is under
construction.
Planning
Guide Plan designation: NN, Neighborhood Node.
Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development
Parking
Based on the City Code requirement, Section 36-1312, a total of 65 parking stall would be
required for the retail and 110 seat restaurant (see table below). The proposed plans would
provide 36 parking stalls on the site. The applicant also owns the property to the south and
would make available 15 stalls when the business on that site are closed to make up for some
of the shortage. The Spack Consulting parking study concludes that even with the 15 available
stalls during the peak operation of the restaurant, there would be four (4) days each week in
the evening, when there would not be adequate off-street parking; two weekdays and each
Friday and Saturday night. (See attached study.)
Engineering staff has reviewed the Spack Consulting parking study and provided a memo
regarding the conclusions of that assessment. (See attached memo.)
Code Requirement Proposed
2,680 s.f. retail spaces = 18 spaces
(8 spaces for the 1st 1,000 s.f.
6 spaces per each additional 1,000 s.f.)
110 seat restaurant = 47 spaces
(1 space per 3 seats + 1 space per employee on a
maximum shift {10 employees})
Total = 65 spaces required
36 enclosed spaces proposed*
*Variance and amended final development plan required
STAFF REPORT Page 3
Final Development Plan Amendment
The approved final development plan for this development, limited the restaurant seating to 35.
(See attached city council minutes.) Therefore, the final development plan approval as part of the
rezoning requires an amendment. (See attached 2018 resolution that approved the final
development plan.)
Site Circulation/Access/Traffic
Primary access points to the proposed development would not be altered. Access would be off
France and Sunnyside.
Spack Consulting conducted a traffic and parking study which concludes that existing roadways
would still support the project and the additional restaurant size. The level of service at
adjacent intersections would not be impacted. (See attached study.)
44th & France Small Area Plan
Guiding Principle 7: Parking
Parking should be hidden from view behind or beneath buildings on the west side of France
Avenue. The large parking lot with multiple owners between Sunnyside and 44th Street should
be reimagined as a "community parking facility" 5 that accommodates parking for the study area
(district). This community parking facility should be designed to double as gathering space and
should have the flexibility to change over time, as other modes of transportation, such as ride-
sharing, become more common and fewer parking spaces are needed.
While district parking is contemplated in the 44th and France SAP, it has not yet been
constructed. The proposed plan to increase the size of the restaurant would cause an increase
to visible parking within the area.
Parking Stall Variance
As shown above, a parking variance from 65 spaces required to 36 is required. Per the Zoning
Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the
ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Ordinance and that
the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does not meet the
variance standards, when applying the three conditions:
Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied
affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will:
1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with
ordinance requirements.
Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any
reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical
STAFF REPORT Page 4
difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical
difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns.
There is no practical difficulty in this instance. The applicant was approved for a project that
allowed for restaurant for a maximum seating capacity of 35. The practical difficulty is caused
by the applicant’s desire for additional seating. Spack Consulting performed a parking study and
concluded that the off-street parking (36 on-site spaces, evening use of 15 spaces from the
property to the south) would not be enough to satisfy the shortage. (See attached parking
study.) The study concludes that four (4) days each week there would be a parking shortage in
the evening; two weekdays and each Friday and Saturday. During these times, parking would
then spill out onto adjacent streets. While there may be adequate parking available on adjacent
streets, the city has not considered on street parking to satisfy off street parking requirements
or as justification for variances. Additionally, while these 15 spaces would assist the parking
shortage, there is no guarantee that they would remain available in the future.
2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every
similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created?
No. There are no unique circumstances. As mentioned above, the applicant was approved for
a 35-seat maximum restaurant. The circumstances of being short parked are caused by the
applicant’s desire for a larger restaurant; therefore, are self-created.
3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
No. Additional interior restaurant seats would not alter the character of the neighborhood.
On street parking is an allowed use on adjacent streets. However, the increase in on-street
parking could be interpreted as impacting the character of the single-family residential district
to the west, if on-street parking extends into the area where single-family homes are located.
Options for Consideration & Recommendation
As noted above in the variance review, staff is recommending denial of the request. Below provide
options for the planning commission and city council to consider:
Denial
Recommend the City Council deny the parking stall variance from 65 spaces to 36 and final
development plan revision to expand the allowable restaurant seating from 35 seats to 110. Denial
is based on the following findings:
1. There is no practical difficulty in this instance. The applicant was approved for a project that
allowed for restaurant for a maximum seating capacity of 35.
2. The practical difficulty is caused by the applicant’s desire for additional seating.
3. Reasonable use exists on the site with the development that was originally approved.
STAFF REPORT Page 5
4. Spack Consulting performed a parking study and concluded that the off-street parking (36-
39 spaces) would not be enough to satisfy the shortage. Four (4) days each week there
would be a parking shortage in the evening; two weekdays and each Friday and Saturday.
During these times, parking would then spill out onto adjacent streets, even though fifteen
(15) parking stalls would be made available on the applicant’s property to the south.
5. While these 15 stalls on the south property would assist in the parking stall shortage, there
is no guarantee that they remain available in the future.
6. There may be adequate parking available on adjacent streets, however, the city has not
considered on-street parking to satisfy off street parking requirements or as justification for
variances.
7. On-street parking could extend into the adjacent single-family residential area to the west,
which could negatively impact the character of the neighborhood.
Approval
Recommend the City Council approve the parking stall variance from 65 spaces to 36 and final
development plan revision to expand the allowable restaurant seating from 35 seats to 110.
Approval is based on the following findings:
1. Parking would be accommodated by the existing 36 on-site parking stalls, the 15-stalls on
the property to the south when needed, and adjacent on-street parking.
2. The site is located on a bus route; the project is pedestrian friendly with expanded
sidewalks and bicycle park available. Employees would be encouraged to use these
alternative modes of transportation.
The applicant must make efforts to implement Travel Demand Management strategies to
encourage alternative modes of transportation and reduce the impact of motor vehicles
(consistent with the 44th & France Small Area Plan and the transportation goals in the
Comprehensive Plan). These strategies may include;
i. Providing secure bicycle parking in well-lit, convenient areas near key entrances
ii. Providing on-site bicycle repair station
iii. Providing directional signage for locating transportation amenities (bus stops, bicycle
parking, etc.)
iv. Designating 5% of parking spaces for electric vehicles, carpool or vanpool
v. Subsidizing transit passes for tenants/employees (Metro Transit’s future E-Line bus
rapid transit service, which will operate between the Southdale Transit Center and the
University of Minnesota, will likely have stations at 44th and France)
vi. Distributing information to all new and existing tenants/employees annually (bike
maps, transit info, rideshare mapping applications)
STAFF REPORT Page 6
3. The parking study done by Spack Solutions concludes that there would be an adequate on-
street parking supply on Sunnyside Road and France Avenue adjacent to the site to
accommodate the additional parking demand for a 110-seat restaurant.
4. The on-site commercial parking is available to users of other commercial properties in the
44th and France District. The Spack study further concludes that any non-site vehicles that
would utilize this parking area are currently parking on-street in the area. Therefore, the
net change to on-street parking will be equivalent to the on-street parking demand of this
development.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial subject to the findings listed in the denial option above.
Deadline for a city decision: April 1, 2020
Date: February 6, 2020
To: 4500 France Ave, Owner and Development Team
Cc: Cary Teague – Community Development Director
Chad Millner, PE – Director of Engineering
From: Andrew Scipioni – Transportation Planner
Re: 4500 France Avenue – Parking Variance
Orion Investments is requesting a parking variance for a mixed-use redevelopment at 4500 France Avenue.
This development is proposed to include 46 residential units, 2,700 square feet of retail and 3,700 square foot,
110 seat restaurant. Spack Solutions completed a parking assessment for this project on behalf of the City to
compare the proposed parking supply to the anticipated demand for the site. This memo will outline my
response to the conclusions of that assessment. For the purposes of this memo, only the commercial parking
will be reviewed as proposed residential parking spaces meet minimum City requirements.
The commercial demand for the site is comprised of that for the retail and the restaurant (the latter accounting
for the majority of the demand). The proposed commercial parking supply is 36 spaces, which will be placed in
a public parking easement and available for drivers traveling to surrounding sites. Orion Investments also
currently owns the commercial property at 4528 France Avenue, immediately south of the proposed
development. This site currently includes a bank, dry cleaner and other retail. The applicant is proposing that
the 15 additional spaces at 4528 France can be utilized as overflow parking for 4500 France when the
businesses are not open. While these parking spaces are not currently signed as “customer only,” there is no
public parking easement over them to guarantee that they remain available in the future.
The commercial component of the proposed development would require a total of 40 parking spaces (only 36
are proposed on-site). However, Spack’s demand forecasting for the retail and restaurant show that even 40
parking spaces will be insufficient at various times of the day. Weekday analysis (see Figure 1 below) shows that
the on-site commercial parking will be insufficient for the demand from 6:00 - 9:00 p.m., resulting in 3 to 22
vehicles parking on-street. Including the available parking spaces at 4528 France narrows this window to 6:00 -
8:00 p.m. with 7 to 13 vehicles parking on-street.
Figure 1: Commercial Parking Supply and Demand – Weekday
Friday analysis (see Figure 2 below) shows that the on-site commercial parking will be insufficient for the
demand from 6:00 - 9:00 p.m., resulting in 4 to 17 vehicles parking on-street. Including the available parking
spaces at 4528 France narrows this window to 7:00 - 8:00 p.m. with 2 vehicles parking on-street.
Figure 2: Commercial Parking Supply and Demand - Friday
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
12:00 AM1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM10:00 PM11:00 PMParking SpacesTime of Day
Restaurant Demand
Retail Demand
Supply at 4500 France
Supply including 4528 France
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
12:00 AM1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM10:00 PM11:00 PMParking SpacesTime of Day
Restaurant Demand
Retail Demand
Supply at 4500 France
Supply including 4528 France
Saturday analysis (see Figure 3 below) shows that the on-site commercial parking will be insufficient for the
demand from 6:00 - 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 - 11:00 p.m., resulting in 5 to 20 vehicles parking on-street. Including
the available parking spaces at 4528 France narrows this window to 7:00 - 8:00 p.m. with 5 vehicles parking on-
street.
Figure 3: Commercial Parking Supply and Demand - Saturday
Given the absence of other shared district parking, existing commercial demand for on-street parking in the
area and the proximity of the development to residential streets with on-street parking restrictions, I would
not recommend granting a variance for this development that would result in more vehicle demand than can be
handled on-site.
It is important to note that these estimated demands do not take into account those who may walk, bike or
take transit to or from the site. The applicant should make efforts to implement Travel Demand Management
strategies to encourage alternative modes of transportation and reduce the impact of motor vehicles
(consistent with the 44th & France Small Area Plan and the transportation goals in the Comprehensive Plan).
These strategies may include;
• Providing secure bicycle parking in well-lit, convenient areas near key entrances
• Providing on-site bicycle repair station
• Providing directional signage for locating transportation amenities (bus stops, bicycle parking, etc.)
• Designating 5% of parking spaces for electric vehicles, carpool or vanpool
• Subsidizing transit passes for tenants/employees (Metro Transit’s future E-Line bus rapid transit service,
which will operate between the Southdale Transit Center and the University of Minnesota, will likely
have stations at 44th and France)
• Distributing information to all new and existing tenants/employees annually (bike maps, transit info,
rideshare mapping applications)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
12:00 AM1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM10:00 PM11:00 PMParking SpacesTime of Day
Restaurant Demand
Retail Demand
Supply at 4500 France
Supply including 4528 France
Technical Memorandum
To: Cary Teague, City of Edina
From: Max Moreland, PE, PTOE
Date: February 5, 2020
Re: Parking Assessment – 4500 France Avenue
Purpose of Report and Study Objectives
A new development is being constructed at 4500 France Avenue on the southwest corner of
the France Avenue and Sunnyside Road intersection in Edina, Minnesota.
This technical memorandum presents an analysis of the proposed parking supply for the site as
compared to the anticipated parking demand for t he site.
Conclusions
The proposed off-street parking stalls for the residential portion of the site are anticipated to
accommodate the peak residential demand.
The 36 commercial parking spaces in conjunction with the 15 spaces from the adjacent
development will accommodate the parking demand for the commercial portion of the site at
all times with the exception of three hours per week. Those times are:
• 6:00 p.m. on a weekday with an on-street parking demand of 13 spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a weekday with an on-street parking demand of seven spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a Friday with an on-street parking demand of two spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a Saturday with an on-street parking demand of five spaces
The on-street parking supply on Sunnyside Road and France Avenue adjacent to the site is
anticipated to be able to accommodate the on-street parking demand from this development.
The commercial parking spaces provided for this development will also be open to general
public parking for the area. Any non-site vehicles that would utilize this parking area are
currently parking on-street in the area. Therefore, the net change to on-street parking will be
equivalent to the on-street parking demand of this development.
Development Characteristics
The development will include a mix of 46 apartment units, 2,700 square feet of retail and a
3,700 square foot, 110 seat restaurant. There will be two vehicle access points to the site; one
on Sunnyside Road and one on France Avenue.
Spack Solutions 2 of 5 4500 France Avenue
Parking Assessment
Parking Supply
There are 113 vehicle parking stalls proposed for the site; 7 1 standard spaces including three
tandem spaces below grade for residential use, three at grade for residential visitor use and 36
at grade for commercial/public use.
The owner of this development also owns the property directly to the south at 4528 -4530
France Avenue. This includes a bank, a dry cleaner and two retail spaces. These businesses are
not open after 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, 6:00 p.m. on Fridays and 7:00 p.m. on other weekdays.
The parking spaces for these businesses will be able to be used as overflow parking for the 4500
France Avenue development in the evening hours. There are 15 parking spaces available as
overflow parking.
On-street parking is also available in the area. Directly adjacent to the site there are seven
spaces along the south side of Sunnyside Road. Parking is also available on the north side of
Sunnyside Road with approximately nine spaces and the east side of France Avenue with
approximately 20 spaces between 45th Street and 46th Street. Additional on-street parking is
available on 45th Street near the site.
Based on this review a total of 128 off-street parking stalls are provided for the new
development with additional on-street parking available nearby.
City Parking Requirements
This development is located in the Downtown Parking Overlay District. The minimum parking
requirements per the City of Edina’s Code of Ordinances for planned commercial districts are
listed in Table 1.
Table 1 – City of Edina Parking Requirements
Building Unit Description Parking Requirement* Required Spaces
Multi-residential
41 Units (less than 1,500
square feet)
1 enclosed space per unit 41
Multi-residential
5 Units (greater than
1,500 square feet)
1.5 enclosed spaces per unit 8
Non-Shopping Center
Retail
6,400 square feet
8 spaces for the first 1,000 square feet
plus 6 spaces for each additional 1,000
square feet up to 15,000 square feet
40
TOTAL 89
With 77 residential parking spaces proposed, the residential portion of the site will meet City
of Edina parking requirements while the 36 commercial parking spaces proposed will be short
of City minimums. It is noted that if the 15 parking stalls on the adj acent development were
included, the City minimums would be met for the commercial portion of the site.
Spack Solutions 3 of 5 4500 France Avenue
Parking Assessment
Parking Demand - ITE
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provides the Parking Generation Manual, 5th
Edition, a compilation of parking demand data for various land uses from existing developments
throughout the United States. This national standard provides a basis to forecast parking
demand for new developments. Table 2 shows the peak parking demand on a weekday and a
Saturday for each portion of the development based on the ITE forecasts.
Table 2 – Forecast Parking Generation Based on ITE
Building Unit Land Use Description ITE
Code
Development Parking Demand
Weekday Friday Saturday
Residential Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)
52 Units
ITE
221 60 60 47
Retail Shopping Center
2,700 square feet
ITE
820 5 7 8
Restaurant Quality Restaurant
110 Seats
ITE
931 57 52 51
It is unlikely these different land uses will experience their peak parking demand at the same
time. To determine the total parking demand on site during different times, a time -of-day
analysis was completed. Using data collected at various land uses by Spack Solutions, the
percentage of the peak parking demand can be found for each hour over the course of a day
for each land use.
Hourly results of the time-of-day parking analysis are attached. This analysis forecasts that the
peak parking demand for the entire site for a weekday, Friday and Saturday will be:
• 91 vehicles on a weekday at 7:00 p.m.
• 82 vehicles on a Friday at 7:00 p.m.
• 66 vehicles on a Saturday at 7:00 p.m.
Focusing just on the commercial portion of the site (since there is adequate parking for the
residential portion), the time-of-day parking analysis forecasts the peak parking demand for
the retail and restaurant use will be:
• 58 vehicles on a weekday at 7:00 p.m.
• 53 vehicles on a Friday at 7:00 p.m.
• 56 vehicles on a Saturday at 7:00 p.m.
It is noted that these demands have not been adjusted to account for those walking bicycling
or taking transit to the site. Nearby transit is available and bicycle parking facilities will be
included on site. This may result in a lower parking demand for the site.
Parking Supply vs Demand
Based on the forecasts shown in Table 2, the residential portion of the site will be able to
accommodate the proposed parking demand with the residential spaces supplied.
Spack Solutions 4 of 5 4500 France Avenue
Parking Assessment
With 36 parking spaces available for commercial use on site plus an additional 15 sp aces
available in the evenings when the adjacent development is closed for business (after 5:00 p.m.
on Saturdays, 6:00 p.m. on Fridays and 7:00 p.m. on other weekdays), there is enough off-street
parking to accommodate nearly all of the commercial demand for the site. Utilizing the time-
of-day parking demands along with the off-street supply, there are two hours on a weekday,
one hour on a Friday and one hour on a Saturday in which it is anticipated the demand will
exceed supply causing the need for on-street parking. Those times and demands are:
• 6:00 p.m. on a weekday with an on-street parking demand of 13 spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a weekday with an on-street parking demand of seven spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a Friday with an on-street parking demand of two spaces
• 7:00 p.m. on a Saturday with an on-street parking demand of five spaces
Based on these numbers, the on-street parking supply of 36 spaces on Sunnyside Road and
France Avenue adjacent to the site is anticipated to be able to accommodate the on-street
parking demand from this development without causing a significant strain to the areas on -
street parking facilities.
There will be a public parking easement for the 36 commercial parking spaces for this
development. That means drivers destined for surrounding uses can also park at this site.
Without a current public parking area at this site, it can be assumed any non -site vehicles
parking here are currently parking on-street in the area. Therefore, if this commercial parking
area is full due to existing on-street parking vehicles now parking in the lot, the net change to
on-street parking will be equivalent to the on-street parking demand of this development,
which is relatively low.
Site Comparison
This site will be providing 36 to 51 off-street parking spaces for commercial use. Accounting for
the retail parking demand of the site, that leaves 28 to 51 parking spaces on site for restaurant
use at any time. Similar restaurants in the area are considered as a comparison of how much
off-street parking is provided.
In Edina, restaurants such as Edina Grill, Salut and Cocina Del Barrio utilize large amounts of
shared public district parking provided in the 50 th & France area. That type of parking is
common in many of the commercial areas with restaurants throughout the City but is not
currently available near 4500 France Avenue.
Nearby in Minneapolis, Martina has 25 off-street parking spaces, Red Cow has 10 off-street
parking spaces, and Pizzeria Lola and Hola Arepa each have 12 off-street parking spaces. The
proposed development has a higher number of off-street parking spaces proposed than these
other similar restaurants.
Spack Solutions 5 of 5 4500 France Avenue
Parking Assessment
Traffic Study Impacts
A 2018 traffic impact study was conducted for this development by Spack Solutions. In that
study, the trip generation for the site was analyzed with the restaurant portion of the site being
a 3,700 square foot restaurant. With the updated proposed size of the site being 1 10 seats, the
trip generation for the restaurant portion of the site was re -analyzed. Table 3 shows the
previous trip generation forecasts for the restaurant along with the current forecasts.
Table 3 – Restaurant Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
Code -
Source
Land Use Description & Size Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
In Out In Out In Out
932 – ITE
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant
(3,700 square feet)
103 103 10 8 11 7
932 - ITE
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant
(110 seats)
119 119 14 13 13 10
Difference 16 16 4 5 2 3
As shown in Table 3, the difference between trip generation forecasts for a 3,700 square foot
restaurant and 110 seat restaurant are rather small with the difference being less than 10
vehicles in a peak hour, or one vehicle roughly every six minutes. The 2018 traffic study showed
acceptable intersection operations in the study area without any study intersections being on
the edge of acceptability. Therefore, this change to the proposed site is not anticipated to
significantly impact the results of the 2018 traffic study.
Attachments
• Time of Day Parking Demand
12:00 AM 64 0 5 69 5 36 0
1:00 AM 66 0 2 68 2 36 0
2:00 AM 66 0 1 67 1 36 0
3:00 AM 67 0 0 67 0 36 0
4:00 AM 68 0 0 68 0 36 0
5:00 AM 66 0 0 66 0 36 0
6:00 AM 61 1 1 63 2 36 0
7:00 AM 47 3 1 51 4 36 0
8:00 AM 26 3 2 31 5 36 0
9:00 AM 15 3 3 21 6 36 0
10:00 AM 9 3 4 16 7 36 0
11:00 AM 6 3 8 17 11 36 0
12:00 PM 4 5 30 39 35 36 0
1:00 PM 4 4 25 33 29 36 0
2:00 PM 4 3 14 21 17 36 0
3:00 PM 5 2 9 16 11 36 0
4:00 PM 10 2 12 24 14 36 0
5:00 PM 20 2 28 50 30 36 0
6:00 PM 33 2 47 82 49 36 13
7:00 PM 38 1 57 96 58 51 7
8:00 PM 45 0 39 84 39 51 0
9:00 PM 52 0 34 86 34 51 0
10:00 PM 59 0 27 86 27 51 0
11:00 PM 62 0 13 75 13 51 0
12:00 AM 67 0 1 68 1 36 0
1:00 AM 67 0 0 67 0 36 0
2:00 AM 68 0 0 68 0 36 0
3:00 AM 67 0 0 67 0 36 0
4:00 AM 68 0 0 68 0 36 0
5:00 AM 64 0 1 65 1 36 0
6:00 AM 56 1 0 57 1 36 0
7:00 AM 41 4 0 45 4 36 0
8:00 AM 28 4 1 33 5 36 0
9:00 AM 15 4 1 20 5 36 0
10:00 AM 9 4 2 15 6 36 0
11:00 AM 3 4 3 10 7 36 0
12:00 PM 2 7 22 31 29 36 0
1:00 PM 3 6 26 35 32 36 0
2:00 PM 3 4 13 20 17 36 0
3:00 PM 4 3 10 17 13 36 0
4:00 PM 9 3 14 26 17 36 0
5:00 PM 17 3 24 44 27 36 0
6:00 PM 27 2 46 75 48 51 0
7:00 PM 32 1 52 85 53 51 2
8:00 PM 36 0 40 76 40 51 0
9:00 PM 46 0 27 73 27 51 0
10:00 PM 52 0 13 65 13 51 0
11:00 PM 56 0 3 59 3 51 0
12:00 AM 49 0 5 54 5 36 0
1:00 AM 52 0 0 52 0 36 0
2:00 AM 52 0 0 52 0 36 0
3:00 AM 53 0 0 53 0 36 0
4:00 AM 54 0 0 54 0 36 0
5:00 AM 53 0 0 53 0 36 0
6:00 AM 50 0 0 50 0 36 0
7:00 AM 47 0 0 47 0 36 0
8:00 AM 41 0 0 41 0 36 0
9:00 AM 36 1 0 37 1 36 0
10:00 AM 22 3 0 25 3 36 0
11:00 AM 14 5 3 22 8 36 0
12:00 PM 5 6 13 24 19 36 0
1:00 PM 4 7 21 32 28 36 0
2:00 PM 4 8 8 20 16 36 0
3:00 PM 6 8 13 27 21 36 0
4:00 PM 14 7 15 36 22 36 0
5:00 PM 9 6 21 36 27 51 0
6:00 PM 8 6 36 50 42 51 0
7:00 PM 11 5 51 67 56 51 5
8:00 PM 21 4 37 62 41 51 0
9:00 PM 27 2 25 54 27 51 0
10:00 PM 36 1 21 58 22 51 0
11:00 PM 42 0 13 55 13 51 0
Weekday TOTAL
DEMAND
TOTAL
DEMAND
Restaurant
Demand
Restaurant
Demand
Time of Day Automobile Parking Needs (ITE)
Not Adjusted for Pedestrian, Bicycle or Transit Usage
Saturday Residential
Demand
TOTAL
DEMAND
Friday
Retail
Demand
Retail
Demand
Retail
Demand
Residential
Demand
Residential
Demand
Restaurant
Demand
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
DEMAND
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
DEMAND
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
DEMAND
Off-Street
Commercial Supply
On-Street Commercial
Demand
Off-Street
Commercial Supply
On-Street Commercial
Demand
Off-Street
Commercial Supply
On-Street Commercial
Demand
3,731 SFRESTAURANT1,232 SFRETAIL 11,448 SFRETAIL 2MARKETING COLOR LEGENDLOBBY/OTHERRESTAURANTRETAIL 1RETAIL 2SHARED COMMON AREARESIDENTIAL LOBBYTRASH ROOMOUTDOORPATIO1,104 SFSHARED COMMONAREAPLAN NORTHScale:1/16" = 1'-0"France Avenue ApartmentsREST. / RETAIL PLAN9/24/20194500 France Ave. SouthEdina, MN 55410TRUE NORTH
FS
FS
FS
HOST STAND
KITCHEN
956 SF
BAR RESTAURANT
TOTAL
3,731 SF
SEATS 92 -105
GREASE DUCT
SHAFT ABOVE
DW EXHAUST
SHAFT ABOVE
BANQUETTE
SEATING
FEATURE SCREEN
WALL
COAT
CLOSET
PASS
THRU
KITCHEN
VIEWING
PLAN
NORTH
Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"
THE LORIENT RESTAURANT PLAN
9/24/2019
4500 France Ave. South
Edina, MN 55410
RESTAURANT
3,731 SF
62' - 2"47' - 10"27'
-
1"32' - 5"PATIO
KITCHEN
956 SF
26' - 1"40' - 11 1/2"24' - 10"2
0' - 8
"
35' - 9"
PLAN
NORTH
Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"
THE LORIENT RESTAURANT PLAN
9/24/2019
4500 France Ave. South
Edina, MN 55410
RETAIL 1
1,232 SF
2
0' - 1
1
"53' - 9"PLAN
NORTH
Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"
THE LORIENT RETAIL 1
9/24/2019
4500 France Ave. South
Edina, MN 55410
RETAIL 2
1,448 SF
24' - 6 1/2"56' - 9"58' - 1 1/2"FUTURE VESTIBULE & RAM P26' - 8 1/2"30' - 0 1/2"1
7' - 9 1
/
2
"
PLAN
NORTH
Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"
THE LORIENT RETAIL 2
9/24/2019
4500 France Ave. South
Edina, MN 55410
; (!\ PARKING LEVEt. ftOOR PlAN
8_ �>/l<M:-0•
§
@RRSTLEVEL fLOOR PLAN
;,i:u tn�•Nl"
I
France Ave
Apartments
4SOOfr�neeAve$,blNMNS54lO
1_..,.....,..._
PRELIMINARY
REZONING & SITE
PLAN SUBMITT Al
7/27/2018
Of«Gl�ISSUE:
RfN!S!ON:$; "'"· n ... ,,.r,.,.,� ""
��....--
�·-� .. -
Fr.tnte Ave Apartments
PARKING & FIRS'i lfVEt
PLAN A0.2
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 5
The Council asked why the bidding for this project was so low. Mr. Millner explained competitive bidding
processes were used with all projects and suggested the estimate on this project was higher than anticipated.
Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m.
Public Testimony
No one appeared.
Member Fischer made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to continue the public hearing
and consideration of Resolution No. 2018-90, Countryside G Neighborhood Roadway
Reconstruction, to October 16, 2018.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
VII.H. BIRCHCREST A AND COUNTRYSIDE B NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY
RECONSTRUCTION, RESOLUTION NO. 2018-91 – CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 16, 2018
Mr. Millner outlined the Birchcrest A and Countryside B neighborhood roadway reconstruction project and
estimate of $8,569,082.00 with a final cost of $6,022,652.32 or a 29% decrease. He noted $13,046.24 per
REU was less than the $17,200 estimate and the project had 213 REUs to divide the cost. He stated all
street assessments could be paid over 15 years.
Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:16 p.m.
Public Testimony
No one appeared.
Member Fischer made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to continue the public hearing
and consideration of Resolution No. 2018-91, Birchcrest A and Countryside B Neighborhood
Roadway Reconstruction, to October 16, 2018.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
VII.I. RESOLUTION NO. 2018-92 AND ORDINANCE NO. 2018-09; PRELIMINARY REZONING
AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 4500 FRANCE AVENUE AND 3905 AND
3907 SUNNSIDE ROAD – ADOPTED
Community Development Director Presentation
Community Development Director Teague presented the request of Orion Investments to redevelop a one-
acre tract of land at 4500 France Avenue and 3905 and 3907 Sunnyside Road that would include a 4-story,
45-unit apartment, 6,500 square feet of restaurant and retail space with 69 below-grade parking stalls and
40 at-grade, enclosed public parking stalls for the retail uses. Units would range from 1- to 3-bedrooms with
2 units (4%) proposed for affordable housing. Mr. Teague stated the project would also include a public
gathering space/pocket park on the west side of the development to provide transition to the single-family
neighborhood to the west, improved pedestrian and public realm space along France and Sunnyside, and an
amenity terrace facing south. Primary vehicle access points would be off France Avenue and Sunnyside Road.
The access road off France was on the adjacent property to the south, which was owned by the applicant.
Existing curb cuts on the subject property on France would be eliminated.
Mr. Teague highlighted changes completed by the applicant since sketch plan review that included a reduction
in the number of units from 52 to 45, direct residential unit access to the pocket park, activated Sunnyside
portion of the project with the lobby and a portion of the restaurant on Sunnyside, building redesign at the
corner to incorporate metal panels within a projecting bay element to vary the architectural expression at
the intersection, and others. He stated the Planning Commission added two conditions in their
recommendation that included limiting construction traffic to France Avenue and all commercial deliveries
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 6
to be done during non-peak hours. He said the applicant had also revised their affordable housing proposal
to address a concern of the Planning Commission in regard to providing all affordable housing units within
the development. He noted this was the first Small Area Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan review and
consistent with the Plan. Mr. Teague then described outreach and community meetings held during the
process. He noted the applicant was willing to provide 40 stalls for district parking and addressed setbacks.
The Council asked questions regarding site plan, square footage breakdown, and the 46 units of affordable
housing. The Council also inquired where the transition would occur from four- to two-stories and
confirmed which parcels were included within the Small Area Plan. Mr. Teague outlined the boundary and
confirmed that while the project included just one of the parcels, the applicant had requested the City extend
the boundary to include both lots. The Council confirmed the proposal was entirely within the approved
Small Area Plan study area adopted in March 2018.
Max Moreland, Spack Consulting, answered questions of the Council regarding how parking would be
affected by the reduced number of units, the use could be compared to a similar-sized use such as a drug
store or drycleaner, and the proposed use included pass-by trips or trips that were already in the area.
The Council commented on having one entrance and exit onto France Avenue rather than two, which would
require the entrance to be accessible to both the public parking for retail and private for the apartments.
The Council stressed the importance of safe access and balance between the Sunnyside residents and
inquired whether affordable housing units were proposed as microunits. Mr. Moreland said the entrance on
France Avenue would allow two access points from the west and could come straight in. Traffic going north
on France Avenue would have an easier movement with the signal from Sunnyside to go north. He noted
access on Sunnyside provided a safer option going north on France Avenue and this circulation would better
fit the site.
The Council inquired about height limits and transition to the neighborhood along France Avenue and asked
whether the community came to those conclusions. Mr. Teague replied most of discussion was held on the
two-stories adjacent to single-family homes and that it was reasonable due to the adjacent single-family
zoning. He also commented on the give-to-get elements that included the pocket park, underground utility
lines, and how more density and height was one way to get those public improvements. The Council asked
if the island could be eliminated to change the character of the corner without impeding safety. Mr. Teague
explained that was applicant’s desire as well but unfortunately, trucks would not be able to make that turn.
Applicant Presentation
Ted Carlson, Orion Development, shared project timing and history and said they were very involved during
the Small Area Plan development to assure the project conformed with the Plan through height reduction
of 62 to 48 feet, decreased units from 64 to 45, and building square footage by 26%. He said they worked
with staff after Planning Commission feedback to identify three fully ADA accessible affordable units at 750
square feet. Those units are all one-bedroom and not microunits. Mr. Carlson shared the give-to-get
elements that included removal of a blighted building and contamination, underground power lines and curb
cuts, wider sidewalks, pedestrian/bike friendly elements, public park and art, public parking, affordable ADA
units, new housing, and the site’s highest and best use. He commented how the site was compliant for retail
use for parking and would blend with other retail requirements such as a restaurant, acknowledging that
would require a variance in the future. Mr. Orion shared their award of the second largest DEED grant
which speaks to level of contamination in this site.
Gretchen Camp, ESG Architects, reviewed changes to the project and site design updates that included
public gathering space along Sunnyside as a buffer to the adjacent residential properties, programmed public
pocket park as an amenity to the neighborhood with an art feature and permanent seating, landscape plan
elements with an outdoor dog run, bench seating, decorative lighting, and planting beds. She said they
worked to activate Sunnyside by relocating the primary residential lobby and shared the sustainable design
strategies that would be incorporated into the project.
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 7
Burt Kaufman, ESG Architects, said this was a classic building design with base and modified building façade,
darker brick, and a large bay-type window. He outlined how the building steps created a row house
character element and commented on the parking screening, enlarged windows, and increased balcony
depths.
The Council confirmed dedication of the public realm space was contained within the site and opacity of the
parking ramp with enough lighting for security. Mr. Teague confirmed a sidewalk easement would be
required for the France Avenue side and the applicant would maintain the Sunnyside sidewalks.
Mr. Carlson stated should the project convert from apartments to condominiums, the City had the first
right of refusal to purchase the affordable units. He pledged that should the affordable term expire, it would
be renewed.
The Council asked about the process for a variance for a future restaurant and requested that an amendment
to the PUD would occur instead to ensure Council approval.
Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:53 p.m.
Public Testimony
Scott Smith 3913 Morningside Road, addressed the Council.
Tom Gerahard, 4360 France Avenue, addressed the Council.
Mary Kay Reistad 4055 Sunnyside Road addressed the Council.
Susan Peterson, 4060 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Sarah Lathrop, 4008 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Laura Plaetzer, 4058 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Steve Erickson 5114 Arden Court, addressed the Council.
Mark Schmidt 4011 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Matt Cramer, 4005 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Ryan Hartung 5115 Arden Avenue, addressed the Council.
Cheryl Appledorn, 4611 Townes Circle, addressed the Council.
Frank Lorenz 7151 York Avenue, addressed the Council.
Judy Johnson, 4300 France Avenue, addressed the Council.
Brent Rogers 5413 Halifax Lane, addressed the Council.
Charles Myre,4000 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Ron Erhardt, 4214 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Council.
Patrick Judge 4307 Eaton Place, addressed the Council.
Pete Deanovic, 4209 W 44th Street, addressed the Council.
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 8
Brian Pankratz, 5429 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Council.
Member Fischer made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
The Council confirmed the applicant would maintain the park,shared concerns about the intersection at 44th
Street and Sunnyside, closing curb cuts on France Avenue, and leverage that created a better design and
addressed power poles. The Council commented on ingress and egress on France and Sunnyside to allow
a right turn only onto Sunnyside. Mr. Carlson explained why having to access the site from France Avenue
only would not best serve the property or its residents.
The Council confirmed soil mitigation efforts and inquired about possible truck traffic regulation. Mr. Millner
said truck traffic cannot be restricted on this public roadway. Mr. Teague stated a condition of approval
included that all commercial deliveries be completed during nonpeak hours as well as limiting traffic onto
France Avenue during construction.
The Council inquired about the proposed 500 new trips per day, need to respect the parking ordinance, and
not be under parked. The Council confirmed the project complied with the Small Area Plan and agreed
with the need to confirm parking and the PUD amendment for any future restaurant. The Council stated
the solution was district parking as outlined in the Small Area Plan and cautioned against a future restaurant
approval without sufficient parking. The Council also requested options for the roadway porkchop to make
the area safer for pedestrians. Member Staunton introduced and moved adoption of Resolution
No. 2018-92 approving the Preliminary Rezoning from R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District and
PCD-1, Planned Commercial District to PUD-15, Planned Unit Development District, and
Preliminary Development Plan for 4500 France Avenue, 3905 & 3907 Sunnyside Road, Orion
Investments, subject to the following conditions:
1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary
Development Plans dated July 27, 2018, and the materials board as presented to the
Planning Commission.
2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter
36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must
be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required
landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit.
3. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances.
4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the
City Code.
5. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code.
6. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require
revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements.
7. Three units within the project must be provided for residents earning no more than 50%
AMI for 15 years from the date of the certificate of occupancy. Additionally, $160,000
shall be paid to the City of Edina prior to issuance of a building permit for the City to
provide affordable housing units else ware in the City.
8. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s memo
dated August 20, 2018.
9. Compliance with the Spack Consulting Traffic Study recommendations.
10. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD-15, Planned Unit
Development for this site.
11. Dedication of public access easements along the sidewalks and pocket park.
12. A shared parking agreement to allow district parking in the street level parking lot.
13. A shared access easement must be established over the shared driveway on the property
to the south.
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 9
14. Construction traffic shall be limited to France Avenue.
15. All commercial deliveries shall be done during non-peak hours.
16. The restaurant shall be limited to 35 seats and located at the northernmost retail space
shown on the site plan.
17. The overhead power lines must be buried from 4540 France Avenue north to the
intersection of 44th and France.
18. The applicant and staff shall explore the potential for traffic calming at the intersection
of Sunnyside and France.
19. The Edina Housing Foundation and/or the City’s HRA shall have the first right of refusal
to purchase the affordable housing units if the apartments are turned in condos; if the
units remain rental, after 15 years the property owner will consider extending the
affordable housing units for an additional 15 years.
Member Brindle seconded the motion.
The Council discussed concerns raised during public testimony regarding the importance of pedestrian safety
and district parking and how this project would address those elements. The Council spoke about the
possibility of a TIF district and suggested removing the porkchop and restricting truck turning movements.
The Council expressed support for the modern building with its traditional elements, timeless materials,
green building elements, and stressed the importance of not exceeding parking available to support a
restaurant use as the site would redevelop at some point. The Council acknowledged that how the project
fit the Small Area Plan was key, their preference was for four units of affordable housing rather than three
and a buy-in, and requested assurance that all become part of the overall building.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
Member Stewart made a motion to grant First Reading to Ordinance No. 2018-09, an
Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD-15, Planned Unit
Development-15 Zoning District. Member Brindle seconded the motion.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
The Council took a short recess.
VIII. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
VIII.A. ARDEN PARK 90% DESIGN REPORT AND AUTHORIZE MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT TO FINALIZE PLANS AND ADVERTISE FOR BID - APPROVED
Councilmember Fischer stated he would recuse himself from this item due to his employer’s active contracts
with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Councilmember Stewart disclosed that he was an ex-officio
member of the Policy Advisory Committee for the District.
Parks and Recreation Director Kattreh reviewed the Arden Park 90% design report, public engagement
process, and development goals, then highlighted changes from the 60% check-in that included a park shelter
and budget update. She outlined next steps and schedule and asked the Council to authorize Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District to finalize plans to bid the project after selection of either Option 4C or 7C for
the shelter.
Renae Clark, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, provided the 90% design report that included
stormwater, trails and bridges, creek restoration and access, shelter, and playground details. She outlined
stream improvement alternatives, design elements that followed the evolution of the District’s planning and
project implementation process, and outlined water quality benefits achieved through stormwater and
filtration swales and bridge structures over swales. Ms. Clark highlighted habitat and biology stream
restoration elements, creek restoration below West 54th Street through removal of the concrete slab that
would result in no damage to the bridge. She shared new and upgraded trail information and changes made
since the 60% design that included removal of 350 feet of the sidewalk to maximize useable green space in
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 10
the park. Ms. Clark commented on two oak trees that would need replacement due to possible stress from
flooding and outlined that 57 ash trees would be removed for a total of 136 trees impacted.
The Council asked questions regarding sediment flow, creek meander proposals with one rejected plan, and
which portions of the walkway included pervious materials. Ms. Clark explained the proposals for dam
removal without a remeander element were both rejected in favor of full stream restoration with the City.
The Council commented about on the impact of Emerald Ash borer that would result in removal of more
trees as part of this project and noted the neighborhood design review team’s role. Ms. Kattreh said staff
struggled with review of the two shelter design plans and the resulting sustainability efforts knowing four
options provided the least in terms of daylighting. She shared the updated budget totaled $5,331,110 at the
90% design estimate and noted the $669,000 increased came mostly from design costs that were missed,
not project costs. Ms. Katreh outlined next steps included Watershed Board of Managers approval of final
design and to authorize bids with notice to proceed in December, construction to begin in January, and
completion by November 2019.
The Council commented on the proposed design plan that included branding, sustainability, long-term
maintenance costs and the developed pattern to design shelters based on park character. The Council
shared the concept of the shelter having two fronts on both the neighborhood side and creek side and how
the neighborhood committee preferred Option 4C. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by
Member Stewart, to accept the Arden Park 90% Design Report, authorize Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District to Finalize Plans and Advertise for Bid, and select Option 4C as the
preferred building design.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
VIII.B. RESOLUTION 2018-93 ADOPTED - ACCEPTING VARIOUS GRANTS AND DONATIONS -
ADOPTED
Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be
adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations.
Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2018-93 accepting various
grants and donations. Member Stewart seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried.
IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
IX.A. RECEIVE PETITION REQUESTING REMOVAL OF A STREET LIGHT – Received
Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to receive the petition
requesting removal of street light at 5410 York Avenue.
Ayes: Brindle, Fischer, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland
Motion carried
IX.B. CORRESPONDENCE - Received
Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council’s receipt of various correspondence.
IX.C. MINUTES – Received
1. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, AUGUST 9, 2018
2. HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION, AUGUST 28, 2018
Informational; no action required.
X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE – Received
XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS – Received
Minutes/Edina City Council/October 2, 2018
Page 11
XII. MANAGER’S COMMENTS – Received
XII.A. COMMUNITY COMMENT FOLLOW-UP – Received
XII.B. SELECTION PROCESS FOR HOUSING FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS VACANCY
– Received
XIII. SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS, EVENTS AND DATES AS OF OCTOBER 2, 2018 – Received
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at
12:23 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 16, 2018.
James B. Hovland, Mayor
Video Copy of the October 2, 2018, meeting available.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 5 of 12
• Commissioners asked if the first floor height is being based off of the existing entry and Bodeker
responded in the affirmative.
Appearing for the Applicant
Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, introduced himself and opened the floor for questions.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
Commissioners asked about the retaining wall and what it will be made of. Busyn replied that it will be built out
of a stone material or a type of cast stone. Busyn also commented that the city will require Engineering to
review the retaining wall since it is over 4 feet and it will have an inspection.
Public Hearing
None.
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded
the motion. The motion carried.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
None.
Motion
Commissioner Nemerov moved approval of the variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to
the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion
carried.
Staff Presentation
E. Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is asked to consider Orion Investments’ request
to redevelop of a one acre tract of land at 4500 France Avenue and 3905 & 3907 Sunnyside Road with a 4-
story 45 unit apartment with retail use on the first floor.
To accommodate the request the following is required:
• A Rezoning from R-1 and PCD-1to PUD, Planned Unit Development; and
• Site Plan Review.
Appearing for the Applicant
Ted Carlson, Orion Investments and Mike Spack, Spack Consulting
Discussion/Comments/Questions
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 6 of 12
• Planner Teague was asked by Commissioners if the “island” was being included in the scheme, as it was
in previous proposal. Teague replied that it is not included and the free right would still be there with
this project. Commissioners asked if the building was pulled back to get the public space or if it’s in the
same location. Teague responded that it is in the same spot and there isn’t as much outdoor space.
Teague was also asked where the first residential house appears on the Sunnyside side elevation and he
replied that the first residential house is further west past the commercial establishments on Sunnyside.
• Commissioners asked if this section of France Avenue is considered a county road and Teague
responded in the affirmative. Commissioners also asked if Hennepin County has checked in on the
turning movements and Millner responded that Hennepin County submitted comments and their
concerns were the maintenance of the plantings, snow storage, and to gather any easements for the
sidewalks, which are all covered in the Engineering Memo. Millner added that Hennepin County did not
have any comments on the access of France Ave. in this location with the driveway because they are
going from 4 driveway cuts to 1.
• Commissioners asked about what types of trucks are turning by the “pork chop” coming from
Sunnyside and Millner replied that large delivery trucks providing materials to those businesses on the
North side of Sunnyside Road, including full size moving semi-trucks. Millner also explained that if the
island were to be removed, the entire signal system would need to be moved and storm water catch
basins. Commissioners commented that everyone agreed in the Small Area Plan that pedestrian bicycle
safety is a huge issue on France Ave. Commissioners explained that there are a large number of
pedestrians and bicyclists that want to cross France Ave. safely than number of trucks that need to take
a right turn.
• Planner Teague asked Commissioners if the Planning Commission and City Council would recommend
this for approval that it would be considered a condition to work with the county and take the pork
chop out and Commissioners responded in the affirmative. Millner asked Commissioners if the concern
was strictly crossing France Ave. and Commissioners replied that it is the whole area near the project,
including Sunnyside Ave.
• Commissioners explained that in some communities they appraise the items that are more subjective in
the give to get. Commissioners stated that some of the items on the give to get currently are pretty
standard and asked Planners if there are estimates for what the city if getting. Planner Teague thanked
the Commissioners and stated that a very rough ballpark would be approximately $80,000- $100,000 for
burying of the utility lines and sidewalks, $500,000 for the public park. Commissioners stated that they
encourage the city to formalize a process to establish values for the give to get for transparency
purposes. Commissioners also commented that some of the give to get items seemed more appropriate
for getting a permit rather than a variance. Teague commented that all developments that are requesting
rezoning are expected to meet the Affordable Housing Policy. Teague explained that the give to get list
is taken from the small area plan and certain items, like sidewalk improvements, would be requested
even with a site plan review.
• Commissioners asked if there were any external bike racks being provided and Teague replied that is a
standard code requirement based off the square footage of the retail space of 1 bike rack per parking
stall. Commissioners also asked if the 4 story length was reduced along Sunnyside and Teague
responded that it is generally the same.
Applicant Presentation
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 7 of 12
Mr. Spack explained why the project is a good idea from a traffic engineer’s perspective due to the reduction
from 4 driveways to 1 common driveway down on France Ave. Spack also noted that the level of service at the
intersections will be maintained at an acceptable level. Spack commented that putting in a pharmacy would
generate about twice as much traffic as the proposed development.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
• Mr. Spack was asked how much traffic the drycleaners generated when it was operating and he
responded that he did not have those numbers, and added that it would have been much less
traffic than a pharmacy would produce. Commissioners also asked if the traffic would have been
more or less than the proposed project and Spack responded that it would have been slightly less
than what is being proposed and he would need the square footage of the drycleaners to run
those numbers.
• Commissioners asked Spack how he comes up with his predictions or projected traffic and explain
the process of the study. Spack replied that it is looked at from a few different ways, including the
Institute of Transportation Engineer’s data set of land uses around the country and the traffic rates
by different types of uses. Spack also stated that local data is collected using video camera
technology on different driveways of different land uses.
• Commissioners asked Spack is he considered this lane 2 or 4 lane and Spack replied that it is
considered 2 lane with turn lanes, and it is a starting point for the analysis because the whole
corridor can work well but have pinch points that get looked into at a micro level.
• Commissioners also asked Spack if there was a deeper reasoning for asking all loading on site
should be encouraged to occur during outside of peak hours and Spack replied that there is not a
deeper reason and it’s just good hygiene to not add to rush hour.
• Spack was asked by Commissioners to explain the negotiation with the county and what the
possibilities might look like. Spack explained that if we can get rid of the channelized right turn, it
has the benefit for the pedestrians and bicyclists. Spack explained the tradeoff would be that large
semi-trucks would not be able to make the turn. Spack added that the county is seeing a benefit
by eliminating the 3 driveways and consolidating furthest south with the other parcel.
Commissioners asked if this would be the time to negotiate and Spark responded in the
affirmative and the city would have a strong position if they wanted to go that path. Millner added
that if the park chop moved, the county might require a right turn lane and making it a longer
cross walk for pedestrians, in addition to some other tradeoffs.
• Commissioners commented that one of the options to move the signal to have a wider area
attached to the building, and to lose the island. Commissioners asked if the developer was to
move the signal as a condition, what the cost estimate would be. Spack responded that his
estimate would be in a range from $50,000 to $75,000 to move 1 quadrant of the signal, while
Millner commented that an estimate for moving a whole intersection would be $300,000 to
$400,000 depending on impacts.
• Spack was asked about the parking capacity on Saturday evening with the restaurant and retail
with overflow parking needing to be handled on the street. Spack responded that if the retail and
restaurant were both busier, they would forecast 20 to 25 vehicles circulating looking for street
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 8 of 12
parking. Teague commented that if the restaurant they want to add exceeds the 40 parking stalls,
they would need a variance which would come to the Planning Commission.
• Spack was asked about the cueing conflicts regarding the driveway on France Ave. and the parcel
to the south operating more as a one way. Spack noted that it is expected to be a low traffic
driveway and they don’t see it as a significant issue. Millner also commented that he is in
agreement with Spack.
• Commissioners asked if speeds of traffic were looked at on France on Sunnyside and has the city
received reports or complaints regarding the speed of traffic. Millner responded that the street on
Sunnyside was reconstructed in 2016 and did a volume and speed analysis. Curb cuts and bump
outs were added at Grimes and Curve Ave. There was a reduction in volume afterwards, and the
speeds stayed consistent. Millner also added that there have been no traffic safety requests since
the reconstruction.
• Commissioners asked Staff if the speed limit signs might be encouraging people to go faster than they
would normally drive. Millner replied that the speed limit signs were needed because the speed changes
along France.
Applicant Presentation
Ted Carlson thanked the Planning Commission and stated that he was excited to be there after more than 14
months of planning. Carlson and his development team presented the project. Carlson replied to Chair Olson’s
question earlier about the contamination that is present from the drycleaners and explained that phase 1 and 2
of studies are complete. Carlson continued to explain that asbestos, vapors, and petroleum were all present and
will be removed. He stated that in addition to the contaminations being removed, the blighted building, power
lines, and curb cuts will be removed as well. Carlson explained that what will be added for the give to get is
wider sidewalks, pedestrian and bike friendly, public park and public art, public parking, affordable ADA units,
new housing, and a highest and best use.
Commissioners asked earlier about applying for grants and Carlson answered that their intent is to seek every
opportunity for public contribution to this site. Carlson has applied for a TVRA and DEED grants, and are in for
funding and conjunction with City Staff. Carlson ended with thanking the neighborhood for their participation.
Discussion/Comments/Questions
• Commissioners asked what the approximate square footage of the grass area in the pocket park.
Camp’s civil engineer answered that the total green space on the site is approximately 4,830 square feet.
• Commissioners discussed the traffic concern and the curb cut on Sunnyside with people exiting the
parking ramp. Camp replied in the affirmative and explained that people will have to enter on France
Ave. for the underground parking ramp. Commissioners explained the concern with the increased traffic
through neighborhood with people turning left and camp responded that a strategically placed island
could be added. Millner said he would be the one to determine the need of an island based off of the
traffic study.
• Commissioners asked about eliminating the entrance on Sunnyside and just using France Ave. that was
introduced in the beginning. Camp responded that the flow of the project needed more than 1 curb cut
and the county commented on that as well. Commissioners also commented on the pocket park and
how the redesign made it psychologically a smaller space. Camp responded that they could reduce the
size of the planters and make it feel more welcoming and are open to suggestions.
• Commissioners positively commented on the pocket park and permanent bench seating. Commissioners
asked about the dog run being used for pet relief and Camp replied in the affirmative for its purpose.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 9 of 12
Commissioners asked about the public pocket park and Camp responded that it would be maintained by
and by the private owner, but that it could also be dedicated. Camp also stated that programming is key
to parks with implementing ideas such as a farmers market or kids day. Commissioners also commented
on including bike parking near the front door.
• Commissioners asked if the 4 stories is the same height as it was presented during the sketch plans and
Camp replied that that it is the same height.
• Carlson was asked by Commissioners why the full number affordable housing is being provided and its
being split between units and money. Carlson explained that it made sense to have the ADA accessible
units on the ground floor where there are no steps for vans and for easy walkability. Carlson also stated
that they thought it was a good idea to buy in half and provide half for a medium landing space on
affordable units. Carlson stated that he could provide the full number of units and he is receptive to
anything to get this project built and built the right way.
• Commissioners asked about the profile of the cornice treatment of the 4 story building and if it’s the
same on the bay units. Camp replied that the profile is not the same, but the metal material is.
Commissioners stated that the bay cornice is pleasing on the front restaurant portion.
Public Hearing
Chair Olsen opened the public hearing and commented that the Commissioners received numerous comments
from the public regarding this proposal.
Mark Schmidt, 4011 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Commission and expressed that changing the zoning to R1
is a bad idea on principal and isn’t a good idea for Edina. Schmidt also asked the Commissioners if the pocket
park is public or private and address who is patrolling the safety of the park. Schmidt asked about the parking
and if the on off street parking would include the whole one side of Sunnyside Road of 20 to 25 cars long and
commented that there would be no room for guests of home owners to park.
Kip Myre, 4000 Sunnyside Road, addressed the Commission and stated that he believed Schmidt made some
good points. Myre asked if it was 2 or 3 stories on Sunnyside Road and Camp responded that it was roughly 2.5
stories because the ground is rising because they are burying some of the parking. Myre asked to see the traffic
study and requested that a speed meter was installed on the edge of his driveway to help stop potential speeding
cars. Myre commented on the garbage pickup and where to location will be.
Chris Dall, 4001 Sunnyside Road, introduced himself and stated that Ted Carlson did a good job of listening to
the neighborhood and their concerns. Dall stated that he is concerned about the traffic issue, specifically
concerning the pinch points on Friday night. Dall asked if the traffic report was online for people to view and
also expressed apprehension regarding the entrance on Sunnyside Road and stated he would like if it only
allowed people to turn right out of that entrance and not into the neighborhood. Dall stated that the
neighborhood residents love the area and are open to the idea of what it could bring to the neighborhood.
Brian Pankratz, 5429 Brookview Ave., commented that the project is great and fits into the urbanism idea that
has been discussed and fits well into Edina.
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded
the motion. The motion carried.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 10 of 12
Discussion/Comments/Questions
• Planner Teague answered questions regarding the parking concern and explained that the project meets
the parking requirements for retail use. Teague also stated that if a restaurant is added, it would need to
meet the parking standards and that there needs to be 1 parking stall for every 3 seats, plus the
maximum number of employees on a shift. Teague further explained that if a restaurant didn’t meet the
requirements, they would have to come back to the Planning Commission with a variance request.
• Planer Teague answered another question about the easements over the pocket park and explained that
it would be privately owned and easements would be required so that it is available to the public and is a
requirement written out in the staff report.
• Commissioners made a comment to Carlson that there are obvious improvements to the project since
it first was presented. Commissioners added that they were impressed with the before and after
renditions of the changes made and the project is supported by Commissioners.
• Commissioners stated that the pocket park needs improvement and 680 square feet of grass wouldn’t
be used well. Commissioners also stated that creating a left turn only out onto Sunnyside and is only
affecting Edina residents’ drives home. Commissioners also expressed thoughts on the use of the site
because a pharmacy store is permitted under current zoning and discussed the give to get for the
Commission to consider. Commissioners stated the idea to mandate that all construction traffic in the
construction plan go to France Ave. and not the side roads.
• Commissioners commented that the developer did a good job due to the empty chairs in the room and
that residents felt informed and knew what was being presented. The park was discussed and that
residents of the neighborhood will use it.
• Commissioners commented that the most recent plans presented are less boxy and is more attractive.
Commissioners also stated a few concerns regarding the pocket park and perhaps making it into an art
an education area and make a reason for people to walk to the back, possibly with rotating art displays.
Commissioners asked Carlson about parking on Sunnyside and proposed to not have parking on the
street. Commissioners commented positively on the bigger balconies and being more transparent.
• Commissioners addressed the issues of reducing density and how that might not be the best idea.
Commissioners also stated that if the pork chop stays, it is a possibility to add no turning on red, adding
a red only right arrow, or raising the street on Sunnyside right before France Ave. so that the crosswalk
becomes raised.
• Commissioners discussed the comments received from the public and encourage people to comment
more because it improves the project and outcome. Commissioners also commented on having a
popular restaurant added would be a positive addition to the neighborhood. Commissioners suggested
to be specific with the costs and the value going both ways in the give to get to show value with the
compromises the city is making and concluded with support for the project.
• Commissioners commented that this project is so close to single family homes and that it also is an
opportunity to create something in this node that is much needed. Commissioners stated that the
building is lacking charm and seems prototypical and not specific to the area. Commissioners stated that
the 4 stories seems to be the appropriate height on France Ave., but that it proceeds too far on
Sunnyside Road into the residential district. Commissioners stated that the exit parking onto Sunnyside
and on street parking is not good design and seems to be detrimental to the neighborhood.
Commissioners added that affordable housing needs to be added to the project.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 11 of 12
• Commissioners expressed that more green could be added to the pocket park and that the affordable
housing would be a necessity for support of the project.
Motion
Commissioner Thorsen moved approval of the preliminary zoning and preliminary
development plan as outlined in the staff memo subject to three additional conditions: 1)
Construction traffic shall be restricted to only France Avenue. 2) All commercial deliveries
shall be done during non-peak hours. 3) All affordable housing requirements shall be met on
location.
Commissioner Berube seconded the motion.
The motion failed, 2-6.
Aye: Thorsen, Olsen
Nay: Miranda, Lee, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Berube
Commissioner Nemerov moved approval of the preliminary zoning and preliminary
development plan as outlined in the staff memo subject to two additional conditions: 1)
Construction traffic shall be limited to France Avenue. 2) All commercial deliveries shall be
done during non-peak hours.
Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion
Aye: Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Berube
Nay: Miranda, Lee, Olsen
The motion carried 5-3.
Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hamilton
seconded the motion. The motion carried.
VI. Community Comment
None.
VII. Reports and Recommendations
None.
VIII. Correspondence And Petitions
None.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: September 12, 2018
Page 12 of 12
IX. Chair And Member Comments
• The Commissioners stated that they are in support of affordable housing.
• Commissioners explained the AIA Missing Middle Housing seminar is on Wednesday September
26th at the Minnesota Historical Society and starts at 5:30 p.m.
• Commissioners commented on the bicycle usage at 44th and France and 50th and France. There is
an increase of pedestrians walking and bicyclists and the streets need to be made easier and safer
for both groups.
X. Staff Comments
Staff stated that the 4500 France Ave & 3905 and 3907 Sunnyside Road project will go to City Council on
October 2, 2018.
XI. Adjournment
Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the August 29, 2018, Meeting of the Edina Planning
Commission at 10:16 p.m. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. The motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
APPROVING FINAL REZONING FROM R-I AND PCD-I TO PUD-I5, PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT — 15, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ORION
INVESTMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
Section 1. BACKGROUND.
1.01 Orion Investments is requesting a redevelopment of a one acre tract of land at 4500 France
Avenue and 3905 & 3907 Sunnyside Road. As proposed, the development would include the
following on the above properties:
A 4-story, 46 unit apartment, 6,400 square feet of restaurant & commercial space with 69
below -grade parking stalls at minimum 35 at -grade, enclosed public parking stalls for the
retail uses. Units would range from I to 3 bedroom units.
Three units (6.6%) within the project are proposed for affordable housing. These units
would be targeted for residents with disabilities and earn no more than 50% AMI. The
remaining 3.4% would be provided by a cash contribution to affordable housing elsewhere
in Edina. To satisfy the affordable housing policy an additional 1.6 units would be required
to equal 10%. The policy would require $100,000 per unit or $160,000. The applicant is
agreeable to the cash contribution.
A public plaza on the west side of the development which would provide a transition to
the single-family neighborhood to the west.
1.02 The property is legally described as follows:
See attached Exhibit A.
1.03 As proposed the development requires the following:
A Rezoning from R- I and PCD-Ito PUD, Planned Unit Development; and
Preliminary Development Plan
1.04 On August 29, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended
approval of the Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan. Vote: 5 Ayes and 3
Nays.
1.05 On October 2, 2018, the City Council approved the request.
1.06 The applicant has submitted Final Plans that are consistent with the Preliminary Plans.
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424
www.EdinaMN.gov • 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0389
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
Page 2
Section 2. FINDINGS
2.01 Approval is based on the following findings:
I. The proposed land use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed buildings would be a high quality brick, fiber/cement board, metal panel and
glass, designed to mix and blend with existing buildings in the area.
3. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the
site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council.
4. Addresses the Development Principles established in the 44th and France Small Area Plan
including:
The proposal would clean up a contaminated site (petroleum, asbestos and other soil
contaminants) and improve the aesthetic of this corner by designing the building fit
into the character of the area and burying overhead utility lines;
The project would provide a more pedestrian friendly atmosphere along the adjacent
roadway, with a restaurant and provide pocket park for gathering to strengthen the
neighborhood identity;
The mixed use (residential and retail) will provide an active street environment;
Bike racks and indoor bike parking would be provided to encourage bike use;
Storefronts open toward France and housing units open toward the pocket park to
activate the public realm;
Public realm in the public plaza which also serves as a buffer and transition to the
adjacent single family homes to the west;
The project would include three units for affordable housing for the handicapped;
Parking would be hidden inside the project and underground;
Retail parking would be made available to the district; however, the plan provides just
enough for proposed retail;
High quality design; and
Public art.
5. In addition to the items mentioned above, the proposed project would meet the following
additional goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan:
a. Movement Patterns.
Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods
along secondary streets or walkways.
Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian -scale
lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.)
A Pedestrian -Friendly Environment.
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
Page 3
b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of City infrastructure
and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character.
c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the City, and
the larger region.
d. Increase mixed -use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to
minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base.
e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between
neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure
and reduce dependence on the car.
f. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets creating pedestrian
scale.
g. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a
consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian
environment. On existing auto -oriented development sites, encourage placement of
liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement.
i. Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking Tots.
ii. Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to
any entries oriented towards parking areas.
iii. Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with
windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade.
iv. Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings,
rather than between buildings and the street.
6. The proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. In summary the PUD zoning
would:
a. Create a more pedestrian -friendly development with the construction of improved
sidewalks and connections. The project would bring vibrancy to the area.
b. The building would be of high quality brick, architectural panel and glass.
c. Ensure that the buildings proposed would be the only buildings built on the site, unless
an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council.
d. Ensure that the affordable housing policy is met.
e. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the
Comprehensive Plan.
f. Enhance green space and landscaping and utilize sustainable concepts.
g. Sustainable development.
h. Enhance and provide additional public realm.
7. The height increase is justified. There would be an adequate transition from the four story
portion of the project down to two stories and 30 feet as specified in the 446 and France
Small Area Plan. The pocket park enhances the transition area. The give to get and adhering
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
Page 4
to the Small Area Plan guiding principles justifies the increase in height. Two to Four stories
is consistent with the Small Area Plan.
8. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Spack Consulting conducted
a traffic and parking impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be
supported by the existing roads.
Section 3. APPROVAL
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves
the Final Rezoning from R-I, Single Dwelling Unit District and PCD-I, Planned Commercial District
to PUD-15, Planned Unit Development District, and Preliminary Development Plan for 4500 France
Avenue, 3905 & 3907 Sunnyside Road
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
I The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of
the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter -of -credit, or cash deposit must be submitted
for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening,
or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit.
2. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances.
3. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City
Code.
4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require
revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements.
5. Three units within the project must be provided for residents earning no more than 50% AMI
for 15 years from the date of the certificate of occupancy. Additionally $160,000 shall be paid to
the City of Edina prior to issuance of a building permit for the City to provide affordable
housing units else ware in the City.
6. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated
August 20, 2018.
7. Compliance with the Spack Consulting Traffic Study recommendations.
8. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD-15, Planned Unit Development
for this site.
9. Dedication of public access easements along the sidewalks and public plaza.
10. A shared parking agreement to allow district parking in the street level parking lot.
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
Page 5
I I . A shared access easement must be established over the shared driveway on the property to the
south.
12. Construction traffic shall be limited to France Avenue and a portion of Sunnyside where the
project is located.
13. All commercial deliveries shall be done during non -peak hours.
14. The restaurant shall be limited to 35 seats and located at the northernmost retail space shown
on the site plan.
15. The overhead power lines must be buried from 4540 France Avenue north to the intersection
of 44th and France, subject to approval conditions of Xcel Energy.
16. The applicant and staff shall explore the potential for traffic calming at the intersection of
Sunnyside and France.
17. The Edina Housing Foundation and/or the City's HRA shall have the first right of refusal to
purchase the affordable housing units if the apartments are turned in condos; if the units remain
rental, after 15 years the property owner will consider extending the affordable housing units
for an additional 15 years.
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-137
Page 6
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on December 18, 2018.
ATTEST: '
Sharon Allison, City Clerk '" James B. Hovland, Mayor
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS
CITY OF EDINA )
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
1, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that
the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular
Meeting of December 18, 2018, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2018.
Sharon Allison, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
Parcel 1:
Lots 1 and 2 and that part of Lot 6 described as follows: Commencing at the most Northerly
corner of said Lot 6; thence South along the East line of said lot; 40.62 feet; thence
Northwesterly 30.2 feet to a point on the Northerly line of said Lot 6, distant 27.19 feet Westerly
from the point of beginning; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning, all in Block 2,
Fairbairn's Rearrangement" in Waveland and Waveland Park, including all of the vacated alley
which lies North of the South line of said Lot 2 extended West, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property)
Parcel 2:
Lots 3, 4 and 5;
That part of Lot 6, described as follows: Commencing on the Easterly line of said Lot at a point
distant 40.62 feet Southerly from the most Northerly corner of said Lot, thence Northwesterly
30.2 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot distant 27.19 feet Southwesterly from
the most Northerly corner of said Lot; thence Southwesterly along the Northwesterly line of said
Lot to the most Westerly corner of said Lot, thence Southeasterly along the Southwesterly line
of said Lot to the most Southerly corner of said Lot, thence Northerly along the Easterly line of
said Lot to the point of beginning;
That part of the alley now vacated, described as follows: Commencing at the point of
intersection of the center line of alley, now vacated with the North line of Lot 3 extended
Westward, thence East on said extended line to the Northwest corner of said Lot 3, thence
along the Easterly line of said alley to the most Southerly corner of Lot 5, thence Southwesterly
along an extension of the Southeasterly line of said Lot to the center line of said alley, thence
Northwesterly along the center line of said alley to a point of its intersection with a line erected
to bisect the angle existing in the Westerly line of said alley, thence Southwest along said line
to the West line of said alley, thence North along said West line to a point in said line 40.62 feet
South of the most Northerly corner of Lot 6, the same being the point of intersection to said
West line of alley with the extension Westward of the North line of Lot 3, thence East along said
extended line to the point of beginning;
All in Block 2, "Fairbairn's Rearrangement" In Waveland and Waveland Park (Torrens Property)
Parcel A:
Lot 7, Block 2, Fairbairn's Rearrangement in Waveland and Waveland Park, Hennepin County,
Minnesota. Together with that part of the adjacent vacated alley that accrued thereto by reason
of the vacation thereof. (Abstract Property)
Parcel B:
M-2
Lot 8, Block 2, Fairbairn's Rearrangement in Waveland and Waveland Park, Hennepin County,
Minnesota. (Abstract Property)
M-3
Date: F ebruary 12, 2020 Agenda Item #: VI I.A.
To:P lanning C ommission Item Type:
O ther
F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director
Item Activity:
Subject:Zoning O rdinanc e Amendments - Introduc tion Dis cus s ion, Information
C ITY O F E D IN A
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED:
No action requested
I N TR O D U C TI O N:
T he P lanning Commission is asked to consider various zoning ordinance amendments as part of the P lanning
C ommission work plan.
AT TAC HME N T S:
Description
Staff Memo
Draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Background Information - Survey of Cities
Background Information - Examples existing in Country Club
Mornings ide Impervious Surface Study
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861
Fax 952-826-0389 • www.CityofEdina.com
Date: February 12, 2020
To:
Planning Commission
From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Re:
Zoning Ordinance Amendments Regarding: Impervious Surface, Setbacks in the Greater
Southdale Area, Building Material Requirements, Requiring Affordable Housing in
Commercial Zoning Districts, Design Experience Guidelines, and number of garage
stalls required
Staff has drafted a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to address several items on the Planning
Commission work plan for both 2019 and 2020. The affordable housing ordinance
amendment is brought forward to strengthen the City’s position in acquiring affordable
housing by requiring affordable housing on property that is zoned for commercial uses, but
allows multifamily housing as a conditionally permitted use.
The Planning Commission is asked to review the draft ordinance for discussion at the
February 12, 2020 meeting. No timetable has been set for public hearings regarding these
amendments. The purpose is for discussion at this point. Engineering staff will be in
attendance on the 12th.
The following summarizes each section of the attached draft ordinance.
Section 1. Nuisance Ordinance (Wastewater.) Note that this section is outside of
the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 23) which the Planning Commission is tasked with
responsibility. This is a recommendation of engineering staff as part of the impervious
surface requirements.
Section 2. Definitions. Impervious surface is defined. This definition was drafted by
engineering staff.
Sections 3 & 4. Impervious Surface Regulation. This Section adds a specific
impervious surface regulation. Currently the City of Edina does not have an impervious
surface maximum. As proposed, impervious surface lot coverage would be limited to a
maximum of 60%. If the impervious surface exceeds 45%, a stormwater management plan
is required subject to review and approval of the city engineer.
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Sections 5-14. Setbacks in the Greater Southdale District and Required
Building Materials. These sections codify portions of the Design Experience Guidelines
for the Greater Southdale District regarding setbacks and building materials. These
changes address some of the key elements of the Guidelines regarding setbacks and
building materials.
Section 15. Affordable Housing Required for Multi-Family Residential Uses in
Commercial Zoning Districts. Within the City’s Planned Commercial Zoning Districts
(PCD) multi-family residential uses are currently allowed by Conditional Use Permit. The
Ordinance amendment would require compliance with the city’s affordable housing policy
through the Conditional Use Permit process when considering multifamily housing in
commercial districts.
Section 16. Minimum Garage Stall Requirements. Reduces the number of
enclosed parking stalls for single and double dwellings and townhouses from two spaces to
one. This would reduce the cost of building and to de-emphasize the automobile.
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-__
AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LOT COVERAGE, BASEMENT
REQUIREMENTS, SETBACKS, BUILDING MATERIAL AND HOUSING IN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Sec. 23-95 (Nuisances) is amended as follows:
Sec. 23-95. - Specific conditions declared nuisances.
The following are declared to be nuisances affecting health, safety and welfare:
3) Wastewater. Discharging any sump pump water, swimming pool water, or water
which has been used in a manufacturing process or mechanical process so as to flow
upon or over streets, sidewalks, or other public property or private property except that
owned by the person discharging the water. Provided, however, swimming pool water,
sump pump water and wastewater permitted to be discharged into public waters by
state law and federal law may be discharged into the city storm sewer system, include
curb and gutter if a sump drain line is not available at the property. provided that such
discharge shall not accumulate so as to become stagnant. Discharge from saltwater
chlorine generating pools must be directed to the sanitary sewer.
Section 2. Sec. 36-10 Definitions is amended as follows:
Building coverage means the percentage of the lot area occupied by principal and
accessory buildings and structures. including, without limitation, patios.
Impervious surface: A constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry
of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an
increased rate of flow than prior to placement. Examples include, but are not limited to,
buildings, decks, rooftops, cantilevers or overhangs greater than 5’, sidewalks, patios,
permeable pavers, and concrete, asphalt, or gravel driveways.
Section 3. Subsection 36-438 of the Edina City Code. Requirements for building coverage,
setbacks and height Special Requirements are amended to add the following:
Sec. 36-438. - Requirements for building coverage, impervious surface lot coverage, setbacks
and height.
The minimum requirements for building coverage, impervious surface lot coverage,
setbacks, and height in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R-1) are as follows:
(1) Building Coverage.
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
2
a. Lots 9,000 square feet or greater in area. Building coverage shall be not more
than25 percent for all buildings and structures. On lots with an existing
conditional use, if the combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings
and structures, excluding attached garages, is 1,000 square feet or greater, a
conditional use permit is required.
b. Lots less than 9,000 square feet in area. Building coverage shall be not more than
30 percent for all buildings and structures; provided, however, that the area
occupied by all buildings and structures shall not exceed 2,250 square feet.
c. Combined total area. The combined total area occupied by all accessory
buildings and structures, excluding attached garages, shall not exceed 1,000
square feet for lots used for single dwelling unit buildings.
d. Building coverage shall include all principal or accessory buildings, including, but
not limited to:
1. Decks and patios. The first 150 square feet of an unenclosed deck or patio
shall not be included when computing building coverage.
2. Gazebos.
3. Balconies.
4. Breezeways.
5. Porches.
6. Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle
tennis courts.
e. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building
coverage:
1. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to subsection (1)d.1 of
this section.
2. Parking lots and parking ramps.
3. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not
covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and
shuffleboard courts.
4. Unenclosed steps and stoops less than 50 square feet.
5. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars.
(2) Impervious Surface Lot coverage. Impervious surface lot coverage shall be limited to a
maximum of 60%. If the impervious surface exceeds 45%, a stormwater management
plan is required subject to review and approval of the city engineer.
a. Conditions of approval for impervious surfaces exceeding 45% and less than
60%.
i. Net decrease in runoff rate to amount generated by 30% impervious
condition in 10% probability event.
ii. Net decrease in runoff rate to amount generated by 30% impervious
condition in 10% probability event.
iii. Follow typical standards of grading permit
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
3
iv. Maintenance agreement allowing city access to inspect, 1per5year
inspection frequency and report at request of city, duty to maintain
function, checks at all future permits
(2) (3) Setbacks.
(3) (4) Height.
Section 4. Sec. 36-1259. – Building Coverage Computation; exclusion and inclusions is
amended as follows:
(a) The following structures and improvements shall be excluded when computing building
coverage:
(1) Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios.
(2) Parking lots and parking ramps.
(3) Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a
roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts; but
facilities which are constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts, shall be
included when computing building coverage.
(4) Unenclosed and uncovered steps and stoops less than 50 square feet.
(5) Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars.
(b) Building coverage computations, however, shall include all other principal or accessory
buildings, including, but not limited to:
(1) Decks and patios, subject to allowances provided by this chapter.
(2) Gazebos.
(3) Balconies.
(4) Breezeways.
(5) Porches.
(6) Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis
courts.
Section 5. Sec. 36-525. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height is
amended as follows: (PRD & PSR Zoning District)
(b) Setbacks. Setbacks shall be measured from the boundary of the tract. The required setbacks
shall be increased to equal the building height for those buildings whose height exceeds the
minimum setbacks required. The minimum setbacks are as follows:
Front Street (in feet) Side Street (in
feet)
Interior Side Yard (in
feet)
Rear Yard (in
feet)
PRD-1 30* 30* 20 25
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
4
PRD-2 30* 30* 20 35
PRD-3 35* 35* 20 35
PRD-4, 5 35* 35* 35 35
PSR-3, 4 35* 35* 20 35
Accessory
buildings
Same as principal
building 10 10
* Front and Side Street Setbacks for properties in the Greater Southdale District are subject to
Sec. 36-1276
Section 6. Sec. 36-553. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height is
amended as follows: (MDD District)
• (c)
Setbacks. Setbacks shall be measured from the boundary of the tract or from the public street
right-of-way.
Front Street (in feet) Side Street (in feet) Interior Side Yard (in feet) Rear Yard (in feet)
MDD-3 35* 35* 20 35
MDD-4 35* 35* 20 35
MDD-5 35* 35* 20 35
MDD-6 35* 35* 20 35
* Front and Side Street Setbacks for properties in the Greater Southdale District are subject to
Sec. 36-1276
Section 7. Sec. 36-578. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height is
amended to add the following: (POD Zoning District)
(4) Front and Side Street Setbacks for properties in the Greater Southdale District are
subject to Sec. 36-1276
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
5
Section 8. Sec. 36-579. (3) – Special Requirements (POD Zoning District) is amended as
follows:
(3) Building design and construction. In addition to other restrictions of this section and
article III of chapter 10, the use, construction, alteration or enlargement of any building
or structure within the Planned Office District shall meet the following standards:
a. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be one or a combination of the
following:
1. Face brick;
2. Natural stone;
3. Specially designed precast concrete units, if the surfaces have been
integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture;
4. Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the
panel materials are any of those noted in subsections (3)a.1 through 3 of
this section; or
5. Glass or prefinished metal (other than unpainted galvanized iron).
a. All new building façades in the district must have seventy five percent (75%)
transparency at the ground level.
b. All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use natural
materials (brick, stone) facing the public realm (streets, parks, sidewalks).
c. No building façade shall be longer than 200 feet without changing direction by a
minimum of 90 degrees.
d. First floors must have a minimum ceiling height of 20 feet.
b.e. All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings constructed
after the erection of an original building shall be constructed of the same materials
as the original building and shall be designed in a manner conforming to the
original architectural design and general appearance.
Section 9. Sec. 36-617 (b) – Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height in the
PCD Zoning Districts is amended as follows:
Sec. 36-617 (b). - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height.
(b) Setbacks. Subject to the requirements of section 36-618 (1) and (2).
Front Street (in
feet) Side Street (in feet) Side Yard (in feet) Rear Yard (in feet)
PCD-1 35* 25* 25* 25*
PCD-2 35* 25* 25* 25*
PCD-3
North of 70th St. 35** ** 35** 35 35
PDC-3
South of 70th St. 50** ** 50** 50 50
PCD-4 Gas stations 35 25 25 25
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
6
All other uses 45 25 45 25
*Subject to the requirements of section 36-618.
** Subject to the requirements of section 36-1276
Section 10. Subsection 36-618, Special requirements in the PCD Zoning Districts is amended
as follows:
Sec. 36-618. - Special requirements.
(3) Setbacks for PCD-3 subdistrict. The minimum building setback required by section
36-617(b) shall be increased as follows:
a. In the area bounded by France Avenue on the west, York Avenue on the east and
W. 70th Street on the south, the minimum building setback shall be increased by
one-third-foot for each foot that the building exceeds 50 feet in building height.
For purposes hereof, only those portions of buildings which exceeds 50 feet in
building height need provide the additional setbacks required by this subsection.
b. In all other areas, the minimum building setback shall be equal to the building
height for buildings taller than 50 feet.
(11) Building design and construction. In addition to the other restrictions of this
section and article III of chapter 10, the use, construction, alteration or
enlargement of any building or structure within the Planned Commercial District
shall meet the following standards:
a. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be one or a combination of the
following:
1. Face brick;
2. Natural stone;
3. Specially designed precast concrete units, if the surfaces have been
integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture;
4. Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the
panel materials are any of those noted in subsections (11)a.1 through 3
of this section; or
5. Glass or prefinished metal (other than unpainted galvanized iron).
a. All new building façades in the district must have seventy five percent (75%)
transparency at the ground level.
b. All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use
natural materials (brick, stone) facing the public realm (streets, parks,
sidewalks).
c. No building façade shall be longer than 200 feet without changing direction by
a minimum of 90 degrees.
d. First floors must have a minimum ceiling height of 20 feet.
e. Exceptions may be made to a-d above for an affordable housing project that
has over 50% of the units considered to affordable housing as defined in
Section 36-612 (1).
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
7
b.f. All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings
constructed after the erection of an original building shall be constructed of
the same materials as the original building and shall be designed in a manner
conforming to the original architectural design and general appearance.
Section 11. Subsection 36-643, Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height in
the PID Zoning District is amended to add the following:
(g) Front and Side Street Setbacks for properties in the Greater Southdale District
are subject to Sec. 36-1276
Section 12. Subsection 36-644, Special requirements in the PID Zoning District is amended as
follows:
Sec. 36-644. - Special requirements.
(11) Building design and construction. In addition to the other restrictions of this
section and article III of chapter 10, the use, construction, alteration or
enlargement of any building or structure within the Planned Industrial District shall
meet the following standards:
a. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be one or a combination of the
following:
1. Face brick;
2. Natural stone;
3. Specially designed precast concrete units, if the surfaces have been
integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture;
4. Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the
panel materials are any of those noted in subsections (4)a.1 through 3 of
this section; or
5. Glass or prefinished metal (other than unpainted galvanized iron).
a. All new building façades in the district must have seventy five percent (75%)
transparency at the ground level.
b. All facades on the first vertical 60 feet of a building (above grade) shall use
natural materials (brick, stone) facing the public realm (streets, parks,
sidewalks).
c. No building façade shall be longer than 200 feet without changing direction by
a minimum of 90 degrees.
d. First floors must have a minimum ceiling height of 20 feet.
b.e. All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings
constructed after the erection of an original building shall be constructed
of the same materials as the original building and shall be designed in a
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
8
manner conforming to the original architectural design and general
appearance.
Section 13. Sec. 36-664. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height is
amended as follows: (RMD Zoning District)
(b) Setbacks.
Front Street Side Street Interior Side Yard Rear Yard
35 feet** 35 feet** 20 feet* 20 feet*
*Or the building height, if greater.
**Front and Side Street Setbacks for properties in the Greater Southdale District are subject to
Sec. 36-1276
Section 14. DIVISION 2. - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO ALL DISTRICTS EXCEPT
AS OTHERWISE STATED is amended to add the following:
Sec. 36-1276. – Setbacks in the Greater Southdale District
(1) Front Street Setbacks on France Avenue between Highway 62 and Minnesota Drive and
the on York Avenue between 66th Street and 78th Street: A 50-foot setback is required
from the face of the curb to the face of building. Above a building height of 60-feet the
additional height must step back 10 feet from the face of the building.
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
9
(2) Front Street Setbacks on streets other than France Avenue and York Avenue: A 30-foot
setback is required from the face of curb to the face of building with a building podium
height of 60 feet. Above the 60-foot height limit, additional height should step back 30
feet from the face of the building, to a maximum height of 105 feet. Any height about
105 feet should step back and additional 10 feet from the face of the building.
(3) All new building façades in the district must have seventy five percent (75%) transparency
at the ground level.
Section 15. Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. (PCD Zoning Districts) is amended as follows:
The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict:
(1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts. Multi-residential uses subject to following:
a. New rental multi-family developments containing 20-units or more shall provide
a minimum of 10% residential units at 50% area median income (AMI) or 20%
residential units at 60% AMI.
b. New for-sale developments shall provide a minimum of 10% of residential units
at AMI.
c. Rental and for-sale/owner occupied affordable units shall provide the following:
i. on-site parking (either surface or enclosed) for affordable units and the
cost related to parking must be included affordable sales price or
affordable rental rate. At least one enclosed parking space shall be
included in the purchase price of a for-sale unit in the same manner
offered to buyers of market rate units.
ii. Affordable and market rate residents will have equal access to all entries,
lobbies, elevators, parking and amenities. Examples of amenities include
storage lockers, balconies, roof decks, outdoor patios, pools, fitness
facilities, and similar unit and project features.
iii. Exterior appearance of affordable units shall be visually comparable with
market rate units in the development.
d. New rental housing will remain affordable for a minimum of 20 years and this
requirement will be memorialized by a Land Use Restrictive Covenant.
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
10
e. New for-sale or owner-occupied developments will remain affordable for a
minimum of 30 years and this requirement will be memorialized by a Land Use
Restrictive Covenant. The Land Use Restrictive Covenant will contain a provision
providing the Housing and Redevelopment Authority or Edina Housing
Foundation the right of first refusal to purchase affordable units.
f. The owners of multi-family rental housing projects subject to this Policy by
receiving financial assistance shall accept tenant-based rental housing assistance
including but not limited to Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, HOME tenant-
based assistance and Housing Support. Tenants with rental assistance may
occupy an affordable dwelling unit with the rent charged not exceeding the
maximum allowed by Metro HRA or the assistance provider. Furthermore, the
rent charged may not exceed the maximum allowed by the most restrictive
funding soured. This requirement will be enforced through a contract between
the City of the project owner pursuant to which the owner will be required to
adopt business practices that promote fair housing and provide documentation
of compliance with these requirements to the City. This requirement will be
further enforced through the City’s monitoring policies and procedures.
g. Owners of City-assisted housing projects shall affirmatively market affordable
housing opportunities. All multi-family housing providers subject to this policy
must submit an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan (AFHMP) at lease every
5 years and a Survey and Certification regarding AFHMP outcomes annually.
Owners must advertise housing opportunities on HousingLink or another
medium acceptable to the City concurrent with any other public or private
advertising.
h. Recognizing that affordable housing is created through a partnership between
the City and developers, the City and/or Housing and Redevelopment Authority
will consider the following incentives for developments that provide affordable
housing:
i. Density bonuses
ii. Parking requirement reductions
iii. Tax increment financing for projects that exceed the minimum
requirement
iv. Deferred low interest loans from the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority and/or Edina Housing Foundation
v. Property Tax Abatement
i. In lieu of providing affordable housing in each new qualifying development, the
City may consider the following:
i. Dedication of existing units in Edina to 110% of what would have been
provided in a proposed new development. These units would need to be
of an equivalent quality within the determination of the City.
ii. Financial risk and participation in the construction of affordable dwelling
units of an equivalent quality by another developer on a different site
within the City.
iii. An alternative proposed by a developer that directly or indirectly
provides or enables provision of an equivalent amount of affordable
housing within the city. An alternative could be payment of a Total Buy In
(TBI) fee, a cash payment to the City in lieu of providing affordable
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
11
housing units. The TBI shall be equal to $100,000 per unit rounding up to
the next whole unit. The TBI would be due in cash or certified funds in full
to the City at the time of issuance of the building permit. A building
permit will not be issued unless the TBI is paid in full. The City Council
may allow the housing developer to pre-pay the TBI to satisfy a future
Affordable Housing Opportunity on a case-by-case basis. TBI will be
deposited into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to be used for the
development and preservation of affordable housing.
(2) PCD-3 subdistrict.
a. Automobile agencies selling new, unused vehicles.
b. Boat or marine stores or agencies selling or displaying new, unused boats.
c. Multi-residential uses subject to following:
iv. New rental multi-family developments containing 20 units or more shall provide
a minimum of 10% residential units at 50% area median income (AMI) or 20%
residential units at 60% AMI.
v. New for-sale developments shall provide a minimum of 10% of residential units
at AMI.
vi. Rental and for-sale/owner occupied affordable units shall provide the following:
(1) on-site parking (either surface or enclosed) for affordable units and the cost
related to parking must be included affordable sales price or affordable
rental rate. At least one enclosed parking space shall be included in the
purchase price of a for-sale unit in the same manner offered to buyers of
market rate units.
(2) Affordable and market rate residents will have equal access to all entries,
lobbies, elevators, parking and amenities. Examples of amenities include
storage lockers, balconies, roof decks, outdoor patios, pools, fitness
facilities, and similar unit and project features.
(3) Exterior appearance of affordable units shall be visually comparable with
market rate units in the development.
vii. New rental housing will remain affordable for a minimum of 20 years and this
requirement will be memorialized by a Land Use Restrictive Covenant.
viii. New for-sale or owner-occupied developments will remain affordable for a
minimum of 30 years and this requirement will be memorialized by a Land Use
Restrictive Covenant. The Land Use Restrictive Covenant will contain a provision
providing the Housing and Redevelopment Authority or Edina Housing
Foundation the right of first refusal to purchase affordable units.
ix. The owners of multi-family rental housing projects subject to this Policy by
receiving financial assistance shall accept tenant-based rental housing assistance
including but not limited to Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, HOME tenant-
based assistance and Housing Support. Tenants with rental assistance may
occupy an affordable dwelling unit with the rent charged not exceeding the
maximum allowed by Metro HRA or the assistance provider. Furthermore, the
rent charged may not exceed the maximum allowed by the most restrictive
funding soured. This requirement will be enforced through a contract between
the City of the project owner pursuant to which the owner will be required to
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
12
adopt business practices that promote fair housing and provide documentation
of compliance with these requirements to the City. This requirement will be
further enforced through the City’s monitoring policies and procedures.
x. Owners of City-assisted housing projects shall affirmatively market affordable
housing opportunities. All multi-family housing providers subject to this policy
must submit an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan (AFHMP) at lease every
5 years and a Survey and Certification regarding AFHMP outcomes annually.
Owners must advertise housing opportunities on HousingLink or another
medium acceptable to the City concurrent with any other public or private
advertising.
xi. Recognizing that affordable housing is created through a partnership between
the City and developers, the City and/or Housing and Redevelopment Authority
will consider the following incentives for developments that provide affordable
housing:
(1) Density bonuses
(2) Parking requirement reductions
(3) Tax increment financing for projects that exceed the minimum requirement
(4) Deferred low interest loans from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
and/or Edina Housing Foundation
(5) Property Tax Abatement
xii. In lieu of providing affordable housing in each new qualifying development, the
City may consider the following:
(1) Dedication of existing units in Edina to 110% of what would have been
provided in a proposed new development. These units would need to be of
an equivalent quality within the determination of the City.
(2) Financial risk and participation in the construction of affordable dwelling
units of an equivalent quality by another developer on a different site within
the City.
(3) An alternative proposed by a developer that directly or indirectly provides
or enables provision of an equivalent amount of affordable housing within
the city. An alternative could be payment of a Total Buy In (TBI) fee, a cash
payment to the City in lieu of providing affordable housing units. The TBI
shall be equal to $100,000 per unit rounding up to the next whole unit. The
TBI would be due in cash or certified funds in full to the City at the time of
issuance of the building permit. A building permit will not be issued unless
the TBI is paid in full. The City Council may allow the housing developer to
pre-pay the TBI to satisfy a future Affordable Housing Opportunity on a
case-by-case basis. TBI will be deposited into the Affordable Housing Trust
Fund to be used for the development and preservation of affordable
housing.
d. Offices, except offices allowed as a permitted accessory use.
e. All nonresidential uses that increase the FAR to more than 0.5.
Existing text – XXXX
Stricken text – XXXX
Added text – XXXX
13
Subdivision II. - Parking Spaces
Section 16. Sec. 36-1311. Minimum number required is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Single dwelling units, double dwelling units and residential townhouses. Two fully
enclosed spaces per dwelling unit. One fully enclosed space per dwelling unit for
single, double dwelling units and residential townhouses.
Section 17. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage.
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published:
Attest
Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor
Survey of Cities
Single-dwelling unit residential standards
Coverage and impervious maximums
Metro Cities
2
Apple Valley
Zoning R-5 R-2 R-3
FAR None None None
Max. building
coverage
None None None
Max. impervious
surface
None None None
Blaine
Zoning R-1 R-1A R-1AA
Max. building
coverage
None None None
Max. impervious
surface
None None None
Bloomington
Zoning R-1 RS-1
Max. building
coverage
None None
Max. impervious
surface
35% 35%
Burnsville
Zoning R-1
Max. building
coverage
None
Max. impervious
surface
None
Eagan
Zoning R-1 R-1S
Max. building
coverage
20% 25%
Max. impervious
surface
None
25% for shoreline
None
25% for shoreline
Eden Prairie
Zoning R1-22 R1-13.5 R1-9.5
Max. building
coverage
None None None
Max. Impervious
surface
None
30% for
shoreline
None
30% for
shoreline
None
30% for
shoreline
3
Edina
Zoning R-1
Max. building
coverage
25%
30% if lot is less than 9,000
square feet
Max. Impervious
surface
None
Hopkins
Zoning R-1A R-1B R-1c
FAR None None None
Max. building
coverage
35% 35% 35%
Max.
Impervious
surface
None None None
Lakeville
Zoning RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-4
Max. building
coverage
None None None None
Max. impervious
surface
None None None None
Maple Grove
Zoning R-1 R-2 R-2B
Max. building
coverage
None None None
Max. impervious
surface
None
None
None
Minneapolis
Zoning R-1 R-2 R-3
Max. building
coverage
45% 45% 45%
Max. impervious
surface
60% 60% 60%
Minnetonka
Zoning R-1
Max. building
coverage
None
Max. Impervious
surface
None
30% Impervious
within 150 ft of lake
75% impervious
within 1000 ft of
lake
4
New Brighton
Zoning R-1
Max. building
coverage
30%
Max. Impervious
surface
50%
Plymouth
Zoning RSF-1 RSF-2 RSF-3
Max. building
coverage
30% 30% 35%
Max. impervious
surface
None
25% within 1000 ft
of water body
None
25% within 1000 ft
of water body
None
25% within 1000 ft
of water body
St. Louis Park
Zoning R-1 R-2
Max. building
coverage
35% 35%
Max. impervious
surface
None None
Wayzata
Zoning R-3A R-2A R-2
Max. building
coverage
30% 20% 20%
Max. impervious
surface
None None None
Woodbury
Zoning R-4
Max. building
coverage
35%
Max. impervious
surface
None
MorningsideNeighborhood Boundary
2015 ImperviousSurfaces
Morningside Impervious Surfaces
0.00
500,00 0.00
1,000,0 00.00
1,500,0 00.00
2,000,0 00.00
2,500,0 00.00
1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feetTotal Impervious Surface Area within Parc els
26.46 28.62 29.98 31.08 31.66 35.30
24.30 26.47 27.62 28.78 29.39 32.95
0
10
20
30
40
1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015percent AveragePercentageCovered perParcelPercent ofResidentialParcelsCovered
Impervious surface area includes primary and accessory structures, driveways, private paths, decks, patios, and pool decks.
Average percent covered per parcel (2015): 35.30%Average impervious area per parcel (2015): 3,419.03 sq ftMinimum percent covered: 0.34%Maximum percent covered: 65.74%
Percent Impervious Surface0-1010-2020-3030-4040-5050-6060-70
2015 1960 1950
52%
30%
3% 9%
3% 3% 0% 0%
Impervious Surfaces 2015
Primary structure
Driveway
Private paths
Accessory structure
Deck
Patio
Other
Pool deck
0.00
2,000.00
4,000.00
6,000.00
8,000.00
10,000.00
12,000.00
1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feet Average Size ofOccupiedParcel
AverageImperviousSurface Areaper Parcel
0.00
500,000.00
1,000,000.00
1,500,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,500,000.00
1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feet Pool deck
Other
Patio
Deck
AccessorystructurePrivate paths
Driveway
Primarystructure
2
51
184 201
142
63
14 0
50
100
150
200
250
0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70Count of Parcels Percent of Parcel Covered
Parcels Histogram 2015
Average impervious surface area per parcel increased 39% from 1950 to 2015. Average size of occupied parcels increased by 3%. Average impervious surface area per parcel increased 12% from 2000 to 2015. Average size of occupied parcels increased by <1%.
1950
2000
2015
65.74% 64.46%
1950
2000
2015
63.44% 62.17%
1950
2000
2015
61.1% 60.79%
Sec. 36-438. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height.
The minimum requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R-1) are as follows:
(1) Building coverage.
a. Lots 9,000 square feet or greater in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 25 percent for all buildings and
structures. On lots with an existing conditional use, if the combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and
structures, excluding attached garages, is 1,000 square feet or greater, a conditional use permit is required.
b. Lots less than 9,000 square feet in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 30 percent for all buildings and
structures; provided, however, that the area occupied by all buildings and structures shall not exceed 2,250
square feet.
c. Combined total area. The combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and structures, excluding attached
garages, shall not exceed 1,000 square feet for lots used for single dwelling unit buildings.
d. Building coverage shall include all principal or accessory buildings, including, but not limited to:
1. Decks and patios. The first 150 square feet of an unenclosed deck or patio shall not be included when computing
building coverage.
2. Gazebos
3. Balconies.
4. Breezeways.
5. Porches.
6. Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts.
e. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage:
1. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to subsection (1)d.1 of this section.
2. Parking lots and parking ramps.
3. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor
swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts.
4. Unenclosed steps and stoops less than 50 square feet.
5. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars.
95
14%
237
36%
327
50%
Non-Code
Compliant
Maybe Code
Compliant
Code Compliant
Parcels with red boundaries are non-code compliant based on building structure area (greater than 2,250 sq ft) despite being within 5% of their coverage limit (30%). *2,250 sq ft limit only applies to parcels under 9,000 sq ft.
Date: F ebruary 12, 2020 Agenda Item #: VI I I.A.
To:P lanning C ommission Item Type:
C orrespondenc e
F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist
Item Activity:
Subject:C orres pondence S ubmissions R egarding 4500 F ranc e
Ave.
Information
C ITY O F E D IN A
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED:
None.
I N TR O D U C TI O N:
C orrespondence Submissions regarding 4500 F rance Ave.