Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 09-30 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularREGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1981, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bill Lewis, James Bentley, David Runyan, Leonard Ring, John Skagerberg, Gordon Johnson, Helen McClelland MEMBERS ABSENT: Len Fernelius, Del Johnson, Mary McDonald, John Palmer STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, Comprehensive Planner Fran Hoffman, City Engineer Joyce Repya, Planning Secretary Chairman Lewis announced that Boy Scout Troop #68 from the Good Samaritan Church was attending the meeting. I. OLD BUSINESS: Z-81-5 Community Development Corporation. R-1 Single Family Dwelling District to SR -5 Senior Citizen Residence District. Overall Development Plan Amendment. Generally located north of Park - lawn Avenue and west of York Avenue. Mr. Larsen advised the Commission that the H.R.A. and City Council had approved the acquisitions of Parcels A and B from Hedberg and Sons along with the trade of Parcel C (owned by 7500 York Cooperative) for Parcel B to acquire a 4 acre site for construction of a 98 unit elderly high rise. How- ever, since that time, the City has been unable to acquire or enter into a pur- chase agreement with 7500 York Cooperative committing to a trade of Parcel C for Parcel B. As an alternative to that plan, the City Council and H.R.A. considered acquiring only the Hedberg property (Parcels A & B), building the same apart- ment building on Parcel A, and splitting Parcel B to allow the new building enough land to meet it's density requirements and the H.R.A. continued control of the other Parcel B. This plan was approved by Council on September 21, 1981, and acquisition of the Hedberg property was approved by the H.R.A. Mr. Larsen explained that through further discussions with Hedberg and Sons, the concept of acquiring another 160 feet to the west of the northerly parcel to achieve an approximately 3.2 acre piece of property (adequate to meet the density requirements and the building as initially approved by the Planning Commission and City Council) was suggested. Such an alternative would eliminate the site being split by the Parklawn Avenue right of way. Mr. Larsen stated that Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the development plan to allow for rearrangement of the site in addition to the approval of the revised plat. Discussion ensued regarding the status of the 2 acre Parcel C. Staff conformed that it must presently remain undeveloped because it is maintaining the density requirements for 7500 York. If, however, Hedberg and Sons were to acquire the parcel through a land trade, they would be able to develop it with as much as a 40 unit project. Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 2 Gordon Johnson moved approval of the development plan amendment and plat. David Runyan seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried. II NEW BUSINESS: Z-81-7 J.H.E. Associates, Inc., R-1 Single Family Dwelling District S to 0-1 Office Building District. Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 1, LD -81-15 Braewood Park. Generally located east of County Road 18 and south of Braemar Park. Mr. Larsen advised the Commission that the subject property measures about 30 acres in area. It was recently detached from Bloomington and annexed to Edina as part of the Radisson South land exchange. Prior to detachment, the City of Bloomington rezoned the property to Freeway Development Two -Planned Development. The approved plan illustrated two, single story office warehouse buildings for the easterly one third of the property and two, four story buildings. for the westerly two thirds of the property. In connection with the land exchange, Edina agreed to rezone the easterly one third of the property to Planned Indus- trial District and the westerly two thirds to 0-1 Office District. This zoning would allow the plan approved in Bloomington to be implemented in Edina. Prior to de- tachment, Bloomington also approved a plat of the property which dedicated all necessary rights of way and easements. Mr. Larsen explained that following annexation to Edina, the property was sold. The new owners are requesting a rezoning to 0-1 Office District for the entire property rather than only the westerly two thirds. The office ware- house arehouse concept for the easterly one third has been abandoned. The proponents have submitted preliminary plans for the proposed development of the property. These plans illustrate a four story, 100,000 square foot office to be built on the easterly end of the property. A second office building, which would be a mirror image of the first, is proposed for the near future. The balance of the property would be developed with two more office buildings, although plans for these buildings have not been refined. Mr. Larsen stated that 'by way of the land exchange agreement, the City is obliged to rezone this property to 0-1 and PID. Staff believes the request to delete the PID zoning and expand the 0-1 zoning is logical and desirable. Staff believes that the office uses are more in keeping with the existing land uses in the area. Staff recommends rezoning to 0-1 Office District. The pro- ponent is advised that curb cuts to 78th Street for this project require permits from Bloomington. Permits from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District are also required. Mr. Larsen further commented that in addition to the rezoning, the proponent is requesting a lot division to re -adjust the westerly lot lines of Lots 2 and 3. Staff would approve this division. Mr. Rick Dykman of Windsor, Faricy Architects, representing the proponent explained that the proposed lot division will re -adjust the property to conform to the needs (setbacks, parking requirements, etc.) of the new proposal for the site, Community Development Corporation September 30, 1981 Page 3 Mr. Jeff Longtin, 5828 W. 78th Street expressed concern regarding the additional traffic that would be generated onto West 78th Street from the new office building. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer advised Mr. Longtin and the Commission that the Minnesota Department of Transportation has future plans for County Road 18 and 494 that include rebuilding the ramps and hooking them up to the frontage road. Such a plan will relieve some of the excess traffic from West 78th Street. Gordon Johnson observed that motorists approaching the subject site from the east will most likely exit 494 at E. Bush Lake Road and come down W. 78th Street rather than traveling further west on 494 and backtracking off the frontage road. Fran Hoffman agreed with Mr. Johnson and pointed out that the roadway plans are projected for 10 years in the future. Responding to a question from Helen McClelland, Mr. Dykman advised the Commission that Sunde Land Surveyors have worked with Barr Engineering and have determined that the plan is well within the 20o for the Nine Mile Creek Water- shed District. Following a brief discussion, David Runyan moved approval of the rezoning request. John Skagerberg seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried. David Runyan then moved approval of the lot division. Helen McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried. Z-81-8 Darrel A. Farr Development Corp., R-1 Single Family Dwelling & District to 0-1 Office District. S-81-13 Lincoln Office Center: Generally located in the northeast quadrant of County Road 18 and West 7th Street. Mr. Larsen advised the Commission that the subject property measures approximately 4.8 acres in area and is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District. The site is completely surrounded by public roadways: County Road 18 on the west, the frontage road on the north and east, and 7th Street on the south. To the north and across the street is Grandview Cemetery. To the east and across the street is Van Valkenburg Park which is undeveloped, and to the south and across the street is vacant land which is zoned Office and Multiple Residential. The proponent is requesting a rezoning to 0-1 Office Building District. Preliminary development plans in support of the request have been submitted showing a four story office building containing approximately 63,000 square feet of floor area. This building would be oriented on a north/south axis. Surface parking complies with ordinance requirements in terms of quantity and location. Access to the project is by way of two curb cuts to the frontage road; one on the north side and one on the east side. These curb cuts appear to be properly located from a site distance and safety standpoint. In addition to the site 'plan, landscape plans, elevation drawings, and floor plans have been submitted. All such plans appear to comply with ordinance requirements. Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 4 Mr. Larsen explained that in conjunction with the rezoning, the proponent is also requesting a subdivision approval. This subdivision is composed of one lot and one outlot. The outlot comprises a sliver of property located to the north and east of the frontage road. Staff believes that the proponent has prepared an excellent plans for the development of the site. The use conforms to the draft Comprehensive Plan which designated mixed uses for this site. Staff recommends rezoning to 0-1 conditioned upon final plat approval. Final plat approval should be conditioned on subdivision dedication. Staff recommends that the outlot located north and east of the frontage road should be accepted for that dedication. Mr. Rod Bernu, representing Darrel A. Farr Development Corp., reviewed the development plans for the subject property, pointing out that the building would be constructed of block with a brick exterior, tinted windows, fully carpeted and sprinklered and contain 2 elevators. He added that the building would be 60 feet deep; double loaded with a central corridor. Mr. Larsen advised the Commission that the City is proposing the outlot in the northeast corner of the property (NE of the frontage road) to satisfy the subdivision dedication requirement. He added that it is an important piece of property for the city because it provides westerly access to Van Valkent)urg Parka Mr. Bernu explained to the Commission that Mr. Farr is buying the parcel west of the frontage road, not the outlot northeast of the frontage road. Mr. Bernu added that Mr. Farr is willing to cooperate with the City to provide the subdivision dedication, be it a cash, or a land dedication. Discussion ensued amongst the Commission regarding the subdivision dedi- cation. Mr. Bernu stated that Mr. Farr doesn't have a right to dedicate the outlot for his subdivision dedication since it is not part of his purchase agreement. Mr. Larsen explained that the seller of the property does control both parcels of land (the property for which Mr. Farr has a purchase agreement, and the outlot) . Gordon Johnson suggested that either the proponent acquire the outlot and dedicate it to the City, or the subdivision dedication be a cash amount substantial enough to allow the City to purchase the outlot at no additional cost. Mr. Bernu voiced concern that problems with adjacent properties should not have a bearing upon the development of the subject property. Discussion ensued regarding the outlot and it's potential for future develop- ment. Gordon Johnson stated that he felt the Commission should wait to make a decision until more information is presented regarding the outlot. Mr. Johnson then moved for continuance of the subject rezoning and subdivision request for 1 month to allow for clarification regarding the status of the outlot. Leonard Ring seconded the motion . All voted aye; the motion carried. Z-81-9 Byron E Kathleen Recke. C-4 to C-1 Commercial District for Lots 11 and 12, Block 22, Fairfax. 4400 Valley View Road. Generally located at Valley View Road and Oakk, -� Avenue. Gordon Johnson announced that lie would abstain from this m. Community Development Corporation September 30, 1981 Page 5 Mr. Larsen informed the Commission that the subject property measures about 11,600 square feet in area and is zoned C-4 Commercial District. This property had been used as a Texaco service station for many years. About two years ago, the service station closed and the site stood vacant for approximately one year. Approximately nine months ago, Total Automotive, a service garage, successfully appealed Staff's administrative decision that "Automobile Service Stations" must include gasoline sales. The Board of Appeals overruled Staff's interpretation of the ordinance and allowed Total Automotive to occupy the building provided that the subject property was improved by landscaping, parking arrangement, etc. The required improvements were deferred until October 1, 1981. Those improvements were not completed and Total Automotive has terminated operations. Mr. Larsen explained that the proponents have entered into a purchase agreement on the property and are requesting a rezoning to C-1 Commercial District. They are requesting this zoning in order to relocate their beauty parlor to the subject property. Their business has been located at 3903 Sunny- side Road for many years. In it's present condition with the C -A zoning, the property and building are non -conforming from several standpoints including lot area, building, parking and drive aisle setbacks, number of curb cuts and landscaping. A rezoning to C-1 would reduce the non -conforming features in that the required lot areas and setbacks for C-1 are less than C-4. However, it will still be necessary for the proponent to seek variances from the Board of Appeals for various setback and parking requirements. Mr. Larsen said that the proponent has presented preliminary plans for the site. These plans essentially follow the type of parking and landscaping improvements proposed by Total Automotive. The building will be remodeled and upgraded to accomodate the new use. Staff has mixed emotions concerning this rezoning. The draft Comprehensive Plan advocates the use of the property for multiple residential housing and Staff has recommended to prospective purchasers that the property be used for housing or office purposes. It has been the City's goal to reduce the strip commercial atmosphere of this shopping district.. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the City doesn't have a special use or conditional use permitting system. Thus, in addition to the proposed beauty parlor, any of the approximately 50 uses allowed, in the C-1 zone would be permitted. In the subject case, the proponents are requesting a rezoning which adjoins an identical zoning to the west. The proponents have submitted a plan which appears to exceed the parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for C-1 property (11 spaces are required and 17 are proposed) . In addition, landscaping and parking setbacks would be improved and building appearance would be enhanced. It obviously difficult for Staff to discourage such a petition. Staff would recommend approval of the request with the understanding that the proponent"must pursue the necessary variances before the Board of Appeals and Adjustments prior to final zoning. Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 6 Mr. James Van Valkenburg, attorney for the proponents stated that his clients recognize the problems involved with the reuse of the subject site and are most willing to make improvements to make the site more compatible with the surrounding area. Addressing the concerns of some of the neighbors to the site regarding the proposed use, Mr. Van Valkenburg said that the site will be used only as a beauty salon, similar to an office use where people come by a regular appoint- ment The salon will not be a drop-in type of business. Responding to an inquiry from David Runyan, Mrs.. Recke, the proponent explained that the salon will have four operators with the potential to expand to six operators. Each operator will have one customer at a time, and at times, a second customer will be waiting. She also stressed that the customers will come on an appointmebt basis, consequently, parking overload should never be a problem. With regards to remodeling, Mrs. Recke stated that the site is limited and the building can not be made any larger. They will be attempting to achieve a residential look with bay windows in place of the present garage doors. She then referred to a photograph of a building on 54th And Penn that has been con- verted from an old Texaco station identical to the building on the subject site, pointing out the changes that can be made to the gas station. Regarding signage, Mr. Recke explained that they have not made plans ,for a sign, however, he stated that he would be more than willing to work with Staff to comply with City requirements. Mr. Folke Victorsen, owner of a 14 unit apartment building across the street stated that he approves of the proposed rezoning, noting that the pro- posed use is the quietest one that has yet been proposed for the site. Ms. Julie Hamblin, 6240 Peacedale Avenue stated that she was concerned about the potential of on street parking blocking the view of traffic from the young bikers in the area. Mr. Recke stated that the proposed parking on the site will be sufficient for her business, and that cars should not have to park on the street. She added that there are many other uses that would be much more intense and generate much more traffic than her beauty parlor, further noting that her proposed use would be most compatible with the abutting residential zoning due to the limited amount of traffic. Helen McClelland moved approval of the rezoning from C-4 to C-1 Commercial District subject to the receipt of the necessary variances from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. David Runyan seconded the motion. Gordon Johnson abstained from voting; the rest voted aye; the motion carried. S-81-12 Marthe Woods Hill Addition. Generally located north of West 78th Street and west of Marth Road. Mr. Larsen advised the Commission that the subject property measures approximately 2 acres in area and is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District. Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 7 The property is relatively long and narrow (i.e. 130 feet by 600 feet) and is developed with a single family dwelling located on the southern extreme of the site. This dwelling fronts on West 78th Street. The property abuts the Marth Court right of way on the east with the exception of a 150 foot stretch located approximately 300 feet north of West 78th Street. In this area, a five foot wide strip of privately owned property separates the subject property from the Marth Court right of way which measures 33 feet in width in this area. This 33 foot wide right of way was obtained by the City about two years ago by way of a claim of adverse possession. The proponent has submitted a subdivision plan for the property. This subdivision proposes five single family lots. Lot 1 would be retained for the existing dwelling and would measure about 20,000 square feet in area. Lot 5 also measures about 20,000 square feet. The other three lots measure about 13,000 square feet. The newly created lots would gain access from Marth Court. Mr. Larsen observed that the greatest concern associated with this project is associated with Marth Court. The right of way was only recently obtained for portions of this street and it is still below City right of way standards. In addition, the street has not been improved to public road standards, and public sanitary sewer and water are not located in this street. From an environmental standpoint, the property is characterized by steep slopes from east to west. Dwellings will properly located as close to Marth Court as possible. Staff has advised the proponent that topographic information must be submitted prior to final approval. Mr. Larsen stated that Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is logical and generally consistent with other subdivisions in the area. It is obvious, however, that the stated problems associated with Marth Court must be solved prior to final approvals. Thus, preliminary approval should be pend- ing upon the following conditions: 1. The proponent must enter into a Developer's Agreement and petition the Council for curb and gutter, permanent street surfacing, sanitary sewer, and watermain (all to be located in the Marth Court right of way) . This work must be authorized by the City Council prior to or concurrent with final plat approval. 2. The 33 foot wide right of way for Marth Court located in the proximity of Lots 3 and .4 of the proposed subdivision as previously discussed, must be increased to 48 feet in width. Property for this right of way must be acquired prior to final plat approval. This right of way must include the 5 foot strip presently separating the subject property from Marth Court. 3. The proponent must dedicate a two foot wide strip of right of way along the east line of the subject property in order to increase the Marth Court right of way to 50 feet. 4. Lot line easements for sewer and water must be dedicated as needed. 5. A proposed grading plan must be submitted. 6. Subdivision Dedication Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 8 - Byron Zotaley, attorney represnting the proponent stated that it is the proponent's position that there is access to the public right of way for the lots as platted; the five foot strip is not needed for that. All of the conditions recom- mended by Staff would be agreeable to the proponent. Mr. Zotaley pointed out that it is his understanding, after discussion with Gordon Hughes and Warren Hanson (owner of the property to the east of the Marth Court cul de sac) that the cul de sac arrangement was previously worked out with Warren Hanson as part of his subdivision, consequently, the cul de sac is ready to go. Mr. Zotaley added that the only homes that would be affected by the cul de sac right of way would be Mr. Hanson's home and the homes on the proposed Lots 4 and 5. The homes on Lots 1, 2 and 3 will be serviced by the roadway as it exists today. Discussion ensued regarding the history of Marth Court. Mr. Roger Evanson, 7717 Marth Court informed the Commission that contrary to Staff's reporting, the 33 foot right of way was not obtained by the City through a claim of adverse pos- session. On the original plat maps, Marth Court is shown as his driveway. When Mr. Hanson expressed a desire to subdivide the property to the east of his home, the City determined that it would not be allowed because a land locked portion would be created. Consequently, through negotiations, Mr. Hanson agreed to pay for the right of way. Also, at that time, Mr. Hanson agreed to cover all of the costs of developing the cul de sac since he was profiting from the subdivision.of the east half of his property. Mr. Evanson concluded by noting that he is concerned about how the costs for the road will be covered and about the future of the 5 foot strip of property which he owns. Mr. Jeff Longtin, 5828 West 78th Street voiced his concern to the Commission that the proposed plan is too intense for the site, providing lots that are much smaller than the surrounding neighborhoods. He added that the topography of the property has not been taken into consideration when platting these small lots. Mr. Zotaley responded to Mr. Longtin's concerns by noting that a topographic of the area will be presented as requested by Staff. (The delay is due to the nec- essity of waiting for the leaves to fall off of the trees to obtain an accurate repre- sentation). The topography will clearly show that Lots 2 and 3 are relatively level. Lots 4 and 5 are higher to the east (near the road) and slope westerly to the pond. The high ground on Lots 4 and 5 is sufficient to build a house with little or no. fill problems. Mr. Zotaley added that the proposed lots are larger than many of the surrounding lots. Gordon Johnson stated that even though the lots fit within the site, it is important that a better roadway be proposed prior to the Commission taking any action. Helen McClelland agreed with Mr. Johnson and moved for continuance for 1 month requesting that the proponent provide Staff with dimensions of the Dewey Hill 11 and ill lots for comparison, more information on the road and the topographical maps prior to making any decisions. James Bentley seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried. 0 Community Development and Planning Commission September 30, 1981 Page 11 III. NEXT MEETING DATE: October 28, 1981, at 7:30 p.m. IV. ADJOURNMENT: 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, OLS Joyce G. Repya, Secretary