Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 01-02 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 1, 1985, AT 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bill Lewis, Del Johnson, Dave Runyan, Helen McClelland, Phil Sked, John Palmer, John Skagerberg and Virginia Shaw MEMBERS ABSENT: Len Ring, Gordon Johnson, and John Bailey STAFF PRESENT: Gordon Hughes, City Planner Craig Larsen, Comprehensive Planner Fran Hoffman, City Engineer Linda Elsen, Secretary I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES; November 28, 1984 Mr. Palmer moved for approval of the minutes and Mr. Skagerberg seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried. II. OLD BUSINESS: Z-84-3 Opus Corportion/Normandale Golf Course S-84-14 Camelot West. R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District to POD -2, Planned Office District Mr. Gordon Hughes reminded the Commission that this item had been continued from the November 28, 1984, meeting in order for the Commissioners to view a golf course plan prepared for the City. He presented the plan and illustrated the location of the proposed office building. He noted that this plan had been approved by the Park and Recreation Department; Kenneth Rosland, City Manager and John Vallerie, Manager of Braemar Golf Course. Mr. Bob Worthington, Opus Corporation, was present to answer any questions. Mr. Dave Cooper, 4521 Sedum Lane, presented a petition signed by 130 of the neighbors opposing the rezoning. He stated that it was contrary to the South Edina Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Bill Sexton, 4901 Poppy Lane, presented pictures taken from Fred Allen's property, 7453 West Shore Drive, of the golf course to emphasize the impact a five -story building would have on the neighbors. He said that he had spoken with Warren Hyde, former City Manager and George Hite, former Planning Director. They believed that the subject land would always remain golf course. He presented a letter from Mr. Hite stating so. Mr. Helge Thomsen, 4705 Hibiscus Ave. S., stated that he had attended those meetings when the area south of Lake Edina Addition was being developed. At that time Pentagon Park called for five stories which was two stories above the then existing code. Due to much controversy, a compromise was established between the neighbors and Mr. Rauenhorst. The neighbors were guaranteed that the golf course would remain permanently as a buffer and the five -story Pentagon Park building was agreed upon. Mr. David Byron, 7433 West Shore Dr., presented 30 additional signatures to the petition opposing the rezoning. Mr. Byron commented that the November 28th Staff Report was pro -developer and that parcel of land proposed for rezoning was described as the southerly 6.5 acres. This description was misleading. He further commented that Staff stated they found no documentation of the agreement with the City to permanently retain the golf course with the City. He believed documentation existed. Mr. Byron told the Commission that Mr. Rauenhorst was unable to develop the industrial park until the City adopted an industrial ordinance. The permanently guaranteed golf course buffer was used to sell this project to the City and the active neighborhood committees who were involved at that time. Mr. Byron based his opinion on documentation and research of records on file in the Planning Department files. He stated that the Edina Zoning Ordinance lists 13 specific objectives, not one of which would be met if this rezoning proposal was to be granted. At least half of them would be met if the rezoning was denied. These are the guidelines which should be followed. Mr. Fred Allen, 7453 W. Shore Drive, believed that the golf course plans presented were misleading because they were out of scale. He pointed out that trees would have to be cut down for this development and a five -story building would be totally out of proportion. The proposed location of the parking lot is illogical and undesirable. Roger Peterson, 7505/07 W. Shore Drive, purchased his property in 1970. He inquired of the status of the golf course before purchasing his property and was told it would remain open space. Bob Worthington reminded the Commission that only a portion of the property would be rezoned. He explained that Opus Corporation was attempting to assist the City in obtaining the golf course. Mr. Runyan commented that it would be possible to build an office as proposed, however, he would not be in favor of any further development. Mrs. McClelland felt that extensive research had been done by the neighbors to support their opposition. Mr. Del Johnson moved for denial of the proposed rezoning and subdivision and Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion was approved and the rezoning and subdivision denied. III. NEW BUSINESS; P-84-3 Final Development Plan Edina Family Care Clinic, 5203 Vernon Avenue Generally located east of Vernon Avenue and North of Link Road Mr. Craig Larsen stated that the subject property is zoned Planned Commercial District 2 (PCD -2) and is being used as a medical office for three physicians. The owner's are requesting approval of a plan to construct an addition of approximately 1,100 square feet to the building. The addition includes a full basement resulting in an addition of 2,200 square feet in floor area to the building. The main floor would be used primarily as office space with the basement area used for storage. Mr. Larsen reported the Zoning Ordinance now requires that medical clinics provide one space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each physician. This results in a requirement of twenty-two spaces for the existing use and eleven spaces for the proposed addition. The owners are proposing to lease seven spaces on adjacent property for a total of twenty-eight spaces, resulting in a need for a five parking space variance. The Zoning Ordinance allows the Commission and Council to consider variances as part of the Planned District review process. Mr. Larsen recommended approval of the proposed addition and also recommended granting a variance from the parking space requirement. The leased parking should be utilized by clinic staff since it does not relate directly to existing parking on the site. A concern, however, is if additional physicians are added to the practice a parking problem would result. Mr. Larsen noted that support of the proposed variance is based upon the particular space needs of the existing clinic with its three physicians. Mr. Jack Barren, representative of Edina Family Care Clinic, assured the Commission that the expansion was for office space only and no additional physicians were anticipated. He presented a memorandum listing the use of the additional facility. Mr. Palmer moved for approval and Mr. Sked seconded the motion. All were in favor; the final development plans were approved. Z-84-4 Brutger Companies R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -3, Planned Residential District Generally located: West of Cahill Road and South of Dewey Hill Road Mr. Larsen reported that the subject property measures approximately 5.1 acres in area and is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District. The property is developed with a single dwelling and accessory structures which remain from the original farmstead. Dewey Hill Estates Condominiums are located immediately north and west of the subject site. Windwoods Condominiums are to the south and everything to the east is a developed Planned Industrial area. The Comprehensive Plan illustrates the site as suitable for "medium density residential" which has a density range of 6- 12 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the property to PRD -3, Planned Residential District. The site plan consists of traditional two and three- story townhouses with tuck -under garages in buildings containing 8, 9, or 10 units. The proposal calls for 46 units with double garages and 14 units with single garages. The Zoning Ordinance requires that townhouses have no more than 8 units in a single building and that each unit must have a double garage. The applicant has indicated that 45 guest parking spaces will be provided but has not indicated where they would be located. Mr. Larsen noted that the proposed 60 unit development represents a density of 11.67 dwelling units per acre. The proposed plan appears to conform to Zoning Ordinance requirements for building and parking setbacks, usable lot area, and building coverage. However, building coverage calculated at 29.2% is close to the maximum of 30% allowed in the PRD -3 District. Staff feels that the proposed townhouse concept has merit. The exterior design of units and the proposed building materials appear to be compatible with other good townhouse designs in the City. However, Mr. Larsen expressed concern with building coverage on the site. The site is simply too crowded with buildings and the buildings are too large. The site plan should be reworked with individual buildings containing no more than eight dwelling units, therefore, resulting in a better arrangement of buildings, greater distance between buildings and less hard surface on the site. This should also result in a reduction of the density on the site to a point more compatible with other developments in the area. He also noted that the issue of parking must also be addressed. Mr. Larsen stated that he had met that afternoon with Mr. Wilson from the Brutger Co. at which time they discussed new plans in answer to Staff's concerns. He recommended, however, that the Commission hold the matter over to enable Staff to further study Brutger's new proposal. Mr. Wilson was present. Mrs. McClelland supported Staff's concerns. The present proposal was too busy, too high, too dense, and too much black top. It appeared that there could be problems with maintenance of the property, such as snow plowing. Any new plans would need major changes. Mr. Mel Gittleman, Gittleman Corporation, noted that his development was located to the north. He was interested in the proposed site himself in hopes of repositioning a proposed third building in the Dewey Hill project. He stated that Brutger's proposal was too dense in comparison to Dewey Hill's open green area and that two, three-story townhouses would be out of place. Mr. Wilson explained that in his project he hoped to take advantage of Dewey Hill's landscaping and openness as well as the landscaping from Windwood Apartments. They also planned on landscaping their townhomes. He assured the Commission they would build a high market project. Mr. Sked inquired as to the construction timetable and retail of the townhomes as well as the retail price of Dewey Hill units. Mr. Wilson stated that they would start with sixteen units and the rest of the construction would be based on sales. The units begin at $95,000 and an additional $20,000 to $25,000 could be added for skylights, basement, decking and vaulted ceilings. Construction was project to begin in the spring and be completed in 2 1/2 years. Mr. Gittleman stated that his units start at $149,000. Mr. Sked voice his objection to the amount of black top on the Brutger project. Mr. Wilson believed that his project would appeal to a different customer market than Mr. Gittleman's project such as elderly and young professionals. Mr. Gittleman commented that the layout of the buildings were poorly planned. Mrs. McClelland moved that the proposal be tabled. Mr. Skagerberg seconded the motion. All were in favor; the proposal was tabled for further study. LD -84-19 Lots 28 and 2, Warden Acres Generally located north of Benton Avenue and West of MNS Railroad. Mr. Larsen stated the applicant requests a party -wall division of an existing double bungalow. Separate utility connections have been provided. Approval is recommended. Mrs. McClelland moved for approval and Mr. Palmer seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Runyan moved for approval and Mr. Sked seconded the motion. All were in favor; the meeting was adjourned. Li da D. Elsen, Secretary