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