HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 12-04 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD WEDNESDAY DECEMBER, 4, 1985, AT 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman, William
Helen McClelland,
Skagerberg, John
Paulus.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
David Runyan
STAFF PRESENT:
Lewis, Gordon Johnson, Del Johnson,
Phil Sked, John Bailey, John
Palmer, Virginia Shaw and Jane
Craig Larsen, City Planner
Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Mr. John Palmer moved for approval of the October 30,
1985 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting
minutes. Mr. John Skagerberg seconded the motion. All were
in favor. The motion carried.
Mr. Del Johnson moved for approval of the minutes of
the September 19, 1985 Board of Appeals and Adjustments
meeting. Mr. Phil Sked seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
Mr. John Palmer moved for approval of the minutes of
the October 3, 1985 Board of Appeals and Adjustments
meeting. Mr. Phil Sked seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
Mrs. Virginia Shaw moved for approval of the minutes of
the October 17, 1985 Board of Appeals and Adjustments
meeting. Mrs. Jane Paulus seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
Z-85-3 Grandview Development Company
5212 Vernon Avenue
Planned Residential District, PRD -4
to Planned Seniors Residence, PSR -4
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission a preliminary
rezoning approval for the subject development was granted by
the City Council on August 19, following the Commissions
recommendation of July 31, 1985. The approval anticipated
152 rental apartment units designed for occupancy by
seniors.
Mr. Larsen pointed out that on November 4, the City
Council passed a bond inducement resolution which will allow
the developer to secure tax exempt financing for the
project.
Mr. Larsen added the proponents have submitted Final
Plans, including a site plan, floor plans, elevations,
grading and utility plan, and a landscaping plan in support
of their request for Final Rezoning approval.
Mr. Larsen continued that at the time of preliminary
approval the Commission and Council directed that certain
changes be made. In addition to a satisfactory
redevelopment contract, preliminary approval was conditioned
upon realignment of the access to Vernon and an increase in
the amount of underground parking. The Final Development
Plan illustrates the driveway access at right angles to
Vernon as recommended. Underground parking has been
increased from 76 to 94 spaces.
Mr. Larsen stated in addition to the mandated changes,
minor changes have been made to the building foot print,
unit plans, and common spaces. Overall floor area has
increased slightly while there has been a slight decrease in
total lot coverage. The changes can be attributed to design
refinement.
Mr. Larsen concluded the proponents have submitted
plans which respond well to criticisms of the preliminary
plan. Staff believes this will be a high quality
development and an asset to the community, and recommend
approval conditioned upon:
1. An executed Redevelopment Contract
2. Final Staff review of the landscaping plan.
3. A proof of parking agreement for surface parking.
Mr. Harry Olson, architect for Grandview Corporation
was present .
Mr. Palmer asked Mr. Larsen the setback distance of the
westerly corner due to the minor change in design. Mr.
Larsen using graphics said a 36 foot setback was required.
The proposed development will have a 40 foot setback which
complies with the Ordinance of setback equaling height of
the structure.
Mr. Frank Dunbar, the Developer arrived.
Mr. John Palmer moved for approval of Final Rezoning
subject to staff conditions. Mr. John Bailey seconded the
motion. Mr. Gordon Johnson abstained. The motion carried.
II. NEW BUSINESS:
S-85-12 Richard Steiner
Preliminary Plat
and 42, Block 2,
2nd Addition
and Robert Gislason
Approval, Lots 41,
South Harriet Park
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property
consists of two, individually developed single dwelling
lots. Both lots are relatively narrow and exceptionally
deep, each measuring approximately 60 feet by 400 feet.
Total area in the two lots is 44,854 square feet.
Mr. Larsen stated the individual owners have agreed to
a joint venture to propose a four lot subdivision which
would create two, new buildable lots. Lot 1 measures 78
feet in width, 119 feet in depth and contains 9,282 square
feet. Lot 2 would be 80 feet wide, 119 feet deep, and would
contain 10,472 square feet. Lots 3 and 4, for the existing
dwellings, would contain 13,400 and 11,700 square feet
respectively.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the zoning Ordinance requires a
minimum lot depth of 120 feet. Since Lots 1 and 2 would
provide only 119 feet, a lot depth variance would be
required. The new lots would meet all other Zoning
Ordinance requirements for single dwelling unit lots.
Mr. Larsen added that within the South Harriet Park
Subdivision a lot width of approximately 60 feet seems
typical. Lot depths within the two block area east of the
creek between 52nd and 54th Street vary from 220 to over 400
feet. Due to the path of the creek and the need to align
with roads to the north, the lots in this area are unusually
deep.
Mr. Larsen concluded there is adequate property
available on this combined site to provide two new lots
which would be very similar to the lots north of 52nd
Street. Lots widths on Juanita, Indianola, and Halifax,
north of 52nd Street are generally 75 or 80 feet, and most
lots are between 105 and 110 feet in depth. Staff
recommended approval with the following changes and
conditions:
1. Increase the frontage on each lot to 85 feet
to compensate for the lack of lot depth. The
existing houses would still maintain 65-70
foot rear yards.
2. In order to have adequate spacing between the
new home on lot 1 and the existing home at
5209 (immediately south) the normal rear
yard set back of 25 feet should be increased
to 40 feet. This condition could be imposed when
lot depth variances are requested.
3. Developer's agreement to cover the extension of the
water main in 52nd Street to serve the new lots.
4. Subdivision dedication.
Mr. Palmer asked Mr. Larsen if the proponents had an
objection to the increase of the rear yard setback from 25
feet to 40 feet. Mr. Larsen stated he has submitted a staffs;
report to Mr. Frank Cardarelle, Developer but at this time
had received no reply.
Mr. Mansell Mitchell resident of 5137 Juanita stated he
was not opposed to the development of the property in
question but would like the Commission to take into
consideration the uniqueness of the neighborhood and the
architectural design of its' homes. Mr. Mitchell further
added he realizes the Commission and Council cannot place
architectural restrictions on Developers with regard to
structural design of dwellings but expressed his concern
that the new dwellings maintain compatibility with the
character of the neighborhood.
Mrs. Helen McClelland moved for approval of the
preliminary plat subject to staff conditions and the
condition that the increase of the rear yard setback from 25
feet to 40 feet be recorded with the plat. Mr. John Palmer
seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion
carried.
P-85-7 Honeywell, Incorporated 5901 County Road #18
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property
measures 21.74 acres in size and is developed with structure
containing a gross area of 96,768 square feet. The property
is bounded on the West by County Road 18, on the south by
Manor Homes, and the east by Nine Mile Creek. Directly
north of the site are the Londonderry Townhomes, and to the
northeast are single family homes.
Although Honeywell owns several parcels near or
adjacent to the subject property, only Tract A of Registered
Land Survey 1145 is used to determine Zoning Compliance for
the subject proposal. No changes or improvements are
proposed on tracts B,D and E of R.L.S. 1145, or Tract B of
R.L.S. 1378.
Mr. Larsen stated Honeywell has submitted plans for a
3 -story building containing a gross floor area of 169,690
square feet. As required by the Zoning Ordinance a site
plan, grading and utility plan, landscaping plan, and
elevations have been provided for Commission review.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the proposed building would be
immediately north of, and connected to the existing
building. The building will be cut into the hillside which
will allow the roof elevation of the new building to be the
game as the existing building. Exterior materials will be
brick to match the existing brick.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission the proposed addition
either meets or exceeds all standards and conditions
established in the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Larsen added the proponents have submitted plans to
the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District for the required
grading permit. The plan -does indicate filling in a portion
of the flood plain for the site. According to Barr
Engineering, consultants to the Watershed, the proposed
encroachment is within the allowed 20 percent encroachment,
and that Watershed staff will recommend that the permit be
granted.
Mr. Larsen reported that Honeywell has also submitted
a traffic study. The report shows that currently, the only
access to the site is on Lincoln Drive midway along the
Westerly properly line. Although Londonderry Drive east of
Lincoln Drive is a public street, it currently serves only
the residents of Londonderry Townhomes. The use of
Londonderry Drive by Honeywell will increase the average
daily traffic, on the street from 420 trips to approximately
1,240 trips.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff believes that Honeywell has
prepared an excellent plan for expansion on this site. The
building addition is well located, and the design and
materials are excellent. The site is currently well
buffered from residential uses to the north and east by the
creek and existing vegetation. None of this area will be
disturbed. New landscaping is proposed at approximately
double Ordinance requirements. New landscaping along the
southerly property line will provide a visual buffer for the
residents of Manor Homes.
Mr. Larsen stated that several traffic related issues
should be addressed:
1. County Road 18 - Londonderry Interchange. The
Interchange currently becomes quite congested during peak
hours. The installation of signals at the ramps in 1986
should help relieve this congestion.
2. Honeywell site access. Staff feels that the site
should have two access points. The use of Londonderry Drive
appears to be the most appropriate location.
3. Londonderry Drive Design. The plans submitted
illustrate Londonderry as a entry only to the Honeywell
site. Staff would prefer to see a full cul de sac at the
end of Londonderry. This would allow snow plows and other
traffic to turn around without using townhouse property.
Mr. David Opheim, Honeywell Defense Systems, Mr. Jim
Lindberg, Architect and Mr. Kick oppy were present
representing Honeywell, Inc.
Mr. Opheim explained to the Commission that Honeywell
has occupied the present building since 1979 and.the
expansion plans are for office and research space. The
reason for the expansion is two -fold:
1. To consolidate the 2,000 Honeywell employees
which are presently spread over the southwest
suburbs, the majority at Opus.(the proposed
expansion would increase the occupancy of the site
from 300 to 750. 10o to 15% would be new hires).
2. Expansion of Business.
Mr. Opheim added that Honeywell has employed the
architectural firm of Lindberg and Pierce to develop a
building concept that would 1) have no variances. 2)
Comply with all EPA standards. 3) stress protection of the
wetlands and natural vegetation. 4) maintain or exceed
present landscaping 5) blend with the terrain.(the
result being the proposed structure's height matching the
present structure. 6) address the problem of traffic.
Mr. Opheim stated that Honeywell requested that
Lindberg/Pierce employ a traffic engineering firm (Westwood)
to study the problem of traffic, take measurements and
propose recommendations or means to minimize the traffic
impaction for Edina residents. Mr. Opheim pointed out in a
traffic flow study that the center of gravity for Honeywell
employees is the highway intersection of Highway 55 and
Highway 18, concluding the majority of employees will use
Highway 18 to commute to/from work and not travel through
the City of Edina. Mr. Opheim noted that Honeywell works a
flex hour system, which should disburse the traffic flow
over a few hours, minimizing the traffic impact during peak
hours. Mr. Opheim told the Commission that Honeywell mailed
notices to affected neighbors inviting them to a meeting on
the proposed expansion. Twelve neighbors attended. The
primary concern of the neighbors in attendance was the
proposed drive access from Honeywell to Londonderry Road to
the north. Presently a access does not exist at this
location. Mr Opheim added that members of Honeywell,
traffic engineers and the architects discussed other
alternatives and concluded, as did staff, that the northerly
access was the best.
Mr. Lindberg elaborated on building design, pointing
out the care that was taken in blending the new structure
with the present structure, noting landscaping is double the
Ordinance requirement. Mr. Lindberg added that a 6% to 8%
encroachment of the marsh area will take place as a result
of the expansion. This encroachment into the flood plain is
allowed, a 20% encroachment guideline is permitted. The
expansion has been reviewed by the Watershed District, and
no objections were made to the 6% to 8% encroachment.
Mr. Lindberg said the storm sewer system would be improved,
filtering out more sand and forming a retention pond which
would improve the quality of run-off water. Mr. Lindberg
pointed out the parking and traffic concern, stating at
present 550 cars come in and go out of the site daily. One
of the problems found on the site by Westwood is left-hand
turns; and as a result the suggestion was made to find
another point of egress and ingress. It appears that for
purposes of emergency exiting and the elimination of left
hand turns adding a driveway to the north accessing
Londonderry is the best solution. The driveway would be
adequately screened.
Mr. John Loper, Mr. Peter Shank,and residents of
Londonderry Townhomes were present.
Mr. Loper submitted to the Commission a written
statement expressing the feelings of the residents of
Londonderry Townhomes and a signed petition opposing the
construction of a drive access to Londonderry Road by
Honeywell, Inc. ) note: Staff refers to the Road in
question as Londonderry Road, Residents of Londonderry
Townhome at times refer to the road as Duncan Lane.)
Mr. Loper began by reading the letter from the
residents of Londonderry Townhomes to the Planning
Commission.
"The homeowners in the Londonderry Townhouse complex
are deeply concerned about the Honeywell plan to put a road
from Duncan Lane into their property which lies to the
south. Duncan Lane is a pretty little incline down to Nine
Mile Creek and was not intended to become a main
thourogfare. It is about 180 feet long and has a 70 foot
wide city right-of-way that the Townhouse Association has
sodded, landscaped, sprinkled and maintained for about 15
years. It is the only entrance and exit road for the
Londonderry residents.
We object to the proposed road for the following
reasons:
Honeywell owns about 1500 feet of land immediately
adjacent to Lincoln Drive, property that could easily
accommodate another entrance or exit for their parking lots.
The location of the parking areas on the plat plan
shows that a road off of Duncan Lane would require traffic
to drive behind and around their building into the three
major parking areas.
The large increase in traffic on Duncan Lane will
greatly restrict movement in and out of Londonderry, and it
will adversely affect our quality of life as well as our
property values.
We strongly urge the Planning Commission to ask
Honeywell to delete the Duncan Lane driveway from their
plan."
Mr. Loper explained that on or about the 1st of
November residents of Londonderry Townhomes received a
invitation from Honeywell, Inc. to attend a meeting
regarding the proposed expansion. It was discovered at that
meeting where the proposed road access was to be
constructed. Mr. Loper stated that the residents of
Londonderry Townhomes have no objection to the proposed
expansion and find it very well done. Their objection is to
the proposed access onto Duncan Lane. Mr. Loffer stated the
Developer deeded Duncan Lane to the City in exchange for
pavement of the road down to the bridge over Nine Mile
Creek; the bridge is owned by the Londonderry Townhome
Association. Mr. Loper further explained that the area
around the creek has been maintained by the Association.
Sprinklers have been added, and the area has been
landscaped. Large stones have been put along the edge of
the road to prevent damage to the terrain from vehicles who
turn around in the area. Mr. Loper said residents of
Londonderry feel that Lincoln Drive has adequate space for
installation of left turn lanes, and another access to
handle Honeywell traffic.
Mr. Peter Shank addressed the Commission stating the
Associations concern regarding the road access is valid.
Mr. Shank, using graphics, pointed out alternative uses of
Lincoln Drive , a possibility would be adding an additional
drive entrance/exit which in his opinion would help the
elimination of left-hand turns. Mr. Shank feels that the
proposed road access by Honeywell is at the expense of the
residents of Londonderry Townhomes. Duncan Lane is a
beautiful, charming road and the additional signage needed
for the proposed access would have a negative effect on the
Londonderry Townhomes. Mr. Shank said the road would
essentially become a commercial entrance to a commercial
facility. Mr. Shank asked the Commission to seriously
consider alternative road access.
Mr. Loper pointed out to the Commission that Duncan
Lane is a residential street that abutts commercial
property. Duncan Lane is the only access to Lincoln Drive,
by residents of Londonderry. Mr. Loper questioned if
m?.xing a residential street with a commercial driveway
would be establishing a precedent. Mr. Loper also expressed
concern that if the proposed road access is approved the
street will then be used as a delivery and construction road
during the course of expansion construction. Mr. Lopfer
commented on the steep slope of Duncan Lane.
Mr. Koppy, representing Honeywell, said the proposed
access will result in the reduction of left-hand.turns which
will benefit not only Honeywell, but the residents of
Londonderry Townhomes. Mr. Koppy stated the reason for
considering the proposed road access resulted from the
traffic study. Mechanical counters were placed at the
Londonderry and Lincoln corner, the entrance of Honeywell
and below. Manual counters were also placed at the corner
of the Honeywell entrance. Even though stacking and the
steep slope of Londonderry Road were acknowledged issues,
the access to Londonderry road was found to be the best
solution. A plus factor of the proposed access is that the
City will take the road from the blue to the red which will
result in quicker snow removal. Mr. Koppy using a chart
highlighted the traffic study numbers, indicating proposed
traffic lights and 4 -way stop.
Mrs. Helen McClelland expressed her view on the
proposed Development Plan. Mrs. McClelland stated she was
very pleased with the expansion, and found no fault with the
design and landscaping. Mrs. McClelland did express extreme
displeasure with the proposed drive access from Honeywell to
Londonderry Road. Mrs. McClelland felt little consideration
was given to the residents of Parkwood Knolls in the
planning of this road access, which would affect them as
well as the residents of Londonderry Townhomes. Mrs.
McClelland pointed out that Lincoln Drive was designed to
handle a large volume of traffic, in her opinion Londonderry
Road/Duncan Lane is a small road with a bad grade, minimal
stacking capabilities and unable to handle a large increase
in traffic volume. Mrs. McClelland further added she felt
a traffic -signal should be placed on Lincoln Drive in
addition to the proposed lights on the ramp. Mr. John
Skagerberg agreed with her. Mr Larsen responded that the
City Council approved signals for the ramps.
Mr. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer, clarified points regarding
the traffic issue.
1). Three traffic -signals will be installed, two
at the ramps and one at Smentana Drive.
The placing of these signals are a result
of very heavy traffic flow volumes. Lincoln
Drive does not meet the traffic flow requirements
that warrant a traffic signal.
2) If a 4 -way stop is placed, all traffic will have
access, not only the ones on Lincoln Drive. o
3) If Honeywell uses only Lincoln Drive accesss, it
will result in increased volumes of left turns at
the Lincoln and Londonderry Intersection,
which will result in a conflict with the
residents of Parkwood Knolls and Londonderry
Townhomes.
4) It is felt that a balanced blend of commercial
and residential can be maintained. Commercial
use is high in the morning as residential use
leaves, the reverse happening in the evening.
Mr. Hoffman stated he understood the feelings of the
residents, but the Edina side of the freeway does not
generate the volume of traffic that would warrant a traffic
signal at the Lincoln Drive -Londonderry intersection.'
Mr. Gordon Johnson asked Mr. Hoffman what will happen
if cars exiting Honeywell stack on Londonderry and cut off
the residents trying to leave Londonderry Townhomes. Mr.
Hoffman explained that Honeywell does not have free access
to the public roadway. A stop sign will be put at the exit
of Honeywell to the public road.
Mr. Del Johnson asked Mr. Hoffman if in staffs opinion
the proposed road access is the best possible solution. Mr.
Hoffman said to supply a balance that does not favor one leg
of the intersection over the other this solution is the
best solution. Mr. Hoffman said staff agree this access is
a detriment to the residents of Londonderry Townhomes but in
community interest staff feel this is the best solution.
Mrs. McClelland stated she understands the staff
concept, but feels Lincoln Drive should be the access. Mr.
John Bailey expressed his concern and agreement with Mrs.
McClelland.
Mr. John Palmer motioned for approval of the Final
Development subject to staff conditions. Mr. John
Skagerberg seconded the motion. Rollcall:
Ayes: John Palmer, John Skagerberg, William Lewis, Del
Johnson, Virginia Shaw
Nays: Jane Paulus, Gordon Johnson, Phil Sked, Helen
Mcclelland, John Bailey.
The motion failed.
Mr. Griswald of Londonderry Townhomes voiced his
concern that Duncan Lane is the only access Londonderry
Townhome residents have to Lincoln Drive. If Londonderry
Road traffic increases the chances of residents to access
Lincoln Drive worsens.
Mrs. McClelland moved that the building expansion plans
of Honeywell be approved but the Commission requests that
the traffic circulation be re -worked and brought back to the
Commission for review. The motion died for lack of second.
A discussion ensued between Commission members, staff
and Honeywell members on how to word the motion.
Mr. John Palmer moved that the Commission approve the
plan with the exception of the traffic conditions. Helen
McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The
motion carried.
LD -85-12 David Shank and Suzyn Ware
4301-05 West 62nd Street
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proponents are
requesting a party wall division of an existing double
bungalow. Separate utility connections are provided. Staff
recommends approval.
Mr. Gordon Johnson moved for approval of the party wall
division. Mr. Del Johnson seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
IV. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
cQ,c� aq,
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary