HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 04-29 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON APRIL 29, 1967, AT :30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, William Lewis, John Bailey,
Helen McClelland, Del Johnson, Gordon
Johnson, David Runyan, Virginia Shaw and
Lee Johnson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jane Paulus, Phil Sked and John Palmer
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner
Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Mr. Gordon Johnson moved for approval of the January 28,
1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes. Mr. Del Johnson seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
Mrs. Shaw moved for approval of the April 1, 1987 Community
Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mrs.
McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion
carried.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
Z-86-2 Namron'Company
S-86-4 R-1 to PRD -4
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the City Council referred
the subject rezoning back to the Planning Commission at its April
20, 1987 meeting. The reason for the referral was to review the
reasons for the approved density of the proposal. Mr. Larsen
added the motion to refer was made by the Council Member'Smith,
who did not participate in the preliminary approval of this
proposal.
As you are aware the Commission recommended final rezoning
and final plat approval for this project at its April 1, 1987,
meeting. No facts or circumstances have changed since that
approval.
Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission the history of this
dates back to at least 1966. In 1966 the City Council approved
plans for a 7 story 175 unit apartment building on the property.
The project was not constructed.
114
Mr. Larsen pointed out the Comprehensive Plan designates the
property for "high density residential". High density
residential translates into a range of from 12 units per acre to
over 40 units per acre when Zoning Ordinance standards are
applied. By using "Type I or II" construction (concrete) on
this site density could legally exceed 24 units per acre.
Mr. Larsen with graphics reviewed the density of apartments
in the area. Highland Villa , 176 units, with a density of 18
units per acre, Interlachen Court, 61 units, with a density of 24
units per acre, Vernon Terrace, 12 units with a density of 43
units per acre, Summit Point, 29 units, with a density of 43
units per acre. The proposal for Vernon Oaks is 135 units, 19.8
units per acre. Mr. Larsen noted that including the private
drive of the easterly side of the site, the density of Vernon
Oaks is reduced to 18.9 units per acre.
Mr. Larsen said staff's original position was that the
appropriate density range for this site was between 18 and 24
units per acre. He added staff has maintained that the density
should be closer to 18 than to 24. As a consequence, the
Commission denied their first proposal and recommended a
reduction from the originally proposed 21.9 units per acre. The
proponents responded with 19.8 units per acre which was approved
by the Commission and City Council.
Mr. Larsen told the
hear from you regarding
the proposed density.
The proponents,' Mr.
Junior, and Nick Palaia,
the area were present.
Commission the Council would like to
the reasons for recommending approval at
Bjornnes, Senior and Mr. Bjornnes,
architect were present. Residents of
Neighbors and representative of neighbors who spoke in
opposition and their reasons are summarized as follows:
Mr. David Getsch, 5233 Richwood�Drive, stated he strongly
opposes this development proposal. He said the frontal view of
the apartment complex from Vernon Avenue will be very imposing.
He added he felt this proposal is out of character with the
beautiful residential flavor of this neighborhood. He commented
that the density appears high at the proposed 19.8 units per acre
and recommended a reduction to 12 units per acre if this proposal
is approved. Mr. Getsch also requested additional buffering on
the site. Mr. Connor Schmid, 4711 Meadow Road was present
representing his clients Wilma Adams Smith, 5304 Glenbrae Circle
and Mr. and Mrs. L. Jonason, 5300 Glenbrae Circle. Mr. Schmid
said the comparison between the Highland Villa and the property
in question is very deceiving. With the aide of graphics he
pointed out the different site configurations of both parcels.
Mr. Schmid said the property of Highland Villa is relatively
regular in shape, whereas the property in question is elongated
with a portion that considerably narrows. Mr. Schmid stated this
configuration leaves a smaller area for development on the Vernon
Oaks site. Therefore, the density should be addressed
accordingly. Mr. Schmid stated for the record the site is to
dense at the proposed 19.8 units per acre. Mr. Schmid said by
his calculations the height of the proposed building is 4 stories
or roughly 49: -feet in height. This height will negatively impact
his clients. Concluding Mr. Schmid asked the Commission to
carefully consider the following points before making their
decision: the unique topography of the site, the irregular shape
of the site as it relates to the density of the project , the
dense vegetation that will be lost as a result of this proposal,
traffic safety, the overall negative impact on residential
neighbors who reside in close proximity to this development, and
continued support for high density developments in Edina will
compromise the single family residential character of the City.
This characteristic should be protected. Mr. Getsch asked if the
Villa Way Road could be used as the primary egress for the site.
Chairman Lewis informed Mr. Getsch Villa Way Road will be used to
a certain extent but traffic generations would be too high for
this road to be used as the primary egress. Mr. Getsch said he
would like to see a single entrance instead of multiple
entrances. Mr. Larsen said Vernon Avenue is a Hennepin County
road and subject to County permits on curb cuts. It was the
County's determination where to place curb cuts and they deemed
the proposed sites as appropriate.
Mr. Norman Bjornnes Jr. told the Commission he is present
to answer their questions and address their concerns if they
wish. He pointed out the proposal is unchanged and there have
been no additions or deletions to the approved final plan. Mr.
Runyan asked Mr. Bjornnes the height of the proposed building.
Mr. Bjornnes pointed out there are 3 levels above grade level,
each level is 9 feet equaling a total of 27 feet, plus 10 feet,
which equals 37 feet. He added the building has been placed as
far as possible from single family property owners. Mr. Bjornnes
noted the proposal is 36% less dense than what is allowed by the
Edina Zoning Ordinance, the proposal is 56% less dense than
Vernon Terrace, 21% less dense than Interlachen Court, and
virtually identical in density to Highland Villa. Mr. Bjornnes
in responding to questions regarding vegetation said the building
is designed to take advantage of the bowl effect of this site.
This topographical uniqueness along with significant landscaping
enables the site to retain 60% green space. Mr.Bjornnes said the
various landscaping materials which will be placed on the site
equal a cash value of around $150,000.00. This includes the
retaining walls, boulders, timbers, plantings, additional trees,
ground cover and sodding. Mr. Runyan stated this site is a
difficult site to develop and has been in its present undeveloped
state for many years. He added he understands the feelings of
the neighbors to have this site remain unaltered but years ago
this site was designated in the Comprehensive Plan for high
density use. Continuing Mr. Runyan pointed out this site has
been scrutinized for traffic, building placement, landscaping,
and how the building relates to adjacent properties. Mr. Runyan
said in his opinion the developer has developed a well thought
out project. He pointed out the proposal is unchanged from the
previous proposal which received Commission and Council support.
He said the present proposed density of the building is
reasonable. Mr. Jonason of 5300 Glenbrae Circle said he
contacted a real estate appraiser who informed him his property
value would depreciate as a result of this proposal. Mr.
Getsch, said neighbors are very upset about this proposal and
have a concern about their neighborhood and want the Commission
to be aware of their concerns. He expressed frustration and a
feeling that their feelings are meaningless. He asked the
Commission to take into consideration the negative impact this
development will have on their neighborhood in the future. Mrs.
McClelland inquired as to how long this parcel has been
designated for high density use. Mr. Larsen said the designation
for high density use has been in place for about 20 years. Mrs.
McClelland pointed out the problem may reside in the fact
residents have assumed that this parcel of land would remain
unaltered. She explained the Comprehensive Plan was revised in
1975 , after publication in the Newspaper and an open hearing
where residents could express their views. At that time no one
spoke against the plan so no changes in the plan were
implemented. Mr. Getsch said residents understand this property
has been designated for high density use but asked the Commission
to consider lower density. Mr. Getsch further commented that it
is very hard to visualize the project and neighbors worry that
the structure may be as imposing as Vernon Terrace (across from
Jerry's). Mrs. McClelland commented that the proponent will use
the bowl effect of the site which should make the structure less
imposing. Mr. Del Johnson said he understands the frustration of
neighbors but noted their input has been very important and
constructive. He pointed out the density has been reduced from
the original proposal of 21.9 units per acre to 19.8 units per
acre, traffic has been seriously studied and if warranted a
traffic light will be installed, a sidewalk will be constructed
at the expense of the developer and landscaping has been
increased. Neighborhood impact is needed and very useful to this
process and is considered. Mr. Del Johnson added that at this
time the developer has complied with recommendations of City and
staff and is now within his legal right to proceed with the
process. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Bjornnes if due to the change
in the voting composition of the Council he considered
addressing Mr. Smith's concern of a possible reduction in
density. Mr. Bjornnes replied that Namron Company has complied
will all requirements placed on them by the Edina Zoning
Ordinance, City staff , Planning Commission and Council and they
did not consider reduction of the project. He added the Company
is very committed to the proposal as submitted. Mr. Mahoney,
5309 Ayrshire, suggested that a lower density ratio can be
achieved if the developer would remove the third floor. He also
commented that the Comprehensive Plan states it can be amended
from time to time and it can be changed. He feels the plan
should not be used as a crutch. Mr. Tengdin, 5241 Lochloy Drive
stated he feels strongly about the increasing development of
apartments in Edina. This project abutts a prime residential
area and that should be considered.
Mr. D. Johnson moved to recommend final rezoning and final
plat approval. as submitted and with staff recommendations. Mrs.
McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion
carried.
P-86-5 Fairview Southdale Hospital
6401 France Avenue South
General Location: East of France Avenue South
and north of West 65th Street
Zoning District: Regional Medical District (RMD)
Request: Construction of new Medical Office
Building
Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission Fairview Southdale
Hospital has appeared before the Commission on two previous
occasions, most recently on January 28, 1987, with proposals to
construct a new medical office building on the hospital site. In
both instances the Commission voted to recommend denial of the
request.
Mr. Larsen added the hospital has returned with a modified
plan for Commission review. The new plan reduces both the height
and the floor area of the building. It also proposes removing
the entire upper level of the parking ramp.
Mr. Larsen with graphics compared the two earlier plans to
the current proposal in terms of Zoning Ordinance compliance.
The comparison is as follows:
The proposed exterior materials for the medical office
building remain the same as in previous proposals. The material
will be glass curtain wall in gray and silver.
The easterly access, at 65th Street and Drew, has been
redesigned. The revised design calls for two inbound lanes and
one outbound lane. Internal access to the emergency room has
been improved to avoid conflict.
The parking ramp as initially proposed included 3 levels on
the southerly portion and 3 levels plus a basement or depressed
parking level on the northerly portion. The second proposal
removed 60 feet of the top level of the ramp adjacent to the
Colony property line. The current proposal removes the upper
level of the ramp completely. As in previous proposals the ramp
would continue the 21.5 foot setback provided by the existing
ramp along the easterly property line. The ramp would range from
15 feet to 18 feet in height, measured from the existing ground.
elevation. A 4 foot high berm is proposed along the entire
length of the ramp to reduce the exposed surface area. Exposed
aggregate panels will be used on exposed areas of the ramp.
The landscaping plan emphasizes the easterly side of the
parking ramp along the shared property line with the Colony
Condominiums. Proposed materials include spruce, pine, ash and
locust. The size of the proposed materials is in excess of
Ordinance requirements. The plan also proposed to install a
landscape screen for the westerly parking lot.
Mr. Larsen pointed out that although it is not a Zoning
issue, much past discussion has centered on the hospital's
incinerator. Since the last Commission hearing the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has been reviewing the operation
of and emissions from the incinerator.
Mr. Larsen said the proposed plan requests only one
variance. The westerly parking lot does not provide the required
20 foot setback from France Avenue and West 65th Street. A
variance is requested to allow the existing parking lot to remain
unchanged.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission the current proposal offers
the following changes or improvements over earlier proposals.
They are as follows:
1. The building has been reduced in size by 11,900 square feet,
or 19 percent. The smaller building reduces the parking
requirement and traffic generation.
2. The entire upper level of the parking ramp has been
removed. The ramp addition has been reduced in size by
approximately 100 spaces. It's height has been reduced by
approximately 10 feet. These reductions lessen the impact on the
Colony.
3. The building has been reduced to 5 storys.
4. The proposal complies with all Zoning Ordinance requirements
except for the setback of the existing westerly parking lot.
5. Extensive landscaping is provided adjacent to the ramp. An
irrigation system will be installed over the entire site to help
insure the long term survival of the plantings.
6. Internal traffic circulation has been improved to,eliminate
conflicts with emergency vehicles.
7. The MPCA is reviewing the operation of the incinerator.
Changes will be made as ordered by the MPCA.
Mr. Larsen concluded that should the Commission choose to
recommend approval of the proposal staff would suggest the
following.conditions:
*That the hospital enter into an assessment agreement
ensuring financial participation in future street and traffic
control improvements required on West 65th Street. The
assessment should be based on the hospitals traffic generation.
Douglas Robbinson, Fairview Southdale Hospital
Administrator, Hospital Staff, Dr. Lund, representing physicians,
Mr. Dahlgren, -consultant and residents of the area were present.
Dr. Lund, Chairman of the physicians group which proposes
to construct the medical office building and ramp told the
Commission every effort was made to reduce the impact of said
structures. In an effort to achieve an acceptable project they
have retained Mr. Howard Dahlgren, as their planning consultant
and he will address the changes to the plan and address your
concerns.
Mr. Dahlgren began his presentation by briefing the
Commission on his background as a developer and planning
consultant. He pointed out a major concern regarding this
project is reducing any negative impact other developments may
receive as a result of this proposal. Mr. Dahlgren with the aide
of slides pointed out the step by step changes in the plan and
measures implemented to reduce negative impacts.
Mr. Gordon Johnson asked Mr. Dahlgren what can be done to
retard east bound traffic from leaving the hospital campus and
using Barrie Road/Colony Way to reach their destinations. Mr.
Dahlgren replied the hospital has no objection to any measure(s)
implemented by the City to control and re -direct traffic from
using those roadways. He added the Hospital agrees to
participate in and share the cost of any road improvements that
need to be implemented to aide in the smooth and orderly flow of
traffic in the area. Mr. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer pointed out
that at the last Planning Commission meeting City staff reported
that a license plate survey was conducted and the findings were
that 20% of the traffic on Barrie Road/Colony Way was through
traffic. Mr. Hoffman said with future road improvements and the
possible elimination of left hand turns from Xerxes to Heritage
Drive some through traffic may be reduced but not all. Continuing
Mr. Hoffman pointed out the license survey indicated that many
people who use this route live in southwest Minneapolis. They
may be using the residential streets to go to their doctors, go
to and from work etc. and it may be impossible to change their
habits. Mr. Hoffman said travel time is very important to most
people and usually they opt for the quickest route. There are
also many people who do not feel comfortable using highways or
major road arteries which is why they use quiet residential
streets. Complete through traffic control is hard to implement.
Mr. Hoffman indicated the City hopes present and future road
improvements will produce some relief. Mr. Hoffman pointed out
careful research is undertaken regarding road improvements. He
noted all parties concerned including residents are affected by
change in traffic flow. Mr. Hoffman stated road improvements
have been in process in this general area for the past 4 years
and road improvements are expected to continue over the next five
years. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Dahlgren the total length of
the parking ramp. Mr. Dahlgren said the proposed ramp would
total roughly 660 feet. Mr. L. Johnson said in his opinion the
long continuous channeling effect of the ramp as proposed could
be aesthetically improved. He suggested variations in the
continuous line and the addition of shadow lines to break up the
wall like effect of the ramp. Mr. L. Johnson said a variety of
measures could be implemented to create a more pleasing
structure. Mr. Dahlgren agreed that it is a difficult task to
develop an attractive ramp but with the proposed berming and
landscaping it is their hope to create a more aesthetically
pleasing structure. Mr. L. Johnson asked what is the slope of
the grade for the berm. Mr. Dahlgren said the slope is 4 -1 out
to the property line. Mr. Dahlgren added the hospital is not
adverse to the changes suggested. Mr. Alvin Krolick, 6401 Colony
expressed concern over the continued horrible maintenance of the
present landscaping at Fairview Southdale Hospital. He added how
can we be assured that the hospital will maintain the proposed
new landscaping any better than the have maintained the present.
He stressed his concern is very real that the hospital will not
maintain the landscaping appropriately. Continuing Mr. Krolick
noted his concern over the operation of the incinerator, possible
drainage problems as a result of the additional berming of the
ramp, present and future traffic problems, is there a legitimate
need in Edina for a new medical office building and concluding
the suburb of Edina is rapidly moving toward a urban flavor. Mr.
Phil Smith, 6312 Barrie Road pointed out the hospital and the
Colony were constructed at virtually the same time. He added the
Colony has not changed, except for aesthetic improvements,
whereas the hospital has continually changed and been expanded.
Mr. Smith said the property values at the Colony will be
dramatically reduced as a result of this proposal. Future
homeowers at the Colony will not want to purchase a home that
overlooks a 2 block long cement wall. Mr. Smith noted if
landscaping is placed across the access ramp toward the crosstown
highway visibility will be reduced. Mr. Hoffman commented that
any potential drainage problems will be reviewed by the City.
The Colony should not develop any drainage problems as a result
of this proposal. Mr. Hoffman concluded this project as it
stands does not have a drainage problem. Mrs•. McClelland said
she is uneasy discussing the questions of landscaping, drainage
etc. She stated she feels the proposal has been denied twice for
reasons of zoning, over development of the site, need, and
unnecessary traffic complications . Mrs. McClelland said these
are the real zoning issues. She said attempts were made to
remedy the problems but the important issues still remain. Mr.
Douglas Robbinson explained the reasons for the requested medical
office building and ramp, they are as follows: 1) The age mix
of the population of Edina and surrounding communities has
increased, older people as a general rule require more medical
services, more visits to their doctors, and many times specialty
services. It is very important to the elderly to have easy
access to these services. 2) The Southdale Medical Office
building has a very high occupancy rate of 98 percent. This
situation has led offices to divide their space between floors in
that building. The proposed Fairview project will enable
practices to increase office space and add specialities that are
not currently available on the Fairview campus. 3) The
anticipated occupancy at the proposed building will be 50%
occupation by practices that need more space, 18% occupation by
practices new to the area, 22% occupation by practices that wish
to return to the area and 10% occupation by shared ancillary
services (i.e, lab, x-ray, pharmacy, etc.). 4) The proposed
facility will enable the tenant practices to share resources,
this is not possible at the current medical bLrilding. 5)
Vacancy that is created at the Southdale Medical Office Building
will be refilled by other offices currently in that building
which need to increase their space and new practices which will
be recruited to the area by the building management and Fairview
Southdale Hospital. Concluding Mr. Robbinson said it is their
hope this project will increase physician office capacity in the
area. In turn, this will enable physician's practices to grow to
better accommodate current and forecasted consumer demand and
provide local alternatives for new speciality practices to the
area. Mrs. Shaw asked if Mr. Robbinson if he is anticipating
Southdale Hospital to operate more efficiently as a result of
this proposal. Mr. Robbinson indicated it is their hope that as
a result of this proposal the hospital operates more
efficiently. Major changes have been developing in the medical
field, the most dramatic is the change for increased out patient
care. The hospital must adjust to this change and try to meet
those changes. Mr. Phil Smith, asked if the hospital is
planning future developments. Mr. Robbinson said expansion is
not planned at this time. Mr. Del Johnson asked Mr. Robbinson if
Fairview Southdale has ever considered the Honeywell site as an
expansion possibility. Mr. Robbinson said the site was looked at
but was found to be incompatible as a medical facility, the
primary reason is parking. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Robbinson
if the Hospital has any potential for expansion. Mr. Robbinson
said the hospital does have some options. Ms. Polly Berg, 6320
Barrie Road stated she is concerned about the ramp, traffic and
decreased property values. Mr. Murray Lowell, 6613 Cornelia
Drive, stated he does not believe there is a need for this
facility. He said the physicians may have a need but individual
residents of Edina may not share that need. Edina is becoming
more of a urban community as a result of this type of proposal.
Mr. Curtis Hersey, 6320 Barrie Road said each expansion by the
hospital has had a negative impact on the Colony residents. The
Colony cannot withstand more negative impact. Mr. Dahlgren said
Fairview Southdale has been working within the rules of the City
of Edina. The Zoning has been applied and is proper. The land
use plan calls for this type of use in this area. Fairview
Southdale has attempted -to develop a project that improves some
of the existing negative conditions and have developed a fair
project that conforms to Zoning requirements. Mr. Dahlgren said
it is not up to the Government to establish or control need. The
courts have said Zoning cannot be used to create a monopoly or
control free enterprise. Mr. Dahlgren asked the Commission for
recommendations which would make the project function better
(i.e.,undulating the ramp, landscaping,etc). Mrs. Shaw reminded
the Commission at the last meeting she requested facts and
figures from the hospital to support their need for constructing
the proposed facility and ramp. Continuing Mrs. Shaw said
perhaps it is not the function of the Commission to decide need,
economics will decide if there is a need. She said the developer
is working within the framework of Edina's Zoning requirements
and that is how this project should be judged. Mr. Alvin
Krolick,6401 Colony Way said need is subjective and from the
Colony's standpoint they have need to keep their home a
desirable place to live.
Mrs. McClelland moved to recommend denial citing the
following reasons 1) present traffic congestion of the area,
2) the additional congestion arising on France Avenue and
Crosstown 62. 3) 65th Street improvements, including the
realignment of Drew Avenue 4) from Planning principals the site
appears to be developed at capacity and further building would be
overbuilding 5) the adverse effect on the neighborhood,
particularly concerning the parking ramp. Mr. Del Johnson
seconded the motion.
Upon roll call vote:
Mr.
John Bailey
Aye
Mrs.
McClelland
Aye
Mr.
Del Johnson
Aye
Mr.
Gordon Johnson
Nay
Mr.
William Lewis
Nay
Mr.
Runyan
Nay
Mrs.
Shaw
Nay
Mr.
Lee Johnson
Nay
The motion failed.
Mr. Gordon Johnson moved to recommend approval subject to
conditions stipulated by city staff. Mrs. Shaw seconded the
motion.
Upon roll call vote:
Mr.
John Bailey
Nay
Mrs.
McClelland
Nay
Mr.
Del Johnson
Nay
Mrs.
Gordon Johnson
Aye
Mr.
William Lewis
Aye
Mr.
Runyan
Aye
Mrs.
Shaw
Aye
Mr.
Lee Johnson
Nay
The motion failed.
Mr. Lee Johnson explained he is a new Commission Member and
has not been present at previous hearings. He said he has read
all the materials regarding this proposal. He feels the proposal
is a plus for the City of Edina as a whole but also pointed out
Fairview Southdale Hospital has exhibited insensitivity regarding
the development of the parking ramp. Mr. Johnson said he feels
the ramp could be designed to be more aesthetically pleasing to
residents of the Colony. He would like to see the Hospital
address this issue to his satisfaction.
Mr. Bailey said he is very uncomfortable with approving this
proposal. He stated he is concerned the hospital may ask for
future expansions. This facility is landlocked on three sides by
Crosstown Highway, the Colony and France Avenue. These factors
will not go away, making this proposal one that should be very
carefully considered. Mr. Bailey concluded overbuilding is a
factor on this site.
After further discussion Mr. Gordon Johnson moved that the
item be forwarded to the City Council without recommendation
since the Commission was deadlocked. Mrs. McClelland seconded
the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried.
II. NEW BUSINESS
S-87-6 Preliminary Plat Approval
U.T.F.C. Addition
Cherne, Corporation
General Location: East of Washington Avenue and
north of Highway 494
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property is
zoned Planned Industrial, PID and is developed with a 3 story
building on the easterly portion of the property. The south
property line is the Bloomington -Edina border. The proponents
y. own this site and the southerly adjacent site in Bloomington.
The Bloomington property is undeveloped.
Mr. Larsen said the proponents seek to rearrange property
lines for the two sites to create a more desirable building site
on the Bloomington property. Outlot A of the plat would be
attached to the Bloomington site. The Bloomington land east of
the creek would be attached to the Edina site.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the new building would be constructed
on the Bloomington side. Outlot A would be used for a driveway
and possibly some parking. The owner will give the City a
conservation easement over Outlot A to prevent attempts to
is develop the site independently in the future.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff approval is conditioned on:
1. Final Plat Approval
2. Executed and recorded conservation easement.
The proponent, Mr. Bill Cherne was present.
A brief discussion ensued between Commission Members and Mr.
Cherne. Mr. Runyan noted that as far as Edina is concerned there
will not be any changes. Mr. Cherne answered that is correct.
Commission Members questioned whether the City of Bloomington was
aware of this proposal. Mr. Cherne said the City of Bloomington
was aware of the proposal.
Mrs. McClelland moved to recommend preliminary plat approval
subject to staff conditions. Mr. Runyan seconded the motion.
All were in favor. The motion carried.
0
P-87-3 Plitt Theatres, Inc.
Edina Theater
3911 West 50th Street
Request: Building Expansion
93 Space Parking Variance
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Cineplex Odeon
Corporation has submitted a request to allow the reconstruction
of a major portion of the Edina Theater. The purpose of this
reconstruction would be to increase seating capacity from its
present 841 seats to 1400 seats. The theater would continue to
have 3 screens.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the theater property has
approximately 87 feet of frontage on West 50th Street. This
frontage includes 3 shops and the existing theater lobby. The
expansion of the theater would remove the existing shops and
convert the entire frontage into a lobby area for the theater.
The new lobby would be accomplished by remodeling the
interior space of the existing shops. The facade of the
building, including the tower and marque, would remain.
Mr. Larsen added reconstruction would begin approximately 36
feet back from the front property line. The addition would
provide for 3 auditoriums oriented east to west. Seating in the
individual auditoriums would be 371, 359, and 670 respectively.
All three auditoriums would contain a balcony level.
Continuing Mr. Larsen said decorative concrete block would
be used for the new portion of the building. Existing portions
of the building would be repainted and some reglazing would
occur.
Mr. Larsen explained the Edina Theater originally contained
970 seats. In 1976 the theater converted to two screens, which
reduced seating capacity to 643 seats. In 1980 a third screen
was added and seating was increased to its present 841 seats.
Mr. Larsen added the theater is located within the 50th and
France Tax Increment District. Parking for the theater is
provided in the public ramps. The Zoning Ordinance allows for
the reuse or reconstruction of existing buildings in the district
without providing additional off-street parking. The Ordinance
provides, however, that expansions to existing uses must include
additional off-street parking in conformance with Ordinance
requirements. The Ordinance requires 1 space for each three
seats plus one space per employee for theaters. The proposed
expansion would add 559 seats. Assuming no new employees are
added the expansion would require 186 new parking spaces. The
Zoning Ordinance provides that for certain complementary night
time uses the required parking can be reduced by 50% if adequate
parking to meet the total demand is available within 500 feet of
the building. Theaters are specifically listed as an eligible
night time use. As a result additional parking demand can be
reduced to 93 spaces.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission the theater has no way of
providing parking to meet the additional demand created by the
expansion. Consequently, they are requesting that an additional
level be added to the 51st Street public ramp to satisfy the
additional parking demand. The addition to the ramp would
provide 115 new parking spaces.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the original 50th and France Plan
assigned additional development potential to specific properties
within the district. Those properties paid additional
assessments for parking and other public improvements based on
the assigned expansion potential. The additional parking demand
created by these expansions would be satisfied by the addition of
a level to the 51st Street ramp. Some of the anticipated
expansions have occurred, however, two major planned additions
have not occurred. First, the Arby's site was expected to
redevelop with 15,000 square feet of retail space and 15,000
square feet of office space. Second, the undeveloped area
immediately north of 51st Street ramp and immediately west of the
theater was expected to develop within approximately 6,000 square
feet of retail and 6,000 square feet of office. The theater was
not included in the properties with expansion potential.
Mr. Larsen continued in 1978 our expansion policy for the
district was reviewed and revised . As a result of that review a
policy was adopted which allowed building expansions up to a
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0 to use existing public parking.
Expansions between 1.0 and 1.5 (maximum allowed in the PC -2
district) were allowed only if additional parking demand were
satisfied privately. The theater was expanded to an FAR of 1.0
in 1980. A 66 space parking quantity variance as granted to
allow the expansion.
The theater has submitted a parking and traffic analysis in
support of their proposed expansion. The report concludes that
the theater use is complementary night time use which does not
conflict with the day time retail uses in the district. The
report does find, however, that during peak day time periods
(12:00 - 3:00 p.m.) that the parking is essentially full. Study
findings show that the impact of the theater on this condition to
be minor. The additional 115 spaces "will alleviate that parking
deficiency and will increased retail activity," according to the
report.
The original public improvements at 50th and France were
financial by a combination of tax increment bonds and special
assessments. Eighty percent of the cost was funded by tax
increments, twenty percent by special assessment. The theater
has proposed that the addition to the ramp be financed in the
same manner. However, instead of all property owners receiving a
share of the special assessment, the theater would pick-up the
entire 20 percent. Other property owners would incur no
additional cost. Staff has conducted a very preliminary review
of the tax increment status. It appears that the district could
finance the cost.
Mr. Larsen indicated staff has no doubt that the proposed
theater would be a first class facility. We also agree that for
the most part that theater patrons will not be competing with
retail patrons for parking. The exception could be matinee
showings during peak shopping periods. We are not comfortable,
however, in recommending approval without a thorough discussion
of the following issue areas. The issues areas were summarized
by Mr. Larsen as follows:
Impact on the Character of the Area.
50th and France is a very fragile area. The mix, variety,
and size of the uses is critical to its continued success. Will
a single use of the magnitude proposed change the character of
the area? What will the loss of 3 store fronts on 50th Street
mean to the character of the area? Could the plan be altered to
save some or all of these stores?
Parking
The proposal is contrary to the original plan and also to
the expansion policy of 1978. The additional parking demand
would be provided in the public ramp and not privately. What do
we say to other property owners who wish to expand up to a FAR of
1.5 and use public parking. The additional 115 spaces on the
51st Street ramp represent all of the planned additional parking.
Need
The Barton-Aschman parking study indicates a maximum
attendance during the study period of 465 persons. This is only
slightly over 500 of the theater's current capacity. Is the
study a typical representation of theater attendance? If so, why
increase the capacity by 559 seats?
Other
Trash storage at 50th and France is provided at sev.eral
locations on City property. The receptacle used by the theater
and others is at capacity. The theater should provide trash
storage within its building if this expansion is approved. The
City has an easement for sidewalk purposes over a small area of
the southeasterly portion of the theater property. The proposal
would maintain the existing sidewalk but would encroach into the
easement at the second story level. We are currently
investigating the advisability of this encroachment.
Mr. Larsen concluded Representatives of the theater's owners
recently held a meeting to explain their plans to the 50th and
France Merchants Association. Staff expects a written response
from the association prior to the Commissions meeting.
Mr. Peter Kofman and Erika Engle, representing the proponent
Cineplex Odon corporation were present, Mr. Paul Pink , architect
and Mr. Dave Koske,Bart6n—Aschman were present.
Mr. Kofman began his presentation by informing Commission
Members of the plan and design of the proposed facility. He said
Cineplex Odeon acquired the facility in 1982 from Plitt Theatres
and since then has upgraded all theatre holdings. The plan for
this site is to upgrade the facility creating a first class
motion picture facility and retain the Art Deco motif. The
building marquee will be retained. Mr. Kofman added motivating
patrons to use the facility is their goal. Mr. Kofman said he
understands and shares the concerns of City Staff and residents
regarding the stressed parking situation during regular business
hours and told the Commission they would petition the HRA and
apply the tax increment method of paying for the business portion
of 20% of the ramp cost. Mr. Kofman pointed out this expansion
will result in the loss of retail tenants and Cineplex Odeon
Corporation will provide relocation assistance. Mr. Kofman
concluded the building will conform to all zoning requirements.
Mr Hosmar Brown, Member of the 50th and France Organization
apologized =or the failure to give the Commission response to
this proposal. Mr. Brown added this group is made up of very
busy individuals and they were unable to meet together as a group
until yesterday morning. Time did not enable them to develop a
presentation. Mr. Brown said he is in general agreement with
staff. He expressed interest and delight with the concept of an
improved theatre facility but expressed concern over the possible
loss of three unique businesses. Mr. Brown agreed theatre use is
generally during non business time and stated the proponent's
offer to pay for the 20% portion of the ramp is great.
Continuing Mr. Brown said there are concerns and reservations
regarding the loss of the retail stores. He pointed out 50th and
France is very densely used and the main use is retail. The
concern businesses have is with a possible current trend to
develop use by other than retail. He pointed out this trend has
created a parking problem at the 49 1/2 Street ramp. He said the
loss of the unique shops as a result of this proposal hurts. He
would like to see the 3 shopowners protected. Mr. Brown
suggested that the proponent look at the possibility of
redesigning the facility to create room for these three
businesses and added he is very much in favor of the concept of
upgrading the facility but want the proponents to look at
redesigning the facility so the businesses would not be lost.
Mrs. McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if it was possible to put
another level on the 49 1/2 Street ramp. Mr. Larsen pointed
out there is a user at this site that stresses the parking. No
feasibility study has been done on decking. Mrs. McClelland said
in her opinion this proposal should be reconsidered allowing the
proponent time to review the plans and consider the issues
brought up by staff and the 50th and France Organization.
Mr. Larsen said the HRA mechanisms can be dealt with at the
Council level. He added the Heritage Preservation Board has
commented on the proposal and the proponent plans to respond to
their comments. Mr. Larsen said in his opinion the central issue
is the proposed loss of the three shops. Mr. Gordon Johnson
asked the proponent about attendance and if he believes
attendance will increase as a result of this proposal. Mr.
Kofman said the theatre renovation is being undertaken to respond
to the requirements of the industry in placing first run movies
in a motion picture facility and meeting the needs of the
public. He added in order to get first run movies which would
entice the public the theatre must meet industry requirements.
Mr. Kofman said if these requirements are met attendance would
increase. Mr. Runyan wondered why they need three theatres. Mr-
Kofman explained the first solution considered was 6 theatres.
This would enable the theatres to play different films thus
reaching the larger viewer need. Continuing Mr. Kofman said in
speaking with the Businessmen's Association they found the
proposal of 6 theatres would have a negative impact on the area.
Mr. Kofman explained the reason for multiple theatres numbering 6
or 3 is to produce a feeder system which screens a first run
movie in the largest auditorium and as attendance decreases the
movie is fed into the smaller auditoriums. This works well for
the exhibitor as well as the distributor which is why there is a
need is for multiple theatres. Mr. Kofman pointed out upgrading
this facility will allow the theatre to compete with the growing
trend of placing motion picture facilities into larger shopping
malls. He added and upgraded facility will benefit the area.
Mr. Gordon Johnson asked Mr. Brown if there were other locations
on 50th where these merchants could relocate. Mr. Brown replied
that at this time there were none.
Mr. Gordon Johnson moved to continue P-87-3 until the May
27, 1987 meeting allowing the Heritage Preservation further
review of the proposal and receipt of a written response from the
50th and France Association. Mrs. McClelland seconded the
motion. All were in favor. The motion carried.
P-87-4 Regis Corporation
5000 Normandale
and 5075 Arcadia
Request: Construct New Office Building
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Regis Corporation has its
corporate headquarters at 5000 Normandale. They own the
one-story office building at 5075 Arcadia and the bowling alley.
Their stated intent is to redevelop this 4.2 acre site as their
new corporate headquarters. Redevelopment would occur as their
space needs increase. This application is for Phase I of the
redevelopment.
Mr. Larsen continued Phase I calls for the demolition of the
4100 square foot building at 5075 Arcadia and the construction of
a new 3 story building containing a gross floor area of 23, 765
square feet. The new building will be connected to their
existing building. Total office area will be 41, 265 square
feet.
Mr. Larsen added the zoning Ordinance requires 206 parking
spaces for a building this size. Regis is proposing 137 spaces
and projecting 167 employees. This parking count does not
include the 86 spaces provided for the bowling alley. Regis is
proposing a proof of parking agreement to solve any future
parking shortages.
Mr. Larsen pointed out office buildings are required to
provide a 20 foot side yard setback. Portions of the lower
walk -out level encroach into this setback. Also, because of the
building height, the northeast and southeast corners of the upper
level fail to provide the required setbacks.
Mr. Larsen said exterior materials of the new building will
be glass curtain wall and stone trim. These materials comply
with Ordinance standards. The exterior treatment of the existing
building would remain unchanged. Regis has indicated that in
approximately 5 years they will either tear down the existing
building or reskin the building to meet Ordinance requirements.
Currently, Arcadia Avenue splits the site north to south.
This proposal suggests that the north portion of Arcadia be
vacated and incorporated into the Regis site. This vacation is
consistent with recommendations made by BRW for the Grandview
Area.
Mr. Larsen concluded Regis is willing to encumber all of the
properties with a proof of parking agreement. We will be able to
cure any future parking shortages. He said he does not expect a
shortage. The bowling alley is complementary to the office use.
The spaces can be effectively shared. The building setback
variance is at the least obtrusive portion of the site. It also
allows for a more efficient parking arrangement. Due to the
elevation of the site, however, the building will be very
prominent when viewed from the east. The proposed landscaping is
excellent, but some existing landscaping is substandard. Trees
missing from the front of the bowling alley should be replaced
and the northeast parking area should be screened.
Staff recommends plan approval with the following
conditions:
1. Staff approval of a revised landscaping plan.
2. Recorded proof of parking agreement.
3. Vacation of Arcadia right-of-way by City Council.
4. That the variance for exterior materials be temporary,
for a period of five years.
Mr. Mike Suppes, and Mr. Fox representing the proponent, ,
Regis Corporation were present.
Mr. Suppes said the proposed 3 story office building is
relatively small. He added the use of this building is strictly
for use by Regis. He pointed out the design of the proposed
building is contemporary in flavor and materials used will be
different colors of curtain wall glass and polished stone. Mr.
Runyan asked how the proof of parking would be satisfied if it is
warranted. Mr. Suppes said parking will be satisfied by
vacating the use of the bowl. The 86 spaces used at that
function would then be incorporated into the parking for the
proposed facility. Mr. Suppes clarified that Regis Corporation
owns the bowl which is why.vacation would not be a problem. The
bowl site is included with the redevelopment of this site, and
long term plans are for its demolition. Mr. Fox, Regis
Corporation stated Regis Corporation is growing at a rate of 75
new stored per year and now employs 9,700 employees. Expansion
is need to accommodate the projected growth. Mr. Suppes said the
proposed buildings construction would take place on a step by
step basis. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Larsen how staff would
enforce the five year variance limitation. Mr. Larsen said
temporary variances for mostly aesthetic reasons on a legal basis
may be very hard to enforce but are possible. Mr. Fox said
within the existing ordinance this site would fall under the
grandfather clause. Regis Corporation has every intention of
having their Corporate Office remain in Edina and want a
aesthetically pleasing facility. Regis Corporation is committed
to develop the total site. A brief discussion ensued regarding
the needed variances and the time frame of development. Mr. Fox
stated Regis would like some flexibility in making developmental
decisions. Mr. Runyan pointed out the proposed building faces
the freeway where the structure will not impact residential
neighborhoods and a sense of spacing is retained. Mr. Bailey
commented that the structure will be very prominent on the
landscape and this particular area is very populated with office
buildings.
Mr. Runyan moved for approval subject to staff conditions.
Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion
carried.
AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 21 of ORDINANCE NO. 8?R
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Section 21 of the Zoning
Ordinance regulates and controls activities within the designated
flood plain. Regulation of activities in the floodplain is
mandated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the
agency responsible for federally backed flood insurance. Our
Ordinance was taken from a model Ordinance provided by FEMA.
Mr. Larsen pointed out from time to time FEMA audits our
rules and the administration of those rules. Continued
eligibility or Edina property owners to receive flood insurance
depends on our performance. The attached letter indicates the
results of the most recent audit.
In order to comply Section 21, paragraph F.I. (ii) must be
amended to delete references to flood proofing methods other than
structurally dry methods.
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to refer to their packet and
read the following addition:
must be floodproofed by structurally dry methods as
certified by a registered engineer.
A brief discussion ensued.
Mr. Runyan moved to recommend the amendment to Section 21 of
Ordinance No. 825. Mrs. Shaw seconded the motion. All were in
favor. The motion carried.
•
Zoning Ordinance amendment to allow curbside
pickup of leaves and grass clippings in
Morningside
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the City Council has
scheduled a Public Hearing on May 4, 1987 to consider a trial
program for composting leaves and grass clippings. The program
would only operate in the Morningside area. The program has been
proposed by a local garbage hauler, Vierkant Disposal, and the
Edina Recycling Commission.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the placement of garbage or other
refuse for pickup is regulated by the Zoning Ordinance Section 7,
paragraph B.2. Mr. Larsen read the Ordinance it reads as
follows:
"Single Dwelling Unit and Double Dwelling Unit Buildings.
All solid waste material, debris, refuse, garbage or similar
material shall be kept within closed containers designed for such
purpose. Said containers shall not be located in the front yard.
and shall not be visible from the front lot line.
Mr. Larsen said as proposed the pilot program would violate
this provision of the Ordinance. The hauler has proposed curb
side pick up on a daily basis. Daily pick up would be complete
by 9 a.m.
Mr. Larsen concluded as the Commission is aware all Zoning
Ordinance amendments must originate with the Planning
Commission. If the City Council approves this trail program it
will be necessary to amend the Ordinance to allow curbside
pickup. Since the placement of garbage and other refuse is
regulated by other Ordinances, staff would suggest that the
Section 7, paragraph B.2. be deleted from the Zoning Ordinance
This seems to be the cleanliest, most effective approach.
Mrs. McClelland moved to recommend deletion of Section
paragraph B. 2. from the Zoning Ordinance if the curb side
proposal is approved by the Council. Mr. Johnson seconded
motion. All were in favor. The motion carried.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 12:35 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
7,
the