Loading...
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