Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988 01-27 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, 1988 AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Gordon Johnson, Helen McClelland, Geof Workinger, Del Johnson, John Bailey, Jane Paulus and Virginia Shaw MEMBERS ABSENT: William Lewis, John Palmer, David Runyan and Lee Johnson STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner D. Johnson moved for approval of the October 28, 1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Commissioner Shaw seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. II. NEW BUSINESS: LD -88-1 6501-6503 Gleason Court Lot 14, Block 1, Gleason Court General Location: North of Crosstown Highway and west of Gleason Road Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proponents are requesting a party wall lot division of a newly constructed double bungalow. Separate utility connections are provided. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends approval. Commissioner D. Johnson moved to recommend approval. Commissioner Paulus seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. Commissioner Bailey arrived. III. OTHER BUSINESS: Hedberg Tax Increment Plan Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to recall discussions on the expansion of the existing Southeast Edina Tax Increment District that took place in December of 1986, and, more recently, in connection with Preliminary Rezoning of the Hedberg property. In June, 1987 the City Council and the HRA approved an expansion of the Southeast Edina Plan area to include the remaining land in the redevelopment area. i Mr. Larsen explained the purpose of the tax increment district is to allow the development of the park and provide subsidies to the housing. As discussed 44 the time of preliminary approval the housing concept is similar to the condominium portion of Edinborough. Mr. Larsen said the HRA and City Council are scheduled to consider expanding the tax increment district on February 22, 1988. Adoption of the tax increment district has been delayed until now because of the Statutory requirement that 50% or more of the parcels in the district must be subject to a signed redevelopment contract. A redevelopment contract which satisfies requirements of the statute will be ready for the February 22, 1988, HRA Meeting. Mr. Larsen concluded prior to adoption of the tax increment district the statute requires the HRA to have the Commissions comments on the proposed activities. Commissioner G. Johnson asked to abstain from any decision regarding this issue. Mr. Larsen briefed the Commission on the changes that have occurred during the development process of the Hedberg property. The Commission commented that they are very interested in keeping abreast of the changes which have occurred during the final developmental stages of the Hedberg site. Commissioner McClelland said she wants final development plans to be sensitive to the needs of the proposed residential community and the residential community of, Edinborough. She said careful consideration must be given to the height of buildings sited near these residential areas. Commissioner Shaw asked Mr. Larsen if he could put a dollar figure on the amount of money the HRA would generate for the first phase of development. Mr. Larsen replied it is difficult to pinpoint a monetary figure but his belief is that the amount would be in excess of $20 million dollars. Commissioner D. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if the HRA will be involved in the proposed transportation system. Mr. Larsen said the HRA will be involved and their involvement will mainly be with capital worth. Mr. Larsen added at the present time the City and the HRA do not have the statutory authority to run the transportation system. To rectify this the City will have to petition the legislation to procure that authority. Commissioner Bailey moved to recommend endorsement of the proposed activities as discussed. Commissioner Shaw seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried with one abstention. Review of Landscaping Standards Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission the City them to review the current landscaping requirements Zoning Ordinance. The focus of the review is to be ,adequacy of the current requirements and the extent requirements facilitate the integration of new sites developed sites. Council has asked specified in the directed toward the to which the current with surrounding Mr. Larsen said City staff has reviewed the ordinances of surrounding communities doting that most require landscaping, however, only Minnetonka and Eden Prairie have ordinance standards which specify quantity. Bloomington, St. Louis Park and Richfield rely on negotiation to achieve sufficient landscaping. The typical tree size specified is a 2 1/2 inch caliper deciduous tree or a coniferous tree 6 feet in height. Mr. Larsen told the Commission in an effort to encourage a greater variety of landscaping and trees sized relative to the scale of the building, staff has been experimenting with requirements which vary the size of trees. With graphics Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission staff's proposed alternative requirements to the Landscaping Ordinance. Commissioner Bailey commented that the current Ordinance seems to address landscaping needs very efficiently. He added if minimum standards are stated a developer may opt to plant just the minimum required. He questioned if this would in a sense "tie the staff's hands" if they felt additional landscaping was needed. Mr. Bailey commented that negotiation to achieve sufficient landscaping should be an option for staff if the proposed changes are approved. Commissioner Shaw said she understands and agrees in a sense with Commissioner Bailey's comments but added a minimum standard would create a bench mark to work from, negotiation should be maintained as an option. Commissioner D. Johnson said he sees no legitimate reason for altering the present Landscaping Ordinance. Mr. Larsen commented that the proposed alternative requirements would only change the threshold where discussion begins on landscaping. Commissioner G. Johnson said the proposed alternative may give the City a greater variety of trees, and a higher level to negotiate from. Commissioner D. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen what is required at this hearing. Mr. Larsen said a motion is needed to either recommend approval of the alternative landscaping requirements or'a motion for denial, stating the current landscaping ordinance is adequate. Commissioner D. Johnson moved to deny the proposal to alter the requirements of the Landscaping Ordinance. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. Commissioner G. Johnson called for the roll: Ayes: G. Workinger, D. Johnson Nays: J. Bailey, G. Johnson, H. McClelland, J. Paulus and V. Shaw The motion failed. Commissioner J. Bailey moved to recommend approval of the proposed alternative landscaping requirements stating the proposed landscaping requirements are to be used as a minimum standard with the further recommendation that the City retain where needed the option to negotiate for additional landscaping. Commissioner Paulus seconded the motion. Commissioner J. Johnson called for the roll: Ayes: J. Bailey, G. Johnson, H. McClelland, J. Paulus and V. Shaw Nays: D. Johnson, G. Workinger The motion carried. Subdivision Standards Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission the City Council has asked us to re-examine the standards used to review proposals to subdivide properties within developed neighborhoods. This request is a result of a letter written by a Edina resident regarding the subdivision process. Mr. Larsen added at this meeting the issue can be informally discussed. A response is due to the City Council by June of 1988. Commission Members stated if subdivision standards are to be reviewed, all areas of the City must be treated equally. The Commissioners asked to have certain parts of past minutes available to them for review. The meetings cited were Rudy Trones Construction Company's request to develop a site in the Prospect Hills neighborhood, January 1986 - March 1986, and Charles David Luther's proposal to subdivide 4800 Rolling Green Parkway, creating 1 lot. The original plat submitted by Mr. Trones contained 8 lots, final approval was given for 5 lots. The Commissioners cited this as an example of how the present subdivision process works on difficult site. A section of the July 29, 1987 meeting for Charles David Luther was also asked to be made available to them for review. The Commission agreed that the present subdivision standards seem to meet the needs of the Community. The Commission also noted that careful consideration must be given to any changes in the standards. Mr. Larsen said an option he is considering is to call a special meeting whereby neighborhood associations and concerned citizens could either supply written or oral reports on their feelings regarding subdivision standards. This meeting would be handled as a public testimony meeting, not as a public hearing and the Commission could review the materials at a later date. Commissioner McClelland said the public testimonial meeting would have to have some guidelines so it would proceed in an orderly fashion. Commissioner G. Johnson pointed out when mailing or publishing for this meeting the City should ask for a spokesperson from each neighborhood association allowing a limited time to speak or encouraging written testimony. Commissioner Paulus stressed when reviewing the subdivision standards caution should be given to keep the standards general. This enables the Commission and Council to proceed with flexibility. If rigid standards become part of the Subdivision Ordinance flexibility is lost and so is the option of compromise. The Commission briefly discussed the adequacy of the present subdivision standards, the Council's comments on the letter submitted by Suzanne Knelman regarding the subdivision process and the above mentioned items. Commissioner Bailey moved the Commission supports Council's statement; that areas with subdivision potential should be reviewed on a community basis rather than on a neighborhood basis, standards should remain the same for the entire community. Commissioner Bailey also moved that the Commission will delay any formal action on reviewing subdivision standards until more information is provided by staff. (i.e. minutes of previous meeting and Council comments) This item will be continued to the March 2, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner McClellandjeconded the motion. All were in favor. III. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. MWo - o - genakker, S��-etary