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