HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 01-03 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Regularr
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON JANUARY 3, 1489, AT 7:30 P.M. q q p
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson; Helen McClelland, John Palmer,
Nan Faust, Robert Hale, Lee Johnson, Charles Ingwalson,
David Runyan, Geof Workinger, Virginia Shaw
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Bailey
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner
Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary
I. NEW BUSINESS•
Comprehensive Plan Quasi -Public to Single Family Residential and
Amendment Quasi Public to Medium Density Residential
2-90-1 R-1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residential
District. Also repeal of Heritage Preservation
District from easterly 300 feet of site, at the
southwest corner of West 70th Street and Cahill
Road
S-90-1 Preliminary Plat Approval for Ridgewood Addition,
Ron Clark Construction, Cahill School Site
Mr. Larsen noted that there are several actions required by this proposal. He
began his presentation by discussing them in the following order:
Comprehensive Plan Amendments:
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Comprehensive Plan designates most of
the site as Quasi Public. This designation includes churches, private schools,
golf courses, and cemeteries. The easterly 300 feet of the site is designated
Medium Density Residential. This designation includes townhouses and low-rise
apartment buildings in a density range of 6-12 dwelling units per acre. Except
for Lewis Park the entire west Cahill Road frontage from 70th to 78th Streets is
designated Medium Density Residential. The underlying zoning of the entire site
(12.8 acres) is R-1, single family. The City did, in 1982, approve a
preliminary rezoning of the easterly 2.1 acres of the site to allow a two story,
22 unit apartment building. The proposed development suggests expanding the
Medium Density designation to the west, along 70th Street, approximately 480
feet. The remainder of the site would change from Quasi -Public to Single Family
Residential.
Mr. Larsen stated that the area proposed for Medium Density Residential makes
sense and should be approved. The area corresponds almost exactly to the
adjacent townhouse and condominium developments and other Medium Density
Residential developments to the south along Cahill Road. The change from
Quasi -Public to Single Family Residential should also be approved. It provides
the most appropriate relationship with the park to the south and the single
family lots to the west.
Heritage Preservation District:
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the minutes from the November 28, 1989,
meeting of the HPB, Heritage Preservation Board. Mr. Larsen added this meeting
was held following a joint meeting between the City Council, The Heritage
Preservation Board, and members of the Edina Historical Society on November 22,
1989. The purpose of the joint meeting was to discuss the future of Old St.
Patrick's Church. It is the Board's recommendation that the building be removed
from the site and the history of the Cahill settlement be marked by a pocket
park.
Mr. Larsen recommended that the Commission recommend to the Council repeal of
the Heritage Preservation District overlay zoning.
Rezoning:
Z-90-1 Rezoning, R-1, Single Family to PRD -3, Planned Residence District
Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proposed rezoning concerns the easterly
arm of the site. It measures approximately 780 feet along east -west axis and
240 feet along the north -south axis. The site area is 4.3 acres. The proposal
calls for 25 townhouse units arranged in five buildings. The proposed density
is 5.8 units per acre. A comparison to other townhouse densities along Cahill
follows:
Village Drive Townhomes (immediately south on Village Drive) - 8.3
Units/Acre.
* Highlander I Townhomes (Cahill at Amundson) 7.8 Units/Acre
k Cahill of Edina (Cahill at 74th) - 9.7 Units/Acre
Mr. Larsen pointed out three of the proposed buildings contain single story
walkout units, and the other three are two story units. The average size of the
main floor of each unit is 2,160 square feet, which includes an attached two -car
garage. Exterior materials are stucco and brick.
Mr. Larsen explained the townhouse development meets or exceeds the following
Ordinance requirements: lot area per dwelling unit; building coverage;'building
height; usable lot area; and the number of units per building. The plan meets
all setback requirements except for the side street setback for unit eight.
Unit eight provides a 23 foot setback from Village Drive. Since Village Drive
is a public street, the required setback is 35 feet. Thus, a 12 foot side
street setback variance is requested. With this one exception the plan meets
all requirements of the PRD -3 District.
The proposed development also requests preliminary plat approval for the 25 lots
and one common outlot. The proposed plat complies with the requirements of the
City Subdivision Ordinance.
r
C.
Mr. Larsen concluded that assuming the required amendment of the Comprehensive
Plan, staff recommends approval of Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Plat.
He also recommended granting the one variance requested, the 12 foot side street
setback variance for unit eight. Unit eight is separated from the street by a
retaining wall and is several feet higher than the street with no access to the
street.
Mr. Larsen recommended the following conditions to preliminary approval:
1. Final Rezoning Approval
2. Final Plat Approval
3. Parkland Dedication
4. Developer's Agreement
5. Landscape Plan review and inspection fee
6. Investigation of a "pocket park" pursuant
Heritage Preservation Board.
to recommendation of the
S-90-1 Preliminary Plat Approval Ridgewood Addition, 13 Single Family Lots
The proposal is to redevelop 8.5 acres of the Cahill School site with 13 single
dwelling unit lots. Twelve of the lots would front on a new public street cul
de sac off of West 70th Street. One lot, Lot 11, would front on West 70th
Street.
Neighborhood:
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note the neighborhood for comparison purposes
is illustrated on sheet five of the submittal. It includes all developed single
family lots within 500 feet of the proposed subdivision. The median dimensions
and sizes for the defined neighborhood are:
Lot width: 110 Feet
Lot depth: 150 feet
Lot area: 16,800 square feet
Mr. Larsen pointed out Section 14, (b) of Ordinance 804, the Subdivision
Ordinance, establishes the above lot dimensions and lot area as minimums for all
lots in the proposed subdivision. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to refer to
their staff report to review the corresponding dimensions and lot areas for the
13 lots proposed. Mr. Larsen said lot areas or lot dimensions which fall below
these minimums are marked with an asterisk. Lots falling below any of the
minimums would require a variance.
Lot #
Lot Width
Lot Depth
Lot Area
1
113'
132'
14,784*
2
113'
125'
15,525*
3
115'
176'
21,440
4
115'
392'
60,160
5
115'
327'
33,800
6
94'*
280'
36,400
7
34'*
315'
40,000
8
110'
162'
19,800
9
110
135'*
15,250*
10
145'
130'*
21,700
11
178'
124'*
22,250
12
150'
146'
21,609
13
130'
145'
19,980
Lot Width To Perimeter Ratio:
Mr. Larsen explained that Section 14(b) (4) requires that each lot have a lot
width to perimeter ratio of 0.1 or greater. One lot in the proposed
subdivision, No. 7, has a ratio of less than 0.1, its ratio is 0.04. Thus, a
variance to the required ratio is requested.
Mr. Larsen concluded the proposed subdivision requests several variances to the
requirements of Section 14 (b) of Ordinance No. 804. Specifically, lot width
variances for lots 6 and 7. Lot depth variances for lots 9, 10, and ll, and lot
area variances for lots 1, 2 and 9. In addition lot 7 would require a variance
from the lot width to perimeter ratio requirement. In staff's opinion the most
significant variances are the two variances required by lot 7. If lot 7 is
removed from the plat all significant variances will be eliminated. An
additional benefit will be a reduction in the amount of disturbance to the areas
of steep slopes and dense vegetation.
Mr. Larsen summarized for the Commission the recommended actions: They are as
follows::
* Amend Comprehensive Plan from Quasi Public to Single Family Residential
and Medium Density Residential.
Repeal Heritage Preservation Overlay Zoning.
* Preliminary Rezoning Approval for 25 unit townhouse development.
Preliminary Plat approval for Ridgewood Addition subject to elimination
of Lot 7.
The proponent, Mr. Ron Clark, Nancy Horn, project manager, Mike Gair, Architect
and Marsh Iverson were present. Interested neighbors were present.
Mr. Gair began his presentation by outlining Mr. Clark's history as a developer.
He pointed out Mr. Clark has developed many projects in Edina including
Highpointe, Edina Highlander, Gleason Court and various single family
residences. Mr. Gair added Mr. Clark has been successful as a developer because
he acquires, the property then develops, markets, and constructs on those
properties. Continuing, Mr. Gair said he began working with Mr. Clark on the
proposed project in June of 1989, and on August 22, 1989, held a neighborhood
meeting advising them of the upcoming proposal. He added because of the
moratorium on subdivision of single family lots within the city the project was
unable to go forward until the moratorium was lifted, which was in December of
1989. Mr. Gair noted that a notice of the proposal and this meeting was mailed
to single family property owners within the neighborhood. This mailing list was
provided by City staff and a interested neighbor.
With graphics Mr. Gair explained the ingress and egress for the development. He
pointed out that all curb cuts are on West 70th Street. The existing curb cuts
on Cahill Avenue will be removed. Mr. Gair continued, adding, at the present
time the existing land use is a Montessori Day Care Center which operates a full
time Montessori Day Care Program and a K-7 Montessori school. He added the day
care operates 12 months a year with an enrollment of 200 students. He pointed
out during the summer months the amount of students drops to 150. He further
added that the K-7 school has,137 students during the nine month school year and
70 students during the summer. The staff employed by the school is 35. Mr.
Gair pointed out that the Edina School District leases office space at the
Montessori School Building with a staff of 30 employees. Mr. Gair said the
present ADT (Average Daily Traffic) at the site is 1176 trips. The proposed
residential change will result in an ADT of 353 trips. Chairman G. Johnson
asked Mr. Larsen if the City Engineer, Fran Hoffman, would agree that the
proposal would generate this significant of a reduction in traffic flow. Mr.
Larsen said Mr. Hoffman would concur. Mr. Larsen pointed out that single
family neighborhoods of this size would gener.Ite less traffic than those of the
current day care/private school.
Mr. Gair continued his presentation by pointing out the 13 house sites. He
added topography played a role in how the single family dwellings were laid out.
He said seven sites were situated on the sloped area creating nice building pads
and six sites were located on the flat area. Mr. Gair said he understands City
staff does not look favorably on flag lots (lot #7). He presented to the
Commission a revision to the proposal which has three lots accessing the cul de
sac versus the original proposal of two lots. This revision will eliminate the
non -conforming lot width of lots 6 and 7.
Mr. Gair addressed the townhouse proposal explaining that three of the proposed
buildings contain single story walkout units, and the other three buildings are
two story units. He added the townhouses will be constructed of brick and
stucco. Mr. Gair pointed out that landscaping for the proposed townhouses would
be substantial.
Commissioner Faust said she has a problem with the proposed density of the
townhouse units in relation to the proposed single family lots. She said Edina
usually tries to buffer its single family homes from medium to high density
housing with doubles or open space. Commissioner McClelland agreed with
Commissioner Fausts observation and added that the middle section of the
proposed townhouse development appears too dense. Mr. Larsen said in his
opinion the townhouse proposal needs to be reviewed as a whole, not in its
proposed individual sections. Commissioner Faust commented that she also has a
hard time approving a new development that requires variances. She pointed out
this is the first test of the new subdivision ordinance and to already have a
proposal that requires variances is a concern. Mr. Larsen indicated that the
revised plan proposed this evening by the proponent eliminates the lot width
variances which were previously required by lots 6 and 7.
Commissioner McClelland noted that the lack of a grade differential between the
proposed townhouses and the single family residential lots also poses a concern.
She said in her opinion a real problem is lot 9. She observed the elevation and
proximity to the townhouses make it an undesirable lot.
s
Commissioner Palmer told the Commission that even though the establishment of
the new subdivision ordinance has been accomplished; it is still to be used as a
guide that affords the Commission and Council flexibility and judgement to
determine if a proposed development as a whole makes good planning sense. He
pointed out it is the job of the Commission to review the ordinance along with
the Comprehensive Plan and with these guides make an educated decision and pass
it along to the Council with our views and recommendation.
Commissioner Runyan questioned Mr. Gair if lot 11 would be accessed off West
70th Street. Mr. Gair explained that lot 11 would be accessed off the cul de
sac by a private easement through lots 10 and 9. Commission Members expressed
concern over this situation. They indicated they do not want a private
easement over lots 9 and 10 to provide access to lot 11. Commissioner
McClelland pointed out that it is unfair to the future property owners, and does
not make good planning sense. Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Clark if the
house on lot 11 would front on West 70th Street. Mr. Clark said the house would
front on West 70th Street with a rear loading_garage.
Commissioner L. Johnson said in his opinion he does not find lot 7 as previously
proposed to be an unreasonable development site, and added the configuration of
lots 9,10,11, and their relationship to the townhouses along with the grade of
the property to be a concern of this proposal. He observed that it may be
possible to relocate the row of townhouses nearest the single family lots at the
toe of the slope. Thus creating a wider buffer between the single family lots
and the townhouse development. Commissioner L. Johnson suggested another
possibility to achieve proper spacing would be to reconfigure the proposed
dwellings around a loop road versus the proposed cul de sac. Commissioner
McClelland commented that she feels the proposal will work better if the single
family home sites were fewer. She added 12 lots instead of the proposed 13
would provide better development pads for lots 9,10, and 11, and eliminate the
needed driveway easement for lot 11. Commissioner McClelland pointed out Edina
has traditionally tried to keep a wide buffer between single family dwellings
and multiple dwellings and this proposal as presented does not maintain the
desired buffer and grading.
Commissioner Workinger said while the density of the townhouse project is less
than the surrounding townhouses,in his opinion it appears tight and as presented
just "doesn't feel right". He added the feeling of tightness may be a result of
the topography. Mr. Gair said when he first viewed the proposal he had the same
feeling, but added, when he walked the site and experienced the topography the
feeling of crowding disappeared. He told the Commission the proposed plan works
very well in reality.
Chairman G. Johnson said he has trouble with the driveway easement for lot 11.
He added that is something he would recommend the proponent to redesign.
Commissioner Ingwalson agreed with Chairman G. Johnsons observation regarding
the driveway easement.
Commissioner Palmer told the Commission that he agrees there are aspects of the
proposal that need to be revised but added he finds no problem in recommending
to the Council amending the Comprehensive Plan and removing the Historic Overlay
District from the site. A discussion ensued with the Commission in agreement
with Mr. Palmer. Commissioner McClelland proposed that the rezoning and
subdivision aspect of the proposed project be held over until the next Planning
Commission meeting. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Clark if he has a
deadline for construction to begin on this development. Mr. Clark said that he
would like to see the legal process move as quickly as possible. He pointed out
there has been a considerable wait as a result of the subdivision moratorium and
at the present time the school building is not being utilized, so the wait is
becoming expensive.
Commissioner Palmer moved to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from
Quasi Public to Single Family Residential and Medium Density Residential, and to
repeal the Heritage Preservation Overlay Zoning. Commissioner Workinger
seconded the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Workinger, L. Johnson, Shaw, Palmer,
Hale, Ingwalson, Runyan, G. Johnson. Nays, Faust. Motion carried.
Commissioner McClelland moved to hold the meeting over until January 31, 1990,
allowing the proponent time to address the concerns of grading, lot 11 easement,
and the relationship of the townhouses to the single family residences.
Commissioner L. Johnson seconded the motion.
Chairman G. Johnson asked if there were any further comments from the Commission
or public.
Mr. Steve Smithson, 5608 West 70th Street told the Commission he has no
objection to the development as a whole but expressed concern over the
transition from single family homes to townhomes. He added he believes the
buffer between them should be wider and more pronounced.
Upon roll call: Ayes; Faust, Hale, L. Johnson, H. McClelland, Runyan, Palmer,
Shaw, Workinger, Ingwalson, G. Johnson. Motion carried.
P-90-1 Final Development Plan
7101-13 Amundson Avenue
George Rosmides
Located: Southeast corner of Cahill Road and Amundson Avenue
Request: Construct new office building
Mr. Larsen presented his report and noted the property measures approximately
3.5 acres in area and is developed with a single story warehouse building
containing 37,700 square feet of floor area. Mr. Larsen added the proponent
requests permission to construct a single story, 15,000 square foot
office -warehouse building on the westerly portion of the site, south of
Amundson.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff's view of the proposed development is generally
positive. The development intensity is less than the Ordinance would allow,
adequate parking is provided, but the shape of the site does make development
difficult. The difficulty of the site creates the need for variances. Mr.
Larsen said staff supports the parking setback from Amundson Avenue. He
explained the lack of site depth is a hardship and the property directly across
the street is commercial. Mr. Larsen continued adding staff also supports the
continuation of the non -conforming setbacks for the site in order to meet code
parking requirements, thus staff supports the drive aisle variance south of the
supported building.
Mr. Larsen told the Commission could not support the proposed setback and added
the building setback from Cahill Road should be increased from the proposed 65
feet to the required 75 feet. This would provide additional green space and
room for additional screening along Cahill. This would also eliminate the need
for the parking setback variance from Cahill Road.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff would also like to see landscaping meet ordinance
requirements and that the materials stored outside should be removed. He
suggested that additional landscaping should be concentrated in front of the
building along Cahill and Amundson Road.
Mr. Larsen concluded subject to the recommended changes staff recommends
approval of the proposed Final Development Plan.
The proponent, Mr. Kosmides, and his architect Mr. Reese were present.
Chairman Johnson questioned if shared parking could become a concern. Mr.
Larsen clarified that the property has common ownership and if the properties
were split they would comply with the parking requirements. Mr. Larsen added he
believes parking on site is adequate.
Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if traffic would flow one-way. Mr.
Larsen indicated traffic would flow one-way.
Commissioner Runyan questioned the grading needed on the site and wondered if
there could be a water run-off problem. Mr. Larsen agreed with Mr. Runyan's
observation and noted that permit approval would be contingent on an approved
grading plan from the City Engineer.
Commissioner L. Johnson observed that the drive -way would be on the Jesco
property line and asked if they have any objection. Mr. Larsen said to his
knowledge Jetco has no objection.
Mr. Reese told the Commission the building would be moved back 10 feet as
recommended by Mr. Larsen. He also explained that a catch basin would be
installed in the rear. Mr. Reese added that landscaping would be brought up to
the City's requirements.
Commissioner Faust asked Mr. Reese if there would be loading docks constructed
on the building. Mr. Reese said there would be no loading docks constructed.
He explained that the anticipated users of this site are small, such as a print
shop etc.
Commissioner McClelland questioned why the building has been allowed to store
goods and materials outside without the City enforcing the outdoor storage
ordinance. Mr. Larsen explained that staff polices sites, and violations of the
code, on a complaint basis. When staff went to view the site it was noted that
outdoor storage of materials was taking place. Staff felt comfortable in adding
as subject to approval removal of these materials. Mr. Larsen noted that this
was also an opportunity to upgrade the landscaping on the site, which in its
present condition is below ordinance standards.
Commissioner L. Johnson moved to recommend approval of the proposal subject to
staff conditions that the materials comply with Ordinance requirements, that the
current storage of goods and materials be discontinued, that the grading plan be
reworked and approved by the City Engineer and that the building setback be
increased from the proposed 65 feet to 75 feet. Commissioner Ingwalson seconded
the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Ingwalson, Hale, Faust, Workinger, Shaw, Palmer,
Runyan, L. Johnson, G. Johnson. Motion carried.
LD -90-1 Carson Pirie Scott and Midas Muffler at Southdale Center
Request: Division of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 432
Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission the subject property includes Carsons
Department Store and related parking along with the Midas Muffler store. The
property is located on the easterly side of the Center adjacent to York Avenue.
Mr. Larsen added the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States,
owners of the main center has agreed to acquire Midas from Carson's. In order
to complete the transaction, Midas must be separated from the remaining Carsons
property. The action is a single lot division and is being done by way of a new
Registered Land Survey. Tract B is the Midas Property.
Mr. Larsen pointed out Midas will continue to operate as usual. However,
Equitable's long terms plan call for removing the building
Mr. Larsen concluded Staff recommends approval of the split. No new development
rights are gained by the split or transfer of ownership.
Mr. Jim Lanson, Center Companies was present.
Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Larsen if Midas Muffler has a land lease. Mr.
Larsen responded that Midas has a building lease.
A discussion ensued with the Commission in agreement that Equitable has been
responsible with their property and feel that when the lease with Midas expires
that the building should be removed and no other use allowed on this site,
except for additional parking.
Commissioner Workinger moved to recommend approval of the lot division with the
recommendation that the parcel be noted as not a development parcel.
Commissioner Palmer seconded the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Hale, Runyan,
Ingwalson, Faust, Palmer, Workinger, Shaw, L. Johnson, G. Johnson.
_ II. OTHER BUSINESS:
An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 825 to Add a Landscaping Inspection Ree
Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission staff has decided to add a fee for staff
review of landscaping plans in Edina. Mr. Larsen added this fee does not
include R-1, or R-2 dwellings. Mr. Larsen added that staff does spend a fair
amount of time reviewing landscaping plans for new construction and when a
building permit is issued for changes to sites that require landscaping work.
Mr. Larsen concluded the amount of the fee is $100.00.
The Commission felt the proposed fee is a fair way to pay for staff time.
Commissioner Ingwalson moved to recommend approval of the addition to Ordinance
No. 825 to add a $100.00 landscaping fee. Mr. Palmer seconded the motion.
Ayes; Runyan, McClelland, Hale, Faust, L. Johnson, Shaw, Workinger, Palmer,
Ingwalson, G. Johnson. Motion carried. voted aye. Motion carried.
Strategic Plan/Edina School District
Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to review the plan submitted to them on
Strategic Planning by the Edina School Board.
III. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
ie Hoogenakker, S retary