Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-12-05 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularAGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1996 7:30 P.M., EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: October 30, 1996 OLD BUSINESS: Z-96-2 Final Rezoning, R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD - 2, Planned Residence District. 5120 and 5124 France Avenue. Hans Kuhlman Z-96-4 R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District, to POD -1, Planned Office District. 7128 France Avenue South. (Lutheran Church of the Master). Pinehurst Properties. 8 Amendment to Comprehensive Plan NEW BUSINESS: LD -96-4 IV. ADJOURNMENT Quasi Public to Office. 7128 France Avenue South Lot 4, Block 1, Landmark Addition John Stafford and Arnold Abens i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1996 7:30 P.M., EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Johnson, Runayn, McClelland, Fa Ingwalson, Workinger, Swenson, Ber'qm STAFF PRESENT: C. Larsen, F. Hoffman, I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the October 30, 1996, II. OLD BUSINESS: Z-96-4 R-1, Single Dwelling'Un District. 7128 Fr'a'nce A Amendment to Comprehensive Plan to as submitted it11 o POt-1, Planned Office nue��r_inehurst Properties 7129f -France Avenue South the mssion to recall the proposed rezoning and pend '"'` 't wire heard and continued by the Commission at Meeting: "Ie Commission asked for further information and tc impacts, buffering, and building height. The a revised traffic study, a revised site plan, and a Mr. Larsen coobluded after reviewing the revised plan staff recommends denial DiOR011,11 oject we can support. he proponents, Mr. Tom Lohmann and Paul Maenner of Pinehurst Properties were present. Mr. Milo Thompson, and Gary Brown were present representing the proponents. Mr. John Kuehn, and Mike Sokolski were also present representing Lutheran Church of the Master. Interested residents were present. Mr. Sokolski, representing Lutheran Church of the Master addressed the Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Commission requesting they recommend to the City Council a change in the Comprehensive Plan designation of the subject site from Quasi Public to Office. Mr. Gary Brown addressed the Co analysis was performed by RLK, and on No` taken on Hazelton Road, west of France Av and west of Lvnmar Lane. Continuinc e , Mr. amoupt of ining t6lh'bm another traffic h and 13th traffic counts were � sst 72nd Street, both east ned the issues addressed in cutting through the est 72nd Street 3) traffic Mr. Brown said at the ie me ffYie"Planning Commission the following to beo used; 1) distribution of west bound traffic 2) het 3) increase in traffic on West 72nd Street 4) traffic cutting throb '1111- eighbo ��� capacity of France Avenue to accommodate the proposed devoloj�e0t Mr Bron,,`ded the development team also focused on trip generations ai1 fi�rl� the development will generate 1300 trips per day. Mr. Brown asked the Co en to note peak hours for the development appear too typicallcorrespondet'yexisting adjacent street traffic. Peak a.m. traffic is be '`en 7:30-8:30 an4;"" traffic is between 4:30-5:30. During the am peak hour tri, ' are calculated ati.4176 total trips, with 157 inbound and 19 outbound. PM peak trips are calcul, d at 175 total trips with 30 inbound and 145 outbound. Mr. stated th�ifjr calculates that 38% of the traffic from the site will go to the west, foJQ+% will go west. Continuing, Mr. Brown expanded that their nd 34% of traffic will travel north, 32% south, 22% west and 12% east. With gttohics Mr. Brown explained the changes in the entrance/exit, and the alternatives indicating the development team believes Alternative 2 best addresses the neighbors concerns. Chairman Johnson directed a question to Mr. Sokolski asking him if at the end of December the church will disband. Mr. Sokolski responded to date the church has not Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 voted to disband, and a vote will not be taken until the purchase of the site is completed. Mr. Sokolski explained many parishioners leave during the winter, and we may have a difficult time securing a quorum. Chairman Runyan asked Mr. Sokolski if the sale is contmg�gt Mrr'Sokolski responded the sale is contingent on successful approval by the oEdina of the rezoning and redevelopment plan.E 3 Commissioner McClelland asked if the p mentioned in the purchase agreement. Mr. Lohmann asked Commissioner McClell he did not understand her question. Commissioner McClelland referred to the developer with references that it is not,,, square foot building is constructed. She eis Sullivan) who appears to have some Towle Mr. Lohmann said he be the purchase agreement, but City of Edina on what is legal said originally, the developme' is set up Jr-,% Ou, , a fashion tl*t LA,mbuildmq i .irt r, ,s„ed the puff u her question, because eived the :+Do mmission from develo�is'site unless a 91,000 Ufa lettq�'rom a resident (Mr. Comm1s� cClella d c ,vented out you started at the maximum square footage allo�ufb ance Mr:'Lohmann explained we did not start there, the i formula cues not ref at number, but is based on a sliding scale. Commissioner)onger asked Mr. Lohmann if the purchase agreement has a scale with respect to the price if less than a 91,000 square foot building is X13 l�nn stated there is a base price for the property, adding he believes the sem, on the 91,000 square feet allowed by Ordinance. Commissioner Workit reiterated if there is a lower purchase price if the square footage of the building is reduced. Mr. Lohmann said this site had competitive bidders and a competitor offered a base price, so in order to be competitive we offered a base price with a .5 FAR. Commissioner McClelland interjected she found the letter she referred to earlier, Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 from residents Mark Sullivan and Becky Corcoran that refers to a sliding price fee range based on the square footage of the building. The letter indicates a low price of $590,00 for a 60,000 square foot building ranging up to $2.15 million for a 160,000 square foot development, which is not be allowed in the POD -1 zoning district. Commilisioner McClelland questioned if the letter is correct. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Lohmann to respond, he cojnmnted the letter Commissioner McClelland referred to sounds like it Js from somepne i�► tho neighborhood, and they may not be correct in their assumpticzris X33' Mr. Lohmann said the numbers referenced'ittiithe letter are not farnIu" 91,000 square feet is what we looked at, with the pd S ' i,of going higher. Commissioner McClelland asked for clarification. `5he,re�ated her question if the sale is contingent on approval of a 91,000 square foot bujcan the price be negotiated for less if the building size is reducad Commissioner Workinger inquired on the options the church has if Pinehurst Properties does not receive the necessary approvals. He asked if the church would disband, or reconsider when more church members are available. Mr. Sokolski said at Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 this point in time the church does not have a continency plan. He explained if this sale does not close the church would have to look at other options. Commissioner Workinger said in his opinion church options are important, and if you find yourself unable to muster a quorum, would the church automatically disband Mr. Sokolski said church members met previously, and have approved a budget allowing,,:tA church to operate until late April 1997. Continuing, Mr. Sokolski explained t -,why it is so important to the church to receive approval to ame a potential rezoning change. Mr. Sokolski pointed proposal gets defeated, we can still market the site- Sokolski iteSokolski pointed out the east side of France Aven France Avenue is office, so in his opinion the requ Concluding, Mr. Sokolski said the church wants a t believes they have been a good neighbor. Commissioner Byron said as he unde the Commission to amend the Comprehen f proposal presented by Pinehurst Properti';, for the entire property, questioning the buffet church would like the Commission tOffecomr reflect office for the entire site, i wards tq'. � ,�, i333q ��,, the commercial properties on ,1'�ast sid�c Plan to if the Pi designa end thewes"� dment mak6'1i development, and the sitA io'd t" —church would like rgardless sof„id' r decision on the #`,”' inner Byron questioned if this is kolst msd that is correct the am n fiq`the Comprehensive Plan to r, tlx: church felt office is a buffer from venue. if the Planning Commission can tent to the r✓omprehensive Plan, but deny the ity Ordinance requires a plan to be submitted for i- pensive Plan can be amended. Mr. Larsen llye that is a good option. Mr. Larsen said in theory t'reiterated staff wants to have control over what is mmend no rezoning and no amendment to the Commissioner §wenson asked Mr. Larsen if part of the site could be designated ;e, and part ofihe site designated as R-2. She inquired if he believes it Is le to split a parcel into two different zones. Mr. Larsen said he would hesitate It "ab a there may be other solutions. Concluding, Mr. Larsen reiterated j site you really have to deal with specific proposals to see how they will Chairman Johnson asked the neighborhood for their input. Brian Martens 7112 Bristol Boulevard, told the Commission he opposes the proposal, and the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Continuing, Mr. Martens Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Pagn R said he moved to Edina 10 years ago, and chose this neighborhood because he loved it, and Edina has the reputation of great schools. Mr. Martens said he has a child who walks to school daily, and one who also waits for the bus. Mr. Martens asked the Commission to note there are a large number of families in this neighborhood with children who walk to school and/or wait for the bus, and there arc,,,few side�nralks. Mr. Martens pointed out in his opinion because of the church, traffic fb+ ls;� the neighborhood are reasonable. The church generates ffic p� �at is appropriate with the neighborhood because their I neighborhood children walking to and from school homes in the neighborhood were all purchased wi purchased our home we did so with the belief a ct Martens commented in his view when making a di if the project benefits the community, is legal, or is proponent. Mr. Martens said in this instance if th will dominate the east profile of France Avenue; community, and only be a financial benefit t„ n pointed out there have been many discrefianciel may be no reason to believe them at this time Alli support staffs recommendation that,this buildtfig r Pinehurst Properties to constructs 91,00001-q uare square foot building does not txelbng direly adja( Ms. her hust present'; purchase Adair quec, office builc „,'KP traffid''analysis and there r sked that the Commission port, and deny the request of `building, reiterating a 91,000 to residential properties. ie Adairim,77120kPLynmar` lean tc ('Members of the Commission she and ted pr4l 33js Edina for a rmber of years before they purchased their site, no ;nly will it dr also ar c ' " to su bstanti So; ;,,dale, etc.) alre� e . 'lishment. Ms. „p space at Cent( iar me years ago. She added they never would have if that' S a33four-office building directly across the street. Ms. this sit t� be designated as office. She pointed out if an as the ortie'roposed is allowed to be constructed on the subject e? tic difficulties for the residential neighborhood, but it will 0�tion problems for area merchants (Byerlys Galleria, ly' aseriencing problems with customers trying to enter/exit their 'air pointed out with the additional one+ million square feet of nial Lakes, and this proposal if approved, this problem will Adair said if the reason the Commission and Council are +g`ing the zoning of this site is to generate more tax revenue, is that r " e�enough reason? Changing this zoning can erode our neighborhood! Con rrlrrg, Ms. Adair pointed out Edina is a premier community, and the reasons are many. It has an excellent school system, a good park system, good roads, accessibility to goods and services, property values that continue to increase, and most importantly it is a safe community to live in with very little crime, and safe residential streets. Ms. Adair stressed we live in such an area, but because of the proposal presented this evening by Pinehurst Properties the safety of our neighborhood, and our children is Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 being seriously threatened. Continuing, Ms. Adair stated our neighborhood is being compromised because of the potential for cut through traffic as a result of construction of a 91,000 square foot office building. Ms. Adair reiterated the safety of our children is paramount to the residents of the Cornelia neighborhood, and we ask thaw, be Commission deny the rezoning and amendment to the Comprehensive P"n, thereby allowing our neighborhood to remain residential and safe. �E Bill Nieman ;;Cornelia Drive, addressed the Commission and pointed out: them the Corneti, is a very active neighborhood that supports an 3' n,'r a ' environment fodults and children of the community. He pointed out there is an eentary school irrhis neighborhood, a park, and ice sheet, with all of them very used Mr Nieman also pointed out the school sponsors special events for 33Ahe4'ea, and they are able to walk to them. Continuing, Mr. Nieman el��bof his personal history. Before moving to Edina he resided in southwest Minns i"I the 13th Ward, and was an Alderman whose Ward abutted Edina. Mr. Nieman said at that time the neighborhood was being threatened by redevelopment, but it was for the best and highest use of the property, which in reality makes the most money for the developer. Mr. Nieman said the decisions made at that time by the Minneapolis Council were difficult, but we were able to stop a high-rise development in the 13th Ward. Mr. Nieman added during this time he also learned to recognize when a Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Paga 8 development would compromise the residential character of a neighborhood. Mr. Nieman explained in his experience as an Alderman once a neighborhood has been compromised by commercial and office development, and is in trouble, it is almost impossible to restore. Mr. Nieman stressed nothing matters more to Edina"�future than maintaining its' neighborhoods. Mr. Nieman said in his opinion altiuture;cisions for this site (and other sites) should be made with the intent of maim ' hang the residential flavor of the neighborhood by making neighborhoods the;first lty Mr. Nieman concluded that is what will serve Edina best!. '\ f Commissioner Swenson stated she applauds the neighbors and their ntation, and moved to deny the plan presented by Pinehurst Properties. issioner Swson added she was disappointed and offended to review a plan �ntd ss iMMI ssues previously expressed. She referred to comments in the y Commissioners at the previous Commission meeting, and moved for devil: °commissioner Ingwalson seconded the motion. Commissioner McClelland asked if Mr. Sullivan could comment on his letter. Mr. Sullivan said his letter refers to a letter submitted to the church on May 31, 1996, and in that letter a pricing matrix was offered to the church by Pinehurst. $590,000 on the low end for a 60,000 square foot building, and up to 2.15 million for a 160,000 square foot Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Pang 9 —a building. At one time these options were on the table for the church, and he does not know what happened to them. Commissioner McClelland said it appears the church ended up with a 1.4 million -dollar offer. Fugle �,Piinciple of X06116 Elementary School said he is speaking for the S i Obuncil etude ts. He noted in his opinion this proposal creates a be' uch close proxirttityo major commercial and office developments, and the pr'. " sed developme exacerbates the problem. Mr. Fuglesten pointed out there are Ily no sideway n the area, and the school is attached to a City park, and use of the pa, 'referendum the park site will be further developed, and more � Mr. Fuglesten informed Commission Members he has been with the g o for six+ years, and has seen traffic increase during this time period. We''d ave a concern with our traffic crossing guards who are only 10 and 11 as they try to control traffic for our walkers. Mr. Fuglesten concluded what he has learned over the years is that traffic and children don't mix, and asked the Commission to deny the proposal as recommended by City Staff. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Hoffman what he believes the difference is Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Page 1n between our traffic distribution figures which reflect 38% to the west, and the proponents figure that reflect 22% to the west. Mr. Hoffman said the correct figure may be somewhere in the middle, noting different conclusions were drawn, but it is well known by engineering staff that people will cut through residential neighborhoods to reduce their drive time. Concluding, Mr. Hoffman said in his opinion if this"'project is 3.$5 allowed to be developed as presented more restrictions'are neec (1 control the traffic. Traffic needs to be forced out to France Aven,u sand nA � h.the neighborhood. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Hoffman if he.believes;the proposatj will be effective in regards to traffic circulation. Mr.,H6tt an said his feeli project proposed by Pinehurst Properties is not accept Torn Moe, 7"fa rton Trail, said in his opinion because of the amount of retailvr�"France Avenuet' stem is already broke. Commissioner,unyan acknowledged this is a very emotional matter, adding if ne leaves h",this this evening with the belief the site will always remain a church, it ably not a c�"rect assumption. Commissioner Runyan said the site will be �yf ,gape:3&Y, and probably will be developed with an office building that is Oatible with what already exists on France Avenue. Commissioner Ingwalson said when he first viewed the project he liked the style of the building, and felt because office is located along the east side of France Avenue that this proposal may be appropriate. Commission Ingwalson explained he now has changed his mind by listening to City Staff, listening to the neighbors, and visiting the site. Commissioner Ingwalson stated he understands and agrees with Commissioner Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 paep 11 Runyan that at some time in the future this site will be redeveloped, probably with office, but in his opinion this proposal is too extreme for the site, and the neighborhood, and he cannot support it as presented. Commissioner Byron said this has been an listening to his neighbors speak about his neighbc stressed that Cornelia school is more than a schoi part of the Edina park system that is used year rot developed with the school, play ground, skating ri moving up and down the streets in the dark to use Continuing, Commissioner Byron stated he has IN for the first six on Ellsworth Drive, and now on We referred to a graphic of the neighborhood street s network serves the neighborhood community, and other than the neighborhood community. Cts going all the way to West 70th Street, tis ori neighborhood, and that is West 72ndSfreet. q fr of least resistance do not mix. Com r't ssione Byre neighborhood will not cross Wes7pth Strut at VV cresting exper`iertch for him ,Ill way to Cornelia Drive, and pas§'" he schooU`to use t light. This scenario happens throughout the entire neighborhood as re�Jdents Oahe neighborhood community try to get in and Qt Commissioner Byron saifilhi���pinion the neighborhood has admirably + ��fated the cc m�nercial develt r tints along France Avenue, and has m_ benefitehfr�khse dev% rtps, with neighborhood children using West 72nd Street by foot or brio to and fro�t�e-theatre and McDonalds at Centennial Lakes. Commissione�Bstated or t""II�consideration he has not heard anyone address this evening,, RIt,5 0 1h on, the l;ntersection at 70th Street and Hazelton noting it is not desiad and stru'3 handle the volume of traffic moving west from France or retur90 east to Frani 3 missioner Byron reiterated this intersection was not N cony ducted to handle �e1°�affic west of France Avenue. Commissioner Byron o + Ned proof of this, s if you are heading down Hazelton to cross the street to Byerlys y� have at least a.,5, -'second traffic signal. He pointed out this is due to the volume of CWhat is there dew. Commissioner Byron said the entire neighborhood community � orb clogged Edina becomes. Commissioner Byron said one other thing a resident of the neighborhood community and serving on the Commission is th"f1h realizes that land use and zoning and rezoning is drawing lines and redrawing lines, but as a parent of this neighborhood we have always asked ourselves certain questions, and that always has been when do we allow Johnny to cross West 70th Street and France Avenue. Commissioner Byron stated that is also Where the line of perceived safety has been, and there is no room for a four-story office building on the west side of France Avenue. A structure of this magnitude belongs east of France Planning Commission Meeting/December 5, 1996 Pana 19 Avenue. Commissioner Byron concluded that he will be voting to deny the proposal. Commissioner McClelland called the question. Ayes, Byron, Swenson, McClelland, noting in her opinion this parcel will probably be redeveloped,,4w she does not believe the developer responded in good faith to the issues reed Me last Commission meeting, Runyan, Workinger, Ingwalson,ergma n. Abstain, Faust. Rezoning denied 8-0. 1 abstention. Chairman'" nson a his opinion if this site is to be redeveloped it should be at three stb s maxi anJohn reiterated the vote is 8-0 with one abstention to de the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 1111. NEW BUSINESS: LD -96-4 Lot 4, Block 1, John Stafford Mr. Larsen informed t jCommi, the dosed division would divide this vacant lot j. o three par arcel C ost northerly five feet, would be attached s, , yj.. ,.,. to the a Lot 5 0tl- rk Adds This would accommodate an existing basket'' The oat", arcels, A and B, would be attached to adjacent, developed �3v divide", ould not be individually buildable. However, if parcels A a Urecomb "resulting lot would be a buildable parcel. recommends approval of the division. Commissioner asked Mr.Larsen if anything different could be plished as a r It of this split. Mr. Larsen responded all lots are zoned R-1, dwelling, an he parcels are recombined only one structure(home) would be d to be co " cted on the recombined lot. sioner Byron moved to recommend division approval. Commissioner seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.