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.