Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 3, 2001, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson, David Byron, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, Geoffrey Workinger and Lorelei Bergman STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the November 29, 2000, meeting were filed as submitted. II. OLD BUSINESS: Preliminary Plat JMS, Inc. S-00-5 Brookside Heights Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Planning Commission reviewed a five lot, zero lot line development of this property at their November 1, 2000, meeting. That proposal was viewed under multi -family zoning standards, and would have required a rezoning of the property. After hearing testimony and comments from the Commission the request was withdrawn. The proponent submitted a revised plan, a four lot conventional plat, for the November 29, meeting. The Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat. After the meeting it was discovered that errors were made in data representing the 500 foot Neighborhood, which requires that the proposal return to the Commission. Mr. Larsen concluded although all of the lots require variances, this is a development that fits its neighborhood. The most important measure, lot width, fits the development pattern in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. The numbers are skewed because this property is at the edge of the neighborhood causing the larger lots to the north and west to become part of the formula. The best way to ensure that the new houses are compatible in size and scale with existing homes is to provide a similar lot width. The one and a half story homes the developer intends to build would be compatible. If the plat were reduced to 3 lots, variances would still be required. However, 3 larger lots would likely result in homes much larger than the typical home in Brookside Heights. Staff recommends preliminary plat approval, including the requested variances conditioned on: 1. Final Plat approval 2. Subdivision dedication 3. Watershed District permits 4. New homes would conform in size and scale to the plans presented. Mr. Roger Anderson and Mr. Rob Pleggman were present representing the applicant, Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen what the problem is concerning water run-off. Mr. Larsen explained water runs down Oxford Avenue, crosses Interlachen Boulevard and continues down Hollywood Road to the low ponding area. Continuing, Mr. Larsen said in 1987 the home located at 5340 Hollywood Road received property run-off damage. Mr. Larsen said events such as the 1987 flood are difficult to plan for, but changes have been made to the system in an attempt to prevent future problems. Commissioner Ingwalson commented he supported the proposal that was presented at the last meeting, and pointed out that proposal depicted a different set of numbers. Mr. Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen what changed since the last meeting. Mr. Larsen told the Commission he apologizes for the incorrect numbers presented at the last meeting. He reminded the Commission at that meeting it was brought up by residents that there is a discrepancy with the numbers. Mr. Larsen explained the next day staff recalculated the 500 foot neighborhood and found the numbers presented by the proponent were correct but an incorrect scale was used in calculating the neighborhood resulting in incorrect numbers. Mr. Larsen said staff decided another meeting was needed to present the Commission with the correct numbers. Mr. Rob Pleggman, explained to the Commission the design concepts for the proposed homes have not changed from the previous meeting. Mr. Pleggman asked the Commission to note the home now proposed for the corner lot is a rambler as requested by the Commission at their last meeting. Continuing, Mr. Pleggman told the Commission the footprints for the proposed homes will be approximately 1351 square feet, with an additional 1200 feet if the lower level is finished. Mr. Pleggman said if a client decides on the story and one half home 808 square feet can be added. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Pleggman why the smallest lot continues to be located on the corner. She added she recalls at the last Commission meeting the Commission requested that the largest lot be platted on the corner to better afford a greater setback from Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Anderson responded if so desired that can be accomplished. Continuing, Mr. Anderson said it was felt the additional 1 Meet would better benefit the interior lots. Mr. Anderson explained in response to Commissioner McClellands comments on drainage that he is waiting to speak to the City Engineer on drainage options. Mr. Anderson said in his opinion the development will need to be constructed with underground pipes. He said he believes because of the size of the site a drainage pond will not work. Mr. Anderson said in previous conversations with Mr. Hoffman it was suggested to construct a berm along Interlachen Boulevard with a large drainage pipe. Mr. Anderson said the proponent will work with the City Engineer to ensure proper drainage control. Commissioner Byron referred to #4 of staff's recommendations and asked Mr. Larsen what he means by "plans presented". Mr. Larsen said if this proposal is approved his goal is to ensure that the homes constructed on this site match in scale the existing homes in the Brookside Heights neighborhood. Continuing, Mr. Larsen said the footprints presented will be considered final. No variances from setbacks will be allowed. Commissioner Byron said if approved as presented can the Commission be guaranteed that on Lot 1 a rambler will be constructed. Mr. Larsen said that is correct, if approved a one story home (rambler) will be the only housing style that can be constructed on that lot. Commissioner Runyan commented that the 500 foot neighborhood in this instance is varied. Mr. Larsen said he agrees, this site appears to sit at the edge of four different neighborhoods, acknowledging the 500 foot neighborhood analysis does not always answer all questions. Commissioner Workinger asked how far the proposed home on Lot 1 will be from Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Anderson said the home will be at minimum 25 feet from Interlachen Boulevard. Mr. Richard Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, told the Commission from the start this proposal has had problems. He pointed out in the beginning the sign indicating a subdivision would occur was placed in an area on the property difficult to see. The developer has also supplied erroneous information regarding lot calculations, and actions by the Commission were based on wrong numbers. Mr. Miller asked the Commission to deny the request to subdivide. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen to explain for her lot coverage requirements on lots less than 9,000 square feet. Mr. Larsen explained on lots less than 9000 square feet lot coverage cannot exceed 30% or 2,250 square feet whichever comes first. Mr. Leenders, 5317 Hollywood Road, told the Commission he is opposed to the requested subdivision. Mr. Leenders submitted to the Chairman a packet he assembled containing materials and his comments and requested they be read into the record. Attached to the minutes as "Exhibit A". Mr. Robert Tessmann, 5109 Blossom Court, told the Commission he opposes the proposed subdivision and asked the Commission to deny the request of the proponent. Ms. Tostenson, 5137 William Avenue, told the Commission she does not support the construction of small houses on this corner lot. Ms. C. Bisson, 5340 Hollywood Road, submitted to the Commission her written comments and asked them to be read into the minutes. Attached as "Exhibit B". Mr. Don Peterson, 5403 Interlachen Boulevard, told the Commission in his opinion if this request is approved the City would be defenseless in stopping others from subdividing their property. Mr. Wailenkamp, 5332 Hollywood Road, told the Commission water run- off continues to be a problem. He concluded he wants the character of the area to be maintained, and in his opinion this proposal will negatively impact the neighborhood. Ms. Greer, 5109 Bedford Avenue, told the Commission she crosses Interlachen Boulevard at Oxford Avenue and wants that site developed appropriately. She stated she does not believe what is proposed suits the neighborhood. Mr. Pleggman thanked the neighbors for their comments and said he understands their concerns. He explained the driveways for the proposed four homes will be off Oxford Avenue, not Interlachen Boulevard which in his opinion provides safety. He stated drainage will be addressed to ensure proper standards are implemented. Mr. Pleggman said in his opinion the four proposed homes will maintain the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Runyan said he feels the house proposed to be located on the corner of Oxford and Interlachen should be a rambler style home. He said in his opinion this is a difficult decision because redevelopment of the subject lots needs to occur. Commissioner Runyan stated he believes four homes are too much on this corner, and two homes may be too few. Commissioner Runyan said he cannot support the proposal as presented at four homes. Commissioner Ingwalson told the Commission he recommended approval of a four lot subdivision at the last meeting because he believed minimal or no variances would be required. Commissioner Ingwalson said in light of finding the lot calculations were incorrect he cannot support the proposal, the variances required are too significant. Commissioner Ingwalson acknowledged something needs to be developed at this location, but he is not sure on what is right. Commissioner Swenson stated she grew up on Skyline Drive, and in her opinion four homes are too much at this location and for this 500 foot neighborhood. Commissioner Lonsbury told the Commission for the past three meetings the Commission and neighborhood have listened to much discussion regarding this proposal, right numbers, wrong numbers, not my neighborhood, my neighborhood, etc., and he appreciates all the comments and feelings expressed. Continuing, Commissioner Lonsbury explained to members of the neighborhood the Commission also represents the 45,000 Edina residents not present this evening. Commissioner Lonsbury said this proposal has been difficult for him because he believes redevelopment of this area would be a plus for the neighborhood and community at large, and that the proposed concept is good. Commission Lonsbury added he commends the developer for this concept, but he cannot support four homes on this corner. Concluding, Commissioner Lonsbury said he wishes he could suggest what is right for this site but he can't. Mr. Larsen told the Commission they need to take action on what is before them this evening and more this forward to the Council. Commissioner Swenson moved to the deny the request for a four lot subdivision. Commission Ingwalson seconded the motion. Ayes; Lonsbury, Swenson, McClelland, Ingwalson, Runyan, Workinger, Berman, Johnson. Nay, Byron. Motion to deny carried 8-1. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M. Jackie Hoogenakker DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2000,7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chair, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, Geof Workinger, Helen McClelland, Ann Swenson, John Lonsbury, Lorelei Bergman and David Byron MEMBERS ABSENT: Gordon Johnson STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the August 30, 2000, meeting were filed as submitted. II. NEW BUSINESS: Z-00-4 JMS - INTERLACHEN OF EDINA JEFF AND NANCY SCHOENWETTER LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 5 BROOKSIDE HEIGHTS 5012 OXFORD AVENUE 5343 INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD Mr. Larsen informed the Board the subject property comprises 3 single dwelling lots all of which are zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit district. There are 2 houses located on the properties. Total area of the 3 lots is 0.61 acres, or 26,572 square feet. The Comprehensive Plan designates the properties as Single Family. The City has received a request to redevelop the property with a five unit, zero lot line development. The proposal requires a rezoning of the property to a multi -family district, in this case the district would be PRD -3. PRD -3 is considered medium density and would allow townhouses and apartment/ condominium buildings, as well as zero lot line homes. The zoning ordinance requires a lot area of 4,400 square feet per unit in the PRD -3 district. The proposed plan would comply with the density requirement in the PRD -3 district. Mr. Larsen explained the proposed plan is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and is not consistent with existing development in the neighborhood. In concept the proposal is similar to the zero lot line development along the northern portion of Malibu Drive. The difference is that the Malibu land was designated and zoned for multi -family use. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends denial of the proposed rezoning based on inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. I would, however, support a single family redevelopment of these properties. There is enough width to the site to have a 53 foot wide lot at the corner of Oxford and Interlachen and three 50 foot lots to the north. Such a layout would be consistent with the neighborhood and would comply with neighborhood median lot width of 50 feet. Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Homes was present to respond to questions. Mr. Schoenwetter introduced himself and informed the Commission he is a lifelong resident of Edina. He said he has studied a number of design plans for zero lot line developments and that study resulted in the proposal before the Commission this evening. Mr. Schoenwetter presented renderings of the proposal including individual home designs. Continuing, Mr. Schoenwetter said market analysis has indicated this concept is very desirable, and a product the market and the City of Edina is looking for. Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he has set a price range for the proposed new homes. Mr. Schoenwetter said prices will be in the 300 thousand dollar + range. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he owns the three lots. Mr. Schoenwetter said the lots are owned by two different parties, and JMS has entered into a purchase agreement with them. Mary Kay Cadalbert, 5333 Interlachen Boulevard, told the Commission privacy is very important to her, and with five houses constructed in such a small area her privacy will be compromised. Mr. Schoenwetter interjected the homes will have east/west exposures with minimal windows on the north/south exposure. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen to explain the zero lot line concept. Mr. Larsen explained "traditional" single dwelling unit lots must maintain setbacks from the sideyards. The zero lot line concept maintains a setback from only one sideyard. Commissioner Byron asked if setbacks must be maintained from the front and rear. Mr. Larsen said that is correct. Mr. R. Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, urged the Commission to deny the proposal before them. He stated Edina is foremost a residential community, and in his opinion this is over development. 2 Mr. Walencamp, 5332 Hollywood Road, stated he does not support the proposal as presented, it establishes a precedent that many corner lots could also try to achieve. Mr. Peterson, 5005 Bedford Avenue, told the Commission he would like the subject site to be developed with single family homes, not the proposed zero lot line concept presented this evening. Ms. Bisson, 5340 Hollywood Road, stated she also cannot support the proposal, and in her opinion this site is being developed for financial gain. She commented what would stop others from "maxing out" their properties if this is approved. Commissioner Swenson interjected she tends to agree with comments from the neighbors. She explained she visited the site and in her opinion the proposed subdivision is too dense. Commissioner Swenson moved to deny the presented subdivision. Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. Commissioner Byron asked for clarification from Mr. Schoenwetter on structure size, amenities, etc. Mr. Schoenwetter explained each unit will have a two car garage, and the homes are planned to have three bedrooms or two plus den. All homes will face Oxford Avenue and each prospective property owner will be able to choose from three housing styles as indicated earlier. Continuing, Mr. Schoenwetter explained each new owner will also be able to decide on interior design options. Commissioner Byron commented he has been considering what is going on in the market as it relates to the health of Edina's housing stock. Commissioner Byron pointed out much of the City's housing stock is on 50 foot lots. Commissioner Byron said he realizes setbacks are sacred, but as a member of the Zoning Board he routinely hears request from residents desiring a variance from our setback requirements. Commissioner Byron added a majority of those requests come from residents on substandard lots (lots less than 75 feet). Commissioner Byron said in looking at this objectively the proposal continues to provide single family homes. He acknowledged they may not be considered the single family lots of "old," but that does not necessarily mean the product presented tonight is not desirable. Commissioner Byron said this may not be the right location for this concept, but the idea is intriguing. Concluding, Commissioner Byron said the width of the lots could result in four homes, adding it may be possible that a zero lot line concept may result in the construction of homes that better match the character of the neighborhood and similar house size. Commissioner McClelland interjected she grew up in a community of 35 foot lots and commended JMS for bringing this design concept to the City. Commissioner McClelland said while she supports the concept she does not believe this is the right location for five homes. Chair Runyan said he also believes the proposal presented in very nice, adding he has a hard time visualizing five homes in this area. Commissioner Workinger stated in his opinion the design is very well done, but he is not in favor of five homes. Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Schoenwetter if four homes would work for him. Mr. Schoenwetter said he believes four homes are workable, but no less than four. Commissioner Lonsbury said occasionally the Commission has before them a proposal that has merit, but may need some revisions. He asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he would be willing to table this proposal allowing time for redesign. Continuing, Commissioner Lonsbury said from the discussion thusfar it appears the Commission finds the concept well done, but five units appears to be too dense in this area. Mr. Schoenwetter stated he withdraws his request. Commissioner Swenson withdrew her motion to deny and moved to accept the withdrawal request from Mr. Schoenwetter. Commissioner Losnbury seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. P-00-5 Christopher J. Cummins Concordia Properties, LLC 10 Southdale Center Movie Theatre/Restaurant Expansion Mr. Larsen presented his staff report and recommended Final Development Plan approval conditioned on: 1. City Engineer approval of the circulation and ring route design. 2. An easement to allow City transit vehicles right to cross center property. 3. Watershed District Permits. 4. Provision of walkway connecting to existing walkway south of 69tH Street on Galleria property. 0 The development team for Southdale Shopping Center consisting of Christopher Cummins, Concordia Properties, LLC (Mall Manager); Michael Dzaman, Jones, Lang & LaSalle; Linda Fisher, Larkin Hoffman; Vince Ivarone, V.M.I. Maris; Dick Taylor, The O'Connor Group; Scott Pollack, project architect, Kenny Harris, Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc., and Gary Colliard, Colliard Group, were present to respond to questions. Mr. Dzaman addressed the Commission and informed them he, along with others have been working on this concept for the past four or five years. The proposal is to expand the existing Center by adding more restaurant/retail space and a multiplex movie theatre. At this time the Center proposes to develop a 16 screen multiplex theatre, two restaurants, and additional retail space. The goal of the management team is to ensure that Southdale Shopping Center continues to be a dominant force in the market. Mr. Dzaman stated tenants who have indicated interest in this development are proven theatre and restaurant corporations. Mr. Dzaman explained to Commission Members the intent of this proposal is to provide a movie experience that is the best the market has to offer. Mr. Dzaman said the proposed theatres will feature stadium seating, and other high quality amenities. Mr. Dzaman said the Center is very excited about this project, and it is the hope of the team to move this process along. Mr. Dzaman concluded it is the aim of the Center to have the project completed by the 2001 holiday season. Mr. Scott Pollack told the Commission he is very excited to be working on this project. He explained his design firm has worked on renovating three other aging malls, and with Southdale being the first enclosed mall in the country it is a real thrill for him to be involved in this project. With graphics Mr. Pollack pointed out the expansion will occur on the southwest corner of the existing center, directly west of Mervyns. Mr. Pollack explained the exterior materials are brick/stucco with the addition of a cylindrical mall entry. Lighting and signage are also added features to the facade. Commissioner Ingwalson interjected and asked Mr. Pollack if there is a lobby area where one can wait to purchase movie tickets out of the elements. Mr. Pollack said there is a large lobby area that can accommodate theatre goers purchasing tickets or waiting for a movie to begin. Commissioner McClelland noted on the graphics the new facade indicates two "tower like" structures, and asked Mr. Pollack their height. Mr. Pollack said he believes the height of the tower features is 56 to 60 feet. Commissioner McClelland asked if the proposed tower features will be the tallest structures on the Center campus. Mr. Pollack said he believes the proposed "towers" will not be as tall as the Daytons element. 5 Commissioner McClelland said she has some concern with the proposed tower lighting and signage. Mr. Larsen interjected the proposed signage will be reviewed by the Planning Department. Commissioner Swenson commented there may be traffic and parking issues during the high holiday season, and questioned if the development team believes Southdale Center can accommodate the proposed growth as it relates to parking and circulation. Mr. Ivarone responded with proper routing and the implementation of parking plans in his opinion that is a good problem to have, and is addressed. Commissioner Ingwalson said in reviewing the staff report and the numbers supplied by the traffic engineer he has trouble with the number representing the parking variance. Mr. Larsen recalculated the number and told the Commission the variance request is for 759 parking spaces. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr. Ivarone how far he believes people will travel to see a movie. Mr. Ivarone said studies indicate most people will travel two to five miles to view a movie. Commissioner Lonsbury said he is curious on how Edina will be able to support the proposed 16 screen theatre. Mr. Ivarone explained the site will not only draw viewers from Edina it will draw viewers that live within a five mile radius, which includes Richfield, Bloomington, SW Minneapolis, Eden Prairie, etc. Commissioner Lonsbury said he does not understand what this proposal brings to Edina residents. He stated he believes the introduction of 16 theatres will change the dynamics of Edina. Mr. Colliard responded when one looks at Edina they also look at Southdale Shopping Center as one of its cornerstones. Mr. Colliard said Southdale is a very vibrant component of Edina that offers a good clean up -scale environment. Continuing, Mr. Colliard said the development team believes this site is a superior site that will work, and they would not undertake a development that would not succeed or not be a plus for the community. Commissioner Lonsbury asked Mr. Colliard if the theatre product is seasonal. Mr. Colliard said Hollywood does play a role in the product, adding it is very true the days between Thanksgiving and New Years, and May through July are peak movie viewing times and peak shopping times. Commissioner Bergman told the Commission she read an article that indicated "mail type„ theatres were not doing well, adding she was surprised when this proposal was submitted. roll Mr. Colliard interjected the Center started interviewing theatre companies three years ago, and have closely monitored the market. Mr. Colliard acknowledged there are theatre complexes in trouble, but most are older, outdated theatres. Continuing, Mr. Colliard reiterated the "Southdale" market has been monitored, and it was found that the Southdale area falls within the top 100 theatre markets. Concluding Mr. Colliard said in his opinion there are three reasons this will succeed: Center management; quality project, and financial wherewithal. Commissioner Bergman asked members of the development team if they believe people from outside the area will come to the proposed new facility, and if that occurs will parking demands be met. Mr. Colliard reiterated the corporation interested in the theatre aspect of this proposal has studied the market area surrounding Southdale Shopping Center for at least three years, and believes Southdale is the top mall in the state. Continuing, Mr. Taylor said from time to time people will travel from outside the "area" but for the most part will come from an area within five miles. Mr. Colliard concluded in the opinion of the development team parking demands will be met. Commissioner Swenson interjected it appears the development team believes "if they build it, they will come" and stated she also has a concern parking demands may not be met. Commissioner McClelland interjected she understands the development team believes this will be a successful project, but pointed out Centennial Lakes Theatre (8 screens) is only a few blocks down France Avenue, and questioned their impact on the proposal. She commented in her opinion there will be too many theatre screens in a five block area. Mr. Colliard said he understands the concern expressed by some Commission Members regarding parking, and assured them this proposal has been carefully studied and the principals involved in the proposal are confident this will be a success. Concern about success for the project, and concern over adequate parking are different matters. If the proposal is not successful, parking will not be an issue. Mr. Colliard stressed the development team firmly believes this project will be a success. A benefit to Edina and the community at large. Commissioner Byron stated he believes further discussion on this issue, "will it succeed", "will there be adequate parking", can be debated at length. Commissioner Byron said he is very excited about the project. He added the continuing health of Southdale is important to him and to Edina. Commissioner Byron commented he has no reason to believe he knows more about the issues than the principals. Concluding, Commissioner Byron stated he is very pleased the management team of Southdale Center views this mall as the gem it is. Commissioner Byron noted in his opinion Southdale Center is the best site on the drawing board. Commissioner Ingwalson expressed his pleasure with the proposal and said it is in the best interest of Edina that Southdale moves forward, 7 acknowledging Southdale does need improvements. Commissioner Ingwalson said he does have a concern with parking, but it is important that Southdale Center remain competitive. Mr. Ivarone said everyone involved with this project believes this will be successful. Continuing, Mr. Ivarone said the 418 space reduction in parking spaces as a result of the proposal has been figured into the calculation. Concluding, Mr. Ivarone said it is anticipated during peak periods parking demands will peak at 6,200 spaces, 6,686 parking spaces are provided, leaving 486 additional parking spaces. Commissioner Lonsbury clarified he is excited about the proposal, but struggles with the availability of parking spaces as they relate to the new theatre location. Commissioner Lonsbury said he questions how far people are willing to walk especially during the cold winter months and peak holiday season. Mr. Dzaman responded he understands the expressed concern and acknowledged people tend to want to park as close as possible. Mr. Dzaman told the Commission all entrances will remain open so patrons of the theatre can park throughout the Center. Continuing, Mr. Dzaman explained the Center also plans to have kiosks set up to purchase tickets. Mr. Larsen interjected City Staff is very comfortable with the proposal and parking. Commissioner Swenson asked if a Proof of Parking Agreement can be entered into. She said it may be possible if parking becomes a problem that that area can be ramped. Mr. Dzaman said he is unsure if the principals would want to enter into a Proof of Parking Agreement pointing out the leasing and management office will want parking demands to be met, and if they are not met the problem will be resolved. Mr. Dzaman commented there are many options available to the Center's management office. The parking lot areas could be re -stripped, and during peak holiday season employees may be shuttled to and from the Center. Commissioner Ingwalson inquired how Daytons, and J.C. Penney's, etc. feel about the proposal. Mr. Dzaman stated other facilities in the center are very excited about the project, and have expressed their support for the proposal. Commissioner McClelland asked if a drop-off lane will be available for theatre goers. Mr. Dzaman said there will be a drop-off area. Continuing, Commissioner McClelland commented as mentioned in the staff report the Center campus does support a bus shelter, and giving the Center credit for the shelter is not unreasonable. Mr. Larsen stated he agrees, noting Southdale 8 Center is a hub area for mass transit, that not only does itself a service, but also the community by creating space for the hub site. Acting Chairman Runyan said the discussion this evening has been informative., adding unless there are other issues to be covered he would entertain a motion. Commissioner Ingwalson moved Final Development Plan Approval subject to: City Engineer approval of the circulation and ring route design; An easement to allow City transit vehicles right to cross center property; Watershed District Permits, and provision of walkway connecting to existing walkway south of 69th Street on Galleria property. Commissioner Byron seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker E EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 11, 2001 Chairperson Johnson called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., on April 11, 2001, in the City of Edina Council Chambers, 4801 West 50th Street. Commissioners Present: Lonsbury, Swenson, McClelland, Runyan, Byron, Bergman and Johnson Commissioners Absent: Workinger and Ingwalson Staff Present: Larsen and Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUITES: Commissioner Lonsbury moved approval of the January 31, 2001,meeting minutes. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye, motion carried. II. NEW BUSINESS: Z-01-1 Preliminary Rezoning PCD -4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD -1, Planned Commercial District 1. Edward and Lisa Noonan 5400 France Avenue South, Edina, MN Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property is located in the southwest corner of 54th and France. The property is currently zoned PCD -4, Planned Commercial District. The PCD -4 district allows various automotive services uses. The site was originally developed as a gas station in 1950. In 1991 the tanks were removed, and the site was converted to a Mr. Tires. Most recently, the building housed a Car X facility. The building is currently vacant. Mr. Larsen explained the City has received a petition to rezone the property from PCD -4 to PCD -1. The PCD -1 district is a general retail district. The property immediately west of the subject property is zoned PCD -1. The proponent intends to remodel building for office use. The building currently has three service bays facing France Avenue and one bay facing 54th Street. The proposed remodel would convert one bay into office space and leave the remaining bays for parking and storage. The proposed remodeling would create and office area of 752 square feet with an additional 550 square feet of storage area. The parking required for the proposed facility would be seven spaces. The proposed site plan illustrates 11 angle stalls, 2 parallel stalls, and 3 in -door parking stalls. For comparison purposes, if the building were used for retail 10 spaces would be required. The proposal includes plans to completely redo the exterior of the building. The existing flat roof would be replaced with a pitched roof covered with either cedar or slate shingles. The exterior walls would be brick and stucco. The garage doors would be wood. The proposed materials meet ordinance requirements. Parking and circulation would remain unchanged. Mr. Larsen concluded the proposed rezoning would result in a low intensity use of the property that would not cause a parking problem. The recent use of the property for auto repair uses resulted in frequent parking problems. Staff recommends Preliminary Rezoning approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Rezoning 2. Landscaping Plan and Bond The proponent, Mr. Edward Noonan was present to respond to questions. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if an establishment similar to a Caribou Coffee could be located on this site. Mr. Larsen said the proposed rezoning would allow the location of a Caribou Coffee type of establishment. Continuing, Mr. Larsen said seating would be limited to the amount of parking provided on site. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Noonan his reason(s) for not occupying his recently approved building on France and West 44th Street. Mr. Noonan responded he found the site on France and West 44th Street lends itself better to retail development. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Noonan if he believes the three proposed bays will be used. Mr. Noonan said his intent is to use this building as his office. The bays will be used for vehicle and equipment storage. Mr. Noonan noted for the past 10 years he has operated his business out of a renovated Philips 66 service station. Continuing, Mr. Noonan said he believes locating his business office on this site better suits his needs while renovating an out dated structure. Mr. Noonan said his business will operate between the hours of 8-5 with little or no weekend or nighttime hours, an added plus in his opinion for the neighborhood. Commissioner Byron asked for further clarification from Mr. Noonan on his reasoning for locating his business on 54th and France versus 44th and France. Mr. Noonan explained when he learned the building he owned (Grandview) would be taken by the City for redevelopment he began looking for alternative sites to house his business. Mr. Noonan said at one time the site on West 54th/France was available, but nothing transpired after initial contact. Continuing, Mr. Noonan said time was running out for re-location and when he learned the 44th and France Avenue site was available he purchased it. Mr. Noonan said in the beginning he realized the site he would occupy on 44th and France was larger then his needs demanded, (over 1200 square feet on the lower level) adding he needed an office location soon. Mr. Noonan explained after purchasing the property on 44th and France and going through the rezoning process for that site 54th and France again became available. Mr. Noonan said he entered into a purchase agreement with the property owner of 54th and France with the intent of purchasing it if he was able to rezone the site to use as his office. Mr. Noonan reiterated in his opinion the 44th and France Avenue area is better suited to retail. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Noonan if outdoor storage of equipment would occur on site. Mr. Noonan responded equipment will be stored indoors. Continuing, Mr. Noonan said all refuse will be stored in the enclosed outdoor refuse area. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Noonan the type of signage he will use. Mr. Noonan said currently there is a monument sign on the site and he is planning to do something tasteful with that sign. Commissioner Byron moved to recommend preliminary rezoning approval subject to staff conditions and the revised plans presented. Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Insert Bancor Group Mr. David Neuman of Bancor Group was present. Mr. Joe Cooper, of JR Hill was present and Mr. Dolezal and Mr. Williams were present to respond to questions from the Commission. Mr. Neuman addressed the Commission and explained the proposed twin home units will be constructed in an up/down fashion. The units will be constructed with stone or brick exterior and stucco and depending on location the units will be walk -out or look -out options. From West 70th Street passer-bys will see three units and from Dunberry Lane four units would be visible. Continuing, Mr. Neuman said in considering redevelopment options for this site we came to the conclusion . DRAFT MINUTES P.C. MEETING APRIL 11, 2001 S-01-2 JMS, INC. AND THORPE REAL ESTATE & 6512 VERNON AVENUE Z-01-3 PRELIMINARY REZONING, R-1 SINGLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT TO PCD -2, PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT Mr. Larsen informed the Board the development proposal for this property was initially reviewed as a single dwelling subdivision. It is, however, the intent of the developer to develop the property as a detached townhouse development. As such, the proposal must be reviewed under the Planned Residence District (PRD) standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposal also requires amending the Comprehensive Plan from Quasi -Public to Low Density Attached Residential. The church would retain ownership of Lot 1 and Outlot A of the proposed plat. Outlot A includes one half of the proposed private street. This allows the church access to the street from a new curb cut. The lot size for the church after development would be 3.3 acres which meets the 3 acre minimum lot size for a church. No variances are requested. Mr. Larsen pointed out the PRD -2 district requires 7,200 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. The proposed development provides 9,650 square feet of lot area per unit. Maximum building coverage is limited to 25 percent. The building coverage proposed is 20 percent. The only variances requested are for sideyard setbacks on lots 9 and 10. Interior sideyard setback in the PRD -2 district is 20 feet. These two lots provide no setback from outlot A. They do,however, meet the setback requirement from the church property line. Mr. Larsen concluded the question before the Commission is what is the appropriate land use for this property. To the east Vernon Avenue is developed with double bungalows. Tamarac, Walnut Ridge, and Aspen are traditional Single Dwelling lots. Further west is a mix of townhouses and condominium developments. There is currently no vacant land in the City designated for Low Density townhouse style housing. As witnessed by recent proposals there does seem to be a demand for this type of housing product. The question is where should it go, if anywhere. The proposed development does fit well under the standards set for the PRD -2 district. The development does require sideyard setback variances. However, the variances are more technical than real. The intended spacing and open space is provided by the outlot. No building can be constructed on an oulot. The 4 lots fronting on Tamarac relate more to the existing neighborhood than they do to the new development. If the number of lots were reduced from 4 to 3 the new lots would be closer in size to other lots on the street. Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS, and Mr. Thorpe, Edina Realty representing the church were present to respond to questions. Members of the church were present and interested neighbors were also present. Commissioner Lonsbury stated in reviewing the plans he observed if the proposed lots on Tamarac Avenue were reduced from four lots to three lots the three lots would be approximately 89 feet in width, and very similar in size to the existing lots along Tamarac Avenue. Commissioner Lonsbury commented that may be an option worth considering. Mr. Schoenwetter addressed the Board and explained members of Chapel of the Hills Church began a site and need study considering future options for the church, including possible church growth, etc. After considerable study and discussion church members agreed to redevelop a portion of the site and contacted Mr. Thorpe of Edina Realty for his help. A decision was made to send out RFP's (Request for Proposals) to a number of developers seeking redevelopment options for the site. Continuing, Mr. Schoenwetter reported JMS was chosen to redevelop the site. Mr. Schoenwetter told the Commission the design concept presented this evening is similar to the design concept previously requested for three lots on Interlachen Boulevard/Oxford Avenue. Potential property owners will be able to choose from four different home styles. The size of the homes can be as small as 1300 square feet and as large as 3300 square feet depending on the style of home. Spacing between homes will be approximately 20 feet. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he ever considered platting three lots on Tamarac as suggested previously. Mr. Schoenwetter responded that was considered, and he submitted to the Commission a graphic depicting a plan reflecting three lots on Tamarac Avenue and 10 internal lots accessing off Vernon Avenue. Mr. Schoenwetter told the Commission both layouts allow the church to maintain the required three acre site. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Schoenwetter which layout he prefers, and if he ever considered reducing the plat by one site. Mr. Schoenwetter stated in his opinion the 13 home layout with four lots on Tamarac Avenue best suits the site, and allows the proposed homes to be marketed correctly. Mr. Schoenwetter pointed out if one home site is lost the cost per unit will increase. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Schoenwetter if a price has been set for each unit. Mr. Schoenwetter reported the smaller homes will run in the 400 thousand dollar plus range, and the larger units up to and over 500 thousand. Mr. Schoenwetter said the average price will be around $450,000. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Schoenwetter if he has set an association fee. Mr. Schoenwetter said the association fee will depend on how involved the association wants to be. Mr. Schoenwetter said the basic association fee is ground maintenance which includes snow removal, lawn care, and refuse removal. Other options can be added to include building maintenance. Concluding, Mr. Schoenwetter said the association fee can be as low as $145 per month to as high as $250 per month. Ms. Gollia, church member told the Commission the church has worked very hard to be a good neighbor and respect the residential character of the neighborhood. Mr. Mark Brauer, church member told the Commission he headed the steering committed for the church, and informed the Commission the church mailed out 28 RFP's sending out the majority of them to developers who reside in the City. Mr. Brauer said the church went through a screening process and settled on JMS. Mr. Brauer said in his opinion this proposal best suits the site, and the residential character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Swenson questioned if the church would still have the ability to add-on if a need was found. Mr. Larsen said the church site maintains 3 acres and an addition is possible. The addition would have to meet the setback and parking requirements. Ms. Laura Kloster, 6505 Aspen Road, told the Commission she supports the proposal, but would like to see the number of units reduced. Ms. Kloster said she has a concern regarding drainage. She explained at present the water run- off situation is not good behind her home. Ms. Kloster acknowledged the proposal should improve the existing water conditions, but she stressed drainage is a large issue for the property owners along Aspen Road. Mr. Dick Boaster, addressed the Commission adding he supports the plan as presented with four homes on Tamarac Avenue. He pointed out if the proposed homes on Tamarac Avenue are reduced to three the lost site is then pushed to the interior impacting the properties on Aspen Road. Mr. Hugh Meeker, 5924 Tamarac Avenue, told the Commission he would like to compliment the church on their thoughtful approach to this proposal. Mr. Meeker said he would like to see only three homes constructed on Tamarac Avenue. Mr. Don Kennedy, 5928 Tamarac Avenue, and Mr. Ronald Dahl, 5920 Tamarac Lane, told the Commission they support the proposal, but would like to see three houses constructed on Tamarac Avenue. Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Schoenwetter if fill needs to be brought to the site. Mr. Schoenwetter said he believes no fill will be needed. He said the site will be graded in a cut and fill fashion. A brief discussion ensued between residents on four lots on Tamarac Avenue versus three lots on Tamarac Avenue, and nine and/or 10 lots in the interior. Commissioner Lonsbury said he understands and appreciates the difference between four or three sites on Tamarac Avenue and asked Mr. Schoenwetter which scenario he prefers. Mr. Schoenwetter reiterated he prefers the proposal depicting four lots on Tamarac Avenue with a site total of 13 lots. He added any lost of building sites results in an increase in unit price, adding he believes the proposal works well as presented. A discussion ensued between Commission Members regarding the layout of the proposal. Commissioner Bergman observed the original proposal depicts four lots on Tamarac Avenue and nine internal lots, and in her opinion that is the best scenario. She pointed out the proposed structures are narrow, no more than 30 feet in width, thereby providing ample spacing between them. She concluded in her opinion four homes on Tamarac Avenue will not "crowd" the landscape. Spacing between structures is ample. Commissioner Lonsbury moved to recommend approval of an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan changing the plan from Quasi Public to Low Density Residential. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Lonsbury moved to recommend preliminary plat approval and preliminary rezoning approval from R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD - 2, Planned Residence District subject to the plans presented, watershed district permit and the house plans presented. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 25, 2001, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50T" STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chair, David Runyan, Ann Swenson, Helen McClelland, David Byron and John Lonsbury MEMBERS ABSENT: Gordon Johnson, Charles Ingwalson, Lorelei Bergman and Geoffrey Workinger STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the April 11, 2001, meeting were filed as submitted II. NEW BUSINESS: S-01-4 Preliminary Plat Approval Grandview Square 2nd Addition Phase II Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the attached preliminary plat represents Phase II of the redevelopment at Grandview Square. Phase I, now underway included the office building, the first condominium building and the park square. Phase II includes lots for the second condo building, the library/senior center and a reconfigured Sherwood park. Mr. Larsen explained the plat for Grandview Square 2nd Addition includes three properties not included in the Phase I plat. Those properties are the Edina pet hospital, the Classic Hair Salon, and the Noonan office building. The HRA is acquiring the three properties through eminent domain. Mr. Larsen concluded the proposed plat is consistent with the approved Overall Development Plan for the Grandview Square development. Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat. Y After a brief discussion Commissioner Byron moved to recommend preliminary plat approval. Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Amend Zoning Ordinance To Allow Currency Exchanges In Certain Districts Mr. Larsen informed the Commission financial institutions are currently allowed in all commercial districts, the office district, the industrial district, the mixed development district and the regional medical district. The zoning ordinance does not contain a definition for financial institution. Mr. Larsen explained recently, Unbank, a currency exchange business opened at a retail strip mall on Edina Industrial Boulevard just west of highway 100. The business provides a number of financial services, including check cashing and money orders. While this business may be appropriate at this location, it may not be appropriate at others. Mr. Larsen concluded since currency exchange businesses are logically related to employment centers, staff recommends amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow "currency exchange". businesses in the PCD -2, PCD -3 and the PID districts. Commissioner McClelland referred to the memo from Deputy Chief Schwartz and asked Mr. Larsen if the Commission approves this amendment is it possible to place a fee on police calls to the facility that exceed a certain number. Mr. Larsen responded he is not sure if that is legal. He explained at present if a false alarm occurs at a commercial site a fee is charged for each false alarm exceeding two per year (that would also include this facility). Continuing, Mr. Larsen said the police would need to determine the nature of calls. He pointed out the Edina Police Department continually deals with a large amount of calls generated from Southdale Center and the Galleria concerning "bad checks", shop -lifters, etc., reiterating he is not sure if a fee would be appropriate at this facility. Commissioner Lonsbury asked if the Commission could add to the approval process that facilities of this nature need to be licensed by the state as currency exchanges. Mr. Larsen said that is an option. Commissioner McClelland asked if this is the first facility in the City of this nature. Mr. Larsen explained this is the first. He explained his research has found that a growing number of immigrants who work in the area are not familiar with US banking systems, and are uncomfortable using them. He noted many immigrants also send money home to their families, and this facility provides that service. Mr. Larsen reported facilities such as this also provide bus passes and other amenities. Commissioner Swenson moved to recommend approval of an Ordinance amendment allowing currency exchanges to be located in the PCD -2, PCD -3 and PID zoning districts. The currency exchanges are also to be licensed by the State of Minnesota. Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 2001, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, David Byron, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, and Geoffrey Workinger MEMBERS ABSENT: Lorelei Bergman STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, Joyce Repya and Jackie Hoogenakker OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Robert Vogel and Association I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the March 28, 2001, meeting were filed as submitted. II. OLD BUSINESS: Z-01-1 Edward and Lisa Noonan 5400 France Avenue South Mr. Larsen told the Commission at the May 1, 2001, Council Meeting Edward and Lisa Noonan received preliminary rezoning approval. PCD -4, Planned Commercial District -4 to PCD -1, Planned Commercial District -1. Mr. Larsen said at this time the proponents are requesting final rezoning. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends final rezoning subject to a landscaping plan and Landscaping Bond. The proponent, Mr. Ed Noonan was present to respond to questions. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if landscaping is required on the west side of the property. Mr. Larsen said ordinance does not require landscaping in that area. Commissioner Workinger asked Mr. Larsen if he believes the landscaping along the south property line is adequate. Mr. Larsen said the landscaping along the south property line meets code, but the Commission can recommend more landscaping in that area if desired. Mr. Noonan interjected along the southern property line there are some evergreens, scrub trees, and grass. He told the Commission the entire site will be cleaned and cleared of dead brush and trees, and replanting and reseeding Will occur. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Noonan if he would use the existing pylon sign. Mr. Noonan said he is not planning to use the existing pylon sign. Commissioner Workinger interjected and asked Mr. Noonan if he would be willing to remove the pylon sign. Mr. Noonan said he is willing to remove the pylon sign. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if parking requirements are met. Mr. Larsen said parking complies with City Code. Commissioner Ingwalson moved to recommend final rezoning approval subject to receipt of a landscaping plan and bond. Commissioner Runyan seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. S-01-2 & Z-01-2 JMS Equities and Thorpe Real Estate Comprehensive Plan 6512 Vernon Avenue Mr. Larsen informed the Council at their May 1, 2001, meeting met and approved a revised plan. The original proposal contained 13 units, with nine units fronting on a new cul de sac, and four units fronting on Tamarac Avenue. The plan approved by the City Council removed one of the lots on Tamarac Avenue. Mr. Larsen said no additional changes were ordered by Council. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends amending the Comprehensive Plan, and final rezoning and final plat approval conditioned on: 1. Developers Agreement 2. Subdivision Dedication based on a raw land value of $722,000.00. 3. Watershed District Permits 4. Modification of landscaping plan to meet ordinance requirements, plus landscaping bond. The proponent, Mr. Schoenwetter was present to respond to questions. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he anticipates any problems with parking on Sunday mornings. Mr. Larsen said to date the City has not received any negative reports on parking at this site. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he believes guest parking is adequate. Mr. Larsen said guest parking would occur on the street and in the driveways, similar to other residential neighborhoods where a church is present. Commissioner McClelland noted the church and church membership is not large, adding she does not believe parking will be an issue. Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Schoenwetter if the prices vary between the proposed homes on Tamarac Avenue and on the cul-de-sac. Mr. Schoenwetter responded the base price for all buildings will be the same. Added amenities, and square footage will change the price of each unit. Mr. Schoenwetter said he believes the average price of the homes will be in the 400 thousand plus range. Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend final rezoning, final plat and amendment to the Comprehensive Plan subject to: 1. Developers Agreement 2. Subdivision Dedication based on a raw land value of $722,000.00 3. Watershed District Permits 4. Modification of landscaping plan to meet ordinance requirements, plus landscaping bond. Commissioner Lonsbury seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. OTHER BUSINESS: Country Club District Demolition Permit Moratorium Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Members of the Heritage Preservation Board have recommended a six-month moratorium on teardowns within the historic Country Club District. Mr. Larsen stressed the recommendation for a moratorium in no way reflects a problem. The goal of the moratorium is to ensure there are no weaknesses in the present code as it relates to teardowns, and to protect the historic integrity of the district. K Mr. Larsen introduced Ms. Repya city staff Liaison to the Heritage Preservation Board and Mr. Robert Vogel, of Robert C. Vogel & Associates, preservation planning consultant. Commissioner Runyan asked Mr. Larsen Mr. Vogel's role in the moratorium. Mr. Larsen explained in the up -coming months Mr. Vogel will work with city staff and members of the Heritage Preservation Board as they re -visit city code. Together they will formulate guidelines for the district. Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen the role the Planning Commission plays in the moratorium. Mr. Larsen explained the Heritage Preservation Board advises the Planning Commission and in turn the Planning Commission advises the Council. Mr. Larsen said at this time the Heritage Preservation Board is asking the Commission to consider recommending to the City Council a six-month moratorium on demolition permits in the Country Club District. This moratorium will allow city planning staff and advisory commissions time to examine how to best approach teardowns in the district. Commissioner McClelland referred to a copy of a "Country Club Survey" she received in her Commission packet and asked Mr. Larsen when the survey will be mailed to the Country Club residents. Mr. Larsen said he believes the survey will be mailed to Country Club residents after the moratorium is in place. Mr. Vogel addressed the Commission and informed them the main reason for requesting a moratorium is to grant time to study the teardown issue and develop a land use strategy before another teardown is requested. Continuing, Mr. Vogel informed the Commission in the 1920's Edina was a small village. During this time the concept of the Country Club District was developed as a planned community with sidewalks, compatible streetscapes, and tree lined streets. Building restrictions for the planned district also included criteria for size, value, scale and architectural style. Commissioner Ingwalson told the Commission he has opinions on teardowns within the Country Club District, and is concerned more might occur without proper supervision. He explained he is a long time resident of the district, and one concern he has is that the people making decisions for the district might not live in the district. Commissioner Ingwalson acknowledged to date the two sites where teardowns have occurred have resulted in new homes that meet the character of the Country Club District. Concluding, Commissioner Ingwalson said any future "committee" would need to be careful in placing restraints on individual homes, and if it is deemed appropriate for a committee to review house plans maybe those individuals should come from the district. 4 Commissioner McClelland referred to question #7 on the Survey form and recommended that question be changed to read, "Please list any other comments or suggestions you have about the Country Club District". She said in her opinion that reads "more friendly". Commissioner Swenson asked who the members of the Heritage Preservation Board are. Mr. Larsen explained members of the Heritage Preservation Board are appointed by the Mayor, are Edina residents, and have an interest in Heritage Preservation. Commissioner Lonsbury said he understands the focus of the moratorium is on the Country Club District, and its historic significance, adding in his opinion there may be other neighborhoods in the City that warrant consideration. Commissioner Lonsbury said, as he understands the Country Club District the "District" is on the "National Register of Historic Places" but not individual houses in the district. He commented it might be difficult to isolate individual houses. Concluding, Commissioner Lonsbury agreed with staff that presently there appears to be no problem. The District polices itself well. Chairman Johnson asked if this request would go before Council. Mr. Larsen said if the Commission recommends a temporary moratorium it will move forward to City Council Commissioner Byron said he has some reservations on a limited area moratorium because it does not include the entire City. Commissioner Byron said he understands members of the Heritage Preservation Board are only concerned with the Country Club District, but in his opinion since no problems have been recorded it might be better if a moratorium on demolition permits encompasses the entire City. Concluding, Commissioner Byron asked if the final goal is for a positive collective guide policy for the entire city or just the Country Club District. Mr. Vogel said at this time the focus is on the Country Club District. Mr. Vogel explained residents in that district already realize their homes are located in a historic district. Mr. Vogel said the City has exhibited a commitment to historic preservation that goes back almost thirty years. Mr. Larsen said he understands issues expressed by Commissioners this evening and explained with the moratorium the City is being pro -active, he reiterated a problem does not exist, but the City is committed to preservation of the district. Commissioner Ingwalson acknowledged as a resident of the district there has been no negative reaction regarding the two teardowns, however within the district a level of concern exists. 9 A discussion ensued with Commissioners in agreement a moratorium may be warranted. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Vogel if he believes six months is long enough to address the teardown issue. Mr. Vogel stated in his opinion six months is adequate to develop an appropriate land use strategy for the historic district. Continuing, Mr. Vogel said it is important to recognize the historic significance of the Country Club District, adding it is one of the first planned neighborhoods in the Country. Mr. Bill Horn, resident of the Country Club District, told the Commission there is an element of concern in the district regarding teardowns. Commissioner Lonsbury moved to recommend at the request of the Heritage Preservation Board a six-month moratorium on demolition permits for principal structures within the Country Club District. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. Commissioner Workinger commented in his opinion the motion made this evening is good, but he is worried about the exclusiveness of the motion. Commissioner Byron agreed focusing on just one area in the City is tough to sort out, but the Heritage Preservation Board and staff support the request for moratorium and I will agree with that request. Commissioner Ingwalson said as a resident of the district I have concerns, but believe at this time I should abstain from the vote Ayes, Lonsbury, Swenson, McClelland, Runyan, Johnson. Nay, Workinger. Abstain, Ingwalson. Motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:15. P.M. Jackie Hoogenakker N. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting August 1, 2001, 7:30 P.M. Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN Members Present: Chairman Gordon Johnson, David Byron, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, and Lorelei Bergman Members Absent: Geoff Workinger Staff Present: Craig Larsen II. NEW BUSINESS: Applicant: Parkwood Knolls Construction Location: South of Kelsey Court and east of Malibu Drive Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Dwelling Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit Request: Revised master plan for all remaining vacant, unplatted land in Parkwood Knolls Mr. Larsen informed the Commission in December 1994, the City Council approved a master development plan for all remaining vacant land in Parkwood Knolls. The approved plan contained 91 lots and comprised 53 acres. Since the master plan was approved, the proponents have platted 49 of the lots for development. The proponents have now submitted a revised master plan for the balance of the property. Mr. Larsen explained the unplatted area is approximately 41 acres and contains 49 lots in the master plan. The proponents are proposing a revision to the master, which reduces the number of lots from 49 to 48. The plan alters the street layout. Kelsey Terrace ran north south along the eastern portion of the site in the old plan. In the new plan Kelsey angles toward the center of the site and runs southeast to connect to the existing street. The other significant change is the removal of the connection between Ridge Trail (Cougar Trail on the old plan) and Malibu Drive. The grading plan shows the elimination of five small wetland areas, and the enlargement of two other wetlands. The watershed district is currently reviewing the plan. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends approval of the revised master plan. The new plan is slightly less dense than the earlier plan. The change in alignment of Kelsey will likely reduce speed on the street because it will not be a straight shot. The wetland review by the Watershed District may impact the number of lots. One or two lots could be lost. Approval is conditioned on: 1. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Permit 2. Army Corp of Engineers The proponent, Mr. Carl Hansen Jr. was present to respond to questions. Commissioner Byron informed the Commission he will abstain from the vote. After a brief discussion Commissioner Lonsbury moved to recommend preliminary plat approval subject to staff conditions. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 7 to 0 with one abstention. LD -01-4 Applicant: Jensen Homes for Carl and Eloise Pohlad Location: 4810 and 4812 Bywood West Request: Transfer a 2,600 square foot parcel from 4810 to 4812 Bywood West. Mr. Larsen informed the Commission staff recommends approval of the proposed lot division. Both lots will continue to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements following the division. Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend lot division approval. Commissioner Ingwalson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. II. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned of 8:15 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2001 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, David Byron, David Runyan, Charles Ingwalson, Geof Workinger and Lorelei Bergman MEMBERS ABSENT: Helen McClelland Staff Present: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: August 29, 2001 II. NEW BUSINESS: EPlanniin:gCommission Case P-01-2 Applicant: SMB Operating Company, LLC Northco Real Estate Services Location: 6545 France Avenue South Comprehensive Plan designation: Medical Zoning: Regional Medical, RMD Request: Final Development Plan approval to permit construction of a 3 -story, 65,596 square foot addition to the existing improvements on the property. A parking garage below the addition would add 75 parking spaces. The proposed additional deck over the existing ramp would add 154 spaces. Total parking after the addition would be 1,274 spaces. Mr. Larsen delivered the staff report and introduced the members of the development team of SMB Operating Company and Northco Real Estate Services; Mr. Dennis Zylla, Bruce Carlson, Todd Young and Paul Carlson. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he believes the West 65th Street intersection is adequate. Mr. Larsen said if the proponents respond to the points stipulated by the engineering department to add a sidewalk along West 65t Street, remove one curb cut on West 65th Street, and combine the easterly lot driveway with ramp driveway the intersection will be adequate. Chairman Johnson questioned if staff believes parking will be adequate, and if not would a Proof -of -Parking agreement be appropriate in this instance. Mr. Larsen said to date the formula set forth in the city code appears to work well. A Proof -Of -Parking agreement is something the City has required in the past in certain instances, adding he is not sure if this is one of those instances. Continuing, Mr. Larsen said it appears to him from the plan presented if parking were to become an issue an additional deck could be added to the east ramp. Mr. Larsen stated staff also believes parking will be carefully monitored by the building management team to assure parking demands are met. Chairman Johnson asked if the proponents ever considered "going up" instead of constructing an addition on the north side. Mr. Zylla said that was considered but aborted because the present building structure cannot support additional floors. Commissioner Lonsbury commented he also has a concern parking at this medical campus may not be adequate. He pointed out this immediate area (hospital, medical office building) will be heavily utilized and parking demands and traffic flow must be met. Mr. Larsen agreed and explained at present the subject site has available parking stalls and also leases 80 parking spaces to neighboring properties. Mr. Larsen acknowledged at peak times the lot may appear "full" but spaces are available, though they may not be located in the most desired spot. Mr. Larsen concluded it has been the past experience of city staff that property owners police their sites well to ensure their clients parking needs have been met. 2 Chairman Johnson interjected when he goes to the doctor at this site he has a difficult time finding a parking space. Mr. Larsen said to date the City has not received any complaints regarding the inadequacy of parking. Mr. Larsen acknowledged when paid parking on this site was implemented staff spent a considerable amount of time fielding complaints, but since paid parking was eliminated staff has not received any complaints with regard to parking. Commissioner Swenson said she remembers well when paid parking was implemented on this site, and acknowledged many users of the medical office building were angry about the paid parking implementation including her. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen if the proponents have agreed to the stipulations from the engineering department. Mr. Larsen said the proponents are in agreement with the requirements from the engineering department. Mr. Dennis Zylla and Mr. Bruce Carlson presented to the Commission their goals for the expansion and remodel of the Southdale medical building. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Carlson if he is willing to enter into a Proof -Of - Parking agreement. Mr. Carlson said Southdale Medical building will voluntarily increase parking if the need arises. Chairman Johnson stated a Proof -Of - Parking agreement is a safety valve for the City ensuring that parking demands will be met. Mr. Carlson said he is not sure how to respond to the request for a written agreement. Continuing, Mr. Carlson pointed out with the proposed addition and renovations to the campus parking spaces continue to exceed ordinance requirements. Mr. Carlson reported city staff is aware patrons of the hospital continually use the Southdale Medical building campus parking lot and plans will be implemented to reduce crossover parking. This will free up a number of spaces on the north side of the lot. Mr. Larsen interjected that the City on a number of occasions has worked with the medical buildings management with regard to crossover parking from hospital patrons, and if the medical center implements its plans to reduce the crossover parking, more spaces will be available. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Carlson if he plans to impose paid parking. Mr. Carlson said there will not be paid parking on this campus. The only paid parking on this site will be individual contracts with physicians for underground parking Commissioner Runayn asked if there would be a ramp connection between the ramp and the new addition. Mr. Carlson responded there will be a ramp connection on the 2nd floor. Commissioner Workinger said in listening to the conversations thus far that he was unaware of the crossover -parking situation on West 65th Street. He stated this is a safety issue. Mr. Larsen agreed. He said it is a safety issue and city staff and medical office management have been working to eliminate this habit. It is dangerous for pedestrians to run across the street from one location to another. Commissioner Workinger stressed this really concerns him and asked hospital staff if the tunnel between the medical office building and hospital is ever used. Mr. Carlson said medical staff has always used this tunnel and the more savvy hospital visitors have also found the tunnel. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Carlson if the facility will continue to lease spaces to neighbors after the addition is completed. Mr. Carlson said spaces will no longer be leased. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if he believes a Proof -Of -Parking agreement may be "over -kill". Mr. Larsen said in his opinion, yes, but added Northco will have to be diligent in policing their lot for crossover parking and to ensure all parking demands are met. Commissioner Lonsbury commented he hopes the exterior building materials used in the proposed addition will match what exists today and noted he is very unhappy with the result of materials used in the hospital expansion. Mr. Carlson explained the materials used will be complimentary, and will meet all standards stipulated by the ordinance and uniform building code. He told the Commission he believes the new addition needs to tie into the existing building while depicting the new architectural flavor and materials of the 21St century. A brief discussion ensued regarding type of building materials used, color and the changes in materials over the last 30 years. Mr. Golden, resident of Point of France told the Commission in his opinion traffic resulting from the previously approved hospital expansion will increase congestion in the immediate area, and pointed out the proposal before you this evening will only add to that congestion. Commissioner Runyan moved to recommend Final Development Plan approval subject to the plans presented, staff requirements and requirements stipulated by the engineering department. Commissioner Workinger seconded the motion. Ayes, Byron, Ingwalson, Runyan, Workinger, Bergman, Johnson. Nays, Swenson, Lonsbury. Commissioner Swenson commented she wants the City to ensure that stacking and traffic flow from Cross-town 62 is carefully considered, monitored, and addressed. She acknowledged the proposed changes to this intersection, but stated she wants assurance the City will be vigilant in monitoring Cross-town 62 at Valley View Road. Mr. Larsen agreed this intersection needs to be addressed and is something the city has been working on over the past five years. Chairman Johnson noted any backup in this area could transfer traffic to other streets. 4 Commissioner Lonsbury commented there might come a point when we have to say no to development in certain areas. III. OTHER BUSINESS: Discussion on car washes as accessory structures Mr. Larsen told the Commission over the last month he spoke with other cities asking them if they have similar facilities. Mr. Larsen said other cities either have not dealt with this request, or if they have they face the same questions we have. Mr. Larsen said at this time he has no recommended language changes to the Ordinance. Commissioner Ingwalson said in reality the proposal on 54th and France is state of the art, and maybe to have an educated discussion we need input from the industry. Mr. Larsen agreed, he pointed out this is a state of the art operation that we have no track record on. He said the ordinance could lag behind technology. Continuing, Mr. Larsen reported he uses this facility on a regular basis and believes the new technology of 3 to 4 cars being washed at one time may speed up the service, adding this concept is new to everyone including the property owner. Commissioner Byron said he is sensing at this time there is nothing to recommend. Mr. Larsen said that is correct, he would like to continue looking into this and observe the operation when it is on line. Commissioner Runyan commented if he recalls variances were granted to allow this facility and suggested this could also be looked at as a variance issue. Commissioner Lonsbury agreed, he said his concern is also with setbacks. Commissioner Swenson added one of her concerns is the potential for ice build up and maybe the Commission didn't consider that adequately when approval was granted. Chairman Johnson suggested talking with members of the industry to obtain their input before any changes to the ordinance are made. Mr. Larsen said he would contact people in the industry for their input. Members of the Commission directed Mr. Larsen to speak with business operators in the carwash/service industry and report back to them. Discussion on setbacks from ponds Chairman Johnson explained he realized at a zoning board meeting that there are continual requests for variances from setbacks to waterbodies. Chairman Johnson said he wonders if city staff should be allowed to grant these variances on an administrative level or change the code requirement. »1 Mr. Larsen said he believes it would be a good idea to change code language to reflect a more reasonable number. Mr. Larsen explained in 1992 the zoning ordinance was amended and one point amended was the setback from our naturally occurring lakes and watebodies. In the past the setback was 25 feet. In 1992 that setback was changed to 50 feet. Mr. Larsen acknowledged in many cases (especially in east Edina) that change technically created many non- conforming situations for Edina residents that reside on waterbodies. Mr. Larsen said the reasoning behind the jump from 25 to 50 feet and as high as 100 feet for new subdivisions was to err on the side where the city would have more control, but this decision has created a need for variances and in some cases the end result was not desirable when the code was strictly enforced. Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen if he knows how many variances have been granted since 1992. Mr. Larsen said he is unsure of that number but acknowledged to the best of his knowledge the majority of those request have been granted. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen to review past variance requests as they relate to setbacks from waterbodies and report back to the Commission in the future on his findings. Mr. Larsen agreed and also asked the Commission to note it may be warranted to review the water body setback clause in the subdivision ordinance. Expanding, Mr. Larsen explained when his previous reference to undesirable outcomes was stated he was referring to the development on Harold Woods Lane. He pointed out the Commission and Council strictly adhered to the subdivision standards which created houses being constructed closer to the street and very wide. Report on Amendment Change Mr. Larsen reported to the Commission an amendment has been added to the zoning ordinance with regard to vote on rezoning issues. Mr. Larsen explained in the past for a rezoning to be approved at Council level a 4/5's vote was required. That requirement is now 3/5's. Mr. Larsen said he believes the only rezoning that retains the 4/5's vote is residential to commercial. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen if this change was mandated by the State. Mr. Larsen responded that is correct. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen what he needs from the Commission on this matter. Mr. Larsen said a motion acknowledging this change. Commissioner Workinger moved to acknowledge the change to the ordinance with regard to the vote on rezoning issues. Commissioner Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT: 0 The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 26, 2001, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Gordon Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, David Byron, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Geof Workinger, Lorelei Bergman STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the August 29, 2001, meeting were filed as submitted. II. NEW BUSINESS: S-01-6 & P-01-3 Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Final Development Plan Approval for Leo Evans, etal. Ms. Aaker presented the staff report noting in 1997 the City Council approved 26 units. The proposal before you this evening slightly increases the overall density of the site by two. Ms. Aaker said the question before the Commission is if the additional two units were approved would this approval have a negative impact on the overall project. Ms. Aaker concluded if this area is not developed it might be the subject of future proposals that may not be compatible with the existing Olde Vernon. Mr. Fred Richards was present representing the property owner Leo Evans. Commissioner Swenson asked Ms. Aaker if Outlot A was included in the original Olde Vernon plat. Ms. Aaker said that portion was included in the plat but remained platted as an outlot. Ms. Aaker reminded the Commission Olde Vernon is platted in phases. Commissioner Runyan asked Ms. Aaker how the 22,300 square foot outlot parcel will be divided. Ms. Aaker responded the 22,300 square foot outlot will be divided to match the size of the existing parcels in the Olde Vernon 26 -unit plat. Commissioner Byron asked Ms. Aaker what setbacks are proposed. Ms. Aaker explained if approved as submitted the outlot will be folded into the Olde Vernon plat which is zoned PRD -1. The PRD -1 zoning district allows for up to 4.15 units per acre with setbacks of 30 feet for the front and side street, 20 feet for the interior side yard, and 25 feet for the rear yard. Ms. Aaker said the Commission should note within the PRD -1 zoning district all measurements are from the perimeter of the site. Commissioner Byron asked Ms. Aaker if she believes the outlot benefits from the PRD -1 zoning with regard to setback. Ms. Aaker said not necessarily. Expanding, Ms. Aaker explained if the subject outlot were to be zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district the setbacks would be similar. R-1 zoning states a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet, rear yard setback of 25 feet, interior side yard setback of 10 feet, and side street setback of either 15 or 20 feet. Commissioner Swenson said in her opinion what is being requested this evening is increasing a previously approved plat for 26 homes to 28. Ms. Aaker said that is correct. Chairman Johnson said he has a problem with the fact that the outlot is not part of the present homeowners association and questioned why or how that happened. Mr. Richards introduced himself explaining he represents the property owner, Mr. Leo Evans who resides in California. Mr. Richards explained the development history of this site dates back many years. Continuing, Mr. Richards said in 1996 a proposal requesting a rezoning of the subject site from R-1 to PRD -1 was brought before the City Council. The request was for a 32 -unit townhouse development. At that time the City Council determined a 32 -unit townhouse development was not appropriate for the site and the Council recommended reducing the unit count from 32 to 26. Mr. Richards said in 1997 a revised plan was brought before the Council illustrating a 26 -unit townhouse style development. However, all buildings would be constructed on "individual" lots. Mr. Richards said the approved project would contain no common building walls, with property owners only owning the building pad of their home with all open space commonly held by a homeowners association. Concluding, Mr. Richards said the concept of a detached 26 -unit development received final approval. Mr. Richards stated after this process was completed it appears Mr. Evans sold a portion of the subject site to Charles Cudd for development, but retained a portion of the site for future development. Presently, the majority of the subject site is developed by Mr. Cudd with 22 building sites. Chairman Johnson commented one of his concerns is with the appearance of the proposed lots on Olinger Road. 2 Mr. Richards acknowledged that concern and pointed out Mr. Evans is willing to have Mr. Cudd develop this portion of the site. Mr. Richards pointed out the outlot in question contains over 22,000 square feet and it is up to the Commission and Council to determine if they believe this section of the site should be developed to mirror and fold into the existing Cudd development, be redeveloped on its own, or left undeveloped. Continuing, Mr. Richards reiterated Mr. Evans would agree to a continued development by Mr. Cudd with the proposed new homes (on Olinger) belonging to the present Olde Vernon Homeowners Association. Commissioner Runyan commented in his opinion it would be difficult to develop the two sites on Olinger Road with a separate homeowners association. Commissioner Runyan said if developed he wants a common association. Commissioner Byron stated he agrees with the previous comment from Commissioner Runyan. Commissioner Byron pointed out the outlot is isolated from the rest of the development and he believes if approved at 28 any approval should be conditioned on it being part of the original homeowners association. Mr. Richard interjected in speaking with Mr. Evans; Mr. Evans would agree to add Olde Vernon Two to the current homeowners association. Mr. Richards told the Commission, Mr. Solheim, president of the Olde Vernon Homeowners Association is present this evening and deferred Commissioner's Byron question to him. Mr. Solheim addressed the Commission and said with respect to the two lots off Olinger Road that the association does not really care one way or the other if this outlot is added to the homeowners association. Mr. Solheim said the concern of the association is that any development should be compatible with what presently exists in Olde Vernon. Mr. Solheim said if approval is granted for the two proposed building pads the association would welcome them. Mr. Solheim acknowledged that piece of the site is isolated from the rest of Olde Vernon. He explained currently the homeowners association collects dues for street maintenance, landscaping, lawn care etc. and pointed out the street maintenance portion of the dues will not benefit the proposed properties off Olinger Road. Continuing, Mr. Solheim said the bylaws of the association do include,a "lesser benefit" clause that could be implemented for those two building sites. Mr. Solheim told the Commission the association will willingly accept those two sites adding the association is concerned about continued construction in the area, and the lack of care the construction vehicles take with the existing street. Mr. Solheim explained the current roadway system within Olde Vernon is stressed by construction vehicles. Mr. Solheim said the association understands construction will occur but want the construction team to be more respectful of the area. Mr. Solheim said another concern expressed by members of the association is the vacant piece of property owned by Mr. Evans off Olinger Road. K Mr. Solheim reiterated if developed it would be beneficial if this parcel is compatibly developed. Chairman Johnson said the "lesser benefit" cause is interesting in addressing the two new proposed sites off Olinger Road. Chairman Johnson acknowledged this proposal is a challenge because it deviates from the original proposal approving a 26 -unit site. Mr. Richards acknowledged the original proposal was approved at 26. He said for some it may be a difficult jump from 26 to 28 if they have it in their mind that only 26 -units should be developed on this site. Mr. Richards said he understands that, but pointed out when the Commission and Council approved this 26 -unit detached development this type of product was a rather new development concept in Edina. He said since its concept the product has been very well received and there is an expressed need for this form of housing. Mr. Richards pointed out if approved and consequently developed only 27 units will be constructed on this site. One person has purchased two building pads and constructed one home over them. Continuing, Mr. Richards said in his opinion if developed as proposed, with the entire site under one homeowners association; the site will have a finished development look. Commissioner Byron reiterated a point previously made by Chairman Johnson on how Mr. Evans retained this portion of the site. Mr. Richards said it is his understanding the original Olde Vernon was platted in phases. Mr. Evans retained ownership over this phase. Mr. Richards. said there is no doubt Mr. Evans believes his original submission for 32 -units was the proper density for this parcel of land, and Mr. Evans has in a sense played a waiting game. Mr. Richards said he does not know the reason Mr. Evans has retained this piece of land for so many years paying taxes on it, leaving it undeveloped, but he has. Mr. Richards said to him it makes more sense if the site is developed as presented this evening. Commissioner Workinger said if the Planning Commission decides not to approve the request by Mr. Evans what will happen to the outlot. Mr. Richards said in all probability nothing will happen to it. Chairman Johnson said this is difficult because it is an outlot and people who own outlots have come before the Commission and Council in the past for development of those outlots. Chairman Johnson said what this may come down to is a political judgment. Mr. Richards said that might be the correct assumption. Mr. Richards said if the Commission can remove itself from the political issue of past approval for 26 -units this site could be developed to meet the standards set forth in the original Olde Vernon development, while complying with all ordinance standards. 4 Commissioner Byron commented in reality what Mr. Evans is asking for is similar to revisions that have occurred in previous City developments that have been platted in phases. He pointed out the Parkwood Knolls Harvey Hansen tract has been developed in phases with each phase increasing or decreasing the number of lots. Centennial Lakes, Edinborough and Grandview are all platted in phases and minor deviations have occurred. Ms. Aaker acknowledged that is correct. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Richards if it is his understanding that Mr. Evans if firm on 5 building sites. Mr. Richards stated in his discussions with Mr. Evans that Mr. Evans is firm on 5 lots. Mr. Richards said he understands the position of the Commission with regard to Mr. Evans. Mr. Richards acknowledged, "Leo is being Leo", adding it might be difficult to separate the politics and Mr. Evans personality from this project. Commissioner Byron commented if he remembers correctly at past meetings on this site some neighbors might still believe what exists today at Olde Vernon is too dense. Ms. Aaker said that might be correct, noting the Comprehensive Plan designation for this parcel has always indicated a low- density development, not single family residential. Commissioner McClelland interjected stating in the past a number of neighbors attended the hearings, especially the immediate neighbor off Olinger Road. Continuing, Commissioner McClelland said if she recalls past hearings density was always an issue and the adjacent property owner off Olinger Road resides on a rather deep parcel noting there was some discussion if his parcel could be tied into the Olde Vernon Development. Mr. Richards agreed density was an issue during past hearings, which is the reason for the reduction from the original 32. Mr. Richards said as he understands it the adjacent property owner, Mr. Dennis Wegner and Mr. Evans have had contact in the past about possible development options, but to the best of his knowledge nothing has transpired between them. Commissioner Workinger said it is difficult for the Commission to assume what may have transpired between Mr. Wegner and Mrs. Evans and the decision of the Commission should be based on what is presented to us this evening. Continuing, Commissioner Workinger said what he believes the job of the Commission is is to either uphold the past Council decision, or carefully consider what is presented this evening. In all reality what is proposed is one more building site than previously approved, and does the City feel that is agreeable, or do we leave this area undeveloped. Mr. Solheim interjected that his concern is that the subject site is left undeveloped or if developed does not tie in with the existing Olde Vernon site. Mr. Solheim said the association wants uniform homes constructed on this site. 5 The association does not want to see two story homes constructed in this area that are not architecturally compatible to Olde Vernon. Mr. Solheim said this proposal could be viewed in a positive light if the right conditions are placed on approval. Mr. Solheim said in a sense this could be "breaking the log jam" that is present on this site. Mr. Solheim concluded Mr. Cudd constructs quality homes and bringing the proposed 5 building pads on board is a plus. Commissioner Lonsbury said, as he understands it, the original proposal is for 26 units. 22 units are "accounted for" because one property owner purchased two pads for the placement of one home. Commissioner Lonsbury suggested instead of the proposed 5 building pads, that Mr. Evans consider four new sites with a different configuration. Commissioner Lonsbury acknowledged building pad placement may be difficult because of site and road configuration, but internal reconfiguration may be possible. Mr. Richards said his client believes five building pads is reasonable, and what is proposed is actually under the density requirement allowed by the PRD -1 zoning. Mr. Richards said Mr. Evans firmly believes the proposal is what is needed in Edina and there is a large demand for this type of housing. Commissioner McClelland said she doesn't like feeling she has to make a decision on this outlot. She pointed out it may be possible the Olde Vernon Association may want to purchase the outlot to develop tennis courts on the corner of Olinger Road and Vernon Avenue. Commissioner McClelland said she believes Commissioner Lonsbury's suggestion of reconfiguring this piece is a possibility. Ms. Judith Schmidt, 5900 Merold Drive told the Commission in the past density was an issue for the residents on Merold Drive. Ms. Schmidt asked what the notification process is for public hearings. Chairman Johnson explained the City mails notices to residents who live within 500 feet of the subject property for public hearings before the City Council. Chairman Johnson explained if this proposal moves forward this evening the Council will hear this request at its October 16, 2001 hearing. Commissioner Bergman asked Ms. Aaker if the proposed new sites are similar in size to the existing sites in Olde Vernon. Ms. Aaker responded the sites are similar in size. Ms. Aaker explained if approved at 5 lots the density would increase from 2.86 units per acre to 3.08 units per acre. Ms. Aaker reminded the Commission the PRD -1 zoning district allows up to 4.15 units per acre. Commissioner Bergman said in viewing the proposal and listening to the discussion thus far she believes the proposal can work. Commissioner Bergman pointed out the lots are similar in size and fall below the allowed density, adding in her opinion complete uniform development of this site is a plus. Continuing, Commissioner Bergman said she couldn't think of another type of development that would work at this corner. Commissioner Bergman said she doesn't feel C- single-family homes are appropriate on this corner. She said she believes if approved as presented and the right conditions are placed on the development this proposal makes sense. Commissioner Swenson said in her opinion she can't visualize the outlot as part of the existing Olde Vernon Homeowners Association, it is too isolated. She said in her opinion a single family home(s) may work. Chairman Johnson commented if a single family home(s) is allowed to be constructed on that corner it will one of the few single-family home sites west of Jerry's. Commissioner Workinger said in going back to one of the first questions raised by the Commission what is the intent of this outlot and what is an outlot. (He said he is somewhat sympathetic to the proponent and. believes what is proposed would work). Ms. Aaker said an outlot is considered an area, parcel or lot of land on a plat or subdivision. Commissioner Workinger asked if outlots can be developed. Ms. Aaker responded they can be developed. Commissioner Byron said in thinking out loud the City may have had a good reason in keeping the unit count at 26, maybe it is density, but as previously mentioned the density is lower than what is allowed by ordinance. He said important points for the Commission to consider is if developed building construction should be compatible with what exists. Continuing, Commissioner Byron reiterated if developed the outlot should be part of the Olde Vernon Homeowners Association. Commissioner McClelland stated what is being discussed is what type of housing may go on the outlot. Commissioner McClelland reiterated it is possible the homeowners association may want this outlot for tennis courts or some other form of amenity, like open space, it doesn't have to be developed. Commissioner McClelland acknowledged in the past Mr. Evans has been difficult to work with, but that doesn't mean the Commission should allow this outlot to be developed. Mr. Richards asked the Commission not to take into account the personalities involved with this development but view the proposal as a product that has been very well received in the City. Continuing, Mr. Richards reiterated he understands caution on the part of the Commission as it addresses this issue. He acknowledged density was an issue in the past and still is an issue, pointing out the density with this development is still less than what is allowed by Ordinance standards. Concluding Mr. Richards stated when the Commission and Council originally heard this proposal the concept was relatively new and we really did not know how it would be received. 7 Commissioner Bergman addressed the Commission and stated she believes the question before the Commission is; would the additional two units negatively impact the overall project. She pointed out if developed as proposed the total unit count would be 27, one over the originally proposed 26. Commissioner Bergman also noted the proposed units fit the site, and require no variances. Commissioner Bergman concluded she supports the proposal. She added if the proposed development is constructed with similar housing styles and is a member of the Olde Vernon Homeowners Association it is a reasonable project. A discussion ensued with regard to making a motion, and if the request should be addressed in parts. Commissioner Byron moved to recommend approval for an amendment to the Final Development Plan for P-01-3. Commissioner Runyan seconded the motion. Commissioner Workinger moved for an amendment to the motion that includes if amended the site becomes part of the Olde Vernon Homeowners Association. Commissioner Byron and Runyan accepted the amendment. Commissioner McClelland commented she will not support this motion because it does not include the possibility of reduction in units as mentioned by Commissioner Lonsbury. Ayes; Lonsbury, Byron, Runyan, Bergman, Workinger, Johnson. Nays; Swenson, McClelland. Motion to approve amendment to the Final Development Plan approved 6-2. Commissioner Byron moved to recommend final plat approval of Olde Vernon Three subject to staff conditions and the additional conditions that Olde Vernon Three be part of the Homeowners Association of Olde Vernon and if Olde Vernon Two is approved that it is also part of Olde Vernon. Ayes; Byron, Lonsbury, Runyan, Workinger, Bergman, Johnson. Nays, Swenson, McClelland. Commissioner Byron moved to recommend final plat approval for Olde Vernon Three and preliminary plat approval of Olde Vernon Two with approval of Olde Vernon Two to be tied to final plat approval of Olde Vernon Three. Ayes; Lonsbury, Byron, Runyan, Workinger, Bergman, Johnson. Nay; Swenson. Abstain; McClelland. Chairman Johnson informed Mr. Richards and interested neighbors the City Council will hear this proposal at their October 16, 2001, meeting. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2001, 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gordon Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, David Byron, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Steven Brown and Lorelei Bergman MEMBERS ABSENT: Geof Workinger STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the September 26, 2001, meeting were filed as submitted. II. NEW BUSINESS: S-01-7 Preliminary Plat Approval T/C Builders, Inc. North of Belmore Lane, west of Griffit Street, east of Arthur Street Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proponents are requesting a proposal that would combine 4+ -platted lots and a portion of platted right of way for Spruce Road. The total area of the proposed replat is 99,688 square feet or 2.28 acres. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends approval of the proposed replat as presented subject to: • Final Plat approval • Subdivision dedication for one lot • Developers Agreement • Watershed District Permits The proponent, Mr. Eric Lind was present to respond to questions. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen to explain to her the "vacation procedure" mentioned in the staff report. Mr. Larsen explained the proponents are requesting a vacation of the abutting Arthur Street/Spruce Road. The vacated right of ways will be added to the existing property. Arthur Street will be developed with a cul de sac that "cuts into" the lot dept of the Arthur Street lot creating a lot depth variance. The "vacation procedure" requires a public hearing by the City Council. Previously the property owners of 309 Arthur Street (Lundholm) requested and received a similar vacation of Spruce Road. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if anyone could request a street vacation. Mr. Larsen said a vacation could only be requested by abutting property owners if the right of way adjoining them has no public benefit. Continuing, Mr. Larsen explained there are many areas in the City where vacations of either alleyways or streets have been requested by residents and granted. Commissioner Runyan in viewing the location map asked Mr. Larsen if the vacant lots to the west are proposed for development. Mr. Larsen responded at this time the property owners of those lots (the Lundholms) do not plan on development. Commissioner Byron interjected and asked if the Arthur Street cul de sac created a variance situation. Mr. Larsen responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Byron asked if the proposed cul de sac off Arthur Street would also serve the vacant properties to the west if the property owners would decide to develop them. Mr. Larsen said that is correct. The proposed road and cul de sac of Arthur Street would serve all lots. Commissioner Swenson asked if the radius of the proposed Arthur Street cul de sac is adequate especially during heavy snow fall seasons. Mr. Larsen said the proposed radius according to review by the city engineer is adequate. Commissioner Swenson asked who pays for the extended road. Mr. Larsen said traditionally all benefited parties are assessed for road improvements. Mr. Larsen said there is a new home on 311 Arthur Street that will receive a credit. Commissioner Swenson pointed out the depicted 10' of right of way designated as a path along Arthur Street and questioned if that path exists today. Mr. Larsen responded it is an exiting trail used by residents of the neighborhood. Mr. Eric Lind addressed the Commission and informed them he proposes to construct five single-family homes. Three of the homes will front on Griffit Street and two will front on the new cul de sac off Arthur Street. Mr. Lind said he believes the project is a good project, adding he has met with immediate neighbors regarding his proposal. 2 Mr. Bob Anthony, 301 Griffit Street, stated he doesn't have a problem with the development, but has a concern with the layout of the homes on the Griffit Street site. Mr. Anthony asked Mr. Lind which way the garages and front doors will face. Mr. Lind responded future property owners will be able to choose their home design, but he believes the houses and garages will face Griffit Street. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Lind if he has renderings of future homes. Mr. Lind responded at this time he does not have building plans for the 5 lots. Mr. Lind explained the homes would be custom homes with the buyer of the lot choosing the type and style of home they want. Mr. Lind said presently their plan is to construct a two-story model home. Continuing, Mr. Lind said the new homes would be in the range of $500,000 +. Mr. Larsen interjected and pointed out all new homes will have to maintain residential setbacks as stipulated by ordinance. The City Code does not require building plans for preliminary plat approval. Ms. Deb Naiditch, 6512 Belmore Lane, asked Mr. Lind what type houses he proposes to build. Mr. Lind reiterated at this time he is planning on constructing a two-story model home with future buyers retaining the option to construct any style of house they desire. Mr. Anthony asked Mr. Lind with regard to the Griffit Street lots the direction the front door will face. Mr. Lind said he believes the front doors will face Griffit Street. Mr. Larsen cautioned explaining the process this evening is either denying or approving a 5 -lot replat. Not approving the style and type of houses that may be constructed on the lots. A resident of 308 Arthur Street asked Mr. Lind if he is planning on "saving" as many trees as possible if this replat is approved. Mr. Lind said they would be very careful with tree removal. Mr. Lind acknowledged there are many large trees on these lots and he wants to "save" as many trees as possible. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen what drives road and cul de sac width. Mr. Larsen said our code is driven by certain engineering standards and a standard that ensures the width and/or radius can accommodate emergency vehicles. Ms. Dorothy Lundholm, 309 Arthur Street, introduced herself and informed the Commission her family owns the property at 309 Arthur Street and also owns the vacant lots directly west of the vacant lots (Lind) on Arthur Street. Ms. 3 Lundhom said she does not want the development to occur, and if it is approved she does not want Arthur Street to be extended and cul de saced. Ms. Lundholm said there are a number of area residents who do not want to see any development occur in this area. She pointed out this area has been left pristine for many years and any development would take away from the natural and familiar surroundings. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Lind if he held neighborhood meetings. Mr. Lind responded he held a number of neighborhood meetings. Mr. Larsen interjected and told the Commission he and Fran Hoffman, City Engineer, have met with Ms. Lundholm on a number of occasions regarding her properties. Mr. Larsen explained staff supports the plan before the Commission this evening because in his opinion less disruption will occur in the area and all undeveloped properties will be served by these extensions, including the Lundholm property. Continuing, Mr. Larsen pointed out the proposed road layout splits the traffic flow and does not put the entire development burden on Griffit Street. Mr. Greg Wilson, 6320 Belmore Lane, pointed out to the Commission the current lot configuration is 4 Y2 lots and if you recommend approval of 5 you are technically giving the developer one lot. Mr. Wilson said if that is granted many people could request replat of their existing lots. Mr. Remington, 6424 Belmore echoed Mr. Wilson's comments and asked if the decision will be made tonight. Mr. Larsen explained the Planning Commission is an advisory board and any recommendation made by them is forwarded to the City Council for their decision. Mr. Bob Lundholm told the Commission his concern is in regard to the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Lundholm pointed out this neighborhood is comprised of modest single-family homes. Mr. Lundholm said he worries that if approved as proposed the homes that will be constructed will be out of character with the neighborhood, dwarfing the existing homes around them. Commissioner Byron told the Commission in reviewing the proposal before them he remembers something about a vacation(s) for a portion of Spruce Road and asked who requested that vacation. Ms. Lundholm told Commissioner Byron her family requested the vacation of Spruce Road that abuts their property. Ms. Lundholm said that portion of Spruce Road in not used and the approved vacation affords her family protection over that portion of land. Commissioner Byron asked if the proponent is also requesting a vacation of Spruce Road. Mr. Larsen said that is correct. Mr. Lind is requesting that the portion of Spruce Road that abuts his property is also vacated. Mr. Larsen said the portion of Spruce Road that abuts both the 4 Lundholm and Lind property is unused right of way. Mr. Linds request for vacation of "his" portion of the Spruce Road right of way will go before the Council in January. Commissioner McClelland wondered if the replat should be heard before granting of the vacation. Mr. Larsen said the vacation of Spruce Road is really a technicality and there would be no reason for the Council to not grant that request. Mr. Lind addressed the Commission and explained the proposed three lots that front Griffit Street are all over 17,000 square feet and the two lots on the Arthur Street cul de sac are in excess of 22,000 square feet or roughly Y2 acre in size. Continuing, Mr. Lind said he held three meetings with property owners in the neighborhood and many different scenarios have been discussed. Mr. Lind assured the Commission he listened to input from neighbors and from the City staff and he believes what is presented is sensitive to the area. He said he is asking for a 5 -lot development. He acknowledged there are only 4 Y2 sites, but combining the Y2 lot with the Griffit lots and the vacated Spruce right of way create lots on Griffit Street that exceed the neighborhood standards. Mr. Lind reiterated stressing he worked very hard on this project and listened to all concerns. Mr. Anthony interjected and asked the Commission what they are talking about, the Lind property or the Lundholm property. Chairman Johnson told Mr. Anthony the discussion thus far has touched on the Lundholm vacant property, and their vacation of Spruce Road, but the duty of the Commission this evening is to focus and act only on the Lind property. Mr. Anthony said he just wants to make sure the houses constructed on Griffit Street face Griffit Street. Mr. Lundholm addressed the Commission and Mr. Lundholm said in a quick discussion with his sister they are willing to purchase Mr. Lind's property at a 1 % profit to Mr. Lind, plus the costs he has accrued thus far. Mr. Lundholm said this area has sentimental value to him, his sister and his elderly mother. They want all the vacant property, their vacant lots and the Lind lots to remain undeveloped and in its natural state for 20 years. Chairman Johnson addressed Mr. Lundholm and stated at this point he does not know how to respond to his proposal. Chairman Johnson told Mr. Lundholm if he really wants this area kept natural for the next 20 years that is between him and Mr. Lind. Chairman Johnson said the Commission could have this request held over to allow time for negotiations. Chairman Johnson pointed out there have been three neighborhood meetings where this could have been discussed. Mr. Lind explained the property he presently owns was a trust that was offered through sealed bids. Mr. Lind said he won the bid. Continuing, Mr. Lind stated he understands the emotions present this evening. Mr. Lind said this is his business and he is in business to make a profit, but that is not bad or wrong. All the lots proposed exceed lot area. Mr. Lind stressed he has worked very hard on this project and has the support of both the Planning Department and the Engineering Department. Mr. Lind stressed he firmly believes what is presented best suits the area and is not unreasonable. Commissioner Swenson said that while she understands both the Lind and Lundholm properties benefit from the vacated Spruce Road that vacation does add to the overall and area. Mr. Larsen said that is correct but legally that land is not the City's. Right of ways are platted for a public purpose and there is no public purpose in extending Spruce Road. Mr. Larsen said in fact there are many residents in the area who would object to Spruce Road being put through. Concluding, Mr. Larsen said what is important to the City is that the houses that are constructed on the new lots "fit" the neighborhood, and three lots on Griffit Street maintain the character of that street better than two overly large lots, which could result in two overly large houses. Commissioner McClelland said she hears the concerns presented by some neighbors and Mr. Lind but reminded the Commission character and symmetry is very important and agreed with the comment from Mr. Lundholm that this is a very modest neighborhood. Commissioner McClelland said overbuilding a neighborhood is not in the best interest of anyone. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Lind to be careful with his designs. Mr. Lonsbury said at first look he thought the proposal presented this evening was reasonable, but after consideration what we are talking about recommending is approval of one additional lot and that may not be the best use of that Y2 lot. Commissioner Byron asked if the vacation for the portion of Spruce Road that abuts the Lind property goes before the Commission. Mr. Larsen explained the request for vacating Spruce Road goes before the Council. Vacations are heard and approved by Council. The Lundholms have already received their vacation request. Commissioner Byron acknowledged this has become a passionate subject with pros and con's on both sides. Commissioner Byron said Mr. Lundholm's proposal is between him and the proponent. Commissioner Byron clarified the Planning Commission is advisory to the Council and what we recommend is not "set in stone", and he believes if the proponent wants the Commission to act on his request we should. Continuing, Commissioner Byron said the character and symmetry issue is present, but is present with every request, and in reality the market will determine what will be constructed. Commissioner Byron said he doesn't think the Commission is in the position to decide if this area should be left as "open space" and a vote either up or down may be warranted or this should be held over. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if the City has any plans to extend Spruce Road. Mr. Larsen responded no. He pointed out a portion of Spruce Road has already been vacated by the Lundholms and he doesn't believe extending the existing Spruce Road to serve the Lind lots is appropriate. Commissioner Swenson said her concern is if developed as presented there will be a very small, non -conforming lot 45 feet wide fronting Griffit Street. She commented she would feel more comfortable if Mr. Lind used the vacated portion of Spruce Road by moving everything to the north allowing more space in the middle of the block, not boxing in the 45 foot lot, or adding footage to the 45 foot lot. Mr. Lind said the 45' lot belongs to Ms. Fortier, adding he doesn't know how to respond to that suggestion without discussing it with Ms. Fortier or city staff first. A discussion ensued with Commissioner Lonsbury offering a motion to recommend that S-01-7 be tabled until the next meeting of the Planning Commission allowing time for discussion between interested parties. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. A brief discussion ensued regarding the date of the next Planning Commission Meeting because of the upcoming holidays. Chairman Johnson suggested either December 27th, or January Td and informed residents to contact the Planning Commission for the date. Z-01-4 Preliminary Rezoning — Planned Office District to Planned Residence District Steven Scott Development Company and The Craig Company 4015 West 65th Street Mr. Larsen presented the staff report informing the Commission the proponents are requesting an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and a rezoning from POD -1, Planned Office District to PRD -4, Planned Residence District which would allow construction of a 4 story, 100 -unit apartment building. Mr. Larsen concluded staff believes the proposed apartment building represents an excellent reuse of this property. From a traffic perspective a 7 residential use of this site will create fewer peak hour trips than a comparable office use. The proposed building fits the site well and does not require any variances. Staff recommends amending the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site, preliminary rezoning and preliminary plat approval subject to: 1. Watershed District Permit 2. Final Rezoning 3. Relocation of Sanitary Sewer Line by Developer The proponents, Mr. Craig Alshouse and architect Mr. Dennis Sutlift were present. Chairman Johnson noted during past hearings held on the expansion of the hospital it was indicated a traffic light would be installed at the intersection of Valley View Road and West 65th Street. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if the light is still planned and when it will be installed. Mr. Larsen responded the traffic light would be installed in the summer of 2002. Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Larsen if the intersection would be widened. Mr. Larsen explained the intersection would be widened and the curb cut moved farther east. Mr. Craig Alshouse addressed the Commission and informed them the property is owned by the Rovick Realty Company and is presently on the market. Mr. Alshouse said in deciding on the land use of this site it was felt there is a certain element in the community who want to rent and desire up -scale apartments and that desire needs to be met. Expanding, Mr. Alshouse explained many empty nesters may decide to purchase a home in Arizona, or Florida, etc., but also want to maintain a "home base" in the community they lived in for many years. He stated the decision was made to request a rezoning to allow the construction of a luxury apartment building. Continuing, Mr. Alshouse said the building will be of traditional design and will be four stories high including penthouse suites. Current lot coverage is 46% and after demolition of the existing building and construction of the new building lot coverage will be 42%. The change in zoning will also reduce traffic. An apartment complex will generate 1/3 less traffic in this area. Concluding, Mr. Alshouse told the Commission he is very excited about the project and believes it is a good re -use of the land and a benefit to the community at large. Commissioner Swenson complimented the proponents on the building design and questioned if they believe the 35 surface parking spaces depicted are adequate. Continuing, Commissioner Swenson observed in her opinion parking will not be allowed on West 65th Street reiterating her concern that surface parking may not meet the needs of the new residents. 0 Mr. Alshouse said in his experience the 35 parking spaces are adequate. Mr. Alshouse pointed out the proposed building also provides underground parking. Commissioner Swenson asked Mr. Larsen if he is comfortable with the parking. Mr. Larsen said the parking provided meets ordinance standards. Continuing, Mr. Larsen acknowledged in a residential setting parking demands need to be met but maintaining green space is also important. Commissioner Swenson agreed that maintaining adequate green space is important and asked Mr. Larsen if he feels a proof of parking agreement is warranted on this site. Mr. Larsen said he is unsure a formal proof of parking agreement is needed. He stated the "bottom line" is if the building owners experience a shortage of parking they will contact the City for our input and approval of any changes. Commissioner McClelland asked when the project is proposed to be occupied if approved. Mr. Alshouse said occupancy would not occur until the Spring of 2003. He pointed out that will coincide with completion of the street re- configuration and signalization. Commissioner Brown told the proponents he believes the project they are proposing is beautiful but in his opinion this is not the proper location for it. Mr. Brown said in his opinion this area should be further studied for potential redevelopment. Commissioner Brown stated he believes the best use of this site is a health care use complimenting what is occurring along this corridor. Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from office to residential and to recommend preliminary rezoning from office to residential and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Bergman seconded the motion. Ayes; Lonsbury, Swenson, Byron, McClelland, Workinger, Bergman, Johnson. Nays, Brown. Motion carried 7-1. LD -01-5 Robert Kern 5808/5810 Schaefer Road Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the proposed party wall division complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Lonsbury moved lot division approval. Commissioner Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. LD -01-6 SMB MM LLC C/O Bruce Carlson 6545 France Avenue South Mr. Larsen informed Commission Members the proponent proposes the lot division to create separate parcels for mortgage financing. Concluding, Mr. Larsen stated staff recommends approval. Commissioner Swenson moved lot division approval. Commissioner Byron seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion on front overhangs Mr. Larsen told the Commission the Council expressed interest in variances for front entryways and how the City and other communities are dealing with them. He explained this interest came up because of an appeal by a neighbor from a variance request for a front entryway heard and approved by the Zoning Board. Mr. Larsen said staff has re -worded a portion of zoning ordinance language as it relates to front entryways. Continuing Mr. Larsen stated he wants to know how the Commission feels about the proposed language change and if changing the code to allow front entryways supported by posts to encroach into the front yard setback variance is a good idea. Commissioner Lonsbury said that while the variance board does consider many requests for an unenclosed front entryway he would hate to see the control of the board lost. He pointed out in his opinion the way the ordinance currently reads affords the City protection. Commissioner McClelland agreed. She said many of the front entryways the Board considers are only architectural statements and an inexpensive way for a homeowner to spruce up their home, but the Board should retain review options. Not all homes are the same and the Board has viewed some proposals that are definitely "out of whack" with what we want to see. 10 A discussion ensued between Commission Members indicating that in their opinion the way the present ordinance reads affords the City the best protection. Commission Members pointed out every variance case is studied on its own merits and if the ordinance were changed flexibility would be lost. Commission Members also pointed out 80 square feet on some homes would be too small of an enclosure, and on others too large. The Commission indicated their preference in retaining the existing language. Commissioner Lonsbury moved to retain the existing ordinance language with regard to front yard setback requirements. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Public Facilities Redevelopment Plan and Redevelopment Project Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the Edina HRA is proposing to improve Edina's City Hall building and renovate the existing library located at 4701 West 50th Street to house our police department. Mr. Larsen said at this time the HRA requires a motion from the Commission allowing them to proceed with the redevelopment projects. Commissioner Lonsbury moved to recommend that the Edina HRA proceed with a public facilities redevelopment plan and a redevelopment project. Commissioner McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Ill. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, JANUARY 3, 2002,7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gordon Johnson, John Lonsbury, Ann Swenson, David Byron, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Steve Brown and Lorelei Bergman MEMBERS ABSENT: Geof Workinger STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the November 28, 2001, meeting was filed as submitted. II. OLD BUSINESS: S-01-7 T/C Builders, Inc. Preliminary Plat Approval for 5 -lot subdivision Generally located north of Belmore Lane, west of Griffit Street and east of Arthur Street extended Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission at their last meeting they tabled S-01-7 to allow the proponent the opportunity to speak with an adjacent property owner about the possibility of purchasing the subject site. Mr. Larsen said to the best of his knowledge the plan presented at the past Commission meeting has not changed and staff continues to recommend approval of the proposed replat subject to: • Final Plat Approval • Subdivision dedication for one lot • Developers Agreement • Watershed District Permits The proponent, Mr. Eric Lind was present to respond to questions. Interested neighbors were also present. Commissioner McClelland said in reviewing the plans presented she observed a shed along Arthur Street and asked the status of that shed. Mr. Larsen responded the shed belongs to the property owners of 309 Arthur Street and is not part of this plat. Commissioner Swenson asked for clarification on the Spruce Road right- of-way. Mr. Larsen explained the adjoining property owners along Spruce Road are the underlying owners of that property, not the city. The city placed a right-of-way easement over that property at the time of the original plat to allow access if needed. Mr. Eric Lind, proponent, addressed the Commission and explained to them at this time he is still in the discussion stages with the Lundholms (property owners of 309 Arthur Street and vacant Arthur Street lots) regarding the purchase of the subject site, but needs to proceed with the proposal due to financing requirements Mr. Larsen interjected and explained the city also needs to "keep this moving" through the process to comply with public hearing requirements. Ms. Lundholm, 309 Arthur Street addressed the Commission and informed them she and her brother are in the process of negotiating a sale price with Mr. Lind for the property in question. Ms. Lundholm said she understands Mr. Lind is operating on time restraints, but she has not had enough time to completely research all options available to her and her brother regarding a potential purchase. Continuing, Ms. Lundholm said if the Commission chooses to allow this development she would like to see the proposed Arthur Street cul-de-sac extended farther north right up to the Spruce Road right-of-way. 2 Chairman Johnson said he understands Ms. Lundholms request regarding Arthur Street extended but pointed out as he views it land will be lost wherever the cul-de-sac is constructed. Mr. Bob Lundholm addressed the Commission and informed them he grew up on Arthur Street and now lives in Plymouth. He said his elderly mother and sister currently live in the Arthur Street house (309). Mr. Lundholm stated he is strongly opposed to the proposal as presented. He added he agrees with his sister's suggestion that if the replat is approved Arthur Street extended should be moved farther north from what is proposed. Mr. Lundholm said an alley maintained by the City presently serves residents and if developed as proposed how will snow removal be accommodated. Concluding Mr. Lundholm pointed out if Arthur Street is extended to Spruce Road only driveway cuts would be required for the new homes. Mr. Larsen stated the reason a cul-de-sac is required is because a straight street dead -ending cannot accommodate emergency vehicles/maintenance vehicles. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if a hammerhead at the end of Arthur Street would work. Mr. Larsen said it has been the experience of the city that hammerheads do not work well for the fire department. Commissioner Bergman asked Mr. Lundholm the reason he objects to the placement of the Arthur Street cul-de-sac. Mr. Lundholm said in his opinion the placement is arbitrary. Ms. Marlys Rechkemmer, 308 Arthur Street, stated she objects to the proposal as presented especially the placement of the Arthur Street cul-de-sac . It disturbs the green space. She said she presently views green space and if developed as proposed she will look at concrete. Commissioner Byron questioned how the developer made his decision on the location of the Arthur Street cul-de-sac. Mr. Larsen told the Commission the location of the cul-de-sac was reached with input from city staff. Mr. Larsen said the proposed cul-de-sac meets all city code requirements, in his opinion lessens impact on vegetation, reduces concrete, and the orientation of the proposed new homes is logical in relation to existing homes. Concluding. Mr. Larsen stated the proposed cul-de- sac also minimizes the cost for everyone involved. 3 Mr. Lind interjected and explained if the cul-de-sac is extended farther north more trees will be lost, and reiterating Mr. Larsen's observation that if extended there will be more concrete poured. Concluding, Mr. Lind told the Commission if the Commission prefers extending the cul-de-sac farther north it is not a problem for him. Mr. Lundholm told the Commission as far as he is concerned he would like the cul-de-sac moved farther north. He said in his opinion his lots would be better served by a longer cul-de-sac. Commissioner Lonsbury said he agrees with staff that if the cul-de-sac were extended farther north more vegetation would be lost and more concrete would be poured. Ms. Naiditch, 6512 $elmore Lane told the Commission she opposes the proposal. She said she is worried about safety issues due to more traffic occurring on Arthur Street. Ms. Naiditch said she would rather see the land preserved in its natural state. No development. Ms. Rechkemmer, 308 Arthur Street, said in her opinion there should only be 4 houses constructed, not 5. She said she would also like to have the Commission limit the size of the new houses, limit the cul-de-sac, and preserve as much natural vegetation as possible. Concluding, Ms. Rechkemmer said she also has a concern with regard to the 45' lot (Griffit Street) and that it will be overpowered by the new development. Ms. Rechkemmer suggested that some land be "given" to that lot somehow. Chairman Johnson said at the last Commission hearing he listened to comments regarding the 45' lot on Griffit Street and noted to the best of his knowledge the Commission has not heard from that property owner, and in his opinion it is difficult to discuss "giving" land to that property. The owner may not want any involvement with this situation. Commissioner Lonsbury told the Commission he has been studying the proposed plat and suggested instead of the proposed 98' lots on Griffit Street the lot configurations are changed to provide a buffer for the 45' lot. Commissioner Lonsbury suggested that Lots 1 and 2 be platted at 88' with the remainder going to Lot 3 (118'?). This configuration would allow the creation of a 30' right-of-way buffer over Lot 3. This buffer could be platted as right- of-way to accommodate a though alley. 9 Mr. Lundholm addressed the Commission and told them he understands the 45' lot in the middle of the block is a tough issue to address. Continuing, Mr. Lundholm said the subject site was offered up for bids as a 4 -'/2 -lot plat. Sealed bids were submitted and Mr. Lind won the right to the property with a bid of 510 thousand dollars, and now is proposing a development of fives homes with a price tag of over $500,000 each. Mr. Lundholm said 57 notices were mailed to the 57 properties that fall within 500 feet of the subject site, and 5 of those property owners are present this evening. Continuing, Mr. Lundholm said he would have a difficult time finding homes within 500 feet of the subject site that exceed 500 thousand dollars. He acknowledged there are new homes on Tyler Court and a new home on Belmore Lane that may be in that range, but for the most part this is a modest neighborhood with modest homes. Concluding, Mr. Lundholm told the Commission this is an emotional issue for him, it is where he grew up, and he does not want to see the area redeveloped especially with homes out of character with the neighborhood. He pointed out there are so many issues to consider, the layout of the proposed new homes, what happens to the alley, snow removal etc. Mr. Lundholm said if they are allowed to purchase the property they will leave in undeveloped until the year 2020. Ms. Lundholm interjected and explained presently she is looking into the option of purchasing the property and putting it in a "land trust", but as she mentioned earlier they are still negotiating with Mr. Lind, the proponent. Commissioner Brown asked for clarification on the present alley situation and how snow is presently removed and after development how it will be removed. Mr. Larsen said presently the snow is probably plowed onto the vacant property presently owned by Mr. Lind. Mr. Larsen added if the City feels snow removal will be an issue with this development it will be addressed. Mr. Larsen pointed out there are many alleys in the city that dead-end. Snow is either stored on neighboring properties, or removed and a front-end loader is used. Mr. Pogo, 6512 Belmore Lane, told the Commission in his opinion the integrity of the area and the character of the neighborhood should be maintained. He stressed this is a modest neighborhood with working class people and it's history should be preserved. Mr. Pogo asked the Commission to keep the interests of the immediate neighbors first in their decision making process. E A discussion ensued with the Commission questioning the original plat and the 45' lot on Griffit Street. Ms. Fortier, 310 Griffit Street, came forward and told the Commission she is the owner of the 45' lot on Griffit Street, adding that she is very happy with her property. She stated she would like to maintain adequate spacing between her house and the proposed new houses, and just wanted to introduce herself. Chairman Johnson asked Ms. Fortier if she would be willing to purchase additional footage from the proponent, or if she even wants additional property.' Ms. Fortier said she is unsure, and everything would depend on the price of any additional property, taxes, etc. Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if the 45' lot is a legal lot. Mr. Larsen said the 45' lot is a legal lot in the city and will continue to be a legal lot. Mr. Lind told the Commission he is willing to work with Ms. Fortier on providing a buffer for her property and stressed he believes what he has proposed is not unreasonable. Mr. Lind said he is willing to address the question of the Arthur Street cul-de-sac, and Ms. Fortier's property. Mr. Lind pointed out the underlying plat indicates 3 lots, but because of one ownership the 55' lot next to Ms. Fortier's lot is included as two lots not three. Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend preliminary plat approval subject to: • Final Plat Approval • Subdivision Dedication for one lot • Developers Agreement • Watershed District Permits • 10' right-of-way path preserved as agreed by proponent north Arthur Street cul-de-sac. • Vacation of Spruce Road • Continuing the cul-de-sac as far north as feasible (this extension is to be "worked -out" between the Planning, Engineering Staff and Fire Department. Commissioner Byron seconded the motion. 6 Commissioner Lonsbury offered an amendment to the motion with regard to the proposed lots on Griffit Street. Commissioner Lonsbury suggested that Lots 1 & 2 be platted at 88' with the balance platted as Lot 3. This would afford a 30' alley right-of-way over Lot 3. This 30' right-of-way would prevent the non -conforming 45' lot from being "crowded" by the new homes that will be constructed on the three new lots. Commissioner Lonsbury pointed out the 30' right-of-way could be a through alley that would allow regular snowplow removal, instead of the "dead end" situation that presently exists. Commissioner McClelland said in her opinion she doesn't believe you can create a right-of-way for a public purpose without the intent of using it for a public purpose. She said there are probably many alley situations similar to the one serving Griffit Street. Commissioner Bergman suggested that the Commission recommend a greater side yard setback for Lot 3 that would eliminate any legality, and create the desired "buffer" for the 45' lot. Commissioner Byron stated in listening to the discussion thus far, adding if he understands the proponent correctly the proponent is asking us to either approve his 5 -lot replat or deny it. He is not asking us to redesign his proposal. This is a preliminary plat, not final plat. Changes can be made between preliminary plat and final. Commissioner McClelland reiterated in her opinion it isn't legal to create a "right-of-way" when it doesn't really serve a public purpose. Commissioner Lonsbury, speaking for the amendment, suggested that the developer, by initiating a request for replatting the property and vacating the street right-of-way, presents the Commission with an opportunity that will be forever lost if the Commission does not act on it now. The amendment for creating lots 1 & 2 at 88 feet and the balance in Lot 3, allows for a 30' alley right-of-way over Lot 3. This accomplishes 4 goals: It allows the developer to build five new homes (albeit somewhat smaller footprints, which in my opinion would be more compatible with the existing neighborhood). 7 2. Somewhat minimizes the impact of the new development on the existing homes by putting a buffer between them. 3. May eliminate the potential problem of snow removal. Currently the snow is dumped onto vacant land, but the new homeowners may not want the city piling show onto their backyards. A "through" alley should be designed to allow regular plow removal, without the need for a special trip by a front-end loader. 4. The Alley will immediately add visual width to the existing 45' lot. Most importantly, it will provide a future opportunity for the owners of Lot 3 and the 45' lot to negotiate a land purchase of the 30' right- of-way. ight-of-way. As for Commissioner McClelland's opinion as to whether the city can leverage its position to get this done, Mr. Lonsbury said he would encourage the Commission to allow the City Council and the City Attorney the opportunity to make that determination. Commissioner McClelland said she couldn't accept the proposed amendment to her motion. Chairman Johnson asked for a roll call vote on accepting the amendment. Ayes; Lonsbury and Brown. Nayes; Swenson (Swenson recommends a 4 -lot plat), Byron, McClelland, Runyan, Bergman, Johnson. Motion failed 6-2. Chairman Johnson called for a roll call vote on Commissioner McClelland's motion of approval with stated conditions. Ayes; Byron, McClelland, Runyan, Bergman, Johnson. Nayes; Lonsbury, Swenson, Brown. Motion carried 5-3. H. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Jackie Hoogenakker N.