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comments from the Commission the request was withdrawn.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.