HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-28 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MAY 28 2014
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
Answering the roll call were: Schroeder, Platteter, Halva, Carr, Forrest, Staunton
Members absent from roll: Scherer, Potts, Lee, Kilberg, Olsen
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Chair Staunton informed the Commission agenda item VI. A. has been continued to the Planning
Commission on June 11, 2014.
Commissioner Carr moved approval of the May 28, 2014 meeting agenda. Commissioner Platteter
seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission May 14, 2014
Commissioner Platteter moved approval of the May 14, 2014, meeting minutes. Commissioner
Carr seconded the motion. Commissioner Schroeder noted his name was mentioned when he
wasn't present. All voted aye; motion carried.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
No community comment.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Variance. Stojmenovic. 5501 France Avenue, Edina, MN. Continued to 6/11/14
Chair Staunton asked the Commission and audience to note that the variance request for 5501 France
Avenue, Edina, MN has been continued to the Planning Commission meeting on June 11, 2014.
Page 1 of 11
B. Final Rezoning and Final Development Plan. Lennar Multifamily Communities LLC
— 6725 York Avenue, 6628 Xerxes Avenue and 6700, 04, 08, 12 Xerxes Avenue,
Edina, MN
Planner Presentation
Planner Teague informed the Commission that Lennar Multifamily Communities, LLC is requesting final
review for a proposal to tear down the existing retail building at 6725 York Avenue, and single family
homes at 6712, 6708, 6704, 6700 and 6628 Xerxes Avenue, and build a six - story, 240 unit upscale
apartment building with 11,500 square feet of retail on the first level. A parking lot is proposed in front
of the retail store on York Avenue, with underground parking for residents provided under the
apartments. Surface spaces would be available along the north and south lot lines for resident guests.
Teague explained that this request has received the following approvals from the City Council:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding land use, height and density; Preliminary Rezoning from
PCD -3, Planned Commercial District and R- I, Single Dwelling Unit District to PUD, Planned Unit
Development; and Preliminary Development Plan.
Teague stated the proposed plans are consistent with the approved Preliminary Plans, including the
revised plans submitted to the City Council on May 61h. Revisions included moving the building 10 feet
to the west away from Xerxes Avenue, reducing the square footage of retail space, and creating an
additional setback of 8 feet on the top floor corners of the building on Xerxes.
Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Final
Rezoning from PCD -3, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development
District and Preliminary Development Plan to tear down the existing retail building at 6725
York Avenue, and single family homes at 6712, 6708, 6704, 6700 and 6628 Xerxes Avenue and
build a six - story, 240 unit apartment building with 11,500 square feet of retail on the first level
subject to the following findings:
I. The project is consistent with the approved Preliminary Development Plans.
2. The proposal would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD, as most of the above criteria
would be met. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as "Community Activity Center —
CAC," which encourages a mixing of uses, including retail and multifamily residential. The
proposed uses are therefore consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3.The project would create a pedestrian friendly development with extensive pedestrian
paths planned for the site. Sidewalks would provide pedestrian connections for residents
in the City of Richfield to Southdale.
4. Podium Height would be used on both York and Xerxes.
S. Sustainable design principles would be utilized. The proposed buildings would be a high
quality brick, stone, precast concrete, metal and glass building. "Edina" limestone is
proposed at the street level.
6. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on
the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council.
Page 2 of 11
7. The proposed uses would fit in to the neighborhood. As mentioned, this site is guided in
the CAC, Community Activity Center which encourages mixing land uses, including
retail and multiple family residential, on one site.
8. The existing roadways would support the project. WSB conducted a traffic impact
study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the
existing roads subject to conditions.
9. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan:
a. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a
consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian
environment.
b. Movement Patterns.
• Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods
along secondary streets or walkways.
• A Pedestrian - Friendly Environment.
c. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that
complement area, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character.
d. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city, and the larger
region.
e. Increase mixed use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize
traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base.
f. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and
with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on
the car.
g. Incorporate principles of sustainability and energy conservation into all aspects of design,
construction, renovation and long -term operation of new and existing development.
h. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale.
Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower- density districts and upper stories "step
back" from street.
Approval is also subject to the following Conditions:
Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below:
• Site plan date stamped May 12, 2014.
• Grading plan date stamped May 12, 2014.
• Utility plan date stamped May 12, 2014.
• Landscaping plan date stamped May 12, 2014.
• Building elevations date stamped May 12, 2014
• Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council
meeting.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff
approval. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section
Page 3 of 11
36 -1436 through 36 -1462 of the City Code. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or
cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the
required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures.
3. Any plantings in the right -of -way of York Avenue must meet the requirements of
Hennepin County.
4. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies.
5. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36 -1260 of the City
Code.
6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions
to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements.
7. Sustainable design principles must be used per the applicant narrative. Attempts must be made
meet an energy savings goal of 10 %.
8. All signage for the site must meet the underlying PCD -3 Zoning District regulations.
9. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo
dated April 2, 2014; including that all public utility easements shall be dedicated to the
City.
10. At the time of building permit application, compliance with all of the conditions outlined in
the chief building official's memo dated March 27, 2014.
11. Continue to work with Hennepin County to secure a left turn in lane from south bound
York Avenue.
12. Approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding consideration of R- I property
within a PUD, prior to final rezoning.
13. Final Rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD, Planned
Unit Development for this site.
14. Metropolitan Council approval of the City Council approved Comprehensive Plan
Amendment regarding land use, height and density.
And also recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance Amendment establishing the
PUD Zoning District.
Appearing for the Applicant
Peter Chmielewski, Development Manager, Lennar Multi - Family Communities and Aaron
Roseth, ESG Architects.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Chmielewski addressed the Commission and delivered a power point presentation
highlighting the revisions made to the plans; specifically pointing out the increased setback and
the eroded building corners. Chmielewski introduced Aaron Roseth to further
address the revisions.
Mr. Roseth told the Commission the architectural design and massing of the project is based
on urban design which includes a large opening in the building mass breaking up the south
facade allowing for both increased solar penetration and a view of a vegetative courtyard.
Page 4 of 11
Continuing, Roseth said the project has a contemporary and new street expression. Roseth
presented the "materials board" depicting building materials featuring transparent glass
storefront, masonry, and "Edina" limestone at the street. He explained above will float a
traditionally inspired composition of masonry, architectural metal and large amounts of glass.
Discussion
Commissioner Forrest said light pollution is important to her, adding she wants assurances that
no lighting is directed toward the residential properties on Xerxes Avenue. Forrest further
questioned if any signs, monument or otherwise, were proposed for the Xerxes streetscape.
Mr. Roseth responded that the lighting proposed would be normal "street lighting" including
sconce lighting for the "stoops" on the "townhouse" element. Forrest commented that her
concern was that the lighting would have more of a "retail feel ". Roseth reiterated the lighting
would be what one would expect in a residential setting not a retail setting. Mr. Chmielewski
reported a monument sign is not proposed on Xerxes Avenue.
Continuing, Forrest asked the development team to emphasize public green space where
appropriate. Mr. Chmielewski responded the area is designed with a community feel, adding
their intent was for the project to be part of the community and neighborhood.
Commissioner Schroeder asked what their intent was for the green space on the Xerxes side
and if plantings were proposed on the public right -of -way. Mr. Roseth stated their intent was
to elevate the "townhome" feel of the building on Xerxes with individual stoops including
lighting; however the green space would be a shared place for the entire building. Roseth
said he can envision residents throwing a Frisbee, etc. in this common area. Continuing, Roseth
said they didn't consider the boulevard area but would work with an arborist on what
vegetation would work best in that area. Roseth acknowledged some boulevard trees do
exist, adding they are committed to a tree line. Commissioner Schroeder commented in his
opinion if any of the existing trees die during the construction phase they should to be
replaced. Roseth responded that would make sense.
Commissioner Schroeder referred to sustainable design methods and noted when a PUD is
requested what the City is looking for in terms of a project are extraordinary measures,
adding in his opinion what he's viewed so far is good; but not extraordinary. Mr. Roseth
responded that in his opinion the location of the project itself is extraordinary, adding the
walkability and area transition adds to this project. Continuing, Roseth pointed out people
are now renting by choice, adding this location offers its residents multiple amenities.
Roseth further stated the project includes bus access, bike racks, bike storage, dedicated
green space, integration of native landscaped environments, tree canopy, storm water
management where currently there is none; including treating and holding water, paint energy
friendly, LED lighting, Weidt Group input on heating and cooling, low flow showers, etc.
Concluding, Roseth said a construction document would be created documenting all materials
used in the project.
A discussion ensued on sustainable design features and how they are measured. It was
observed that the PUD process is a flexible process; however the City hopes that developers
Page 5 of 11
strive for a design plan that exceeds what is normally expected. Commissioners acknowledged
that it is difficult to require projects to exceed code but the PUD process should offer the
flexibility to reach higher than code.
Commissioner Forrest commented she would also like to see Lennar develop written tenant
sustainable and safe building practices.
Chair Staunton asked if the project includes an affordable housing component. Mr.
Chmielewski responded that no affordable housing units are proposed. Continuing,
Chmielewski said in discussions with Richfield it was found that Richfield would not support
affordable housing units on this site.
Chair Staunton opened the public hearing.
Public Testimony
Jim Halvorson, 6700 Xerxes Avenue informed the Commission he has lived in Edina for
62 -years and in his opinion this is the time to redevelop this area. Halvorson said in this
instance an evolution of the area is occurring, adding no one is the enemy. There is a give and
take between communities and taxes are generated by this project that benefits both cities.
Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the project; being none,
Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carr seconded the
motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
Motion
Commissioner Platteter moved to recommend Final Rezoning and Final
Development Plan approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions.
Commissioner Carr seconded the motion.
Commissioner Schroeder offered an amendment to the motion adding to the conditions that
the developer will work with City staff to develop a landscaping plan for the boulevard area and
if any of the existing trees along the boulevard are lost as the result of construction that they
be replaced.
Commissioner Forrest offered another amendment to include as a condition of approval that
no signage; including monument be on Xerxes Avenue.
Commissioners Platteter and Carr accepted those amendments.
Chair Staunton stated he would be voting in favor of the development project. He noted in his
opinion the plans have been revised addressing the concerns expressed by both the
Commission and City Council. Continuing, Staunton said the Commission continues to be
frustrated with the lack of traction on increased sustainable building practices. Staunton added
he is also disappointed that affordable housing wouldn't be added in this project; however, he
Page 6 of 11
believes the project on the whole is good for the City,
Commissioner Platteter said in his opinion this project will be good for the City of Edina. He
noted the site sorely needs to be redeveloped and through the approval process the
project has continually improved. Platteter said the amenities of the area are an excellent
benefit to the future residents of this building, adding eliminating access from Xerxes Avenue
and ensuring the project has a residential feel vs. a commercial feel is also positive.
Commissioner Carr stated she also supports the project and complimented all parties on the
process.
Chair Staunton called the Vote; Ayes, Schroeder, Forrest, Platteter, Carr,
Staunton. Nay, none. Motion carried.5 -0.
VII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS
Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager. Wooddale/Valley View Small Area Plan.
Staff Presentation
Assistant Manager Kurt addressed the Commission and reported to the Commission the
results of a Small Area Plan Survey she conducted in March. Kurt said she received responses
from 21 individuals; seven responses were from Planning Commissioners, six from the
Grandview Executive Committee, three from the City Council and five from Administration
and Community Development Staff.
Continuing, Ms. Kurt referred to the Small Area Plan Guidebook, adding after the Wooddale
Valley View process is completed the book is intended to provide a general structure for future
small area planning processes. Kurt explained that at this time the Guidebook is considered a
draft and during the Wooddale and Valley View process staff and the "team" can alter, change,
revise, etc. the Guidebook. Once the Wooddale and Valley View small area plan process is
accomplished the Guidebook can be referred back to the Planning Commission as a template
for further changes and eventually approval of the Guidebook.
Kurt further discussed the formation of a Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan Team
Charter. This Planning Team would be a working group of the Planning Commission and would
be chaired or co- chaired by a member of the Commission (Lee and Forrest have volunteered)
along with other citizen volunteers. Kurt explained that team members chosen to serve would
apply for the position, applications would be submitted and the applications would be screened
by Lee and Forrest. The final "team roster" would be forwarded to the Planning Commission
for approval. Kurt concluded that a Request for Information (RFI) would be submitted for
Page 7 of 11
consulting services for the Wooddale and Valley View small area plan. Responses to the RFI
would be due by June 20`h. City Staff would review the responses and select finalists to
interview with the small area plan team during the month of July.
Comments
Commissioners thanked Ms. Kurt for all her work and stated she did an excellent job and they
were looking forward to the upcoming small area plan process.
Commissioners presented the following comments:
Support was expressed for the Planning Commission approving the Wooddale Valley View
small area plan team. it was further noted that too many members could become a hindrance
and limiting the membership is the right idea. Questions were raised if the small area plan team
was guided by the same bylaws as the Planning Commission. Kurt explained that in the Planning
Commission bylaws there is a section that addresses "working groups ". That section requires
that a member(s) of the Planning Commission serve on the "group "; however, certain latitude
is applied for other issues. Kurt stated there are some rules that would be followed such as
the public meeting process, the taking of minutes etc.
Ensure that the proposed June 16`h Kick -off meeting is adequately "advertised" and that the
"word gets out" to solicit citizen volunteers for this group. Commissioners did indicate they
believe healthy progress would be made if timelines are established in advance and adhered to.
Support was expressed for the engagement of consultants indicating the collaboration between
the "team" and consultant was important. Consider diversity when retaining the consultant.
The relationship between the "team" and consultant is most important; don't focus too much
on the technical. Look at ensuring a truthful and fruitful relationship with the consultant that is
significant to "you" not those "back at the office ".
Use term "work plan" throughout.
Great idea to have an end date. Keep not only a written record of meetings but a record that
includes pictures, etc.
Once the formal small area plan guidebook is approved should the guidebook be placed in the
Comprehensive Plan ( ?).
Be flexible; however encourage a formal organized process that establishes markers. Identify
the purpose of each meeting; plat a road map. It's good to have a beginning, middle and end.
Concluding, Chair Staunton asked Ms. Kurt what she needs from the Commission at this time.
Ms. Kurt responded a motion is needed establishing the Wooddale Valley View Small Area
Planning Team Charter.
Page 8 of 11
Motion
Commissioner Schroeder moved approval of establishing a Wooddale Valley View
Small Area Planning Team Charter. Commissioner Platteter seconded the
motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
Chair Staunton and the Commission again thanked Ms. Kurt for her work on the small area
plan process and also thanked Commissioners Lee and Forrest for volunteering to sit on the
Planning Team as this process proceeds.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regarding Housing Densities
Planner Teague reported as a result of the recent Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the
Lennar project the Metropolitan Council has requested that the City establish new residential
density ranges within the City's Comprehensive Plan to better align with the description of uses
allowed within each district. Currently the density allowed is less than that of the R- I and R -2
zoning districts.
Continuing, Teague explained that there was a disconnect between the version of the
Comprehensive Plan presented to the Commission and Council for final review and the version
sent to the Metropolitan Council. It appears staff had incorrectly interpreted this so that Floor
Area Ratio (FAR) could determine density for mixed uses areas (CAC, Edinborough, Centennial
Lakes, 50`h & France, etc.); however, recently Met Council staff informed Edina city staff that
specific density ranges must also be used and that the City's densities should be revised to
reflect the existing description for its districts. Continuing, Teague noted that FAR alone
cannot be used to determine densities within mixed use areas.
Concluding, Teague referred to a handout that indicated how this is handled in the surrounding
communities. Teague said at the Commissions June I It' meeting staff would be submitting a
Resolution that reflects greater allowable density. The Commission would then forward their
recommendation to the City Council for their review and approval on June 17 "h
Discussion
Commissioners discussed the proposed changes with a comment that when reviewing the staff
materials on the density ratio of surrounding communities it appears the City of Edina is well
below its neighbors. The Commission questioned if the City is limiting itself by being so far
below other communities. It was further recommended that the term used be "dwelling units ".
Page 9 of 11
Commissioner Schroeder pointed out that if a cap is established the City can always go beyond
that cap.
Discussion concluded.
Work Plan
Planner Teague referred to the Commissions 2014 Work Plan, adding that touching base on
the "Plan" periodically is important. Teague acknowledged that new Commission members
would be interested in the 2014 Work Plan and the Commissions progress thusfar, adding the
Commission should also be looking forward to setting the 2015 Work Plan.
Discussion
Commissioner Platteter commented that it appears to him the Commission in one form or
another is making progress on the 2014 Work Plan. Commissioners agreed; however did
acknowledge that some portions of the plan haven't been addressed.
Commissioner Carr said work still needs to be done on a sign plan ordinance and lighting
regulations. Commissioner Forrest commented she too would like to see more focus placed
on light pollution and lighting standards. Commissioner Platteter added he can envision more
work being done on parking regulations /proof -of- parking. He also noted that work on the
"Tree Preservation Ordinance" is not complete and still on- going.
Planner Teague agreed more work is needed, adding he can also foresee drilling down on
sustainability measures and PUD as continuing topics of discussion.
Chair Staunton stated he would like this topic placed on the Planning Commissions agenda
again so a discussion could occur with more members present.
Planner Teague responded the Work Plan would be added to future agenda's.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
Chair Staunton acknowledged back of packet materials.
IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Carr reported that Living Streets continues to make progress. Commissioner
Platteter said he was looking forward to the completion of the France Avenue street project
which will be an asset to the community.
Page 10 of 11
Commissioner Platteter referred to the Tree Preservation Ordinance and asked the
Commission to note a work shop is proposed on August 4`h. Platteter said further discussion
on the Tree Preservation Ordinance would occur before that work session.
X. STAFF COMMENTS
Planner Teague reported that he was informed that the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting on September 24`h is a religious observance day and the Planning
Commission can't meet that day. Teague suggested that the meeting be rescheduled to the
week before; week after or another date.
Commissioner Platteter noted in a similar situation the Commission met once that month and
started the meeting early if the agenda warranted an early start. Chair Staunton suggested
further discussion on firming down this date. Planner Teague added he would also e-mail
Commissioners as to their preference.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Carr moved meeting adjournment at 10 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded
the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried.
��_ %. �1 tJ:���.L11 �► I't
Page 11 of 11