HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-11 Planning Commission Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MARCH 11, 2015
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
Answering the roll call were: Lee, Strauss, Thorsen Seeley, Halva, Nemerov, Olsen, Carr, Forrest and
Platteter
Absent: Hobbs
1111. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Chair Platteter informed the Commission agenda items VI. B. & VII B. are continued to the March 25,
2015. Commissioner Carr moved approval of the revised March 11, 2015 meeting agenda.
Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Olsen approval of the February 11, 2015 meeting minutes. Commissioner Carr
seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT:
No Community Comment.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chair Platteter introduced Joyce Repya, Planning Staff.
A. Variance. Fairview Southdale Hospital. 6401 France Avenue, Edina, MN.
Planner Presentation
Planner Repya reported that Fairview Southdale Hospital is proposing to provide building identification
and way- finding signage on the north elevation of the new emergency center. The signs proposed
include: I)EMERGENCY - Red letters mounted on top of a raceway above the canopy - 75.88 sf,
2)EMERGENCY /URGENT CARE - Cabinet sign suspended below canopy - 11.5 sf and 3)CARL N.
PLATOU EMERGENCY CENTER - Individual Letters on NW wall - 107 sf
-A 1 y___
Repya explained that Edina's sign code # 36 - 1715 provides for one wall sign and one monument sign
per street frontage in the RMD, Regional Medical District. The first sign may not exceed 80 square feet
in area, and a maximum of 40 square feet is established for any additional signs, for a total sign area not
to exceed 120 square feet per frontage. Currently there is one sign on the north elevation facing the
Crosstown Highway measuring 272 square feet, advertising Fairview Southdale Hospital that was
approved by a variance in 2011, which replaced a 249 square foot penthouse sign approved through a
variance in 1970. Repya further noted that most of the signage on all frontages of the hospital has been
approved through the variance process, due to the unique use and signage needs of the hospital which
are not provided for in the RMD section of the City's sign ordinance.
Planner Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the requested variances based on the
following findings:
1. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because:
a. The proposed variances are reasonable since the proposed wall signs will provide necessary
identification of the hospital's emergency center for patients and emergency vehicles on the
Crosstown Highway.
b. The practical difficulty is caused by the location of the emergency room located on
Crosstown Highway, which does not have direct access. Access to the site is off 65th Street.
Visibility to the site from France and the Crosstown is vital.
c. The signs have been designed to be in proportion to the facades where they are proposed
2. This circumstances of the location of the emergency room, and the regional hospital are
unique to this site. Granting variances would not set a precedent for similar requests.
Approvals of the variances are subject to the following conditions:
The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans:
• Site Plan date stamped February 10, 2015.
• Sign plans and elevations date stamped February 10, 2015.
Appearing for Applicant
Robb Gruman, Fairview Southdale Hospital and Steve Hirtz, Nordquist Sign
Applicant Presentation
Robb Gruman addressed the Commission and stated he is delighted to report the renovations and the
addition of the new emergency facility are nearing completion and that he appreciates the Commission
hearing their request for sign and way finding variances. Gruman commented that the proposed signs
will identify and guide people to the new emergency center. Gruman further noted the sign plan has
been revised; eliminating the Urgent Care sign (changed out to indicate emergency). Gruman
acknowledged way finding signage is very important; especially since the emergency center faces the
Crosstown Highway; however, access is off West 65th Street.
---{ 2 1
Concluding, Gruman briefed the Commission on the history and the vision of Carl N. Platou, who began
the process of acquiring the land (with the help of the Dayton's family) and whom the emergency center
is named for. Gruman again thanked the Commission for their service and asked the Commission for
their support.
Discussion
Commissioner Nemerov asked if in the future an Urgent Care sign would be added. Mr. Gruman
responded that he doesn't believe so. Continuing, Gruman reported that the emergency care system
they are implementing is called "Fast Track ", adding that the emergency rooms will meet emergency
patient needs only, adding the proposed emergency concept includes a 2nd floor facility for those
patients that need observation; however, need care and observation on a non - emergency basis. He
noted this change in concept makes "emergency room" spaces more available; because the emergency
rooms aren't being tied up for observation purposes and other non - emergency medical issues.
Commissioner Forrest asked the applicant to clarify access to the emergency room facility. With
graphics Robb Gruman and Steve Hirtz highlighted access to the site. They explained the importance of
way finding and the struggle to provide adequate signage because the location of the emergency room
and the regional hospital are unique to this RMD site.
A discussion ensued on the signage requirements for the Regional Medical District and the fact that the
hospital appears to require multiple sign variances. It was further noted that although the hospital site is
zoned RMD the needs of the hospital don't meet the RMD signage ordinance requirements. Planner
Teague noted that "revising" the sign ordinance; especially for the hospital site and been on the
Commission's "bucket list" for the past few years; however, the variance process has worked in
accommodating the unique needs of a hospital. Teague said in the future the goal is to craft a sign
ordinance that acknowledges the unique status of the hospital in the RMD zone.
Motion
Commissioner Olsen moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff
conditions. Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
Mr. Gruman thanked the Commission and informed them they should consider coming to the open
house for the center in August.
V11. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Planner Presentation
Planner Teague asked Commissioners to refer to materials on the proposed zoning ordinance
amendments. Teague said he felt it would be best to review and comment on each section and offer
comments or revisions (if any).
Lot Division /Party Wall Division
Planner Teague explained that residents, developers, etc. have had issues with the term lot division,
adding, many people believe it is dividing a lot; however, that's not the case. Teague explained that a lot
division application covers rearrangement of lot lines or party wall divisions of double bungalows.
Teague further noted that Edina is one of the few cities that require hearings before both the
Commission and Council to achieve this simple request. Teague stated the present process can be time
consuming for both applicant and City. Concluding, Teague asked for Commissioners comments.
Commissioners agreed with Planner Teague assessment to allow lot divisions as noted for administrative
review.
Procedure for Rezoning
Planner Teague reported that at the joint Council work session procedures for (I 20 -day review period)
rezoning were discussed. Teague explained to ensure a timely application process the goal was to
create a I -step process for standard rezoning and a 2 -step process for PUD rezoning requests. Teague
noted the majority of rezonings also go through a sketch plan review process which is an additional;
however, unbinding step. Teague said this change also reduces the number of public hearings. He
reported at this time a rezoning can include up to four public hearings, adding most City's hold one
(two -at the most).
Chair Platteter said he understands eliminating excess public hearings from the process to expedite the
process; however, he want's assurances that there is adequate opportunities for the public to respond.
Planner Teague responded that although this revision reduces the number of formal public hearings the
meetings continue to be public and the public can be invited to speak. Platteter further commented
that in his opinion a public hearing should continue to take place at final Council approval. Concluding
Teague noted in all instances the City Council has the option to refer plans back to the Commission for
further review if they deem it necessary (changes, etc.). If the Council were to refer the rezoning
request back to the Commission the 120 -day clock would be reset.
Commissioners also suggested that with regard to the Council referring an item back to them that it
may be a good idea to define what constitutes a change that reaches the level of a re- hearing before the
Planning Commission.
Sections 4 & 5- Building Coverage Side yard Setback Requirements
Planner Teague reported that the changes proposed to sideyard setback should reduce ongoing
confusion. Teague noted the zoning ordinance is continuing to evolve; however, one option for lots
under 75 -feet in width has both residents and builders confused. Recently, the sideyard setbacks for
lots between 70 -74 feet increased by 2 -feet; however the option to increase the side yard setback for
each foot the building height exceeds 15 -feet remains another option. Teague said as he previously
mentioned this option has created confusion especially on where to measure building height and how
the step back option really works. Teague pointed out side yard setback is measured from the
proposed grade along that side; however, overall building height is measured in the front from the
existing grade. Eliminating this option would eliminate the confusion. Concluding Teague said the step
back option would remain for lots in excess of 75 -feet.
Commissioners commented that removing that option for lots under 75 -feet in width makes sense.
Section 6 R -2 District Regulations
Planner Teague reported that currently code prohibits single family homes in the R -2 zoning district
unless a property owner requests a rezoning to R- I and goes through the rezoning process. Teague
said he was considering eliminating the rezoning step from R -2 to R- I and asked the Commission their
feelings. Concluding Teague also reported correction of a typo on duplex height.
Commissioner Carr commented that she is hesitant with this change. She said without viewing a map
that indicates where the City's R -2 zoning pockets are located she wouldn't feel comfortable in making
an educated decision. She also noted the R -2 zoning district was usually a buffer into the residential R- I
neighborhoods.
Commissioner Lee stated that she too is hesitant with this revision. She further pointed out that the
R -2 districts could also be areas of affordable housing. Lee also pointed out R -2 lots are larger and the
tendency for builders to build larger homes (especially single family homes) could eliminate or reduce
the number of affordable housing units. Concluding, Lee also indicated she likes the diversity they offer.
Chair Platteter stated he agrees the R -2 zoning district does provide housing diversity.
Teague said considering the affordable element of this zoning district he could be convinced to leave the
code as written. Any rezoning from R -2 to R- I would require going through the rezoning application
process as it now stands.
Commissioner Carr stated it's not that she's completely adverse to the option; she would like to see a
map that indicates where the R -2 zoning districts are located. She added if changing the code to allow
R- I homes to be built on R -2 lots this change could reduce the number of affordable housing unit
options for Edina residents.
Chair Platteter commented that he tends to agree with the previous comments, advising staff to take
another look at this issue and provide the Commission with a map highlighting the areas zoned R -2.
Section 7 Building Height
Planner Teague pointed out the revision in this section was correcting an error.
Section 8 Nonconforming R -2 Lots
Planner Teague explained that revising this section would allow duplexes to be rebuilt on
nonconforming lots without the need for a variance. Teague said this change would be consistent with
existing nonconforming lots in the R- I zoning district.
Commissioners agreed this made sense.
Chair Platteter thanked Planner Teague and said he looks forward to reviewing the final draft.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials.
IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Olsen informed the Commission dates are being set for the upcoming Greater Southdale
Area Plan process. Olsen also reported that the City Council will be selecting members to serve on the
work team. Members will include residents and area business owners. Olsen said they are looking for a
work group of around 12 individuals. Concluding, Olsen said the Kick -Off for the Work Plan is on
March 26th, at the Edina Senior Center.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Thorsen moved meeting adjournment at 8:30 pm. Commissioner Strauss
seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried.
k Em V A �1:j �Mx:
,� re4�'�!
_:
---4 6