HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 04-01 Planning Commission PacketsAPRIL 1, 1970
Corp.
5100 Edina Industrial Blvd.
r c! Z, C; rL ' U) from Plnaned industrial District to
'u.'"ding District on part of Lot 12, Block 1,
Addii.
P:Mposirtg to build a model Child Day Care Center in
mothers. It is his intent to provide this
L :4 PI•C:imity to an intense employment center where there
vlggrof;ation of potential customers. He intends
'ith W-3riolzs rrcmpainies in Edina to provide such service
io 'c
-7e parsail: child car-, centers only in existing
c'
ill, the 7111age and such facilities cannot seemingly
h W7 e -9 Val -Y similar problem with mentessori schools
but k1r,- P=UY much excluded by zoning. How, then,
71thout cLmpromisirig our zoning regulations?
to fulfill a single objective,
to build a 'free-standing or independent child care
aZ:CQ_
of land which is located within an existing
8
Th, J_1to he has chosen Is located on Ohms Lane just south
-Zel
'Ouse facility. It is one acre in size and
7aj DiStrict as Ic all land surrounding it.
Planned
17�:-.u- rervonts call for a minimum site size of two acres
si.^e of the ,,Anale of Lot 12. He could not divide
r. !7 were cloanged. Ile is therefore first requesting a
1 for -his cne acre tract to permit the division of the
qucl-t of the Planning Commission. The remAinder
cc_-,biued with the lot to the south creating a three
1:0 ttl-0 7-0:1ing Or1JinPMCa to Make a Child care
th-Q la -1 District. As You c&n see, all three
Zld ff the =-, erement is denied all most be denied.
St -s cc1:J
is Of the fact that such facilities are
cx!' I mare mothnra enterieg the work force.
Ott cll'ticn operated In private structures aloo seems to be
U "7ztc"'1i0
tY 0110d of
iscated so as to best Serve its users.
of the rezoning to 0-1, the lot division
a
;I care u,, , in Office Districts.
sizI-1-7 v-dd t1je following to the list
each taa6her md e-01-ployce.
on ; for thc folloW in& reason:
omp Z-1 t ab le w--; th, P lanncd Indus rial
-a -:.,z7Utted th-P ed Indust
d it C n rial
EDFN., LP2%1� G C010iISSION
STAFF 11UP0R"i
APRIL 1, 1970
Z--70-2 Johnson _others B Const. Co. Northwest corner Gleason Road and Crosstown
Highway, Parcel 5640. Request zoning change from R°1 Residental District
to R-4 Y.-Jitiple Residence District.
Refer to: Enclosed map, Planning Commission Minutes dated March 11, 1970
and Market Analysis.
The :site in question is 7.1 acres in size, is 1,200 feet long,
averages 2501 in width and has rather severe topography, sloping from
west to east with a difference in elevation of 78 feet from its highest
to its lowest points.
The request is for R-4 zoning with R-3 density to comply with the
Western Edina Plan which calls for a density range of from 5 to 12 units
per acre on this site. The number of units requested is 84 which is
a density of only slightly less than 12 units per acre. The reason for
the R-4 request is to permit all 84 units to be located in one building
and also to permit the east end of the building to be three stories in
height. R-3 zoning limits height to two stories and building size to
12 units.
As; stated, topography is severe. However, its severity proves to be
an important asset to the area. This parcel is like a ledge or shelf which
is both higher than the crosstown Highway and yet is considerabily lower than
the undeveloped R-1 properties to the north. This difference in elevation
serves as a vertical buffer between the various Lend uses.
The Western Edina Plan calls for a frontage road to extend from Vernon
Avenue east to Gleason Road and the Engineering Department is now in the
process of determining where such a facility can be located. We hope to
got approval from the county to build much of this roadway within the exist-
ing Cross3tow-n right-of-way.
The Metropolitan Council may, eliminate the Fabri-Tek interchange and if
this happens, a great deal more reliance will have to be placed on this
frontage road and on the Gleason Road interchange than we had anticipated.
Obviously, the road design will have to be changed from that shown in the
Market Analysis (Map 3) if there is no interchange at Febri-Tek. Existing
.and use is depicted of 14�p 3A of the Market Analysis.
Recommendations: The Staff is very much in favor of the concept portrayed
and recomends approval of R-4 zoning north of the proposed frontage road
with the following condi"' ons :
1. That deed restrictions be imposed against the property by the
o;mer which limit building height to 3 stories maximum above grade
and which limit the total number of units to a ma xiumm of 84, and
2, that sufficient Land is dedicated to the Village to accommodate a
properly designed frontage read facility.
The Stgff so recom lends for the following reasons:
1. The request is totally in accord with the Western Edina Plan which
calla for medium denaity development in this location (5-12 units
per acre).
MT90TE3 0-11? ZIIE WEGUILAR MrEETING OF
,
YHE T_UT`MTI'NG C r WS41ISSION HELD
WEDIIJESDiV, APRTL 1, 1970
EDINA VILUCE HALL
1, m,- Lewis, Chairmina; Charles Clay, Cliff Johnson, George Nugent.,
Dcvid Funyan, ann! David Sherman
1ed Hoisingto, Gary T -!eat, Dpbby Donley, and Lynnae DeJarlais
r.
Vorch 11 1970 Cormission Minutes
made n motica to approve the March 11, 1970 Planning Commission
_1;� Jc,!Inson eccanded the Notion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
&aqtruction. Co. R-1. Residential District to R-4
�soa Brothrs f'f�
75jltipie Reqi&enT_t 3 111rt—rict. 1AU corner Gleason Road and Crosstoma
17,
Iiois4"n-Iton -cen-Iled the discusaia.-I at the March 11 meeting
FCKIiRe chznSo :cram R -I to R-4 with R-3 building requirements on
c tract T) III
croduced Mr. Faward Dahlgren of b1idwest Planning
ttha preacatation &-nd answer any questions concerning this project.
Mr. Dahllrren of Illidhfest Planning and Research reviewed the project.
,Ja c single apartment building structure and under-
`acility. A fro; -stage road is proposed along the Cress-
iz.�a6nuch Pao possible, within the existing right-of-way, with a
;:Cry -7 the lie seld they have net definitel-
y decided who
ii-'Trmccc the buil0ing, but that they are sure it is both buildable and
Z.
Y'Z Nugent ashed herr viluch property is bet -ween the parking lot on
ucst ez;'_ &ad tnc� prope�ty line. tic added that if the to"al project could
rnot?cd dlimy-n�oo ichat thara 13 a minimum amount of the required setback between
line arn-I ths, Piark:LnS lot,, it would facilitate a better frontage
4--Ig� eed to adjust their building accordingly and moire
,€.e-2 approval of the rezoninf, north of the
-ca "I nl
IA th. Z011 crr,&, g cc iticna r
be impoce-d against the property by the
helglht to 3 storiev Yaax:Un1= an the
:U on the wust ond Abcvt grade
nunbnr of vlaitu to a "narxUv= of* 84,
2.
'02 to accommodate
zcmd
April 1, 1970
that- tha requ:Bst is in accord with the Western
Z-21" for dIe_,dty apartments (5-12 Units per acre) oil
-haz appr-vz the request for rezoning in
as to restrictions and also that
ha giviea to m)ove the total project to the west to
V:y
Ad connection.
INI-;:. JCI- icon; '-Cc"ndnd t'ne 10.0"On. All Votad Aye. Motion Carried.
TI.
Co. Raiuec, t fn" -ezoninin, from_ Planned
Distric.- tn 0-1 Offica Biiildirm Di6trict on part of Lot 12�
yW I., ErIaa Center 3rd Addition.
-)c;inta�l tht-At this is a three -fold request to
f." at being to -"!I - Tim AdImic to build a
cu I Ir
facility on a one acre parcel of land
-11: center. Tha multiple reque t
C
A
'7
-L-n. 12 r, zw'), creating a northerly parcel one acre
az_7 tI-I ce,-Q'Untt the reaninder of Lot 12 with the two
L'cza lol,-, to k: be:. crantin- a three acre Flanned lndwtrial
!Istri�zt 10t.
Chi- F -a Zrao. P-xmnad Industrial Dietrict to Office
G -n V'e aorth2rly part. of Lot .12 to accmmo-
a daye"7_-Z md
3. To, tir! Zaai-_'I� cavering the Office Building
topermit a childcare center in this
diQ�rict.
-"It zhie %x an un Li-s;,tual request because It is soce-
2-,,aat of )m -,s for but that they have
Coroy
-U -'ar. Uieri ±ntrod:.,nced Mr. John Ha,- en from
ccmm'; DaIVY2.
Fir. Tom. Manthey of the Dorsey
C ldca Mr. Tip- Learms S
h.- , re Inc. :13 PVGP0iM`
in Edina -k-o cater to vorkima. mothe-ro .
1_Ik7-_-,:5-!` thlo In clx,vc. proximity to mr inzense
zl' -c io 'ks'
_y to be a large agaTegr-tion of potenti,-A
Wa vmricu3 companico in,Uina to
2_1 De
rol D3ta
P,
April 1, 1970
xx . flnsrrri reported ;- uz _her that the children will be under the
c. _1. --C. of a: 111'catcrs tend oMher professsioual staff people -15 at peak times
r11 -7 --all with a s pecini education at the college level.
stye yr_lblp;z is that ve now pef,ait childcare centers only in
.. 'Schc-'l� .-hu-c- es in the Village and such facilities cannot seem-
:.:- ?.',► t ..r y CEa's demand. We have: a very similar problem with montessori
than arc nacd.ed but are pretty much excluded by zoning. Mr.
thaw the co-rua7cial .c�;: : S the most compatible one for this
Mr, S-ciaan esked cibout the size of the facility on the site, and
aphid that it cjould be a viaximt= of 7,000 sq. ft., but was presently
vz 6,000 eq. ft.
CIL.- i -,�"'rod ebooat the parking space available. Mr. Hoisington
h ssa:�i-.,�t.. :_ ;� irS � pit that he has found is two spaces for every
aar emcplofc=_�3 but t'.hat Chis will be raised in this case to one
tecc? er :_aad employee.
arum re sly to MT. Niugont ° s question concerning the type of complex
rcpOrtc! thszt it is a school type complex in the educational
�• :,., �'_ t t .ey Will. a taipt to give e the children what they would not be
:fir. � Xi i s aer �:d i? t:s?is °ase to be as pick-mup service, and Mr. Hagen
_, '-J 'c"' malt Would n -,t o_; sxmua U -As liability. It will be strictly for
of thQ' Mc'_'%I e who 'sill leave her children at the center on
,-md ' ck t7 -,,-n i p on, her way home.
Mr. V1gmnt made tion m;tion to approve the rezoning for the following
s• `0, 3:ui3."Un';; Zo=yinz is ccmrpatible with Planned Industrial
ias C113- Offices are permitted in the Planned Industrial
District.
.,,c z-za an ?rte e t' -:e lot. division and to add to the lion of 0-1 permitted
with the requirement that one parking space per
ie
F%'cyee be proCs':',.ded.
Sher, -&Q cacondgd the metion. fir. Runyan abstained in the vote
.the s&e f rm. All doted eye. Motion Carried.
1. t :t
ree•i-uesis to split a a�oubl-
a
so t._ltit it ca:a qualify &.3 two homazteads.
0 d viaiorl end StafZ reconmendss
April 1', 1970
that it bc. approved. Mr. Cliry seconded. the siotion.
A"Z' 1-C-1-1ca Car cin,".
10,
Lhat the requeet is simply acknowledgement
ZY linez,.V#fc;ma 'Wo existing percels. It Is for that part of
Subd_Via 1OKI 111umber 1,96, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying
7 V:F lj;o r•J- r'Slit of way line of new County Road No. 18, and
•llz-th of-, the �iOrth line 0"
Outlot 1, Sin-= Trail Addition, and lying
of r, Uns --rallf-11 s9,kth and 1010 feet North of the South line of Section 6,
11r' Pi_ -t 21 nxtcadad. It has come back from the County and
Mr Wal-,,,-Inaon rii,,it'%onad that the divialon be approvadi Mr. Nugent
d All loted Aye. Motion Carried.
), tut: +,,j
AREA - SGTOOL T- NS
-)ointed out that this covers a great deal more than
a,, , but th.st tbora haLi uoz_ ;&a m%lch heppani1mg in S. W. Edina,
thn pattemo have been approved 6 proved by Ccuncil. He
pa..-crxns 77a- 5hould Yaexnlnrte t'he plan for this area to establish
cr noit h03 The Ca=1asion generaI17 agreed.
P.m.
R,aspactfully submitted,
Lynaae DeJarlais, Secretary