HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016 09-14 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Regular Draft Minutes0
Approved Minutes
Approved Date:9/28/2016
,4 ,,` Minutes
r-- City Of Edina, Minnesota
', , w '3l Planning Commission
City of Edina, Council Chambers
September 14, 2016
I. Call To Order
Chair Platteter called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
II. Roll Call
Answering the roll were: Commissioners Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Olsen, Nemerov, Hamilton, Bennett,
Chair Platteter. Communications Director, Bennerotte, Community Development Director, Teague,
Administrative Specialist, Hoogenakker
Absent from the roll: Commissioner Hobbs
Chair Platteter welcomed Tanner Jones; the new student member to the Planning Commission.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Chair Platteter amended the Agenda, VII. Reports and Recommendation by adding an E. Election of
Officers.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the amended agenda. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the August 24, 2016, meeting
minutes. Commissioner Nemerov offered a correction to the minutes. Motion was
seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried with correction.
V. Public Hearings
A. Rezoning, Preliminary Development Plan and Variances at 4500 Valley View Road, Edina,
MN for Peter Rifakes.
Planner Presentation
Planner Teague reported that Pete Rifakes, Town Hall Brewery, is proposing to remodel and expand
the existing gas station building at 4500 Valley View Road into a restaurant. The remodeling would
include a 1,300 square foot addition for a cooler and office/storage area, and a 1,000 square foot patio.
Page 1 of 15
Draft Minutes0
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
The restaurant would be designed for 64 indoor dining seats and I I seats at the bar. The outdoor
patio area would have 66 seats.
Planner Teague noted that the plan is generally consistent with a sketch plan that was reviewed for
redevelopment of the site back in 2014-15. At that time the plan was generally well received. To
accommodate the request the applicant is requesting a rezoning of the site from PCD-4 to PCD-I,
Planned Commercial District; and Site Plan Review with building, signage, and parking space variances.
Planner Teague pointed out the PCD-4 zoning is reflective of Wally's Gas Station that was in operation
for many years.
Teague further noted that based on feedback from the Planning Commission and City Council, the
applicant has made the following revisions to the plans:
➢ Eliminated parking in the front.
➢ Expanded the public space on the corner.
➢ Added landscaping and green space.
➢ Enhanced the architecture of the building.
➢ Added sidewalks.
Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Preliminary
Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PCD-I, Planned Commercial District and
Preliminary Development Plan with the requested Building Setback Variance, Parking Stall Variance and
Variance to allow the use of the existing Pylon Sign to remodel and expand the existing Wally's gas
station structure at 4500 Valley View Road based on the following findings:
I. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed variances are reasonable. The practical difficulties for these variances are based
on existing conditions. The existing building setback and pylon sign do not conform to City
Code, and the parking lot is an existing condition. Rather than add stalls in front of the
restaurant, a shared parking arrangement is proposed. It is reasonable to continue these
nonconforming conditions.
3. The Spack Consulting parking study has determined that the site can function with the
proposed parking stalls. The City has typically not required parking stalls when they are not
needed.
4. The proposal is a vast improvement over existing conditions, which includes pavement that
extends to the lot lines. Significant green space and landscaping has been added in front of the
building on both Valley View and Wooddale.
5. The applicant is dedicating an easement for public gathering space at corner of Valley View and
Wooddale.
6. The proposed remodeled building with green space and boulevard style sidewalks will enhance
the character of the neighborhood, as it is a vast improvement to the existing structure and
existing conditions of the site.
Approval is also subject to the following Conditions:
Page 2 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
I. The Final Development Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated
July 22, 2016, and the materials board as presented to the Planning Commission.
2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the
Zoning Ordinance. 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 at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible
for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built.
3. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer's memo dated September 16,
2016.
4. Provision of code compliant bike racks (5 minimum) near the building entrances.
5. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require
revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements.
6. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent residential property, per Section
36-1459 of the City Code.
7. Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum lighting requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Lighting shall be down lit.
Staff further recommends that the City Council deny the Variances to allow the signs above the
roofline, and the wall sign variance from I 5% to 62%.
Denial is subject to the following findings:
I. Lack of a practical difficulty. Denial of the variances would not cause a practical difficulty for the
applicant. Signage could still be applied to the building. The proposed rooftop signs could be
relocated below the roofline. The wall sign could be reduced in size to 15% of the wall face.
2. The City has not granted variances to allow retail signs above the roofline, or variances to
exceed the 15% wall face provision.
3. Approval of the Variances could set a precedent for similar requests.
Appearing for the Applicant
Peter Rifakes, Town Hall Station
Discussion/Comments
Commissioners commented on the following:
• Planner Teague was asked to clarify the sign variances. Planner Teague explained that the pylon
sign is existing nonconforming; however, the other two signs are new and could comply with the
current ordinance. Teague pointed out the sign ordinance does not allow above the roof signs
nor does it permit a wall sign greater than 80 square feet. Continuing, Teague said the proposed
roof top sign could be lowered and the wall sign could be limited to 80 square feet. Teague was
further asked if the sign proposed for the west building wall was painted and if so what the
Page 3 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
difference between a painted sign vs. mural is. Planner Teague responded that the proposed sign
for the west elevation is painted indicating Station which is an advertisement.
• Commissioners asked Teague if the corner public space is at grade. Teague responded he believes
that is the case.
• Commissioners commented that hopefully the new restaurant would be successful; however,
could that success create spillover parking into the neighborhood. Planner Teague responded that
staff believes that the current parking situation would meet the demand; however, if parking were
to become a problem no parking signs could be ordered to be placed on the City streets.
• A concern was expressed over introducing alcohol into a residential neighborhood. Planner
Teague said the applicant is required to apply for a liquor license and meet all requirements.
Teague said it is also possible for the Commission to place limited hours of use on the license.
• Planner Teague was asked where on the site is liquor permitted to be consumed. Planner Teague
responded that Edina has strict rules on consumption. Liquor can be served inside the restaurant
and outside in a restricted area. Teague was asked if there was a concern with the"public
corner". Teague responded that the corner area is for everyone, residents and/or patrons of the
businesses. Teague said food would be allowed; however, no alcoholic beverages can be
consumed in that public space.
• Commissioners noted that the sidewalk was very redeeming. They asked if the sidewalk would be
extended farther. Teague responded that slopes do not lend themselves to a sidewalk being
continued farther along the street; however, Teague said if the entire site would be redeveloped
staff would request that the sidewalk be continued.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Rifakes addressed the Commission and explained that he has been in the restaurant business since
1997. He reported he has two other restaurants in the metro area; Town Hall Tap and Town Hall
Lanes. Rifakes said the proposed Town Hall Station is modelled after Route 66, adding the theme fits
well with the gas station. With regard to the variance for the above the roof sign it was felt that the
heated porcelain white and red band historically identifying the gas station could be cleaned and
polished and kept as an architectural feature free of signage. Rifakes also said they felt that the
screening of the roof top mechanicals would be like a wall and would be the backdrop for the
proposed above the roof sign. With regard to the west elevation building wall sign Rifakes did say
they have a Plan B which reduces the sign to 15% of the wall area. With graphics Rifakes pointed out
aspects of the project to include:
• Sidewalk and boulevard bordering both Wooddale and Valley View.
• Eliminating confusing curb cuts
• Improved public right-of-way with trees and landscaping
• Creating public gathering space with decorative paving and stone seating
Discussion/Comments
• Commissioners stressed that all lighting including the signs meet code and be down lit.
Page 4 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
• Commissioners acknowledged Plan B for signage on the west elevation and asked Rifakes to
explain his reasoning for the larger sign. Rifakes explained that people get used to seeing things so
a business is always competing to be noticed. The larger painted wall sign stands out from the
competing signage of the adjacent mall.
• Mr. Rifakes was asked if there are any environmental issues that need to be addressed/cleaned up.
Rifakes responded that the gas tanks have been removed and no leakage was found; however they
are leasing the site adding the owner would address any issues.
• Commissioners asked the hours of operation. Mr. Rifakes said at this time they believe the
restaurant would be open until I am. Rifakes said they are not against adjusting their hours of
operation somewhat; however, would be opposed to closing at 9 pm.
• Commissioners asked Mr. Rifakes if he was concerned that patrons of the restaurant would leave
the area with their drinks. Rifakes said their operation has no problem enforcing the rules. He
said patrons will be made aware where they can "drink" alcoholic beverages and those rules
would be followed.
• Commissioners suggested that more vegetation be added to the corner area public space.
• Commissioners asked if the restaurant would offer take out. Rifakes responded in the affirmative;
however he said 90%of their business is sit-down.
A discussion ensued on traffic and if parking was adequate.
Mac Moreland, Spack Consulting addressed the Commission and explained that their findings indicated
that the street system can adequately deal with traffic and that the present 4-way stop is sufficient to
accommodate traffic during peak hours. Moreland acknowledged added congestion during the peak hours;
however, the increase was not significant to warrant a traffic signal. Moreland further noted that the site
is presently zoned for a gas station adding their findings indicates a fully operational gas station would
generate more traffic than the proposed restaurant. Moreland further indicated that parking was
sufficient; however, the current striping of the lot could be reconfigured to accommodate more parking
spaces.
Public Testimony
Chair Platteter opened the public hearing.
The following spoke to the issue:
Jeff Miller, 4509 Garrison Lane informed the Commission he fully supports this redevelopment, adding that
the applicant has a proven track record with two successful restaurants in neighborhoods.
John Carlson, 4433 Ellsworth Drive told the Commission he doesn't like to see liquor introduced in a
residential neighborhood.
Stacey, an apartment manager for the apartment building directly across the street commented that she
feels this addition adds a lot of good things to the area. She suggested that speed bumps be considered
Page 5 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
too slow people down. She said sound could also be an issue, adding all in all it's a great addition to the
neighborhood.
Chair Platteter acknowledged the Commission received in their packet a number of letters of support for
the project.
Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Continued Discussion/Comments
• Commissioners expressed their support for the project and the requested variances indicating the
proposal enlivens the neighborhood and supports pedestrian connections.
• Commissioners reiterated they support the parking variance from 143 to 103 parking spaces;
however, suggested that the parking lot be restriped and/or a proof of parking agreement be
entered into to ensure parking would not impact the residential neighborhood.
• Commissioners again indicated their support for approving the sign variances. They indicated the
sign above the roof was reasonable and keeping the porcelain band and bringing the band back to
life was a good architectural feature to retain. Commissioners also saw no issue with the pylon
sign; however, the proposed sign painted on the west building elevation, either Plan A or Plan B
would work.
Commissioner Strauss noted that Commissioner Lee served on the board that implemented the small
area plan for this neighborhood and asked her if she felt this proposal met the goals outlined in the
Wooddale Valley View small area plan. Commissioner Lee responded that this corner was identified as
the catalyst for neighborhood redevelopment, adding in her opinion that goal was met. She further noted
that the small area plan envisioned the corner piece of the property as a public area and the plans as
presented accomplished that. Continuing, Lee said she also feels that proposed signage is good and
enhances the area, adding she can support all three sign variances. Lee said with regard to the proposed
restaurant offering liquor there will always be those in support of it and those against it.
Motion
A motion was made by Commissioner Nemerov to approve the rezoning of the site from
PCD-4 to PCD-I, Planned Commercial District and site plan review with building, signage
and parking space variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. A second
was offered by Commissioner Thorsen. Commissioner Olsen offered an amendment to the
motion to include as conditions a Proof of Parking Agreement(Re-stripe lot) and that more
landscaping and benches are added to the corner public area. Commissioners Nemerov
accepted the Proof of Parking Agreement; however, did not accept the condition providing
more landscaping and additional benches. Ayes; Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton,
Bennett, Platteter. Nays, Olsen. Motion carried 7-1.
Page 6 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
Chair Platteter said he would call for a nonbinding vote on the benches and landscaping.
Commissioners voted to support the nonbinding amendment adding additional landscaping
and benches to the corner public space.
VI. Community Comment
None.
Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close Community Comment. Motion was
seconded by Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
VII. Reports/Recommendations
A. Staff Report: Floodplain District Overlay Ordinance Updates
Planner Teague reported FEMA revised the flood plain map which requires a public hearing before both
the Commission and Council. Teague said that the Engineering Division has been working on the revision
for months, adding a final decision to adopt needs to be made in November. Teague asked the
Commission to note that the Commission will hold a public hearing on the Floodplain District Overlay
Ordinance updates on September 28, 2016; adding tonight is only informational. Teague introduced Ross
Bintner, Engineering Division to speak to the issue.
Mr. Bintner addressed the Commission and explained he is present this evening to update the
Commission on specific revisions to the Floodplain District Overlay Ordinance. Bintner added, as
mentioned by Planner Teague that the City needs to adopt a conforming Floodplain Overlay Ordinance by
November 4, 2016, in order for its residents to continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program. Continuing, Bintner said that City staff has been working on this update for a long time. Bintner
asked the Commission to note that the City of Edina is the only City to appeal and challenge findings on
the map, adding the City won those challenges and has received a conditional letter of approval from the
MN DNR.
Discussion/Comments
Commissioners offered the following:
• Commissioners asked Mr. Bintner where the flood plain is in Edina. Bintner responded that all
property in Edina was monitored, adding the majority of floodplain exist along the Creeks, 9-Mile
and Minnehaha, near our lakes and ponds with other locations such as the Rolling Green, 9-Mile
Village and Weber Park area.
• Commissioners expressed concern over statements in the memo from engineering staff"to opt
out". Bintner was also asked for more explanation about why the City wants to opt out of the
flood ordinance items that it proposed to opt out of, including the possible current and future
effects on homeowners. Bintner explained in specific instances the City requested to deviate from
Page 7 of 15
Draft MinutesD
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
the revisions; however, the City is NOT opting out of the ability for Edina residents to purchase
flood insurance.
There was some hesitation with the amended Ordinance with the Commission asking Bintner to find out
how other cities handled the revisions and bring back those findings and more explanation on the"opt
out" items to the public hearing on September 28th.
Chair Platteter thanked Mr. Bintner.
B. Sketch Plan Review— 5109—5125 49th Street West. Edina, MN
Planner Introduction
Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan
request to redevelop three lots at 5109-5125 West 49th Street. Teague explained that opinions
or comments provided to the applicant shall be considered advisory only, and shall not
constitute a binding decision on the request.
Teague noted that the applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two apartments and
single family home on the site and build two new 3-4 story condominiums with a total of 27
units. The applicant is proposing six units or 22% of the units for affordable housing. The
property is 1.43 acres in size. The density proposed in the project would be 19 units per acre.
Teague informed the Commission this site was rezoned to PUD in 2013; however, the approved
project for the site was never built. The site was approved for a 16 unit townhome development
that had a density of II units per acre. To accommodate that request a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment was granted to re-guide the site from LDAR, Low Density Attached Residential (I-
4 units per acre), to MDR, Medium Density Residential, which allows up to 12 units per acre.
Teague explained that this new request would require another Comprehensive Plan Amendment
to re-guide the site to HD, High Density Residential. A High Density Residential designation
would allow the site to be developed with over 12 units per acre. A Zoning Ordinance
Amendment to the existing PUD would also be required.
Concluding, Teague said the applicant is present to share their vision.
Appearing for the Applicant
Edward Briesemeister, Great Oaks, Dan Ionescu, Architects & Planners
Applicant Presentation
Page 8 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
Mr. Briesemeister addressed the Commission and explained that their vision includes a significant
increase in greenspace. Briesemeister said they believe their proposal calls for empty nesters not
the younger population the previous project was designed for. With graphics Briesemeister
pointed out the viable pedestrian connection to Vernon Avenue and usable open space. He
added their objective was to have an inclusive project that includes an affordable housing
component. With graphics Briesemeister highlighted the following aspects of the project:
• Tear down the existing two apartments and single family home.
• Construct two new 3-4 story condominium buildings with a "wedding cake" design and a
total of 27-units.
• Provide six units (22%) for affordable housing.
• Two parking spaces for each conventional unit and one parking space for each affordable
unit.
• Classic Nordic features will be incorporated into the building design.
• I I guest parking spaces are provided along West 496 Street (inside the curb).
• Preserve as many larges trees as possible to include the wooded area along the RR tracks.
Mr. Briesemeister told the Commission they held a neighborhood meeting with good response
and thanked the Commission for this opportunity.
Discussion/Comments
• Commissioners asked what the site was previously zoned. Planner Teague responded the house
was zoned R-I and the apartment buildings were zoned PRD, adding the current zoning is PUD.
• Commissioners asked if setbacks would be met. Planner Teague responded that would have to be
looked into at the time of formal application.
• Commissioners asked the applicant if he knows how much taller the new building would be when
compared to the R-I house to the east. Mr. Briesemeister responded he believes the new
structure would be roughly 10-feet taller than the existing house.
• Commissioners acknowledged the openness of the site and the effort to provide a pedestrian
experience; however, there was concern with ADA standards and bike mobility. Briesemeister
acknowledged that the topography of the site doesn't lend itself well as a thoroughfare; however,
it is designed for pedestrian access to Vernon Avenue. Briesemeister noted the slopes and their
intent to retain as many large trees as possible.
A discussion ensued on the recent information that the sound wall could be continued along Vernon
Avenue behind the subject property. It was acknowledged that until it is known how far the sound wall
would extend it is difficult to design access from the subject site to Vernon Avenue.
Page 9 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
The discussion ensued with Commissioners acknowledging the concept was interesting; however, more
density is being placed into smaller buildings. Commissioners expressed some concern with traffic.
Mr. Briesemeister acknowledged the increase in density adding he believes traffic levels will be equal to the
levels calculated for the townhouse development. Briesemeister further acknowledged there is only one
way in and one way out of this neighborhood and that includes having to cross a railroad track and that
needs to be studied. With graphics access into and out of the site was viewed along with the I I visitor
parking spaces built into the curb.
Commissioners further expressed the following:
• Acknowledgement that this parcel is unique and as the past indicates a challenge to redevelop. It
was noted the site is a small site with a topography challenge, access challenge, and use challenge.
The location of this multifamily site in an R-I neighborhood is another challenge that makes in
important to get redevelopment of the site correct.
• As previously mentioned the sound wall could pose a problem. The applicant will need to work
with the City and MNDOT to get clarity on where the wall will end and if a "gate" could be added
to the wall. It was pointed out that there is an existing informal pedestrian path that runs along
the tracks opening to Vernon Avenue; however a more formal access would be preferred.
• The railroad tracks are also an issue not only for safety reasons but for vehicle stacking during the
time a train crosses.
• It was further reiterated that this project increases the density. Mr. Ionescu said their design is
community based adding they really want to work with the City and the neighbors to integrate
this project into the neighborhood.
Chair Platteter thanked the applicant for their presentation and encouraged them to bring their proposal
to the City Council.
C. Sketch Plan Review— 7200 France Avenue. Edina, MN
Planner Introduction
Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan
proposal to redevelop the 3.5 I acre parcel at 7200 France Avenue. The applicant is requesting
consideration of a proposal to tear down the existing office building on the site, and redevelop
it with a six-story, 241 unit apartment building with parking on the first two levels. The
applicant is proposing 10% of the units to be affordable
To accommodate the request, three amendments to the Comprehensive Plan would be
required for: Building Height—from 4 stories to 6 stories. Housing Density—from 30 units,
per acre to 69, and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) —from .5 to 1.58.
Page 10 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
Teague further noted that a rezoning to PRD-5 with FAR and building height variances, or
rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development would also be required.
Teague explained that all traffic would access the site off 72"d Street. No access is proposed off
France Avenue. Some of the existing mature trees along the west lot line would remain with
extensive ponding proposed. Boulevard style sidewalks are proposed along 72"d and France,
with sidewalk around the ponding area and along the south side of the building.
Teague acknowledged that the proposed uses would be an upgrade to the current use of the
site. However, the proposed density is significant, and nearly triples the density allowed on site
per the existing Zoning. This site only allows 30 units per acre currently; however greater
densities have been contemplated as part of the Southdale Area Study.
Teague concluded that this property is located in the OR, Office Residential District in the
Comprehensive Plan. Primary uses are offices, attached or multi-family housing; secondary uses
include limited retail and service uses (no big box). "Vertical mixed-use is encouraged and may
be required for larger sites." Development guidelines include upgrading existing streetscape
and building appearance, improve pedestrian and transit environment, encourage structured
parking. This project does not meet the goals of vertical mixed-use. While the building would
be an improvement over the existing, staff has concern about the mass of the building so close
to the street, the architecture, the lack of engagement from the building to the sidewalk, and no
underground parking.
Appearing for the Applicant
Michael Campbell, Campbell Capital Group, LLC, Michael Pool, Pool Architects
Discussion/Comments
The Commission acknowledged there is history with this site and expressed the importance of having no
left turn into the residential neighborhood onto West 72"d Street.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Campbell addressed the Commission explained that the site is a 3.51 acre site with an office building.
Campbell said their intent is to redevelop the site with a 5-story building over 2-levels of parking. The
proposed building is a luxury apartment complex with 241 apartment units, 385 parking spaces (above
ground) and 10%affordable units.
Campbell said that City staff did share with them the challenges of the site and he told Commissioners the
development team is flexible and willing to listen to input from the City. Continuing, Campbell said their
goal was to place the building closer to the street; however, they are flexible if the City wants the building
pushed farther back on the site. Campbell said the biggest obstacle the site faces is challenges with storm
water management and sidewalk placement. Campbell pointed out with graphics the vision is to address
Page 11 of 15
Draft MinutesO
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
storm water through ponding; however, he reiterated they need to work with the City on this issue.
Campbell pointed out the ground water issue hinders going deep because of the ground water.
Campbell said another important issue is that there are conflicting opinions on if the site can be accessed
off France Avenue. He pointed out the sketch plan provides access off West 72nd Street, adding he does
understand there is history with this access. Campbell introduced Michael Poole, Poole & Poole
Architects to explain the design.
Mr. Poole with graphics pointed out building placement, water feature placement and how the building
engages France Avenue. He said the units proposed along France Avenue will have a front stoop onto
France Avenue,stressing the importance of the building engaging the street.
Mr. Poole asked the Commission to note the site sits farther down from France Avenue which also
generates a concern with storm water management.
Patrick Savre, Civil Site Group pointed out the goal of distancing the buildings from the neighborhood to
the west and restricting traffic into that neighborhood. Savre said it is difficult to design the site without
access to France Avenue. With graphics Savre pointed out the challenges of the site to include access and
storm water management.
Discussion/Comments
• Commissioners asked the applicant what they believe the problem would be if the building is
moved farther to the west. Mr. Savre responded that if the building is moved farther west the
open area could be lost and pipes would need to be used to manage storm water. Placing the
buildingcloser to the street was something they thought the City was receptive too while giving
them the opportunity to retain more open space with less impact on the existing vegetation.
• Commissioners said it is their understanding that access can be achieved off France Avenue and
suggested that the applicant approach Hennepin County again. Mr. Campbell responded his
interaction with Hennepin County said otherwise.
• Commissioners asked if the project was strictly residential. Mr. Campbell responded it is all
residential,adding they prefer only residential.
• Commissioners acknowledged the inclusion of affordable housing and asked the applicant their
opinion. Mr. Campbell said they would prefer not to add affordable housing; however, staff made
it clear that the City's goal was to provide affordable housing opportunities.
• It was pointed out that this site is transitional between residential and commercial, adding the
proposed building height and density could be an issue. Mr. Campbell acknowledged this site is
transitional, adding their intent was to tie the new structure to the redevelopment across the
street. Commissioners noted that the proposed building does not have to match the newer
Byerly's development across France Avenue. Mr. Poole said they can drill down on the aesthetic
aspects of the building to include stepping.
Page 12 of 15
Draft Minutes El
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
• A number of Commissioners expressed concern over building height and the proposed setback;
reiterating the building as proposed is too close to the street and the building as proposed lacks
engagement from the building to the sidewalk.
• An opinion was also expressed that the building height was not an issue; however,the challenge
was to "up the design" so the building looks like it has movement to it.
• Further opinions were expressed that the building is too tall, reiterating that this is a transitional
zone requiring the building to have more of a residential feel. It was further acknowledged that
the project addressed the street; however, if the podium design was implemented engagement
with the street would be better. It was suggested that the applicant find a way to break up the
building mass through architectural elements, stepping, etc. It was acknowledged that the
proposed open area or small pocket park was intriguing; adding it would be interesting if this open
area could connect pedestrians across France Avenue.
• It was pointed out that the west side of France has historically been held to 4-stories and any
redevelopment exceeding that height needs to be right.
Chair Platteter thanked the applicant for their comments adding that with regard to France Avenue and its
status as a County road the City has limited control. It was reiterated that the applicant again reach out to
the County. Platteter asked if the applicant had any questions for the Commission.
Mr. Campbell said it was his understanding in contacting the County that access off France Avenue was
not likely and all access would be provided off West 72nd Street. With regard to the building design the
development team thought identifying the new building with what exists across the street was a good
thing.
D. Work Plan
Planner Presentation
Planner Teague referred to the 2017 Work Plan asking the Commission to note the main focus of the
2017 plan is updating the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Platteter said he agrees with that assessment.
Commissioner Lee acknowledged the importance of the Comprehensive Plan; however, said she wants to
keep the monitoring of the Residential Redevelopment Coordinator on the List. Planner Teague said his
intent was to have Cindy Larsen, Residential Coordinator continue to give the Commission yearly
updates.
Continuing, Commissioner Lee said another issue,that in her opinion, needs further review is lot
coverage as it relates to surface permeability. She noted not all paved surfaces are taken into account for
lot coverage; however, those surfaces can become an issue. Lee said she would really like the
Commission to stay on top of storm water management and stay especially vigilant in the R-I
neighborhoods. Lee said she would be happy to clarify her issues and ideas to staff. Planner Teague
reported that engineering is working on storm water management issues and will return to the
Page 13 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
Commission with their finding and recommendations. The Engineering Division reviews all building plans
as it pertains to storm water management.
Commissioner Nemerov questioned the role of the Planning Commission as it pertains to the Southdale
Working Group and the established "Southdale Principles". Nemerov questioned why those Principles
are making their way into the decision making process if they aren't ordinances. Teague said the ultimate
goal is to reconcile the Comprehensive Plan with the Zoning Ordinance which can be achieved through
these Principles. Nemerov pointed out developers could become frustrated with the "hidden rules".
Planner Teague explained that the Southdale Principles were developed at the request of the City
Council.; mainly in response to the continued redevelopment occurring in the Southdale area and Edina
as a whole. Teague said during the updating of the Comprehensive Plan many issues may be resolved to
include ordinance amendments. Nemerov reiterated he is uncomfortable asking applicants to respond to
those Principles and making Commission decisions based on how the applicant responds to the Principles;
reiterating it's a policy; not ordinance. Concluding, Nemerov said maybe the Southdale Principles could be
added to the work plan.
A discussion ensued about what should be on the 2017 Work Plan with Commissioners acknowledging
that the updating of the Comprehensive Plan is first and foremost the issue the Commission needs to
focus on in 2017
Commissioner Lee suggested she would like the Commission to vote on adding additional items to the
2017 Work Plan. She said the Comprehensive Plan is vague and more clarity is needed on a number of
issues to include continued monitoring of the Residential Redevelopment Coordinator duties especially as
they relate to storm water management.
It was noted that storm water management is not the only issue that impacts neighborhoods or the
environment and to continue to be only focused on storm water management may be short sighted.
Commissioner Lee moved to add to the 2017 Work Plan the monitoring of residential redevelopment
particularly in light of storm water runoff and drainage. Platteter called for a vote; 3 ayes, 5, nays.
Planner Teague reiterated he would continue to invite Cindy Larsen, Residential Redevelopment
Coordinator to update the Commission on what's occurring in the City.
VIII.Correspondence And Petitions
Chair Platteter acknowledged the receipt of back of packet materials.
Continuing, Platteter informed the Commission that he offered his resignation from the Commission,
adding this was his last meeting. Platteter said he was much honored to serve on the Commission over
the past eight years. Members of the Commission and City Staff wished Platteter well and thanked him
for his years of service on the Commission and other planning related task forces. Commissioners stated
Chair Platteter would be missed.
Page 14 of 15
Draft Minutes❑
Approved Minutes®
Approved Date:9/28/2016
Chair Platteter pointed out since he resigned from the Commission a new chair and vice-chair need to be
installed.
Chair Platteter nominated Commissioner Olsen to serve as Chair of the Planning Commission. All
Members voted aye. Commissioner Olsen was appointed as Chair.
Chair Platteter noted Commissioner Olsen was the vice-chair pointing out election of a new vice-chair is
needed.
Commissioner Lee nominated Commissioner Nemerov as Vice-Chair. All Members voted aye.
Commissioner Nemerov was appointed as Vice-Chair
Chair Platteter said Commissioner Thorsen remains the Commissions Secretary.
IX. Chair And Member Comments
None
X. Staff Comments
Planner Teague reported that Sheila Berube would be appointed to the Planning Commission at the next
meeting of the City Council.
XI. Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to adjourn the meeting of the Planning
Commission at 11:00 P.M. Motion seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The
motion carried.
-TA.Cia& }F
Respectfully submitted
Page 15 of 15