Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016 06-22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:7/13/2016 Minutes l' " irk\ ~ .. 1/, City Of Edina, Minnesota '� Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers , ` Wednesday,June 22, 2016 I. Call To Order Chair Platteter opened the meeting at 7:00 P.M. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Chair Platteter, Commissioners Hobbs, Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Olsen, Hamilton, Bennett, and Student Commissioner Kivimake. Staff Present, Community Development Director, Teague, Communications Coordinator Gilenbach, Admin Specialist, Hoogenakker Member Absent, Ma III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the June 22, 2016 meeting Agenda. Motion seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. Commissioner Nemerov asked Planner Teague if the Resolution for the variances would reflect all conditions to include engineering memo. Teague responded in the affirmative IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the May 25, 2016, meeting minutes. Motion seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. Motion by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the June 8, 2016 meeting minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olsen. Commissioner Lee offered an amendment to page 7 of the minutes to clarify"to meet the state building code that minimum ceiling heights and minimum floor truss size" to read to "meet the state building code ceiling height for typical new home construction". Commissioners Thorsen and Olsen accepted the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Public Hearings Chair Platteter noted Opus Development Company LLC has asked that their request to rezone and subdivide the property located at 5901 Lincoln Drive be continued to the June 22, 2016 meeting of the Planning Commission. Page 1 of 6 Draft Minutes Approved Minutes® Approved Date:7/13/2016 A Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to continue the public hearing on Agenda Item V. Public Hearings. A. Public Hearing: Rezoning& Subdivision of 5901 Lincoln Drive, Opus Development Company LLC, to the July 13, 2016, meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. VI. Community Comment None Motion was made by Commission Olsen to close Community Comment. The Motion was seconded by Commissioner Thorsen. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. Reports/Recommendations A. Sketch Plan Review— 7700 France Avenue, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported the Commission is being asked to consider a sketch plan to develop the southwest corner of 7700 France Avenue. The request includes consideration of a two phase development. The first phase would be a 60,000-80,000 square foot medical office building and a 358 space parking deck. Phase two could potentially be a 200,000 square foot medical office building expansion, with additional levels added to the parking deck. Planner Teague concluded that if a PUD is considered for the site the rezoning could serve as the tool to achieve the goals of the Southdale Area Framework in exchange for density on the site. He said David Anderson, Frauenshuh, Inc.was present to respond to questions. Appearing for the Applicant David Anderson, Frauenshuh Inc. and Erin Johnson,Twin City Orthopedics. Discussion and Comments • Planner Teague was asked if staff shared with the developer the Principles developed for the Greater Southdale Area. Teague responded that those principles were shared. • Clarification was requested on the status of Commission comments at sketch plan review. Planner Teague responded that the Commission is asked to provide feedback on the proposal, but the Commission is not bound by their comments at sketch plan review. Page 2 of 6 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:7/13/2016 Applicant Presentation Mr.Johnson gave a brief history of Twin City Orthopedics and their expansion into Edina with their (newer) building on West 65th Street at France Avenue. Johnson explained that at this time the current facility meets their immediate needs; however, there is no ability to expand. Johnson stated the organization has been fortunate in their growth and now finds they need the ability to continue to expand their services. Mr. Anderson addressed the Commission and explained since 2000 Frauenshuh has owned this 17.1 acre parcel with multi-tenant building(s). Anderson noted that the existing structures are located at or near the east end of the I7.1-acre parcel and a large parking field currently occupies the western two-thirds of the site. Continuing, Anderson said Twin City Orthopedics has expressed interest in subdividing a portion of the site into two new sites to be redeveloped in two phases for expansion of their medical and professional facilities. Phase I would include a new medical office building totaling between 60,000-80,000 square feet and parking deck. Phase 2 could potentially be a medical office building expansion and the addition of more levels to the ramp. The Phase I structure would be built in the southwest corner of the newly created 4.8 acre parcel. Anderson said the building would have cross access easements and would be served by four access points from the north, south, east and west providing ample ingress and egress. Anderson said at this time they are continuing to study pedestrian movement adding their goal is to break up the new site with parking islands of green space and clearly defined pedestrian paths throughout the site. Anderson said he believes because of the internal layout of the site and for pedestrian safety that the majority of pedestrian movement would occur along the site's perimeter. Concluding, Anderson further noted that the site does have constraints due to poor geotechnical soil and high water table conditions that limit the ability to construct below grade, adding theses constraints need to be weighted in the analysis and ability to deliver excellent site improvements. Anderson asked the Commission for their support. Discussion and Comments • Commissioners noted the difficult soil and water table issues that are present on the parcel and asked the applicant to ensure that these issues are done correctly. The Commission further pointed out the goal of the City has been to reduce surface parking and this plan doesn't necessarily achieve that. Mr. Reinhardt told the Commission they understand the City's goal and the principles developed for the Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework and are working closely with Braun Engineering to create an acceptable plan. Reinhardt further pointed out that the west portion of the 7700 parcel is the most difficult to develop He reiterated that the water table in this area is very high which makes it almost impossible to develop underground parking. Also found on the site was landfill materials. • Again, the Commissioners noted the effort Edina has made in breaking away from "suburbia". It was suggested that parking can be internalized and with the creative use of the parking structure, the result the City is looking for could be achieved. Page 3 of 6 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:7/13/2016 • An opinion was expressed that there was not enough "here" to justify the variances or an increase in density. The PUD is the right approach, but the City must achieve the goals of the Southdale Study to justify an increase in density. • A suggestion was made to add green space on both sides of all sidewalks. • A suggestion was made to widen the sidewalks and add green space. • The opinion was expressed that the site (if developed) as depicted lacks a campus feel that would bring cohesiveness to the entire site and area. It was further suggested that the applicant reconsider parking and look"past the code" and reduce the surface parking. The opinion was further expressed that the requested Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) was too high. • It was acknowledged by the Commission that the site has potential; however, there appears to be some missed opportunities especially with regard to how pedestrians will navigate through the site and the proposed roadway through the site. An opinion was expressed that the higher FAR could make sense; however, the City needs to gain something in return and the sketch plan review plans are lacking in that regard. With graphics Mr. Reinhardt pointed out the proposed pedestrian areas and the drive through road. It was noted that the access road provides vehicle navigation through the middle of the site, adding the access road was designed in a serpentine fashion to slow down traffic through the site. He further pointed out theproposed sidewalks and landscaped islands. Mr. Anderson said that having adequate parking is important and they are working on trying to find a balance between parking needs, City requirements, and the Southdale vision. Anderson said this plan does not greatly increase parking; reiterating the importance of adequate parking. • Mr.Johnson was asked if Twin City Orthopedics was planning on remaining in their current building if this proposal was approved. Mr.Johnson responded it is their intent to remain in the existing building; however with the success of that building they found need additional space to expand. • It was further suggested that the developer look at how to safely navigate both vehicle and pedestrian traffic across France Avenue to Centennial Lakes. • Commissioners also suggested that more definition and detail is needed on the plans when formal application is submitted to better illustrate the proposal. • It was suggested that the applicant work further with the City to fill in the missing pieces in traffic and pedestrian flow. It is important that the City and applicant work together to keep the Southdale pieces in mind as development proceeds. • The opinion was expressed that the serpentine road, while understandable, may not be the best approach. It was acknowledged it may slow down traffic; however pedestrian navigation may become more difficult. It was reiterated that the Commission believes more must be done to define both the vehicle and pedestrian flow to create a more cohesive feel; boulevards are a good way to accomplish this. Commissioners acknowledged that the proposed ramp is hard to envision. • It was suggested that the applicant should "think bigger". It was noted that France Avenue in its present state isn't the best pedestrian experience; however, there is opportunity on this site to Page 4 of 6 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:7/13/2016 achieve a good pedestrian experience especially north/south through the boulevard approach. The City is looking for more green to be incorporated on sites. • Reconsider the parking structure placement or tweaking it somehow. Consider moving it closer to the street and having retail on the bottom with parking above. It was suggested that the development team could consider a pedestrian walkway along the ramp in a safe manner. It was further noted that the building placement anchoring the corners makes sense; however it needs to be developed right. • It was reiterated that the developer should not miss the opportunity to develop this site according to the direction the City is going especially taking into account the Southdale principles. According to the plans submitted there continues to be a sea of asphalt, which is something the City is trying to redirect. Mr. Anderson told the Commission it is difficult to achieve what the City is "looking for" when the Code indicates specific building setback requirements. He noted the City wants buildings "moved" closer to the street; however, that could violate setback. Chair Platter responded that he understands that the current setback requirements (especially for Front Street) can make it difficult to achieve what the City is now looking for. Chair Platteter explained that the zoning ordinance was written many years ago for suburban development. He said that is the reason the PUD is a great tool to use. A PUD affords redevelopment flexibility. Chair Platteter thanked the applicants for their sketch plan presentation. VIII.Chair And Member Comments Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials. Chair Platteter reported that Planning Commission Meeting Agenda for the July I 3th meeting is large. Teague agreed. IX. Staff Comments Planner Teague reported that the City Council heard and approved the rezoning request by Phoenix Plaza. Teague said the developer incorporated suggestions from the Commission on landscaping. Teague further noted that the City Council heard and approved the request to construct a mini-storage facility, X. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to adjourn the meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 8:35 P.M. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bennett. All voted aye. The motion carried. Page 5 of 6 Draft Minutes El Approved Minutes Approved Date:7/13/2016 .Tackle 3-(oogenakker Respectfully submitted Page 6 of 6