Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017 04-05 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes Ill Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 ,i A , Minutes � '�` City Of Edina, Minnesota ` Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers `'✓ April 5, 2017, 7:00 PM I. Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. II. Roll Call Answering the roll were: Commissioners Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, and Chair Olsen. Student Members, Kivimaki and Jones. Staff, City Planner, Teague, Assistant Planner, Aaker Sr. Communications Coord., Eidsness, Support Staff, Hoogenakker III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the revised April 5, 2017, meeting 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 minutes of the March 22, 2017, meeting; The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lee. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Special Recognitions and Presentations A. Council Member Mike Fischer— Bridging Vision Edina and Comp Plan Member Fischer thanked the Commission for all their work, adding he was present this evening to explain to the Commission the process of bridging Vision Edina and the Comprehensive Plan with two workshops; Big Ideas Workshop and Big Picture Workshop. Fischer said these workshops would lead into the kick-off for the 2018 Comprehensive Plan. Continuing, Fischer said the intent of the "workshops" are to "map" Edina's vision through big ideas to a big picture. The Workshops are proposed as two events prior to the kick-off of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update. Fischer said he envisions participation in the workshops to include the Consultant Team, Comp Plan Leaders, Chamber Members, School District Officials, Council Members, City Staff and the public. Page 1 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 Commissioners asked Member Fischer his opinion on the 2018 Comprehensive Work Plan. Fischer responded that in his opinion the Planning Commission's Work Plan is very good. The two "new" workshops should encourage creativity by allowing residents to share their big ideas to build the big picture. These additional workshops would tee-up the kick-off for the Comprehensive Plan Update. A discussion ensued. Commissioners thanked Member Fischer for attending the meeting. VI. Community Comment None. A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close Community Comment. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. Public Hearings A. Public Hearing— 6I 25 Beard Avenue. Variance (B-I 7-05) Commissioner Hamilton recused himself from the discussion and vote. Planner Presentation Planner Aaker reported that the subject property consists of a rambler with an attached two-car garage built in 1956. The applicant is requesting a 2.95-foot variance to allow a whole house 1st floor "lift" for a conversion of a one-story home into a two story home. Planner Aaker recommended that the Planning Commission approve the variance based on the following findings: I. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it maintains existing setback conditions without reducing setback. 2. The imposed setback and existing house location do not provide opportunity for a full second floor above existing. 3. The original placement of the home closer to the south lot line prohibits the proposed house lift expansion for a second floor without the benefit of a variance. Approval of the variance is also subject to the following conditions: I) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Survey dated: February 22, 2017 Page 2 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 • Building plans/ elevations date stamped March 2, 2017. • Engineering memo Appearing for the Applicant Matt Byers, PLAAD Architecture Mr. Byers addressed the Commission and with graphics explained the concept of lifting the existing home to "place" another level beneath it. Byers said the design is sustainable with minimal damage to the environment through this process. He further noted that the existing house remains "as is". Continuing, Byers explained that the applicant desires to remain in his home and neighborhood, adding because of the size of the existing home and family dynamics more space is required. Discussion and Comments The applicant's representative was asked how this "process" compares in price to a teardown. Mr. Byers responded that this process is less expensive and retains the existing house. He explained that the house is actually lifted one story, adding it is less disruptive to the environment and the character of the existing house would be preserved. The Commission complimented the architect on the unique concept and matching house forms, new with existing. Commissioners further stated the graphics were also great help in visualizing the final product. Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. Public Hearing No one spoke to the issue. A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. A discussion ensued with Commissioners agreeing with the merits of approving a variance. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve a 2.95-foot variance based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. B. Public Hearing— 5809 South Drive. Variance (B-I 7-06) Page 3 of 15 Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date:4/26/20 17 Planner Presentation Planner Aaker reported that the applicant is requesting a 16-foot variance to the required 50-foot frontyard setback to construct a new home on the lot located at 5809 South Drive, for a front/side street setback of 34-feet from Dundee Road. The existing home is located closer to the street at 29.6-feet from Dundee Road than location of the new home. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance based on the following findings: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with all the standards, with exception of the front/side street setback (as determined by the adjacent home). 2. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and the improvements will enhance the property. 3. The property is subject to an unreasonably deep street setback that severely diminishes the building opportunity for the lot. 4. The proposed home will be more conforming than the existing home by increasing the west side street setback to be greater than the 50 feet required. 5. There is a practical difficulty in meeting the ordinance requirements and there are circumstances unique to the property due to an imposed front yard setback from the adjacent home that shrinks building footprint options. 6. The variance, if approved, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.The new home will be well articulated and will enhance the character of the neighborhood. Approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: 1) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Survey date stamped: March 5, 2017 and building plans and elevations date stamped March 5, 2017. Appearing for the Applicant John Sonnek, Charles Cudd. Discussion and Comments The applicant was asked if he spoke with the Watershed District. Sonnek responded they would work with the Watershed District to ensure drainage is adequately addressed. Sonnek pointed out this site collects the neighborhood water and at minimum, the French drain would be maintained. Commissioners noted that the house as proposed is large; however, they acknowledged that the proposed size was typical of the neighborhood. Commissioners further acknowledged that corner lots are difficult to design for. Page 4 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 Mr. Sonnek acknowledged that the house was large; however, he pointed out the variance request was the result of the placement of the house next door. He noted that Edina's code does not prevent someone from building their house as far back on their lot as they want. The neighboring house was built in 1954 in a unique location and that location creates a hardship for the subject lot. Planner Aaker agreed that Edina has a unique front street setback requirement, acknowledging that the code as written has created issues for abutting houses if they want to rebuild or add an addition. Chair Olsen opened the public hearing Public Hearing None. Being none, a motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Lee to approve a I 6-foot setback from Dundee Road based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Thorsen. All voted aye. The motion carried. C. Public Hearing— Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Edina Collaborative. 49 %2 Street Redevelopment Planner Presentation Planner Teague delivered a power point presentation on the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Preliminary Rezoning. Teague stated that City Staff askes the Commission to recommend approval of both based on the following findings and conditions: Recommend that the City Council approve the requests for Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows: The Comprehensive Plan Amendment eliminates the prescriptive building heights in the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment would accommodate the proposal for a six-story, 73- foot building south of Market Street. = The density in the MXC, Mixed Use Center would increase from 30 units per acre to 75 units per acre. Approval is subject to the following findings: I. After the current Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2009, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance regarding height so that the Zoning Ordinance matched the recommended heights in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 5 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 2. Building height is typically a function of Zoning regulations and not a Comprehensive Plan. 3. Within the underlying PCD-2 zoning district, the Edina City Code requires that buildings six-stories tall be setback twice the height of the building from the property line of single-family homes. There is one single-family home north of the north ramp. All other homes are duplexes. The building height is 73 feet; therefore, a 146-foot setback is required. The proposed distance of 175 feet therefore is code compliant. 4. Higher density would seem reasonable in the 50th and France and Grandview areas given the proximity to arterial roadways (France Avenue and Vernon Avenue). The floor area ratio (FAR) allowed in these areas is 1.5. FAR is not necessarily a good indicator of residential density; rather a more appropriate measure is units per acre. If you compare a retail or office development at an FAR of 1.5 (using 190,000 square feet of development), the amount of traffic generated from that size of a development would be greater than the 190,000 square foot development proposed consisting of primarily housing with only 30,000 square feet of retail. Residential density of 75 units an acre is appropriate in the MXC District. 5. Density proposed is similar or less than density for mixed-use areas for surrounding communities including Minnetonka, Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. Teague stated that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-2, Planned Commercial District to PUD-I2, Planned Unit Development District, including Preliminary Development Plan to construct the multi-use development including housing, retail, public parking and public space on Market Street based on the following findings:: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by traditional zoning; buildings are brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street and woonerf, includes sidewalks throughout and around the perimeter of the site to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment. Provides additional public parking stalls available to all uses in the 50th and France Area. Provides affordable housing. 2. The proposed buildings would be a high quality brick, stone and glass. They are designed to mix and blend with the existing buildings in the area. 3. The PUD would ensure that the buildings proposed would be the only buildings built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 4... The proposal follows the development principles established in the Southdale Area Vision Plan as follows: a. Division of the property into smaller blocks; b. Improved pedestrian connections to move people through and around the site. This includes an improved center sidewalk to better connect 50th to Market Street; c. Provide a "come to" and "stay at" development with mixed uses, retail, restaurant, public space including seating areas, and a center plaza; d. High quality buildings and design; e. Provision of added shared public parking. This would potentially assist re-development of other properties in the area to develop without as much parking; f. Public art; and g. Economic vitality brought to Market Street. 1. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. Page 6 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian-scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) • A Pedestrian-Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the City, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed-use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. 1. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets creating pedestrian scale. Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower-density districts and upper-stories "step back" from street. g. 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. On existing auto-oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. • Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. ■ Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. ■ Encourage storefront design of mixed-use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade. ■ Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. 7. The proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. In summary, the PUD zoning would: a. Provides a true mixed-use development by including retail, restaurants and housing. b. Creates a very pedestrian-friendly development with the construction of sidewalks through and around the site. c. Ensure that the buildings proposed would be the only buildings built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. d. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. 8. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. SRF Consulting conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. Approval is also subject to the following Conditions: Page 7 of 15 Draft Minutes E] Approved Minutest Approved Date:4/26/20 17 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated March 31, 2017, 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. 3. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances. 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 5. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 6. 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. 7. A Developer's Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 8. Affordable housing must be provided per the City's Affordable Housing Policy, the specifics to be determined at the time of final approval. Ten percent 10% of the units shall be affordable. 9. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated March 31, 2017. 10. Compliance with the sustainability standards in the director of engineering's memo dated March 31, 2017. I I. Compliance with the SRF Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 12. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD-I2, Planned Unit Development for this site. 13. Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding land use, height and density. Appearing for the Applicant Peter Deanovic, Buhl Investors, Brent Rogers, Saturday Properties. Discussion and Comments Planner Teague was asked if the City formally approved the name change from 49 ''A Street to Market Street. Planned Teague responded in the affirmative. He added last evening the City Council approved the name change to Market Street. Chair Olsen asked the traffic consultant to address traffic. Matt Pacyna, SRF, addressed the Commission and with the aid of graphics highlighted the following: • There are three study goals, Assess/Quantify; Current Conditions; Identify Transportation impacts of the proposed development with the consultant recommending improvements for efficient operations for all modes of transportation Pacyna said he believes the increase in vehicular traffic would be roughly 2400 trips per day. He noted intersection field observations were done, adding it was found that they currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Pacyna acknowledged that eastbound Page 8 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 queues along 50th Street to France Avenue could be high especially during p.m. peak times, which affects the western mid-block pedestrian crossings. Pacyna suggested the following: • Consider reallocating the roadway space along 49 '/z Street to improve pedestrian crossings; • Maintain a minimum of I 75-feet eastbound left-lane along 49 '// Street at France Avenue; • Consider construction phasing with estimated peak parking demands to avoid significant area parking impacts during construction. Pacyna stressed the importance of correctly staging ramp construction to minimize hardships for both the vendors and general public; • Limit any sight distance impacts from future structures, landscaping and signing; and • Install crosswalk warning signs and consider push button activated rectangular rapids flashing beacons at both the proposed 49 '/z Street crossings. Concluding, Pacyna again stressed the importance of the timing of ramp reconstruction and what is done first. Commissioners had the following questions and comments: • Pacyna was asked if he had any concern with residential cut through traffic to avoid congestion during the construction phase. Mr. Pacyna responded that again, much would depend on ramp construction staging (which ramp is first). Pacnya said he imagines there would be some cut through traffic, adding it would be hard to guess which area would be the hardest hit; however: it should be monitored. Pacyna said if it was found that cut through traffic was occurring measures would be implemented to correct the overflow into the residential neighborhoods. Pacyna further noted that once the construction was complete demand should be met. • A question was raised on how the role of the Woonerf was envisioned. Pacyna responded that the Woonerf(as a shared pedestrian and vehicle courtyard) would provide convenient delivery and drop off/pick up for the existing businesses on the north side of 50th Street. Commissioners stressed they are concerned that this project would create traffic issues to include vehicles using the residential streets (Maple) as a cut through. Continuing, Commissioners noted that previous comments were correct on the importance of staging during construction. Commissioners asked Planner Teague if the City was satisfied with the findings of the traffic consultants. Planner Teague said the development agreement would be a tight document and at the time (if approved) construction commences all articles would be buttoned up. Staff further agrees with the findings from the consultant. Chair Olsen commented that she wonders (if approved) if the Commission could place as a condition of approval that an acceptable construction staging/traffic/parking plan be implemented. Continuing, Olsen suggested the possibility of providing a shuttle service to ensure that employees and visitors to the area would be able to reach their destination. Planner Teague responded that the Commission could add conditions of approval, adding this condition seems reasonable. Page 9 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 Applicant Presentation Mr. Deanovic addressed the Commission and gave a brief history of the Edina Collaborative project and introduced the development team to include Brent Rogers with Saturday Properties, Todd Novak, Mohagen Hansen and Tom Whitlock with Damon Farber. Deanovic reported that a neighborhood meeting(s) was held in January 2017. Deanovic explained neighbors and tenants within 1,000-feet received notice of the project to include updated filers and e-mails. With graphics, Deanovic highlighted the project area noting the Woonerf and public space, increased public parking, two-sided retail and 34,000 square feet of public space. Deanovic further reported that through conversations with neighbors and tenant's traffic and parking were mentioned as a concern. Deanovic introduced Todd Novak who presented to the Commission a video fly-over of the project. Novak asked the Commission to note that the development team responded too many of the suggestions made by both the Commission and Council at Sketch Plan and incorporated them into the new plan. The fly-over pointed out the following changes to the proposal: • Reduced building height on building corners (some). • Eliminated the three-story connection between buildings. • A minimal addition to retail spaces. • Reduced apartment unit count from 131-units to I 10-units. • Enhanced architecture to include building articulation, balconies and varied height. • Added additional bike stations to include a bike—fix-it station. • Worked and continue to work with north neighbors on screening of ramp. • Work with the Edina Art Center to provide easements for public art. • Do as much as possible to ensure a sustainable project. To include electric vehicle charging stations, sustainable building materials (brick, stone, glass with metal panels and stucco accents), efficient mechanical and water plumbing, LED lighting, drought tolerant landscaping, pervious planters, etc. • Hide mechanical equipment. • Flexible public space (plaza) to be enjoyed throughout the Seasons. Nowak further presented a shadow study that evaluated the difference between 4 vs. 6-stories. Nowak also asked the Commission to note that the density of the project was "located" in the middle of the site; away from the residents. Nowak explained that the development team is also sensitive to the needs of tenants of the buildings; adding they would do everything possible to ensure a smooth transition during construction. Concluding, Novak introduced Brent Rogers to speak to the housing element of the project. Mr. Rogers informed the Commission that the proposed housing would be rental housing that would feel more like a boutique hotel vs. an apartment building. The units proposed are larger than a typical new construction urban project. The finishes of each unit are state of the art and each apartment has access to Page 10 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ I Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 outdoor space as well as larger windows. The building would also offer rooftop gardening and a "shop" space in the garage. Continuing, Rogers said the development team believes future renters already live in the area and are considering selling their homes, adding this development provides housing options in their own neighborhood. He further noted that long-term leases are available. Rogers pointed out that 10 of the units are affordable. Concluding Rogers said he believes this project will be a plus for the neighborhood and the City of Edina. Discussion/Comments Commissioners thanked the applicants for their thorough presentation. A question was asked on when the shadow study was done; pointing out, regardless of that date Market Street would mostly be in shadow. The Commission was informed the study was done on June 21St. An opinion was also shared that more could be done on reducing the building height and offsetting the building mass. Public Hearing Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. The following people commented on the proposal: Mitch Avery, representing Lunds/Byerly's Food Holdings expressed concern. He suggested that the City consider developing a vision for the 50th and France area to include traffic and parking studies prior to area redevelopments. Dr. Patterson, 3930 France Avenue, expressed concern for business owners during the construction phase. She pointed out parking and congestion would be an issue for patients; many of whom are elderly. She stressed timing is everything and two years of construction could potentially harm her business. Heidi Brandenburg, business owner told the Commission that the area of 50th & France is comprised of health care services. Brandenburg said health care is important and the impact of this project would affect not only the business owners and employees, but also their patients. Brian Lambert, 4007 49th Street West, commented that he was glad to see that the City would continue to maintain the ramps. Lambert also noted that in the future Walgreen's might "go" along with the Post Office and the potential for redevelopment of Lund's property. Jim Stromberg, 3930 49th Street West, stated the development team has been excellent to work with. He said he supports the project as submitted, adding he wants the City to monitor traffic on West 49th Street so it is not used as a cut through. Susie Haugland, 5229 West Highwood Drive, stated she has a concern with parking, traffic and where employees of the area would park during the construction phase. Page 11 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 Tom Hepplefinger, 5000 France Avenue, said his concern is with building height. He pointed out the proposal calls for a 50% increase in building height. Robert Sykes, 4524 Casco Avenue, said he supports the project, adding in his opinion it is a very good project. Sykes stated in his opinion this is one of the few places that can tolerate building height, pointing out the building height was placed in the middle of the project. Increased parking was also a plus. Bret Johnson, 4920 Lantana Lane, said he believes the developers have been respectful of the 50th and France area and that redevelopment of the subject area was needed. Mike Marinovich, 5317 Halifax, expressed support for the project stating the public space as proposed provides energy and will be a huge plus for the merchants, residential property owners and the City. Scott Engstrom, 4909 Maple Road said the proposed development is exciting, adding that the development team was very easy to work with; however, he had concerns with cut-through traffic on Maple Road. He further added the apartment buildings are too tall. Jan Monson, 3949 49th Street West, said the "Collaborative" would be a great asset suggesting that the community space be reduced to reduce building height. Building height too tall. Eric Heltne, 5320 Kellogg Avenue, said in his opinion the redevelopment proposal is terrific. Jim Deanovic, 5116 Mirror Lakes Drive, stated he supports the project. David Daly, 4601 Meadow Road, stated he supports the project. The development team put a lot of effort into this proposal. Chair Olsen asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue, being none a motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lee. All voted aye. The motion carried. Discussion and Comments Chair Olsen asked Planner Teague to clarify the action(s) the Commission takes this evening. Planner Teague responded that the City is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for building height and increased density and a rezoning from PCD-2 to PUD. Teague noted the Commission is to take action on the applications; however, the motion could be done in two parts. One for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and another for the rezoning classification. Commissioner Thorsen asked Planner Teague if approved could this establish a precedent. Planner Teague responded that it would not create a precedent. The requested rezoning is to PUD and the ordinance was crafted directly for this project. Teague stated the ordinance would stipulate that six Page 12 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 stories would only be permitted south of Market Street. The four-story cap would still stand for the rest of the district; unless the Comprehensive Plan was amended to remove height. Commissioners expressed concern for the existing businesses during the construction phase. They indicated they believe the proposal as presented was very good; however, they have concerns for the businesses during the construction phase. Commissioners said the City and businesses should be encouraged to find a solution to the traffic and parking concerns. Continuing, Commissioners further acknowledged that the development team appears to be very responsive to the neighbors, both residential and businesses. They also stated they were pleased with the changes between sketch plan review and formal application Commissioner Lee expressed dissatisfaction with the traffic analysis and building height. She said she was concerned that the area roads may not be able to handle the increase in traffic. Lee said she also wonders if this is really what the City really wants; pointing out amending the Comprehensive Plan may not be the "way to go". She questioned if additional study was needed on area traffic and the impact of building height. A lengthy discussion ensued with Commissioners acknowledging that change is difficult; however, the project as presented is a very good project. Commissioners said issues that need to be addressed are traffic and parking during construction to ensure that area merchants are not harmed during the process. It was further acknowledged there is no way around redevelopment in this area and a thoughtful and firm construction management and maintenance plan would go a long way in reducing redevelopment pain. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to recommend an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that eliminates the prescriptive building heights in the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment would accommodate the proposal for a six-story, 73-foot building south of 49 V2 Street. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. Ayes; Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Olsen. Nay. Lee. The motion carried 5-I. A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to recommend a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow an increase in density from 30-units per acre to 75-units per acre. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. Ayes; Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Lee. Nay, Lee. The motion carried.5-I. A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen based on staff findings to recommend preliminary rezoning from PCD-2, Planned Commercial District to PUD-I 2, Planned Unit Development District, including Preliminary Development Plan to construct the multi-use development including housing, retail, public parking and public space on 49 %2 Street. Rezoning is subject to staff conditions to include the condition that prior to final approval by City Council that a plan is agreed to with City staff that creates a strategy and specific measures to be implemented to eliminate or minimize impact on existing businesses Page 13 of 15 Draft Minutes Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 professional and retail and otherwise including client and customer access. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. Ayes; Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Olsen. Nays, Lee. Motion carried 5-1. VIII. Reports and Recommendations A. 44th and France SAP Appointments Planner Aaker reported to the Commission that members to the 44th and France Small Area Plan Task Force have been recommended by Planning Commission liaisons Shelia Berube and Jimmy Bennett. Aaker listed the Members and Alternates: Members: Eric Olson, Ted Carlson, Rebecca Sorensen, Mike Platteter, Katie Ayotte. Alternates: Lisa Fagan, Harvey Ronald Berg Aaker said at this time the Planning Commission is required to approve the appointments. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the listed appointees. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lee. All voted aye. The motion to approve members to the 44th and France Avenue Small Area Plan Task Force carried. 6-0 IX. Chair and Member Comments Commissioner Lee commented that she was invited to attend a "neighborhood meeting". She said she was looking forward to listening to what residents have to say. X. Staff Comments Planner Teague reported that the City Council heard the sketch plan for Restoration Hardware. Planner Teague also asked the Commission to mark their calendars for Wednesday, April I9th. 7 p.m.-9:00 p.m. for the Big Ideas Workshop and Saturday, April 22^d. 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., The Big Picture Workshop. Teague stated all Commissioners are invited to attend. Xl. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen at 10:58 p.m. to adjourn the meeting of the Edina Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried. Page 14 of 15 Draft Minutes❑ Approved Minutes® Approved Date:4/26/2017 ,Tackle 3-(oogenakker Respectfully submitted Page 15 of 15