Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018 03-28 Planning Commission Minutes/ Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers March 28, 2018 Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. Roll Call Answering the roll were: Commissioners Miranda, Lee, Strauss, Hamilton, Bennett, Chair Olsen. Staff, Assistant Planners, Aaker, Bodeker Sr. Communications Coord., Eidsness, Support Staff, Hoogenakker Members Absent: Commissioners, Thorsen, Berube, Nemerov, Jones, Mittal Approval Of Meeting Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Strauss to approve the March 28, 2018, meeting agenda. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Strauss to approve the minutes of the March 14, 2018, meeting minutes. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Public Hearings A. Parking Variance at Southdale Center for Untiedt’s Garden Market. Staff Presentation Planner Bodeker reported that Untiedt’s Vegetable Farm, Inc., the applicant, is requesting a parking variance at Southdale Center. The proposed parking variance request would accommodate for a seasonal produce stand/garden center located on the north side of the mall, within an existing parking area. The proposed seasonal produce stand/garden center would be open May-October and includes roughly 14,400 square feet of display area. Produce stands are a permitted use in the PCD-3, Planned Commercial District per Section 36-613 of the Zoning Ordinance. As require for other recent developments at Southdale, a parking variance for the entire Southdale Site is required. Bodeker noted that parking stall variances have been relatively routine with development that has occurred on the Southdale property. The most recent variances were done as part of the Homewood Suites Hotel approvals on the northeast corner, the RH site at the northeast corner of France Avenue & 69th Street and the Shake Shack on the southeast corner of France Avenue & 66th Street. The basis for the variances has been parking studies that have been done in association with each new project looking at the Southdale site as a whole. Bodeker concluded that staff recommends approval of a 1270 parking stall variance for Southdale Center to allow Untiedt’s Seasonal Produce Stand based on the following findings: 1. The findings for a variance are met. 2. The parking study done by WSB concludes that the City Code required parking for Southdale is not necessary. Based on information from the (ITE) Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, the WSB traffic study concludes that 5,587 parking spaces are adequate to support Southdale. Therefore, there would be an excess of 211 stalls at Southdale. 3. In 2001, a variance was granted to Southdale for a shortage of 759 stalls. Over the past 10+ years, Southdale has operated very well without the code-required parking. 4. A 305 stall parking variance was also granted to Southdale in 2012, when Southdale One apartments were built. 5. A 610 stall parking variance was granted with the proposal to build a Hotel on the northeast corner of Southdale. 6. A 929 stall parking variance was granted with the proposal to build a Restoration Hardware on the northeast corner of France Avenue & 69th Street. 7. A 1,137-space parking variance was granted with the proposal to build a Shake Shack restaurant at the southeast corner of France Avenue and & 66th Street. 8. The City of Edina does not wish to require unnecessary paving or parking structures for parking stalls that are not needed. 9. The Southdale site is unique in the PCD-3 zoning district. It is the only regional shopping mall in Edina. There are no other 80 acre sites held in common ownership and zoned the same within the City. 10. The alternative to the variance would be to require the applicant to construct a structured parking ramp. 11. The parking spaces utilized by the applicant would be during the summer months, when parking demand is not as high. Appearing for the Applicant Craig Gilb, Untiedt’s Seasonal Produce Stands Discussion/Comments Questions The applicant was asked the hours of operation and when deliveries are made to the site. Mr. Gilb responded that the stands are open from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. from May 1st through October 31st (weather permitting). Gilb also added that during the fall season hours could be scaled back. Gilb said that deliveries are usually made early in the morning. Public Hearing Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. No one spoke on the issue. Commissioner Strauss moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Discussion/Comments/Questions Chair Olsen noted that the use is a permitted use; however, parking at the Center is being impacted by all the additional new uses. Olsen asked Mr. Rickart, WSB parking consultant if he felt this use was a problem, and when could parking become a problem at the Center. Rickart explained that this use is unique and in his opinion, parking would be a non-issue; however, parking for the Center would eventually reach its capacity, adding there are roughly 200 excess parking stalls available. Motion Commissioner Hamilton moved variance approval based on staff findings. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. B. Variance. Rear and side yard variances for McDonalds, 3220 Southdale Circle, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planner Bodeker told the Commission Kevin Shay of Landform and on behalf of McDonalds USA, LLC, the applicant, is requesting a side and rear yard setback variance at 3220 Southdale Circle. The proposed project includes the addition replacing the exterior of the building, ADA updates to the parking stalls and sidewalks, updating the drive-thru to include a second drive-thru lane, a small building addition, replacing and installing new signage, restriping the parking lot, installing a new fence and adding more landscaped green space. To accommodate the proposed changes, the applicant is requesting two variances. The first is an 8-foot variance is to the side yard setback for a menu-ordering canopy. The second is 7-foot variance request is to allow an 8 square foot building addition within the required rear yard setback. The subject site is zoned PCD-3, Planned Commercial District. The existing use is permitted in the PCD-3 zoning district and currently has a non-conforming rear yard setback. Planner Bodeker concluded that staff recommends approval of an 8-foot variance to the side yard setback for a menu-ordering canopy and a 7-foot variance to the rear yard setback to allow for an 8 square foot building addition. Staff recommends approval of the variance as requested subject to the following findings: The findings for the Variances are met. The practical difficulty is caused by the existing location of the building and drive-through. The setback from the east lot line does not conform to the current setback requirement. An addition to that side of the building could not be done without variance. The proposed addition in that area is reasonable as it does not encroach further into the setback and is only eight square feet in size. The canopy setback for the second drive-through could not be accommodated without encroaching into the setback requirement due to the location of the existing building and drive-through lane. Landscaping and green space is added to the south lot line to minimize impacts on the adjacent property. The proposal is also 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: Site plan date stamped February 23, 2018 Grading plan date stamped February 23, 2018 Landscaping plan date stamped February 23, 2018 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 3. If required, submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 4. The building must meet all the required building and fire code requirements, including the sprinklering of the building. Appearing for the Applicant Kevin Shay, Landform Public Hearing Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. No one spoke on the issue. Commissioner Strass moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Motion Commissioner Bennett moved approval of the variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Height and Density and Preliminary Rezoning for 3650 Hazelton Road, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planned Aaker informed the Commission he applicant, 3650 Hazelton, LLC is requesting a redevelopment of the 1.25 acre parcel at 3650 Hazelton Road. As proposed, the existing Guitar Center would be torn down and a 19-story, 186-unit luxury apartment with underground parking would be constructed. Features of the development include: A Podium structure provided at ground level, with the units opening outward to access directly toward the Promenade. Enclosed and underground parking that is not visible from the Promenade or Hazelton Road. Public plaza and pedestrian connections to the Promenade and Hazelton Road. The applicant is proposing to meet the City’s Affordable Housing Policy by providing a dedication of $1.86 million to provide affordable housing within the City. Additionally the applicant is proposing small 1-bedroom and Studio/Micro units. These smaller and very efficient units will provide a new housing option to the Edina marketplace. These micro units would generally range in size from 412 - 446 square feet and would be ideal for a college graduate, young professional, young couple returning home and looking for a new home, corporate transfers interested in Edina, single empty nesters and retired persons. Sustainability. LEED or Green Globe designation would be pursued. Amenity terrace including a pool. Aaker pointed out to accommodate the request the following is required: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the height maximum from 8 stories and 96 feet to 19 stores and 218 feet; and increase the density in the MXC, Mixed Use Center from 100 units per acre to 150 units per acre; and A Rezoning from PCD-3, Planned Commercial District-3 to PUD-14, Planned Unit Development. Staff is further recommending that flexibility language be included in the Comprehensive Plan to allow the City the flexibility to approve projects that would exceed the Comprehensive Plan height requirements through rezoning or variance in the Greater Southdale Area and the MXC, Mixed Use Center. After June 30, 2018, the Metropolitan Council will no longer consider amendments to any 2008 Comprehensive Plan. That in effect, could put the City of Edina in a moratorium on development for a minimum of one year. Over the past 10 years in Edina, most re-development proposals in the Greater Southdale Area or in areas guided MXC, Mixed Use Center (50th & France and Grandview) have exceeded the Comprehensive Guide Plan designations for height, and have required a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. If the current 2018 Comprehensive Planning process remains on schedule (concluding in December of 2018), the earliest the Met Council would approve Edina’s Plan would be June of 2019. The Met Council requires a 6-month review process for themselves and adjacent cities. Aaker explained that in adopting this amendment, the City would not lose its regulatory controls in these areas as the City amended the Zoning Ordinance regarding height so that the Zoning Ordinance matched the Comprehensive Plan. Building height is typically a function of Zoning regulations and not a Comprehensive Plan. These changes would not impact the recent Small Area Plans at 44th and France, Valley View and Wooddale or 70th and Cahill. Aaker noted that the Southdale Area Working Principles were shared with the applicant. The City’s consultant for the Greater Southdale Area Plan, Mic Johnson has provided a review of the proposed project; the review is based on the Greater Southdale Area Work Group principles. Aaker reminded the Commission that the applicant went through the Sketch Plan process before the Planning Commission and City Council and based on feedback from the Planning Commission, the City Council, and the review from Mic Johnson, the applicant has: Revised the configuration of the sidewalk on Hazelton Road to be curved. Enhanced the landscaping on all side. Height has increased from 17 to 19 stories (8 feet). (This includes the rooftop mechanical equipment.) Unit increase from 170 to 186 units. Would meet the City’s Affordable Housing Policy. Provided Public Art. Added a green roof. Modified the west façade. Aaker concluded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the requests for Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density in the MXC, Mixed Use Center from 100 units per acre to 150 units per acre; and Flexibility language to be included in the Comprehensive Plan to allow the City Council the flexibility to approve projects that would exceed the Comprehensive Plan height requirements in the Greater Southdale Area (Figure 4.6B) and the MXC, Mixed Use Center District through rezoning or variance. Approval is also subject to the following findings: 1. The City’s Zoning Ordinance was amended to reflect all heights recommended in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan; therefore, the City would not lose its regulatory control over height. 2. Building height is typically a function of Zoning regulations and not a Comprehensive Plan. 3. The City Code requirement for setbacks of buildings over nine-stories in height from property zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District would be met for this project. Within the underlying PCD-3 zoning district, the Edina City Code requires that buildings nine-stories tall be setback six times the height of the building from the property line of single-family homes. The building height is 218 feet; therefore, a 1,308-foot setback is required. The distance as proposed would be 1,450 feet, therefore is code compliant. 4. These changes would not impact the recent Small Area Plans at 44th and France, Valley View and Wooddale or 70th and Cahill. 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. 6. If the adjacent Promenade were included in the overall development calculation the overall density would be 86 units per acre. Continuing, Aaker recommended that the City Council approve the Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3, Planned Commercial District to PUD-14, Planned Unit Development District, including Preliminary Development Plan to construct the multi-family housing development at 3650 Hazelton Road. Approval is also subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed land use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 4. Addresses the Development Principles established in the Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Vision. The following principles are included: Division of the property into smaller blocks (existing small lot); Improved pedestrian connections to move people through and around the site. This includes an improved sidewalk along Hazelton, and would provide a future connection to the Promenade along the north lot line. Provides additional public space adjacent to the Promenade. High quality buildings and design; Public art; Enhances the pedestrian experience along Hazelton Road and the Promenade. Affordable housing; 5. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. 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. f. 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 façade. Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. 6. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. In summary, the PUD zoning would: a. Creates a more pedestrian-friendly development with the construction of improved sidewalks and connections to the Promenade. The project would bring vibrancy to the area, and enhance the experience in the district. b. The building would be of high quality stone, brick, metal and glass. 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. Project would contribute to the City’s Affordable Housing. Additionally, micro units would provide housing for a college graduate, young professional, young couple returning home and looking for a new home, corporate transfers interested in Edina, single empty nesters and retired persons. e. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. f. Enhance green space and landscaping and utilize sustainable concepts. 7. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Spack Consulting conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated February 16, 2018, 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 Nine Mile 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. A cash-in-lieu of affordable housing in the amount of $1.86 million dollars shall be contributed to the City for affordable housing. Payment shall be received prior to certificate of occupancy. 9. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s memo dated March 21, 2018. 10. Compliance with the Spack Consulting Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 11. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD-14, Planned Unit Development for this site. 12. Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding, height and density. Appearing for the Applicant Tom Lund, Lund Real Estate Partners, Gretchen Camp, and Trace Jacques, ESG Discussion/Comments/Questions Planner Aaker was asked how the City ensures that the affordable housing “fee” was met in lieu of providing the units. Aaker responded that a Certificate of Occupancy is not issued until the affordable housing fee was paid. Planner Aaker was asked if the City had “plans” for specific sites to provide affordable units and if so, now what happens? Aaker reported that at this time the HRA is looking into a number of options with how the affordable housing fee in lieu of housing is dispersed. Aaker said that providing funds to the City to establish affordable housing may provide the City with the flexibility to spread units throughout the City. Again, Aaker said the affordable housing options continue to be studied. . Applicant Presentation Mr. Lund informed the Commission that the development team responded to the suggestions made by both the Planning Commission and City Council at Sketch Plan Review and implemented a number of those suggestions. Lund said it was also their intent to meet all the principles established for the Greater Southdale Area. Lund introduced Gretchen Camp with ESG to present the project. Ms. Camp addressed the Commission and listed for them changes made to the proposal since Sketch Plan Review. Camp noted the following changes: The sidewalk along Hazelton Road was curved; not straight as originally proposed. Landscaping was enhanced on all sides of the building. Height was increased by 8-feet to include the mechanical equipment. Units have been increased from 170 to 186 units. The project would meet the City’s Affordable Housing Policy. Public Art was added. A green roof was added. The west façade of the building was modified and enhanced. Parking proposed at 298 stalls. Townhome units were increased to six from five. Lighting was enhanced. Exterior building materials were enhanced. Screening of the mechanical equipment. Camp thanked the Commission and introduced Terry Minarik. Mr. Minarik further explained the changes to the proposal since Sketch Plan Review highlighting the enhancement of the public realm, the dog area and the introduction of permeable pavers, swale and other storm water management measures to enhance storm water management. Minarik also pointed out the following: Created an enhanced “porch”. The addition of an iconic sculpture. Introduction of art pieces. Frame spaces through landscaping and trees. Space along the north property line is restricted; however, it would be enhanced with shrubs and lighting. Front yard aesthetics is provided for the townhouse units. Amenity Deck. Mass Plantings. David Bade, Westwood explained to the Commission the proposed storm water management plan to include swale and surface infiltration. Bade said that currently the run-off is unmanaged and the property is almost 100% impervious. The proposed storm water management measures would meet City and Watershed requirements. Ms. Camp thanked the Commission for their time. Commissioners asked the following: Has a decision been made on the LEED certification level. Camp reported they are exploring LEED (silver level) or Green Globes options. Public Hearing Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue. Commissioner Strauss moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Discussion/Comments/Questions Commissioners expressed the following: The applicant was asked to explain the dog run area. Camp reported that this area should really be considered a “relief” area for the dogs. She said the surface of the area is specially treated to allow for thorough cleaning. It is believed that those with dogs would walk their dogs along the promenade or neighborhood. An opinion was expressed that the building design and materials were not unique and a bit of a disappointment. Disappointment was also expressed with the north side of the site. Mr. Jacques with graphics highlighted the design of the building and exterior materials. Jacques further explained the parking and drop-off area in front of the lobby, landscaping and other amenities of the project. Jacques said the site is small and acknowledged the north side is narrow; however, they can revisit the landscaping and lighting in this area to further enhance it. Camp interjected noting that they followed the City’s position to break areas into small blocks, adding this building would be the first building on the “block”. An opinion was expressed that the building looks great, great public areas and the south façade was done very well. An opinion was expressed that the applicant in designing the building and site appears to have paid close attention to the Greater Southdale Area Principles. This project shows how people can live in an “urban” area but be close to nature. Consider “beefing” up the educational piece, explain better. An opinion was expressed that the front corner of the building was done well. It was suggested that more work needs to be done on engaging the public so they realize they can enjoy the outdoor amenities the site provides. Consider adding signage to the art pieces to interact with people. It was acknowledged that the north side of the site was tight; however, ensure that residents feel safe walking in this area. Make sure that the lighting and landscaping along the north-building wall was adequate. Consider a green wall on that side. The applicant was asked if there were no building restraints placed on this site what would be built. Lund responded that they would probably go taller; however, it was found that providing the underground parking was paramount to a successful site. The water table and soil conditions really dictate building placement and height. Lund also noted that their intent was to build no taller than the Westin. Disappointment was expressed that the building would not provide affordable housing units within and that the applicant would pay a fee instead of providing those units. Lund informed the Commission the development team met with City staff and elected officials adding all were aware of the intent to pay the fee. He pointed out paying a fee is part of Edina’s Affordable Housing Policy. Lund explained that a number of units would be micro-units; offered at more affordable prices. Compliments were paid to the applicant on the storm water management measures. The applicant was asked where the bike parking was located. Jacques with graphics pointed out the underground bike parking facilities. It was suggested that more outdoor bike stalls be added. Jacques agreed It was suggested that the applicants provide as part of their sustainable measures information on bus routes and times. Camp acknowledged that was a good suggestion, adding placing that information in the lobby area was a good idea. The applicant was asked the range in rent prices. Lund responded that he believes the micro-units would be priced at $1,000. Other units would range in price above that upwards to $10,000 per month for the penthouses. An opinion was expressed that the proposal appears too dense. Is the City intent on redeveloping areas of Edina to mirror downtown Minneapolis? It was pointed out that the greater Southdale area was larger than downtown Minneapolis. The Southdale area is the correct area for density. It was noted that mass transit works best with density and if one of Edina’s goal was to reduce the demand for the automobile, density makes sense. It was suggested to Staff that it would be helpful if the Greater Southdale Work Group established guidelines to follow within this area and others. Aaker agreed. A lengthy discussion ensued on Edina’s Affordable Housing Policy and the disappointment that in an area where affordable housing units would be of benefit to workers none are offered. The discussion continued on financial aspects of the projects and the density. Commissioner Lee asked Planner Aaker if under the recommendation for Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval would the two bulleted conditions need to be included in that motion. Planner Aaker responded that both are required for the project to proceed. Lee noted that she had reservations with the flexibility language within the MXC (Mixed Use Center District) zoning, adding in her opinion splitting those bullets would be appropriate. Lee further suggested that separate motions be made for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. Motion Commissioner Hamilton moved to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density in the MXC, Mixed Use Center from 100-units per acre to 150-units per acre; and Flexibility language to be included in the Comprehensive Plan to allow the City Council the flexibility to approve projects that would exceed the Comprehensive Plan height requirements in the Greater Southdale Area and the MXC, Mixed Use Center district through rezoning or variance. Approval is also subject to staff findings. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Commissioner Miranda commented that he agrees that building height should not be in the Comprehensive Plan; however, the Mixed Use Center also includes 50th & France and Grandview Neighborhood Nodes. Grandview will consider a redevelopment to include building height, adding he is not certain if tower height is appropriate in the 50th & France Neighborhood Node. Aaker agreed and pointed out that zoning requirements remain and a tower would not be permitted in any MXC zone unless approved. Commissioner Lee said in her opinion the flexibility language was added because of the time constraints established by the Met Council in allowing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Lee stated that she objects to that language. She said eliminating the flexibility language does not mean that a moratorium was placed on all developments - development needs to match zoning requirements. If approved as written the flexibility language would allow construction of a high-rise tower without going through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. Lee reiterated that the bullet points should be voted on separately. Commissioner Bennet asked the Commission if they believe anything was missing from the proposed language. Commissioners expressed that they were comfortable with the proposed language. Commissioners did not separate the bullet points. Ayes; Miranda, Strauss, Hamilton, Bennett and Olsen. Nays; Lee. Motion carried 4-1 Commissioner Strauss moved to recommend Preliminary Rezoning to PUD, and Preliminary Development Plan approval as outlined in the staff report based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions beginning on page 21. Commissioner Bennett seconded the motion. Commissioner Lee said she could not support the rezoning request to PUD because affordable housing units were not included. If affordable units were included, she could support the rezoning. Ayes; Miranda, Strauss, Hamilton, Bennett, Olsen. Nay; Lee. Motion carried 4-1. Community Comment Chair Olsen asked if anyone would like to speak during Community Comment. No one spoke. Commissioner Strauss moved to close Community Comment. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Reports/Recommendations None. Correspondence And Petitions Chair Olsen acknowledged back of packet materials. Chair And Member Comments Commissioner Hamilton said in his opinion the greater Southdale area is very important, he reiterated it is an area larger then downtown Minneapolis. He noted the Southdale area needs a strong framework, adding for the past three years residents and staff have been working hard on establishing that framework. Hamilton said in establishing the framework and guidelines the work group need to make it relevant stretching out for 20-years or more. Much of the Plan is aspirational and it is not easy. Commissioner Strauss said the draft of the 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan will be submitted to the work group this week. Work Group changes to the Plan need to be received by April 4th for the meeting on the 5th. Commissioner Bennett informed Commissioners that the City Council approved the request by Ted Carlson to construct a Caribou Coffee and Einstein Bagel at 5000 Vernon Avenue. Staff Comments Planner Aaker reported that on May 3rd there would be a Comp Plan midpoint check-in with all Commissions. More information to follow. Adjournment Commissioner Miranda moved meeting adjournment at 10:40 P.M. Commissioner Bennett seconded the motion. All voted aye. Meeting adjourned. Jackie Hoogenakker Respectfully submitted