Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-13-19 Planning Commission Minutes-ApprovedDraft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 1 of 9 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers February 13, 2019 I. Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Miranda, Lee, Strauss, Mangalick, Melton, Nemerov, Hamilton, Bennett, Berube, Chair Olsen Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist, MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Coordinator Absent from the roll call: Thorsen III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Strauss moved to approve the February 13, 2019, agenda. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Commissioner Miranda moved to approve the December 12, 2018, meeting minutes. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. V. Special Recognitions And Presentations A. Better Together- MJ Lamon MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Coordinator, and Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator, presented the new Better Together website and explained how it is going to work during the 30 day public review period for the Comprehensive Plan. VI. Public Hearings A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment; Revise PUD- 17 for Pentagon Park South, 4815 & 4901 77th Street and 7710 Computer Avenue Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 2 of 9 Director Teague presented a PowerPoint explaining the request of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Revise PUD- 17 for Pentagon Park South, 4815 & 4901 77th Street and 7710 Computer Avenue. Teague explained that the City approved an overall development plan and the zoning ordinance PUD-17 in May of 2018. Director Teague explained that the Solomon Real Estate Group is proposing changes to the approved master plan and stated that Staff would characterize the changes as “improvements” to the plans originally approved. Director Teague explained that Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to revise PUD-17, including Site Plan approval for Phase 1 and Overall Development Plan subject to the findings that are outlined in the staff report. Jay Scott, with Solomon Real Estate Group, introduced himself and explained that Engineering staff explained that the streets on West 77th Street and Computer Avenue have minor improvements being made causing the streets to be expanded. Discussion/Comments/Questions Commissioner Miranda discussed significant changes to the pedestrian realm, including the sidewalks being pushed out to the edge of the property and less trees in the proposed plan on the corner of West 77th Street and Computer Avenue. Teague commented that Staff would want to see a “Boulevard” style sidewalk. Commissioner Miranda also commented on the street to the west as being closed off in this version of the plan. Teague explained that there is a potential of a future development expansion in that area in Phase 2. Director Teague suggested that a condition of approval could include adding a boulevard sidewalk on 77th and Computer Avenue. A discussion regarding the building’s design and materials from the architect took place. Commissioners discussed which plans were the most accurate and Scott replied that the civil plans would be the most accurate representation because they’re scaled. Commissioners commented that on the west side there is no continuous sidewalk from the park to the 9 Mile Creek Trail. Commissioners asked Scott if there was a way to add a bike lane or a connector going north and south in the greenspace to the right/east of the parking ramp. Scott replied that there is a sidewalk going north and south and all of the connection points are there. Scott explained that a sidewalk next to the garage may not be feasible because there will be exterior stairwells, elevator stairwells, and the architecture is designed to be on the exterior of the garage. Commissioners commented on the road being closed from the west side and asked Scott if the sidewalk could be expanded for a bike to fit and Scott replied that it is a standard 6 foot sidewalk but it could potentially be widened. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Strauss moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Discussion/Comments/Questions Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 3 of 9 Commissioners stated that there is good sidewalk circulation but it seems to end at the face of the garage. Commissioners suggested to continue to provide a shared pedestrian bike path to the southernmost portion of the site along the east side of the parking ramp and stairwell. Scott replied that the area referenced isn’t appropriate to have a bike path because it is a service area including snow dump and hotel service activities. Motion Commissioner Miranda moved approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment as recommended in the staff memo subject to the findings therein with the conditions to add an 8 foot wide north, south, east, and west path and restore the sidewalks to have boulevards. Commissioner Hamilton seconded the motion. Aye: Miranda, Lee, Strauss, Olsen, Hamilton, Bennett, Berube Nay: Nemerov The motion carried 6-1. Commissioner Nemerov is on record that he would approve it as proposed. B. 4501 Garrison Lane, 1st Floor Height Variance Planner Bodeker presented the staff report for 4501 Garrison Lane, Edina, MN. Bodeker explained that the applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 3.33 feet higher than the current home's first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 4501 Garrison Lane. 4501 Garrison Lane is approximately 13, 444 square feet in area and is located on the south side of Garrison Lane, on the west side of Wooddale Ave., north of Garrison Lake and is located in the floodplain. The City of Edina's Engineering standards require the basement elevation of the new home to be 2 feet higher than the FEMA base flood elevation. The requirement for increased height in basement elevations impacts the ability for the project to conform to the maximum first floor height requirement of I foot. The existing home is was built in 1961 prior to the FEMA floodplain study conducted in 1979 to determine flood risk areas. It is a City and Watershed District goal to elevate and remove homes out of the flood hazard areas when the opportunity presents itself. A variance is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. The current home at 4501 Garrison Lane has a basement elevation of 866.8 and a first floor elevation of 875.7 feet above sea level. The established floodplain elevation is at 866.3 with a required protection elevation of 868.3'. The minimum basement elevation must be no less than 2 feet above the flood elevation so the minimum basement elevation required is 868.3'. The proposed basement will be no lower than 868.3'. The proposed first floor elevation of the house is proposed to be at 879.03, which will be 3.33 feet higher than existing. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Discussion/Comments/Questions • Commissioners asked Planner Bodeker what is the basis for the average 8 foot 8 inch basement ceiling height and where does it come from. Bodeker replied that it comes from construction patterns or what is seen in new Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 4 of 9 construction homes. Commissioners asked how Staff determines how much more above the 1 foot Staff is willing to give to applicants. Bodeker replied that Staff worked with the applicant on aspects of this proposed project to meet the zoning requirements. A short discussion between Staff and Commissioners regarding character of the home followed. • Commissioners discussed concerns about the 24 inch trusses verses 16 inch floor trusses. The applicant Weston explained that the trusses were due to the desire for openness in the basement. • Commissioners commented on the retaining wall and the fact they’re typically used for holding or piling up dirt. Weston explained the retaining wall is more for landscaping purposes. Commissioners also discussed the amount of large steps leading up to the front door and the height from the grade. Appearing for the Applicant Ellen Weston, 4501 Garrison Lane, introduced herself and explained that her husband has been in the home for 16 years and the reason for their variance application is to stay in the neighborhood and keep the home traditional like the neighborhood is. Public Hearing • Alex Swiggum, 4439 Garrison Lane stated that he likes the look of the proposed property and would approve the plan. Commissioner Strauss moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion carried. Discussion/Comments/Questions •Commissioners asked if there were other neighbors that were in favor of the project and Staff replied that it was about 3 neighbors in favor of the approval they received correspondence from. • Commissioners discussed setting a floor to floor height from the basement floor to the top of the first floor. Commissioners discussed the massing task force and that the 1 foot rule can be a problem in the flood zone areas. Commissioners discussed bringing down the truss height down by 8 inches, from 24 to 16 inches, and they would support a 2 foot and 8 inch variance. Commissioners discussed that a 10 foot allowance floor to floor should give the applicant enough room, but that decision of a new policy shouldn’t be made in the middle of this application. • Commissioners noted although applicant comments should be heard, it should not be the only basis for deciding. A variance approval often sets a precedent and having some analysis provides a factual basis for how we decide. Motion Commissioner Nemorov moved approval of the variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Aye: Strauss, Nemerov, Berube, Olsen Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 5 of 9 Nay: Miranda, Lee, Hamilton, Bennett The motion fails 4-4. Commissioner Lee made a motion to approve of the variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein and with the condition to change the variance to a height maximum of 2 feet and 8 inches. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Commissioner Nemerov commented that the Commissioners were struggling to come up with the correct number for the height and that the applicant doesn’t appear to want the lower height, but that they feel like they have to. Aye: Miranda, Lee, Strauss, Hamilton, Bennett, Berube Nay: Nemerov, Olsen The motion passed 6-2. C. 4536 France Avenue, Sign Variance Planner Bodeker presented the staff report for 4536 France Ave. South, Edina, MN. Bodeker explained that the applicant is requesting a setback variance for a freestanding sign. The property is located on the west side of France Avenue, south of Sunnyside Avenue. The subject property was rezoned from residential to office district in 1976. The proposed sign is located within an existing planting bed approximately 3 feet 7 inches from the property line and approximately 13 feet 8 inches from the curb along France Avenue. The City’s sign code requires freestanding signs to be setback 20 feet from the traveled portion of the street. The size and height of the proposed sign is compliant with the City’s Sign Ordinance. There was a sign in this same location for the previous use on the site and had that original sign not been removed, a variance would not be required. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Discussion/Comments/Questions • Commissioners asked if the flower bed was part of the construction for the sign and Bodeker replied that the planter bed is existing. • Commissioners asked if the purpose of moving signs back from the street is to improve the character of the neighborhood. Director Teague replied that it is to keep away from blocking the line of sight for cars coming out of the driveway. Teague mentioned that moving the sign back 20 feet could mean moving it into the middle of the applicant’s parking lot. Appearing for the Applicant Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 6 of 9 Rick Ballantyne, Schad Tracy Signs, introduced himself and explained that he designed it and would be involved with the installation. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Bennett moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. The motion carried. Discussion/Comments/Questions •Commissioners discussed the diagram with the sign and a man standing next to it. Commissioners discussed that the height of the sign is 7 feet and the height of the man doesn’t appear to be scaled correctly. Commissioners discussed using an average height of Americans for future scaled drawings. •Commissioners asked about the plantings and how much room they needed to grow. Ballantyne replied that the property owner has natural plantings and they grow quite tall. •Commissioners commented that the sign is tastefully done with good materials and seems to match the sign to the North well. •Commissioners noted that the sign variance is creating a precedence to allow more visual clutter. Motion Commissioner Bennett moved approval of the variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. VII. Community Comment None. VIII. Reports/Recommendations A. 7079 Amundson Avenue, Sketch Plan Review Director Teague presented a PowerPoint and explained that the property is the old drycleaners site and is located in the 70th & Cahill Small Area Plan area. Teague explained that the Edina Housing Foundation recently purchased the property and went out for an RFP for affordable housing on the site and explained that MWF Properties was the consultant chosen. The site is currently zoned PID until the Small Area Plan is approved and the density allowed is 50 units per acre. Teague explained that the property to the east is owned by the City of Edina and contains the Regional Trail. Teague noted the pedestrian connection through the south side of the site, possibly adding more additional green space, the parking stall side of the building, a parking study would be conducted before a formal application would take place. Teague explained that the plan is generally consistent with density and height. Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 7 of 9 Peter Worthington, with MWF Properties, introduced himself and gave a brief explanation of the project to the Planning Commission. Worthington explained that the Housing Foundation initially had 72 units per acre and it has been reduced to 62 units to meet the density and height guidelines in the Small Area Plan. Worthington discussed some challenges of the site that included only being a 120 foot wide site, IBC regulations with allowed windows, and the grade change from north to south. Discussion/Comments/Questions Commissioners asked how the project compares to the Small Area Plan and Teague responded that in terms of setbacks it wouldn’t be compliant with zoning, but it is compliant with density and height. Teague explained that the applicant would need flexibility for the setback requirements and the project is short-parked as proposed, but the parking study would address that concern. Commissioners discussed potentially flipping the parking to the opposite side so the building to be closer to the park. Commissioners also discussed the idea of having the City owned property re- zoned as a vacated street so that the code issues were less of an issue. Worthington replied that having the building to the west was to activate the streetscape. Commissioners suggested adding balconies on the building to help with “eyes on the trail,” making the trail a safer place. Worthington explained that typically balconies are not included because of a cost factor, possible uncontrolled penetration to the exterior wall, and the esthetic might not be ideal with how some residents choose to use them. Commissioners complimented the applicant on the proposal and stated that it’s clear that the intentions are to make this a good project. Commissioners followed up with asking the applicant why the story wasn’t being proposed as 5 stories and Worthington replied that 5 stories puts the project at a different construction type and raises costs. In addition, Worthington explained that the building wouldn’t necessarily have a smaller footprint if it was 5 stories because of the covered parking and wouldn’t reduce the need for parking. Worthington explained that the current covered parking layout is quite efficient. Commissioners expressed concerns regarding the parking and the spillover off site. Worthington replied with explaining that underground parking is not an additional cost to the tenants so there is no incentive to spill out of the site where uncovered parking is. Worthington also explained that he is fully prepared to provide data from their affordable communities during the parking study. Commissioners expressed concern that some trail users or non-tenants may want to use the parking lot as a starting point start their bicycle rides on the trail and they may take up additional parking spots. Commissioners also expressed support to move the building more to the east in order to be closer to the trail. Commissioners commented that they believe a connection needs to be made to Amundson and the trail and it was a large part of the Small Area Plan. Commissioners noted that might be possible by changing the grading around a bit, and Worthington replied that accessing the garage at the north end might be problematic to do 2 levels of parking. Director Teague commented that a way to address the connection from Amundson to the trail along the south side could be to dedicate a 20 foot easement in green space and when the site to the south develops we could get an additional 20 foot easement to create a 40 foot path for a nice connection. Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 8 of 9 Commissioners commented that they liked the current parking situation because having the front of the building up against the street helps create the village feel that the 70th & Cahill Small Area Plan was looking for. Commissioners asked if any thought went into having retail on the first floor and Worthington replied that mixed use is difficult to have in a completely affordable project because you can’t have retail tenants able sign up for something when you can’t have a contract for something you don’t know if you will get the funding for and it creates an additional cost. Commissioners stated that they believe this is the most important project for the City of Edina because it 100 percent affordable on Foundation owned land so it is important that it is successful. Commissioners also stated that it is the first project for the 70th & Cahill area so it must be a showpiece. Commissioners expressed concerns about the revitalization of the area and suggested that the applicant focus on the village like feel, concerned about the elevation causing there to be a lack of exterior articulation, and concerned about the lack of activation on the ground level. Commissioners stated that they would like to see more outdoor continuity and spaces for the potential tenants of the building and asked the applicant to read the building type guidelines for the 70th & Cahill Small Area Plan. Commissioners continued to explain that architectural elements such as cornices, lintels, bays, and sills are vocabularies that don’t appear to be expressed on the general renderings. Worthington explained that he understands and explained that they are dealing with contaminated soils and mitigation systems as well as competing with second and third tier suburbs were land and developments costs are much less. Commissioners commented on how they would like to see the number of surface parking stalls reduced and they are interested in seeing how the traffic study looks to potentially free up more green space. B. Comprehensive Plan Update Commissioners discussed the Comprehensive Plan Open House on March 11, 2019 at Public Works from 6:30 PM until 8:30 PM. Commissioners discussed possibly making the Open House an interactive broadcast over the internet and Eidsness replied that she would look into the idea. Commissioners explained that City Council members would be at the National League of Cities Conference during that meeting, and it might potentially be a conflict for attendance. Teague explained that the Open House date was chosen so it wouldn’t fall over Edina’s spring break. Commissioners discussed posting the Comprehensive Draft now for people to access online and Director Teague said it is up to the Planning Commission to decide and that was done with the Southdale Plan. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding when to post to draft and decided that the Planning Commission would stand by their original schedule. IX. Correspondence and Petitions None. X. Chair and Member Comments Draft Minutes Approved Minutes Approved Date: March 13, 2019 Page 9 of 9 Chair Olsen discussed developing the TDM, Traffic Demand Management, and wanting two members from the Planning Commission and Commissioner Miranda volunteered. Commissioner Miranda discussed that www.websitewire.com linked to an article about what happens by the year 2080 and what the climate of the Twin Cities will be. Commissioner Miranda also discussed the Community Advisory Committee for the E Line ABRT and that they had their first meeting. XI. Staff Comments None. XII. Adjournment Commissioner Hamilton moved to adjourn the February 13, 2019, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 10:05 PM. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.