Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-08-16 Planning Commission Regular Meeting PacketAg enda Planning Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota City H all Council Chambers Wednesday, August 16, 2023 7:00 PM Watch the m eeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeeting s or Facebook.com /EdinaMN. How to Participate in Public Hearings: Call 786-496-5601 E nter Confer ence Pin 5347981# Press *1 on your telephone keypad when you would like to g et in the queue to speak An operator will intr oduce you when it is your turn I.Ca ll To Ord er II.Roll Ca ll III.Approva l Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approva l Of Meeting Min u tes A.Draft Minutes of Regu la r Meetin gs on July 26, 2023 V.Com m u n ity Com m ent During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. G enerally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for consideration at a future meeting. VI.Pu b lic Hea rings A.Zon ing Ordin ance Am endm en t - Mu lti-fa m ily hou sin g in th e City 's PCD-1 a n d PCD-2 zon ing d istricts VII.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents VIII.Sta. Com m ents IX.Adjournm en t The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli3cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: August 16, 2023 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist Item Activity: Subject:Draft Minutes of R egular Meetings on July 26, 2023 Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve the draft minutes from J uly 26, 2023. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description July 26, 2023 Minutes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2023 Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers July 26, 2023 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Bornstein, Daye, Strauss, Smith, Felt and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Miranda, Padilla, Olson, Hu, and Gandhi. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Daye moved to approve the July 26, 2023, agenda. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, June 28, 2023 Commissioner Bornstein moved to approve the June 28, 2023, meeting minutes. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. V. Community Comment Ms. Janey Westin, 6136 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Commission regarding the June 28, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. Director Teague offered comments that can be reviewed in the official meeting video. VI. Public Hearings A. Preliminary Rezoning (Ordinance Amendments), Site Plan and Subdivision – 5100 Eden Avenue Director Teague presented the request of 5100 Eden Avenue for a Preliminary Rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2023 Page 2 of 3 Staff answered Commission questions. Mr. Ed Terhaar, Stantec, was at the meeting to answer Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Nick Murnane, and Mr. Theo Grothe, Opus Development, made a presentation and answered Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Steve Brown, 5528 Halifax Lane, addressed the Commission and indicated he was in favor of this proposal. Ms. Janey Westin, 6136 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Commission with her concerns about the project. Ms. Connie Carrino, 4509 Garretson Lane, addressed the Commission about her concerns with the Project. Ms. Susan Lee, 6708 Point Drive, addressed the Commission with concerns about the project and PUD. Ms. Laurie Grotz, 5513 Park Place, addressed the Commission regarding the PUD and her concerns with traffic. Commissioner Daye moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission reviewed the preliminary rezoning, site plan and subdivision for 5100 Eden Avenue and offered comments that can be reviewed in the official meeting video. Motion Commissioner Daye moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the preliminary rezoning, site plan and subdivision for 5100 Eden Avenue as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein and Commission findings. The motion included the following additional conditions: The same amount of brick shall be used on the building as would be required by a Code Compliant amount of brick on the building (the first vertical 60 feet of a building facing the public realm); A crossing shall be considered across Arcadia subject to review and recommendation of the city engineer; Windows be installed to mitigate noise from Highway 100; Landscaping on adjacent property shall be protected during construction and landscaping should be added on the north side of the bike/pedestrian path if allowed by Mn Dot. Commissioner Bornstein seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote: 6 Ayes and 0 Nays. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2023 Page 3 of 3 VII. Reports/Recommendations A. 2024 Work Plan Director Teague reviewed the 2024 Work Plan with the Commission. Staff answered Commission questions. The Commission reviewed and discussed the 2024 Work Plan and offered comments that can be reviewed in the official meeting video. VIII. Chair and Member Comments Received. IX. Staff Comments Received. X. Adjournment Commissioner Felt moved to adjourn the July 26, 2023, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 10:59 PM. Commissioner Daye seconded the motion. Motion carried. Date: August 16, 2023 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director Item Activity: Subject:Zoning O rdinanc e Amendment - Multi-family hous ing in the C ity's P C D-1 and P C D-2 zoning dis tric ts Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: R ecommend the C ity C ouncil adopt the O rdinance Amendment option B . I N TR O D U C TI O N: To clarify the C ity’s regulations regarding multiresidential land uses in the P C D -1 and P C D -2, P lanned C ommercial Z oning D istricts, the C ity Attorney has recommended a Z oning O rdinance Amendment. T here are two separate sections of the Z oning O rdinance that are in conflict. F irst, City Code Section 36-612 (C onditionally P ermitted U ses in the P C D, P lanned C ommercial D istrict) allows “multiresidential uses” as a conditionally permitted use. M ulti resi denti al use means a residential use permitted in the P lanned R esidence D istrict (P R D) and the Mixed Development District. P ermitted uses in the P R D include double dwelli ng uni t bui ldi ngs, resi denti al townhouses, resi denti al bui ldi ngs contai ni ng si x or fewer dwelli ng uni ts, and resi denti al bui ldi ngs. T hese types of structures do not have commercial uses on the first floor or basement. Under this provision of the City Code, the City of E dina has approved multiresidential projects, including the E dina F lats, and View 44. S econd, C ity C ode S ection 36-618 (18) states that no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the P C D -1 or P C D-2 subdistrict. T he proposed amendment clarifies the ambiguity between these two S ections of C ity C ode. Links to the S mall Area P lans: M icrosoft Word - F inal Revised Draft 44th-F rance Small Area P lan_8-24-18 (edinamn.gov) M icrosoft Word - 50th-F rance S AP D raft _2019-M AR -22_ (edinamn.gov) *Microsoft Word - 70th--Cahill-plan-adopted-January-8-2019-P D F.docx (edinamn.gov) Appendix-A5-Wooddale-Valley-View-S AP -P D F (edinamn.gov) AT TAC HME N T S: Description Draft Ordinance - Option A (Allow stand-alone multiresidential hous ing in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Dis trict by conditional use permit) Draft Ordinance - Option B (Prohibit housing in basement & firs t story) Zoning Map - Highlighting PCD-1 & PCD-2 Districts Staff Pres entation Planning Commission Staff Report - August 16, 2023 Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Staff Pres entation 8-16-23 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2023-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING MULTIRESIDENTIAL LAND USES IN THE PCD-1 AND PCD-2, PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts) (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a. Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit, no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX Option B ORDINANCE NO. 2023-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING MULTIRESIDENTIAL LAND USES IN THE PCD-1 AND PCD-2, PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts. Multi-residential uses, as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor EdinaMN.gov Zoning Ordinance Amendment Multiresidential Housing in the PCD-1 & PCD-2 Districts Conflicting Code Regulations City Code Section 36-612 (Conditionally Permitted Uses in the PCD, Planned Commercial District) allows “multiresidential uses” as a conditionally permitted use. Multiresidential use means a residential use permitted in the Planned Residence District (PRD) and the Mixed Development District. Permitted uses in the PRD include double dwelling unit buildings, residential townhouses, residential buildings containing six or fewer dwelling units, and residential buildings. Residential building is defined as “a building used for residential purposes or residential occupancy.” These types of structures do not have commercial uses on the first floor or basement. Under this provision of the City Code, the City of Edina has approved multiresidential projects, including the Edina Flats, and View 44. City Code Section 36-618 (18) states that no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Ordinance Options for Consideration Option A – Allow Multifamily Residential Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts as a Conditionally Permitted Use Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts) are amended as follows: (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a.Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit, no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Option B – Require commercial uses in the basement and first floor in any Multifamily Residential Use in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts.Multi-residential uses as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Comprehensive Plan Support for allowing standalone Multiresidential uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts PCD-1 and PCD-2 zoning districts are located within the City’s smaller Neighborhood Nodes, 50th and France, 44th and France, Valley View/Wooddale, 70th and Cahill. Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan Two of the guiding principles of the Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan (SAP) that support stand - alone multiresidential uses are as follows (Page v of the executive summary): “Housing. Sites should be allowed to transition to housing from business use in response to the changing market demands.” “Graceful Transitions to Neighborhood. Graceful transitions should be maintained from more active areas to quieter neighborhood streets immediately beyond the node. Generally lower density multiresidential uses provide a more graceful transition to single family home that commercial land uses.” “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market. Although the proportion of the Study Area devoted to housing will likely be greater than it was in 2014, the exact pattern of land use over time will be determined by market forces. Current uses of land may, of course, remain as they are until owners decide to make a change. The commercial site north of Valley View Road at Oaklawn Avenue may evolve to housing. The Edina Village Market may redevelop as a mix of housing and businesses. The sites east of Kellogg Avenue immediately north of Valley View Road may evolve as either commercial or residential land uses.” (Page vii of the executive summary) Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan “Residential Uses Encouraged. As stated in the definition of Neighborhood Node earlier in this plan, commercial uses are not prohibited within properties with Neighborhood Node designation. Nevertheless, it is recommended that development along the northern edge of the study area include residential uses such as detached single-family houses and/or rowhouses. Commercial uses in this area, if any, should be limited as much as possible to the corners of Wooddale Avenue and have primary frontages facing Wooddale Avenue.” (Page 43) “Site C) The City-Owned Site at Kellogg Avenue and Valley View Road Because of its ownership by the City, size, configuration, and location near the eastern end of the Study Area, the City-owned parcel is recognized as a unique and critical property. (See Parcel A on Figure 4.8) Community members’ opinions about its future use in the Study Area were varied and included commercial, residential, mixed use, and a public use consisting of a plaza/park/open space. Of primary importance to the community is that any new development be carefully designed to respect the scale and context of the single-family homes northward along Kellogg, and that the success of adjacent businesses are not negatively affected. • Leveraging the Property to Accomplish Plan Goals. The City-owned property should be leveraged to advance the principles, goals, policies and guidelines of this plan. Optimizing the use of the City-owned property (0.25 acres) will likely require assembling the property with neighboring privately-owned parcels in the future. At that time, the City will review the merits of any development proposal for conformance to this plan. Future uses could include residential and/or commercial development, with possibility of dedication of a portion of the site as a Gathering Space (see Gathering Space Guidelines) or other public space.” (Page 44) 50th and France Small Area Plan 50th AND FRANCE SMALL AREA PLAN Within the 50th and France plan, there are some areas of the district that are contemplated for future stand-alone multi- residential development (areas in yellow). These properties have PCD-2 Zoning on them and would be allowed by CUP. 44th and France Small Area Plan “Guiding Principle 5: Housing Housing should be provided in the study area to ensure choices for existing and future neighborhood residents. New types of housing may be provided, including multifamily dwellings (in mixed-use buildings with residential uses above ground level commercial or office space) or additional types such as courtyard housing, townhomes, and live/work housing . It is felt that the market will support the preferred housing types, which could include apartments and ownership options. Preferences should be the types that best support the city’s affordable housing policy.” (Page vii. Executive Summary) “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market’s changing over time. (Current land uses may, of course, remain until owners decide to make a change.) Allow for flexibility in land use guidance to allow for a compatible mix of uses. Allow transitions in building scale to bring additional residents, business activity, investment, and vitality to the node.” (Page 38.) 44th and France Small Area Plan 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan “Framing a New Village. When it comes to defining a desired look for a new village, there was considerable discussion about the term “mixed‐use” from both zoning and architectural perspectives. The SAPWG and most community meeting participants were open to a “mix of uses” (e.g. residential, retail, commercial etc.), YET there was strong opposition to how “mixed‐use” is currently (in 2018) being used by developers to merely build rental apartments above retail. The SAPWG and residents would prefer any new development to include a variety of both rental and owned condos, townhomes and apartments along with neighborhood‐serving retail located in the most visible locations.” (Page v of the Executive Summary) 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan Ordinance Options for Consideration Option A – Allow Multifamily Residential Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts as a Conditionally Permitted Use Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts) are amended as follows: (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a.Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit, no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Option B – Require commercial uses in the basement and first floor in any Multifamily Residential Use in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts.Multi-residential uses as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Questions August 16, 2023 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Multiresidential Land Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2, Planned Commercial Zoning Districts. To clarify the City’s regulations regarding multiresidential land uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2, Planned Commercial Zoning Districts, the City Attorney has recommended a Zoning Ordinance Amendment. There are two separate sections of the Zoning Ordinance that are in conflict. First, City Code Section 36-612 (Conditionally Permitted Uses in the PCD, Planned Commercial District) allows “multiresidential uses” as a conditionally permitted use. Per Section 36-10 of City Code, Multiresidential use means a residential use permitted in the Planned Residence District (PRD) and the Mixed Development District. Permitted uses in the PRD include double dwelling unit buildings, residential townhouses, residential buildings containing six or fewer dwelling units, and residential buildings. These types of structures do not have commercial uses on the first floor or basement. Under this provision of the City Code, the City of Edina has approved multiresidential projects, including the Edina Flats, and View 44. Second, City Code Section 36-618 (18) states that no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Staff has provided two options for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider moving forward to clarify the City Code. Supporting information from the Comprehensive Plan/Small Area Plans that multiresidential land uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts be allowed as a stand-alone use. Most of the PCD-1 and PCD-2 zoning districts are located within the City’s smaller Neighborhood Nodes, 50th and France, 44th and France, Valley View/Wooddale, 70th and Cahill. (See attached Zoning Map highlighting the location of these districts.) The following information is from the City’s small area plans for these Neighborhood Nodes. (Links to the small area plan are included in the planning commission packet, attached to the coversheet): STAFF REPORT Page 2 VALLEY VIEW/WOODDALE SMALL AREA PLAN Two of the guiding principles of the Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan (SAP) that support stand-alone multiresidential uses are as follows (Page v of the executive summary): “Housing. Sites should be allowed to transition to housing from business use in response to the changing market demands.” “Graceful Transitions to Neighborhood. Graceful transitions should be maintained from more active areas to quieter neighborhood streets immediately beyond the node. Generally lower density multiresidential uses provide a more graceful transition to single family home that commercial land uses.” “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market. Although the proportion of the Study Area devoted to housing will likely be greater than it was in 2014, the exact pattern of land use over time will be determined by market forces. Current uses of land may, of course, remain as they are until owners decide to make a change. The commercial site north of Valley View Road at Oaklawn Avenue may evolve to housing. The Edina Village Market may redevelop as a mix of housing and businesses. The sites east of Kellogg Avenue immediately north of Valley View Road may evolve as either commercial or residential land uses.” (Page vii of the executive summary) Additionally, the SAP refers to commercial property in the area as follows: “Land Use and Community Design Land use in the Wooddale Valley View Node is expected to evolve but retain a mixed-use profile of small commercial, office and residential uses into the future. The small area plan introduced and recommended a new land use category, the Neighborhood Node (NN) to replace the existing Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation. The NN designation has a more intentional emphasis on the intertwining of new alternative housing units such as row houses and townhomes, landscaped open gathering spaces and pedestrian and bike friendly planning and design. Design goals included the following: Activation of the Core. Concentrate activity and neighborhood-serving commercial businesses near the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and Valley View Road. Building-to-Street Relationships. Ensure that ground-level frontages address public rights-of way so as to encourage beauty, safety, walkability and a sense of place. Graceful Transitions. Encourage the scale of buildings to transition from center to edge of the Neighborhood Node, with the largest buildings located near the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and Valley View Road, decreasing in scale toward the surrounding single-family neighborhood. Ensure that redevelopment near single-family homes is designed sensitively.” (Page 30) “Residential Uses Encouraged. As stated in the definition of Neighborhood Node earlier in this plan, commercial uses are not prohibited within properties with Neighborhood Node designation. Nevertheless, it is recommended that development along the northern edge of the study area include residential uses such as detached single-family houses and/or rowhouses. Commercial uses in this area, if any, should be limited as much as possible to the corners of Wooddale Avenue and have primary frontages facing Wooddale Avenue.” (Page 43) STAFF REPORT Page 3 “Site C) The City-Owned Site at Kellogg Avenue and Valley View Road Because of its ownership by the City, size, configuration, and location near the eastern end of the Study Area, the City-owned parcel is recognized as a unique and critical property. (See Parcel A on Figure 4.8) Community members’ opinions about its future use in the Study Area were varied and included commercial, residential, mixed use, and a public use consisting of a plaza/park/open space. Of primary importance to the community is that any new development be carefully designed to respect the scale and context of the single-family homes northward along Kellogg, and that the success of adjacent businesses are not negatively affected. • Leveraging the Property to Accomplish Plan Goals. The City-owned property should be leveraged to advance the principles, goals, policies and guidelines of this plan. Optimizing the use of the City-owned property (0.25 acres) will likely require assembling the property with neighboring privately-owned parcels in the future. At that time, the City will review the merits of any development proposal for conformance to this plan. Future uses could include residential and/or commercial development, with possibility of dedication of a portion of the site as a Gathering Space (see Gathering Space Guidelines) or other public space.” (Page 44) (Page 49) STAFF REPORT Page 4 50th AND FRANCE SMALL AREA PLAN As demonstrated below, within the 50th and France plan, there are some areas of the district that are contemplated for future stand-alone multi-residential development (areas in yellow). These properties have PCD-2 Zoning on them and would be allowed by CUP. 44th/FRANCE SMALL AREA PLAN The 44th/France Small Area Plan also contemplates standalone multiresidential housing as demonstrated below: “Guiding Principle 5: Housing Housing should be provided in the study area to ensure choices for existing and future neighborhood residents. New types of housing may be provided, including multifamily dwellings (in mixed-use buildings with residential uses above ground level commercial or office space) or additional types such as courtyard housing, townhomes, and live/work housing. It is felt that the market will support the preferred housing types, which could include apartments and ownership options. Preferences should be the types that best support the city’s affordable housing policy.” (Page vii. Executive Summary) “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market’s changing over time. (Current land uses may, of course, remain until owners decide to make a change.) Allow for flexibility in land use guidance to allow for a compatible mix of uses. Allow transitions in building scale to bring additional residents, business activity, investment, and vitality to the node.” (Page 38.) STAFF REPORT Page 5 “Flexibility for Redevelopment. Provides greater flexibility to the development market by more explicitly encouraging the inclusion of needed housing.” Page 42 “The description of a “Neighborhood Node,” (areas where PCD zoning exists) within the Comprehensive Plan, includes “small-to moderate scale commercial, residential or mixed-use buildings, serving primarily the adjacent neighborhood.” “Primary uses encouraged are neighborhood serving retail and services, offices, studios, institutional and residential.” (Page 42.) “C. Development Concepts Shown are the existing condition and a conceptual, future condition. The conceptual plan does not prescribe or dictate what must be built in the study area. Instead, it illustrates concepts, ideas, and design features for the study area that were generated by community members at Community Meetings, Work Group members, and the consultant team.” (Pages 48-53) STAFF REPORT Page 6 70th AND CAHILL SMALL AREA PLAN “Framing a New Village. When it comes to defining a desired look for a new village, there was considerable discussion about the term “mixed‐use” from both zoning and architectural perspectives. The SAPWG and most community meeting participants were open to a “mix of uses” (e.g. residential, retail, commercial etc.), YET there was strong opposition to how “mixed‐ use” is currently (in 2018) being used by developers to merely build rental apartments above retail. The SAPWG and residents would prefer any new development to include a variety of both rental and owned condos, townhomes and apartments along with neighborhood‐serving retail located in the most visible locations.” (Page v of the Executive Summary) Page 9 in the 70th and Cahill SAP: Page 38 in the 70th and Cahill SAP: STAFF REPORT Page 7 Page 43-44 in the 70th and Cahill SAP: STAFF REPORT Page 8 The downside of allowing standalone multiresidential land uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts is that there is the potential over time to lose commercial uses within these districts and the City’s smaller commercial nodes. Staff has outlined alternatives below for consideration. OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION Option A – Allow Stand-Alone Multiresidential Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts Recommend the City Council approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment that would allow multiresidential use within a PCD-1 or PCD-2 Zoning District, as drafted in the attached Ordinance and below: Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts): (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a. Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit, no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Option B – Require All Multiresidential Development in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts to have retail on the first floor and basement. Recommend the City Council approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment that would require no multiresidential use within a PCD-1 or PCD-2 Zoning District be allowed on the first floor or basement as drafted in the attached Ordinance and below: Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts. Multi-residential uses as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Staff Recommendation Based on the feedback from the Planning Commission during its last discussion on these amendments, and the concern regarding the potential for losing retail uses to multi-family housing in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts, Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Option B. Better Together Edina Project: City of Edina Ordinance Amendment, Section 36-618 and Section 36-612 VISITORS 14 CONTRIBUTORS 5 RESPONSES 5 0 Registered 0 Unverified 5 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 5 Anonymous Survey Responses Public Hearing Comments- City Code Section 36-618 and Section 36-612 Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2023 08:44:40 am Last Seen:Jun 22, 2023 08:44:40 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name John Harden Q2.Address 5724 Duncan Ln Q3.Comment Respectfully request the Planning Commission to please reject the Amendment proposed, and that PCD-1 zoning remain in place. I further ask that ask that the Planning Commission and City Council respect the zoning that exists as residents rely on it. Zoning is an important commitment to Edina residents and should be respected. It seems like the pace of development in the City is getting out of hand, creating what feels like a zoning free for all, with inevitable mistakes being made. With all these 100% residential developments being forced into Commercial Districts on small sites, and simply changing zoning when convenient without consideration of the long-tern impact, or the input of the impacted neighborhoods. Most residents want the Commercial Districts and existing zoning to remain intact. The City and residents claim walkability is important, green spaces are important, but by the City Staff recommending and City Council approving these residential developments, that not only doesn’t comply with zoning laws, but is incongruent and unfair to residents who have made investments in their homes and pay the taxes that support the city staff and city resources. It appears both buildings were PCD-1 which doesn’t allow residential on the first floor and basement. Both these buildings were built with residential on the 1st floor. No affordable housing was included. This mistake caused a very large buildings to be built on sites that would have not been allowed in the same density had zoning been respected, and it cut the commercial space in half as to what residents wanted. A small area plan was performed in the area years ago, with a lot of business and resident input, and was incorporated into the Comp Plan. As we understand it, Cary Teague Planning Director informed Developer and City Council that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) could apply, when in fact there is nowhere in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 code that says this is allowable. As we understand, this Amendment is to rectify this mistake. But this is not rectifiable, and the existing zoning should remain as is. The City Staff, Planning Commission, and City Council should respect existing zoning and please stop putting in oversized developments of residential only in neighborhoods that impacted residents do not want. • View 44 apartments! • Edina Flats Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2023 09:54:47 am Last Seen:Jun 22, 2023 09:54:47 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Janey Westin Q2.Address 6136 Brookview Ave., Edina Q3.Comment The proposed amendment to Section 36-618 Zoning Ordinance, does nothing to address what is at issue: "(PCD) Sec. 36- 618. - Special requirements/ (18) Standards for residential dwelling units./ a. No part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict." All Planning Commission members have been provided the two pages (paper copy) of "Section 36-612 - Conditional uses./ The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts. Multi-residential uses subject to following:" etc. etc. You have had about a month to carefully read through and understand how conditional uses are permitted, or NOT stated as permitted, in the PCD-1 & 2 subdistricts. In those two pages that apply to this proposed amendment, the words, "basement" and "first floor" do not appear. NOTHING in Section 36-612 is stated, permitting residential dwelling at basement or first floor levels. This conditional uses section of city ordinances is very clearly emphasizing how affordable housing is to be done in a PCD-1 or 2 subdistrict, when commercial business is happening on the street level and/or basement level of a building. The word "affordable" appears 19 times(!) in the two pages. Paired with Section 36-618, the intention is clear that conditional uses for housing in PCD-1 & 2 districts is to be aimed at affordable housing needs of the city, consisting of at least 10-20%, WITHOUT losing the commercial aspects of the PCD-1 & 2 zoning, and that the residential space is to be at 2nd floor level and up. In the Valley View/Wooddale commercial node area, since 2018, roughly HALF of the commercial potential has been eliminated, due to the three most recent, fully residential projects being erroneously allowed on PCD-1 zoned properties. (City Flats at Kellogg and Valley View on the north, View 44 apartments on the south of Valley View, and the former Burley's site at the Oaklawn/62nd St/Valley View intersection). The developers for these projects should have been properly guided by the Planning Department to apply for correct zoning for the 100% residential projects, at the BEGINNING of the process. The neighborhood has lost a favorite ice cream shop, a potential future Italian restaurant, a desired coffee/sandwich shop, the Superette where we could get a gallon of milk and essentials in a hurry, potential small businesses that residents could walk and bike to, etc. This is NOT what was stated as desirable when I, as well as other residents, participated in creating the Small Area Plan for Valley View/Wooddale. The proposed amendment to Section 36- 618 either steers developers away from a PCD-1 or 2 zoned project to PUD, or steers them back to saying that "Conditional uses permitted" allows basement or first floor residential living, when IN FACT, it does NOT. There is no ambiguity here. The proposal does not solve the city's problem of having allowed the last 3 fully residential projects in PCD-1 zoned properties. They still have that zoning. In my opinion, this amendment would not stand up in court, either. Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2023 13:06:27 pm Last Seen:Jun 22, 2023 13:06:27 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim Barzen Q2.Address 5285 Kelsey Terrace Q3.Comment Please note, I am also a 28yr tax paying tenant of 5780 Lincoln Dr. #105. I respectfully request the Planning Commission to please reject the Amendment proposed. And request the PCD-1 zoning to remain. And ask that the Planning Commission and City Council to please respect the zoning that exists as residents rely on it. Zoning is the commitment to residents and should be respected. Thank you for seriously considering my comments. Tim Barzen Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2023 13:32:25 pm Last Seen:Jun 22, 2023 13:32:25 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Angela Chapman Q2.Address 5509 Parkwood Lane Edina Q3.Comment Please reject the Amendment proposed! I request to PCD-1 zoning to remain and respect the zoning that exists as residents rely on it! I know 100's of residents in Parkwood Knolls that want to reject the affordable housing project. Please listen to us! Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Aug 10, 2023 08:29:17 am Last Seen:Aug 10, 2023 08:29:17 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nate Ellsworth Q2.Address 6141 Oaklawn Avenue Q3.Comment Option A is kind of confusing and I think fails to give home owners an understanding of potential development in their area. When a homeowner/resident or business moves into an area the zoning is known, but the idea the zoning can just be changed by a conditional use permit that does not require the same process as a zoning change seems strange to me. I think zoning and ordinances should provide stability to an area not a wide variety of options that are confusing for residents. Option B does not really seem to resolve the issue since there are buildings in PCD-1 zones with residential in the first story. Not sure what this is resolving. The most disappointing thing about all of this is that this issue was raised by a resident and not city staff, the planning commission or the city council. And then the process to address the issue has not been handled very well by city staff with the creation of potential public notice violations (which again was caught by a resident and not city staff or the planning commission). EdinaMN.gov Zoning Ordinance Amendment Multiresidential Housing in the PCD-1 & PCD-2 Districts Conflicting Code Regulations City Code Section 36-612 (Conditionally Permitted Uses in the PCD, Planned Commercial District) allows “multiresidential uses” as a conditionally permitted use. Multiresidential use means a residential use permitted in the Planned Residence District (PRD) and the Mixed Development District. Permitted uses in the PRD include double dwelling unit buildings, residential townhouses, residential buildings containing six or fewer dwelling units, and residential buildings. Residential building is defined as “a building used for residential purposes or residential occupancy.” These types of structures do not have commercial uses on the first floor or basement. Under this provision of the City Code, the City of Edina has approved multiresidential projects, including the Edina Flats, and View 44. City Code Section 36-618 (18) states that no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Ordinance Options for Consideration Option A –Allow Multifamily Residential Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts as a Conditionally Permitted Use Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts) are amended as follows: (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a.Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit,no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Option B – Require commercial uses in the basement and first floor in any Multifamily Residential Use in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts.Multi-residential uses as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Comprehensive Plan Support for allowing standalone Multiresidential uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts PCD-1 and PCD-2 zoning districts are located within the City’s smaller Neighborhood Nodes, 50th and France, 44th and France, Valley View/Wooddale, 70th and Cahill. Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan Two of the guiding principles of the Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan (SAP) that support stand- alone multiresidential uses are as follows (Page v of the executive summary): “Housing. Sites should be allowed to transition to housing from business use in response to the changing market demands.” “Graceful Transitions to Neighborhood. Graceful transitions should be maintained from more active areas to quieter neighborhood streets immediately beyond the node. Generally lower density multiresidential uses provide a more graceful transition to single family home that commercial land uses.” “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market. Although the proportion of the Study Area devoted to housing will likely be greater than it was in 2014, the exact pattern of land use over time will be determined by market forces. Current uses of land may, of course, remain as they are until owners decide to make a change. The commercial site north of Valley View Road at Oaklawn Avenue may evolve to housing.The Edina Village Market may redevelop as a mix of housing and businesses. The sites east of Kellogg Avenue immediately north of Valley View Road may evolve as either commercial or residential land uses.” (Page vii of the executive summary) Valley View/Wooddale Small Area Plan “Residential Uses Encouraged.As stated in the definition of Neighborhood Node earlier in this plan, commercial uses are not prohibited within properties with Neighborhood Node designation. Nevertheless, it is recommended that development along the northern edge of the study area include residential uses such as detached single-family houses and/or rowhouses. Commercial uses in this area, if any, should be limited as much as possible to the corners of Wooddale Avenue and have primary frontages facing Wooddale Avenue.” (Page 43) “Site C) The City-Owned Site at Kellogg Avenue and Valley View Road Because of its ownership by the City, size, configuration, and location near the eastern end of the Study Area, the City-owned parcel is recognized as a unique and critical property. (See Parcel A on Figure 4.8) Community members’ opinions about its future use in the Study Area were varied and included commercial, residential, mixed use, and a public use consisting of a plaza/park/open space. Of primary importance to the community is that any new development be carefully designed to respect the scale and context of the single-family homes northward along Kellogg, and that the success of adjacent businesses are not negatively affected. • Leveraging the Property to Accomplish Plan Goals. The City-owned property should be leveraged to advance the principles, goals, policies and guidelines of this plan. Optimizing the use of the City-owned property (0.25 acres) will likely require assembling the property with neighboring privately-owned parcels in the future. At that time, the City will review the merits of any development proposal for conformance to this plan. Future uses could include residential and/or commercial development, with possibility of dedication of a portion of the site as a Gathering Space (see Gathering Space Guidelines) or other public space.” (Page 44) 50th and France Small Area Plan 50th AND FRANCE SMALL AREA PLAN Within the 50th and France plan, there are some areas of the district that are contemplated for future stand-alone multi- residential development (areas in yellow). These properties have PCD-2 Zoning on them and would be allowed by CUP. 44th and France Small Area Plan “Guiding Principle 5: Housing Housing should be provided in the study area to ensure choices for existing and future neighborhood residents. New types of housing may be provided, including multifamily dwellings (in mixed-use buildings with residential uses above ground level commercial or office space) or additional types such as courtyard housing, townhomes, and live/work housing. It is felt that the market will support the preferred housing types, which could include apartments and ownership options. Preferences should be the types that best support the city’s affordable housing policy.” (Page vii. Executive Summary) “Flexible Evolution of Land Uses. Allow existing land uses to evolve in response to the market’s changing over time. (Current land uses may, of course, remain until owners decide to make a change.) Allow for flexibility in land use guidance to allow for a compatible mix of uses. Allow transitions in building scale to bring additional residents, business activity, investment, and vitality to the node.” (Page 38.) 44th and France Small Area Plan 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan “Framing a New Village. When it comes to defining a desired look for a new village, there was considerable discussion about the term “mixed‐use” from both zoning and architectural perspectives. The SAPWG and most community meeting participants were open to a “mix of uses” (e.g. residential, retail, commercial etc.), YET there was strong opposition to how “mixed‐use” is currently (in 2018) being used by developers to merely build rental apartments above retail.The SAPWG and residents would prefer any new development to include a variety of both rental and owned condos, townhomes and apartments along with neighborhood‐serving retail located in the most visible locations.” (Page v of the Executive Summary) 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan Ordinance Options for Consideration - Recommendation Option A –Allow Multifamily Residential Uses in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts as a Conditionally Permitted Use Sec. 36-618. – Special Requirements (In the PCD Zoning Districts) are amended as follows: (18) Standards for residential dwelling units. a.Unless otherwise authorized by a Conditional Use Permit,no part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD-1 or PCD-2 subdistrict. Option B – Require commercial uses in the basement and first floor in any Multifamily Residential Use in the PCD-1 and PCD-2 Districts Sec. 36-612. - Conditional uses. The following are the conditional uses permitted in the PCD-1 subdistrict: (1) PCD-1 and PCD-2 subdistricts.Multi-residential uses as long as no part of any dwelling unit be located in a basement or on the first story of the building subject to following: Questions