Edina City Council — Transcript
Wednesday, September 25, 2024
Fence Height Variance Request - 4701-4707 Metal Road
Conditional Use Permit and Variances - 4208 Philbrook Lane
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Resolution - 72nd and France Avenue
Votes (5)
Approval of Meeting Agenda
Dissent: Commissioner Day expressed strong opposition to the inclusion of the TIF resolution, citing lack of Planning Commission authority and conflict of interest concerns.
Moved by Commissioner Day [3:25] · Seconded by None
Commissioner Day proposed removing Item 8.1 (Resolution B249 regarding TIF District) from the agenda, arguing the Planning Commission lacks authority over TIF matters, is not trained on TIF, and has no power of the purse. He also raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest, noting that LHB (the firm that prepared the TIF inspection report) was awarded a contract for the proposed tunnel under France Avenue. Chair Bennett and other commissioners noted that state law requires the Planning Commission to make a finding on whether development plans conform to the comprehensive plan once a TIF application is made. The motion to remove the item failed to receive a second, and the agenda was approved as written with agreement to address the concerns raised during the TIF discussion.
Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes (September 12, 2024)
Dissent: None
Moved by Unknown [7:56] · Seconded by Unknown [8:01]
No proposed changes to the minutes were offered. The minutes were approved by motion and second with all commissioners voting in favor.
Public Hearing: Fence Height Variance - 4701-4707 Metal Road
Dissent: Commissioners Felt and Hanaman voted against approval, citing concerns about the fence's ineffectiveness in screening taller structures and precedent-setting implications.
Moved by Unknown [49:49] · Seconded by Unknown [49:49]
Staff planner Chris Rocker presented a request for a 3-foot height variance to allow 9-foot tall fences (8-foot solid wall plus 1-foot trellis top) to replace existing 6-foot fences at four residential properties. The variance is sought to screen impacts from new BRT transit stations directly across from the properties on France Avenue. The stations include 12.5-foot tall bus shelters with lighting and heating, 14-foot LED illuminated pylon signs, and a new 30-foot street light. Staff recommended denial, citing lack of unique circumstances and concern about setting precedent. However, applicant Karen Willie and neighbors Robin Harmon and Molly Rice presented compelling testimony about the extraordinary nature of their situation: the stations are directly across from their properties (unlike other BRT locations where stations are diagonal), the shelters are lit 24 hours daily, buses will run every 10 minutes from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., and the city sidewalk encroaches on their property by 12 inches, having already removed a tree barrier 12 years ago. The applicants emphasized they had worked with the city for 2.5 years on this issue and that the fence was their only realistic mitigation option. Commissioners Padia and Day supported approval, finding the circumstances unique and the practical difficulties substantial. Commissioners Felt and Hanaman opposed approval, concerned about precedent and noting that the fence would not effectively screen structures taller than 9 feet. Commissioner Bennett cast the deciding vote in favor, emphasizing the unique configuration of the transit stations and the cumulative impacts on the properties.
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit and Variances - 4208 Philbrook Lane
Dissent: None; Commissioner Bornstein expressed some reservations about precedent but voted in favor due to the extraordinary floodway circumstances.
Moved by Unknown [1:26:59] · Seconded by Unknown [1:27:07]
Staff planner Chris Rocker presented a request for a conditional use permit and two variances to allow demolition and reconstruction of a single-family home currently located in a FEMA floodway designation. The property is one of several in the area affected by a floodway designation that staff and the applicant believe may be a modeling error rather than a true floodway risk. The applicant (represented by architect Heather Monahan) proposes to elevate the home above the flood elevation using fill and a stem wall, which would remove it from the floodway and allow the homeowner to pursue a Letter of Map Revision (LOMAR) from FEMA to correct the designation. The variances requested are: (1) a 4.09-foot side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement, and (2) a variance to allow 72.7% of the basement to be above grade (exceeding the 50% maximum), which would technically make it a three-story home. Staff recommended approval, finding that the floodway designation creates extraordinary circumstances unique to the property and that the proposed design minimizes impacts while achieving the city's goal of removing structures from flood zones. Jessica Wilson, the city's water resource manager, explained that the floodway designation appears to be a broad-brush modeling artifact rather than a true indication of flood velocity risk, and that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has more current elevation data suggesting the flood plane may actually be higher than FEMA's maps indicate. A neighbor (Mary Inle) testified in support, praising the family's character and commitment to the community. Another neighbor raised questions about maintenance of the pool and backyard during the interim period. The Commission unanimously approved the request, with Commissioner Bornstein expressing some concern about the precedent of allowing existing non-conforming setbacks to carry forward into new construction, but ultimately supporting approval due to the extraordinary floodway circumstances.
Resolution B249: TIF District Conformance with Comprehensive Plan - 72nd and France Avenue
Dissent: Multiple commissioners expressed concerns about the inclusion of the pedestrian crossing language in Appendix E, with consensus that it should be removed as unnecessary and potentially creating the appearance of a conflict of interest. However, commissioners agreed that removing the language would not prevent the city from using TIF funds for public infrastructure improvements in the future.
Moved by Not completed in transcript · Seconded by Not completed in transcript
Economic Development Manager Bill Nondorf presented Resolution B249, which seeks Planning Commission confirmation that the proposed TIF District plan for the Macy's Furniture Store redevelopment (7235 France Avenue) conforms to the city's comprehensive plan and development goals. Nondorf explained that Minnesota state statute requires the Planning Commission to make this determination once a TIF application is filed, even though the Commission had already approved the underlying development project (PUD #25) in May. The TIF plan was prepared by Ellers and Associates, an independent public finance firm. Nondorf walked through the applicable plans (Comprehensive Plan 2024, Southdale Plan, Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan) and explained how the project aligns with city goals for mixed-use development, multimodal transportation, job creation, and sustainability. He also addressed the inclusion of language in Appendix E of the TIF plan regarding a potential pedestrian crossing (tunnel, bridge, or at-grade crossing) under France Avenue. Nondorf explained that this language was included at the direction of the City Council as a placeholder to preserve the option of using TIF funds for public infrastructure improvements, but that no decision has been made about whether to pursue such a crossing. He noted that the crossing concept dates back to a 2007 Urban Design Plan and that the city has contracted with LHB (a multi-disciplinary design firm) to conduct preliminary conceptual engineering. Significant discussion ensued regarding: (1) whether the pedestrian crossing language should be included in the resolution, with commissioners expressing concern that it appears to earmark TIF funds for a speculative project and that LHB's role in both generating the crossing concept and authoring the TIF plan creates a conflict of interest; (2) whether the Planning Commission's vote would constitute approval of the crossing as consistent with the comprehensive plan; and (3) the appropriateness of including specific project language in a TIF plan when other TIF plans have used more general language about public infrastructure. Nondorf clarified that the general language about public infrastructure improvements is standard in all city TIF plans and that the specific crossing language is not necessary to preserve the city's ability to fund such improvements. He also explained that any decision to actually pursue a pedestrian crossing would require separate city council approval and would likely go through the Transportation Commission and Capital Improvement Plan process. Commissioner Padia raised questions about public benefit to schools, noting that the property is in the Richfield School District rather than Edina, and asking whether the city should be concerned about the historical decision to exclude this area from the Edina School District. Nondorf acknowledged the historical boundary issue but noted that state funding for schools is based on student enrollment rather than property taxes, so there could be indirect benefit if families living in the new development choose to enroll their children in Edina schools. The Commission did not vote on the resolution during the meeting; discussion continued at the end of the transcript.
Notable Quotes (22)
I would motion to remove uh item 8.1 from the agenda the resolution b249... I don't believe that this item is uh really and the purview of the Planning Commission um and to be honest we're not trained on Tiff we're not members of the H um the Planning Commission does not have the power of the purse so I don't find this discussion to be relevant... they have a vested interest in this becoming a tiff District so I don't see how we can consider that report as a piece of this.
I believe when it went to the Planning Commission not sure exactly of the timing whether a tiff application was actually made but once the Tiff application is made state law does require you to pass a resolution saying that the development plans are consistent with the comprehensive plan so there is a resolution that you're asked to pass this evening.
I would respectfully request that when the staff recommendation is made particularly when it is in opposition to the request of the residents that it appear on the website earlier than the day of the hearing... to your question about Metro Transit mitigation the answer is none they they do nothing... this is the only only residential spot on the entire Eline where the stations are directly across from each other as opposed to on diagonal Corners... we're going to be looking at like was already stated these things are almost 9 ft at the back they're 12T at the front they are lighted 20 24 hours a day 24 hours a day.
I think this is a very unique set of circumstances um and the idea that you'd have a light 24 hours and a talking sign um you know right right above the fence uh adjacent to your property um is certainly a unique circumstance... I also think it's very admirable that you are coming to the Planning Commission together um as for homes and that you were trying to do this and make you know at least um have some uniformity in the change that you're looking for.
I'm usually as an engineer pretty stickler for for variance requests but um this one I think is is pretty reasonable... the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance well we have the the fence ordinance um and here in the packet we say you know the uh purpose of intent of the fence height ordinance is to provide reasonable fence height to allow privacy... I think it's the ordinance is there to make sure we don't get 12ft tall fences um so I can see why we put a cap um but I think this is you know in harmony with the general purpose.
The fending structures that relief is that are causing light and and noise and just visual obstruction are all above 9 ft there's a 14 there's a 14t LED sign a 12T roof station and a 30ft street light um I don't think this fence is going to mitigate the effects of those... I do think that granting I I acknowledge that there's a there's a station on the opposite side of this one but I don't think that materially changes the type of type of effect that would probably happen at the other places in the city.
I find this section with the sidewalk right next to the street and the fence the the least pedestrian friendly section of that entire walk and My worry is a 9- foot fence rather than a six-foot fence is going to be more even more unfriendly... I think really looking into the idea of a living fence a green fence arbet or something like that if you can figure out some way to do that they can grow taller than the 99 foot fence and it would help muffle noise.
I think just in general we we set a standard for a maximum for some sort of consistency and just and and I'm not as worried about a precedent that's getting set I think we keep that at 6 feet and we leave it for one off cases like this where we look at all of the details like this is very unique even compared to the other two locations that were shown... this just doesn't seem like it's going to make that big of an impact on literally anyone um except provide a lot of benefit to to the homeowners.
The existing home is um currently located in the floodway the original home is built in 1960 and it predates the flood insurance study conducted in the late 1970s... it is a goal of the city when whenever we have an opportunity to lift those properties out of the flood zone um to do what we can in order to accomplish that because currently um this property is in the flood way um and there is really virtually nothing that they can do to improve the property um short of trying to lift it out.
I think what happened was when uh the modelers were putting together you know what's the elevation going to be along Mina Creek uh there's this huge storage area this flood plane area actually extends all the way down to Pamela Park and then they just kind of broad stroke called all of it flood way... I think it's just a combination of um just some course modeling that makes it really problematic for this house uh for this parcel but I don't think this is an actual floodway designation I think it was the modelers just kind of called this entire area which reaches all the way down to Pamela Park just broad brush stroke said this is all going to be floodway for that model uh calibration.
I think my my struggle is a little bit if and maybe if the flood zone wasn't a part of this conversation I think we have previously had conver um discussions about letting uh existing um variances not be put into the new dwelling when you do a whole Remodel and here we are going to go from a single story to a twostory which is I guess I disagree a little bit it's a it's a neighborhood full of Ramblers um so so for the adjacent Property Owners it is a significant difference to have somebody um closer and higher up um but I'm deeply sympathetic to the situation with the flood zone.
We have been there for 32 years and we've known this generational family they were the very first people in the neighborhood who came with the plate of chocolate chip cookies... I know this family their character their commitment to the environment and to the health and safety of the community and I can't wait for them to be my neighbors again.
The resolution tonight is b249 and ultimately we are seeking uh the planning commission's opinion as to whether or not the project that's embodied in these documents uh complies with the general plans for development and Redevelopment as applied in the city of viina in non-legally speak that means is the project uh aligned with our comprehensive plan... there's a number of different plans that apply in the city of Adina as you are well aware um uh first and foremost I think is our 20 240 comprehensive plan um that includes I think we're well over a thousand and some pages it includes many small area plans sustainability plans bike plans pedestrian plans lots of different um documents are embodied in the comprehensive plan.
I think I touched on most of the issues if there's anything else please let me know um but certainly the in your packet there's a copy of the resolution that summarizes these findings summarizes the reason we're here and what your what your uh uh what your uh findings will be used for... not every Community is like a Dina there are some communities where you might have an independent uh Eda or H that doesn't think along the same lines as the Planning Commission they might bring forward a plan that meets someone else's purpose but might actually violate the comp plan in ad um since our HRA board is well aligned with our uh city council who's generally well aligned with our Planning Commission who's generally well aligned with our school districts um we tend to work much more cooperatively with one another to avoid those surprises but yet state law still asks that we come here tonight and have you affirm something that you've already affirmed back in May so it does seem kind of redundant.
I was I was kind of like paying more attention when you said we'll do this step and then you know this approval is one step along the way to using Tiff financing to build The Pedestrian Crossing and it sort of seemed like you know if we say yes we're saying yeah the Macy's projects consistent with the development plans that we talked about but also this future pedestrian Crossing would be consistent with those... we've talked about this pedestrian crossing a fair amount on this body I think what people have said is uh we've never seen any concept for it it's been discussed in other you know venues but not really here when it has been discussed here folks have actually had concerns about whether that Crossing would be consistent not the project um but whether the crossing would be consistent with the development plans.
I think just looking historically back to other Tiff plan approvals a future concept like that isn't part of this it it's not part of this so and that that's what we'd have to separate so like typically you don't know what Tiff could then get used for in the future but like the monies that are gained from Tiff funding can be used for certain things and I see this as an example of what it could be used for not this is what it's going to to be used for.
So there were a variety of questions... the Tiff plan that's in front of you includes appendix e which describes the plan that was approved for the 7235 site it also includes a paragraph short paragraph about public improvements that would pursue pedestrian Crossing across France Avenue... the underpass version seems to be the most likely of those three options um that being said How likely is it standing here tonight I have no idea right now it's I would lump it in the category of an interesting idea that's worth exploring to see if we should actually do something there... the history of this project dates back to 2007 uh with the Urban Design plan that um that founded the ad prominade the prominade park uh where they recommended um actually an overhead Bridge be constructed at that time um right at the corner of 72nd um and France that bridge never got funded.
I would rather it not be in there um however it sounds like something like that or on any other neighboring parcel could be monies could be used to make those type of public improvements or at least contribute to them right so by writing that in there doesn't allow an exception that would otherwise be restricted in it in this Tiff plan that's just what I wanted to make sure.
I think that's what I understood this Tiff plan to only Encompass and not extrapolate to some potential anything specific because that just doesn't seem appropriate... I think it's there as a placeholder to create options later and I think just to make a clearer record of what might be what what type of pedestrian public infrastructure yeah to just give more more color to it um yeah I don't mind something as like there's an idea but like to label it as like a dedicated option just seems like it's unnecessary because they could do it if they wanted like there is that option so why like anything's on the table correct right so you said that right it can be go towards public infrastructure in general right so then there really needs to be no need to call out the bridge or crossing specifically right if this were omitted they could still do that the city council still still can explore this option without this being called out right.
I think to commissioner D's point it does seem like a conflict of interest where the person issuing this Tiff plan report is the one that with the concept... lhb is a division that is that evaluates existing buildings for compliance with the with the Tiff statutes yeah that division wrote wrote a report that says that that building qualifies yeah I that's the only reason lhb is in here and that was an independent action of the underpass overpass they authored the they authored this 160 page plan it's their name so I'm just referring to page 159 of 160 and 160 of 160 where it's referencing their other idea.
I will happily take credit for realizing that two projects AC two properties across the street from each other were to redeveloping at the same time and this might be an opportunity to do something we' we've been talking about since 2007 um I had mentioned we initially worked with a civil engineering group that's a fine firm they do very good engineering work but that group did not not bring the creativity that's needed in a Dina so I made the decision to switch companies to a firm that's more comprehensive where they bring in Engineers planners Landscape Architects and Architects all together in the same room I know that those types of conversations can yield more creative results so it was my decision to switch from the standard engineering firm to pursue this idea um to make a leap that this is some kind of underhanded um conflict is a pretty tremendous leap.
I want to go ahead and confirm that the din City Schools will not get $1 of anything in this project... so um I know this this is not this project is not in the city school district oh oh okay you threw me on that one um so you asked will the Adina City Schools get a dollar from this project get get a benefit I I'm I'm looking for the public benefit that's to the dino City Schools... this site the 7235 site is in the Richfield School District correct right um so the property taxes both today and in the future from this site will directly benefit the Richfield School District um not the Adina School District.
Ordinances & Resolutions (11)
Finding that the proposed 72nd and France TIF District plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the city as a whole; requires Planning Commission determination per Minnesota state statute.
Planned Unit Development approval for 7235 France Avenue mixed-use redevelopment; final site plan approved by City Council in September 2024 with modifications to parking, public art, dog area, and building architecture.
City of Edina's comprehensive development plan (1000+ pages) including sustainability, bike, pedestrian, and land use goals; guides all zoning and development decisions.
Area-specific development plan applicable to 7235 France Avenue; emphasizes mixed-use nodes, multimodal transportation, street room concept, and subdivision of large lots.
Original plan drafted in 1974 and revised through present; establishes redevelopment framework for southeast Edina including the 7235 France Avenue site.
Comprehensive tax increment financing plan prepared by Ellers and Associates; includes Appendix E describing project outcomes and public improvements; references potential pedestrian crossing across France Avenue.
Engineering staff memo supporting the fence height variance request at Metal Road properties.
Engineering staff memo supporting conditional use permit and variances for Philbrook Lane property.
Property survey for Metal Road fence variance application; documents existing conditions and proposed fence placement.
Property survey for Philbrook Lane conditional use permit and variance application; documents floodway boundary and proposed home elevation.
Report by LHB (performance-driven design division) determining that Macy's Furniture Store building qualifies as substandard under TIF statutes; required for TIF district creation.