[0:11] all right we all made it how about that welcome everybody to the January [0:18] 15th 2025 wow City V Dino Planning Commission [0:24] meeting on behalf of the rest of the commission we are grateful you are here in person and to those tuning in [0:31] remotely say it every time but your participation your curiosity and your feedback is vital as we navigate change [0:40] here together in Edina specifically regarding the ways in which we like to use our land so we have two [0:47] public hearings tonight uh I'll go into more detail of what to expect for those particular [0:53] things once we get to it like for those tuning in remotely I'll provide you some info to call in uh and we also have a [1:01] couple reports and recommendations but more important than that uh your input matters so if you've [1:07] sent us an email or you've gone to the city's engagement website betterto [1:13] together.org and you've shared your thoughts that has gotten to us and we [1:19] commit to you that we'll consider that feedback as we make recommendations tonight for approval or denial of the [1:27] the requests so without further Ado go into kind of what to expect for the [1:35] agenda so we'll have a call to order roll call then we'll approve tonight's [1:40] meeting agenda followed by the approval of the prior meeting's minutes from December 11th we'll have a community [1:47] comment period which is your chance to speak about a matter not on tonight's agenda and that's for those who are just [1:53] in the room then we have the two public hearings we'll follow up that with [1:59] reports and recommendations and then chair and member comments staff comments and [2:05] adjournment so with that we will kick this meeting off and call it to order followed by roll call commissioner [2:13] El here commissioner Smith here commissioner day here commissioner [2:18] Bennett oh I'm sorry here commissioner Bornstein here [2:23] commissioner felt here commissioner hanaman here chair Bennett here again [2:29] all right next we have the approval of tonight's meeting agenda if there aren't any proposed changes I'd welcome a [2:37] motion motion to approve the meeting agenda second all those in favor say I I [2:43] so moved next we have the approval of the prior meetings minutes from December 11th same [2:50] thing motion to approve the meeting minutes from December 11th second all those in favor say I I [2:58] so moved all right next we have the community comment period and this as I mentioned is for those who are in [3:06] attendance similar to a public hearing you have three minutes to come up to a [3:11] Podium and share your thoughts about a matter that's not on tonight's agenda [3:16] State your full name your address when the light turns green that means go and when it's red your time is up please [3:24] wrap it up is anyone here for Community comment [3:31] it's okay if you're shy come on up okay all right we'll move on from [3:38] that into our public hearings so we have two public hearings [3:43] tonight as I mentioned uh the first one is a front yard setback variance for [3:50] 5115 5120 Lake Ridge Road uh for both of [3:55] these uh public hearings you can expect the following kind of process so uh when someone comes before uh the [4:03] city with a formal application it triggers a 60-day rule and in that time we need to make a [4:09] decision uh the request is put forth by a resident or a developer or some other [4:16] entity uh staff puts together a report based on all of the conditions do some [4:22] fact finding engage other commissions departments like engineering and they put together this [4:29] report for for us with kind of a recommendation for approval or denial within that they then put that into a [4:37] presentation which you'll see tonight right now and then we have an exchange back and forth commission to staff and [4:45] then we open it to the applicant to do the same if they have a presentation or [4:50] at least stand for questions and we have a similar exchange after that point we open it to the public hearing and that's [4:57] a chance for those of you who are here in person but also those tuning in remotely to testify about this matter so [5:05] similar to the community comment you'd have 3 minutes to do so um once we get to that part I'll provide you with the [5:11] call-in information um no need to do that right now after the public hearing [5:17] is closed then we bring it back to the commission we deliberate and make an a recommendation for approval or denial so [5:25] without further Ado Carrie take it away yes thank you chair members of the commission I'm [5:32] pinch hitting for Chris this evening on this uh variance request it's for [5:37] properties located on uh Lake Ridge Road it it's actually two properties that have been combined into one uh located [5:45] on miror Lake just east of Lake Road you can see on this graphic there was an [5:51] existing home on the Northern lot and the lot to the South was vacant or is [5:56] vacant The Proposal this evening is to tear down the existing home and build a [6:03] new house on the new what's now one lot rather than [6:08] two there' be some trees removed uh on the site but replaced per our our tree [6:15] ordinance that in additional review should this variance be approved would happen at the time of building permit to [6:21] ensure compliance with the the tree preservation ordinance uh there's some [6:26] limiting factors on this site um we we have a 75 ft setback requirement on [6:32] Mirror Lake so that's the red line here is the structure setback requirement [6:38] from the lake and then also from Lake Ridge Road the setback here is [6:45] established um from an average of the block and what is um impacting the the [6:52] required setback here is the house to the South is I think it's about 82 feet [6:57] back which throws off that a average the house to the north has a 30 foot set [7:03] back and the the next house over has a 27 foot set back what's proposed here is [7:09] a 30 foot setback but the requirement based on that average is 46 feet so you [7:16] can see the buildable area on this quite large lot is restricted by those two setback requirements all other um City [7:26] performance standards are met all other setbacks are met the height of the structure structure would be 35 ft they could build up to 40 ft impervious [7:34] surface hard cover all met as well here's a look at the house a rendering [7:40] of what the house would look like this is from the street and this would be the view uh from miror [7:47] Lake here's the context rendering of the house to the North and the house to the [7:54] South so primary issue for consideration um is the proposed variance criteria [8:01] Justified just quickly looking at our variance criteria the main body of that [8:08] is the Practical difficulty is the property owner proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner that's [8:14] not permitted by the zoning ordinance are there unique circumstances and will [8:19] it alter the essential character of the neighborhood in this case uh staff [8:24] supports the variance practical difficulty is caused by those two setback um those two setback [8:32] requirements that I mentioned from the water and the street those circumstances are unique to the property the rest of [8:38] the homes on the side of the of the block are generally with a 30 foot setback similar to what the applicant is [8:46] proposing again if that house were removed this would likely be [8:51] conforming um it wouldn't alter the essential character of the neighborhood along the street as it it is consistent [8:58] with those set backs to the north so with that staff is recommending approval subject to the findings and conditions [9:04] that are outlined in the staff report and I can answer any questions you might have as well as the architect and [9:11] applicant are here as well thank you Carrie any [9:18] questions yeah commissioner alare um I is more more of a curiosity [9:25] than anything else uh what's the definition of a on story house I thought [9:31] I knew but I don't think I do because that's the way this house is described and it doesn't look like one to [9:38] me yeah I don't have our definition in front of [9:44] me but this seems at minimum a story and a half okay it's not important I was [9:50] just curious about that that's all thank [9:56] you I'm going to follow up every question of that that's not important commissioner [10:03] Smith thank you uh director te for the presentation um the house that exists [10:08] currently on the lot at 5115 what's the setback to that [10:14] currently yeah I believe that is a 30 it's about 32 foots no no that's the [10:29] uh I can check the plan I don't know that up that one off the top of my head you can kind of see it here it looks [10:37] like it it's tough to say [10:46] whether you could kind of see the outline of the house right [10:52] here so it probably has about a in the 40 foot setback range [11:00] okay so what they're proposing really is to remove this home that exists [11:05] currently rebuild just bring it up further just about 30 30 ft yes it it'll pull it out of [11:14] the right now it's currently within the lak shore setback okay just in small [11:19] places but they're choosing to meet that 75 75t setback on the lake side which [11:26] pushes the house into the front setback requirement gotcha all right thank [11:33] you any other questions can you go back to the lot [11:48] coverage that's all I just want to look at it [11:56] again I think that's it uh welcome the applicant or team uh to come forward if [12:03] you have a separate presentation or just willing to stand for questions introduce yourself [12:13] please good evening I'm Kathy Alexander with the Alexander Design Group I'm here [12:19] with my associate Britt Farley and then the homeowners uh ve dard is here [12:26] also I think Carrie covered everything pretty well I'm here to answer any [12:32] questions you might have thank you very much for being here uh any questions [12:42] anyone I guess we made it easy on you tonight no questions okay the the only [12:48] comment I have is it's actually 5115 and [12:54] 5121 so that should be noted yeah [13:00] this odd with it being even didn't pick that up in the packet before we'll make [13:06] sure that's corrected come vote time thank you [13:12] great thank [13:18] you all right as I mentioned this is a public hearing so we're moving to that part of the agenda so for those people [13:24] tuning in remotely to participate pull out your phone and call [13:30] the following number 312 535 [13:37] 8110 enter access code 2631 [13:43] 367 7745 the password is [13:50] 5454 and then press star three on your keypad to get into the cutest speak now [13:56] this should all be on the screen for you too if you're trying to follow along uh we'll give people at least a minute to [14:03] kind of jump in but while we wait uh we'll look to those who are in the room that might be here uh looking to testify [14:10] about this matter same goes as Community comment you have three minutes to do so you can come forward to either Podium [14:18] and when the light turns green you have three minutes when it turns red your time's up State your full name and [14:25] address anyone here that would like to testify in person [14:31] okay so we'll give it about probably 30 more seconds is anyone in the Quee to [14:37] speak no no 30 more [14:44] seconds awkward silence [15:01] you asked another that's what happens you ask one [15:06] opinion you get three [15:11] more um it has been one minute and nobody has joined the call so I think it [15:17] is safe to proceed all right I'd welcome a motion [15:22] to close a public hearing so moved second all those in favor say I [15:29] hi so moved all right public hearing is closed so coming back to the Planning Commission to deliberate looking around [15:35] any comments any [15:47] motions criteria for all the reasons stated by staff and if no one else has any comments I think I'm happy to move [15:55] to to approve for the reason stated in the staff report [16:05] second I just make a comment on this one um I certainly agree that uh this is [16:12] very positive from my perspective I think one thing that I think we try to [16:18] pay attention to is any encroachment on Lake water right and runoff and what was [16:25] very promising for me at least is that the developer is choosing to really maintain that 75t setback from the lake [16:33] and I think that's really important um we've had a lot of cases in the past where you know uh some homes they wanted [16:40] to extend and continue building and it it was just too close to the close to the body of water and this one doesn't [16:46] doesn't do that and the developer is trying to maintain that on the front side of the home um clearly the home to [16:53] the South here uh has a much larger setback that throws the averages off but [16:59] if we were to look at the homes to the north you know 27 ft 30 ft and this one is just kind of falling within that 30 [17:05] ft uh distance that continuity seems like it's going to be a nice smooth transition still right so it's not going [17:11] to be too drastic um and of course you know that house uh on the south kind of really [17:17] pull things down so from an aesthetic perspective I think this certainly works right the designs look great uh it [17:24] doesn't alter the character of of the neighborhood it's actually uh doing a really good job [17:29] the the the uh hard coverage seems really in line right you could have [17:35] built more uh to take up more of that space But it's certainly within um [17:41] what's the acceptable range and again with lake water that's a big concern if you had more concrete cars run off more [17:48] stuff gets into the water that's a big issue but we're staying within that um [17:53] that that that footprint uh uh for the hard cover uh percentages and building [17:59] coverage and we're staying 75 ft off from the water side so for those reasons I think this this this makes sense and [18:07] and and that's why I think most of my Commissioners here would agree and that's why we would probably speedily [18:12] approve this one great comment and yeah yeah I agree with [18:19] everything commissioner Smith has said and um want to reiterate the one point [18:25] when we've got these kind of awkward c to saacs or quas c toac we have [18:30] typically always approved these variances so this is nothing different than what our our normal for the past [18:37] two years has been thank [18:43] you I guess back to the potential motion at hand and maybe I can just clarify [18:49] because of the the the Motions to approve um the variant subject of the findings in the staff Report with the [18:54] one clarification that's for 5115 5121 leak Bridge [19:02] wrote I second that clarification all right uh all those in [19:08] favor say I I I opposed all right motion carries [19:14] congratulations good luck with your project and home all right thank you all right we're [19:20] on to public hearing two of two planner Teague is back this one's [19:27] for I'll let you explain it all [19:32] Carrie yes thank you chair uh members of the commission so the application is a [19:38] subdivision but it's really a replat of three existing Lots two of the lots are on high Highwood Drive and one on Pine [19:45] Grove so here's a look at the site it's just south of the variants that we just talked about see Mirror Lake [19:53] here single family homes uh all around this site here are the three properties [20:00] there that are involved the home at 5229 note there's a home there the home [20:07] at 612 is set right along the lot line it's about 5 six feet from the lot line so [20:14] very close and 5235 is a vacant site [20:19] closer look at the three lots here's a AAL so you can see 5235 is a heavily [20:26] wooded lot and there's also some steep slopes on the site that [20:31] really have made makes the site difficult for development it's been held in ownership with the property to the [20:39] South um but recently the the it was sold to the property owner at [20:45] 612 a Pine Grove here's a a street view of the site you can see [20:52] the the mature trees and it slopes up uh from the street so again here's a look [20:59] at the existing lots and the proposal is to shift the lot [21:06] lines so a portion of this existing lot goes to the lot to the West a portion [21:14] goes to the lot to the South gives them a little breathing room here uh with a [21:20] rear yard there's a an existing drainage utility easement that's standard along [21:26] all lot lines in the city there's no utilities within that easement so they will be vacating [21:32] that and really the purpose of this is to create this outlot that would be a [21:38] conservation easement placed over it um to preserve and protect the site um as [21:44] it sits today um protect those trees from removal so again here's the plat [21:52] replatting you need to Plat property rather than just shift lot lines with [21:57] the meats and bound in order to create that out lot so we're basically creating an unbuildable lot with this proposal [22:06] here you can see the slopes that make it difficult to build within that within [22:12] that area so looking at the lot Dimensions again those two lots get larger the out lot or what's becoming an [22:19] out lot gets smaller but it's an unbuildable lot so again the purpose of the request [22:25] is to establish that conservation easement over out lot a maintain in its natural state it would not be used for [22:32] any park purposes or Trails uh no structures can be built uh trees can't [22:37] be removed unless they're diseased or dead um the city would purchase that [22:43] outlot and it would be paid back over time from the neighbors um the city council reviewed [22:51] this concept who was back in April of 2024 and approved this concept and [22:57] directed staff to go through the subdivision process and then prepare the [23:02] assessment documents um for some of the neighbors along the block will be um paying that that back to the city so the [23:10] city pays for the site up front but gets the cost back over time and then [23:16] acquires the the land so the city is the actual fee owner but there's that conservation easement that's placed over [23:23] the site so with that staff is recommending approval subject to the findings and conditions that are [23:28] outlined in your staff report I can stand for [23:34] questions any questions commissioner day why is why is the city purchasing [23:42] the lot uh to preserve The Preserve the trees I understand but I mean [23:47] conservation easements can be granted to cities without the city paying for it so I'm curious why the city decided to do [23:53] that rather than request that the land owner simply deed to the deed the land [23:58] as a conservation he's me yeah decision that that the council um made um [24:07] it's I'm trying to think back to to all of those discussions um it's [24:14] really um protecting those trees putting it in a permanent easement and they felt [24:19] there's value in that with the city acquires the land and gets paid back [24:24] over time so it's it's not that the city is buying the property they're just providing financing for [24:31] them right the city be responsible for all maintenance of that lot going [24:37] forward um is there anything about the slot really that makes it I guess [24:44] special in any way in terms of the type of trees the age of the trees you know [24:49] the Heritage trees is there anything you know I guess end any endangered species [24:54] in this 047 I think acre lot yeah it's a lot of mature Oaks um I don't know what [25:01] category they exactly um fall in whether they're Heritage tree or not um but it [25:07] is a um some beautiful trees in there um with a lot of Oaks okay and how many how [25:14] many residents would be splitting this tax assessment yeah I believe it's seven seven residents along the block [25:21] and then three on Pine Grove okay how was that number [25:27] established was it it volunteered was it just simply said this is to their all seven of these residents benefit or how [25:33] did that come about yeah it's a lot of work that was put together by the applicant Mr Carter who owns that [25:39] property to the South um getting the neighbors together um each as their own [25:46] um amount that they're contributing yeah um does the city have any set of [25:52] criteria for establishing conservation easements in terms of they have to establish any kind of minimum benefit to [25:58] the public I mean you know I searched the code pretty high and low and looked for any ordinances we really have [26:03] nothing on conservation easements any set of criteria for establishing when we purchase them why we purchase [26:09] them honestly it seems like a bit of just kind of a uh impromptu movement [26:15] here yeah it's individ it's a decision that each city council could make you know it could be part of an overall [26:21] plant where outlots are established um but no you know the request here is a in [26:29] the planning commission's perview it's your reviewing the subdivision not necessarily the decision that the [26:35] council has made [26:43] okay any other questions commissioner [26:50] Smith yeah thank you I know this is a somewhat unique um concept but I'm I'm [26:56] just curious on the maintenance side of it so I think as part of the conservation [27:02] eement if it's a disease tree you know tree with uh old dying the city would [27:09] come through manage that maybe remove it cut it maybe do some replanting it's not [27:14] a park and you know all the neighbors contribute to purchasing and or or or [27:21] buying it from the city however that trancing works but could people use that [27:26] or is it like completely private like is it something that you know kids say hey [27:31] let's go look for bugs right and they go in there and they hang around like would the police show up and say get out of [27:38] here or you know how how is the relationship between this space and [27:43] residents on the community yeah it's City owned property and we do have a number of lots like this all around town [27:50] a lot of them were acquired through tax forfeiture there might be Wetlands things like that it's not that we're [27:58] patrolling that looking for that kind of thing it would be enforced on a complaint basis um we we have had issues [28:07] on people encroaching into city property they um start taking down trees putting [28:15] in fire pits um encroaching on the city land so that is something that that we've had to deal with on other similar [28:23] situations um but the intent is um yeah whether kids are going to go in there [28:30] and um hike around um again enforced on a complaint type [28:39] basis one last question and and this was kind of more on the on the on the [28:44] easement and I think use a term I forgot what what you said I don't [28:50] think there's like any utilities right running between there or is there and [28:56] what action is the C going to take to I guess clear it out move it dig it up can [29:01] you just explain that a little bit more yeah so it's a easement loc that's the [29:06] lightly red dashed lines they're proposing to vacate that easement that's an action that's done by [29:13] the city council so at the same time that they consider this plat they'll be considering the vacation of that [29:19] easement and given the fact that there's no utilities or anything in there um it's no problem to vacate that they will [29:27] be established ing new easements similar to what's located here now along the [29:34] newly established lot lines so there would be 10 foot easements established as part of [29:41] this plat in this location here thank [29:50] you uh just a couple questions what uh what happens after 99 [29:55] years [30:04] so that's because it's a lease rather than so they're not transferring the deed to the lot it's a [30:13] lease so then who owns it after that the the city would still own the [30:19] property where the the fee owner so is it the conservation easement that ends after 99 years and the city still has [30:25] the property correct that makes sense could be a decision at that time whether they want to reestablish that easement [30:30] we do have a number of these across town um I'm not aware of any expiring within [30:38] within their lifespan but I would imagine there are a few that may be coming [30:48] up I think that's all thank you for the record the answer so you can hear it on [30:54] the microphone is 99 years is the maximum legal um established time frame that can be [31:00] put on a conservation eement like this where are there other you mentioned [31:08] that there are similarly situated outlots that the city owns could you point us to any of [31:15] those not off hand I know we have had requests to um change the outlaw [31:24] status um for construction of affordable housing those have typically been denied [31:30] by the city council I don't have those specific sites off the top of my head but we but there are [31:37] preservation out lots that for a similar reason that they have trees are they [31:43] located adjacent to residential like this usually they are in residential [31:49] neighborhoods like this yeah is this the first time that we're [31:56] creating the Outlaw by to by subdividing Uh current you know or Zone compliant Lots [32:04] I guess creating something that would not be you know code compliant if it were an R1 a regular R1 District or Zone [32:11] there was one um somewhat similar situation it was [32:17] an existing lot there a building was proposed on it the neighbors got together and wanted to purchase the site [32:24] on Oak Lane um and it was a similar circumstance stance where the city purchased it up front and the residents [32:31] pay the city back over time yeah that was about seven eight years [32:38] ago okay so I just yeah I was wondering if the City attorney had any hesitation in terms of the process of taking [32:44] essentially a lot that meets comp that is code compliant and turning it into one that's not now I know how A lot's [32:51] different defined differently but um and I wondered if that's why it partially got bounced back to the Planning [32:57] Commission review yeah it's it's for the the plat right that comes back to the Planning [33:03] Commission um is there anything about this lot currently that would make it I [33:10] mean that we would consider to be I know you said there's steep grade but is it [33:15] unbuildable for any reason it was it was created within the subdivision of this [33:22] block as a buildable lot let's see if we [33:27] yeah so you can see it was part of this subdivision along Highwood Drive and it was developed as a or created as a [33:33] buildable lot the property owner and it was one of the later um homes to be [33:40] developed probably because of those slopes but the property owner at 5229 [33:46] purchased it and just held it for many many many years [33:51] um but they've since sold both of those lots okay thanks so yeah it would be if [33:59] someone wanted to build on that lot it is buildable however those steep slopes [34:05] would make it difficult and we have ordinances about just how much disturbance can take place within those [34:11] slope areas so they would have to meet those it would probably result in a relatively small building [34:20] footprint possibly a variance too the uh I just want to make sure I understand [34:25] what we're deciding what we're responsible for deciding here so it's a land use [34:31] question on the outlaw of whether we think that's an appropriate land use and that's pretty much it right yeah there's [34:37] really not a lot of discretion here the the two resulting Lots get bigger and [34:43] we're just establishing a lot that's not buildable [34:53] thanks any other questions [34:58] I guess just one question I have I mean I definitely worry about precedent here and I know others have talked about it [35:06] so it seems like the only one similar is that one you mentioned seven eight [35:11] years ago yeah yeah you may have been planning they were proposing a a house [35:17] to be built there but it didn't have direct access to a public Street there was that long right of way that was [35:23] going to take the access so they needed aing [35:29] I just something seems odd to me about this particular ask and I'll save that for my comments [35:39] but any other questions all right thanks welcome the [35:46] applicant or homeowner or whoever come forward if you have like a presentation [35:51] just want to stand for questions I'm sure there are few I'll stand for questions Andrew Carter 6012 Pine grve [35:56] Road um like Ki said I've been in front of the city council twice once back in [36:01] May and then once about two months ago as well um it's it's it's been a process [36:07] it's taken quite a bit of time to get to this step um so we had another kind of I guess vote it was a City Council vote to [36:12] keep this going a few a few months ago which which passed as well so happy to [36:18] give more details to the story or or answer any questions that anybody [36:25] has as I recall somebody did buy the lot and and [36:31] attempted to build on it yes so can you tell us a little bit of the history and also why it's helping both your lot and [36:37] your neighbor lot and reducing just history okay yeah so this really started about about two years ago um and the [36:45] trustee that was selling this lot along with other um assets of of this the [36:51] person to the to the left of this lot um originally sold it to a builder about three or four months after they listed [36:57] it at a lower price the Builder came out had the lot surveyed uh and it turned [37:02] out that there was really a small trapezoid that was buildable by city code the back or the um set back in the [37:08] lot was 110 ft which put it way up the hill if you look at the culdesac here and the back of my lot it's a 35 foot [37:16] difference and the maximum house height I think was was 35 fet was allowed so [37:22] the Builder you know was thinking I'm going to have to cut into this hill put up a 30ft retaining wall in back and the [37:28] roof has to be the same level the top of the hill was so it it didn't work really [37:34] um so whether yes it's a buildable lot per se but in reality it's it's much more complex than that um so that the [37:41] Builder backed out about 6 months later I acquired the lot which was about a year a little over a year ago um we [37:48] originally came to the city council with a presentation uh which I can distribute to to anybody who needs it but it [37:54] aligned heavily with uh the sustainability plan for city of Vina so we're talking right not another house [38:01] here so no additional impervious surfaces there's about 2500 plus year old Oaks on the property um right which [38:08] which holds the hill together really so if you're talking about runoff no more of that we're right by Mirror Lake as well um so in terms of water water [38:16] quality it helped that as well so um there was a sustainability piece that matched and then my house which is 6012 [38:23] the southern lot here again it's 5T from the bound that house was built in 1928 so when the [38:30] city divided up these Lots in the late 70s that was kind of how they put that put that line straight so the bump out [38:37] would actually get my lot back up to code with a proper setback so that was the the quick story [38:44] of kind of how it all happened if anybody has any questions on it I can surely fill out more details there so [38:52] you're purchasing a proportionate amount of this lot and your neighbor was [38:58] purchasing a proportionate amount and then the cities yeah I think the city is going to come with about 48% of this lot [39:04] um and then we redrew the lot lines really to make it um a bit geometric to make it look nice and if you look at my [39:11] my neighbors lot the Bennetts here uh to the Northwest there they're really taking the I mean very unbuildable piece [39:18] of the lot which is the the steepest of Hills they also have as Carrie mentioned the previous owner of that house own [39:24] both Lots so they have a retaining wall and a fence that go goes into this new lot so their new lot line will be [39:29] pushing outside of that as well thank you [39:43] g any other [39:50] questions this will thinking it maybe some might come up later no it's different and and I guess you know I want to address uh commissioner D's [39:56] comment on the kind of City buying the lot again it's a it's a financing in trade for a land gift is really what it [40:03] is so the city's giving us they've you know they valued it at 150,000 which is [40:08] below taxable value um they're getting paid interest on that loan as well and they're getting this land so right [40:16] they're getting all the money back plus interest plus this land gift as [40:22] well uh can you just make make sure I understood what you just said so the financing cost are going to be recovered [40:29] in the assessments yes y thank you exactly and that's per I think it's the [40:34] standard interest assessment um that the city does and it's yeah it's seven [40:39] different neighbors varying degrees of of I guess payback in the taxes but we've got all the signatures and that's [40:45] that's ready to go any [40:53] questions might have some for you later but uh thank you appreciate it thank [40:58] you all right so this is a public hearing so like uh like before I'll in [41:05] case you just tuned in provide a number for you to call here we go for those who might be [41:13] tun in remotely to participate so please call the following number should pop up on your screen too [41:20] 312 535 8110 and enter access code [41:29] 2631 367 [41:35] 7745 password is 5454 and then press star three on your [41:41] keypad when you like to get in the CU to speak which is now does anyone happen to be in the [41:47] queue right now okay so we will turn it to those who might be in the room that [41:53] would like to testify again you have three minutes to do so you can come up to either Podium State your full name [41:59] address speak [42:06] away uh good evening Commissioners um Tom tesman I live at 5017 Ivon Terrace [42:13] 30-year uh resident of Idina and I also serve on the energy and environment [42:18] commission um and I try to stay up on issues happening in the city uh it's [42:23] tough there's lots going on April 16th and of 2024 must have been a slow night [42:29] cuz I happened to tune in to the council meeting uh when this was on and it certainly piqu my interest you know when [42:35] you started getting into uh conservation easement issues uh my first thought was [42:40] like well why why was the city even entertaining this to begin with um and my second thought was well [42:47] why is it going right to council uh and bypassing the Planning Commission um so I did a little research [42:54] of my own on the parcel and I think we've already talked about that it's a little less than a half acre it's an irregular lot and as we've already seen [43:01] it backs up to many Parcels it is heavily wooded um but it is zoned [43:07] currently zoned as a residential lot um and as Mr Carter already stated [43:13] he purchased a lot in October 16th for 300,000 um and about 6 months later uh [43:19] he was trying to move this into an easement which you know it is what it is I just found that [43:25] interesting the Council B was agreeable and directed the uh staff and City attorney to draft necessary documents [43:31] subject to city council approval um I happened to be at the November 6th meeting uh and it went [43:38] right to a resolution and the resolution I think should be restated it was number [43:50] 2024-the commission vacant land agreement purchase agreement and [43:55] resolution number 2 24-9 adopting special agreements and conservation [44:00] easement it's kind of a mouthful there was a lot there um um the conversation I uh with the [44:07] council I thought was a little odd um [44:12] um you know the tone of the meaning was like this had been in the works for like years but in reality it had only really [44:19] been in the works for about six months [44:24] um as we've already discussed the city agreed to pay the owner 150,000 but then it's going to be paid back over time [44:31] City's going to finance it um and then the ne neighbors as we heard are already [44:37] agreeing to pay for it um I guess what I'm most concerned about well I'll get to my concerns but [44:44] um I certainly can see why the homeowner wants this uh that lot was owned by a previous owner for a reason now it was [44:52] purchased in October of 20 what did I say 20 oh it was purchased in [44:59] October 16th 2023 um I'm sure it's um it was purchased to maintain that privacy [45:06] that protection um you know that would be advantages to [45:13] the homeowners once this is in place their land values will go down their taxes will go down um and I thought it [45:20] was odd that the city's going to agree to finance it UPF front so I guess my real question is why [45:25] is the city doing this um I'm a tree guy I love trees but we do have shortages of lots in the in the [45:32] area um so I'm not sure why we would remove a conforming buildable [45:37] residential lot I already see a is it I'm over time just just so that was one [45:43] issue secondly the city's going to purchase a quarter of an acre and the rest is going to be split to the [45:49] neighbors um ccil member day already mentioned we have no conservation [45:54] easement standards and I don't believe any of municipality would ever entertain an easement of a quarter of an acre um it's [46:02] it seems to me like it's a one-off project to benefit a few folks in the neighborhood uh we have a city budget [46:09] that is already growing demonstrably now um and I think we're just burning [46:14] unnecessary resources of the city in terms of Staff time replatting costs Etc [46:22] um so I guess I would question the validity of the project I think the owners have options I don't know why um this existing lot [46:30] before you have to replant everything just couldn't be dropped into a conservation easement through Minnesota [46:36] land trust or another organization that handles these types of things so [46:41] appreciate just need inter wrap up sorry I'm done okay thank you appreciate it [46:47] thank you for coming in is anyone else here in person i' like to [46:55] testify oh sorry to speak to just wait for No One uh do we have anyone else on the [47:01] line no we don't safe to proceed all right have a motion to close a public [47:07] hearing motion to close all those in favor oh we need a [47:14] second all those in favor say I so move public hearings closed take it back to [47:19] the Planning Commission uh time to deliberate any comments discussion question yeah [47:27] commissioner hman um I'm sympathetic that this seems like a weird sort of pet [47:33] project um you know I appreciate that if I understood correctly the slope slips [47:39] down towards the culdesac so preservation of those trees does prevent [47:44] runoff into the city's streets and public sewer system or whatnot but it [47:50] does seem like a weird little pet project that ultimately benefits um [47:55] surrounding neighbors but that's not not our purview I mean I think our purview is to look at the outlots and I I don't [48:01] see anything objectionable to what's being proposed I can take it up with City [48:07] Council on my own [48:12] time other comments questions yeah I do just Comm yeah sure we'll just go [48:21] down um I mean for me I think there's a few I know I don't know what kind of lot [48:29] it is but I know one between um the group of houses on Maple Road and [48:36] the 50th in France the bank you know there's a little slice back there I mean so we've got some odd Lots all over what [48:42] this does I mean your house was built in 1928 it was platted in you know 1970 50 [48:48] years later um this helps one house kind of achieve appropriate setbacks um the [48:55] other house is going to take over over the retaining wall and so then it is [49:00] literally just a a bunch of trees the homeowners are going to pay interest the [49:06] city is is buying it but the city will not lose money and I don't think they're [49:12] going to go in there and prune those trees um so I see it as kind of a win-win and I and I do understand and [49:19] sympathetic to kind of losing a building lot but we just prior to this um allowed [49:26] a house on two lots that was a more buildable lot than this so um I see this [49:32] as really are just kind of cleaning this up and it's just a the plat approval and [49:39] I'm fine with it yeah I agree with commissioner phel [49:45] and commissioner Haman and would just add that I'm not troubled At All by the idea that there might be one [49:51] lot that's not able to be developed and built to its a absolute maximum capacity [49:58] where people you know like the idea that there may be a single lot with some valuable trees on it that a person can't [50:04] manipulate is like not offensive to me and I it's just like not an offensive concept um and I also don't think [50:11] there's like a conspiracy going on or anything like that so for all those reasons uh this just doesn't feel [50:16] offensive at all and and I would vote in favor all right so I you know I don't [50:24] think there's any conspiracy or ensive about this one either um you know and I I scoured the [50:31] code I spent quite a few hours going through our ordinances and trying to inform myself as much as I could about out lws and conservation easements in [50:39] general um and you know I don't from a procedural standpoint from an ordinance [50:44] standpoint I don't have really any major Hang-Ups in terms of the land use and [50:52] creation of Outlaw based on how our city ordinances read today [50:57] um what does make me a little uneasy I guess is just the concept you know [51:02] creating conservation easement without any any process existing in place um in [51:08] the city of Adina and you know we said we we it's not a very common thing that we stumble across but usually I'd like [51:15] to make an informed decision as a member of the Ping Commission on some set of criteria for establishing conservation eement you [51:22] know just like if we're establishing a PUD what are the set of criteria that a PUD has to meet so I'd like to know what [51:28] are the set of criteria that a conservation needs when has to meet especially one that's can be paid for [51:34] with public money now granted it's going I understand the tax assessment piece um but we still will be responsible for the [51:40] maintenance of this um you know on going through I was trying to research what other cities had and everything there [51:46] isn't a whole lot out there and perhaps there needs to be and I think honestly I think the city um coming out of this [51:53] discussion needs to have a serious discussion about creating a set of standards for conservation easements um [52:00] I did I did find that several years ago the Department of Natural Resources the state of Minnesota did recommend to the [52:06] state um did make Rec series of recommendations to the state about conservation easements um specifically [52:14] if they're purchased with public money uh two of those recommendations were uh [52:20] and I'll just read them quick you know that every entity acquiring conservation ements with public money has an [52:25] established project selection process that includes necessary project criteria and a decision-making process to sort of [52:31] rank the projects um and that a conservation is me being considered for acquisition with public monies you know must meet a [52:38] minimum level of public benefit we didn't really have a lot of discussion around that point because there we don't [52:43] have any guidelines here around that and around conservation easements and I again I do think we that needs to be [52:49] established so you know not having that process in place does make me uneasy especially being an engineer I just [52:55] don't like having any direction here for that um so that's that's my main hangup [53:01] here um and honestly you know because because of the fact that we don't have a [53:07] set of criteria and I think we do and I think it needs is very important going forward um as far as sustainability [53:13] goals for the city and how they conflict with potentially in this case maybe um [53:18] housing goals and whatnot density goals you know I I would Pro I'm probably going to be be abstaining from this vote [53:24] simply because I think from a presal standpoint there are things that we can do we have less very limited discretion but I think [53:31] we do need at least some sort of process for the conservation eement [53:39] piece yeah I I would agree with a lot of things I've heard so far I I'll try to [53:46] put my random thoughts into something that's coherent but um I see this as two separate things [53:54] one is process and process SL financing which I think we heard so far and [54:01] sometimes you know because we don't have established guidelines of what are the checklists that we need to go through um [54:09] and then you hear that the city is financing it and there's a financing mechanism that is outside of our control [54:15] we get a little bit nervous right and our ears perk up we like well what's going on like how do we deal with this right so I think I would definitely [54:22] agree with commissioner day that you know we we come across unique situations [54:27] like this we we say hm there's a gap here in terms of a process maybe in a future work plan it can be something [54:33] that comes up or if we see more of these things coming up you know that's something that we should um touch on and [54:40] we had you know someone come up and give some testimony that hey you know this this didn't seem like it flowed properly [54:46] right so I think that's all signs that establishing a process and a mechanism of dealing with this is important so [54:52] that's one side the other side of it is when we balance things like sustainability goals uh housing goals [55:00] Etc right we certainly want to increase density um in some areas of the city [55:07] right and we want to think about housing you know there's a shortage of houses across [55:13] the city we got to think about how do we use land appropriately in the right zoning so to make sure that we maximizing the [55:19] usage at the same time we love sustainability right we love trees we love nature we love anything to do with [55:26] sustainable goals right so we have to balance those two things together this lot right it's it's not [55:33] any heart of a residential area well it kind of is but it's on a hill that's hard to build on there's a [55:41] lot of building constraints that make this an easier thing to say yes to there's mature trees on it that we want [55:47] to preserve right so when you balance density sustainability all these kind of things [55:54] it seems like yeah this makes sense to con serve some of the land here for the future right and so I think from that [56:02] perspective you know commissioner Borstein was like nothing here is offensive to me it's not offensive to me [56:09] either right but I think going forward having a process will be really important so I'm in favor of this I [56:17] think it's a great spot right um kids could go look for bugs for 98 years [56:23] probably and then the 99th year who knows um but it's something that I think would [56:28] preserve some of that green space within the city going forward and I think that's important but maybe a a note to [56:36] chair Bennett is maybe a process in the future that we could think about like what's the criteria maybe look at what [56:43] other cities are doing um cuz I'm guessing that this may not be the last time we're going to hear about a [56:48] conservation easement popping up at some point in the city so thanks [56:57] uh the public benefit seems clear there's uh preserving some vital canopy for the city which is [57:05] important for our climate action plan so that's all good I think there's a valid question [57:12] about whether it's in the best interest of the city to allow buildable lots to be taken off the market but we literally [57:20] do it all the time and as commissioner phelp mentioned as recently as 10 minutes ago [57:26] I think it's pretty well known in ad Dina that it's hard to subdivide but easy to combine I think that's probably [57:32] what most people would say about our practices for decades so this as as a land use [57:40] question it seems most consistent for us to allow this and I guess my having [57:46] thought about it is unusual but having thought about it why not I mean I have a real hard time figuring out a reason why [57:53] we shouldn't approve this be my two cents [57:59] all before my comments I just have a couple more questions about process as maybe for Carrie as as was mentioned by [58:07] one of the person the person who testified you know there's two meetings prior to this kind of November and [58:15] April is there much more you can share about that and I mean we're looking at a subdivision can you remind us just like [58:22] of that process when that typically happens compared to this why why this [58:28] just feels very unique and odd why did it bypass us like I I don't I don't [58:34] guess I have answers to that that I'm feeling good about yeah I I think the [58:41] applicant wanted some assurances that it would be approved if he would have if [58:47] they would have started with the plat and rearranged all those lots there's no I don't believe he would [58:54] even approach this subdivision without those assurances from the city council that [59:01] they would be agreeable to this kind of arrangement and so the mechanism to create that lot and everything that they [59:08] agreed to this is kind of that last step is to create those lots create the out [59:15] lot and so that just help me understand is that that's technically a subdivision [59:20] and that decision was already made or is that part of what we're doing now I I'm just kind of lost here yeah it's the [59:26] subdivision they didn't approve the subdivision uh because that's a statutorily that that's for your process [59:34] we have the um the code is pretty clear about establishing outlots you have to [59:39] replat the properties in order to establish it um one of the one of the uh [59:47] conditions of creating an outlaw is that the area be conveyed or dedicated to the [59:52] city or other public body yeah so that's the just justification here for the [59:58] creation of the outlaw and it's conveyed even though the city is paying for it that's still I [1:00:05] mean it's technically conveyed to them that's why it's number two on that check [1:00:11] box yeah any other I mean you guys are raising your hand will there be any kind of signage [1:00:17] or indication that this parcel is either city-owned I mean it's not a park I get [1:00:23] that but it is part of a con conservation easement I just to the passer by is this going to [1:00:31] just appear like part of the residents's next door um just wondering how the city [1:00:38] approaches that yeah it would appear as in that picture that I showed [1:00:44] from the street it would appear just like that yeah I guess my comments are short [1:00:50] I'm I'm kind of more with commissioner day on this I I don't know if I'm going to abstain or vote to deny this I I [1:00:58] think this process is just it's not feeling good and I I think [1:01:03] of similar situations where if this can create a precedent why wouldn't it I I know of a near neighbor who has a pretty [1:01:12] cool other property they own that they maintain and they keep wooded but hey it [1:01:19] benefit them if the city could buy it from them so they don't have to deal with the tax or the maintenance I I just [1:01:26] see like I don't see much public benefit That Couldn't already be happened with someone just owning a wooded property [1:01:33] and owning that sustainability I don't understand why the city should take that [1:01:40] onus on um and front that bill when it seems like at least in this particular [1:01:46] Circumstance the benefit is local to the specific spot and I I think I I know [1:01:52] multiple people with multiple they own a neighboring lot it's just this oneoff thing I I don't [1:01:59] like that precedent at all so I'm going to abstain or vote for denial so it's as [1:02:05] simple as that yep just wanted to add um I think that Mr tesman being member of [1:02:12] the energy and environment commission I would encourage you to bring this discussion back to the the commission as [1:02:18] well and make sure that that's get discuss there um so that we do maybe gain some traction for establishing a [1:02:24] set of criteria for conservation easements you know in terms of minimum size the quality of the natural features [1:02:31] the signage you know when I looked up conservation easements I was like I I couldn't find anything this small until [1:02:38] kri mentioned that we have the one in the city but most most places uh most [1:02:43] like the Minnesota land trust and stuff they require a property to be at least 40 acres or 30 depending on the how they [1:02:51] uh what they deem it to be um the conservation re Reserve enhancement program wants properties to be at least [1:02:57] 8 Acres so we need to have something some kind of guidance here um before this potentially becomes proliferates or [1:03:04] we another issue to address that issue um as you [1:03:11] know we've got a huge task ahead of us to update the zoning ordinance I think [1:03:16] we can add this to the list as part of that so I would say over the next year to two years we can work on that as part [1:03:23] of the zoning ordinance update great and from what I'm understanding [1:03:30] this is a plat only this is a yes you're being asked to approve the [1:03:36] plat um and any other recommend approval of the plat okay and hennipen County [1:03:42] will show this outlaw as owned by the city of Adina [1:03:52] correct any other question questions comments discussion motions [1:04:02] [Laughter] yeah nothing important [1:04:07] again motion to approve second let's just do a roll call [1:04:13] Vote for [1:04:18] This commissioner El I commissioner Smith I commissioner Dave [1:04:28] abstain commissioner Bornstein I commissioner felt I commissioner hanaman [1:04:35] I chair Bennett nay motion I guess the it carries so [1:04:43] congratulations on the next steps getting the plat all [1:04:49] right that concludes our public hearing and we move on to the reports and [1:04:54] recommendations we have two tonight we have sketch plan for 5100 Eden Avenue [1:05:01] and then we have some advisory communication regarding parking so start with Addison [1:05:06] Lewis present away tell us what we're about to [1:05:24] see all right good evening chair Commissioners um the Opus group has submitted a sketch plan proposal at 5100 [1:05:31] Eden Avenue um and just for the those in the audience and those watching at home a sketch plan proposal is not a a formal [1:05:37] development application um it's an opportunity for a land owner or developer to propose an idea for a project and receive [1:05:43] non-binding feedback from the Planning Commission and city council no action is taken on a sketch plan so the purpose of [1:05:49] this is really just to have a discussion tonight uh and proi provide direction that may inform a future land use [1:05:54] application does this not [1:06:03] work I can just stand here that's [1:06:09] easier all right there we go so um as mentioned the subject property is 5100 [1:06:14] Eden Avenue um you may recall that this property received preliminary PUD approval in 2023 for a sstory 136 unit [1:06:22] apartment building with ground floor commercial uh that project has not moved forward um but the new proposal is to [1:06:28] con construct a 5tory 112 story foot office building that would potentially include commercial retail on the ground [1:06:34] floor um Opus has indicated that they would occupy a portion of the building um and that this would um that they [1:06:41] would move their corporate headquarters to this location from manano uh the proposal would involve [1:06:47] removal of the existing four story office building um that was constructed in 1968 that building is approximately [1:06:54] 38,000 Fe so it's about 1/3 of the floor area uh of the proposed building um so [1:07:00] here are some photos of the site as it is today here's from the other side along Eden [1:07:09] Avenue the current zoning on the site is planned office district one the [1:07:15] applicants have proposed a rezoning to pcd2 uh which as you can see is how a lot of the district is currently zon [1:07:21] today um there's a couple other pod Zone Parcels in the area area um the Public [1:07:27] Works parcel uh or the the the former public works site which is directly across the street um on Arcadia is Zone [1:07:34] planned industrial um but that is likely not to be the long-term use of that site that site um you may recall receive [1:07:40] preliminary approval for a senior co-op housing um plus a restaurant and public park um that project also has not moved [1:07:46] forward but um it's likely to be something closer to that in the future um so a rezoning would be [1:07:53] required for the subject property to allow for the possibility of some kind of ground floor commercial or retail use [1:07:58] to occupy the ground floor that would not be allowed under the uh the Pod zoning um here is a look at all of the [1:08:07] all of the permitted uses within the planned office District um you can see it's not very extensive it's essentially [1:08:13] offices post offices um you can have like athletic gyms um daycare schools um [1:08:21] Brewery things like breweries tap rooms those are only allowed in um p P2 District so that would not be an option [1:08:30] here um the site is guided mixed use Center on the future land use map of the comprehensive plan um the Grand View [1:08:36] District and 50th in France are the only two areas in the city that have this designation uh these are areas um uh [1:08:44] these areas are mixed use districts that are intended to serve more than just the surrounding neighborhood and are envisioned for roughly a 50/50 split of [1:08:51] residential and Commercial uses um in 2012 the city completed the Grand [1:08:59] View District development framework um and in terms of land use that plan states that uh the plan emphasizes a [1:09:05] mixed use sub area between Vernon Eden Highway 100 and the rail Corridor um so [1:09:11] that's this this area here in the orange that's identified as mixed use Center it [1:09:16] says Arcadia is seen as a more residential street with a range of condo apartments and multi-level townhouse [1:09:22] types mixed use and Office Buildings are anticipated and maybe oriented to Vernon and or sou towards Eden and Our Lady of [1:09:29] Grace Fields um so here's just another rendering um from that plan and so [1:09:36] what's depicted here is um here here's the the site with two to three story Town Homes along Eden with [1:09:44] um you know taller uh more more building massing either multif family or offices [1:09:49] oriented more towards the highway um and then in 2016 the city [1:09:54] complet the Grand View District transportation study and that plan envisioned a new Frontage Road along the [1:10:01] east side of this property um just in talking to our city engineer it doesn't sound like that's likely to happen anytime in the near future but it's just [1:10:08] something for you to be be aware of um so here is a look at uh what is [1:10:13] being proposed again it's a five-story office building about 112,000 Square [1:10:19] ft uh here is a look at their site plan showing the first floor uses you can see they're showing some type of of active [1:10:25] use on the corner um it's yet to be kind of determined exactly what that would be there is an outdoor Terrace for that [1:10:33] space shown here uh most of the ground level would [1:10:39] be devoted to vehicle parking um there would be vehicular access off of Arcadia [1:10:44] and Eden just as there is today um they've indicated that the Eden access [1:10:50] would be the one for um service and trash vehicles um accessing accessing [1:10:55] the the trash and um kind of the utility area here [1:11:02] um the site plan shows 10ft sidewalks around the site the the sidewalks are currently 8 ft along Eden and then eight [1:11:08] on Arcadia tapering down to six and then they're also showing a bike storage room [1:11:14] here as well um this is just another version of [1:11:20] their site plan here that shows the approximate setbacks um so we're at about 20 F feet from the edge of the [1:11:26] building here to the property line along Arcadia we're about 6 feet from the [1:11:32] north property line here about 15 and 1/2 ft from this East property line and [1:11:38] then about 3 feet here at this corner down along Eden and about 18 ft a little [1:11:45] more over at this corner here um I also just wanted to note that along the Eden [1:11:50] side we have about 30 feet from the property line to the curb [1:11:56] um it's a bit of a different story along Arcadia there's only about 5T from the property line to the curb here um and in [1:12:03] fact we only have about 40 feet of of RightWay from property line to property line on this [1:12:12] side um so here are U there will be two two levels of below grade [1:12:17] parking um the the plan in total shows about 300 stalls which should comply [1:12:22] with the ordinance they've indicated that they intend to meet the city's parking [1:12:28] requirements uh here's a look at the upper story uh floor plans so the second [1:12:33] level here on the left shows an amenity area with an outdoor Terrace uh facing [1:12:40] south uh the fourth and fifth Story floor plans [1:12:46] here um so given the proposed sketch plan it appears that um this request [1:12:52] would require rezoning from uh the planned office District to either pcd2 or PUD to um allow for the ground floor [1:12:59] commercial um and then either variances or flexibility through a PUD would be required from Building height floor area [1:13:06] ratio um and building and parking setbacks um it would also require a replat to combine all seven Parcels that [1:13:14] are currently on the site into one um and then it would also require going through site plan review um so once we [1:13:21] receive the final plans it's possible that additional variances are required um but this is just based on the information that's been presented here [1:13:27] today we believe that these would be the the requests um so tonight the Planning Commission should provide feedback on [1:13:32] the appropriateness of the rezoning um as well as the proposed variances um and just as you think about that keep in [1:13:39] mind you know our pyramid of discretion with a rezoning um the city is acting in a legislative capacity we have a lot [1:13:46] more discretion here um with any variances um we're acting in a quasi [1:13:51] judicial fashion and have um some but less discretion and then we do with a [1:13:57] resoning um this is the compliance table that was included in the staff report so gave you the standards for the current [1:14:04] zoning under the planned office District um the the standards for the proposed [1:14:09] zoning pcd2 um this is what was approved with the previous PUD from 2023 for the um [1:14:17] the 136 unit apartment building um and then this is what's being proposed so again here flexibility would [1:14:23] be needed from the setbacks build build height and floor area ratio um other things like the first floor uh Building [1:14:30] height the building materials first floor transparency um we'll have to look at those once the final plans would come [1:14:37] in um and then here are just some other developments in the Grand View District um that have either been completed or um [1:14:45] approved recently and um that have either the same height or um more height [1:14:52] um as well as floor area ratio to the proposed project and then also just wanted to note that [1:14:58] this site is within a quar mile of Metro Transit bus route 46 which uh provides [1:15:04] connections to other um important Regional Transit routes including the future um Eline on France the Orange [1:15:11] Line brt the dline brt and the blue line LRT um so with that be happy to take any [1:15:18] questions and then um the applicant team is is here as well [1:15:26] thank you Addison any questions fellow Commissioners for [1:15:34] Addison come on there's got to be one commissioner Smith all [1:15:41] right thank you Addison uh for doing the uh [1:15:46] presentation so if I understand this correctly uh if we want any kind of [1:15:52] retail mixed use really pod one wouldn't work for us right yep that's correct so [1:15:58] we're looking at pcd2 or PUD PUD would give us maximum flexibility right in [1:16:03] terms of what we want to put in place if we do a [1:16:10] pcd2 that gives us retail that gives us some options but then there going to be a lot of variances that we have to approve as well yeah and I guess I'll [1:16:17] just clarify too um you know the decision of what to request is ultimately up to the applicant they've [1:16:23] indicated that it's their preference that it be rezoned to pcd2 um so you should consider you know [1:16:30] the appropriateness of a rezoning to pcd2 but also you know consider considering the variance criteria [1:16:36] provide feedback on you know how you would feel about those proposed variances um I included this just [1:16:43] knowing that the city has historically used the Pud to you know move projects forward that achieve other benefits of [1:16:50] the comprehensive plan um because you know the the Varian if if we do the [1:16:56] rezoning to pcd2 the variances will need to you know be justified and meet that criteria um and it'll be on the [1:17:03] applicant to you know demonstrate that that criteria is met um but it is [1:17:08] ultimately their decision of of which you know direction to kind of go here but I thought you could kind of provide [1:17:14] feedback on on both gotcha okay thank you [1:17:25] Comm h i I have two questions is the current building compliant from a [1:17:31] setback perspective for its zoning is it really 75 ft all the way [1:17:39] around no it is not okay I didn't think it was um and then the second question [1:17:50] um so I don't think the existing building that's the building height I don't think that building is 75 ft High [1:17:56] um so it' be less than that but I I I guess I don't know if it meets all the if it's compliant for setbacks or [1:18:03] not um my understanding is that this year I guess 2025 now there's [1:18:10] a major road construction project anticipated on 50th over Highway 100 and [1:18:16] then the following year over Benton over Highway 100 and this past summer we had the joy of right was this past summer [1:18:23] where those roundabouts went in currently I [1:18:28] guess does city council when thinking about [1:18:34] projects aim to time them at all with major roadworks [1:18:40] projects um I would say no I mean these are private property owner de you know [1:18:45] projects that they're pursuing um I don't really think we can require [1:18:51] Property Owners to kind of you know abide by our timelines too for our street projects we certainly try to coordinate and work together to mitigate [1:18:57] those impacts but I don't think I don't know that that's ever been a factor in a in a land use decision okay and then my [1:19:05] last question is the um I'm sorry it was called the dis Design District [1:19:10] development framework is that similar with a different name to a [1:19:15] small area plan I mean it has the same sort of weight and input from citizens [1:19:21] and Planning Commission and I mean it sort of went through a similar process just has a different name yes [1:19:33] thanks any other questions for [1:19:42] Addison not to put too fine a point on it but is it isn't it the case that this [1:19:48] particular framework was not adopted by the city council [1:19:55] it wasn't adopted as an official small area plan um when we updated the last [1:20:02] comprehensive plan I guess it was five years ago um at that time you know we [1:20:09] were doing the small area plans for the different areas and we had suggested actually taking this document and [1:20:16] turning it into a formal small area plan but the council decided not to just [1:20:21] because we've got this development framework we've got the transportation study that was done that they can still [1:20:28] be guiding documents um for development within this area but they're not fully [1:20:35] recognized um small area plans it's included in the comprehensive plan just [1:20:41] as an attachment yeah thank thank [1:20:50] you any other questions for Addison I just got one and maybe the applicant can [1:20:55] fill it in too um but just kind of any distinguishing noteworthy features [1:21:01] between the two proposals the one previous to this and this one just like [1:21:07] I mean I can see them but maybe for people who are tuning in just of like access points height you know what are [1:21:15] what what did staff see as kind of biggest differences well I guess just in terms of as you think about the [1:21:22] variances um not that this is like you know the only thing to consider but um [1:21:28] it's certainly a much smaller building I mean it's you know they it would need a height variance but it's not as tall as [1:21:33] what you know we had previously approved it needs a variance from the Flor a ratio but it's almost half of the Flor a [1:21:39] ratio of the previous building so that kind of stuck out I think to [1:21:46] me cool all right that's all I had guess we'd welcome the applicant [1:21:53] team forward please introduce yourselves thank you for coming here thanks for proposing yet [1:22:01] again not so often we see the same group proposing something quite a bit [1:22:06] different so it'd be nice to hear the story behind that and just story behind you guys and why this make sense to you [1:22:12] now great thanks uh good evening chair Bennett Commissioners my name is Nick manand with Opus development and it's [1:22:18] great to be in front of all of you again uh with a little different proposal on a site that we're all very familiar with [1:22:23] um we we've got a team here our team from ESG as well Matt axeman and Bob lokin so we're excited to get your [1:22:29] feedback get your input and answer any questions you have um again a site we're very familiar with as you all know that [1:22:35] uh we originally had pursued multif Family Market rate apartments on the site um that uh was something that I [1:22:41] think we approved um end of 2023 and um candidly the the headwinds that we saw [1:22:47] in the capital markets with interest rates and kind of everything happening in the economy uh we put that on hold [1:22:53] and uh started exploring what other uses we might look at there um I may blame some of the um Construction in the area [1:22:59] of driving by the building every day on my way home that I couldn't get it out of my mind um so we started looking at [1:23:05] what else could work here um and ultimately at the same time um Opus was uh coming up on our current lease over [1:23:12] in minona and starting to explore uh where our new office building our headquarters would be um and really just [1:23:18] kind of knew that the majority of our uh being in minaka a lot of our employees are on the west side of town um we've [1:23:24] got a lot of history in the Grand View area um in the past uh developing in the area and it was always a site that we [1:23:30] really liked and we thought um you know as we looked at office um certainly some you've seen the headlines some Office [1:23:36] Buildings have some challenges today but we've seen in submarkets specifically highly desirable markets like Edina uh [1:23:42] that buildings have uh done well and there's a high demand so we ultimately made a shift and um started looking at [1:23:48] how we could look at an office building on the site um as you know uh it's a challenging site it's a smaller site [1:23:54] it's a it's an odd shape um for those who were on the Planning Commission when we went through the apartment proposal [1:24:00] um we had a couple iterations and kind of tried to figure out how could we get this to work um and not feel like it's too imposing but also fit the the um the [1:24:07] neighborhood and really work with the the framework that um all of you have laid out so um I think with that I can [1:24:14] um turn it over to uh Matt and Bob they're just going to articulate a few things in addition to um what Addison [1:24:19] presented and then um any feedback input and questions we're we're here to answer so thank you [1:24:27] again uh good evening chair and Commissioners I'll kick us off a little bit and tell you why we are excited [1:24:33] about this new use um there was a little talk about the Grand View um district and its [1:24:41] applicability there's also the the staff report talks a lot about the comp plan and those goals we think that pivoting [1:24:48] this from residential to office use uh makes a lot of sense and meets a lot of those goals uh the plan is for this to [1:24:56] be a mixed use district and for it to be uh walkable and we think that this site [1:25:03] is really well suited to office the adjacency to Highway 100 gives it great visibility which is of more value to to [1:25:12] office tenants and and office users than it is to Residents we also think the proximity to 100 and the noise and air [1:25:20] quality issues there might um make it better suited to office where typically [1:25:26] um they're non-operable Windows um and and and um sort of noise and air quality [1:25:33] are less less of an issue and then finally you know bringing a bunch of employees here during the daytime is a [1:25:40] great way to to to um rejuvenate a mixed [1:25:45] use District you have all those daytime users who can then patronize local businesses and make um restaurants and [1:25:52] businesses more uh more economically viable if they've got um patrons at at [1:25:58] all hours of the day um so I'm GNA pass it over to Matt who is our lead designer [1:26:04] and is going to and is really chomping at the bit to make this look a lot more compelling than this white box Mass um [1:26:11] and he'll he'll talk a little bit about more about uh some of the features uh thank you commission um yeah [1:26:18] I I think you know at this stage the things that we can start to talk about really are just general building organization and [1:26:24] um kind of a little bit different than maybe what you saw in some of those previous kind of sketch versions are are [1:26:30] kind of primary design considerations at this stage really start with sustainability and building orientation [1:26:36] related to sustainability so as we all kind of know a building oriented East West is generally going to be a more [1:26:42] sustainable structure um from the get-go knowing that that hot Western Sun you get during the summer is limited to a [1:26:49] smaller uh square footage on a western facade when it's it's the the smaller side of of the building um so you know [1:26:56] during the summer you're not uh using as much of your ATAC needs um as otherwise [1:27:01] if that was a much larger facade and additionally during the winter you're going to gain that solar heat gain from [1:27:07] the south when the sun is much lower so from a solar and uh sustainable perspective that's kind of what drove [1:27:13] the initial concept of orienting the building East West um and then additionally uh creating active uses at [1:27:21] both Arcadia and Eden so um with the build bu Lobby and the commercial space [1:27:26] kind of jutting out and and kind of reaching out to that corner towards the the roundabout there that's also where [1:27:32] we have primary our primary open space as located at B um the ideal kind of end [1:27:38] condition there would be in Li of what is today a 5- foot retaining wall as you sort of um Traverse across that sidewalk [1:27:45] would be instead something that you're able to engage with and walk up a a sort of series of cascading landscaped [1:27:51] elements um into this pocket park space so those are the things we're we're excited about as the as the design kind [1:27:57] of progresses out of the the white box stage um and happy to answer any questions and I'm excited to hear some [1:28:07] feedback thank you all right question time who wants to [1:28:14] go all right commissioner Ela I'll start with the one that just [1:28:21] jumped out at me why is it five stories and when I when I ask that [1:28:26] question I don't mean it should be shorter I mean why isn't it seven yeah it's a good question um we're primarily [1:28:33] driven by parking um so we we are trying to park this at a market um a [1:28:39] marketability for the office space and we're very restricted in what we can do uh with parking on site so we went down [1:28:46] two floors uh which gets us I think we get to about 240 below 230 below and [1:28:52] then some parking that you see grade at the end of the day we we we need space that we can lease and the parking will [1:28:58] be required so that's that's driving a lot of uh the building height add to that quick um if you look [1:29:05] at the compliance table too the previous proposal even though it was a bigger building only required 165 stalls um [1:29:11] this one would be around 300 so part of it is just you know our parking requirements require addition parking so [1:29:18] the what's driving that is it the code or is it the the financing I know [1:29:24] financing sometimes asks for particular levels of parking or is it that you really think the the facility needs it [1:29:31] yeah the office demand uh the lowest that we've really seen acceptable to tenants is three per thousand give or [1:29:36] take uh in the market today so we're trying to maintain that as close as we can if we go any lower than that we're [1:29:41] going to have to find parking elsewhere um there is a ramp uh across from the public work site but um not having [1:29:48] parking on site is a is a is a pretty fatal flaw when you're in the leasing uh portion of of the project okay [1:30:04] thanks uh commissioner F okay um I have other questions but I just wanted to ask [1:30:10] a followup to the parking question um you know Dina is a first ring [1:30:16] suburb and um so those parking requirements are across the board yeah [1:30:23] we see even higher in in as you get further out we've seen four per thousand um four and higher was kind of standard [1:30:28] for a while I think um that's starting to morph you're seeing less you know every it's going lower um I would say [1:30:35] slowly um but we're still seeing that um what I would call office market rate is [1:30:40] is three per thousand even this close end unfortunately this close end even [1:30:45] you you live within a mile of this I do would you ride your bag um I know uh for [1:30:52] a month or two yeah I think I would to tonight I don't think I would have not tonight yeah yes uh yes I I I would yes [1:30:59] which is why we're we're excited to uh further explore the Bike Room and having bike parking and really making it a very [1:31:05] pedestrian friendly experience so that folks who do live nearby can can walk or bike when when possible and you know at [1:31:11] the end of the day we're seeing patterns have changed with office it's not what it used to be it's not everybody coming and going at the exact same time so um [1:31:18] there there could be some flexibility there um but it feels like 300 is is kind of the minimum that we have to [1:31:31] hit okay um and maybe right so I appreciate [1:31:40] the I mean I can tell there's a lot of work the whole kind of parking and how to get that down there and all the math [1:31:46] involved and the orientation um so I appreciate the spareness because it kind of keeps some [1:31:51] of this clean um but at the same time that spareness is you know what I'm [1:31:57] looking at in both the kind of shape and the orientation is [1:32:04] um what feels more like an office park building to me [1:32:10] um so so and I know you're good I've seen [1:32:15] some of your other work and you came through before on this but you know the [1:32:20] site once again you can see City Hall the Public Works is right across the [1:32:26] street this is on 100 it is kind of the South Gateway into Grand View um so I'm [1:32:34] kind of hoping for some information here about what's going to make this um [1:32:41] appropriate for this site sure and I I'll I'll let es way in on that a little bit but I I I do want to just mention um [1:32:48] this is um we we recognize that this is a very important prominent Corner um this is going to be a class a highly [1:32:55] amenitized multi-tenant office building again where our headquarters are going to be which is very important to us as [1:33:00] well as of course to the city in the neighborhood so um somebody on the either Planning Commission or um or or [1:33:07] city council used the word jewelbox of Grand View last time we were going through the apartment uh process and we [1:33:12] we haven't forgotten that it's important so um I know that the ESG team is is wishing that we had better Imaging for [1:33:19] you so that you could see kind of what they're thinking about but I'll I'll let them weigh in a bit as well yeah um so [1:33:25] in general the way we're going to avoid the The Office Park kind of um typical typology that you're kind of used to [1:33:31] seeing is um really the idea is to focus our fenestration to a much more human [1:33:36] scale so think of it a little bit more akin to some of the more modern um curtain wall buildings you're used to [1:33:43] seeing um it's not going to be your classic ribbon window with a you know five foot thick spandrel going across [1:33:49] it's really not the Orient uh the direction that we're going and direction that Opus wants to take this so we are going to be flexing our our [1:33:55] design skills here to make this a really special um articulated uh [1:34:01] building and then um you know you you're talking about two [1:34:06] more things you're talking about activating that corner and right you've got office retail um I think [1:34:13] that's important more retail more you know cuz office you go and you work at [1:34:18] your office and you come and go in your car um it'd be great if you're coming and going on your bike or some other [1:34:24] thing right to make it more pedestrian so but seeing people kind of go in and out that corner what are you thinking [1:34:31] about that from a corner space from a youth standpoint we're we're calling it [1:34:37] commercial today I think we we uh certainly are going to explore all the different uses uh for that space But we [1:34:42] we certainly agree we want that activity there U Matt touched on the open space um similar to what we had in the last [1:34:48] proposal um but I think even larger is is this idea of of a public pocket park that kind of interacts with the building [1:34:54] on that corner and really makes that corner kind of come to life where today you know you've got a 5-ft retaining [1:35:00] wall with a with a rail over top of it um again we're calling it commercial today we're very hopeful that um those [1:35:06] conversations progress and um and we do have um a very active use there and then [1:35:12] on the same that corner you've got the wide sidewalk and I appreciate wide sidewalks right having [1:35:19] um a couple of parties like go by each other with um strollers strollers right [1:35:27] like 12 feet or what and then the other thing about that is your property line is set back fairly far you can bring [1:35:33] that sidewalk kind of up and because of that grade change and the pocket park I [1:35:38] mean one could go down and be able to cross the street but another part of the sidewalk and come up against the property line because the more there's [1:35:46] kind of Green Space Between the sidewalk in the street the more comfortable people are going to feel because that is [1:35:53] kind of uh you know cuz the whole South is open and fairly exposed um so if you [1:36:00] can make it kind of nice for pedestrians on the corner I would really appreciate that yeah absolutely it's good [1:36:07] feedback I think that's it for me thank [1:36:19] you um most questions I had have been answered I guess really I'm not at the comment stage so two things would be [1:36:25] just um PUD if we decide to go that route um I feel like I mentioned this [1:36:31] the last time he was in front of us and probably done it multiple times but it's always great to see you know we have a [1:36:38] uh set of requirements for PUD that's spelled out in our zoning code um section [1:36:43] 36-53 and there's all the different criteria addressing you know how your building meets those set of criteria [1:36:50] it's always good to just have directly spell in the packet especially for residents and stuff if they do Venture a look at that and it really just helps [1:36:57] with the conversation right away um and the other piece would just be you know around I'm I'm really curious to see how [1:37:03] the traffic study and stuff shakes out for this one um you know we debate the [1:37:09] utility of traffic studies when we have discussions about sites in general but um I know that area can be kind of a [1:37:16] nightmare to give different times a day so with you know 300 different parking stalls and a busy office building just [1:37:23] be anxious to see what that looks like and I hope that that's highlighted and could help alleviate any fears we have about what that what impact they may [1:37:30] have on that corner thank [1:37:39] you yeah I think you know as as going through all the material activation was [1:37:46] the key word for me um how do we bring more life more energy into this part of [1:37:54] uh the city you know uh you're coming up Highway 100 you see the OPA sign it's [1:38:00] like an entryway folks get excited I take this route quite [1:38:06] often um and as new development starts popping up on the west side you know we [1:38:11] want people to maybe come into you know ground level active use section c coffee [1:38:17] shop maybe a couple other things in there that would be great to walk to I know in the previous um PUD that we that [1:38:25] we talked about this was a question and I wish Lou was here cuz he's he would have been going bonkers on this one but [1:38:33] having folks be able to access that space as mixed use is going to be really important um to the parking question [1:38:42] right what does that look like with the vehicle access point a um certain points [1:38:48] of the day uh with residents trying to access Highway 100 it gets kind of busy cars are trying to figure out who's [1:38:54] going to go first and this kind of stuff and so just was that parking and that [1:39:00] driving vehicle traffic is going to look like would be really important um but overall uh bringing you [1:39:08] know your firm to the city as a headquarters we love that um activating this area making it exciting to visit [1:39:15] and check out we love that um and the building design I know is still in the [1:39:21] works and I know you do a good job kind of Designing it and this one thing was kind of bugging me but I don't know if you guys no this [1:39:27] but sunlight sometimes on France Avenue there's aing at the end all the way down to the end like by Highway [1:39:34] 494 the Sun hits that building and it reflects all the way up France and it blinds people when you're driving down [1:39:41] France I know with the sudden exposure as the Sun is setting in the winter time [1:39:46] I don't know if that's going to have an issue reflecting it on to Highway 100 so I'm sure as you're doing your design work you'll kind of figure out about you [1:39:54] know the reflection if it's a huge glass facade facing the highway the last thing [1:40:00] that we want is drivers kind of like flipping down their thing or trying to see where they're going just something [1:40:06] to think about and I know it's kind of quirky but I've seen it happen a lot of times um but overall um I like where [1:40:14] this is going activation is the key and I think if we could focus on that um [1:40:20] this would be a very very positive site thank [1:40:29] you I have a few more can we go back to the image of the building [1:40:34] yeah I just want to follow up on what commissioner Smith [1:40:40] was talking about Activation so I'm imagining myself walking along aadia see [1:40:45] all the people here are to the west and the cars are to the [1:40:51] right and the way it looks to me so far is that the [1:40:56] activation is not where the people want to be so if I'm walking up a Cadia the [1:41:02] wall to my right appears to have no entry points and it appears to be a blank wall yeah that that's a blocking [1:41:09] diagram I'm wondering if this could be a little more helpful um in that what you see here is so this facade um this is [1:41:17] where the commercial space would be so this would be you know 75% or more transparency um and then there's [1:41:23] actually a little um I guess I'd call it a covered walkway and then there would be a office building entry here in [1:41:31] addition to kind of a drop off area here and then the idea with the commercial space is we're exploring the different [1:41:37] uses um there's a project in St Louis Park uh the Bridgewater Bank building um that has Hazelwood in it and you go into [1:41:43] their Lobby to go into the restaurant it would probably be a similar uh entry here with also an exterior entry so [1:41:49] trying to kind of create that energy in the lobby of the commercial spaces as well as the uh office space so um [1:41:56] apologies I Rec we recognize this is a very um crude if you will blocking diagram um but there would be a [1:42:02] significant amount of architecture with uh Windows setbacks um pedestrian uh walkways covered walkways um all sorts [1:42:10] of stuff and then there's also obviously the uh vehicular access as well at the at the far northwest corner okay thank [1:42:16] you that helps a lot so oh go ahead yeah maybe to um add on to that one of the [1:42:21] challenges for activating Arcadia and we're we're up for the challenge is there's a tremendous amount of grade [1:42:27] change along Arcadia you know if it were a flat Street you could be able to pop doors wherever you want but here we're [1:42:34] we're having to to negotiate that grade change so so that's the challenge is is [1:42:40] we are all about activating Arcadia and making this enticing and and and [1:42:47] exciting um our challenge will be making it inviting and convenient to enter [1:42:53] despite that great change okay that makes perfect sense so you would imagine [1:42:58] that on that west facing there would be a couple of [1:43:04] pedestrian entries for various things yeah so if you can imagine probably just kind of plan down from the [1:43:12] a a Marc there would likely be some paracity and ability to go um East into [1:43:19] the building whether it's into that covered uh kind of porch space or within the building proper but then [1:43:24] additionally right as you kind of get to the crust of where that thing starts to bend down by between c and e we imagine [1:43:31] there that's going to be a potential access point um like when um commissioner Fel was talking about [1:43:36] multiple pathways through the site is we're going to try to get one of those ones push as far north as possible so [1:43:42] that you can really have kind of almost a if you need a study to watch somebody kind of what's the path of lease [1:43:47] resistance so to speak so they kind kind cut across it and there's multiple points of Entry that's great that's [1:43:53] really important to me and so you would imagine that whatever the retail [1:43:58] business is on the first floor whether it's a store or restaurant or have you do you [1:44:04] care you know ideally I think a restaurant would be great okay um so there' be a sign we have yeah we have to [1:44:10] see how the market dictates um and as as Bob mentioned you know our grade change from the upper uh vehicular access down [1:44:17] to the pocket park I think is 18 feet give or take 16 so um you know you you [1:44:24] you w won't have obviously doorways on Arcadia but that's the idea of looking at this covered walkway and trying to [1:44:30] maintain that grade so that you have that access and have kind of a pedestrian experience that doesn't require them to walk all the way to the [1:44:36] far side of the site to access okay it's for feedback my feedback on that [1:44:42] would be it's really important to have the building be engaging from the West [1:44:48] cuz one of the things that I excited about with this project is that I feel like it's going to help help us build [1:44:55] this area and help us solve the problem of the public work site across the street uh and it could give us some [1:45:01] positive momentum in the area really help make the hole be greater than the some of parts um since you just mentioned the [1:45:09] pocket park when you say pocket park what do you mean is there benches and [1:45:14] places for is it a is it green space or is it a place for people to gather yeah [1:45:20] I think it's a little bit of both and we we kind of went through this on the the residential as well and trying to program it and and see what worked best [1:45:27] for the neighborhood but I think again given some of those grade changes you may have a tiered Park you know maybe [1:45:33] there's some benches maybe there's some um maybe we play with that grade a little bit to kind of create um a a [1:45:39] three-dimensional if you will pocket park but the idea is it's an open green space but probably some programming to [1:45:44] it as far as you know areas to sit um you know we're really open to to any and [1:45:50] all ideas and um that's where you know ESG will help kind of think about you know what we've seen in other areas um [1:45:56] other cities other parts of of udina other um municipalities that have done it well where it really incorporates and [1:46:02] feels inviting and brings people in yeah yeah I think that's that's the right direction and once you start getting [1:46:08] more detail about the entry and how the first floor is really going to be organized you'll have a better sense of [1:46:14] what could work where um but I mean in Indi we have plenty of green places to [1:46:20] look at but we don't have places to gather necessarily and that that would be really valuable a few [1:46:27] other [1:46:34] things what so it's a lot of parking spaces and it's an office building so [1:46:43] nights and weekends there'd be a lot of parking spaces just sitting there doing nothing so is there a way that we could [1:46:53] do you have have it be available for public use off [1:46:59] hours um you know I think that for the commercial space the idea has always [1:47:04] been um that they would have more parking stalls at night given that a lot of the office um a lot of the office [1:47:10] would would not um the office cars would not be there so you actually gain some parking um the intent is for the below [1:47:18] grade parking to be private for the office um we have not explored uh public [1:47:23] um if we were asking for Tiff candidly we would um we would look at how we could make that a public garage um we've [1:47:30] heard um that the district has quite a bit of parking in the uh garage uh behind the public work site obviously um [1:47:38] obviously the site as it gets developed across the street um and I know I know Hilltop is short on parking as well um [1:47:44] so there there could be you know an agreement maybe in that regard where we we talked to some private owners who [1:47:50] have a who have a need but we have not looked at public parking [1:47:57] okay a few minutes ago I think it was commissioner day brought up traffic on [1:48:03] Arcadia and um I think that's a problem too but that's not I mean there's [1:48:11] there's there's traffic today kind of a mess traffic today on Arcadia before you [1:48:16] even come to town so I don't necessarily view that as your problem but I think one thing that we should be talking [1:48:22] about as a city as we proceed in this direction is [1:48:28] maybe Arcadia should be no parking just cuz it's a mess and we have [1:48:33] as you just mentioned really excellent District parking in this area you're going to add 300 spaces for your [1:48:39] building I don't it's in inconceivable why we make this investment in District [1:48:45] parking and then allow people to park on the street where it makes a mess you can park on the street if it didn't make a mess but in this case it does so that's [1:48:51] just something not your problem but something that we can continue to talk about in the future let me just [1:48:57] make sure oh I was really happy to see that you maintained some of the stilt look on the Southeast Corner that was [1:49:02] nice kind of kind of a a recognition of the past Heritage of the site [1:49:16] um yeah I think that's it thank you very much thank you and uh the updated traffic study is underway just as an FYI [1:49:22] for for uh the new use and a big part of uh why we do have the two access points is is for those reasons that you've all [1:49:28] stated is is we think it's important to have two spots um specifically for uh you know loading and trash off of Eden [1:49:35] and then obviously the main entrance off of Arcadia so [1:49:42] thanks um I'm a little bit torn about this one [1:49:47] and it's sort of my thought about small area plans or Frameworks in general is that you you map out great visions of [1:49:55] possibility but we the citizens and Council and we don't own those properties we don't know when they'll [1:50:01] turn No Hands we don't you know have control of the development timeline [1:50:07] um I think it's a a perfectly nice office building I do actually like the [1:50:13] nod to the with the pylons to the old sort of building on stilts I'd love to hear you say that you were going to do [1:50:20] some major earth work to make uh what's identified as B uh More [1:50:27] Level so that it's accessible from the sidewalk I I think honestly this you [1:50:32] know roundabouts aren't particularly pedestrian friendly so we've kind of created The [1:50:38] Pedestrian attraction right next to a place that's very unattractive and not [1:50:44] safe um and I question that positioning and if that's the right place to put it [1:50:50] versus pulling the building further South I guess and putting [1:50:57] um yes thank and putting you know the pocket park or the green space in a more [1:51:02] uh protected area um I wasn't quite clear what you were saying on the two different entrances uh two different [1:51:08] vehicular access points So currently we have the access point here off of Arcadia this would be the main vehicular [1:51:15] access point so Vehicles would come in uh through here for parking we also maintain a curb cut on Eden as well [1:51:22] both of which exist today they do both exist I mean I guess i' I'd be curious [1:51:28] from a a traffic flow pattern do we need to access I mean every vehicular access [1:51:35] across the sidewalk is another opportunity for um an incident with a pedestrian to me the the mixed use is [1:51:43] really important here that activation is really important um but I'm sort of [1:51:48] holding my breath a little bit to give you a chance to fully develop it because it does feel perfectly fine but not [1:51:56] inspired the way that I think those Grand View District Frameworks were and [1:52:01] the way that the whole area could be if it you know had the will behind it so um [1:52:09] for me that would be really important is that mixed use the activation and then you [1:52:14] know working with the city or other business owners on the parking piece I [1:52:19] mean I certainly I'm I I don't hate Tiff as much as some folks but to me there is [1:52:24] real value in Partnerships and uses of parking that benefit everyone and having [1:52:32] 300 stalls sit empty um on nights and weekends seems like a a waste of what [1:52:38] could be a much more inspired what you call it Jewel box of the [1:52:44] area thank you I mean everybody said everything but [1:52:52] I agree that the office use is may make sense here and it's it's a good mix uh [1:52:59] to add in I think the variances could be reasonable you know just depending just thinking about those and and how much [1:53:07] they deviate from what would be required um agree with everything everyone said [1:53:13] about it may turn on how well Arcadia can be activated like how much of that can be activated and what that might [1:53:18] look like uh to a person um and also just that I mean look looks like a flat [1:53:25] like a it's like a flat wide box isn't it right now I mean that's I know and I [1:53:30] know you've talked about it but like how does it not look like that you know does does this just even just setting aside [1:53:36] like the human scale activation and what what a how a person might be able to interact with it along Arcadia just like [1:53:43] stepping back and seeing it you know as you're driving by 100 and you guys are going to maybe be in there as the tenant [1:53:49] what what what kind of architecture do you Envision just like the structure as a whole having cuz the cuz a box would [1:53:56] maybe fit better like I don't know this is very close in this is like not [1:54:03] Suburban in in a location so what kind of archit it's more just a question I know you're thinking about this and like [1:54:08] this is not the rendering but it how does it look yeah it's it's tough to [1:54:13] present a a massing box and tell and and and tell a a group of planning [1:54:19] Commissioners trust us it's going to be beautiful um but um for instance the the [1:54:25] the height and the floor plate size and the overall volume of this is very [1:54:30] similar to 7250 France the also known as the Craftsman um I'm not suggesting that [1:54:37] this is going to look like the Craftsman but I think but I think I can say that the Craftsman is an appealing looking [1:54:44] building and it doesn't look like a Office Park okay um so there's there's [1:54:50] potential this is this is a canvas that that is not limiting in that regard yeah [1:54:56] I mean you can imagine people would be like wow the Opus building is really cool looking totally yeah yeah maybe we [1:55:03] should hire them to build our next building that's the that's the idea sure yeah or like maybe what firm designed it [1:55:13] precisely just to kind of add you know obviously an aerial view is sometimes a little deceiving when it comes to like [1:55:19] mass and scale and how this is perceived both from highway or pedestrian but the [1:55:24] the topography and the 16 feet of grade change actually really makes this kind of dynamic in the way you view the [1:55:30] building because in some you know we've been looking at this for for a number of weeks now and it almost feels like [1:55:35] specifically that portion of sea kind of feels like this dock sort of like sticking out and then it kind of drops [1:55:40] off like like you'd see a Minnesota lake so it's it's a really interesting way to perceive um the building that's just not [1:55:47] there today so I think once you see specifically some pedestrian level views you you'll understand that the [1:55:53] topography plays into kind of the the general architectural [1:55:59] Motif great no but thanks for being creative and and working to put [1:56:04] something active here thank [1:56:14] you this the question this is highly hypothetical but let's just say um the [1:56:21] lot went I what it would be 30 feet to the north [1:56:28] but say it's to the other side of that Frontage Road would you make the building bigger or because the parking [1:56:34] you'd be constrained and would you move it to the North or would you move it to the North uh it's a good question uh [1:56:42] this came up in our multif family proposal and uh it was shared with us that even if that land was uh forfeited [1:56:50] which it could be that it would have to be for for public benefit and would not be it would be uh for the city's benefit [1:56:55] not for private development but hypothetical if we were able to absorb that land we would have a larger [1:57:01] building we'd have a bigger footprint we'd have more room to work with okay [1:57:11] thanks count questions all right we got a few well this is exciting first off [1:57:17] thank you guys again for coming back um there's just been a lot of stuff sitting [1:57:22] you know and there's been some good plans we've seen like the previous one was exciting and then when that turned [1:57:29] into nothing it was less exciting so to see something come back this is this is what we want to start seeing just around [1:57:36] town anyways uh first off just in ideal [1:57:41] order of process none of us benefit from the public work site like having come to [1:57:49] fruition already which was kind of the point of the grand you view development framework is like that was going to be [1:57:56] the Catalyst that then drives all this other Redevelopment and really helps Define it so unfortunately it's just [1:58:03] guesswork of how do you best interface with something that's not there yet and [1:58:11] I think through your tweaks on the last proposal you made it better and I I [1:58:17] trust that you'll make this one better but I think that other one was slightly better than from what I'm seeing now [1:58:23] just of how again it was faced more toward Arcadia but again it's we put a lot of [1:58:30] onus on Opus and others to kind of figure that out and I I think you guys [1:58:36] just in general with the shape configuration the style you're doing a [1:58:42] pretty dang good job to help try to set a good tone for across the street um [1:58:48] that's what you guys did with the previous proposal so I expect to seed this but even better refined come formal [1:58:56] proposal um other part of the process commissioner borine touched on it uh [1:59:04] pcd2 I really support going that direction over a PUD I think we've been [1:59:09] doing too much PUD where we could just get creative with variances that are modest and I [1:59:16] think these ones when you look at the Practical difficulties to do what you want to do on a un unique lot are well [1:59:24] warranted so um one of the one of the pieces oh sorry [1:59:31] and then uh has also discussed the youth so I think a lot of people around town [1:59:37] are just I guess tired of seen more and more residential going up I think for a lot of reasons they make sense where [1:59:43] they're going up and what you had proposed before was great but seeing something distinctly different from [1:59:50] everything else that's been built around around there you have the thing blurred uh Maison green and then the um why am I [1:59:58] blanking on the other building avador avador uh those are great features but [2:00:04] to get something that um even though it's separate kind of suburban style but like having a different use in this [2:00:11] dense area is just it's inherently making it more diverse and all strengthen the area to your point [2:00:18] bringing more people there during the day freeing up parking and other [2:00:24] opportunities at the night is like that's that's something that we haven't seen with proposed uses even on the [2:00:30] public work site where one of the exciting opportunities there was like a [2:00:35] 16-story tower with a big open field that basically had a bunch of parking [2:00:42] under it and it really didn't make sense for the developer of the city to build all this extra parking for no real [2:00:48] reason except for like a surge use so I think this is a great opportunity [2:00:55] to build something for a primary use but then could accommodate that surge so I [2:01:00] see this is not a stretch for Tiff like other things are or it's like come [2:01:06] please give us some money but like there is a true benefit that you could sell [2:01:11] with providing offour parking on this side you got the the structure parking [2:01:17] across the railroad but to think someone's going to park there and walk to here in the winter [2:01:22] they'll do it but to have that parking right there for this building even Hilltop or maybe what appears across the [2:01:28] street is is great so like the use I'm a huge fan of and then to make it multiuse [2:01:35] with where you have C focusing on a retail ground level use to activate that [2:01:41] corner is like the the perfect combination so it's just this is exciting to see uh one one piece of the [2:01:49] development framework I'll talk about two of them but one of the guiding [2:01:54] principles um oh gosh now I'm not going to find it anyways it's turning perceived barriers into opportunities so [2:02:02] a lot of times we hear about the to topography being a challenge I mean when you just look at this site it's an [2:02:09] unsettling site you have the freeway right there you have a roundabout you have this curve you have the front edge [2:02:16] road swooping in it is just movement of vehicles all around your building [2:02:22] so it is like how do you turn turn that perceived barrier into an opportunity [2:02:29] and I think the office use again is like a is a good use to do it having that [2:02:36] commercial use on the Southside and then kind of what you've done with the [2:02:43] shape and orientation um is really good so last time one of the proposals again [2:02:50] one of the perceived barriers is actually what the city's built is that large retaining wall around the corner [2:02:56] and you guys proposed to take that away the last time and I was excited to see that again removed um if they didn't [2:03:05] propose that like just as a pedestrian you're walking there like you literally don't see anything I mean that Wall's [2:03:11] taller than you and it's even more unsettling you're just pinched between traffic but to kind of make a pocket [2:03:18] park even if it's not utilized but just having Landscaping with like more space to the building cuz [2:03:26] the previous project had the building pretty tight to that corner so that's just a good way to turn that barrier [2:03:33] into an opportunity whether or not people gather it just will add [2:03:39] pleasantry to that Terrace and the other Terraces and the sidewalk so that was [2:03:45] awesome uh the see the overall Orient [2:03:53] ation and shape and look one thing that I've always pointed out during any of [2:03:59] these and it kind of speaks to the experience is page 18 of the development [2:04:04] framework it is the look North up Arcadia [2:04:10] and I don't I don't think I've seen anyone do it well because again you're [2:04:16] hoping the other side of the street does that so you can match to it one of the proposals for the public work site had a [2:04:23] version that looked very similar to this with like artist Loft stepping up the hill really activates the street but it [2:04:30] also shows kind of like a a very wide terrist like sidewalk on the west side [2:04:38] and you guys having a 10- foot sidewalk is no con I mean that's a big [2:04:45] concession so like keeping that wide sidewalk I think you know is still going [2:04:50] to allow that other side to kind of mirror it but the one thing that I see [2:04:56] that lacks with the shape and orientation of what we're what we at least as a [2:05:01] community envisioned is kind of stepping back and having more of that human scale right along Arcadia so um the aerial [2:05:09] that you have that's nice to see I mean you see it from above but if you're down at the roundabout and then you start [2:05:15] walking up that sidewalk I mean it's going to be a really tall building really close to you so one idea that [2:05:21] that we tend to see in the in the Southdale areas you know at least stepping back so I see you know like [2:05:29] even going in one column Row from your depiction there stepping that back maybe [2:05:34] bringing the the mass of the building forward to kind of eat some of that the [2:05:40] roof of sea Maybe cover some of that parking but still expose it with tilt [2:05:46] stilt um it'll just be easier for maintenance easier to build if you certain matching columns but then [2:05:53] allowing it to step back along Arcadia even if it's like a 20ft [2:05:59] column spacing you know that could allow you to run your Terrace you know along [2:06:05] Arcadia and then kind of have either private office balconies or you know [2:06:12] other amenity balconies for the office but it also just the effect of it down below as it humanizes that skill as you [2:06:19] know about but then it bring it closer to what the framework imagines and I'd I think I'd feel a little better about the [2:06:25] orientation being opposite of what I'd expect but for the reasons you described [2:06:31] I think that's a good way to go with the orientation um as it relates to the roof [2:06:37] um depending on what you would want to harness with you know we allow rooftop [2:06:43] dining um if you want it if it were a restaurant and you wanted to have options of that Terrace in front but [2:06:49] also a rooftop thing or if it's just a much you know bigger office type of roof [2:06:57] I mean I could picture that being like this extremely Pleasant looking like [2:07:03] green roof even for all the office people to look down at where maybe you eat up some of the usable space with a [2:07:09] bunch more kind of landscaping um I'm just trying to picture like as others mentioned as you [2:07:16] get to this corner it is like a prominent welcoming gateway to this area [2:07:22] I think how you have it turned like have some great opportunity but yeah if you could see some Greenery [2:07:29] up top and you have that Terrace and that casc cascading Hill with some trees like it' be a really [2:07:35] nice feature for that experience as people come around one other thing that came up that [2:07:41] you guys added the last time was um a sidewalk all the way around the building it looks like you have a version of that [2:07:47] just a little smaller almost like a little foot path can you explain what that [2:07:53] is so um initially we're we're looking at it for eress out of that stair [2:07:59] particularly okay um but I think as a team and looking at that further we are [2:08:04] kind of questioning the validity of needing that obviously we'll need erress um from that stair but let's if it were [2:08:11] to just go for instance back out to the West um we imagine that that's still [2:08:17] probably you know we can't imagine somebody really utilizing That Sidewalk [2:08:22] to go around the building frankly especially if we've done a good job of creating an active public space where [2:08:28] they're going to take the The Wider better looking path in this narrow sidewalk around the building to the [2:08:34] north one thing I'd say is like I because we got to think of the future too if that if and when that Frontage [2:08:41] Road eventually does change and and like it should run to the east of this [2:08:46] building and maybe that disappears um and whatever redevelops possibly to the North like treating the [2:08:54] building with four sides is good so as long as a building's not going too close to the property line where we come put a [2:08:59] sidewalk I'd still think it'd be better if he had something there um just to give tenants the opportunity if you come [2:09:07] out of that elevator instead of walking through the parking garage you could actually walk the path and and then I [2:09:13] guess one other question about opportunity is there's that kind of trapezoidal wedge to the east um have [2:09:21] you thought thought about like articulating the building out once you get above grade or you just keep in that [2:09:28] green space or is there something you could do with the sidewalk there that now you cut the angle off and kind of [2:09:35] just get people closer to head and East on Eden yeah I mean part [2:09:43] of you know the the the sort of real estate developer in our in the internal [2:09:49] real estate developer in all of us wants to you know enlarge the footprint and take War area but um once we started [2:09:57] getting civil and Landscape involved they quickly pointed out like what's your storm water strategy so some of [2:10:03] this site some of this area has to remain unbuilt so that we can so that we can locate tanks for storm water but um [2:10:10] yeah I mean it's possible the building could push out toward that it's it's possible I I think I think we'll [2:10:17] ultimately treat that trapezoid somehow it won't it won't be yeah unthought of that's [2:10:24] that's what I was getting to just not sure how to use it cuz even if you hung the sidewalk down that you know and then [2:10:31] you know really dress up with some landscaping or in between you know I mean you got a freeway right there so um [2:10:38] again if if someone's coming out of the building out of that stairwell and they want it some maybe they want to walk [2:10:44] East to that restaurant right over here um just having a nicer path to do that [2:10:50] versus walk through the parking garage just all all that stuff matters um it's the little things really I just see that [2:10:57] as a little opportunity whatever it might be to sweeten sweeten the deal plus it's like if you extend toward the [2:11:02] freeway of all the variances that we'd be a fan of like that's definitely one [2:11:07] so even if the whole building could shift like 5 feet East like I'd prefer [2:11:13] that over it in the same place so they're probably things you've thought [2:11:18] of but just providing a little more relief along Arcadia which is like either to match at page 18 or just start [2:11:26] to step back and physically move the building back it'll it's good but everything you're doing just in general [2:11:33] configuration is like sticking to the plan like where you have parking even the surface parking is behind the [2:11:39] building you know it really doesn't interrupt like the vibe as you're [2:11:45] walking around it or driving around it um last couple things [2:11:51] so it was talked about the parking so just to be clear tenants would be [2:11:58] expected to be in P1 P2 kind of that's just where you're thinking right now and then level one which we're looking at [2:12:04] would more or less maybe be guest or some tenants you would have tenants as well um okay so I think we get yeah we [2:12:11] get aund what is that 140 give or take or I'm sorry 240 down on the two levels [2:12:17] so we'd have some uh we'd still have to kind of figure all that out you know where where access points would be you know is there a garage door here as you [2:12:23] go down or is it at the bottom or you know this would all be open always but [2:12:28] as you go down it may be secured are you picturing from all sides let's say the [2:12:34] North and the east in that fraction of the South Side to have it open with the columns exposed or might you like if you [2:12:42] did bring the building forward and covered some of that parking just from like a security of warmth other type of [2:12:48] perspectives All Seasons would like have you considered covering it I don't think we would want [2:12:54] to fully enclose it but we've talked about how do we screen it properly how are we looking at that um the idea is [2:13:01] that this floor would be open okay I like the nod to the stilts as what [2:13:11] discussed um the entry points were talked about just for vehicular AIS like [2:13:16] I was trying like just looked at this forever just seeing could there be a different way way but with doubling the [2:13:23] parking and having multiple uses it I think it goes more to what commissioner [2:13:28] elare was saying of like Arcadia especially at that exact point is pretty steep especially winter people coming [2:13:35] down that hill so if someone's waiting to turn left into that entry point and they're waiting for pedestrian got cars [2:13:42] sliding so it'd be nice to see no parking but I think that also would benefit the building stepping back like [2:13:48] a car could come off the street and at least just safely you know tuck in there [2:13:54] you know before E you know either flying into it you know just a little more space [2:14:00] there I think would just provide a little more relief from a safety perspective [2:14:07] um one last two last questions so ground level height you know we've had some [2:14:15] Reckoning in the city of you know our Southdale area has kind of you know we [2:14:20] want 20 ft people want to propose as little as possible if you are picturing a ground [2:14:25] level like commercial office or re or retail what what are you picturing for [2:14:32] your first level height um it it looks a little taller than the other ones but I [2:14:38] just just out of curiosity yeah approximately right now we're at about 18 ft oh nice okay sweet that's that is [2:14:47] with with the ability probably you know plus or minus a foot or so and either Direction but um oh that's great we like [2:14:53] to stay um prominent at that first level and that speaks to kind of flexibility and then again if things were to shift [2:15:00] or things step back you know having 18 ft wouldn't look awkward um and then [2:15:06] also like inside that that's a that's a nice Lobby very [2:15:12] spacious um as far as the look as it was [2:15:17] discussed there's some like you know transparency with it any other type of features that you're [2:15:24] just thinking about but as placeholders you haven't put in I mean what would you love to do will likely be some [2:15:30] additional outdoor space somewhere in the in the building um um whether that's a a large balcony or Terrace um [2:15:37] additional to what you're seeing as number D and then I I think you know we set sort of design guidelines with Opus [2:15:44] um one of them is that we don't want an all Glass Tower so I I think you know one of the things we're going to be [2:15:49] looking at is what is that in fill and that fenestration look like once you start to break it down into the scale and it's not just an all glass curtain [2:15:56] wall building so um those are the things we're looking at currently all right and then this would [2:16:03] be the last item so what we're not seeing here but obviously during your formal proposal [2:16:09] what would be good is to get some glimpses of what it would be like at pedestrian level um thinking down by the [2:16:15] roundabout again pulling away that wall stepping it back's good but still like [2:16:20] you know you know it's pretty looming up to the building and you'll probably have structural elements [2:16:26] exposed so even along like that whole glass wall with C which you said you'd [2:16:31] have entrances um just any other like architectural features or articulations [2:16:37] that can break up that and make it look like different frontages or even like the exposed foundation wall you know if [2:16:44] there's 8 ft of exposeed what else could you do to just make it look a little better or just cover it and put plans I [2:16:52] don't just thinking but that's all I have which was a lot um Jimmy can I ask [2:17:00] a clarifying question the on sorry Arcadia a is supposed to be their [2:17:06] primary entrance that's correct yeah correct and there is currently parking allowed on [2:17:13] the opposite side of the street right it is just on the west side on the [2:17:20] west side as it go down the hill so if people are coming off of Highway [2:17:27] 100 or coming from other parts they're going to be coming down AR the expectations are going to come down [2:17:33] Arcadia past the Starbucks line take a left into the building or or coming from the if [2:17:40] they're coming from the north correct if they're coming from the north [2:17:46] okay the city want that to be the entrance or is that a a design choice that you guys have made I [2:17:53] would say a little bit of both that's where uh we looked at um our deliveries were there when we had the retail there [2:17:59] on the um on the U housing proposal um with the grades we're trying to maintain [2:18:05] two vehicular access points without having to do any significant ramping um [2:18:10] these two access points work fairly well um because the low point of the site is actually at the roundabout so you're [2:18:16] actually I don't want to say that it's at the same grade but you're coming in and fairly close to the same grade at [2:18:22] the two access points God okay so you're kind of high [2:18:28] at the Eden Avenue and you're high at the Arcadia and then you do drop down at the roundabout but it is preferable from [2:18:35] a flow of business that you don't both enter and exit on Eden uh yes yes that that would be [2:18:42] preferable um I'm very curious to see the traffic study we had a lot of conversations about our access point [2:18:47] here on the housing um and it lot conversations people concerned about it [2:18:53] for it we ultimately did not have an entrance here for the housing we only had an entrance well was it it moved [2:18:58] around a lot but um this is the most desirable and most logical given the grades I would say got it thank you for [2:19:06] clarifying just while you're on the subject commissioner Hanan that a great point but you could also if you're coming from the north you could also go [2:19:12] straight across Vernon and then come out on this Frontage Road you could skip the Starbucks [2:19:18] line you'd be ended up you you end up on a Cadia turn left and then left right into the ramp which I think is what I [2:19:24] would [2:19:30] do it's real well yeah I mean that's all I had [2:19:36] uh any other questions comments discussion I really appreciate you [2:19:42] coming here this is exciting to see we hope to see some great changes next time you're back and uh best of luck till you [2:19:49] get there hope the market just keeps like getting exciting that's right thank you all for all the comments and [2:19:55] feedback we look forward to seeing you soon thanks take care all right thank you that was the [2:20:02] first report and recommendation the sketch plan for 5100 in even Avenue and now we will move to our advisory [2:20:09] communication regarding parking we got Addison and commissioner [2:20:14] elire uh will [2:20:19] present minutes nine minutes uh if anyone would like a bio [2:20:27] break uh we got a couple [2:20:32] minutes all right three minutes if you want to drink of water [2:20:37] bathroom break [2:20:52] does it go backwards yes this what usually [2:21:19] happens [2:21:49] e [2:22:19] e [2:22:49] e [2:23:19] e [2:23:49] e [2:24:19] e e [2:24:51] right all right let's go oh let's not go [2:25:27] our work during 2024 on work plan initiative number four which was just to ground everyone [2:25:35] consideration of future of parking in ad to identify parking initiatives to pursue in the next 10 to 15 years in [2:25:42] what order and what commissions resources should be assigned to each Planning Commission will be the lead [2:25:48] Transportation Commission and energy and environment will review and comment on final report and recommendation from the [2:25:54] Planning Commission so just a word about scope you'll note that it says Identify parking initiatives to pursue so I think [2:26:01] the best analogy here is that we're writing a menu we're not actually cooking the food so you're not going to see any great Progressive parking [2:26:10] reformations in this deck what we're doing is prescribing an action plan for [2:26:15] the future what we should be considering as a city in the future and because it D's vision for the future is documented [2:26:22] in several adopted plans uh we use that as the basis to do our investigation of [2:26:29] what we should be looking at in the parking realm so we reviewed the comprehensive plan transportation land use and [2:26:35] environment chapters the climate action plan and the living streets plan uh to [2:26:41] look for insights into opportunities for parking projects in our city and you can [2:26:48] see to the right there we reviewed the documents we we identified themes to parking links to parking created a plan [2:26:53] for future parking initiatives and then re reviewed that with staff uh and with the Commissioners that with the [2:26:59] commissions that were part uh of the work on the left you can see the the themes that are linked to parking I [2:27:06] think the only one that's probably not self-explanatory might be number five as [2:27:11] far as a link to parking um in the document so there's a [2:27:17] the um the four-page document that's actually going to go to the city council mentions in it uh that it's been widely [2:27:25] reported that there's more than a billion parking spaces uh in the United States and that that we have more square [2:27:31] footage assigned to each car than we do assigned to each person for housing in [2:27:37] our country so that just underscores the land use implications of parking [2:27:43] generally takes up a lot of space so the more space you have assigned to parking [2:27:48] the less space you have for green space trees and the other things that we value in our [2:27:54] community uh so each of these themes has a link to parking and we've grouped and combined them into four project [2:28:01] opportunities I'll say a little bit more about each one starting with the parking audit parking audit is intended to [2:28:07] discover the current situation in our city so if you recall a few years back [2:28:13] uh the US Bank project I think it was 7025 France included a ramp I think it [2:28:19] was a six-story ramp on one of the quadrants of the spot and there was a [2:28:24] lot of conversation at the Planning Commission and also at the city council about whether Southdale was overp parked [2:28:31] or underp parked and whether we needed a six-story parking ramp or whether we didn't and it would be useful for us as [2:28:39] planners and as a city to know whether Southdale is overp parked or underp parked because we might make different [2:28:45] decisions on future projects if we knew that so this would be an effort that would be a collaboration between [2:28:51] planning and transportation and it would have the characteristics of be organized by commercial node uh it would quantify [2:28:59] off Street and on Street capacity and usage thereby identifying Surplus and shortage whether you're overp parked and [2:29:04] underp parked and it would recommend policy op options to increase efficient [2:29:09] land use next part has to do with off street parking this would be something because [2:29:15] it's um mainly land use it would be our responsibility as a Planning Commission [2:29:21] in 2022 we updated the off street parking ordinance after about 50 years with the same ordinance uh I think the [2:29:28] the notion is that our work is not necessarily done that there are more opportunities for um improving our off [2:29:34] street parking policy in the city so we would propose an update to the 2022 off [2:29:39] street parking ordinance which includes uh potentially reducing uh commercial minimums given the [2:29:45] environmental changes updating incentives near Transit so so that includes things like well what is the [2:29:52] definition of near should it be closer or farther and also what are the scale of the incentives that we offer uh for [2:30:00] um off street parking minimums near Transit could have new incentives and trade-offs for active Transportation pH [2:30:05] facilities like uh giving um incentives for reducing off street parking if you [2:30:11] replace it with uh pedestrian facilities or bike facilities or green space or any [2:30:16] number of things that we should be looking at or could be looking at reducing minimums near District parking [2:30:23] updating uh electric vehicle price parking standards updating bike and ebike parking standards and updating [2:30:29] surface parking standards uh the notion there is that there are better and worse [2:30:34] ways to design a surface parking lot if we're going to have a surface parking lot we might as well design it the right [2:30:39] way that has to do with the position on the lot how it's shielded from the street and generally what it looks [2:30:48] like on on street parking we're proposing to create a new on street [2:30:53] parking plan this would be a new tool for planners it would be a collaboration between the Transportation Commission [2:31:00] and the energy and environment commission and the key opportunities that we see uh to evaluate here are uh [2:31:07] specific goals for replacement of on street parking with bike or ped facilities Street trees and green space [2:31:13] Transit access and other productive uses especially where District parking is available so if you look at 50th in [2:31:20] France has excellent District parking and yet we still allow street parking on the west side of France that space [2:31:27] potentially could be repurposed as something more productive bike facilities bike parking Street Furniture [2:31:34] pedestrian space lots of other things we could do with that other than Park cars [2:31:39] secondly specific goals for one side no parking on select streets in residential zones to create bike facilities so for [2:31:46] example I'm not recommending this particularly but for example example if we were trying to find a way to connect [2:31:52] 50th in France and 44th in France by bike that was in France Avenue you could find a street a route through the [2:31:58] residential neighborhoods designate them one side no parking and use the the space that you [2:32:04] freed up for bike facilities for a really good bike route from that point to or from 50th in France to 44th in [2:32:12] France we'd like to see specific goals for strategic use of one-way traffic to [2:32:17] create space for bike facilities and preserve par I can't think of a single one-way Street in a Dina I'm sure there must be one or [2:32:24] two but there certainly aren't very many and that's a way that we can reduce the uh the amount of space used uh for [2:32:31] traffic and repurpose it to more productive uses on bikes and also bikeing e parking standards in [2:32:37] commercial nodes finally District parking which we've already talked about some it can [2:32:43] be a really effective tool in car-based communities like ours to help create [2:32:48] pedestrian friendly no nodes it's really hard to do in um fully developed cities [2:32:54] like ours however we do have some good examples like 50th in France like 44th [2:32:59] in France uh and like Grand View these these can work really well and help [2:33:04] improve The Pedestrian environment that they serve it is hard to develop but we will [2:33:11] improve our chances if we plan ahead and identify nodes in our city where we would like to have District parking so [2:33:17] for example someday 7 and K is going to be redeveloped and if we have in our [2:33:23] minds that we want as part of that Redevelopment to try to find a way to create District parking there it's [2:33:28] better for us to know that now than when the project comes to us for review uh this would be a uh planning [2:33:37] committee project and the key uh ele elements of it would be be informed by [2:33:42] the parking audit and organized by commercial node so if you take those four [2:33:50] categories of projects you organize them in an iterative way iterative way over [2:33:55] the next 11 years um that's what we would be proposing to do the reason it [2:34:03] has to be iterative is because it's always changing if we go after off street parking once going to implement [2:34:09] for a few years the world's going to change you didn't need to go after it again um probably the best practice on [2:34:15] off street parking ordinances is not to wait 50 years before you do it again [2:34:20] uh so it's a it's a NeverEnding cycle of improvement is what we're what we're really [2:34:26] recommending these projects will compete for resources with [2:34:32] other things that will be going on during this time frame there's really nothing we can do about that except to [2:34:39] we need a place to start so this is our starting point for a schedule knowing that we're going to be working on the [2:34:46] comprehensive plan during some of this time and we'll just have to sort all that as we go [2:34:56] along so what we're asking for tonight is to adopt the 2024 parking advisory communication and forward to the city [2:35:02] council before I do that I'd ask commissioner day commissioner hunman if they have anything they wanted to [2:35:10] add I didn't tell you I was going to do this sorry that's okay um the only thing [2:35:16] you know as you go through for anybody that's watching both now or like you know is that these are opportunities [2:35:22] and they're not all one size fits all for parts of the city so I know sometimes we can have a reaction to say [2:35:28] we're going to get rid of parking all over the place in ad and stuff we're talking about areas where it makes sense [2:35:33] right where we have District parking where we have opportunities right now um and it's you know like you said kind of [2:35:40] a menu right is that right so a menu for us to choose from and just inform the [2:35:46] decision- making process and it's not a wholesale all right we're gonna put bike Lanes on every street in the dyo or turn [2:35:52] everything into one way right it's it's not that aggressive it's it's a a road map uh with great opportunities [2:36:00] and uh just lastly too I appreciate your effort leading this um you know we [2:36:06] contributed but you definitely took the bull by the horn bull by the horns and uh did the majority of the heavy lifting [2:36:12] on this so so thank you yeah I'd Echo that yman sherff for [2:36:18] sure I think what I found um most exciting reading through the guiding [2:36:24] documents and and having these discussions is there are um I think you've called it the give [2:36:31] to get that we're used to with the Pud but there are ways to um create benefits [2:36:37] for the City by creating um a plan and a process for evaluating if you're right [2:36:44] across the street from a bus stop I think it makes sense that you might not need to build a much parking right and [2:36:50] so when we Define that process and we think about all the things I think it helps um create benefits for everyone [2:36:56] and also gives developers and projects flexibility within um Common Sense [2:37:04] parameters all right thank you so I guess now we'd open for any questions or just what's up to you [2:37:10] chair yeah I'd say questions discussions but this is phenomenal like really great [2:37:16] work it's exciting to think about yeah so thank you I you know parking is one [2:37:23] of those things where um you know you made it give it more life than you know it's [2:37:30] a boring topic right but but you give it more life um [2:37:37] yes I'm I'm actually quite excited now um so when it comes to the audit I just [2:37:45] want to think about this for a second so audit by district and I'm just kind of reading through this and I and it makes [2:37:51] complete sense so if just you know if let's just say Southdale district and 50,000 France [2:38:00] districts they might have different parking rules right is how you're thinking about [2:38:05] it um you're not thinking about it as an entire city have one set of Standards but by District by District we have [2:38:11] different standards so let's just say you can only Park on this side of the street in this District but you can park [2:38:17] on this side of the street in this district is that kind how you're thinking about it the the parking audit [2:38:23] has less to do with ordinance and more to do with actually what's happening so [2:38:29] you would look at a area it's just Southdale is so big let's use a smaller example like inventory might be another [2:38:35] word you inventory is a good word yeah so you look at 44 France business not you say okay there's X number of on [2:38:42] street spots there's y number of off street spots if you add up the spots for [2:38:47] all the businesses that are permitted on that corner giving you this capacity and then you [2:38:52] would compare that to usage let say Peak usage in that area and say wow it's overp parked or it's underp parked [2:38:58] there's a problem here one way or the other so it's all it's a it's like a system it's a it's a quantitative view [2:39:06] of a system rather than having anything to do with what's in the ordinance gotcha [2:39:13] so I like that so essentially if we think of Southdale you could say [2:39:20] for this quarter or this month it goes up to [2:39:25] 85% and then it diffs back down to 60% MH and it gives you a sense of if it's [2:39:30] overp parked or underp parked or you might even say it goes up over over 100% MH so it's uh underp parked right and [2:39:37] then it kind of dips back down so like that kind of flow and volume and how it stretches and expands and contracts it's [2:39:43] kind of part of the audit sure you can make a heat map of Southdale that shows you where your parking excess you green [2:39:49] for excess red for uh shortage you could map out the whole thing yeah okay um I [2:39:57] know we talked about parking a little bit with the de different developers and [2:40:02] I'm guessing and I'm not sure where this is going to sit but if we had a [2:40:07] recommendation I'm thinking out the road right of if your development property [2:40:16] only is at capacity at 85% then you are mandated to share that space with [2:40:21] somebody else let's just say we have that would that come from [2:40:26] the the the audit would tell us if it's what it's the you know how much parking [2:40:33] is there and uh the volumes on the capacity but then you have update the [2:40:38] off street parking ordinance kind of go through [2:40:44] that that's when we will start writing and designing what you rules should be [2:40:50] by District you could I'm that's not necessarily recommended here but you [2:40:57] could do that I mean one of the potential Solutions in the future would be overlays where you could say in these [2:41:02] areas that's this rule set and in those areas it's a different rule set we're not necessarily recommending that but it [2:41:08] could happen that way but the the parking audit or inventory is a way to [2:41:14] guide policy in that [2:41:20] at least project by project and possibly within the ordinance if you wanted to [2:41:26] have there are cities that have Dynamic parking ordinances where if you are um [2:41:33] if you're in a a place where there's a that's overp parked your off street parking requirements are less and vice [2:41:40] versa I'm not we're not suggesting in this document that that's what we should do but that's what could be done but you [2:41:47] really don't know any of that unless you do a parking inventory and figure out where you're at today so that gives you [2:41:53] lots of options for what you could do next if you have a really rigorous [2:41:58] understanding of where you are today last question so any the recommendations [2:42:05] right you have this like cycle 26 27 28 implementation 33 34 [2:42:12] 34 are you saying that we're going to go to the audit process every eight [2:42:19] years or so or and then we just kind of audit create update create audit like is [2:42:26] that kind of the idea yes okay so we don't get 50 years behind [2:42:33] again I mean presumably be incrementally easier if it's iterative [2:42:39] Goa okay all right I think that helped a lot [2:42:45] because I I love how you have like the menu [2:42:50] analogy right we're we're we're building a menu but not right we're not creating the food um I think that that helps a [2:42:57] lot so thank you other questions down [2:43:05] here guess maybe just my only question um regarding kind of when when you [2:43:12] talked about districts and once you get past the inventory phase it and you might have mentioned I [2:43:20] missed it or at least as a tool to inform next decisions but like where do we have small area plans in place we [2:43:27] tend to have some discussion within those about some of those Solutions and already have some insight I'm just [2:43:33] thinking of 44th in France of there was some preliminary counts and those type [2:43:39] of that type of inventory at least for the development of the small area plan was like should [2:43:46] really try to do District parking back here as like the tool to go forward to [2:43:51] mitigate against the other things I see what you're saying I'm just I'm just thinking logically once you do [2:43:57] the inventory I would say district and small area plans ought to have something [2:44:02] good in there to reference and use as kind of um reinforcement M so I think that's [2:44:11] right that's all I had thank you all right so the job here is we [2:44:20] would welcome a motion right to approve the communication advisory to The [2:44:26] Advisory communication to the city council motion to adopt the 2024 parking advisory communication and Ford to [2:44:35] council do we have a second second I guess I could have looked at the screen [2:44:41] uh all those in favor say I I opposed all right motion carries great job [2:44:50] team and that concludes the second of two reports and recommendations and so [2:44:56] we move on to chair and member comments I guess I'll I'll just kick off [2:45:04] uh one thing or maybe three things and then and then turn it over to you uh [2:45:10] first a couple Updates this will probably steal some of carries Thunder but the council voted unanimously [2:45:19] uh for the varian's appeal so for the one with you know the road running [2:45:25] through their backyard that did ultimately get approved um in case you were curious the [2:45:32] other one was the Kevin Keys site I'm sure you're allware but that was voted [2:45:38] down 3-2 it required a 4:1 super majority because it involved the [2:45:43] comprehensive plan Amendment and I'd say just one main takeaway is like that's important of [2:45:50] getting the comprehensive plan in line with the state of the community because [2:45:56] if it only required if that was consistent with the zoning it would have only required a 3 to two and likely that [2:46:04] project would have went forward as you might recall we voted to support that [2:46:09] unanimously so that was definitely a let down to see yeah when we do a new [2:46:16] comprehensive plan does that give us the opportunity to change how things are [2:46:22] currently or do we have to go through an amendment process as well Carrie can speak to that but that [2:46:28] is like that is where there's an opportunity to do it but he can speak to maybe more specifics yep so yes and yes [2:46:35] we're creating a whole new um land use plan so we can take it par however we [2:46:41] decide to do it by area by parcel I mean interestingly enough [2:46:49] um the mayor sided with the comprehensive plan when he [2:46:56] voted which I'm like right of course that's fine I mean you know we accept we [2:47:02] accepted this and we were all fine with it and I think he was just on the other side of the fence and he's like good or [2:47:08] bad comprehensive plan that's legitimate and that's I guess again my [2:47:14] message of like and you know studying the areas of potential change like all [2:47:20] like those updates are very important so if someone arbitrarily changed something in 1980 to to the residential use there [2:47:28] and we never thought about it and never pushed it like that didn't help that [2:47:35] project in particular I think we also should be thinking about um when we're evaluating [2:47:43] projects then being cons as we get closer and as we're doing that project being consistent to [2:47:49] um that perspective that the comprehensive plan is the guiding document not how things are currently [2:47:55] zoned or what current expectations may be like that's the opportunity for everyone to set what they want and then [2:48:03] that should be the guiding document correct were you gonna add [2:48:11] something just the detail that that lot is particularly challenged because it's in a surrounded by residential so we're [2:48:18] not going to be able to just Zone that one little lot for a commercial going in the comprehensive Plan update right so [2:48:24] it's it's just it's a challenging site for sure because everybody wants to different ideas [2:48:31] so yeah we could have a whole discussion on that site and we should save it save it for another day uh the third thing I [2:48:38] was going to mention um just change on the commission commissioner Miranda [2:48:44] resigned early from his role uh his term was ending in [2:48:49] March and uh you know sad to see him go although early but we'll look to kind of [2:48:56] celebrate and honor him come March when we have the transition to whoever is [2:49:02] fing his role anyway um and uh [2:49:09] yeah he did a lot of great work for a lot of time so it's important for us to celebrate people's good hard work and I [2:49:15] look forward to march to making sure every everyone knows about how how many good things he [2:49:22] did that's all I had wish your day just one additional comment so I [2:49:31] Spurs from that um something people are watching or still watching later right there still is time to apply for Comm [2:49:38] for commissions so the deadline is the 19th so you can go um oh I had had it [2:49:46] memorized that I didn't write it down but the website name for you know the volunteer for ad Dina I'm sure if you [2:49:51] search commission volunteer opportunities for a Dina um you can find it but there's still time um you know [2:50:00] personal experience very rewarding to be on on any commission and engage more with the city and you know certainly if [2:50:07] anybody has any questions about what being on a commission entails what the experience is like they can reach out I'm sure probably could would other [2:50:13] Commissioners would feel the same way that if anybody reached out they'd be willing to share um [2:50:19] their opportun or their experiences and how it rewarding has been so [2:50:27] yeah I guess one thing to add back onto that so uh with commissioner Miranda's role as Vice chair just so people think [2:50:34] we won't um fill that until probably March right Carrie so just for other [2:50:40] Commissioners just reach out to me and or carry um if you have interest in like [2:50:46] stepping up I know commissioner borne secretary so if you want to take that logical step up the ladder and reach [2:50:53] high for the Stars let us what does just for everybody's what [2:50:59] does yeah so I yeah know it's the main thing is like [2:51:05] if I'm not here you got to run the show and that's that's a that's an [2:51:11] important task because I am not here at [2:51:16] times then one second to thought to so feel free to have at it [2:51:26] yeah yeah we'll have to do regardless and as we think forward my my final term [2:51:32] starts in March and I'm not looking to run this out until the end I'm I'm [2:51:38] looking to like transition to more of a past chair roll just to help so [2:51:45] Expediting that it's kind of two steps like it' be good to be a Vice chair fill in at times get the experience and then [2:51:52] um transition over whenever that times makes sense but I'm ready and willing to [2:51:59] look at who's next and start the path to step out of the way and make that transition seemless [2:52:06] so that was the fourth thing maybe maybe third with an asterisk but I think I [2:52:12] signed a document once secretary pretty performing that Ro just stay [2:52:26] fo a [2:52:32] lot that's all I got any other Commissioners with [2:52:39] comments nothing else for me to add I was going to give you the update on those projects but well done in your [2:52:45] description of the decisions all right well thank you staff as always [2:52:53] thank you all of the technicians and people behind the scenes making this happen and [2:52:59] come together and connecting us to people out there a lot of goes in a lot of stuff goes into this we appreciate [2:53:05] your awesome work last uh order of business adj German motion to close second all those [2:53:13] in favor say I I meeting has been adjourned thank you everyone [2:53:47] for but