Heritage Preservation Commission Two-Year Work Plan Development
No formal vote recorded; this was a work plan development discussion. Commission to return in fall with refined work plan proposals.
Manager Neil introduced a new two-year planning cycle for boards and commissions, replacing the previous one-year compressed timeline. The Heritage Preservation Commission presented their core work: COAs (variable monthly volume), Heritage Landmarks designations, Heritage Preservation Award, Century Home Program, and upcoming comprehensive plan updates affecting heritage code. Council discussed workload sustainability, community outreach challenges for award nominations, and the feasibility of scaling back award frequency. The commission noted that new consultant hires have significantly improved educational support and onboarding for new commissioners. Council emphasized the importance of the commission's work in preserving Edina's identity and character.
Mid-Century Modern Housing Preservation and Community Engagement Initiative
No formal vote recorded. Council indicated this could become a work plan item for Heritage Preservation Commission if they assess value in it; explicitly stated this is not a directive but an opportunity for commission consideration.
Council members raised concerns about mid-century modern homes being demolished and proposed creating recognition and educational programs to promote preservation. Suggestions included: creating a mid-century modern award or recognition program, organizing resident-driven home tours (modeled on Lynnhills example), partnering with American Institute of Architects for 'Homes by Architects' tours, and marketing campaigns to educate homeowners and real estate professionals about renovation possibilities. Council emphasized that mid-century modern homes are prevalent throughout Edina and represent significant architectural value. Discussion noted that many residents are proud of their mid-century homes and would likely participate in showcase programs. The goal is to shift community mindset from 'tear down and rebuild' to 'preserve and adapt.'
Planning Commission Two-Year Work Plan and Zoning Code Overhaul
No formal vote recorded; this was a work plan development discussion. Commission to return in fall with refined work plan proposals and zoning update focus items.
Planning Commission presented three major work plan initiatives: (1) regular bi-weekly meetings and applications review (ongoing statutory work), (2) comprehensive zoning code overhaul addressing complexity and efficiency, and (3) preparation for comprehensive plan update beginning in approximately two years. Commission noted that the zoning overhaul is enormous and captures many previously-identified parking lot items. Discussion emphasized the need to align zoning changes with community goals and desired development outcomes. Council requested feedback on small area plans implementation from 2018 comprehensive plan before designing new mechanisms. Commission discussed process improvements including meeting length, duplicate public hearings, and the need for better staff analysis and code compliance.
Code Compliance and Statutory Interpretation Issues in Development Review
No formal vote or action taken. Discussion identified as ongoing concern requiring attention during zoning code overhaul and comprehensive plan update process.
Council Member Risser raised significant concerns about inconsistent application of zoning code and comprehensive plan provisions in development review. She cited specific examples: (1) the Burly site sketch plan from 2021 where non-contiguous lots were analyzed as if combined, creating a 'mythological site' that never existed; (2) recent council meeting where information presented was not code-compliant, preventing fully informed voting. Risser emphasized that these issues waste time, create inefficiencies, and undermine credibility. She questioned whether the problem stems from lack of code understanding or unwillingness to apply code correctly. Mayor Hwood cautioned that individual council opinions should not be presented as collective council direction, and that variances exist for good reason. Discussion emphasized the need for thorough, code-compliant staff analysis and better training for commissioners on code interpretation.
Small Area Plans Implementation Review and Effectiveness Assessment
No formal vote recorded. Council requested that Planning Commission provide formal feedback on small area plans implementation as part of comprehensive plan update process.
Council Member Jackson requested formal feedback from Planning Commission on the experience implementing small area plans from the 2018 comprehensive plan, particularly the Southdale plan. She noted that small area plans created ambiguities in how they interact with base zoning (e.g., 'zone says 4 stories but small area plan allows 20 stories'). Jackson indicated that discrepancies between planning commission and council recommendations often stemmed from small area plan implementation challenges. She requested a report on what the experience was actually like and whether small area plans could be made more efficient or less contentious. Planning Commission Director Jimmy Bennett agreed this should be addressed as part of comprehensive plan update process, noting that revisiting effectiveness of previous mechanisms would inform design of new ones.
Variance Caps and Development Standards Limitations
No formal vote recorded. Council requested that Planning Commission consider variance caps as part of zoning code overhaul, with emphasis on starting with desired community outcomes.
Council Member Risser proposed establishing caps on variances to prevent projects with 2-4 times the legal buildable area. She referenced Bloomington's policy of limiting variances to 25% over established setbacks. Risser noted that Edina currently has no caps on variances, resulting in projects that significantly exceed legal buildable area. She also noted that PUD (Planned Unit Development) mechanism, which was originally intended to trade density for green space, has evolved to allow both increased density and increased building footprint without corresponding community benefits. Mayor Hwood cautioned that variance caps should be driven by desired community outcomes rather than arbitrary limits, and emphasized the need to understand why current standards exist before changing them. Discussion emphasized starting with the question 'What products do we want in our market?' and working backward to determine appropriate code changes.
Affordable Housing Strategy and Development Product Diversity
No formal vote recorded. Council directed Planning Commission to consider minimum lot size analysis and affordable housing product diversity as part of zoning code overhaul.
Council discussed how zoning and comprehensive plan changes should encourage diverse housing products (ADUs, twin homes, missing middle housing) to address affordability without relying on market control mechanisms. Mayor Hwood emphasized that the city should create code and comp plan that encourages desired product types rather than trying to control the market. He noted that it's currently easier to buy two lots and build a single house than to build twin homes on one lot, despite the city having existing twin home examples in Parkwood. Council discussed the need to analyze minimum lot sizes and understand how code changes would influence development patterns and affordability outcomes. Discussion also referenced ongoing housing production and affordability work that has been occurring for over a year at the staff level.
Industrial Zone Use Flexibility and Economic Development
No formal vote recorded. Council suggested that Planning Commission consider updating industrial zone code to allow public-facing retail/artisan uses as-of-right rather than requiring variances.
Council discussed national trends in industrial zone revitalization that allow public-facing retail or artisan components (e.g., leather tooling with glass window for public viewing, gift shop). Council Member Jackson referenced the Drooling Moose project as an example where planning granted a variance to allow retail use in industrial zone. She noted that other cities welcome such uses as-of-right rather than requiring variances, and that planning is typically responsible for physical changes, not functional changes. Discussion suggested that current code should be updated to allow such uses without variance, and that this would be more consistent with peer cities and economic development best practices. Council also noted that if such uses were allowed as-of-right, they would not require planning commission or council review.
Planning Commission Training and Code Expertise Development
No formal vote recorded. Council indicated openness to additional training for Planning Commission and suggested that commissioners should seek training opportunities as needed.
Council Member Jackson noted that planning commission training is important for ensuring commissioners understand code and planning principles, and that this understanding should lead to more unified outcomes between planning and council. She referenced that training has been conducted at least annually, including sessions from the American Planning Association (APA). Jackson emphasized that commissioners should be well-trained as subject matter experts (SMEs) in code and planning so that council can rely on their technical analysis. Discussion suggested that adequate training has not yet been achieved and that there is room for more comprehensive training programs.
Sign Code Uniformity on Highway 100 Corridor
No formal vote recorded. Council indicated support for updating sign code to match neighboring cities' standards on Highway 100.
Council Member Jackson raised the issue of sign code uniformity on Highway 100, noting that Edina's current code does not allow signage that neighboring cities permit. She indicated that this creates a competitive disadvantage for Edina properties on Highway 100 compared to properties in neighboring cities. The goal is to update the sign code to match neighboring cities' standards so that property owners can compete effectively. This was identified as a small but meaningful code adjustment to address a long-standing issue.
Planning Commission Culture and Meeting Efficiency
No formal vote recorded. Council suggested that Planning Commission consider cultural and operating principle changes to improve meeting efficiency.
Mayor Hwood raised the issue of planning commission culture, noting that there may be a cultural expectation that commissioners must 'pontificate' or express opinions even when previous speakers have already made the same points. He suggested that if someone has already made a point, it may not need to be repeated. This cultural issue, separate from process or code changes, could improve efficiency. Discussion emphasized that efficiency improvements could come from both structural changes (process, code) and cultural changes (how commissioners interact and communicate).
Use of AI Tools in Code Revision and Zoning Overhaul
No formal vote recorded. Council indicated openness to using AI tools as part of zoning code overhaul, with emphasis on pairing AI with human expertise and consultant knowledge.
Council Member Risser suggested leveraging AI tools to assist with zoning code revision and simplification. She noted that AI can be used to make complex code more digestible and readable, and to research how other comparable cities have addressed similar issues. She emphasized that AI should be used as a tool paired with human expertise and consultant knowledge, not in isolation. The suggestion was to use AI for initial research and drafting, then have human experts review and refine the output to ensure it maintains community-specific nuances and context.