6016 Vernon Avenue, Station Pizza-Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances

As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and standards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 of our municipal code.

This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site since it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads demand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern.

The code specifies that:
1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets.
2. When lots border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume.
3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case here, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue.

The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two driveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standards. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but those discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for good reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community.

Additionally, as Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on this proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards.

In summary, I oppose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I respectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefully before advancing this proposal.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Cem Candir

Email Submitted to Edina Staff on November 8 11:50AM

As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and standards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 of our municipal code.

This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site since it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads demand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern.

The code specifies that:
1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets.
2. When lots border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume.
3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case here, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue.

The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two driveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standards. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but those discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for good reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community.

Additionally, as Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on this proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards.

In summary, I oppose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I respectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefully before advancing this proposal.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and standards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 of our municipal code.

This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site since it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads demand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern.

The code specifies that:
1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets.
2. When lots border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume.
3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case here, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue.

The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two driveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standards. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but those discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for good reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community.

Additionally, as Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on this proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards.

In summary, I oppose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I respectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefully before advancing this proposal.

As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and standards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 of our municipal code.

This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site since it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads demand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern.

The code specifies that:
1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets.
2. When lots border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume.
3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case here, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue.

The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two driveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standards. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but those discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for good reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community.

Additionally, as Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on this proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards.

In summary, I oppose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I respectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefully before advancing this proposal.

As a long-time resident of Edina and the owner of multiple properties in this community, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue. My concerns center on the project’s failure to align with established safety codes and standards, specifically those set forth in Chapter 24, Article IV, Division 2, Sec. 24-130 of our municipal code.

This section of the code outlines requirements for driveways and curb cuts, especially in cases of corner lots and through lots, which apply to this site since it has street access on both sides. It is particularly relevant because Vernon Avenue is classified as an arterial road. According to our comprehensive plan, arterial roads demand careful regulation due to higher traffic volume, making driveway access points a critical safety concern.

The code specifies that:
1. Driveways should be limited to those essential for adequate access, particularly on collector and arterial streets.
2. When lots border more than one street, driveways should be placed, if possible, on the side with lower traffic volume.
3. For properties within R-1 and R-2 zoning (as is likely the case here, given the surrounding zones), driveways are not permitted to intersect with arterial roads, like Vernon Avenue.

The proposed project at 6016 Vernon Avenue retains two driveways on Vernon, raising significant concerns about compliance with these standards. The project may require rezoning or amendments to the comprehensive plan, but those discussions must prioritize established safety codes designed to protect residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Code requirements related to road safety are in place for good reason, and diverging from them could increase risk to our community.

Additionally, as Vernon Avenue is a county road, I urge the city to consult with Hennepin County on this proposal to ensure alignment with county road safety standards.

In summary, I oppose this project due to its potential non-compliance with essential safety requirements and the absence of demonstrated necessity for two driveways on an arterial street. I respectfully request that the city consider the established codes and county input carefully before advancing this proposal.

Hi, My name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the corner of Vernon and Blake Rd in the condominium building. I am very much against the restaurant idea. I strongly oppose the re-zoning. I oppose any development that would add more traffic and noise to the area. The traffic noise is already extremely loud at this intersection. I would like to see the site used as a mini park with more trees, plantings and benches. Or a small neighborhood dog park. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park.

Hi, My name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the intersection of Vernon and Blake Rd. in the condominium building. I am opposed to the restaurant idea. I am opposed to any development that increases noise and traffic in the area. The traffic noise from the Vernon/Blake intersection is extremely loud all day as it is. I would like to see the site made into a green space, (mini park), with more trees and bushes planted and benches. Or a neighborhood dog park for smaller dogs. I definitely am against the rezoning. I feel this area is developed enough. It is noisier at this location than it was at my many addresses in the inner-city. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park.

Hi, my name is Polly Kiesel and I live at the intersection of Vernon and Blake Rd. in the condominium building. I am opposed to the restaurant idea. I am opposed to any development that increases noise and traffic in the area. The traffic noise from the Vernon/Blake intersection is extremely loud all day as it is. I would like to see the site made into a green space, (mini park), with more trees and bushes planted and benches. Or a neighborhood dog park for smaller dogs. I definitely am against the rezoning. I feel this area is developed enough. It is noisier at this location than it was at my many addresses in the inner-city. I moved here for more open space, nature and Bredesen Park.

We live across Vernon from the Kees parcel, and while it's appealing on the surface to imagine a decent pizza alternative right across the street, on balance we can't support the Station Pizza proposal. We worry primarily about restaurant traffic entering and leaving 40mph Vernon. And those who gush about having a walkable amenity in the neighborhood but live to the south would have to contend with crossing a busy thoroughfare that's uncontrolled to the east, or crossing at the Blake Road light only to navigate a boulevard on the Kees side without a sidewalk. We're also sensitive to the concerns of residents behind the Kees site, who worry about restaurant patrons parking on their streets. Frankly, the earlier proposal for a charity drop-off facility struck us as a great traffic-reasonable use for the parcel, with a five-year lease giving the city time to work out a feasible housing use for the site. You rejected that idea for the wrong reasons; please reject this one for the right ones.

We live across Vernon from the Kees parcel, and while it's appealing on the surface to imagine a decent pizza alternative right across the street, on balance we can't support the Station Pizza proposal. We worry primarily about restaurant traffic entering and leaving 40mph Vernon. And those who gush about having a walkable amenity in the neighborhood but live to the south would have to contend with crossing a busy thoroughfare that's uncontrolled to the east, or crossing at the Blake Road light only to navigate a boulevard on the Kees side without a sidewalk. We're also sensitive to the concerns of residents behind the Kees site, who worry about restaurant patrons parking on their streets. Frankly, the earlier proposal for a charity drop-off facility struck us as a great traffic-reasonable use for the parcel, with a five-year lease giving the city time to work out a feasible housing use for the site. You rejected that idea for the wrong reasons; please reject this one for the right ones.

My husband and I live on Eden Prairie Rd and are opposed to the redevelopment of Kevin Kees property into a restaurant. One of the things I have learned from this process is when a prospective buyer looks for a site to build a restaurant, they do a site analysis first . Starbucks and Baskin Robbins are examples of corporations who use this practice. Included are: 1) parking 2) neighborhood 3) competition 4) space turnover 5) traffic and 6) zoning laws. The use of this land for Station House Pizza violates several of these considerations. Instead of any commercial use, I would suggest the city purchase this property as green space to go along with their many environmentally friendly initiatives. It would be a win/win as the owner could divest himself of this burden and the surrounding residents would be happy and able to maintain their property values and quiet neighborhood. Also, the city could finally close out this constant agenda item at their meetings.
Elaine A.

We live in the Bredesen Park neighborhood with two young kids, blocks from this location. We are in full support of this restaurant! There is a huge void of restaurants and bars in this neighborhood, and we think this would be beneficial for the neighborhood.

I reside on Eden Prairie Road several houses away from the proposed restaurant. I am opposed to this restaurant development plan on a small, oddly-shaped parcel that is 100% adjacent to residential dwellings. It is guided for multiple unit residential use in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal requires amending the Comprehensive Plan, creating a new commercial zone designation, granting setback variances from all sides, allowing insufficient parking spaces, and sits on a busy County road that doesn’t allow over-flow parking. While there is a general desire to add dining sites to the west side of Edina, this proposal requires too many compromises to be feasible without permanently harming the character of the immediate neighborhood.

Nancy Scherer

I live on Highwood Drive, 5 houses up from the proposed redevelopment. I urge the city council and planning commission to vote against the proposed redevelopment. My main concerns are increased traffic on Highwood Drive and Eden Prairie Road, the potential for any commercial development in the future once the property is rezoned, and the late hours of operation - especially with a patio and alcohol license. While I would appreciate a neighborhood gathering place, I do not think it's worth the commercial rezoning which would allow any future development. Thank you for your consideration.

We live in the condominium immediately to the west of the site. We've been down this road once before with the Planning Commission as a neighborhood concerned about the effect of introducing a restaurant into the middle of the neighborhood. The last time the conclusion was that a restaurant not compatible with the neighborhood and would cause multiple problems. Among the problems identified were the lack of adequate parking on the site causing patrons to park on Eden Prairie Road much similar to the parking on Drew Ave in the vicinity of the Red Cow restaurant. Related to the parking problem was the interference with traffic on Vernon that would be created by vehicles coming and going from the site. The odor from pizza cooking was identified also. One thing I was concerned about was the storage of waste food on the property. The site is approximately one block from Bresden Park. The denizens of the park would love to have a dumpster full of goodies to visit from time to time. Hours of operation were another issued addressed last time around along with the plans to serve alcohol on the premises. The rather substantial number of variances required to fit the facility on the site was another consideration. The current comprehensive plan identifies multi unit housing as the desired use for the site. This is entirely compatible with the existing surroundings. The former use as an auto repair facility was a low volume use which had little impact on the neighborhood. The proposed pizza parlor is a high volume use which would have substantial impact on the neighborhood adversely affecting quality of live and home values for those of us living in the neighborhood. Even more problematic is that the change in zoning would permit other commercial uses even less compatible as a matter of right. The ostensible purpose of zoning ordinance is to protect the residents of the community. The Planning Commission and the City Council would be abrogating their responsibilities to the citizens of Edina if they were to permit this change in zoning to go forward.

I live close to this site and against this redevelopment because:
- A rezoning to PCD1 opens future use to just about anything. If the Station Pizza place doesn't last then the next restaurant would find it much easier to put in a 50-seat place serving alcohol until midnight.
- Even with additional parking the indoor seating makes this place significantly underparked. Patrons would quickly learn to avoid the Vernon danger by parking on Highwood and Eden Prairie Road.
- Vernon is one of the only non-highway spots in Edina that has a speed limit over 40, and rush hour gets very intense/fast on that straightaway. In/out condensed to rush hour time would not be safe.
I would enjoy more dinner options on the west side too but this site is too small. And eight counter seats does not make a neighborhood gathering spot.

Hi, my name is Jim Frey and my address is 5017 Oak Bend Lane in the Parkwood Knolls area and I'm calling about the proposed Station Pizza operation at the site of the old Kevin Keys gas station or service station. I and my wife Mary are very much in favor of the proposed plan. There's a real Darth of restaurants and in the area and this would be a nice addition as far as the walk ability. Yes, there is a fair amount of walking traffic and I think we'd benefit greatly from that and the fact that it has been sitting idle for years, it's kind of an eyesore and a reminder of things. You know, we're not getting done, so I am with Mary and I very strongly support this and would love to see it happen. Thank you.

Transcribed by Edina Planning Staff on October 30, 2024 at 10:30 AM

We do not support the remodel of Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into the Station Pizza restaurant. We do not support rezoning of the property from PCD-4 to PCD-1. The neighborhood surrounding this property is a peaceful residential neighborhood. On Eden Prairie Road there are parents pushing children in strollers, children riding bicycles and skateboarding, elderly people out for their daily walk. The area is quiet with very little non neighborhood traffic or parking by people not living in the immediate area. Having a Pizza restaurant and delivery business would adversely change the character of the neighborhood. It would decrease the safety of all who use and live on Eden Prairie Road. It would increase the noise pollution due to the increase in traffic and people coming and going from the restaurant. For these reasons we do not support this Comprehensive Plan Amendment.

Steven and Julie Begich

We live on Eden Prairie Rd., a Frisbee throw from the Kevin Kees property.
We would like the property zoned residential as stipulated by the Comprehensive Plan. Non-chain pizza places come and go. Once zoned commercial, anything could locate itself on the property and we worry what that would do to our neighborhood and our property values.
What concerns us about this particular project is 1) the paucity of parking which would inevitably lead to strangers parking on our street, 2) the outdoor patio which would create unwelcome noise on peaceful summer nights, 3) the likelihood of a liquor licence which would exacerbate 1) and 2), and 4) the come and go traffic that would snarl traffic on Vernon Ave. at dinnertime.
We would like to keep the quiet residential vibe that attracted us here.

We live in the Bredesen neighborhood less than a mile from this proposed project. This is a great project that will add walkability and community gathering in a completely new way for the area west of grandview/jerry's. When I think about the future of how this site/location is used I can think of no greater use of the space to improve and contribute positively to the neighborhood.