Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the PUD-17, Planned Unit Development District - 17 to change the use on Lot 3 of Pentagon Village from a 153-room extended stay hotel to a 200-unit apartment at 4911 77th St W.
Share Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the PUD-17, Planned Unit Development District - 17 to change the use on Lot 3 of Pentagon Village from a 153-room extended stay hotel to a 200-unit apartment at 4911 77th St W. on FacebookShare Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the PUD-17, Planned Unit Development District - 17 to change the use on Lot 3 of Pentagon Village from a 153-room extended stay hotel to a 200-unit apartment at 4911 77th St W. on TwitterShare Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the PUD-17, Planned Unit Development District - 17 to change the use on Lot 3 of Pentagon Village from a 153-room extended stay hotel to a 200-unit apartment at 4911 77th St W. on LinkedinEmail Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the PUD-17, Planned Unit Development District - 17 to change the use on Lot 3 of Pentagon Village from a 153-room extended stay hotel to a 200-unit apartment at 4911 77th St W. link
This proposal was approved at the City Council meeting on August 17, 2021.
The proposal includes a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to develop the vacant site at 4911 77th Street West, which is part of the Pentagon Park South PUD that was approved in 2019. The applicant, Solomon Real Estate and Rise Development, is proposing to develop the vacant Lot in the southeast corner of the Pentagon South development, with a 6-story, 200-unit apartment. Ten percent (10%) of the units would be for affordable housing. The apartment would take the place of the previously approved 153-room extended stay hotel.
This proposal was approved at the City Council meeting on August 17, 2021.
The proposal includes a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to develop the vacant site at 4911 77th Street West, which is part of the Pentagon Park South PUD that was approved in 2019. The applicant, Solomon Real Estate and Rise Development, is proposing to develop the vacant Lot in the southeast corner of the Pentagon South development, with a 6-story, 200-unit apartment. Ten percent (10%) of the units would be for affordable housing. The apartment would take the place of the previously approved 153-room extended stay hotel.
This forum is open for questions to City staff related to the project. Submit your question and staff will get back to you.
Share I submitted this as a public hearing comment, but felt I needed to add it as a question here as well. I wish public hearing comments were actually visible to the public like they used to be on this Better Together Edina site, but apparently that's not possible anymore.
OK. Now for the nested questions:
How can I even comment on this development when it's so light on real, useful information?
I reviewed the full "Zoning Ordinance Amendment Application Narrative For the Pentagon Village Apartments on Lot 3" document and it lacks substance in almost all ways – at least for a non-developer and non-city planner like me.
Compare Cuningham's document with Solhem's equivalent document for Pentagon Park Housing Development at 4660 77th St West and you'll see what I mean.
Solhem's not only communicated the vision, but gave specifics in writing. It also had visuals with data and text overlays that allowed someone in the local area like me to envision the development much better.
So do I like or not like Cuningham's proposal? I have no idea. The lack of clarity makes me disapprove of the development because I have so little to base a factual decision upon.
Can we *please* get an updated document like Solhem's with real data, real bullet points, and designed for some of your average residents to decipher? on FacebookShare I submitted this as a public hearing comment, but felt I needed to add it as a question here as well. I wish public hearing comments were actually visible to the public like they used to be on this Better Together Edina site, but apparently that's not possible anymore.
OK. Now for the nested questions:
How can I even comment on this development when it's so light on real, useful information?
I reviewed the full "Zoning Ordinance Amendment Application Narrative For the Pentagon Village Apartments on Lot 3" document and it lacks substance in almost all ways – at least for a non-developer and non-city planner like me.
Compare Cuningham's document with Solhem's equivalent document for Pentagon Park Housing Development at 4660 77th St West and you'll see what I mean.
Solhem's not only communicated the vision, but gave specifics in writing. It also had visuals with data and text overlays that allowed someone in the local area like me to envision the development much better.
So do I like or not like Cuningham's proposal? I have no idea. The lack of clarity makes me disapprove of the development because I have so little to base a factual decision upon.
Can we *please* get an updated document like Solhem's with real data, real bullet points, and designed for some of your average residents to decipher? on TwitterShare I submitted this as a public hearing comment, but felt I needed to add it as a question here as well. I wish public hearing comments were actually visible to the public like they used to be on this Better Together Edina site, but apparently that's not possible anymore.
OK. Now for the nested questions:
How can I even comment on this development when it's so light on real, useful information?
I reviewed the full "Zoning Ordinance Amendment Application Narrative For the Pentagon Village Apartments on Lot 3" document and it lacks substance in almost all ways – at least for a non-developer and non-city planner like me.
Compare Cuningham's document with Solhem's equivalent document for Pentagon Park Housing Development at 4660 77th St West and you'll see what I mean.
Solhem's not only communicated the vision, but gave specifics in writing. It also had visuals with data and text overlays that allowed someone in the local area like me to envision the development much better.
So do I like or not like Cuningham's proposal? I have no idea. The lack of clarity makes me disapprove of the development because I have so little to base a factual decision upon.
Can we *please* get an updated document like Solhem's with real data, real bullet points, and designed for some of your average residents to decipher? on LinkedinEmail I submitted this as a public hearing comment, but felt I needed to add it as a question here as well. I wish public hearing comments were actually visible to the public like they used to be on this Better Together Edina site, but apparently that's not possible anymore.
OK. Now for the nested questions:
How can I even comment on this development when it's so light on real, useful information?
I reviewed the full "Zoning Ordinance Amendment Application Narrative For the Pentagon Village Apartments on Lot 3" document and it lacks substance in almost all ways – at least for a non-developer and non-city planner like me.
Compare Cuningham's document with Solhem's equivalent document for Pentagon Park Housing Development at 4660 77th St West and you'll see what I mean.
Solhem's not only communicated the vision, but gave specifics in writing. It also had visuals with data and text overlays that allowed someone in the local area like me to envision the development much better.
So do I like or not like Cuningham's proposal? I have no idea. The lack of clarity makes me disapprove of the development because I have so little to base a factual decision upon.
Can we *please* get an updated document like Solhem's with real data, real bullet points, and designed for some of your average residents to decipher? link
I submitted this as a public hearing comment, but felt I needed to add it as a question here as well. I wish public hearing comments were actually visible to the public like they used to be on this Better Together Edina site, but apparently that's not possible anymore.
OK. Now for the nested questions:
How can I even comment on this development when it's so light on real, useful information?
I reviewed the full "Zoning Ordinance Amendment Application Narrative For the Pentagon Village Apartments on Lot 3" document and it lacks substance in almost all ways – at least for a non-developer and non-city planner like me.
Compare Cuningham's document with Solhem's equivalent document for Pentagon Park Housing Development at 4660 77th St West and you'll see what I mean.
Solhem's not only communicated the vision, but gave specifics in writing. It also had visuals with data and text overlays that allowed someone in the local area like me to envision the development much better.
So do I like or not like Cuningham's proposal? I have no idea. The lack of clarity makes me disapprove of the development because I have so little to base a factual decision upon.
Can we *please* get an updated document like Solhem's with real data, real bullet points, and designed for some of your average residents to decipher?
JoelZaslofsky
asked
almost 3 years ago
Thanks for your question. Below is a link to submitted plans and narrative. The submittal package has all the detailed plans required to process the application. Plans include detailed building plans, building renderings, site plan, landscape plan, utility plan, grading and drainage plan and project narrative. -Cary Teague, Community Development Director
