Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors urge council to reject spot rezoning for 5516 Vernon Avenue; developer and staff ask for more review
Summary
Developers asked to rezone 5516 Vernon Avenue to allow two twin homes (four units); staff supported a comprehensive‑plan amendment while dozens of neighbors testified that the change would be ‘spot zoning,’ increase traffic and remove mature oak trees. Council kept the record open to July 6 and continued action to July 15.
Mayor Hlin opened a public hearing Tuesday on a request from Abundance Properties to re‑guide and rezone 5516 Vernon Avenue to allow two twin homes (four townhome units). Addison Lewis, the city’s community development coordinator, told the council staff supports a comprehensive‑plan amendment and rezoning to PRD2, saying the proposal meets setbacks and other PRD2 standards and would generate about 24 additional daily vehicle trips.
The developer team — Jordan Crockett, Rashad Kennedy and Darian Fletcher of Abundance Properties — presented renderings, energy‑efficiency features and a floor plan that includes finished basements. “Our goal is to try to keep [price] under a million,” Kennedy said, but added finishing basements and market factors had pushed projected costs upward.
The project drew sustained opposition from nearby residents. At the podium, Sean Boland, who lives on Goya Lane, read a prepared statement asking why an estimated “20 to 30 million price tag” related to a separate France‑Avenue tunnel proposal had not been transparent in city communications. Several neighbors focused on local impacts: traffic and pedestrian safety on Vernon Avenue, loss of mature oaks, and the prospect of an isolated rezoning within an otherwise single‑family neighborhood.
Robin Johnson, representing a property owner at 5504 Shantry Road, submitted written objections and urged the council to consider the legal risk of “spot zoning,” citing Minnesota case law that has invalidated piecemeal plan amendments in similar circumstances. Opponents repeatedly asked the council to preserve the Highlands neighborhood’s character and to defer broader corridor decisions to a small‑area planning process.
Not all testimony opposed the change. Steve Brown, a resident, said Edina needs more housing and described Vernon as an arterial corridor where modest increases in density can be appropriate. He urged a small‑area planning process to address corridor‑wide policy.
After testimony and questions from council members about setbacks, tree replacement and unit design, the council voted to keep the public record open for written comments until noon on Sunday, July 6, and to continue action to the council’s July 15 meeting.
What happens next: Staff will accept written testimony through July 6; the council will consider the comp‑plan amendment, rezoning and site plan at its July 15 meeting. The planning commission previously recommended approval by a 7–2 vote, and staff materials note the city has discretion on comprehensive‑plan amendments.
