Loading...
09-26-05 Joint PC-CC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Joint Meeting with the City Council 1-394 Corridor Study Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room Monday, September 26,2005 7pm I. Approval of Minutes Approval of Minutes from the September 12, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting II. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings III. Other Business IV. 1-394 Corridor Study - by URS, Planning Consultant A. Public Input - Lessons Learned . Business Survey . Residential Survey and July 27 Roundtable . Visual Preference . Council! Planning Commission Photographs B. Principals for the 1-394 Corridor Study C. Imple menting Principals - Alternative Approaches D. Next Steps - schedule V. Adjournment Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission . September 12, 2005 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, September 12, 2005. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Commissioners Cera, Eck, Hackett, Keysser, Schmidgall and' Waldhauser. Also present were, Planning Intern Kristin GonzaleZ and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Rasmussen was absent. . I. Approval of Minutes August 22, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carrie the August 22, 2005 minutes as submitted. II. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdi South Applicant: Address: Purpose: d c 'it two separate lots in order to keep the construct one new home. d out the location of the proposed subdivision. footage of the property is 26,000 square feet and that be 12,000 square feet and the other would be 14,000 ,.the proposed new home is being built on is lower than cant has been working with City Engineer Jeff Oliver he way the proposed new property line was drawn. 4\\" Jorttj~~~r, for the project, showed the Commissioners a model of the proposal. He ex!! t the civil engineering for this proposal was done by assuming a 100 year flood ev by determining the 100 year high water mark. He said that the lowest opening of the proposed new home will be above that 100 year high water mark. He added thaUhey are planning to build an eco-friendly home and install a geo thermal heqting and cooling system. . Dennis Dylong, applicant,. referred to the proposed new property line and stated that they drew it the way they did because they want to keep the atmosphere of the forested area. He stated that June Avenue was reconstructed in June of 2002 but that he is concerned about having to pay for the $2,600 assessment and also having to pay to restore the street when the new services are put in because they should have been put in when the . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 2 street was originally reconstructed. He asked if the City could be flexible regarding this requirement. He added that the street was also damaged by the big machines when street reconstruction was done originally and that he doesn't think he should have to pay for that damage done 3 years ago. Keysser asked where the proposed rain garden would be located. Dwyer referred to the site plan and stated that the rain garden would be located on the lowest part of the property and that it has been engineered for the worst case scenario. Waldhauser asked about the proposed permeable driveway. Dwyer e new driveway would be permeable and would be constructed usin 0 types of rock. t the ifferent Hackett asked if the proposed new house was going to be 0" that they are still in the development process but that they w walls or piers to make sure that all of the living area w' e ab added that this will also help preserve the trees as er stated ing concrete elevation. He Keysser asked about the condition of the soils. stable. Keysser asked about the height of the home will be lower than houses acr . Dwyer stated that the new Keysser opened the public hea Jon Yeager, 4325 Susse he supports this proposa property to a develo r t will have the best view of this property and that tyE! be catastrophic for the homeowners to sell this o new homes. , aid she had some reservations, but after listening to else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. his understanding that the proposal meets all of the City's Eck refer the issue of the cost of reconstructing the street and stated that he thinks that is outside of the Planning Commission's privy and that they don't have a say in that matter. He added that as long as the requirements are being met they have no basis for denial. Cera stated that the key issue with this proposal is the drainage and that it looks like . they've resolved those issues. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 3 . MOVED by Hackett, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to approve the subdivision request at 1440 June Avenue South with the following conditions: 1. The final plat of the June Ave Addition will be consistent with the preliminary plat submitted with the subdivision application. 2. The comments in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated September 6, 2005, shall become a part of this approval. Gonzalez referred to a sit She stated that the prop proposed subdivisio one would be approxim remove the exi tin 3. A park dedication fee shall be paid in the amount of $1 ,000 prio plat by the City Council. the final III. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision - SU Road Applicant: David Spencer Address: 209 Cutacross Road . Purpose: The Subdivision w the existing horn rate lots in order to remove o new homes. Commissioner Hackett recused1 ted out the location of the proposed subdivision. rely 35,000 square feet in size and that after the d be approximately 18,000 square feet and the other uare feet. She added that the applicant is proposing to d two new homes on the property. roperty. Gonzalez stated that the applicant, David Spencer . ::plicant, stated that he has been a Golden Valley resident for 15 years. ~n area of the City that he really loves because there is no highway and quiet and they appreciate the large lots so when he saw the lot for sale he ed it. He said that the existing home is in disrepair and is placed very far back on the lot and would require a rear yard variance if any work was done to it. He said he questioned what to do with the land and though about building one big house versus two smaller houses that keep with the character of the neighborhood. He showed elevatioll drawings of what the two new homes would like and stated that they would be staggered on the lot to preserve the existing views. He said the biggest issue to him is tree preservation so he had an extensive tree survey done and only a couple of the existing trees will have to be removed. He said he is very excited about this project and about the idea of trying to make it fit it with the neighborhood. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 4 . Eck stated that he was confused by the applicant's contradicting statements. Mr. Spencer said that what attracted him to the area are the large lots and then he said he wants to subdivide the property into smaller lots to fit in with the neighborhood. Spencer clarified that this lot in particular is even larger than most. He said he still thinks this proposal maintains the' large lot feel and that he doesn't think the lots he is proposing are small lots. . Keysser asked Spencer if he plans to live in one of the proposed new h said it is his hope to live in one of the homes if they don't get out of hi Keysser asked Spencer if he plans to be involved in building the on selling them to a different builder. Spencer said he would Waldhauser asked if the existing house on this lot is currentl neighborhood. Spencer said he didn't think it was the . est Waldhauser stated that the new homes will visu compared to the ramblers that are in the area a that the proposed homes would be differen with the basements di erent. Spencer agreed ral style would fit in. Keysser asked if the proposed house 0 next to it. Spencer said that itwoul garage. jut out further than the home ~_ard than the neighboring homes' Cera asked about the price be in the $750,000 range roposed new homes. Spencer said they would Keysser opened th . id he is opposed to this proposed subdivision. He Ions that the neighbors signed stating that they are posal. He said that this neighborhood is the original Hughes d the second owner developed the neighborhood in the . e d he looked at a map of Golden Valley and that this only one like it in all of Golden Valley because there is not a single lot otj under a half an acre or with less than 200 feet of frontage. He said s "Tralee" division are unique. He said that a lot of people walk through the neigH od because of the large flowing yards and the historic nature. He said this is the first time in 60 years that this kind of substantial subdivision would be permitted and that the neighbors have fought proposed subdivisions twice before in the past. He said allowing this subdivision would create a domino effect and would allow every lot in the neighborhood to be able to be subdivided. He stated that this proposed subdivision would create the smallest lots in the neighborhood and would not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, He said he isin real estate and he understands what it takes to makes the proposal profitable but this will fundamentally change the character of the neighborhood and will allow every other neighbor to do the same thing. He'll have to . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 5 ask himself why he wouldn't also sell out in order to buy a $750,000 home elsewhere. He said he realizes that this area is prone to investors, but it is unique in all of Golden Valley and it's historic in the way it was developed but this proposal would be incompatible with the neighborhood and once it is done they can't go back. Diane Richard, 217 Paisley Lane, said that her house was the second house in the history of the neighborhood. She said her house was built in 1939 as part of Mrs. Keefe's "Rose of Tralee". She said Mrs. Keefe created the "Tralee" neighborhood based on her Irish decent and many of the neighbors are interested in preserving the' . nature of this piece of land. She said that one of the pieces of the neighborhoo Is to all of them is the woodsy, bucolic look and after seeing the applicant' as a hard time believing an investor is interested in keeping the buco . re cutting the lot into half of the size of any other lot in the neigh e Commissioners her petition against the proposal. She aske of pre ent approving this subdivision would set for future subdivisions i hood. She said she understands thatthere was something in the' ed . ed subdivisions but it expired after 30 years. She said she would Iik gua ntee she has that if this subdivision goes through it won't happen t 'ghborhood. Jim Sanford, 115 Meander Road, stated tha resides at 4924 Glenwood Avenue. He s subdivision for the same reasons as th unique neighborhood and if this is He stated that if this proposal go Tralee Addition is forfeited. aking for Linda Buck who sed to the proposed . He said it is absolutely a half a dozen homes that will fall. entire atmosphere and environment of Jerry Kassanchuk, 235 P but he likes the bigger 10 it would completely ang parties affected by t Golden Valley uld neighbors woul 10 ed that he used to live in the South Tyrol area ei,rhood, He said that if this proposal goes through aracter of the neighborhood. He said there are three , Golden Valley, the developer and the neighbors. ing more tax base, the developer would gain and the Lane, stated that Mr. Spencer has said that he loves the eSI fits in with the neighborhood but most of them have ramblers. 's a conflict of interest that the applicant's architect sits on the on and that the applicant needs to be accountableand live in one of w homes. He added that the neighbors really take pride in having large Luan Rockman, 130 Jersey Avenue North, stated that she is sure that the issue of subdivisions is going to before the Planning Commission many, many times in the next 10 to 20 years. She stated that as the price of gas goes up, people will no longer desire to commute and that as a first ring suburb of Minneapolis, Golden Valley is susceptible to things like this happening. She said she previously lived in Houston, Texas, in a first ring suburb that had historic homes built between 1890 and 1925. She said developers came inand knocked down cute, little Victorian cottages, and small, affordable craftsmen style . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 6 homes and put up huge homes that filled up the entire parcel of property and towered over the smaller houses. She said maybe Mr. Spencer hasn't drawn up the perfect proposal but the Planning Commission needs to start thinking about issues like this because she doesn't want to see what happened in her old neighborhood happen in Golden Valley, buts he happens to think this proposal is a good compromise and that it sets a good precedent Kathy Watkins, 112 Paisley Lane, stated that they have lived in their home for 16 years, they love the area and they plan on staying quite a while. She said she of this lot will jeopardize the integrity of the neighborhood and will op development She said that it is a beautiful neighborhood but it ha couple of years because neighbors have been building and rem staying. She said she feels bad for people with small children through the area all day. She said she realizes that someda down and other single family homes built, but Mr. Spencer is not guaranteeing that he will live in one of the homes . h is the door for another builder to come in the future. Lois Hagel, 200 Cutacross Road, stated that he years ago and that Grandma Keefe at the ti r said they've had a strong backgroUnd in this neighborhood is because of the lar traffic. She said with growth comes who have small children are con Grandma Keefe was a strong I going to be built on her pro , ban uilt their home 51 one's building plans. She ason they bought a lot in there wasn't any through she can understand why people ore homes and more traffic. She said ad very strong opinions about what was a, ed that he has concerns about the sincerity of g him wanting to preserve the character of the f this lot into two lots would be a very big change from rhood and he very much opposes the proposal. He presentation that his partner and he would see this e to a greater vision for the future of the neighborhood. He a Planning Commissioner might be in partnership with o ent in Golden Valley prior to it coming to a hearing and he flict of interest 9 Meander Road, stated that what brought him to his house in Golden Valley is aracter of the neighborhood, the large flowing lots and the peacefulness. He said that Roger Ulstad, the previous owner of his home, proposed subdividing this lot several years ago which was approved by the City but ultimately not carried through because of the emotion of the neighborhood. He said it saddens him that the character of this neighborhood could go away with this proposed subdivision and he opposes these plans. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment Chair Keysser closed the public hearing. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12,2005 Page 7 Keysser said that he would like to address the allegations that have been made regarding a conflict of interest. He explained that the Planning Commission members are volunteers, serve for no pay and are all residents of Golden Valley. He said it is hard to be active politically in a city like Golden Valley and not occasionally have a conflict develop. He said the policy is. straightforward, if someone is an elected or appointed official and there is a conflict of interest they are expected to recuse themselves from the discussion and from the vote and Commissioner Hackett has done that. Keysser said another issue he would like address is that the City is cau of public good versus private right. He said the City has attempted to by a number of ordinances including a minimum lot size, setback r maximum lot coverage ratio and height restrictions. He said that developments are going to happen and there are going to be as long as they are permissible under current city law it is di these requests. . he dilemma opment Eck said that if he lived in this neighborhood he wo neighbors do and he would want to see his large code does not discriminate by saying that a mini is different ftom another lot size in another 0 does not legally have the authority to sa be preserved that a subdivision should the me way as these wever, the subdivision in one part of Golden Valley ley and therefore the City there is a nice character to Keysser added that the Metropol" million people coming to this re increasing pressure from th make it very difficult to c rojecting an additional 900,000 to one ne years. He said there is going to be Coun il to make lots available and it is going to . ision requirements. Cera said that he t' s at the look and feel ir responsibility as Planning Commissioners is to look to try to keep that within certain standards and this proposal would set a precedent and there will be for the next 15 years if this snowballs. He said he would tion that the City Council develop some sort of in-fill policy azardly around the City. He said he would like to hold off on the et some more guidance. He added that $700,000 homes in this definitely go against the look and feel of the character of this t ey are responsible for keeping. Waldhau ted that she would like more time to think about it as well. She said she understands what is different about this neighborhood than some other areas in Golden Valley. She said shewants to be responsive to the pressure upon the City regarding higher density housing and more efficient land use but she understands that there are some things were saving even though they may not be economically efficient. She would like. time to look back at the deed restriction that was on these properties at one time although underthe current zoning requirements they don't have the basis to decline a subdivision of this sort. She said she thinks there may be other ways that other communities have handled these types of zoning issuesthatthey maybe have not . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 8 explored yet. She added that even if one new single family home were to be built on this lot it would be huge and it would still change the character of the neighborhood. Keysser said that he doesn't think they have the grounds to table this request because normally they only table requests when they need more information from a developer. Waldhauser said she would like to see some information on the deed restriction that was mentioned earlier. Spencer said that the deed restrictions have unquestionably expired. Keysser said he agreed with Cera that there is a broader city wide is Council needs to address. Schmidgall said that all of the requirements of the City's ordin this is a beautiful neighborhood and he wishes there was s . neighborhoods like this if it's the wishes of the majority of the he doesn't think there is much they can do. Cera said he thinks there could be something in f. address the look and feel of neighborhoods. Ke .ser sai subjective. ances that would "look and feel." is fairly Jamie Wellik, 31 Meander Road aske Wellik stated that what the appli the investment and the setback that once the City starts to let out of the barn and in even if new design guide permitted. He said e t are all able to be su their lots. Key r state. Wellik s Planning City. K need to ., g has clearly been designed to maximize %@> ing\t;t,~ new 12.5 foot requirement. He stated tible development in neighborhoods, the horse is won't be much to stand on to deny subdivisions, n pi because this would have already been e in this neighborhood it will, overnight, create lots that ere is no economic reason for people not to subdivide ey are not changing the laws; this is what current laws a e law says they can do and then there is what the ked to do which is to determine if this is in the interest of the em is that the term look and feel is subjective and they really w says. 100 ing at the petitions about a third of the neighborhood opposes this Waldhauser said apparently a subdivision was declined in the past and it would be helpful to know why. Paul Meland, 309 Meander Road, stated that he knows that the previous owner of his home attempted to subdivide his property but he never followed through on his subdivision application. Keysser asked Mr. Meland to talk to Director of Planning, Mark Grimes about this previous subdivision. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 9 Spencer stated that he did look into that previous subdivision attempt and he knows for a . fact that the subdivision was approved by the City but the applicant just chose not to do it. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Eck and motion carried 4 to 1 (Commissioner Cera voted no) to approve the subdivision request at 209 Cutacros$ Road with the following conditions: 1. The final plat of the Cutacross Addition will be consistent with the preliminary plat submitted with the subdivision application. 2. The comments in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE of Planning and Development and dated August 22, 2005, s approval. , Director fthis 3. A park dedication fee shall be paid in the amount of $1 ,0 plat by the City Council. IV. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Avenue North Applicant: LoveWorks Early Address: Purpose: Perml ould allow a child daycare facilityto itutional zoning district at St. Margaret Mary's nd pointed out the location of the proposed daycare rks Early Childhood Academy is applying for a e a daycare facility in a portion of St. Margaret Mary's d that another portion of the building wiU house a charter but that they are not affiliated with each other. Gonzalez a good location for a daycare facility and that there is more than at the applicant was not in attendance and stated that he thought the be tabled. Keysser opened the public hearing. Rhonda Hammonds, 1949 Xerxes Avenue North, stated that she came to this meeting just to learn more information about the school. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 12, 2005 Page 10 . Schmidgall stated that this looks like a good location for a daycare facility. Hackett agreed and said that he would like to vote on the proposal even though the applicant wasn't present. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimQusly to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit for LoveWorks Early Childhood Academy to operate a daycare facility at 2225 Zenith Avenue North, St. Margaret Mary's Church. VII. Adjournment -Short Recess- V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelop Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetin, Waldhauser and Schmidgall gave a report on a Sensible Lan they attended regarding the recent Supreme Court d . 'on 0 vs. City of New London) VI. Other Business . Waldhauser said that she would like to t options with neighborhoods that have ways to control future development sion to explore different maybe try to come up with Cera invited the Commissioner holding on Wednesday, Se .n Building Seminar that his office was .