04-22-85 PC Agenda . .. .. . .... ..__.. .._...._::.. _.,: . .. ... -. .._�.,_,_.:.:. . ...:�
� I
I
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION !
� Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road
April 22, 1985 �
AGENDA
� �
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 8, 1985
II. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING ;
APPLICANT: Goldman and Sachs �
;
LOCATION: 220 Turners Crossroad !
�
REQUEST: Rezone from Open Development to Multiple '
Dwelling (M-1) Zoning District I
I
I III. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PUD #48 �
�
I
APPLICANT: Meridian Construction Company, Inc. ;
LOCATION: 9025-35 23rd Avenue North
� I
REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Design Plan PUD #48 to i
A17ow a Duplex with Zero Lot Line Division �
I
IV. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - APRIL 16, 1985 �
V. REPORT ON BZA MEETING - APRIL 9, 1985
I
�
lII. REPORT ON HRA MEETING - APRIL 9, 19�5 !
VII . RESCHEDULE MAY 27, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING �
�
I
;
�
;
�
I �
, MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
� PLANNING COMMISSION
April 8, 1985
�
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers
of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Chairman Prazak called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Those present were Commissioners Kapsner, Leppik, Lewis, McAleese,
McCracken-Hunt, Prazak and Russell . Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of
Planning and Development; Alda Peikert, City Planner; and Gloria Anderson,
Planning Secretary.
Chairman Prazak introduce Jean Lewis who was appointed by the City Council as
the new Planning Commissioner.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 25, 1985
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt
and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 25, 1985 Planning
Commission meeting as amended.
II . SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PUD #48
APPLICANT: Meridian Construction Company, Inc.
LOCATION: 9025-35 23rd Avenue North
� REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Design Plan PUD #48
to Allow a Duplex with Zero Lot Line Division
Chairman Prazak introduced this agenda item and noted the April 22, 1985
informal public hearing date recommended by staff.
It was moved by Commissioner Russell , seconded by Commissioner Leppik and
carried unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of April 22, 1985 to
consider PUD #48 located at 9025-35 23rd Avenue North.
III . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING
APPLICANT: Robert L. Johnson
LOCATION: 6300 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Approval of Rezoning from I-4 Institutional
to the Industrial Zoning District
Chairman Prazak introduced this agenda item and asked staff to review the
proposal . City Planner Alda Peikert reviewed the request for rezoning
explaining that the rezoning would correct an apparent oversight at the time
the property was rezoned by Pako in 1958.
Mr. Gary Persian, attorney, was present to represent the proponent. He stated
� that staff had covered their request and had no further comments.
,, Planning Commission Minutes
April 8, 1985
Page 2
� Chairman Prazak opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one, the
hearing was closed.
It was moved by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Leppik
and carried unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the request by
Robert L. Johnson to rezone a portion of the property at 6300 Olson Memorial
Highway from the I-4 Institutional Zoning District to the Industrial Zoning
District.
IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: St. Margaret Mary Catholic School
LOCATION: 2225 Zenith Avenue North
REQUEST: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to
Operate a Day Care Center
Chairman Prazak introduced this agenda item and asked staff to review this
request. Director Grimes reviewed the request and gave the staff recommenda-
tion.
Commissioner McAleese stated he was a member of this parish and would refrain
from discussion and voting on this item due to a possible conflict of interest.
� Commissioner Kapsner asked how close the day care would be to a private
residence. Director Grimes said it would be approximately 400 feet from any
of the homes.
Joe and Mary Whelan were present on behalf of themselves and St. Margaret Mary
Church. Mr. Whelan thanked the staff for their presentation. They were asked
by Chairman Prazak if they had applied to the State for a license to operate a
day care center. Mr. Whelan explained that they first had to get approval from
the City of Golden Valley. They would request a license to care for up to 70
children of which about 40 would be preschool age children and the rest would
be "latchkey" children. The Whelans said they would have eight to ten
employees and hope to have senior citizen volunteers to help out. They stated
that there would be no food prepared on the premises, that it would be prepared
in the church kitchen or catered.
Commissioner Leppik asked if the day care center would be open to the public or
only members of the church. The Whelans said it would be open to the general
public.
Chairman Prazak asked Mary Whelan if she had any experience in running a day
care center. Mrs. Whelan said she is currently employed by District 281
Adventure Club and has had other day care experience.
Chairman Prazak opened the public hearing for public input.
�
P�anning Commission Minutes
� April 8, 1985
Page 3
� Mr. Bob Papousek, 1929 Glenwood Parkway, had concerns regarding the traffic
problems a day care center would cause.
The Whelans explained that it should not create a traffic problem as some of
the parents already drop older children at the school and would probably drop
the younger children at the day care center and also that in many cases one car
would probably be dropping off more than one child.
Chairman Prazak closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kapsner felt it would create some additional traffic but that it
would probably be only 20 to 25 additional cars and that he would support the
proposal .
Commissioners Russell and Leppik both felt there was a need for day care and
"latchkey" programs and that the positive aspects outweighed the negative
aspects of additional traffic.
It was moved by Commissioner Kapsner, seconded by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt
and carried unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve a
Conditional Use Permit to operate a day care center in the convent building
at 2225 Zenith Avenue North subject to the following conditions:
1. The building meet all applicable standards and codes required by the
City, State and County. This includes, but is not limited to, the
� Uniform Building Code, Uniform Fire Code, Plumbing Code and Handicap
Access Requirements.
2. The State of Minnesota has issued a license for the operation of the
day care facility for 70 children.
V. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: William 0. Friede dba Midway Rent-All
LOCATION: 9010 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow
Outdoor Sales and Storage
Chairman Prazak introduced this agenda item and asked staff for their review of
the Conditional Use Permit request.
Director Grimes gave a review of the request and the staff recommendations.
The Planning Commissioners had a number of questions regarding parking, snow
removal , repair of equipment, etc.
Mr. William 0. Friede of Midway Rent-All , the proponent, was present to answer
questions. He explained that there would be space for seven cars plus the fact
� that some customers, when renting a truck, would park their vehicles in the
truck spot in the storage area. Mr. Friede also explained the entrance and
� Planning Commission Minutes
• April 8, 1985
Page 4
� exit plan which should alleviate any traffic backup. Mr. Friede informed the
Commissioners that they had they own snow removal equipment and that if there
was a large amount of snowfall , it would be hauled from the site. He also
stated that they would only do small repair jobs at the site and that most of
the repairs would be done at their St. Paul location.
Questions were raised regarding the storage of fuels on the premises and
Director Grimes stated that if the building were sprinklered, up to 50 gallons
could be stored there. He also stated it was recommended by the City Fire
Marshal that the building be sprinklered.
Chairman Prazak opened the meeting for public input.
Mr. Ralph Lange, owner of Hannon Security at 9100 Olson Memorial Highway,
expressed his concerns regarding the parking problem, snow removal , and asked
what Midway Rent-All 's hours of operation would be. He also stated that the
trucks parked in the storage area and the fencing would block out their signage
along Olson Memorial Highway.
Mr. Friede said they plan on being open from 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. for a year
or so and then extend their hours, and that they would be open seven days a
week. He felt that with the trucks parked at an angle along the east side,
there would not be a visibility problem for Hannon Security's signage. Mr.
Friede stated that there should not be more than five cars parked there at any
given time. He further stated that the property will be landscaped and
� resurfaced and that the property's appearance and the parking will be improved
over what it is now.
Chairman Prazak closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Leppik feels that the Midway Rent-All business would be an
improvement in terms of traffic and parking and that the landscaping will help
to improve the appearance of the area.
Chairman Prazak asked questions of the staff regarding the fence.
Director Grimes said that the matter of the fence would have to be addressed by
the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) .
Commissioner Russell felt an effort should be made to include the neighbors in
discussion of the parking and fence problems, and City Planner Alda Peikert
informed the Commissioners that adjoining neighbors would be notified when
Midway Rent-All went to the BZA.
It was moved by Commissioner Russell , seconded by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt
and carried unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the Conditional
Use Permit for Midway Rent-All at 9010 Olson Highway subject to the following
conditions:
1. The site plan dated March 31, 1985 shall become a part of this Conditional
� Use Permit.
Planning Commission Minutes
• April 8, 1985
Page 5
� 2. The site plan be submitted to the BZA to address the non-conforming access
of the plan.
3. The amount of outside storage be limited to 15 trucks (pickups, vans and
trucks up to 22 feet in length) , 20 trailers, and other miscellaneous
equipment. All equipment must be in the designated display and storage
areas shown on the plan in order to allow for circulation.
4. At least 15 parking spaces be designated on the site.
5. As shown on the site plan, areas along Golden Valley Road and Highway 55
should be landscaped as per plan. The final landscape plan should be
approved by the Director of Planning and Development. The landscaping
shall be completed by October 1, 1985.
6. Any plan for lighting of the lot shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Inspections.
7. The operation shall comply with all requirements and recommendations of
the City Building Inspector and Fire Marshal .
Commissioner Russell left the meeting at this point.
VI. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING
� APPLICANT: Foxboro Corporation
LOCATION: 1245, 1315, 1335 and 1411 North Lilac Drive
REQUEST: Approval of Rezoning from Residential to Business
and Professional Offices Zoning District
Chairman Prazak requested an update of this rezoning request from the staff.
Director Grimes gave a review of the request and stated that neighbors had been
re-notified of the rezoning request.
Chairman Prazak suggested that the proponent make their presentation at this
time.
Mr. Dennis Marhula of Westwood Engineering was present to represent the
proponent, Foxboro Incorporated. Mr. Marhula gave his presentation of, the
drainage plan for this property whereby they had worked out the problems that
had previously existed. He also explained the site line of the property from
nearby homes.
Mr. Lynn Sloat of Sloat Logan Associates gave a presentation on the building
concept. He stated that they had reduced the size of the building from 36,700
square feet to 32,500 square feet. Mr. Sloat stated that reducing the size of
the building did not change it's appearance but it did reduce the numbers of
� parking spaces which would indicate less cars. The number of parking spaces
now required is 130 and they have provided 132 parking spaces.
` Planning Commission Minutes
• April 8, 1985
Page 6
� Mr. R. C. Johnson, 1200 Welcome Avenue, showed pictures to the Planning
Coremissioners of the water that drains into his backyard at the present time.
He is concerned with the drainage and traffic problems.
Mr. Pavlos Electris, 1316 Welcome Avenue, is concerned with the drainage,
traffic, exhaust fumes, and the fact that the building will obstruct their
view.
Mr. Frank Tenczar, 1310 Welcome Avenue, also had concerns with drainage and
snow removal . He asked the when construction would begin and how long it would
take.
The proponent explained that construction could start in 60 days and would take
approximately five months to complete.
Mrs. Fay, 1420 North Lilac Drive, felt something should be done with the
property but that it should remain residential . She indicated that they do not
need another commercial building in that area and that it would block her view.
Mr. Scott Rayman, 1240 Welcome Avenue, had questions and concerns on drainage.
Mr. Wally Klovstad, 1220 Welcome Avenue, still had concerns on drainage and
wanted good, effective screening for the property.
� Mr. George Seiter, 1408 North Lilac Drive, is opposed to the rezoning.
Mr. Brian Napstad, owner of the house at 1201 North Lilac Drive, stated that
the proposed rezoning and new building would be an improvement. He felt that
not everyone was against the proposed rezoning and commercial building.
A representative of the three sellers of this property, was present at the
meeting and he stated that for two and one-half years an effort had been made
to sell this property for residential use but that no one was interested in
building on this property because of the high traffic count on Highway 100. He
felt that the proposed building was attractive and an improvement over what is
there at the present time.
Mrs. Lloyd Johnson, 1125 North Lilac Drive, had concerns about the traffic in
this area.
Mr. A1 Schuler, 1411 North Lilac Drive, is for the project as it is an
improvement over what is there now.
Mr. Lynn Sloat stated that he believed they tried to work with the residents
to meet their needs and wants regarding drainage, berming, etc. and hoped the
Planning Commission would see their way clear to recommend approval of the
rezoning.
�
Planning Commission Minutes
� April 8, 1985
Page 7
�
The Public Hearing was closed.
Chairman Prazak stated he felt the proponents had been responsive to the
drainage issues, that it appeared unlikely the property would be developed for
residential use and was inclined to supp'ort the revised plans.
Commissioner Leppik felt she would support it as it seemed the property could
not be sold as it was presently zoned and that she would prefer to see a
different zoning with a higher quality development on it and thought that is
what the Foxboro proposal would be rather than leave it in a deteriorating
condition.
Commissioner McAleese stated that as a planner, he felt this was a good project
but that a State law seems to state that a local governmental unit can't rezone
in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, he said he would vote
against the plan.
Commissioner Kapsner stated that he agreed it was an important issue that the
former owners had tried to sell it for residential use and that he would
support the rezoning rather than have it remain as it presently is, as it was a
good proposal .
Commissioner McCracken-Hunt was in favor of the rezoning and felt it was an
• improvement of the site and that the proponent had worked with the neighborhood
to everyone's best interest.
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Kapsner and carried to
recommend City Council approval of the rezoning of the property at 1245, 1315,
1335 and 1411 North Lilac Drive from Residential to Business and Professional
Offices Zoning District and that the Council take no final action until the
private covenants have been made between the proponents and residents.
Commissioner McAleese voted against the rezoning.
VII . REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - APRIL 2, 1985
Commissioner Kapsner attended the City Council meeting of April 2, 1985 and
gave a report to the Commission.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M.
Gary Prazak, Chairman Linda McCracken-Hunt, Secretary
•
Planning Commission Minutes
' March 25, 1985
Page 3
� VIII. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 19, 1985
Commissioner Leppik attended the March 19, 1985 meeting of the City Council and
reported on the Planning Commission items. The City Council recor�nended that
the Planning Commission make specific recommendations on development proposals.
This came up at the March 19 meeting because of the Planning Commission
recommendation on PUD �30-B. The Planning Commission had not recommended a
specific number of townhouses or garages but a range of townhouses and garages.
IX. REPORT ON HRA MEETING - MARCH 12, 1985
Commissioner Kapsner gave a report on the March 12, 1985 meeting of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) .
X. REPORT ON BZA MEETING - MARCH 12, 1985
Acting Chairman Prazak gave a report on the March 12, 1985 meeting of the Board
of Zoning Appeals (BZA) .
XI . REPRESENTATIVES FOR APRIL CITY COUNCIL AND HRA MEETING
It was decided that Commissioner McCracken-Hunt will attend the April 9, 1985
HRA meeting and Commissioner Kapsner will attend the April 2, 1985 City Council
meeting.
� XII . ANNUAL ELECTION OF OFFICERS
The following persons were nominated for office:
Gary Prazak for Chairman
Peggy Leppik for Vice Chair
Linda McCracken-Hunt for Secretary
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner McAleese and
carried unanimously to elect Gary Praiak as Chairman, Peggy Leppik as Vice
Chair and Linda McCracken-Hunt as Secretary for 1985.
XIII . WORK/STUDY SESSION
The Planning Commission discussed topics that they would like to study. This
was done by a "brainstorming" session.
It was determined that the first study topic will be a discussion of the role
of the HRA. This session is tentatively scheduled to take place at the end of
a regular meeting in May. The second study session will cover the
Comprehensive Plan. r McAleese and Director Grimes will meet to
develop an agenda for these s u y session .
�
. April 17, 1985
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
SUBJECT: Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning of Property
at 220 Turners Crossroad from Open Development to Multiple
Development M-1 (Three Story Maximum) ,
Richard Sachs and Ted Goldman have a purchase agreement to buy the property
at 220 Turners Crossroad. They would like to rezone the property to M-1 in
order to construct an 24-unit apartment. At the present time, a house is
located on the lot. Access to the lot is over an easement from Turners
Crossroad.
(Mr. Goldman is the owner of the apartment building that is located south
of the proposed building on Laurel Avenue. )
The Comprehensive Plan for this area designates the entire area north of
� Laurel , west of Turners Crossroad, east of the railroad tracks and south of
Glenwood for medium density development except for the church and fire
station.
The staff suggests that an informal public hearing date of May 13, 1985 be
set by the Planning Commission to consider this rezoning.
�
' ���( E w'� , � , , ' ,', {
ff. �� _
, �•,- � � � _
, � ,
/i' _ � ,�,. .,• - ��'', ` �� .MIE ' I
c ,a���:�.�� — �
`' ......... �.
� ': C:::::'��:. 1
s � n ,?v '�,:wCSL:CC: ��� '��
� 'C;�.� ..,�A�� \,�•�:�:: ���•,;..�i
.;.w-�^a��� , -�
� � � � � E
;rc: � � !' - i
� � �; - - »;
: �•i f'
��� ��r� � '`�� �
� � � �� ' p
� .
�� ��
- -- '' � , �` �
� ��` � �_„ _
, � -- / _
I � � F
- �i �i� �� � �;�,. , �, �'
�
, , � �� ��,
� �� �
� ;
% AY�.NN �
%% %�% .�.. / -.� -
�,////,: � .���� i
, / � /i, ;��::�.� ,
,,, ,.,// , �. �... .
, / ,, ��. ______�:: ./,/ ��
- , �, , , ...::: ,
� � :::::::.. ..���
/, , ::: ��
/ __ �.
; — — ��,`.;
� � _ �c�� •ff - ��/��
� �� � 'f�
J '
_ --- � _ , ;,.� .
�� � �
� I ' �mm `
f� � _ � ���;
� � a
� 1 4
I
�1 _ /
a �i� '
� �� .i�� , , _
� ��.�� ME� �f � rl _ �/// �
.'�ff= y� � ���� E •
.'r{. �� � w , �
r:r: % ' ���-:�:-
� � � � !� � ���.� j �j� � �T � �
,. % � % i ,% i�;; � ! , �/ ; �
i � ,� �„ / i , /, ..
- % /i�//////:///� •, . //, f ,/ , �_ -
, %f%% � ,�,,�. , ,,, . i, ,
, , � , -,`/�;/ /,-/, %% /// � � -� �, �
�4�� / � / //./�� /j I j�/��%�i/j ii�ii �� ���� u.17�1�����������
/
��! ' �/ /� �Ci�f/�%� ��/ �i�i��iiY�� '�w!�!�!! V�ii ii�i�ii i� �
_ .�� a��N
_ `iiw����:::oi��ii u
� —._� _ ._�.
' • . -- - - --�_--__��� ���/�� �■! — ——
�.—._ _
=-.: �� - -- —,�
� -
' :e:� ���,
::::.
r ff�i.•f.ff � k -
-. . . ! s,,�
- �.�I` '�'��
::i::: • ' ��
:v�'�"'!�'� - �� • . - -�•�
� � �
April 17,1985
� '
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Alda Peikert, City Planner
SUBJECT: Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan of PUD #48,
Meridian First Addition
Meridian Construction Co. , Inc. requests approval of the Preliminary Design
Plan for PUD #48, Meridian First Addition, which proposes construction of a
zero lot line duplex on a vacant lot located at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North. The
purpose of zero lot line division of the proposed two family residential
structure is to allow separate ownership of each of the two single family
residential units by creating two separate lots.
The Planned Unit Development (PUD) procedure is the only process providing for
zero lot line division of a structure under the City of Golden Valley Zoning
Ordinance. Precedent for use of the PUD process in the case of a single duplex
was set with approval in March 1984 of PUD #41, Valley Wood, which allowed
division of an existing duplex located southwest of Highway 55 and Highway 100.
Prior to that action, the PUD process was used in May 1983 to divide four
existing duplexes into eight separate ownership single family residential units
in the case of PUD #36, Lakeview Terrace, located on the southeast corner of
. Winnetka and 23rd Avenues North.
Conformance with Zoning Ordinance Requirements and Comprehensive Plan
The subject lot at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North, proposed site of PUD #48, is an
oversized single family residential lot remaining vacant in an otherwise fully
developed neighborhood. Current zoning is Residential (Single Family) , while
the proposed PUD development corresponds to Two-Family (R-2) Residential
zoning. The adopted City of Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan specif�es long
term land use of the location as Single Family (Low Density) Residential , which
the adopted Golden �Valley Housing Policy defines as one to four units per acre.
Two-Family (R-2) Residential zoning may fall within the Single Family (Low
Density) Residential land use classification on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
map.
Dimensions of the subject lot substantially exceed requirements for the
Two-Family (R-2) Residential Zoning District. Although Zoning Ordinance
requirements become flexible in a PUD, dimensional requirements of the
appropriate zoning district are used as a base guideline for comparison.
Minimum lot size in the Residential (Single Family) Zoning District is 10,000
square feet, and minimum lot size in the Two-Family (R-2) Residential Zoning
District is 12,500 square feet. The subject lot has a total area of 30,699
square feet, which is more than twice the minimum lot size requirement for R-2
zoning. The lot width requirement for R-2 zoning is 100 feet, and the subject
lot has more than adequate width at 140 feet.
� Proposed density is comparable to that of the surrounding single family resi-
dential neighborhood. The proposed individual lots housing each of the two
units are 15,271 and 15,428 square feet in area, each half again as large as
• Golden U�lley Planning Commission
April 17, 1985
' Page 2
� required for a single family residential lot in the Residential Zoning Dis-
trict. Density in proposed PUD #48 is 2.84 units per acre.
Compatibility with Surroundin Land Uses
Proposed PUD development of a two family structure with zero lot line division
for individual ownership of separate units on large lots is compatible with
surrounding zoning and land uses. Directly across 23rd Avenue to the north is
Medley Park, providing open space on one side of the proposed duplex site.
Adjacent property to the east and south is zoned Residential and houses an
established single family residential neighborhood. Adjacent to the PUD site
on the west is a single family residence on an unusually large lot. Beyond
that one house on the west is Kings Valley, a townhouse development arranged
entirely in doubles. There are natural barriers consisting of a drainage ditch
and tree line between the single family residential neighborhood and Kings
Valley. The street systems are separate, with only a trail and walking bridge
connecting Kings Valley to Medley Park and the single family residential
neighborhood. Nevertheless, the subject site is situated near the edge of a
single family residential neighborhood across from a park and one house away
from existing duplex development. As noted previously, density and individual
unit lot size are comparable to those of surrounding single family residential
development.
The proposed structure is a split entry design one and one half stories above
grade in height. The subject lot is lower than the lots immediately to the
� west and to the east. Therefore, height of the proposed building would not be
obtrusive. Back yards of lots immediately to the south are low, but both the
subject site and the lots to the south provide deep back yards creating ample
separation between the proposed double and existing single family homes. A
site visit is suggested as helpful in visualizing relationship of the proposed
structure to the surrounding neighborhood.
Drainage
As noted previously, the subject lot is low. Attached is an information letter
prepared by the proponent, Meridian Construction Co. , Inc. , for purposes of
informing surrounding property owners of the PUD proposal . The letter de-
scribes plans for replacement of poor soils and for handling of surface water
drainage. Drainage is further detailed on the Proposed Grading Plan included
with the Preliminary Plat for PUD #48. Grading of the site is planned to
create a berm and swale in the back yards of the two units designed to carry
surface water drainage to the north to 23rd Avenue North. Volume of surface
water runoff to the south into neighboring back yards would be reduced below
that under current natural conditions. The City Engineer has reviewed the
grading plan and finds it acceptable with the comment that there is potential
for standing water in the back yards of the proposed double units if grading is
not exact. Grade from the back yards to the street is almost one percent,
which is adequate provided grading is accurate. Any standing water in back
yards of the PUD units would pose no problem for the City or for surrounding
property owners.
�
, �olden Valley Planning Commission
April 17, 1985
• Page 3
� Utilities
The two proposed res.idential units have separate sewer and water service
connections as required for zero lot line division of a duplex. The City
Engineer has reviewed utility plans included on the Proposed Grading Plan and
approves the plans with modification of the sanitary sewer connections.
Preference is that the sanitary sewer connections tap directly into the sani-
tary sewer line rather than into a dead end manhole as shown on the plan. The
City En�ineer comments that this method would actually be less costly to the
developer. Planning staff has discussed the change with the engineering repre-
sentative for the proponent, who agreed that connection to the line is prefera-
ble from an engineering standpoint and expressed willingness to make the
change.
Previous Rezoning Request
Rezoning of the subject lot at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North to the Two-Family (R-2)
Residential Zoning District was requested approximately two years ago in April
1983. The proponent in the rezoning petition was Mr. David Reinke, own-
er/occupant of the adjacent house on the west at 9045 - 23rd Avenue North. Mr.
Reinke had received approval in April 1981 of the lot division which separated
the easterly portion of his property from his home site and created the subject
lot. Mr. Reinke indicated at the time of the lot division that he wished to
use the subject lot for construction of a duplex. However, it was not until
1983 that he made application for the required rezoning.
• The Golden Valley Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested
rezoning to R-2 on a split vote of four in favor and three against the rezon-
ing. Copies of the Planning Commission minutes and of the staff report to the
City Council outlining the Planning Commission recommendation are attached.
The City Council subsequently denied the rezoning request on July 19, 1983. A
copy of the City Council minutes is also attached for reference.
The current PUD proposal addresses some of the concerns of surrounding property
owners expressed at ttie time of hearings on the previous rezoning request,
Concerns raised by neighbors at the hearings included integrity of the sur-
rounding single famiiy residential neighborhood, drainage of surface water from
the proposed new development into neighboring yards, and compatibility of
structure design with surrounding residences. Mr. Reinke requested rezoning
for sale of the lot to a builder and provided no specific site plan or building
plans with his rezoning petition. The currently proposed PUD plans specify
building design and provide an acceptable drainage plan, thereby alleviating
neighborhood concerns regarding control over building design and regarding
surface water drainage.
The proponent, Meridian Construction Co. , Inc. , sent the attached letter along
with copies of the building elevations and site plan/landscape plan to all
single family detached homeowners on the 500 foot hearing notice mailing list.
Staff was informed that the proponent intended to follow up the mailing with
telephone calls to neighboring property owners in an effort to assess and deal
• with any neighborhood objections to the proposed PUD plans.
u�iaen vaiiey rianning �ommission
• April 17, 1985
Page 4
� Recommendation
Based on compatibility with surrounding land uses, staff suggests that the
Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the Preliminary Design
Plan for PUD #48, Meridian First Addition, which proposes construction of a
zero lot line two family residence at 9025 - 23rd Avenue Nort�, subject to the
following conditions:
l. Sewer and water service connections shall conform to City of Golden Valley
Utility standards.
2. Building construction shall conform to all requirements and recommenda-
tions of the City Building Inspector and City Fire Marshal .
3. Landscaping shall conform to the adopted City of Golden Valley Landscape
Standards and to all requirements and recommendations of the City Building
Inspector. '
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a landscape bond in an amount to
be determined by the City Building Inspector shall be executed and
delivered to the Golden Valley Inspection Department. The landscape bond
shall run for two (2) full growing seasons and until released by the
Golden Valley Building Inspector.
5. A homeowners agreement for joint maintenance of the two family structure
� shall be drafted and submitted with the PUD General Plan of Development
application. The joint maintenance agreement shall meet the approval of
the City Attorney.
6. Standard six-foot drainage and utility easements along all rear and �ide
property lines, exclusive of the zero lot line between the two newly
created lots, shall be added to the Final Plat of Meridian First Addition
- PUD No. 48. Ten-foot drainage and utility easements along front proper-
ty lines of each of the two newly created lots shall be added to the Final
Plat.
Attachments:
1. Site Location Map
2. March 22, 1985 Letter from Meridian Construction Co. , Inc.
3. Building Elevations and Preliminary Site Plan/Landscape Plan (Three full
sized plan sheets enclosed separately. )
4. Preliminary Plat and Proposed Grading Plan (Two full sized plan sheets
enclosed separately. )
5. July 19, 1983 City Council Minutes
6. June 7, 1983 City Council Minutes
7. June 2, 1983 Staff Memorandum to City Council
8. April 25, 1983 Planning Commission Minutes
•
i , � .. .._ .
W�� ti �`^� �;o N.n e�� :.��: � �~;;, .� a
�I J �J ° •�`'�.. g� o:�•. 3 •a� .��� =-'
� lZS M I7�GS^\q,", J-�- �a `�"' � G•.'3T3 y�:i/� -�7a �
- I °� °a�OI�`� 'o`` ' ��58+37`0�__ _ h,,:. `o
! 2' �ry °. 4 D���7 N'r T,,,9'3��W� 158.35 '��r '„"`° ., a 4
� � �y �tan°
� �' 140. 2 �' �� ¢ _ � �q M•e°o r��,� r- �i:T i6it
� �i .F ,33.bD _M � p. � � N a � .t
�6Z n. 1. �. ;6 �. P' o.- 9 � �o .. � : ��� '48 --" � a
p o c.c 5 iy �� ••
Sd9'3:56'E 59i,99 - - 100 �; �� �, I��C 5
r� � � �.t3 IJG, v iS °
r� M � „ SB°°3C�i6E � SB9'�ti 3J£�.Z � 47.J6�� i5 qq Z; E 5� �r+
C� e '^ '^ �. /:� m i N7��29 ; o ol'n f48.3
Y OUTLOT 2 N � 64�0 .o � �a�s � M ` ��.i' :N 89.06 � c; �.�. �.�.°�il�r� m�°
- 1 p .6.•� 'n �I ��n,r � r o 7 �M� 6 .�.�N �J' r � a �
90/C° • •j G ° N %,,ti'� v1j�n � p v'-- en.rN . .�F�(�,,,o N 0 m�- '�" �
"'S89•3:`�E 1�4 N e�D1^' O° ti •� q�'\a7iN 7 �O M 6 J!N.., � " ��,L T i�yI B B.� z �j 4 9 ,� �
�/ `�i
e • / '�D z^Q Nh �p, .�N.Il0 � . �''l� �,� 8930 �� ���'. � �� l8 lq 1�� „^;, _.�il Q-
N84 0'S6"ri /� _r�n rr �T'• C.I Ji $4.61 ' � N !3 /8
� .. 3�i.as W � NM��� �a�` � � , �r 359•''i {-�►aE �` s Z�65
+ j�oOL. I o� �d � Zwi 8�er�o- �' � MEDL.EY d93635E .�''�"z� N16°29'Egg 'y i',� � �,-•���.,m�
�6%q�� 6 m;,. ��� ��Jj.� ° 945 e525� � ;25.99 fi3•� ti � `��
N)So '� olr� $° !J$?? �,f�J 75 .o ''i9. ��o �� ��,.• ' .
'iZJ`'� � `f). �°o� /�/�� 0.�'2o I �u � \1.�' - O:y;� IZ e o ,� a 10
K 99 : ^�L 1/7 � � -,�.i 4'..g� ��., )a ._I!- . j ZO�E e O •. �
� IGS � 102'Vi '�� II ,',�n�, � E -, � sJo� - M�Z'Zp a; oa:39 �
` 3,. �..r o Z o ( ~i r' � � 7- `� Sd'!4.
'-'"�-�4Z "rT�'`_ ;z� - • �_� -� � � 'MBZ54'Id�E �s��� ,��,
P A R K � o � ��3e�F •�� � ,, �ses, ila.io � .N i:,� ;-
h89°38'Si"W' � AE9T5'22iVo /�S `^ 21Ge 2 Ir0�77ta• e,� .4� w��� Z '.°o^b h �v ,�.f=3'18z8�5
� °1° Z - n �~ Sd9'36�j0 E 2:E r+ �1.17 � � co r- •°��0.82 a ',�i 'r'
�6 4 40� ; "'I � � 1'� m �.pj d`r13d� �`•y� � �� S �� � �� �� o
r W - - - - - , N �, � r � 2 •Ia9 y y' ��s)9°scE�niz�s''•� �W a� ti 9 �
• W �I ., �89 �'�� � � s. . -
,n .o°10 /�3 0 ' L,j �Z ri_� , 3ZIGfY �ID�,°,�'^ ,�y � .4.� a o `; °^��.� I
z L . �� . d 9; _ c ° 53.5
_� q� ��h�1SZZW� ' Iv, :''ti � �I B y � 'NM �''a,,: 10 v �NBI'3S'1�E °h �d = '�R9'S8'�
Z gi.» o - _ �u a i , 9 ` 3 �,�'� � �'" �^� 138�'► �,^ `�t
i30 ::� - n8925'22"w �25 � �� a -ro °a °° M� �� <;� �...,MIO
•� I �89,_4G;:�f N o o� `^,►. a . �- e-N oa =_N
. 1 �°, � i r s.Z l � --�24��y �t; �y6�� � l 0 4 '^� �� q �
\ N�o I o N ..� �c IJ '� I� �= ! I.
pl.n M 2,(�! �'IY _�=
� �,0� ��� '1;..� � ,�. N� 8 �:.. h'a� •ti y; !'�n8�5t0 E_•i" . a;`�., �Se;�1
J� �m ol iv �1�' � z 4 0 �'y -0 9 � � 4.j1 'e� �� ��"'��ov
•�- b � . N ISZ �!� � � •N�� ��`± .��j i� p'�1' s ��n r e+` `��S
� 9� �so , NB�z5'2z'w � ;� •`°"� «,"II
, O
28 � 2 W �ccrW IJO � :;h873�M'W - o/(84Zr�3a'jy ;,���6' °�c"3Z� � �
O 5842 ,66j8 � �< ' ° � o^^ 71;�;�� `; 1�.g,o _ a2�.. ,., /pp'��978� 'Q. _'� '°_u
'� �°3 6 � o � ° "'; � �; � 6 Nu'' b, 1��'r� :S . a' Z7So�: S8•
'� 0 0 63 �ID6.05 _ �2� e N _e.'1� :' -'3 o R'[• r " e �= � g�� 4..
^i.._vq .t!� `a R.6fti 4.�?S7B i e �, i 'l oS, i � �'��1�t Iv✓:�'�O r' 'µ+, a ^o ' 7 � O M ' � ' -r�'A
, � l Q 1 a, N°89 25'�Z W od:.: � -: �� � ;t3.1 K� ' >. ;;�3c,�x ��o,. l"�
� a 6�.81 1!5 0: ° ; 23 rd a � � - �r+ .:N� . o J�c'Ne; �'"� ;v°d
� :r (^l y� � 0 .o �'�,! . „�, B910 ;L�b'/J � �.�.+ 'O Z79 •}�'r•`O .,: �' eoT..c
�� � aW `-`+ f� o•' .; . Z1�7 • 9. � ilD./9: .`�t'.... a lOG � 7) rio2. N W �jI
� . �; � p N iTBI B ; . �,��:�, :�T:,6g45 )E9°3e"?`��' 'R°;ef. 1 - ..� ^" BB30 8 "o ,
54 � � y ''�'lo • y_va..^. � �v� e. 990s � o�VF 33L'�p :�- 8.
��o ev e o ��n.,�o�:°�R ;1 a;3.�.2b , �CO . ��a.T1' C 9 �'.; ^'� eA�'s a ��z
OO � o o ry o N ,i� �_�' �� ,,, � �8925,t � �S � S j�Z63L. - v..
h�m �O � � IZ61°:ei'^ °':-•��,`•9 c •• I.� 10 0-"�,� ,�al�' 30 3: ..\J�z�Se• ll)l6 f �;�R7
° S h - e � ��c� � •: �,-�.., •,�^_ Iefl-e��,�- �� ;„���rvfZ t3 i � n.8+ ,o �
� v N89 25:t��w • - ,f. �,� . � �"' � :v9+ ... 2' •� ,i5o: 30
� � ` I , _ r' p l•., ., � �o ,�, �q`f�.,w ,�, p�„S o g3•.. o �?z:
�, �O� � ti 36 N �`V �� N.� a�N: . . . o�M �> ,-°y.i M8?761YN'J Z • ,^+, M� ti C:fe'
�5 .5 . N °�`. �h ' g � ..,�` l ry ; '' i�4.�d _ , y8 ti3.:' N �I�t
2? y �°„ 3� h :6184 5 ' ' ;ZS'� J .i 1' `�' � o l35 g.t4'.,� ,��i �,.�y�
[ �� a h '1 z !70 II:.i'� _d9 i2� �' ^(. _ ����c ie3t E 4' DG 47' IY 43°%d/t�O �ti '° 12•.,� ?•2 ti � `?�i�. �B s
.3 ,pN � 9 � � :a n' � 903 '�.�$� � 9ltf�50 r, ? » t�� yA :3L y �,.- ` � M8�° '�y i� `,. �, .e fpc . �`ir
6 u 1 'l �.f ti 1 �1 t �� e�`_1 L'" � 1
49 ��= 3 � � A S: 4 ? `I v' �.�p � o+i��0 7 �.o ;�,,e � 3�3. � �� -p�e.lti/3488 � O
� + � 4 F� DO �� �V•�n �� �n,f, Q� �'N A.�,�. �dd..�sF'.� �M �`�.," p Z6�9B � (yb 2�
� � ;0 3i z B°r � 2'E° �^ ti -•.D' � \ �'� ��. ry '� v,.,^.� ry°z
=' �, � IZ, 6 SE9'_+6>�'_' 's � � `^.^v �� � rti 3 � ti S ,.a.
5 48 ,�, � �s,� ' 3 � e"�.� `��. - izTe� � '� a� °�.. �- S ;: � ,; w
03ca8��„ , , �. �i3°75a_ � K� � o h •� �' S • � M o
4 �� • w. • 2 � �dxc�s �' \ ,, a • �'Z�T�+-- ,s°4 �o• b o
En�oi o?'0 �1J �40��i135.e'¢ o. � `n 5 � +�s ry�a�, �y�p . l,B� �f^, .41.lB e�.a 3 1
a.o8 9ax� � �= o��� b�py
66 � N vELGIM: ',s�:�',� 8�114 " -• o %''��9g�� �o 8920 \::.".'°�0 ��jw`,�1\ f0^ o ,� -°
4 �"� s�; ea • • � I� �."� • a ti i
6 ,�... � a IO o J
?'� �fo� .�s ,' • ff Q•�.' '1r ��.�.,• !'9. �'S� a,y4o\Kh� S)B'S ,E �' U 4 ' nW Sd7i3Y
��O �o � B , 1. �7 �° � o e�. /6j < . 12;3;
61 45 ^� � �s9 �, �' P a� � ���. , sa e�E �, h 4� ' P�o•y, ti
4 o Q �i� 30 1 1:30 • e,�°�o,6-,'46. -+ , � (N . '�,�, • �, /513P :
•� a•�,. 90.2s j .r 310.0 � ry M �` o •4
� 4 „g 9 c.. . _ d.3e; a' �
u �Ig `-' � °r,6� lp��"if7�TbZ-��9Gt1/ � o. � o _ ��¢3.' j ;05.13 !• '���� ",2R�4 3:39" 9 0 5 � aV
� sv�5 e' 1 �� °o � " �: S81
4 �c �9si' ' 4G�� 7•t919,�:a � ^7� ..:L ,a, .:+��ci<`V A'��'4!'�; o ti l0�41
2 ..� : w � a ,°� ,_ a ,� p�ti 14 ,�IW15 9'i�" ,,,, " I04uf �-�f.;-A't3°4in/IZ31 •W 13:.,�
6'� p, Q N y0qc �..�.., E� . • w,�, ;,,e O =�i� ��4, • � . ' 0 • +y //�.Sc i � v�� ° •rJ
� a � s N�7 6"r° =� ^ �Z5 y 1 Z 5_ °o� ; �,o `^o ;,, 3e.80 0 °v. �
O o 5 ti 9 w o �'M ro v�
� � - N89'?6,�f••YY�oM89°3«i'i!° y� 8 �a 7 �+.o • °` °o`t
: i i�tJ � n:w 4 oa' 2•'`cD '� ? e. . �.F+- '7•`t e�°< 6 �O r p SB3/dC7�E
•�,�4 5�..�1 5... • 2 : " a)I o p G , e�� i 2��rc.o� v, � h- � 7�N --f� ; /4
�•W �O .---a��8°a � ..f4 I �w� � 0'4•� ,, 013 N 29e� �r °��.ro J1 8B/0 �1. o�,�� ��C� 94
- __ v? 2i•.i 6 t3B � � °?0 1 �ti � =I:'C9J%W.E � s=r �ir ZC !�J 7ti '� �':titi ':�ti �
c ,. ��' 8860 BB40 a°�/•` ,°b
� �.� E '• - � -•� �c�d' , u
9/B5 ;t�Z ��''. R:I/ O �c S 31 I , r � ' ' ,lQ`lc (I� Sd9i4i5'._ ��11,��' 0 6
5^ � i�3.7= _ i331z I °'y9 [��1�f '� �r • ab A69�¢'>>.'„ Z9,.B� 40�, e -z�7.2�����`� � .r
�} i� ;o �: /'�' •� , , Aa ... 5'L,.•'�� s�„ �
O v `d�V °° I °`t� �O% �/O �� Qi W • �' ..=`si3.ZN���� N' �lI"L8.1 �'��p5 C''j 9•
.. • 36- sr�, � �, � o� �.,�e o -0 �, r,, �' es .�, ,�.
2 ti ' . ti 'oy � _ b 121 S o� �� ��.hA,r�p� Q �. 8 N ��s �• � <
��'c� 19��c .°s Z �O 04 -�d e� • z°`�'���:c'`."wp • wo o •�'
m - �. �I ��,�. ..�;o �` �.a � ,3' '�`� +
° ��� �3 . '... a a4•;4; �H eoo
.�
� . � `.
� � 4 ,
-- �� . - ���
b (�'i
, 16 ti 5�ti >; o �z�9�, i2zs
`� 15• G a� " '''� 6�
°'�33. z :: ~�
(9 ! 13 . 2 � I
� �'lii.4j• I;?�, D \ /
. __1.9�r1 �
� MERIDIAH
COHSTRUCTION C0. IHC. CONTRACTORS DEVELOPERS
14914 MINNETONKA BOUIEVARD • MINNETONKA, MiNNESOTA 55343 • (612j 933-8888
March 22, 1985
Re: Proposed Twin Home
9025 23rd Avenue North
Golden Valley, Minnesota
Dear Neiahbor:
Enclosed is a set of reduced architectural drawings consistino of the front
elevation, the side and rear building elevations and the plan showing the
placement of the building on the property alona with the landscape schedule
for the above referenced proposed horoe.
5Je are applying to the City of 6olden Valley for the necessary rezonina to
accorrplish our locating the proposed twin home on this site. The present
zoning of the property is for a single family home and we are askina for the
City to approve a zero lot line so that each side of the twin hone can be
. sold separately. Each side has 1 ,802 square feet of finished area and should
have a market value of approximately �105,000 or a total of $210,000 for the
building.
The building site is low and has poor soil to a depth of seven feet below the
surface. The poor soil below the entire buildino must be removed and replaced
with good granular material . We also intend to raise the building up approxi-
mately two feet above the existing grade and the lots v�ill be graded so that
excess water from the lawn or drive areas will run into the street directly in
front of the home and not onto the neic�hbor's property. The additional cost
over normal construction for the poor soil removal and replacement and the
necessity to raise the building and site from the present grade is probab7y
the reason that a sin�le family home has not been built on the property.
Every effort has been made to desian an attractive home of high quality con-
struction along with landscaping to blend in with the existing residential area.
We feel that this twin home a�ould be a beaatiful asset to your neighborhood.
We ask that you please look these draa�ings over and call us with any questions
or comments you may have. It is our desire to consider your wishes and we wel-
come your input. Please feel free to contact either myself or m�y brother, Bob
Noyes, in our office.
Sincerely,
� F1ER �DI CONSTRUCTIOPI C0. , INC.
�
IIIC,�O�.�
aul ��yes
f'JN/pan
Enc.
--•.� +�s 17oJ
, *Bassett Creek F1ood Contral Commission Budget
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Mitchell and motion carried unanimously to receive
and file the 1984 Bassett Creek F1ood Control Commission Budget.
. Public Hearing - First Reading - Rezoning to R-2 - 9025 23rd Ave�e North
Council Member Anderson abstained fram the discussion and votirg on this iten
stating a potential conflict of interest.
MOVED by Mitchell, seconded by Johnson and motion carried to bring on the table
for first reading the ordinance amendment herein entitled:
..
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE
(Two-Family R-2 Residential Zoning District)
David Reinke, Proponent, was present to answer questions from the Council .
Gary Prazak, Planning Commissioner� stated that the Planning Commission had
recommended approval of the rezoning by a 4 to 3 vote.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public input and persons present to do so were
afforded the opportunity to express their views thereon.
Dave McCunn, 8930 23rd Avenue North, opposed.
Paul Anderson, 2233 Ensign Avenue North, apposed.
Richard Larson, 9036 E1gin Place, opposed.
� Stan Hansen, 905Q Elgin Place, opposed.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Lowell Odland answered questions regarding the rezoning. Robert Skare reviewed
the criteria needed for rezoning of property and PUD's.
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Mitchell and motion carried to derly the request
for rezoning to R-2 of the property located at 9025 23rd Avenue North, because
it is not the highest and best use consistent with the surrounding neighborhood.
JOHNSON - YES MITCHELL - YES STOCKMAN - YES THORSEN - YES
Public Hearing - 83 SI 4 - Duluth Street, Mendelssohn to Flag
� Lowell Odland reviewed the pro3ect.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public input aQd persons present to do so were
afforded the opportunity to express their vic�vs thereon.
L�ell Benson, 2123 Tamarin Trail , opposed.
J oni Levine, 2203 Kings Valley Road, opposed.
James Brattvet, 6001 Duluth Street, opposed.
�
' Detached Worker Program Update
Kandi Larson-Lindenberg, Detached Worker Mas present to update the Council on
the Detached Worker Program and answer questions from the Cauncil .
� MOVED by Anderson, seconded by Stockman and motion carried unanimously to receive
and file the Detached Worker Program Report for January - March, 1983 and to
extend the Council s apPreciation to Kandi Larson-Lindenberg.
Public Hearin - First Reading - Rezoning to R-2 - 9025 23rd Averwe North
Council Member Anderson abstained fran the discussion and voting on this item
stating a potential conflict of interest.
MOYED by Johnson, seconded by Thorsen and motion carried to bring on the table
for first reading the ordinance amendment herein entitled:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE
(Two-Family R-2 Residential Zoning District)
David Reinke, Proponent, was present to answer questions from the Council .
Dave Thompson, Planning Commissioner, stated that the Planning Canmission had
recommended approval of the rezoning by a 4 to 3 vote, reviewed the reasons the
Commission stated for approval and denial of the rezoning and answered questions
fran the Council .
The Mayor opened the meeting for public input and persons present to do so were
afforded tMe opportunity to express their views thereon.
� Dave McCunn, 8930 23rd Avenue North, opposed.
Tom Zins, 8925 23rd Avenue North, opposed.
Jim Johnson, 2315 Decatur Avenue North, opposed.
David Reinke, 9045 23rd Avenue North, in favor.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Jeff Sweet stated that since this item requires four votes for approval the next
meeting in which a full council will be in attendance will be the July 19 meeting.
MOVED by Stockman, seconded by Johnson and motion carried to continue the public
hearing to the July 19 Council meeting and to send public hearing notices to
those property owners previously notified. Council Member Anderson abstained.
PubTic Hearing - Prelimina Plat Approval - Standard Oil 3rd Addition
Jerry Hauer, McCombs-Knudson Associates, Inc., representing the Proponent, was
present to answer questions from the Council .
Dave Thompson, Planning Commissioner, stated that the Planning Commission had
recommended approval of the rezoning, reviewed the landscape plan and answered
questions from the Council .
�
i
' ����`4 sr�ee City o1
Q�s � ��r�
. �r��� �rr�
� �
; � , �
. � :
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
A � V
I
� MEMO
tnspection
D A T E: JUNE 2, 1983
T O: MAYOR THORSEN AND MfMBERS OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
P Fi O M; ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
S U 6 J E C T: PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF 9025 23RD AVENUE N4RTH fROM RESIDENTIAL
(SINGLE FAMILY) TO TWO FAMILY (R-2) RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT
The Golden Valley Planning Commission on April 25, 1983 recomnended by
a vote of four to three that the City Council approve a request received
from Mr. David Reinke for rezoning of a vacant lot located at 9025 23rd
Avenue North from the Residential (Single Family) to the Two Family (R-2)
• Residential Zoning District to allow construction of a duplex.
Reasons cited by Planning Commissioners favoring approval of the rezoning
included the following:
1 . Need to fully utilize the limited amount of vacant land remaining
within the City of Golden Valiey.
2. Provision of a suitable transition between Kings Vatley and the adjacent
single family residential neighborhood.
3• Large tot size and lower density than results from single family
homes on lots meeting minimum lot size requirements.
4. Lack of vacant lots in the surrounding single family neighborhood
eliminating the question of precedent for additional duplexes in the
neighborhood.
5• Minimal impact on the surrounding single family residential neighborhood.
Reasons cited by Planning Commissioners opposing approval of the rezoning
included the following:
1 . Lack of a compelling reason for the proposed rezoning.
2. An isolated incidence of rezoning within an area consistently single
family and separated fram Kings Valley.
�
Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 ��.M
• Public Hearing - Rezoning of 9025 23rd Avenue North
Page 2
� Attached is an ordinance for approval on first reading of rezoning of
9025 23rd Avenue North to the Two Famity (R-2) Residential Zoning District.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance
2. April 25, 1983 Planning Commission Minutes
3• April 20, 1983 Staff Report
�
�
� Planning Comnission Minutes
April 25, 1983
Page 2
� IY. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning
APPLICANT: Davi d A. Reinke
L OCATION: 9025 - 23rd Avenue North
REQUEST: Change Zoning f rom Residential (Single Family)
to Two Fami ly (R-2) Resi dential Zoni ng Di stri ct
C hairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and explained the Planning
Comnission informal public hearing procedure for the benefit of residents
attending the hearing. Chairman Thompson then asked for Planning Comnissioner
questions of staff.
Comnissioner Prazek asked whether there are any doubles other than those in
Kings Valley in the neighborhood of the subject site. Staff confirmed that
there are no other doubles in the immediate vicinity of the subject site.
C omnissioner Thompson recognized the proponent, Mr. David Reinke, and asked
whether he wished to add aRy information. Mr. Reinke stated that he did not
have any information to add.
C hairman Thomp son opened the informal public hearing for public input.
� M r. Tom Z?ns, 8925 - 23rd Avenue North, stated that there is a rationale for
establishing zoning and that reasons for establishing single family residen-
tial zoning inclu de preservation of the ambience of a neighborhood, control of
population density in an area and maintenance of property values. Mr. Zins
offered his opinion that an exception should not be made for the subject lot
located within an established single family residential neighborhood. Mr.
Zins continued with the observation that good planning makes use of buffers
between single family residential development and main arterials in the manner
i n which Kings Valley provi des a buffer between County Road 18 and the adja-
cent single family residential neighborhood. Mr. Zins observed that there is
a definite division between the single family residential neighborhood and
Kings Valley formed by a creek between the two areas and reinforced by the
f act that the road does not run through between the two areas. Mr. Zins
concluded that there should be good reason for a rezoning and that he sees no
good rationale for a change to R-2 in the case of the subject lot. Mr. Zins
a dded that the rezoning would add traffic to a street already busier than he
likes due to the location of the park at the end of the street. He also
cautioned that rezoning of the subject lot could set a precedent for conver-
sion of other homes in the area to two family dwellings.
M r. Paul Anderson, 2233 Ensign Avenue North, expressed concern over lack of
information on the type of structure to be built on the sub3ect lot. Mr.
Anderson stated that he is not against the proposed rezoning to R-2 but is
c oncerned over potential drainage problems resulting f rom development of the
p roperty. Mr. Anderson pointed out that the subject property is low and that
i
' Planning Comnission Minutes
April 25, 1983
Page 3
� there is a high water t�ble^problem in the area. Mr. M derson s
peculated that
development of the subject lot would necessitate raising the ground level and
that alteration of the lot could cause water problems for adjacent homeowners.
M r. Richard Larsen, 9036 Elgin Place, stated that his lot abuts the southern
p roperty line of the subject lot. Mr. Larsen stated that the water table in
the area has risen since he constructed his home in 1969 due to subsequent
development of surrounding properties. According to Mr. Larsen, tests taken
a t the time of construction of his home confirmed no water to a depth of six
f eet. Presently the water table is one foot below the slab of his home. Mr.
Larsen asked whether neighbors would have any input concerning the type of
building to be constructed on the subject lot. Staff stated that following
rezoni ng a devel oper may construct any bu i 1 di ng whi ch conforr� with the
restrictions for the zoning district, including setback requirements and
height limitations. Neighbors have no input at the time the building permit
is issued. Staff pointed out that even when a developer submits a construc-
tion plan with a rezoning application, the owner or subsequent owner is not
bound to that specific plan following the rezoning. Mr. Larsen indicated
agreement with clarification offered by Co mnissioners that his concern over
water problems would be the same under either Residential or R-2 zoning and
that he questions whether the lot should be developed under either zoning
classification.
C omnissioner Polachek noted that the Planning Comnission may recomnend appro-
� val of the proposed rezoning and at the same time request that the City
Engineer inspect the property to determine whether development could take
place without causing water problems for neighboring homeowners. Comnissioner
P olachek further pointed out that it is accepted that a developer is respon-
sible when land alterations create problems for ad,jacent property owners.
M r. Larsen asked whether the proponent, Mr. Reinke, would be able to obtain a
tax abatement if it were determined that his property is unbuildable. It was
confirmed that application for an abatement would be appropriate in such a
case.
M r. Stan Hansen, 9050 Elgin Place, stated that he has no problem with the pro-
posed construction of a double unit. He stated that his concerns are that the
s tructure conform in appearance to other residences in the area and that
potential water problems are recognized and considered.
M r. Dave McCunn, 8930 - 23rd Avenue North, stated that he has lived at his
current address in the neighborhood since 1961. Mr. McCunn stated that once a
p roperty i s rezoned the nei ghborhood res i dents mu st 1 i ve wi th any probl ems
c reated by the rezoni ng and he feel s that any break i ng of the si ngl e fami ly
residential precedent for the neighborhood must be done very carefully. Mr.
McCunn pointed out that there are a number of four and five bedroom colonial
style homes in the neighborhood, including his own home, and that families in
these homes are reaching the age where children will be leaving. He specu-
lated that future requests for conversion of these homes to two family
�
' Planning Comnission Minutes
April 25, 1983
Page 4
• dwellings could follow a first break in recedent resultin from rezonin of
P 9 9
the subject lot to R-2.
C hairman Thompson closed the informal public hearing.
Comnissioner Singer stated that he wished to note for the information of resi-
dents present for the informal public hearing that a later topic of discussion
on the Planning Comnission agenda would be the question of utilization of
underoccupied single family homes.
In response to an informal question f rom the audience concerning the placement
of restrictions on the sale of the subject lot, Comnissioner Polachek explained
that the only possibility for restriction would be by means of a restrictive
covenant placed on the lot by the current owner. Co mnissioner Polachek noted
that restriction by the City would approach censorship and that such restric-
tion would not be within the purview of the Planning Conmission.
Comnissioner Tubman observed that a builder intends his development to be
marketable and that it is unlikely a developer would build something bizarre
or divergent from the surrounding neighborhood.
Comnissioner Leppik stated for the information of residents attending the
informal public hearing that the City of Golden Valley does not at this time
have an ordinance provision for conversion of single family homes and that
� without a change in the City code ar�y requests for conversion would be turned
down.
Comnissioner Leppik asked the proponent whether he has attempted to sell the
subject lot as a single family home site. Mr. Reinke replied that he placed
the lot on the market as a potential double unit site.
Comnissioner Tubman asked whether there are any other vacant potential double
u nit lots in the area. Co mnissioner Prazak confirmed that there are no other
available lots in the neighborhood, and Comnissioner Tubman concluded that the
lack of other potential double unit sites eliminates the precedent question.
C hairman Thompson stated that in his opinion Kings Valley is not close enough
to the subject lot to be relevant to the proposed rezoning. Chairman Thompson
pointed out that Kings Yalley is separated f rom the single family residential
neighborhood and that 23rd Avenue North does not go through to Kings Valley.
CHairman Thampson stated that he is not prone to allow construction of one
duplex in a single family residential neighborhood and that he prefers to
maintain the integrity of the single family residential neighborhood.
Comnissioner Leppik moved that the Planning Comnission recomnend that the City
Council deny the request received f rom Mr. David Reinke for rezoning of his
vacant lot located at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North from the Residential (Single
F amily) to the Two Family (R-2) Residential Zoning Oistrict to allow construc-
tion of a duplex based on the premise that there should be a co�elling reason
�
• Planning Commission Minutes
April 25, 1983
Page 5
� f or a rezoning and based on the fact that there is no cortQ elling reason for �
the proposed rezoning. Co mnissioner Leppik added that if the lot proves to be
u nmarketable as a single family home site, the rezoning request could be
reconsidered.
Comnissioner Prazak seconded the motion and stated that he supports the motion
f or denial because the proposed rezoning would be an isolated incidence of
rezoning within an area consistently single family.
Comnissioner Singer stated that he sees a compelling reason for a recorrmen-
dation of approval of the proposed rezoning in view of the need to fully uti-
lize the limited amount of remaining vacant land within the City of Golden
V alley. Cortmissioner Singer offered a substitute motion that the Planing
Comnission recommend City Council approval of the rezoning requested by Mr.
David Reinke of his vacant lot located at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North from the
Residential (Single Family) to the Two Family (R-2) Residential Zoning
District to allow construction of a duplex with the stipulation that the
owner, Mr. Reinke, place on the lot a restrictive covenant requiring construc-
tion of a building comp atible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Comnissioner Tubman stated that she concurred with Comnissioner Singer's
recommendation for approval of the proposed rezoning due to the fact that the
rezoning would have a minimal impact on the neighborhood but that she had a
p roblem with the stipulation of a restrictive covenant.
� Cortmissioner Forster seconded the substitute motion stating that he concurred
with Comnissioner Singer's stated reason for supporting approval of the pro-
posed rezoning but that at the same time he questioned stipulation of a
restrictive covenant.
Following Comnissioner and staff discussion concerning legality and advisabi-
lity of requiring a restrictive covenant, a vote was taken on the substitute
motion. The motion did not carry, with Comnissioner Singer voting in favor
and Comnissioners Forster, Leppik, Polachek, Prazak, Thompson and Tubman
voting against the motion.
C hairman Thomp son asked for further discussion on the original motion recom- �
mending City Council denial of the rezoning based on lack of a compelling
reason for rezoning.
Comnissioner Prazak noted that the rezoning request could be resubmitted if
there should be evidence in the future of a compelling reason for the rezoning.
Comnissioner Tubman stated that based on concern for maximum utilization of
the little buildable land remaining in Golden Valley and based on the minimal
impact the proposed rezoning would have on the surrounding area, she favored
approval of the rezoning request.
� �
Planning Comnission Mirwtes
April 25, 1983
Page 6
•
Comnissioner Forster stated that he agreed with the points made by
Comnissioner Tubman. Comnissioner Forster pointed out that there could be no
expansion of the double unit concept to other sites in the area unless there
i s a ma jor change i n the Ci ty Zoni ng Ordi nance. Comni ssi oner Forster concl uded
that he was against the recommendation for denial.
A vote was taken and the motion failed on a vote of three to four. Those
voting in favor of the motion were Comnissioners Leppik, Prazak and Thompson,
and those voting against the motion were Cortmissioners Forster, Polachek,
Singer and Tubman.
Comnissioner Polachek stated his support for approval of the proposed rezoning
without stipulation of a restrictive covenant based on his feeling that the
p roposed duplex would be a suitable transition between Kings Yalley and the
single family residential neighborhood and based on the fact that the proposed
density would be no more than that results f rom the location of single family
homes on lots half the size of the subject lot or smaller.
It was moved by Comnissioner Polachek and seconded by Comnissioner Tubman to
recommend City Council approval of the request received from Mr. David Reinke
f or rezoning of his vacant lot located at 9025 - 23rd Avenue North from the
Residential (Single Family) to the Two Family (R-2) Residential Zoning
District to allow construction of a duplex. A vote was taken and the motion
� carried by a vote of four to three. Those voting in favor of the motion were
Comnissioners Forster, Polachek, Singer and Tubman, and those voting against
the motion were Comnissioners Leppik, Prazak and Thort�son.
V . Revi ew of Capi tal I mp rovement Program
C hairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and asked whether Comnissioners
had comments on the Capital Imp rovements Program. It was determined that
Comnissioners had questions concerning street projects in particular which
require answers from the Director of Public Works.
I t was moved by Comni ssi oner Polachek, seconded by Comni ssi oner Si nger and
carried unanimously to defer consideration of the Capital Improvements Program
until the next Planning Comnission meeting and to ask the Director of Public
Works to provide the Planning Com�ission with an overview and answer questions.
VI. Recommendation of Implementation of the City Housing Policy
C hairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and invited comnents on the
"Recomrnendation to the City Council for Implementation of Housing Policy" pre-
pared by Chairman Thompson on behalf of the Planning Conmission. Co mnissioner
Singer stated that he felt the recommendation had been prepared by the person
best qualified for the job, namely Chairman Thompson.
s
` STUDY TOPICS FOR GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
• 1985
The Planning Commission has determined that it is in their best interest, and
the City's best interest, to set time aside to study various issued that relate
to planning and the function of the Planning Commission. Full study sessions
have been scheduled to occur once every two months. These sessions will have
no other business than the study topic with the exception of setting informal
public hearing dates. In addition, smaller or single study topics will be
occasionally discussed at the end of Planning Commission meetings that are
expected to have short business agendas. The determination of specific topics
and meeting dates will be determined by the Planning Commission at the
suggestion of the Planning Commission members or staff.
The following topics were suggested by the Planning Commission to be chosen for
the study sessions:
1) Review of the Comprehensive Plan
- Study and resolve conflict between Plan map and Zoning map.
- Prepare for updating of Plan (Plan was completed in 1982). Review
each section and make necessary changes.
- Consider new land use map including new land use categories.
2) Review and Update Housing Policv
- Methods and financing to encourage low and moderate income housing.
• - Accessory housing.
- Senior citizen housing.
3) $tudy the Roles of the HRA & Plannin Commission in the Development
Process
4) Stud Methods for Increasin Public Partici ation in Plannin Issues
_At Planning Commission, HRA and City Council Levels
- Improved notice requirements such as better property description and
maps to be included in hearing notices.
- Use of cable TV.
5) Study the Need for Home Occupation Ordinance
6) �date Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances
- Develop shortened platting procedure to eliminate "waivers".
- Update Zoning Map by increasing Zoning Code categories in harmony
with the Comprehensive Plan.
- Eliminate unnecessary requirements to streamline zoning process.
7) Increase Planning Commission General Knowled e of City Operations
- Role of City Engineer
- Role of Building Board of Review
- Role of Board of Zoning Appeals
- Role of Housing and Redevelopment Authority
- Role of Park Board '
� �