04-26-76 PC Minutes �; `:;�4
MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 26, 1976
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley P1anning Commission was held at 7:3� P.M.
on Monday, April 26, 1976 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road,
Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Chairman Ronald Edstrom presided and the following members were present:
Commissioners Herje, Hughes, Lundsgaard, Mindess, Sehlin, Specktor, and Wagman.
Also present was Jon Westlake, staff inember.
Members Absent: Comnissioner Christiansen.
1 . APPRQVAL OF MINUTES: MOVED by Herje, seconded by Sehlin, carried unanimously
to approve the minutes of the Apri1 12, 197� Planning Commission meeting as amended
as follows: Page 5, second sentence, to read as fotlov�s: The land to the North
is higher; therefore, it would be difficult to provide adequate site screening.
2. REFQRT TO PLANNING COMMISSION — P.U.D. #1$
Commissianer Mindess withdrew from the discussion of P.U.D. #18 because of a
possible conflict of interest.
(a) Regarding Eligibility of Application for P.U.O.
Jon 4�estlake reviewed a letter from the City Attorney regarding Sectio� 15.03
of the P.U.D. Ordinance in reference to the P.U.D. application if the proposai
contains one structure. The letter points out that the use as proposed in
P.U.D. #18 can be considered by the Planning Comnission because the proposa1
is on more than one existing lot of record.
(bj Mayor' s Letter in reference to Proposed Fire Station Site
The Chairman of the P]anning Commission reviewed a letter from the Mayor pointing
out that the eastern portion of the property for P.U.O. #18 is the primary site
under consideration for the Southeast Fire Station and that such should be a
part of P.U.D. #]8.
Mr. Ted Goldman, the proponent, was present and read a letter from Richard Sachs,
who is one of the property owners objecting to the taking of a portion of the
parcel for a fire station site.
The Planning Corrmission suggested to Mr. Goldman that he meet with the City Staff
to determine what alternatives could be worked out on the site in reference to
the apartment building and fire station. The Planning Comnission further indicated
to Mr. Goldman that they will leave every opportunity open so a solution may be
worked out on the site.
3. WAIVER 4F THE PLAT7ING ORJI�VAlV�:�:
Applicant: Richard R. Tieva
Location: 2510 Douglas Drive North
Request: Divide Single Parcel into Two Lots
Zoning: Residential
� ��
Planning Commission
April 26, 1976 page 2
1
� The Planning Commission on September 27, 1971 approved this request, subject to:
t ) A 50—foot road easement, 2) Requiring a cul de sac on the property to include
the property to the South, and 3) If a structure is built on the south parcel it
is to be 85 feet west of the east property line. The request was approved by the
City Council on May 21 , 1973 subject to the deeding of the road Right of Way and
with the costs of construction to be assessed to the new iots. In the current
request the proponent is requesting to divide the lot into two parcels. 7he west
parcel will have a depth of 183 feet and the east 183 feet-50 feet of which will be
detached for street Right of Way. Both parcels have 119 feet of frontage. Notices
have been sent to the abutting property owners including those who own the vacant
parcels to the south of the request. If the property owners tv the south are
interested at this time in dividing their property, the area should be platted.
In platting the property, lot tines can be adjusted with a designed street pattern
which would include a grading plan. This is what the Ptanning Commission suggested
for the area directly to the west of Douglas Drive.
If the division is approved, street access would be a condition. In providing
street access it would allow access to the land locked parcel to the east which
should also then be required to dedicate a 50—foot Right of Way. Both parcels
would have to provide for utilities, and a grading pian should be required.
The proponent, Ri�hard Tieva, was present and stated he would like to see the
area platted. Mr. Burt Shelton indicated he is the property owner of the parcel
to the south and indicated he would like to see the area piatted because his
property is presenfity land locked. Another resident of the area indicated that
if there is a procedure to develop the total area this woutd be the best way
because then the neighborhood would know how the properties would be divided.
The Planning Commission in discussing the request reviewed the open parcels to
the south and north of the property in this request, noting that the best w�ry`:��o
deve�op the property is to consider the total area.
It was moved by Merje, seconded by Mindess, carried unanimously, to defer action
on the lot division request to May 24, 1976 which wouid aliow time for the property
owners to consider the platting of their property, and also request that the
Chairman of the Planning Commission send a letter strongly urging the attendance
af property owners of the open parcels of land in this area at the May 24, 1976
Planning Commission meeting (Parcels 5200, 2700, 3053� 3�63, 3100, 2800 and 2900�.
4. WAIVER OF THE PLATTING ORDINANCE
Applicant: Wayne J. Westerlund
location: 1124 Sumter Avenue North
Request: Re—establish Lots as Originally Ptatted
Zoning: Residential
The request is to re—establish two separate parcels of land that are presently
merged. The lots are known as Lot 14 and Lot 15 Biock T3, Winnetka Addition.
The proponent resides on Lot 14 (1124 Sumter Avenue North) and woutd like to
construct a new home on Lot 15. All lots in the block have a frontage of 59 feet,
except 1105 a�d 1219 Sumter Avenue, which have a frontage of 118 feet.
� �°`�_�
Planning Commission
April 26, 1976 pa9e 3
I
Wayne Westerlund was present for the request. The Flanning Comnission in dis— �
cussing the request reviewed the lot sizes in the area and also noted that the
present structure on Lot 14 is 16 feet away from the south lot tine of lot 15.
It was moved by Lundsgaard, seconded by Wagman, carried unanimously, to approve
the request as submitted, noting the lot as divided woutd be the same as the
other platted lots is� the btock, except two parcels.
5• PRE6TMINARY PLAT — TYROL WEST ADOITION
Applicant: Wayne Jopp
Location: 13�0-1400 block of Natchez Avenue South
Request: Platting of 13 Lots
Zoning: Residential
The proposal contains a total of 13 lots—two of which the proponent is requesting
f.or double bungalows. The reason for this is that the developer would like to
preserve the existing barn on Lot 6 Block 1 which is 34' x 66' ; however, because
of its size it would be very large for a single family house. The required size
for a double bungatow lot is 150 feet of frontage and 18,750 square feet. The
lot has the proper frontage, but the square footage is 11 ,�Q0 square feet. The
location of the structure in relation to the rear lot line also should be studied
further. The other proposed double lot would have access off Frinceton Avenue
adjacent to the service ramp to 7.N. 12. By adjusting the east lot line this
parcel could meet the 18,750 square—foot requirement.
Lots 2 through 7 in Block 2 meet the required lot size of the present Platting
Qrdinance for single family detached dweliings, which is 12,500 square feet and
100 feet of frontage at the 35—foot setback line. Lots 2 through 5 in Block 1
vary from the Platting Ordinance in square footage and frontage. The lots in
this area of Tyrol Hitts range from 60 to 95 feet of frontage. In square footage
they range from 7,350 to 12,160 with an average of approximately 11 ,000 square
feet. There are a few lots smaller than the figures indicated above adjacent
to Highway 100.
Planning C�nsiderations to consider at the preliminary plat stage are:
1 . In reviewing the two double bungalow parce1s,
(a} are they a compatible land use?
(b) should the standards such as frontage, square footage, and structure
location to the lot lines apply to the lots?
(c) shoutd the develaper provide landscaping to protect Lot 1 Block 2
from the Highway 100 service ramp?
2. Allow somewhat smalier lots in Block 1 than the drdinance requires because
of the shape of the parcels.
3. If no double bungalow lots are approved, should the Planning Commission
consider somewhat smaller tots in the total plat than the Ordinance requires
because of smaller lot sizes in the area and the shape of the parcel?
Messrs, Fred Held, property owner, and Wayne Jopp, building contractor, were
present for the request, Mr. Hetd indicated that the property has been in the
family for years and they feel the mast acceptable proposal to the City would
be single family lots. The proponents are proposing to keep the two barns on
���
Planning Commission
April 26, 1976 page y.
the site—larger of which is constructed of White Oak and Birch. The large barn is
� 34' x 66� and t�o stories in height. Because of its size they are proposing a
doubie bungalow. The smaller barn wili be remodeled into a singie family dwelling.
The house and garage on the site will be remodeled. The reason for the double lot
off Princeton Avenue is because of its size and location. In designing the plat
the proponents kepfi in mind the existing strueture, terrain and trees.
(Commissioner Herje left the meeting.)
The Planning Commission in discussing the proposed plat reviewed the size of the
lots in the neighborhood in relation to the proposed plat, the possibility of
having five lots rather than the six lots in the area where the large barn is
located, or a rearrangement of the lot lines. Commissioner Sehlin indicated that
the people that spoke to her about the plat indicated they would like to see
the large barn preserved. The Planning Commission also discussed a single
family planned unit development for this area with the devetope�.
It was moved by Mindess, seconded by Sehlin, carried to grant preliminary
approval to the plat, subject to:
1 . If anything should happen to the existing large barn prior to its use
as a double bungalow, this lot reverts to a single family lot.
2. Proponent to work with City staff to determine if square footage can
be added to the double lot and what type of buffer can be designed
adjacent to the highway on the double bungalow lot.
3• Consider a tuck under garage for the ?arge barn site )so that it can
preserve its rustic look and not occupy additionaT land by adding a
garage unit).
Commissioner Wagner voted nay, indfcating he would like to see the lots re—worked
where the large barn is located (the proposed two family dwelli�g lot has less
square footage than a single family parcel ).
6. DISCUSS CAPITQL LONG RANGE IMPROVEMENT COMMIT7EE REQUEST
This item was deferred to the May 10, 1976 Planning Commission meeting.
7. GENERAL
(a) Meeting with City Council
The City Council will meet with the Golden Valley Planning Comnission on
May 10, 1976 at 6:30 P.M. The regularly schedu1ed Planning Commission meeting
will begin at 8:30 P.M. If any Commission member has items to be discussed
with the Council , they should contact Jon Westlake so they may be listed as
agenda items for discussion.
(b) Representative of Metro Council Speaking to City Commissions
Chairman Edstrom reported that he is discussing with the Mayor the possibility
of a joint meeting with the Council and City Commissions at which a representative
of the Metro Council will speak on fihe current changes by the legislation
regarding planning.
� , z�
n '"�i r�
Planning Commission
April 26, i97b page 5
(c� Conflict of Interest — Ethics Disclosure Qrdinance
The Pianning Commission at the beginning of this meeting briefly discussed
the procedure to use if a Commissioner feels there is a conflict of interest
with respect to a particular planning item. All members of the Planning
Commission will receive a copy of the Ethics Oisclosure Ordinance.
There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was on motion,
duly seconded, adjourned at 10:2fl P.M.
.
� >
t
. _ _ ,,
� ��� __...__ � "
� ��,,,.� �.� •
C irman Ronald rom S cretary athryn H , je