Loading...
09-30-96 PC Minutes183 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 30, 1996 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The meeting was called to order by Chair Prazak at 7pm. Those present were Commissioners Groger, Johnson, Kapsner, Lewis, McAleese, Pentel and Prazak. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and Mary Dold, Recording Secretary. Approval of Minutes -September 9, 1996 MOVED by Pentel, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to approve the August 12, 1996 minutes with the following amendments: .Page 6, Paragraph 1. Add the following sentence to the Yingst's comments. "The Yingsts believe that development of these properties should be delayed to a time after the frontage road/Hwy. 100 project has been completed and new traffic patterns are established." Page 7, Paragraph 1. Add the work "favorably" after the work commented. Page 8, Paragraph 8. Add the following sentence: "Commissioner Lewis suggested that the I-394 corridor have a special land use designation. II. Informal Public Hearing -Minor Subdivision Applicant: Dolores Zahrendt Address: Lots 13 and 14, Block 4, Tyrol Hills Purpose: Take approximately 1650 sq.ft. from the lot at 1307 June Avenue South (Lot 14) and add it to the adjacent vacant lot (Lot 13) in order to create a larger building area on the vacant lot. Commissioner Groger removed himself from the discussion and decision in that he stated that he was related to the applicant. Director Mark Grimes gave a summary of his staff report to the Planning Commission saying that the applicant is requesting to have approximately 1650 sq.ft. from 1307 June Avenue (Lot 14) added to the lot to the north (Lot 13). He told the Commission that the applicant also owns both lots. By adding the additional square footage to the vacant lot, the owner would be able to present for sale a larger lot which could accommodate a more normal size house. Director Grimes continued by saying that Lot 113 is buildable at this time but only a very small house, approximately 600 sq.ft. could be built on the lot. He said the (ot was platted sometime in the 1930s and that a "taking of land" for Wayzata Blvd. occurred which decreased the size of the lot. 1$4 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 30, 1996 Page Two Grimes also commented that the City Council would have to grant a variance from the requirements of the City Code, Section 12.20, Subd. 5(A) and (B) Corner Lots and Section 12.03 Definitions #26. This variance would allow for a lot width of $7 feet vs. the required 100 feet for corner lots. The wording of the affected sections of the code are found below: Section 12.03. Definitions. #26. Width of Lot. The minimum required horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at right angles to the lot depth, at the minimum building setback line in the Residential and R-2 Zoning District, or the front property line in the Business and Professional Office or Terminal Warehouse Zoning Districts. Section 12.20, Subd. 5 Lots. A. Minimum Requirements. All lots shall meet the minimum area and dimension requirements of the zoning district in which they are located. the front of each lot shall abut entirely on an improvement public street, and the minimum front setback line shall be established thirty-five (35) feet distant from the street right-of-way line. Section 12.20, Subd. 5 Lots. B. Corner Lots. Corner lots shall be platted at least twenty feet wider than the required minimum to width as required by the Zoning Chapter. Director Grimes commented that the subdivision can only take place if the City Council grants a variance from the Subdivision Section of the City Code. Also, the Board of Zoning Appeals needs to review a front setback variance for the property at 1307 June Avenue of .83 feet of the required 35 feet to a distance of 34.17 feet in order make the lot legally nonconforming to allow for the subdivision to occur. This minor variance request will go before the Board of Zoning Appeals at its meeting of October 22, 1996. Mr. Grimes reviewed the consideration of factors as found in Section 12.50, Subd. 3 of the City Code. He then reviewed the three findings that the City Council has to make regarding the subdivision variance. They are as follows: • There are special circumstances for conditions affecting said property so that the strict application of the provisions of this chapter would create an unusual hardship and deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. Economic difficulty or inconvenience sha11 not constitute a hardship situation for the purpose of this ordinance. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. • The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood in which said property is situated. Director Grimes told the Commission that the last two conditions could be met. The Commission needs to determine if the first condition related to the special conditions is met. Staff believes that there are special circumstances due to the rough topography of the lot and the "taking" of land for Hwy 12. 18,.5 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 30, 1996 Page Three Director Grimes said that staff is recommending approval of the proposed minor subdivision with the variance for the lot width as requested. He did outline three conditions in approval of the minor subdivision which are as follows: The variance for the lot width on Parcel A (Lot 13) be accepted with the condition that no setback variances be applied for by the owners of the property for future construction. 2. The house on Parcel B (Lot 14) be made legally nonconforming by the BZA prior to the minor subdivision being approved by the City Council. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, the City Engineer shall make a final determination on the need for any additional easements. Chair Prazak asked staff how the vacant lot size compared to other lots in the area. Mr. Grimes commented that most lots in the area are similar with about 14,000 sq.ft. He also commented that many of the lots are difficult to build on but with today's technology, it is easier for builders to construct on more difficult terrain. Commissioner McAleese asked if the lot is currently buildable. Director Grimes said that it was, but would need to be two or three levels in order to gain space. He continued by saying that the applicant is looking to gain land space in order to sell the lot so a buyer could place a normal size house on the lot. Commissioner McAleese also asked staff if it was correct that the issue of the variance is something that the City Council decides. Director Grimes said the Planning Commission could make a recommendation on the variance request. Commissioner Kapsner asked staff if the variance setback width is approved with the condition that no variance be applied for in the future, is there some kind of mechanism in place to enforce this. Director Grimes commented that he was not sure and would check with the City Attorney. He said that the City Council could request a covenant on the lot with the above condition. Winston Peterson, realtor and representative for the applicant, told the Commission that there was a concern about Mr. Grimes' first recommendation that no other variances be granted in the future. Commissioner Pentel, who is the Planning Commission representative to the BZA, said that the Board does not look favorably on applicants who seek a variance on new construction. Commissioner Pentel asked if the. lot could be marketed so that potential buyers know what size house is allowed on the lot with current setbacks. Mr. Peterson told the Commission that he will leave if up to the future owner of the lot to approach the City if a larger house is wanted on the lot. Chair Prazak opened the informal public hearing; seeing and hearing no one, Chair Prazak closed the informal public hearing. Chair Prazak noted the intent of the minor subdivision was to create a lot with more flexibility for a potential owner to build a normal size house. He believes this is a reasonable request and would vote in favor of the Minor Subdivision. 186 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 30, 1996 Page Four Commissioner McAleese commented that he understands the request and is in favor of the minor subdivision but it is the responsibility of the Planning Commission to enforce the code. Commissioner McAleese was referring to Section 12.50, Subd. 3(A). Conditions for Approval or Denial which states that Minor Subdivisions or consolidations shall be denied if the proposed lots fail to meet all of the requirements of the appropriate zoning district. He said that he would encourage the City Council to grant the variance if the legal requirements of the variance are met. Commissioner McAleese is concerned that in approving this variance, the City may be setting a precedent for many other corner lots that don't meet width requirements. He said that the City Council can decide to grant the variance, that it is not the Planning Commissions job to set policy. Commissioner Pentel said that Lot 13 is an existing lot and the Minor Subdivision allows only for the lot to be increased in size. She believes that the future marketing of the lot would be more promising if the minor subdivision request was granted. Commissioner Pentel said that if a larger lot existed it may alleviate a future owner coming to the BZA with a hardship case and requesting a variance which would allow for construction into the setback areas and closer to the property lines. Commissioner McAleese commented that he agrees that it makes sense to enlarge the lot but the Code doesn't make exceptions so he will vote against the request. Director Grimes told the Commission that the City Council will make the ultimate decision and the Planning Commission's role is to make a recommendation. Commissioners Kapsner and Pentel asked staff again if the lot is buildable without granting the variance. Director Grimes said the lot is buildable at this time but a variance would allow for a more normal size house on the lot. MOVED by Kapsner, seconded by Johnson and motion carried. by a vote of 5-1 to recommend to the City Council approval of the minor subdivision including the three conditions as stated above. V. deports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Board of Zoning ARpeals No meetings were discussed. VI. Other Business A. ,Director Grimes and the Commission briefly discussed the new development Hwy. 55 and Winnetka Avenue. One major concern was the Hollywood Video drop-off box. Members of the Commission believe the lane for the drop-off box is located in a bad place due to back-up of cars waiting to drop off movies. B. Commissioner Pentel asked staff if the Lupient Used Car Lot had put up more pylons than permitted. She believes that there is too much .signage on the lot, Staff said they would talk with the Inspections Department who reviews the signage for the City. ~8? Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 30, 1996 Page Five C. Commissioner Groger is concerned .about setback issues in the City. He believes it would be helpful to know what the setback regulations are for surrounding cities and requested staff to do a comparison study. Chair Prazak and Commissioner Lewis commented on maintaining setbacks as stated in the code. Commissioner McAleese thought it would be a good idea to find out what other cities require for setbacks. Commissioner Groger suggested staff conduct a modest survey. MOVED by Groger, seconded by Pentel and motion carried unanimously to have staff conduct a survey relative to setback requirements in other cities. VII. Adjournment Chair Prazak adjourned the Golden Valley Planning Commission meeting at 8:30pm. can .Lewis, ecretary