06-08-98 PC Minutes
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
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,
June 8, 1998. The meeting was called to order by Chair Pentel at 7pm.
Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Groger, Johnson, Martens, and
McAleese; absent were Kapsner and Shaffer. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director
of Planning and Development; Beth Knoblauch, City Planner; and Mary Dold,
Administrative Secretary.
I. Approval of Minutes -May 11, 1998
MOVED by Groger, seconded by Martens and motion carried unanimously to approve
the May 11, 1998 minutes as submitted with the correction that Johnson did not attend
the meeting of May 11, 1998.
II. Informal Public Hearing -Minor Subdivision
Applicant: Ronald J. Schmidt
Address: 2945 Regent Avenue North, Golden Valley, Minnesota
Request: Subdivide the property located. at 2945 Regent Avenue No.
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development gave a summary of his report. He
noted the following information that the subject property fronts on Regent and Scott
Avenues; that the existing and proposed lot would meet the 10,000 sq.ft. requirement
for new lots; and that both lots would meet the 80-foot front setback requirement.
Grimes next reviewed the conditions for approval or denial as noted in Section 12.50,
Subd. 3 of city code. They are as follows:
• The proposed lot would meet all requirements of code.
• No steep slopes or excessive wetness is found on the existing or proposed lot.
• Sewer and water is available to the proposed lot.
• At this time, a shed occupies a portion of a drainage and utility easement. Staffs
recommendation is for the applicant to remove the shed from this
easement. Grimes noted that the other alternative would be to have the applicant
request a vacation of this easement.
1
~~
~_ 4:~
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1-998
Page 2
• No other public agencies would be affected by the proposal.
No title review of the property is necessary because no property is being given to
the City of Golden Valley
• The proposed lot would not cause any undue strain on adjacent roads or public
utilities.
• A park dedication fee for the new lot is accessed at $500.00.
Staff recommends approval for the Minor Subdivision with the conditions of a park
dedication fee of $500; the existing shed be relocated outside the existing drainage and
utility easement and all other easements are dedicated per code.
Commissioner McAleese asked staff if there should be a condition regarding the
Assistant City Engineer's memo. Grimes said that the commission could include the
memo as a condition.
Commissioner Groger asked how often water could be found in the drainage ditch.
Grimes commented that he did not believe that there is a significant amount of water in
the ditch after a rainfall. He said that Jeff Oliver, Assistant City Engineer, has reviewed
the survey and believes that if the house is sited properly water can be routed around
the house.
Chair Pentel asked if staff knew how wet the drain field was and if anyone knew where
the drain the was located. Grimes commented that he doubted if anyone knew where
the drain the would be located.
Commissioner Martens questioned how staff could insure that no other landscape
structure would interfere with the drainage routed to the rear of the lot as noted on the
survey. Grimes commented that a drainage easement could cover the rear of the
property which means that no structure could be placed or constructed in this area.
Martens noted his concern that the drainage be maintained properly.
Martens, who lives to the north of the applicant, said that he has never seen water in
the swale that runs through the proposed lot and to the south.
Ronald Schmidt, 2945 Regent Avenue North, told the commission that he has lived at
this address for 30 years and now the yard is too large to maintain. Schmidt
commented that there has never been drain the in the area of the drainage ditch. He
said there was a drainage pipe located to the north that was filled with sand and since
that time there has never been water in the swale.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 3
Schmidt addressed the issue of the shed located in the drainage and utility easement
on the north side of the lot. He said that the contractor, who had constructed the shed,
told him there were no regulations for the construction of the shed and that he had
checked with the city and nothing was on file. Schmidt had an old survey. which he
stated did not show the easement on the property. Grimes commented that the original
plat on file does show the easement on the north side of the property. Schmidt told the
commission that the shed was constructed with the same materials as the house and
that it is bolted down to the contract slab beneath it.
Pentel asked about the easement and commented that the commission cannot grant a
variance for the shed to remain in the easement.. Grimes said that the applicant could
request, through City Council action, a vacation of the easement and the Engineering
Department would review this situation to see if it could be vacated.
Martens agreed with Pentel that a variance cannot be obtained to allow the shed in the
easement. Pentel commented that this process of a vacation of the easement is
outside the process being discussed at this meeting. She continued by saying that the
minor subdivision meets the requirements of city code and that Mr. Schmidt can
address the shed and easement issue at the City Council level.
Martens questioned staff on why the Board of Zoning Appeals could not address a
variance for the shed and what Mr. Schmidt would need to do. Grimes said that
vacation of the easement needs a public hearing and a recommendation by the City
Engineer to the City Council. He continued saying that the minor subdivision can go
forward with the understanding that if the vacation is denied, the shed would need to be
moved.
Pentel asked Grimes if staffs recommendation for moving the shed stands. Grimes
said yes.
Pentel opened the informal public hearing.
Mrs. Katherine Norman, 2935 Regent Avenue North, said that she is concerned with
drainage in the area. She said that she is concerned that with the construction of a
building on the proposed lot which would divert drainage toward her house. Norman
said the ground and house of the applicant is now elevated higher than her house and
water drains toward her already. She is concerned the drainage problem may have an
affect on her property value.
Marcie Maier, 3005 Scott Avenue North, said that she also was concerned with
drainage. She requested staff to look into the drainage issue a bit more.
s
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 4
Schmidt said he is aware that the surrounding residents are concerned about drainage,
but when the city constructed a storm sewer system in the area years ago, the drainage
problem was taken care of.
Tammy Brotland, lives in Plymouth and granddaughter to Mrs. Katherine Norman living
at 2935 Regent Avenue North, talked about the concern of what would happen to
property values in the neighborhood with the addition of another house on Scott.
Pentel asked whether the proposed house on the survey is the footprint or envelope in
which a house could be constructed. Grimes said he believes it is the envelope of
where a house could be constructed and said it could be even larger on the north and
south sides.
Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing.
Pentel asked staff that other than drainage issues the applicant meets the factors for a
minor subdivision. Grimes said that is staff's finding and that if there is a concern
regarding drainage this can be added as part of the conditions for the subdivision. He
said the elevations of the proposed lot are about 851 and Mrs. Norman's lot elevation is
about 854; drainage for the proposed lot would be approximately three feet lower. He
said he doesn't believe that this proposed lot would cause wetness in existing
basements in the area. Pentel agreed with this comment.
Martens commented that the drainage runs north to south. He said he was aware of
wet basements in the area last year, but then the whole water table was substantially
up. He recommends that a drainage easement be placed in the rear of the proposed
yard to eliminate any structure obstructing the flow of drainage in this area. Grimes
said that he would talked with the Engineering Department about looking at this, and
having Mr. Schmidt's surveyor include the easement on the final plat if necessary.
McAleese said that he agreed with what was being said concerning the drainage and
believes it is a good idea to have the city's Engineer look at this situation. He said the
existing shed should be removed.
Johnson said she could understand the applicant's desire to have the shed remain
where it is currently located, but unfortunately it cannot be in the easement. She
agreed with McAleese that the city's Engineer should determine whether a drainage
easement needs to be located to the rear of the proposed yard.
Groger agreed with previous comments but added the possibility of the drainage on the
', proposed lot being routed to the front of the house because most people want to use
'i their back yards, this may otherwise be a problematic area. He hopes that alternatives
', would be looked at.
~.~'
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 5
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to
recommend to the City Council approval of the request to subdivide the property
located at 2945 Regent Avenue North with the following conditions:
A park dedication fee in the amount of $500 be received at the time of final plat
approval.
2. The shed, located on the north side of the property, be moved out of the easement
area before final plat approval and that all easements be shown on the final plat.
3. The Assistant City Engineer's memo, dated May 18, 1998, be considered a part of
the condition for approval.
4. Staff discussed with the city's Engineering Department on whether a drainage
easement should be placed on the east side of the proposed property.
III. Informal Public Hearing -Rezoning
Applicant: Sharon and Gerald Lund
Address: 2320-22 Douglas Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota
Request: Rezone the property from single-family residential to two-
family residential
Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, told the commission that the
applicants are requesting an amendment to the zoning map from single-
family residential to R-2. He explained that the applicants are trying to refinance their
house, but because the land is zoned single-family and a 2-family now exists on the
site, the bank will not refinance. Grimes said the dwelling was constructed as a duplex
and has been used for that purpose.
Grimes said the property exceeds the minimum requirements fora 2-family dwelling of
12,500 sq.ft. -this property is 27,000 sq.ft. He said the existing garage would need a
variance and the applicants are proceeding to the Board of Zoning (BZA) appeals at its
meeting of June 23. Grimes believes the character of the neighborhood will not change
with this rezoning. He then reviewed a color map indicating property uses in the vicinity
of the proposed rezoning.
1
1
1
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 6
Pentel asked staff that if the rezoning is granted do they need to proceed to the BZA.
Grimes said staff's recommendation to the applicant was to first appear before the
Planning Commission for review of the rezoning request. The BZA would then review
the variance request for the garage, and if the BZA denied the applicant's request, the
applicant would. then proceed to the City Council with both the rezoning and an appeal
to the BZA's findings.
Pentel asked for clarification on zoning in an R-2 district. Grimes said this district only
allows 2-family dwellings. Pentel asked if there is room enough on this site to create a
third lot to the south. Grimes said that there is not enough space for another lot.
Peter Thier, 2320 Douglas Drive and Gerald Lund, 2322 Douglas Drive, told the
commission that when they bought the dwelling, they were told that the two-family
structure was grandfathered in. They said they were told about the nonconformity
when they went to refinance the dwelling.
Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing.
Gerald Egge, 6110 Wynnwood Road, wanted confirmation that the use on the property
could only be used as a 2-Family dwelling. Grimes reviewed that section of city code
regarding the 2-Family Zoning District. Egge said he was concerned because of the
size of the lot and the possibility that there was enough space for another dwelling.
Pentel reiterated what Grimes had said about the site not having enough square
footage for another building. Grimes added that additions could be done to the existing
structure.
McAleese commented that someone could come in and request a higher use for the
property, but it would then need to go through the hearing process for consideration.
Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing.
Groger asked if other duplexes in the area have been rezoned; Grimes said no.
Groger said he had no problem with the requested rezoning of this property and
believes it is appropriate to have R-2 zoning adjacent to single-family zoning and that
this is an appropriate setting. Groger wanted to make it clear that this request for a
rezoning does not set any precedent for other lots on Douglas Drive to be rezoned.
Johnson agreed with Grogers comments.
MOVED by Martens, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to
recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning of the property located at
2320-22 Douglas Drive from Single-Family to 2-Family Residential.
~~
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 7
IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Author,
City Council and Board of Zoning Appeals
Grimes noted that there would be redevelopment items coming before HRA, along I-
394 soon. Pentel asked at what point does the commission want to think about the
uses located along I-394 and is office/warehouse the best use. Grimes told the
commission that they would be reviewing a PUD to be submitted by MEPC on the
Golden Hills West area. He also said that the owners of the Metropolitan and vacant
land to the east would be submitting applications for a PUD and rezoning of the
property.
Martens asked staff if there would be amenities (master planning) in the Golden Hills
area. Grimes commented that MEPC, before Duke Realty Investments bought them
out, had planned to fit everything together but due to the sale is not sure the amenities
would be affected. Knoblauch commented that in the. case of the Valley Square Area C
development, public spaces were important because it was considered a gateway into
Golden Valley, but Golden Hills is anon-retail oriented district. Martens noted that with
three or four buildings in the same area a master plan would be needed for coordination
on signage, etc. Grimes commented that MEPC is working on signage for an entryway
into this development. He also commented that Council Member LeSuer would like to
see sidewalks in these development areas.
Groger asked if the Planning Commission was going to be involved in the MEPC design
process because of the land use changes. Grimes said that he would bring plans to the
next Planning Commission meeting and the commission could make comments on the
plans. Pentel believed there are sidewalk, transit and roadway issues. Knoblauch
thought the MCTO would like to be involved in some way.
Martens believed that most of the issues on these redevelopments are worked out
before the commission gets involved. He asked if the development agreement would
come after the PUD process. Grimes said no that the HRA would enter into a
development agreement before the Planning Commission and City Council saw the
plans; but this does not preclude that the PUD would be approved. Martens asked if
the HRA is reviewing plans during the development agreement process and Grimes
said they were, but these are preliminary plans which need to be looked at due to the
investment into the site. Knoblauch noted that these details are flexible.
Another item briefly talked about by Director Grimes concerned the City hiring a
consultant regarding how the code deals with cell towers.
-~
Minutes of the Golden Valley. Planning Commission
June 8, 1998
Page 8
V. Other
The commission made note of the Oasis Mental Health Program Annual Report.
VI. Adjournment
Chair Pentel adjourned the meeting at R~~~nn,
1