Loading...
01-13-03 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 13, 2003 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, January 13, 2003. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, McAleese, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, City Planner, Dan Olson and Recording Secretary, Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Keysser was absent. I. Approval of Minutes - December 9, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting Address: Purpose: 407 Turner's Crossroad North, Golden Valley, MN The applicant would like to subdivide his property into two parcels. A new home would be built on the newly created eastern lot. Chair Pentel removed herself from the discussion and action due to a potential conflict of interest. Vice Chair Shaffer filled the Chair position temporarily. - Olson explained that the applicant is proposing to split the property at 407 Turner's Crossroad North into two lots in order to build a new home on the newly created eastern lot. He added that the existing home does not currently meet setback requirements but that the applicant has stated he would meet all setback requirements for the new home. Olson discussed the lot requirements and stated that the proposed new lot would not meet the requirement of 100 feet of frontage along Woodstock Avenue and that the applicant would be required to pay park dedication fees because a new lot is being created. He discussed the positives and negatives of subdividing this property into two parcels. McAleese asked Olson about the rationale of why a variance should be granted for this subdivision or if there were any strong feelings one way or the other. Olson stated there were no strong feelings one way or the other. Eck stated that the variance for the existing home along the north side of the lot should be added to Olson's memo. Olson agreed and stated that that variance request should be added on page 2, section number 1 of his memo. Minutes of the City of Golden Valley Planning Commission January 13, 2003 Page 2 Rasmussen asked about the total number of variances being requested. Olson clarified that the newly created parcel B would not have 100 feet of frontage on the north side, and that a person can not create a non-conforming lot. He added that the applicant would like to reorient the existing home to face Woodstock Avenue. Groger asked if the proposed new home would have frontage on Woodstock Avenue or Turner's Crossroad. Olson stated he wasn't sure but that the north side of the lot would be considered the front for zoning purposes. Groger asked if the 11.5-foot side yard setback on the west side of the proposed new lot would also need a variance. Olson stated no because the side yard setback in this case was based on the current width of the lot. e Greg Newtson, applicant stated that he didn't have a lot to add to what Olson explained but that the lot is large and that having two homes there would be an advantage to the neighborhood. He stated that he would like to have two medium sized lots and that the new home would be a moderately sized home. Shaffer explained that with any variance request the City tries to understand what the hardships of the property are and that hardships don't include financial reasons. Newtson stated that to have two houses there similar in nature would be a benefit for both homes and that the existing home needs a lot of work. He stated that in order to meet all of the subdivision and Zoning Code requirements the new property line would have had to zigzag and the City did not want that. - Groger asked if the footprint of the existing home was going to remain the same even though the front entrance to the home was going to face Woodstock Avenue. Newtson stated that the garage would be moved to the west side of the property and that the footprint would remain as is. Eck asked the applicant how building another house would enhance the existing home. Newtson stated that the two homes would be similar and that he feels the lot is too big. He added that the previous owner said that it took four hours to mow the lawn. Shaffer opened the public hearing. Irene Steinbrueck , 5536 Loring Lane, stated that the existing house is not a shack by any means and that it took one and a half hours to mow the lawn. Sharon Bourne, 401 Turner's Crossroad, showed the Planning Commission a petition that had 27 signatures against the proposal. She then read a letter she wrote and sent to the Planning Commission earlier. Joan Peters, 5605 Woodstock Avenue, stated that she moved to Golden Valley from Richfield and with so many requests for variances in order to squeeze this in, it really won't fit in and it would look different from the rest of the neighborhood and would end up being a detriment to property values. Minutes of the City of Golden Valley Planning Commission January 13, 2003 Page 3 John Dolan, 5615 Woodstock Avenue, stated that he is a new resident and that one of the reasons he moved to the area is because of the large size of the lots. He said that he believes approving this subdivision would be a mistake and that this would change the neighborhood. Jim Peters, 5605 Woodstock Avenue, asked if there were two or three variances being requested. Grimes stated that there are three instances where this proposal doesn't meet the Subdivision Code. Peters stated that in no way would this proposal be beneficial and that he is not in approval of this request. - Lauren Newtson, 1250 Angelo Drive, stated that one concern she is hearing from the neighbors is that splitting the lot and building another house wouldn't enhance the neighborhood. She said that her husband has been in the contracting business for 25 years and that they have had a lot of success in making homeowners happy. She stated that if the neighbors are concerned about them building something that doesn't fit in with the neighborhood that it is not true, they love Golden Valley and would like to enhancement the neighborhood. Irene Steinbrueck, 5536 Loring Lane, asked if there are any criteria regarding granting variance requests like this or if they are granted according to a specific need other than as a profit motivator. Grimes read the three criteria for variances from the Subdivision Code. Steinbrueck stated that the lot has been reasonably used for many years and that using the lot this same way would not create a hardship. e Tim Parsons, 5550 Woodstock Avenue, referred to a similar situation on Woodstock Ave. where there is a house that doesn't fit in with the neighborhood and all that is seen from the street is the garage. He said that in his opinion that affects the value of the neighbors on both sides of that home. He added that to approve this subdivision request would be going on some strong assumptions that new homeowners would keep the property well maintained. Barbara Kuenne, 5715 Woodstock Avenue, stated that because of Turner's Crossroad being widened she is concerned about safety if there were to be a one and a half story home built on that corner. She said that traffic has increased a lot and asked if there is a safety issue. Hearing and seeing no further speakers on this issue, Shaffer closed the public hearing. Grimes stated that if a house were built on the corner it would have to meet the corner visibility requirements. McAleese asked Shaffer for his opinion on the setback requirement on the east side of the existing home. Shaffer stated that it would still be 15 feet. Olson told the Commissioners that Staff is in the process of drafting new language for side yard setbacks. Minutes of the City of Golden Valley Planning Commission January 13, 2003 Page 4 McAleese asked if it would be possible in this case to redraw the property lines without requiring variances. Olson stated that he didn't think so and that one or the other lots would need variances. Eck stated that he is not convinced that there is an economic hardship and that there is no proper justification and therefore is opposed to the proposal. Groger stated he agreed and that it is not appropriate to create lots that are non- conforming. Rasmussen stated she also agreed mostly because she didn't think they should be creating nonconforming lots but that she is not inherently against putting a second home on a large lot. e McAleese stated he agreed and that he doesn't believe there is a hardship in this case. Shaffer stated he agreed and that he also sees the potential for problems with subdividing this lot in regard to the Board of Zoning Appeals corner lot criteria. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to deny the request to subdivide the property at 407 Turner's Crossroad North into two parcels to allow for a new home to be built on the newly created eastern lot. Pentel returned to the council chambers and resumed as Chair. -- Short Recess -- III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings - Shaffer referred to the December 16, 2002 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting and stated that the Board tabled several variance requests for the property located at 235 Paisley Lane. The applicant will come before the before the Board again in January with revised plans. IV. Other Business A. Discuss revision process for Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) ordinance. Olson stated that Staff has retained a consultant to create a draft copy of a new P.U.D. ordinance. He told the Commissioners he would show the draft to them and send it back to the consultant with their comments. V. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:10pm.