Loading...
06-12-06 PC Minutes . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 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 12,2006. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes May 22, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Eck, seconded by Schmidgall and motion carried unanimously to approve the May 22,2006 minutes as submitted. 2. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision SU09-10 - 4243 and 4253 Glenwood Avenue Applicant: Tyrol Hills Land Trust (Karen Woyak) Address: 4243 and 4253 Glenwood Avenue Purpose: The Subdivision would reconfigure the property line between the two existing lots. Grimes stated that this request is for a minor subdivision at 4243 and 4253 Glenwood Avenue. He explained that 4253 Glenwood is currently a vacant, buildable lot of record and that 4243 Glenwood already has a house on it. Grimes stated that the new property line would increase the square footage of the vacant lot from 13,200 sq. ft. to 15,300 sq. ft. and decrease slightly the lot with the house on it from 43,000 sq. ft. to 41,000 sq. ft. He stated that both lots will meet all of the setback and Zoning Code requirements. He referred to City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo and stated that his concerns have more to do with when the vacant lot is developed. Karen Woyak, Applicant, explained that she is trying to "clean up" the lot lines. She stated that the lot line between the two properties would invade the site lines of the existing home when a house is built on the vacant lot so she is proposing to move the property line back a little bit which will be better for both lots. Cera asked the applicant about the Tyrol Hills land Trust. Woyak stated that it is the entity that owns the properties. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Page 2 . Keysser asked the applicant if there are plans to build a home on the vacant lot. Woyak said there are no plans at this time to build on the vacant lot. Keysser asked if the vacant lot was currently for sale. Woyak said it is not currently for sale. Keysser opened the public hearing. Marcia Fluer, 225 Janalyn Circle, stated that she has been asked by her neighbors to speak for them at this meeting. She said they are concerned about building on this property for several reasons. The first reason is flooding; she said that adding another house will add 600 gallons of water to the pond with each half inch rainfall. She said the second concern is that each tree lost is a threat to people who live west of the pond because trees near the water table can affect the pond level by 2 to 3 inches per tree. She stated that the City needs codes regarding "starter castles" or "McMansions" and that they would oppose any plan that allows a home to be built at this location. She said they would like the City to hold informational meetings with public input so residents can voice their concerns over the "McMansion" trend and protect its citizens from overdevelopment. . Gene Hollister, 240 Janalyn Circle, referred to City Engineer Jeff Oliver's staff report and asked Grimes what the issues will be when a new house is constructed. He asked who the principals are for the Tyrol Land Trust. Keysser suggested he ask the applicant about the principals of the Trust. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. Grimes referred to Mr. Oliver's staff report and discussed some of the issues such as requiring comments and appropriate permits from Hennepin County, as well as submitting a grading, drainage and erosion control plan and a tree preservation plan to the City. Keysser explained that there are a number of requirements already in place regarding subdivisions but he would like to get together with the City Council and discuss whether these requirements are sufficient because he realizes this is a sensitive issue. Eck said he didn't think there was any legal basis in denying this subdivision request. Keysser said he agrees because the proposal meets all of the City ordinances. . MOVED by Eck, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the subdivision request at 4243 and 4253 Glenwood Avenue subject to the City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo dated June 8,2006 and Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes memo dated June 6, 2006. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Page 3 . 3. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision SU09-11 - Turners Crossroad South Applicant: Brakins Homes (Yele Akinsanya) Address: 621 Turners Crossroad South Purpose: The Subdivision would create two separate lots in order to keep the existing home and to construct one new home. Grimes reviewed the subdivision proposal and stated that it is very similar to the applicant's request in April which was denied by the City Council because of the need for a variance to allow the existing garage to remain where it is currently located. He stated that the applicant has redrawn the lot line so that there are no variances required and both lots still exceed the minimum size requirement. Grimes stated that there are some concerns about drainage but the City Engineer and their consulting engineers have reviewed the proposed rain garden and they feel it will work adequately. . Keysser stated that he would like to add the City Engineer's staff report dated June 9,2006 as a condition of approval. Grimes agreed. Cera asked Grimes to review where the storm sewer lines are located. Grimes referred to the survey and pointed out the existing and proposed new sewer lines. Cera asked about the City Engineer's requirement of removing an existing 18" private storm sewer line. Grimes confirmed that the City Engineer is requiring that it be removed. It is a private pipe that is very shallow and is part of an old drain tile system that was used when the property was a farm. Cera asked if removing it would cause water to back up. Grimes explained that the City Engineer is concerned about the effect of this subdivision on other properties and is also requiring that a berm be constructed along the south side of the new lot to minimize any impact to the neighbors to the south. Grimes added that the streets in this neighborhood are proposed to be reconstructed in 2011, so there will also be drainage improvements made at that time. Yele Akinsanya, applicant explained that he has met with city staff and that all of the City Engineer's requirements have been met. He stated that all of drainage will be handled adequately. Lawrence Marofsky, the applicant's attorney, stated that these issues don't need to be addressed by the Planning Commission as a part of the applicant's request for subdividing a lot. He stated that the City Engineer is proposing that the applicant . remove part of a private system which he can not do because it is not his. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Page 4 . He stated that Mr. Berman (601 Radisson Rd) has agreed to let the applicant tie into the private storm sewer line on his property. He reiterated that they are going to meet all of the City's requirements when they build the new house, but they disagree with the mandate regarding removal of the private system. Cera asked Mr. Marofsky if he has talked to the City Engineer about the requirements in his June 9 memo. Akinsanya stated that they just recently received Mr. Oliver's memo but they will talk to him about their concerns before this proposal goes to the City Council. Keysser asked Grimes if the requirements are relevant right now. Grimes explained that the subdivision ordinance states that the City can require further information in order to evaluate a proposal. He stated that staff needs to have a general understanding that the proposed rain garden and drainage plan will work. He added that the Planning Commission could vote on this proposal contingent on the City Engineer's memo. Akinsanya stated that the City should be concerned about him linking into the City's storm sewer system. He stated that the City is open to liability if the system were to flow back into private property. Grimes stated that more than likely the proposed rain garden will adequately handle the rain. . Keysser opened the public hearing. Harold Berman, 601 Radisson Road, said that he has noticed that the Planning Commission tends to incorporate staff memos into their recommendations. He said he doesn't want to get bound too tightly by including memos that are under contention. He said he has no real objection to the proposed subdivision or the proposed rain garden. Cera asked Berman if he has any issues with removing the sewer line. Berman said he believes that the private sewer line in question serves his property and others in the area. He added that he thinks it was constructed in the early 1950s to drain the intersections on highways 100 and 1-394. Grimes said he would talk to the City Engineer about the concerns that have come up at this meeting. . Gary Hanson, 701 Turners Crossroad South, said he has seen rain gardens and that they are basically just perennial gardens and mosquito swamps. He said his property is going to be the lowest spot and he thinks the subject property needs to be drained and tied into the existing storm sewer system. He said the idea of a subdivision is that there has to be a buildable property and if it is not properly drained it's not a buildable lot and can't be approved. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Page 5 . Grimes explained that rain gardens are one of the new best management practices around. He stated that there will be an overflow system and that there is plenty of experience to show that rain gardens work and enhance water quality. Kluchka asked if there is an ordinance in place that makes sure rain gardens are maintained. Grimes said the City requires rain garden maintenance agreements similar to pond maintenance agreements. He explained that the maintenance agreement is attached to the property and filed at the County. Kluchka asked if the condition of requiring a rain garden should go with the building permit or with the subdivision approval. Grimes said the issues need to be resolved before final plat approval. McCarty said he thinks it makes sense to have the rain garden requirement go with the development of the new property rather than with the subdivision in case a house isn't built on the new lot. Grimes said the drainage on the property will be covered as a part of the drainage, and erosion control plan. Waldhauser said she agrees that acting on a subdivision request doesn't require the Planning Commission to address future development but because of the public's concern it saves a few steps and helps put neighbors at ease. . Cera referred to the City Engineers memo dated June 9 and noted that item 3(a) says a new manhole must be installed to provide a connection to the existing private drain, but 3(b) says that the existing private drain must be removed to the extent possible. He said he thinks those two sentences contradict each other and would like it to be worked out before the proposal goes to the City Council. Keysser said he understands the memo to mean that the old pipe will be removed and a new pipe will be connected. Hanson said that since there seem to be some contradictions in the City Engineer's memo the City should slow down and make sure the City Engineer knows exactly what he is trying to convey. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. Kluchka said he would also like a better explanation of the City Engineer's requirements. . Keysser said they are being asked to approve this subdivision contingent on ongoing discussions with the applicant. He said he is aware that there are concerns but that if the Planning Commission makes it clear that there will be ongoing discussions with the applicant, he feels ok voting on the proposal. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12,2006 Page 6 Grimes said he would ask the City Engineer to be as clear as possible when the proposal goes to the City Council. Keysser said he would like Jeff Oliver's memo dated June 9, 2006 to be made a condition and he would also like to require continued discussion with the applicant and Mr. Oliver on the overflow issue to make sure drainage won't adversely affect other properties. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the requested subdivision at 621 Turners Crossroad South subject to the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 2. The Certificate of Survey prepared by Kemper and Associates for Yele Akinsanya and dated May 19, 2006 shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations of City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, found in the memo to Mark Grimes and dated April 17, 2006 and June 9, 2006, shall become a part of this approval. Additional information requested by the City Engineer shall be submitted to the City Engineer for his review at least three weeks prior to the date it is placed on the City Council agenda for final plat approval. 4. A park dedication fee in an amount determined by the City Council shall be assessed at the time of final plat approval. 5. The applicant will continue discussions with the City Engineer regarding the overflow issues with the proposed rain garden to make sure it will not adversely affect other property owners. 4. Informal Public Hearing - Creating a Mixed Use Land Use Category for the General Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: To create a Mixed Use Land Use Category for the General Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Grimes reminded the Commissioners that they discussed creating a Mixed Use Land Use Category definition at their May 22 meeting. He read the proposed definition and stated that it has been reviewed by staff, the 1-394 Corridor Study Consultants and the City Attorney. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Page 7 Keysser asked if a car dealership would be considered to be "compact urban form" Grimes said there could be a small dealership such as the downtown Minneapolis Saturn dealer. Keysser asked about the areas of the City that this definition would be applicable to. Grimes said staff hasn't looked at specific areas yet but reminded the Commissioners that there has been a request for a mixed used development at the former Olympic Printing site. Keysser said he thought it was good to have a looser, more flexible definition like the one being proposed because it allows for more flexibility. Kluchka agreed. Keysser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no wishing to speak, Keysser closed the public hearing. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the following Mixed Use Land Use Category definition. Mixed Use (MU): This category includes tracts of land, buildings, or structures that support two or more land uses which are complementary to one another, support the ability to live, work, shop, and/or play within a defined land use area, and are in a compact urban form. This category includes the following principal uses; residential, office, retail, public, and entertainment. --Short Recess-- 5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Waldhauser referred to the May 16, 2006 City Council meeting and stated that the Council approved the ordinance allowing accessory structures in non-residential zoning districts. 6. Other Business Council Members Pentel and Scanlon were present and discussed the Council's decision regarding accessory structures in non-residential zoning districts. Pentel told the Commissioners that the Council would like to have a joint meeting with them to discuss subdivisions and in-fill developments. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm.