Laserfiche WebLink
32 MINUTES <br />OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE <br />EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL <br />NOVEMBER 18, 1985 <br />Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor <br />Courtney. <br />NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT PRESENTS CHECK TO CITY. &Is. Aileen Kulak, <br />President of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, presented a check in the <br />amount of $7,500 to the City and explained that this represents the participation <br />of the Nine Mile Creek TJatershed District in the development of Bredesen Park. <br />Mayor Courtney extended thanks on behalf of the Council Members and the City for <br />the contribution. <br />EMPLOYEE COLLEEN PAULUS COMMENDED. Mr. Rosland introduced Colleen Paulus, <br />Assistant Sanitarian, advising that she has been employed by the City since 1979. <br />He explained that her chief responsibility is the inspection of the City's <br />restaurants and that she has developed a slide presentation for food handlers <br />and a complaint assignment chart for monitoring the restaurants. Mr. Rosland <br />commended Mrs. Paulus for her excellent work and presented her with a silver pen <br />bearing the Edina Logo. <br />for her dedication and effort. <br />I <br />Members of the Council also expressed their appreciation <br />MINUTES of the October 21 and November 4, 1985 Regular Meetings and Special Meet- <br />ings of October 21, November 4 and November 12, 1985 were approved as submitted <br />by motion of Member Turner, seconded by Member Kelly. <br />Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney <br />Motion carried. <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BARBARA FEILER CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 2, 1985; FINDINGS, REASONS <br />AND DECISION TO BE PREPARED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved <br />and ordered placed on file. Planner Craig Larsen presented the request for pre- <br />liminary plat approval for Lot 23 and the north 103.5 feet of Lot 22, Block 1, <br />Edina Highlands noting that the subject property is located on the northerly end <br />of the Duncraig Road cul-de-sac. Directly east of the property is the Villa Way <br />apartment complex and to the north, west and south are developed single family <br />lots. The property contains approximately 73,000 square feet and is developed <br />with a single family dwelling. <br />the northwesterly corner of Lot 23, directly north of the existing house on Lot 22. <br />The easterly three-quarters of Lot 23 is characterized by steep slopes. Mr. Larsen <br />advised that the proponent has submitted a proposal to subdivide the property in <br />order to create one new buildable lot. <br />31,500 square feet and the lot remaining for the existing dwelling would contain <br />41,400 square feet, which would include the northerly 103.5 feet of Lot 22. The <br />new'lot would meet or exceed the minimum standards for lots established in the <br />Zoning Ordinance. <br />not meet the minimum frontage or lot widths standards of the Ordinance. The lot <br />would have a frontage of approximately 10 feet on the street where 30 feet is re- <br />quired. The Ordinance also requires that lots provide a minimum width of 75 feet <br />at a point 50 feet from the front property line. The lot for the existing dwell- <br />ing would have a width of 22 feet. <br />for lot width and frontage on a public street to help define neck lots. <br />lot remaining for the existing dwelling would be a neck lot. <br />a graphic illustrating the original conceptual development plan for the Edina <br />Highlands subdivision. <br />is shown near where the proponents propose the dwelling on the new lot. <br />record or reason could be found why the the north part of Lot 22 was transferred <br />to Lot 23. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan contains several <br />policies regarding the subdivision of lots in developed neighborhoods: 1) allow <br />further subdivisions of developed single family lots only if neighborhood char- <br />acter and symmetry are preserved, and 2) prohibit "neck Lot" subdivisions whereby <br />access to public streets is gained through narrow strips of land adjacent to <br />other lots. Staff believes that the location of the existing dwelling creates . <br />the illusion of subdivision potential for the property. <br />have been constructed where originally contemplated the illusion of subdivision <br />potential would not exist. <br />able location, the lot does presently comply with Ordinance standards. <br />posed subdivision would create a substandard lot which would damage the character <br />and symmetry of the neighborhood. <br />exceptionally large, its small frontage prevents the division of the property <br />into two conforming lots. <br />to the ability to subdivide. Further, staff can find no evidence that this <br />transfer was approved by the City. The proposed plat was considered by the <br />Community Development and Planning Commission at its meeting of October 30, 1985 <br />and recommended denial for the reasons set out in the staff report: 1) the sub- <br />I The existing dwelling is located in the notch .in <br />The new lot would contain approximately <br />: <br />However, the lot remaining for the existing dwelling would <br />The new Zoning Ordinance established standards <br />The <br />Mr. Larsen shozed <br />The building site contemplated for the subject property <br />No <br />If the dwelling would <br />Although the existing dwelling is in an undesire- <br />The pro- <br />Mr. Larsen submitted that although the lot is <br />The additional property from Lot 22 does not contribute