HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969 12-03 Planning Commission Meeting PacketsMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE EDINA PIANNING COMMISSION HM
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1969
EDINA VILLAGE HALL
Necmbers present: W. W. Lewis, Chairman; Cliff Johnson, Sam Hughes, Robert
Huelster, David Griswold and A. H. Hiatt.
St:a'Qf present: Fred Hoisington and Karen Sorensen
I. ApEr oval of November 5. 1969 Commission Minutes.
11r. Hughes moved that the November 5, 1969 Commission Minutes be
approved as submitted. Mr. Huelster seconded the motion. Motion Carried.
T.I. LOT DIVISIONS
1.. B. E. Johnsrud. Lot 28, Block 3. Normandale 2nd Addition.
Mr. Hoisington reported that this property is located along
Tingdale Avenue between W. 63rd and W. 64th Streets. This division of
Lots 27 and 28 occurred some time ago and the proponent needs Village
approval to convey the North 30 feet of Lot 27 and the South 40 feet of
Lot 28 as a separate parcel.
Mr. Huelster moved that the Commission recommend approval of the
lot division. Mr. H--ighes seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion
Carried.
2. Frank_ B1u&er>z. Lot 9 � Block 22, Fairfax Addition.
Mr. Hoisington reported that the Board of Appeals had granted a
variance for the construction of ani garage on Lot 10, Block 22, Fairfax
Addition with the condition that a one foot lot division of Lot 9 be made
to place the garage all on one parcel. This request represents the
satisfaction of that condition. The staff recommends approval of the
division.
Mr, Hiatt moved that the Coxmfssion recommend approval of the lot
division. Mr. Huelst€.r seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion
Carried.
III. SUBDIVISIONS
Sp -69 -?O ScuLhdaale A.;a res )2.L.S.
Mr. Hoisington reported that this was a meplatting of Lot 1
and 2, Block 2, Southda.le Acres. Traa.ct. B is the site of the R.-5 zoning
which was approved several years ago. Our attorneys indicated that it is
adequate to replat with a registered laud survey and the 3taaff recon ends
aapproval of the plat.
14r. Johnson moved that the Commission recommend approval of
the uInt. Mr. Hugheo aecor.dee1 the motion. All Voted ,Aye. Motion Carried.
Edina Planning Commission -2-- December 3, 1969
SP -69-21 ,Harold Woods Third Addition.
This one lot plat. is located on the west side of Schaefer
Road, south of Interlachen Blvd. The plat meets ordinance requirements
and the staff recommends approval of the plat.
Mr. Hughes moved that the Commission recommend preliminary
approval of the plat. Mr. Huelster seconded the motion. All Voted Aye.
Motion Carried.
SP -69-22 Warden Acres Austin Reolat.
This seven lot plat is located south of Grove Street, north
of Benton Avenue and west of Hansen Road. The staff recommends approval of
the plat subject to Engineering Department approval of street grades.
Mr. Huelater Moved that the Commission recommend approval
of the plait subject to the condition imposed by the staff. Mr. Johnson
seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
SP -69-16 Kesler -Lilts Addition._
This three lot pkat is located on the south side of Valley
'view Road just east of Dakota Trail. A simple lot division of the property
was approved by Council in November, 1967. The two lots on the easterly
end of the property nre to be platted in an east/west manner with 40 feet
on the easterly side to be dedicated for road purposes. The staff recommends
approval of the. plat.
Mr. Hiatt moved that the Covoissiou recommend approval of
the plat. Mr. Auelster seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
Iva WESTURN EDINA PLAN -
Mr. Hoisington informed the audience that there were several
critical issues to be discuoied, not just the Chen proposal, the PCH pro-
posal or Interlaachen Blvd. He indicated that the Planning Commission had
not been shorn this plan, and is not ready to make a recommendation at this
point.
For the past month, a series of neighborhood meetings have been
held and they have beeu beneficial to the staff and hopefully to those
residenLo who have been in attendance as well. The first phase in the
planning process was t- a neighs,orhood meetiugs .and this meeting is the
second base of the: pv _ess. '11.e no-ist s'cep �;ill be the public hearing after
the Flannirg Ccr iosiou has reo af_ed, if necessary, tkiis plan. We intend
to have a formal heap:_ nc,7 bef�zry the Cc:LUc Sinn on January 7, 1970 at
7:30 11.41.
Ecsinn Planniag Covarais3ion -3- December 3, 1969
Mr. Hoisington then gent on to explain the different land use
patterns which exist in Western Edina and those that are suggested.
He then cm=ented on street functions and standards and explained the
difference between local, collector, major and minor arterials, freeways
and scenic roads. Ile indicated that diamond interchanges were proposed
at 7th Street, Fabri Tek and Valley View Road on County Road 18 and that
there would be no extension of Interlachen Blvd. beyond Mirror Lake. It
could be extended as a local residential street, but not to County Road 18
and not as a major street. He indicated that there were 4,000 acres in the
total plan area and that by 1978 there would be 16,400 persons residing
in single family dwellings on 2,057 acres; 1,600 persons in low density
multiples on 150 acres; 2,500 persons in medium density multiples on 100
acres and 2,500 persons in high density multiples on 60 acres with comsmercial
occupying 8 acres; industrial erd office on 75 acres; recreation and open
apace on 750 acres and streets occupying 800 acres.
He also discussee, Maloney Avenue connection with the 7th Street
interchange, two creek crossings and a possible pedestrian way to Country-
side Park, as well as a proposed fire station at Tracy Avenue and the
Crosstown Highway. tie a;1so discussed the proposed commercial development
on the northeast corner of County Road 18 and Vernon Avenue.
A raoident of the Walnut Drive -Tamarac Avenue area asked if there
was a need for the proposed shopping center as his area people live four
miwutes from .Jerry's, six minutes from Cahill, four minutes from Super
Value and five minutes from Southdale. The commercial project has no
merit and should be rejected. We object also to the fact that you are
plannin; to upgrade Vernor. Avenue from two lanes to four lanes. We were
going to €s.ssk that: the speed limit be lowered to 30 MPH. Vernon Avenue
was adequate as two lanes before the Crosstown and now you want to increase
it to four lanes.
Mr. Robert F. Hensen, attorney representing the NW Edina
Com"ittee, stated that all of the members are seriously interested in these
meetings. A number of changes have been made in the proposal and many
things are different than what was talked about at the earlier meetings.
Some of the ob jectit rt s of the committee have been alleviated because of the
changes in the plan. We aask for additional time to give the new proposal
some thought.
Mr. Alf Bergerud stated that the staff contemplated a street that
rent naihere (Interlachsa). There will be 300 homes in the area, 1200
people, about 700 additional cars on Interlachen Blvd. and we are fearful
of what the traffic ci tua,tion gill be. I have aao alternative, but I do
know that the people do not want Interlachen Blvd. extended at all.
One gentleman asked -f recent traffic counts had been taken on
Veruon Avenue vi -ace the Croustn.:°n was opened, if the police department had
nnY taccid e. increases on. Interlachen Blvd., and if the Fabri Tek employees
were Edina re,i.denta.
.Edina. Plsnaning Commission -A- December 3, 1969
Mr. John Waters, representing Dr. and Mrs. Schuman, stated that
the amain objection of his client was that they didn't want Interlachen
Blvd. to become more than a minor arterial and anything that could be done
to reduce the traffic on Interlachen Blvd. would be appreciated.
Mr. Toss Olson, Hennepin County Commissioner noted that there
are no plans at the present tine to do anything to Interlachen Blvd.
through 1975 and felt confident that the County would be agreeable to what
Village staff and residents wanted.
Mr. Hoisington indicated that there would be no state aid funds
m*tailable until around 1975, so any upgrading of any estate aid street would
not be done until after that date.
Mr. McDonald, Tyler Court, stated that there was a great deal of
shuttle traffic from T.H. 100 to County Road 18 and wondered if thera
shouldn't be an origin/destination study made for that area.
After considerable discussion, Chairman Lewis thanked the
people for attending and giving their views to the Coy dssion. He stated
that there woi.ld be a public: hearing before the Commission on January 7,
1970, and at that time the Corxkission would take action and awake recommendations
to the Council about the Western Edina Plan.
No Action Tnk,en .
Mr. hoisingtor stated that has would lice to have a work/study
maeting with the Commission on December 17, 1969 at 7:30 P.I. The public
is invited, btiat the p arposf: is principally a study meeting of the proposals
made is the Western Edina area.
V. Adjournment nt 9:40 P.M.
Respectfully submitted.
Karen Sorensen, Secretary
Name
Existing
Recommended Street
Function Width
Recommended
Street
Width
No. Lanes
Interlachen
Minor Arterial
30'
361*
2`
Malonev
Collector
30'
30'-36'*
2
Blake South
Minor Arterial
30'
36'*
2
Blake. North)
Minor Arterial
30'
36'*
2
W. 70th
Cahill to Antrim
Major Arterial
44'
44'
4
Antrim Road
Ma'or Arterial
44'
44'
4
Valley View
Ma or Arterial
24'-36'
36'*
2
Tracy
Minor Arterial
36'
36'*
2'
Gleason Rd.
Minor Arterial
36'
36'*
2
Vernon Ave.
Ma or Arterial
27-1/2'
48'
4
STREET FUNCTIONS AND STANDARDS
1. Local Street: Provides direct access to individual abutting properties;
40' minimum right-of-way width; 22-30' pavement width;
2 moving lanes; 25 MPH, low traffic volumes.
2. Collector Street: Collects traffic from local streets and moves it to
and from arterial streets; a minimum of direct driveway
access; 50' minimum right-of-way width; 24' pavement
width, no state-aid; 36' pavement width, one parking
lane, state-aid; 44' pavement width, parking both
sides; 30 MPH, medium traffic volumes.
3. Minor Arterial: Moves through or longer distance traffic at moderate speeds
and volumes to and from expressways, freeways, and local
traffic generators (shopping centers, employment centers,
etc.); a minimum of direct driveway access; state-aid 36'
minimum pavement width; 60' minimum right-of-way width;
2-4 moving lanes; no parking, 40 MPH.
4.:_ Major Arterial: Moves through or longer distance traffic at moderate speeds
and higher volumes to and from expressways, freeways and
other major traffic generators.- Arterials serve as the
primary Village street system, taking people conveniently
from place to place within the community and to some
extent into adjoining communities; 44' minimum pavement
width;,80' minimum right-of-way width; speeds up to 50 MPH;
i" no parking, median preferred; no driveway access to
. abutting properties.
5. Scenic Road: Moves non-commercial pleasure oriented traffic through scenic
area, 30 MPH; 24-48' pavement width; minimum access to
abutting properties.
6. Expressways and Freeways: Moves through, regional or inter-community
traffic at high speeds and volumes between
" regional traffic generators; controlled access;
200-300' right-of-way width; median required;
60-70 MPH.
S,
i
1
V!
t;,ettia . Cine Block Long Street in Edina School District •- :15 Fiouse3, Value,
Children, School :fax
1968
Children Children Market
T A¢n ICALQ 11-1-
1969
1969 School
Total Tax
Ts.. T e..4 nA
School Tax
Dollars Needed
Per House To
Break Even @
is71 _ 17 nav nttM 1
Profit Lose
Per Per
"nsina Hnt1AP_
2
0
33,900
1,082.31
690.51
--
690.51
3
2
35,100
1283.67
718.69
1742.24
1,023.55
3
2
32,100
1126.49
648.23
1742.24
1,094.01
3
2
30,300
949.79
605.96
1742.24
1,136.28
3
0
31,200
982.93
627.09
--
627.09
2
0
30,300
949.78
605.96
-
605.96
3
2
32,400
1027.10
655.28
1742.24
1,086.96
2
5
37,200
1203.81
A-8.01
4355.60
3,587.59
2
2
24,900
751.00
479.13
1742.24
IoM.11
2
2
24,900
751.00
479.13
1742.24
1,263.11
3
2
25,200
762.04
486.17
1742.24
1,256.07
1
2
27,300
839.34
535.50
1742.24
1,206.74
3
2
37,200
1203.80
768.01
1742.24
974.23
2
0
35,100
1126.50
718.69
718.69
1
0
29,700
927.70
591.86
591.8.6
3321
466,800
14,967.?.6
9378.82
2,543.60
2.3,891.65
11,348.05 Net Lose
1963 14 Unit Apartment Mouse built in Edina School District has estimated market value of
$214,875 and pays taxes in 1969 of $8,079.59, has no children and never has had any.
$5,046.70 _of 'the taxes go to the school, 'therefore the school shows a 'net profit of
$5046.70.
This apartment house could have 5.8 pupils in the 14 units or .41 pupils and still
break even For the school district. The apartment units that have been built in the past
2 or 3 years have an average value of more than $21,000, will pay school tax in Edina
District (based on 21,000) of $493.22 or .57 pupil per apartment and still break even.
1970-71 Taxable School Budget 9,631, 970 s 11,057 pupils n $871.12 average tax cost
per pupil,