Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-02-28 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesAGENDA EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1977, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call. II. Approval of the January 31, 1977, EQC Minutes. III. Old Business: A. Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition. IV. New Business. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports. B. Watershed District Proceedings. VI. Other Business. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard. VIII.. Adjournment. EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1977, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL I. Members Present: Paul Mucke, Chairman Pro Tem, James Bentley, Clifford Johnson, Wendy Weden, Astrid Wang, and G. E. McCracken. Staff Present: Gordon Hughes, Environmental Planner, and Nancy Rust, Secretary. II. Approval of the January 31, 1977, EQC Minutes. Mr. C. Johnson moved for approval of the January 31, 1977, EQC minutes. Miss Weden seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried. III. Old Business: A. Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition (Wallace Kenneth). Generally located east of Lincoln Drive and west of Malibu Drive extended. R-4 Multiple Residential District and R-2 Single Family Residential District to R-4 and R-2 Multiple Residential Districts and R-1 Single Family Resi- dential District. Mr. Hughes said the property in question is located in the northwest portion of the city and recalled that about a year ago the EQC had reviewed a plat for the same property. He indicated that the request at this time is to divide the property into 42 lots and two outlots. Lots 1 through 13 in the northeast portion and Lots 26 through 34 in the southeast portion will be single family; and Lots 14 through 25, which abut Outlot B on the east side, and Lots 35 through 40 will be R-2 double bungalow. Two outlots have been identified as Outlots A and B. Mr. Hughes stated the developer has suggested dedicating Outlot A, which is 5.5 percent of the total land area, for parkland dedication. Mr. Hughes recalled the main problem which exists is the flood plain with an elevation of 876. After the commission reviewed the plat a year ago, Mr. Hughes said, staff was asked to meet with the developer and attempt to work out a revised plan. He explained that staff and the developer have met considerably in the past year and frequently during the past three to four months. The present plan was the result of those meetings. Mr. Hughes further noted that nearly all of Outlots A and B and a substantial portion of Lots 41 and 42 lie within the flood plain as well as Lincoln Drive and portions of Lots 35 through 40. He indicated that the filling which would take place for development in Lots 35 through 40, Lincoln Drive, and Lots 41 and 42 will result in 20 percent encroachment into the flood plain. Therefore, Outlots A and B could not be filled without exceeding the 20 percent encroachment rule of the Watershed District. Mr. Hughes continued by saying access form the south would be provided from an extension of Malibu Drive and recalled that in the Edina Green Subdivision, which lies directly south of the proposed subdivision, an outlot was set aside for this purpose. Access from the north would be acquired by an extension of Lincoln Drive to serve the apartment and two-family lots on either side of Lincoln Drive. Mr. Hughes reviewed the history of•the property saying it was rezoned in 1964 after three years of hearings and compromises between the developer, the neighborhood, and the City. Mr. Hughes noted that the proposed rezonings are Minutes of the 2-28-77 EQC Meeting, Page 2 primarily down-zonings and are necessary to align the boundaries of the existing zoning with the proposed land use. Mr. Hughes concluded that the Planning and Environmental staff would recom- mend approval of the proposed requests for rezoning and subdivision contingent on the following: 1. Lots 1 through 13 be excepted from the final plat until access can be provided from the east. 2. That for the final platting of Lots 1 through 13 a 20 foot easement be dedi- cated between Lots 7 and 8 for utility purposes. 3. That Lots 1 through 13 face the north cul-de-sac road and egress only onto that road. 4. That developer be required to dedicate Outlot B and Outlot A as shown on the attached parkland dedication report. This dedicaiton is deemed to be a reason- able amount considering the flood plain elevation, the amount of fill to the remaining flood plain, and the necessity to protect flood plain areas to the maximum possible degree. 5. That the developer be granted development rights of up to 350 units which could be transferred to other multiple development zoned property on this site. 6. Grading permit from Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and flood plain permit from City of Edina must be obtained prior to any work in the flood plain. Mr. Hughes stated that an addendum had been written to condition number 4 of the staff report for additional clarification. He recalled the 20 percent en- croachment rule was established in 1961 by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and the Watershed District has never varied from this rule. Mr. Hughes also explained that private property owners, as well as the City, have purchased property and constructed improvements in reliance on the 20 percent encroachment rule and the protection it provides by preventing increases in flood elevations. He said eligibility of the Federal Flood Insurance Program requires proper enforcement of the Flood Plain Ordinance. Mr. Hughes then proceeded to read from the Edina Flood Plain Ordinance regarding the importance of Flood Plain preservation and stated precedence has been set for flood plain dedication in other developments of the city, including Edina Green Subdivision directly south of Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition, Prestige 2nd Addition, Walnut Ridge 3rd Addition, and other plats adja- cent to Nine Mile Creek. Mr. Dave Sellergren, the attorney for Wallace Kenneth, the developer, was present and indicated he had been working with the staff and Mr. Kenneth for some time trying to formulate an agreement allowing the subdivision to meet the concerns of the neighborhood and staff in regard to various matters concerning the proposal. Mr. Sellergren indicated he had read the staff report and said Mr. Kenneth and his surveyors had spent many hours of effort to design a plat which would meet the concerns of the neighborhood and that all lots are of buildable size and meet ordinance standards regarding utilities and traffic circulation. Mr. Sellergren also said the plat was designed to direct multiple family traffic away from Minutes of the 2-28-77 EQC Meeting, Page 3 existing single family and two-family homes, and said the basic reason for the subdivision as it exists is Mr. Kenneth has presented many proposals for the site and would like to begin building on the lots shown in the current proposal as soon as possible. He emphasized that the zoning changes are generally a reduction of density and that the proposal is consistent with the 20 percent fill policy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. He, therefore, did not feel at this point in time they needed to deal with the question of the dedication of Outlot B and did not feel approval of this plat needed to be tied with Outlot B. He further said that in a memorandum to Mr. Hyde, the City Manager, staff indicated that showing that portion of the flood plain, now Outlot B, as an outlot would be an acceptable approach. Mr. Sellergren indicated that he did not feel facing a dedication issue at this time was a way to approach the flood plain problems and emphasized he was very much aware that there were issues that needed to be faced at a future time. He pointed out that staff recommended the isolation of the issue of Outlot B and referred to Mr. Kenneth's obligations in relation to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District regulations. Mr. Bentley asked Mr. Sellergren what the developer intended to use Outlot B for. Mr. Sellergren responded the outlot would be unusable right now and if they intended to pursue any future development onthisoutlot it would have to be approved by the EQC, Planning Commission, City Council, and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Mr. Sellergren also said he was not clear as to what is meant in condition 1 under the recommendation of the staff report and said the developer cannot get a building permit until access is obtained from the east. There- fore, he saw no haLut to the City as to whether Lots 1 through 13 can be shown on the proposed plat so far as they understood the lots meet with staff approval. Mr. Hughes stated the plat could receive prelimilary approval with Lots 1 through 13 included; however, final platting of the portion would not be accepted until access was provided. He further explained that a similar situation existed with Hyde Park, wherein the developer came in with one large preliminary plat and as access was obtained and desire to develop portions of it, final plats were subsequently approved. Mr. Sellergren said Mr. Kenneth has built a home in the far north end of the site and is presently living there, thus giving him a personal interest in the development of the property. Mr. C. Johnson asked if this wasn't a package develop- ment containing single family homes, doubles, and apartments which propose a permitted use of the flood plain. Thus, should Mr. Kenneth be allowed to separate out parts of the package and still expect the same consideration. Mr. Sellergren responded the plat was submitted to isolate Outlot B and not to present it as a package. Mr. C. Johnson said Outlot B was a liability and asked why Mr. Kenneth would want to keep it. Mr. Sellergren said that he feels that leaving Outlot B in private ownership would allow future development in the event of revisions to the Watershed District's rules and the Flood Plain Ordinance. Mr. Kenneth was also present and noted that Greg Luce, the City Planner, and staff had worked with him on the proposed plat and approved of it as presented to the EQC. Mr. Johnson felt the developer should willingly dedicate Outlot B as open space as he would be getting rid of any liability and flood hazard. Mr. Sellergren felt the dedication of 60 percent of the land was unreasonable. Mr. C. Johnson moved for approval of the proposed subdivision and rezoning with the contingencies as stated in the staff report. Mr. Bentley seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried. Minutes of the 2-28-77 EQC Meeting, Page 4 V. New Business: A. Reorganization of Commissions and Boards Mr. Mucke said Mr. Telfer and he had been present at the special City Council meeting held on February 12, 1977, at which there was a section of the meeting devoted to reviewing the number of commissions and boards and the possi- bility of duplication among them. He noted that one idea presented was to combine the EQC and Planning Commission to avoid such duplication. Mr. Telfer had intro- duced himself at the meeting as representing the EQC and said he was not in favor of the combined commissions. Mr. Hughes said that three main commissions are suggested: Physical Development, Human Resources, and Governmental Services. The Baord of Appeals, Recycling Commission, Building Construction - Appeals Board, and Heritage Preservation Board will be retained. The three main commissions would consist of 15 members. He concluded that he would have more information at a future meeting. V. Reports: None. VI. Watershed District Proceedings: A. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Mr. Hughes said the Watershed District considered Iroquois Hills 4th Addi- tion and the declaration of the buildability of the outlot,which was discussed at the last EQC meeting, and held it over to the March meeting. Mr. Hughes also said he had received a call regarding the creek by Cahill Road and that it was high in chloride content and the water level was unusually high due to the spring melt. Mr. Hughes said he will be receiving a final draft from John Dickson of the Mud Lake Soil Analysis and feasibility of excavation. He said he should have it by the next meeting. VII. Other Business: Miss Weden asked where access to the inside of Bredesen would be after the fence was completed. Mr. Hughes answered that after the fence was up, access would be from Olinger Road. Mr. C. Johnson asked about the final decision on the Community Development Block Grant funds. Mr. Hughes said the funds were distributed among five major projects: 50th and France Commercial Area, Frank Tupa Historical Park, Neighbor- hood Park and Morningside Improvements, and Housing Rehabilitation. In regard to weed and algae control in the lakes and ponds. Mr. Hughes said the City would again request permits to treat uertaih lakes. VIII. Adjournment. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Rust, Secretary