Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972 06-07 Planning Commission Meeting Minuted Regular.4 "'V Till" "TIG HELD XUINE 7, SDIVA "-LLAT,12 FALL Members Present: W. W. Lewir— S, ?. rlugbP�V. 7)'. C. shermrl.+' C. E, Johnson, rud G- VJolanp-,ant, Staff Fresen,Z: G. Luce, R-, Dunn,, vrd L. Nye:: 1. Avrroval of the May 3x,397'.2, Plannin%t Caimnission Niuutes., Mr. Hughes moved the :Tanning Commission minutes of May 3, 1972, be approved as submitted. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. All. voted aye. Motion carried. Ii. LOT DTVISIONS: LD -72-7 Johan 14. Larsen. 6933 Mark Terrace Circle. _Iat, 8 Bloclic 1., Breemar Hills 2nd AAdition. I Mr. Luce stated the pro-ponent wishes to divide oft a ouall portion of land from the southwest corner of the lot in question, As discussed in the staff report, the proponent prasently curs this lot and the lot direc',Iy to the south. A swimaiing pool was built very close to the rear lot line, and I -EV., order to sell the lot on Mark Terrace Circle, a minor charge in the prope;:ty lines must be made Co maintain the proper setback around the pool. Mr. Luce stated that although this is a seif-imposed problem, the staff would recomiend approval of the division requested for '4"I1e following reaaons: L This would solve a problem without creating any undue hardship on the surrounding property. 2. An additiona:'. buildable lot would not be crearcd; thus there would be no neighborhood impact, Mr. Hughes clarified no house presently exists on the lot on Mark Terrace Circle,, )�'cllawing brief discussion, Mr© Hughes moved the division be approved as requested, Mr. C. Johnsen seconded the motion, All vov.ed aye. Motion carried. U-72-8 .2,slyas,,_of Ca!'J�11 'Lutheran Cliurch,, 5308 Brook Drive. Lot 18, Aloci,.-. 4--I.aIIsaera�Yk Mr. Luce, stated that the Calvaz-y of Cahill Lutheran Church presently ovnins lots 12 throzAgh 1.8, of L-tBuran?i Vista Adeliticnlie brie'-,*-Iy explained that their prcsen prnsM.r Ourns his rs h.(:,ne and the church now desires to sell the home oi--. 1 o -, 18 used previously as a Versonaje. lie painted out the existing lot and tLe vlannf�;r in w si ca it is pr,-,4.-!osed a -o b�: divided from the enure h property. Mr. Luce statcd the ciighbGrhc:od 4'Varafre-- lot size varin-!;rorn to 20,000 square f squa-ze feez, ,-ftcr 1,; di-rided, lo; 18 w�-'I !ntiil inrludp�. appr-w-i-uatlely 22,00 He aic..e zi the zunIng three ne-re for a church, and the r.117urch wi'11 bc, nufficte--,t to that require-ment. &�-acriptlm o"Vnitter' for tl7.,e church property Luce stetef! the A follmrf-ng t'.:ie rcqu,,ested shoulclj,,F! revisftd,_ Ti'2 cla,',-ified the division Edina IPIanning Ccrnmi.seaor. - <:• .;Lsnc l; 3I2 create two parcels: orm legal°� -�': 3.;!8:� lir: � i�:ii': `.1 LOQ 9 troy d RL."chide. that part of "lot IS where. the existing p,3r:s;7 t;:,;''? is, t).' --,1t * g Z.lc Other dc8c$'ipt."'Gn (Percal would include the remainder of lo: 1.8 ,nil all 'iSA .!. +`:f'7 12 uhrou.gh 111. Thus. the, remainder of lot 1$ is attached "ae end an unbuildable lot Will not be created. In response to 14r. G. Johnson, who questioned the proposed division of lot 18, Miro Harold Jastrom of Calvary Lutheran Church stated that the present lot line comes to within 20 feet of the church at one points the Village ordinances require at least a 50 foot. setback. Also, there is a hedge along the existing lest line, and if the new lot line is established where proposed, any future dispute will be avoided as to who vias the hedge. Creating the division in the manner proposed would thus solve the boundary distance problem aid provide the minimum three acre tract required by the Village. Pollowing further discussion, Mr. C. Johnson moved the lot division as requested be approved provided the legal description for the remaining church property (Parcel A) is corrected to include lots 12 through 17, and Mr. G. Johnsaa seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. LLL -72--9 Virs3t Christian Refo. cd_ Ch.urch._4075 inglewooc+ Avenue. Part of Tract A. R.L.g. No. 557. - - - �- Mr. Luce indicated the property is located in the extreme northern portion of the Village in what was previously knoon s.a the Yorningside area. A school and church presently exist, on the property; the zoning crdinancea requires a school must have a minimum five acre tract and a church must have three acres. He noted that if the request to divide the church and school is approved, the school would have the required fiveacres, but the. church would only have about one acre. Mr. 1:.1cc reminded the Comiission that if the division is granted, they could grant Fa variance of the subdivision requirfaments at this ti,.a. In reply to Mr. Hughes, Mr. Woe stated the :arhool has apparently been sold to a different body. He presented the prognosed division on an air photo, and indicated that if it is approved, no parking would be retained fox the church, €a the parking lot would be located entirely on the school site. lie stated that -tic ataff recommendation could be made without additional informaticn on how parking will be provided for the church or what the relationship will be between the church and school fo? loguing this division and the subsequent sale of ;.he school. Mr. Wwirs agreed many questions remain unane vexed and, because the applicant wen not present, suggested the request be pootponed until additional information is made Following additional discussion, Mr. Luce sn3gested the division could be �,evi ied so the church would own the w1 is wing parkin; lob:, as a large vacant area north of the school. could pruvie-a parking for that use. Mir. G. Johnson moved the request be deferred until additional information is provided by the church �-,l;c pa y-itin.g siruiati.on. Zhe motion died fcr lack of a second, Nor. Hughes Ino ad gone a:e,:uested lot di.v'is:3 ^ a be denied be?cxausn aidcquats, ? <' Qe2tier, ;>:a"."3 f'i$: Erh- mx1iA3"13?C'. ircl Cc? -would, be id'aadegi.ate ari..d b� ,a !A 3.:::4 . w r' to w.T_.,, m tlhr e r t _ to ��� E.. ',�'. c3" cm1-e.I2�, ��d4 _ x _. ?C�i: a__:3� a c_. ani. tai€,. c:iYc.i 3 curet e i'a ;a��{ r. ,.:, G C� .: �Ca. lr, � � � b F�a..i:. Se'+.. i:. � E. u. �'�� �..:ex.h ", :i ..L .1 VA�V wrzlzj- low, "M '2nn? W-�Tzm. MOurs 5 �zv X -�715 5- adjamin pwrartivo to nK cost, §Amm �Y;OnOnq NOVA 0000mg NW. Ec -ccw MCA 7 -OW proposed, VMS is one Zany SA60 ard to jacnknd Vong On WKSly V1 W', p7 «l_ Awaacav cc agynss R6 ea UK Oculs. on. WCO .::C ......Y. GO COME M CWMWV,�, PIS& K00=0l, STUR W2 PIGPIrty QQWYP;Y 010th WZY W. divilza, US CU-41-wn pzuy "Zo woula ba %he mly NOVOWN point of ansaw. H% Was SO Ught-cf-my ._vvN?a VIVO nr_ .i.c-a_.. so icst adjvwanu no m h lt MS1paralln! wj?h zhc vczzm= QUYis anewa, Un, Uzasvn=6On a nve w­ Qwn 23,00 Oquarm feat and IM be 01mand Q nn arm of Wemundn"s m4e io, in in Maz. He P&MOd 1�� Na zu===Wr� Ut Nnm, cad indicand W OnnS_, 0107a wV0710IN aPPOS701 11 0 vaca- an feat -to? SKONAVY'n, cc NOR=W104'', =3 1067-AM� now too MOT&VINCOO to all Ornallw2. &Mo; Own Q� 1011MM ps Anm CA W 5NI 0:0 1 : ml� Ow 160��O�O Unnow !ran TAtOu Mnmd m W.I-Y : Pan w116 12 U -7y :Y7 07VT Mun unive. to. Tw7z www1cmdV Onn, Am gran -on, 7P4 u—s" Ow KWN nny z 1; Any 4ZVO Tr:W�011, So S-n� �Yvv Anon z:n�7� Edina Planning Commissiou ¶r- Juni: 7, 3.9 72 of IEREAS, due to the imprcAcement o:`. 18, there will be small parcels of land on the western side. of rhas: conril-y road, and WHEREAS, land use planning for thee: parceles can best be accomplished by the City of Minnetonka during the develnprnent of their comprehensive plan, and WHEREAS, it is recognized that the delineation of areas for a land use plan should be based on physical, social, and economic boundaries rather than political boundaries, NOW, THBBEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Village of Edina that Minnetonka consider proper and appropriate uses for these small parcels of land during the development of their City of Minnetonka comprehensive land use plan." Ile noted the property in question is a small sliver of land located -along the western side of County Road 18, worth of the Crosstown Highway. He clarified the resolution merely requests Minnetonka iucorporate these properties into their comprehensive land use plan as a basis for rezoning,, although the Village of Edina would retain the right to rezone. He indicated the resolution is being proposed because Edina did not include this area in their Western Edina Land Use Plan and because the properties are located on the west side of County Road 18. Following further discussion, lir. Hughes moved the resolution be accepted as written. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. all voted aye. Motion carried. Following revision by the Planning Conmaission and staff, Mr. Luce then read the second resolution, as follows: 0° HEREAS, the Village of Edina has limited space in their Western Edina land Use Plan area for possible commercial uses and, due to substantial implemen- tation of the Western Edina Plan, including both public and private improvements, difficulty and expense Mould be incurred to include commercial uses, and WHEREAS, the City of Minnetonka is developing a comprehensive land use plan which includes land adjacent to the Western Edina Plan area and this land being substantially undeveloped is of great enough size to allow the development of neighborhood shopping and service facilities, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESCUED by the Planning Commission of the Village of Edina that the Planning Commission and all other interested parties in the City of Minnetonka be requested to consider the incorporation of a neighborhodd commercial area in the vicinity of the proposed Dominick interchange within the City of Minnetonka.`: Mr. G. Johnson abstained from the discussion and subsequent action on this item. Mr. Lace stated the land wast of County Road 18 is esSentialIy undeveloped and because Minnetonka is now in the process of adopting a comprehensive plan, the ;tillage staff felt this would be an appropriate tier _ to decide where ccninerci .al facilities, if any, in western Edina might be locate edi . Although a co erci.ail :=Facility on the Robert E. 1hrasen property (zccated nt the nomp.��.eaot corner of- County fCounty Load 18 and the Crowstoum Highway) was onco e1scusaed, this -vus e1iri1nv C'i when the Western Edina Plan wr,,-- fc'nm.al.ated and zdc-p..cdv Si=3 that in , sphere have been other modifications to the ,Man,, Vernon A-,7enu ;, �nstklad of ns;ing txae major arterial to the Cross to Ccan`y Raad 18 area, hae Lhi-fted to siting so?flv1Y cn Glevsan S&tna Road to the Gleasore-CrcsstwTi rczent77 acieunowiLdgee. b, the Council, the County has ,2,c. .1 to construct Roca and Rcj�;bax proposed f rontagge road on the i�.�zan -easan Road. These changes have in effc:L-b -, al points of access to the Hansen property. He recalled .,.,ha-, 4r. ad 6averal tima-9 dur5mg conaidpir- ation of the Western Edina Plan, th3 Go:i,�.Assion and Council went on roc,,=d as being opposed to comercial uses on this property. Mr. Luce clarified it is the staff's feeling that a larger ccvm3rcial use would be more justified on the weat side of County Romd 18 becauve olu a gmater residential brae to serve, it crdl be -cause of better egress -,md Ingreos. Ile votad Che'Western Edina ?Ina will probably have to be modified due to the changes made by the County, Mr. Adrian Herbst, an attorney with Allen, Thompson$ Nybeck and Zeck, appeared on behalf of Mr. Robert flansen "to review briefly their thoughts on t1w, proposed resolution. which Mr. Hansen believes will negate the Possibility of nig developing a ehopplg center in western Udine.".. Mr. Herbst indicated "Mr. 11arnuf_�A is concerned that the adGption of this resolution might be contrary to the Past: . .1 -'.' t intentions of the Village of Edina, contrary to- the Western Edina Plan,, and rdgii not be desirable for the citizens of the Villege of Edina". Ile requested Lctic"l on thin resolution be postpaued until Mr. Havean has had an opportunity to pranpnt his complete p1mis for a sholipirus facility to the fk=ission, as Tftr. Herbst's conversations with the City of Kinin.etonka indicate the formulation - of their coziprehansive plan will not be Included until Icte this year, and Mr. Hansen. _.ka erready, willing, and able" 'co provide a shoppling canter in western Edina. Follovlu3 considerable discussion, Mr, Rug as and Mr. Levis que-stion2c; wbether western Edina needs a chopping center and Vnetinmy the adeption of the propoved resolution would Indicate the ?launin,% Camissicn is ons record Z3 saying ' C:; zhis r - reed aKists. Mr. Hughaa moved re of this solution b-- con=-Lm��d for cut month to gktre Mr. Rammea the opportmi-ICY to nak2 his presentntion for cozening. Mr. C. Joh=on seconded the motion. A-11 votad aye,, except Mr. G. Joh en, who abstained. Notion carried. bis fid. p at Unif lo. Hr. Luce itidicated the Blo=ington City Council has approved a rapid tern it concept presentod by Unif lo Company whi&. will ancircle & POrtIOU of -4941 and tA I %e EdLue Villaga Gwvneil rowntly iudicated "he Village would assist Iftifla in applying for a fadare,"I &-monstraticu grant. Ile add -ed a lon&-terv. proposal exists whaidh:would axt~maad the Uuiflo trx-mit line into Edina to service the Ganthdnle std Yorktown areas. Htt questioned whather the. ?Iannins commission gibers would be interasted in going to Uniflo to obtain a good unders-MAing of n1hat mass transit: is. - Although sevaral merbara of the Cora Iesion have alrecAd!,r been there and ridden the existing damoastration syacam, it was agreed a trip :should , be schadulad I or these maz-ibara t1int ha. -o not, Folltiwing futrVaer It was cgreaj, a Lata of ecriaorom field tri -a, shsvld elso be nchadulad t" si4,%-! Z:ho Pla=iag 'he opportsnitry to Revidential Dioveic­ (PED) projer" -,maid*trad F, I t, -60 3. Fl(".nd for 11 - 3y the .1j 4� --r, % , - 'lls All -`,fa dr -a zoi,,jim 3, 4'n _--waa da-naf, t) them t O -L, Re Edina Planning Commission Jane 7$ 1972 ordinance would affect only, Eed.rcr-, �� .s h.:Yz ;2: tie of Minnesota has made the adoption of a flood plain ordinr.n ,� Ka rioted the duties of the Board of Appeals would become enanded r -r6 fii c Village staff would be required to become more knowledgeable in the fieL�: of hydrology, etc. In response to the Commission, kir. Luce stated that although July 1, 1972, was originally thought to be the date by which an ordinance must be adopted, there Is now some question regarding this deadline. He clarified the ordinance voul.d apply only to creeks (Ninuehaha and Nine Mile creeks in Edina). Following brief discussion, the Planning Commission generally agreed ,.consideration of the proposed flood plain zoning ordinance should be postponed for one month for further study. Mr. G. Johnson so moved. Mr. Hughes sec6nded- the motion. All voted aye. Notion carried. v. Ad j orncnment. Respectfully submitted, LynnaeW G. Nye, Secretary