HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968 09-04 Planning Commission Meeting PacketsA G E N D A
Edina Planning Commission Wednesday, September 4, 1968
Edina Village Hall 7:30 P.M.
I. Approval of August 7, 1968 Commission Minutes.
II. REZONING REQUESTS
Z-68-19 Shell �
Z-68-20 Rudy Trones Constr. Co. R-1 Single Family -District -to
R-2 Multiple Residence District. Valle► View Heights.
III. SUBDIVISIONS
SF -68-6 Hondo II Addition.
SP -68-12 Gleason IV Addition.
SP -68-10 C1agramar IV Addition.
IV. LOT DIVISIONS
1. Mendelssohn Addition - T. K. Davidson.
2. R.L.S. 01050 - G. Rauenhorst.
3. Normandale 11 Addition - B. K. Weekl2j.
4. Countryside Addition - J. L. Boxer
5. Outlot 1. Sioux Trail - A. W. Garrison.
V. OTHER BUSINESS
1. Mud Lake Area.
2. Policies Pian.
3. S.W. Edina Plan.
EDINA PLANNING COMISSION
STAFF REPORT
September 4, 1968
Z-68-19 Shell Oil Co. Petition for a change in zoning from R-2 to C-4
on the west 24.52 feet of Lot 1 and the east 20
feet of Lot 2, Block 1, Steven's 1st Addition.
Refer to: Enclosed Map.
Shell Oil is requesting rezoning for a parcel of land
44.62 feet wide and 125 feet deep which lies immediately west of
and is contiguous to the existing Halifax and West 50th Street
station site. This parcel is currently zoned R-2 and is occupied
by a two family dwelling. Said dwelling is to be removed should the
C-4 zoning be granted.
Presently, the Shell Oil site has an area of 11,375
square feet, 8,625 less than that required by ordinance. They
intend to expand the site to 16,952 square feet and build a complete
new service station facility. Shell's proposal very closely
parallels that of Pure Oil where complete redevelopment is nearly
underway. Like the Pure Oil case, Shell will require several
variances, without which redevelopment would be impossible.
Land use in the area consists of an apartment building
to the west (R-3), single family homes to the south (R-1), Pure
Oil (C-4) and National 'lea (C-2) to the east across Halifax and a
bank (C-2) to the north across West 50th. The present Shell site
measures 91 feet by 125 feet and is zoned C-4 commercial.
Recommendation
The staff is of the opinion that this case should be
treated in a manner similar to that of Pure Oil. We should grant
both the rezoning and the variances in an effort to encourage
Improvements of the type proposed. The staff therefore recommends
approval of the requested rezoning, subject to the granting of
requisite variances, for the following reasons:
1. The proposed redevelopment that will emanate
from rezoning complies with our principle
objective to intensify, upgrade and diversify business
activity in the 50th and France area.
2. The proposed rezoning is a logical extension of
existing C--4 zoning on the present Shell Oil site.
3. The requested rezoning is consistent with our
current land use plan for the whole 50th and
France area.
f lh
EDINA PWINING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
September 4, 1968
Z-68-20 Mr. Rudy Trones Jr. Construction Co. Petition for a zoning change
from R-1 to R--2 on Loon Lots 8 and 9, Block 2, Valley
View Heights.
Refer to: Attached snap, Staff Report, 7-684-3, and Planning
Commission Minutes dated February 7, 1968.
Mr. Troves is, in essence, asking that the Planning
Ccmiission take another Look at the property on the north side of
Valley View Road between Hillside Roar? and Westridge Blvd. He is
asking for R-2 zoning on two of the three remaining vacant lots on
the north side of Valley View road, one of which has already this
year been deliberated upon the by Commission. Mr. Trones intends
to build a doable bungalow on Lot 8 and another on Lot 9. Lot 8
has an area of some 19,000 square feet a3ud a width of 135 feet. Lot
9 has an area in excess of 20,000 square feet and a width of 120
feet. The ordinance requires a minimum of 15,000 square feet for
an R-2 lot.
If you will recall, earlier this year, firs. E. L.
Johnson made a request for R-2 zoning on Lot 9, the westerly of
the two lots in question. The Planning Commission at that time
felt such rezoning would be somewhat premature and tabled the issue
until other activity is generated in the area. The question mark
at that time was the vacant parcel south of Valley View Road which
is owned by the State and was supposedly sold for development
purposes earlier this year. Latest information indicates that this
parcel is still awned by the State who inherited it through tax
forfeiture.
Recommendation:
staff is still of the opinion that R-2 development
in this area is somewhat more approprsite than It -1 in light of
highway exposure and the rather excessive size of the lots in
question. The staff therefore recommends that the whole area (Lots
8, 9 and 10, Block 2 and than property south of Valley View) be
recommended for °R-2 zoning for the following reasons:
1. R-2 zoning appears to provide the most
appropriate solution for the lots in question
in light: of excessive freeway exposure. The income
potential of double bungalows may offset the dis-
advantage of such axposure.
Staff Report
Rudy Trones
Page 2
September 4, 1968
2. To rezone this lot R--2 residential and to
anticipate similar rezonings of adjacent
highway influenced lands, conforms to our policy of
zoning lands in critical areas along major streets
and highways for R--2 asses.
3. Such rezoning will not adversely influence
adjacent: R-1 properties. Doubles arep in
fact, not much different than single family homes.
In this case, they will serve somewhat as a buffer
between R-1 properties and the Crosstown Highway.
f lh
�UVTRY-
PARC
MF�
4R:7111 E
3 T
17
:..N,OkMAN:- '
PARKDAL.
LAJ
0
LA.
BROOK
V1 F w
V