Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968 12-04 Planning Commission Meeting PacketsAGEN DA Edina Planning Ctx=ission Wednesday, December 4, 1968 Edina Village Hall 7:00 P.M. 1. Approv&I of November 6, 1968 Commission Minutes. 11. ZONING 2LQUMSTS Z-68-22 P.C.R. Co. R-1 Residential District to R-4 or R-5 Multiple Residential District. Sime Pro-, I)erLy. Z-68-23 D. E. 'faomas,_Sir._ R. -I Resident -:al District to C-4 Commercial- -Fistrict. 51st and France. I.H. LC41T DIVISIONS 1. Lot 4., Prospect Hills. A. Fredr-lksen. 2. Lots 28, 291 INTarden S t�-- Acres. E. jazZ:- e� 3. Lot 1, Lot .2 .-BI-ock 1,_ 2,dinv. htterch.anRe Cnnte7. 4. Part of Govarnaeut Lot T. 116, F�- 21- _f _ S UB D TH S1 ON S SP -64-13 Hendelssohn Additioi,-. -]Rfallquist flat. SP -68-19 0'11eill R.L.S. Xerxes Avenue and Crosstowa. sp-68-210 Valley Estates Ist A-Adition.- SF-68-13 Wm. Scott -'s Addition, Peterson Replat. 17. OTHER BUSINESS I Southwestern Edina. 2. Planried Residential District Orein.ance. 3. Amendment - Roof line distance from poverty line. I!i. Jcnuary Meeting Date - Januar, 8, 1969. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING C014MISSION HELD WEDNESDAY, DECOOER 4, 1968 EDINA VILLAGE HALT, Members Present: W. W. Lewis, Chairman; Sam Hughes, Cliff Johnson, A. H. Hiatt, George Nugent and Charles Clay. Staff Present: Fred Hoisington, Village Planner and Karen Sorensen. 1. A2proval of November 6, 3.968 Commission Hinutes. Mr. Hiatt moved that approved as submitted. Aye. Motion Carried. IT. ZONING REOUES'F.S Z•-68-22 the November 6, 1968 Commission Minutes be Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. All Voted Mr. Frank Cardarelle stated that he and his associates wanted to start planning an apartment complex on the Sime Property which is north of Vernon Avenue and east of Walnut Drive. He introduced Mr. Toys Stahl of Stahl -Wolf -Peterson :'architects. Hr. Stahl presented a preliminary site analysis of the property. He noted that the northerly portion of the property (north of Vire Mile Creek) would be used for R-1 Single Family development and that the middle portion of the property 4s lowland and would be used as a posed and wildlife area. The southerly portion of the property would be cased as the apartment site. He presented several site plans to the Cr .mission to show different variations of multiple uses ranging from R-3 to R -S. kip; noted the maximum nuber of units allowed in each district as well as other requirements. He stressed that his clients were not asking for rezoning at this time, but merely wanted to present the project to the Commission for their thoughts and ideas on the matter. It w -as felt that they should start now so that by the time the moritorium etas lifted, a good development could be planned. After some discussion and questions, Mr. Hughes moved that the. Commission accent the ronosal for study. fir. NuR,2nt seconded the motion. All Voted Ave. Notion Carried., 7.-68-23 D. E. `3liomas t Jr. R-1 _Residential District to C-4 Commercial District:. 51st and France. - Mr. Thomas is requesting rezoning on I'xaqce Avenue :imcrediately :south of the proposed south -sena di.agona? to permit the establishment of an automobile service station. The site is 27,906 square feet in area which is in excess of the. 20,000 square foot ordinance requirement. Edina Planning Commission Minutes -2- December 4, 1968 Land use in the area consists of an office building, a gasoline station and single family dwellings. The plans for this area have been fairly well solidified. The southwest diagonal is proposed to extend from France Avenue to West 50th Street and will be situated between the site in question and the Hauschild Building. The develop- ment concept in the area is one which encourages a separation of commercial from single family residential properties via the diagonal street and transitional residceutial uses. The staff is of the opinion that a proper rei:ationship between residential and commercial uses cannot be fulfilled by the establishment of a gasoline station at the proposed location. It would seem imperative that we continue to carry out the concept of transitional zoning than the extension of commercial zoning along France Avenue. Mr. Dick Ellis, representing Murphy Oil Ccmpany, stated that there would be a 30 foot land dedication on the north side of the property for street purposes. He stated that the property lends itself to commercial development and that the oil company will screen the property in any manner suggested by the Cotamissiou or Council. Mr. Hiatt asked if the ordinance would permit C -k zoning in this particular area. fir. Hoisington stated that the ordinance prohibits the zoning of property to Commercial District unless it is either: (1) more than two acres in area, or (2) contiguous on a side lot line or street frontage to an established Commercial District when such contiguous line or frontage constitutes not less than 25Z of the total length of the perimeter of such property or (3) contiguous on not less than 75% of the total length of the perimeter of such property to an existing Commercial District, Office Building District, Industrial District or Planned Industrial District, or ,any combination thereof. The proposed plan does not conform to any of the requirements. Mr. Nugent stated that a lot of time and effort has been put into the 50th and France area. This proposal is in complete contradiction to ghat we want to accomplish in this area of the Village. He noted that he was opposed to any commercial development outside of the Halifax conpection. He then moved to den the renuest for the following reasons: 1. The zoning ordinance prohibits comercial zoning under existing circumstances. 2. The request is not in accord with the (r7erall plan for the 50th and France area. There would appear to be uses which would be more in keeping with the overall land use concept in the area and which would have less adverse impact on adjacent single family residences and traffic movements In the area. 3. Thebe appears to be no reason why the p ::operty cannot be uced for a use which ie compatible with the plan for the 50th and France area. Edina Piazaing Camaissiou. rfli-nutes -3- December 4, 1968 4. A service station deficiency does not appear to exist in tha area. S. The site Ii-tsel-2: has no physical limitations which prohibit all uses except that of a service station. Mr. Hughes seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried. LOT DIVISIONS 1 .oE: & PKoq ect ilills. A Fradriksen . 1- This division request was tabled at the Wo--.rember meeting pending a field irspecticra. Mr. F.oisington- reported that there were deed restrictione Sn Lots 1. 2 and 3, prohibiting their division, how- ever, such aotric-tions slid not apply to Lot 4 accnrdirna-- to our att-c-macys. MI -1. Hoising-l-va stated thzt the staff feels that a division of the property at this tirze would be inappropriate si'ace the area is characterized by very large lots -which caTraot be divided. 'Mr. Fredrik-san stated that he would like to divide the property north nnd south to crease a -nenw 'lot 120 li-zeet in width, to the cast of the enisting house. The existing house is on the vcsterly portion of the prone----ty and it is his intenz to sell it and build hizszse.Lf ,;j -,IeN-i ho-je on the eaGterly portion of the prop- ty. He stated that he had spoken with one of the neighb-o-rs villo d:,.d nat object as there wculd still be a considerable dis'Z--aace between the proposed house and that of the neighbor. Aftev swe discussion, Mr. Lewis stated that he would have no objection. to a division of this kind and if Mr. Fredriksen could present a petition to the Commmi3vion. signed by all the neighbors on Lots 1, 2 and 3; that that' did n ot object to his division, the Conmission would act favorably upon the division. Mr. Ru,,?iaes moved that the division be ta',-)Ied pending jlrf�c to 1:.j neig bors.— M -r. .10,11r.f3on'occnad'-aet -.Ie mo;;;.on- AIII Voted Poy-a. Hat -ion Carried. 2. Lot's 28 29 Warden Acres. U. he w. j,jr.Hajs;.agton reported that vevewal months ago the Ce-mmiedion and Cozzacil hed grantad R�2 gc-�iir on this p7operty torsed on the div.1'sion land. The astner of Lot 30 sold Lot 28 and the East 129 feq=!. of zot 29, uarec-n Acrc-La to Mr. Sharpe. The staff rac=mands approval of the d4-Vir'.7'.01n. tLme Cogmissign cis mend �ar�ovral. f t I i's G r 1 t I e- rc; ze e a)et f -3 i V.-; o j D u- al I I-- _SG d�- L -41 L -1 rt!; i 0 n - �'l oted --Kation Can's::. Edina Planning Commission Minutes -4- December 4, 1968 3. Loth.. Lot 2, Block 1, Edina Interchange Center._ The new post office facility is being constructed on Lot 1, Block 1, Edina Interchange Center and the westerly 39 feet of Lot 2. The requested division then is for Lot 2. The staff recommends approval of the division. Mr. Eggent _moved that the Commission recon the requested division. Mr. Hughes seconded the motion. dive. Motion Carried. 4. Part of Government Lot 1, Sec. 9 T. 1161 R. 21. This property is located south of 70th Street, west of the Creek. It is encompassed in the Edina Interchange Center III Addition, but the County has asked for approval of the division since the sub- division has not yet been submitted to the County for recording. The staff recommends approval of the division. T Notion Carried. Irl. SUBDIVISIONS att seconded tete motion. All _vocea ave. SP -64-13 Mendelssohn Addition, Hallquist Replat. Mr. Hoisington reported that this three lot plat is located north of Belmore Lane and just east of Grove Place. The lots Are serviced by serer and water. Mr. Hallqui.st received preliminary approval from the Commission and Council in 1964 and had now decided to proceed with the platting,. The staff recommends approval of the preliminary pant. Air. Ain , nt moved that the Cownission recommend preliminary an prow Z of the pro, Rsed olLts_ Mr. Joiir�son sic©nded the motion. All Voted Agee,_ otiora Carried. - - SP -68-19 ©`Neill R. L. S. Xerxes Avenue and Crosstozvr_ Hi& way. Mr. O'Neill is dividing the property into two parcels. The westerly 203 feet has been acquired by Mr. Field for tete construction of an apartment home for the elderly. The easterly 383.67 feet will be retained by Fir. O'Neill for development purposes. The staff recommends approval of the registered land survey. Mr. Hiatt moved that the Covvi sign recoLnend gpproval of the s Lstered land survey. Mr, %jugent seconded the notie z. All Voted Awe. Motion Carried. Edina Planning Commission Minutes -5- December 4, 1568 SP -68-20 Valley Estates 1stAddition. This eight lot plat is located on the West side of Gleason Road, north of St. Alban's Church. The staff approves of the preliminary plat with the exception of the proposed cul-de-sac. It is felt that the roadway should be moved northward approximately 20 feet and recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to Engineering Department approval of final grades and relocation of the road. After some discussion Mr. Nugent moved that the Commission recommend approval of the preliminau Plat saubiect to Engineering Depart- ment review anal relocation of the road. Air. Hughes seconded the _motion. All Voted AYE. Motion Carried. SF -68-13 Wm Scott's Addition, Peterson Replat. This four lot plat of part of Lot 15, William Scott's Addition, located east of Kipling Avenue and south of West 41st Street, received preliminary approval from the Commission and Council this Fall. It meets all ordinance requirements and the staff recommends approval of the final plat. Mr. Hughes moved that the Commission recommend approval of__ the final plat Mr. Johnson seconded the notion. All Voted Ave.__ Motion Carried. V. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Southwestern_ Edina Prelimin8U Plat. Mr. Hoisington reported that Mr. Cardarelle, the staff and the property owners had arrived at a tentative road pattern for this plat. The development of the area cannot begin until approval is given to the location of the proposed road. The affected properties are shown as outlots and the staff recommends approval of the plat as shorn. Mr. Orin Johnston and his attorney, John Forrest, appeared and stated that they were not pleased with the way the road went through Mr. Johnston's property and asked that the road be moved easterly. Air. Johnston stated that he has done quite a bit of improving to the property and has every intention of staying there. IIe also noted that he might be interested in leaving the property for park purposes. He stated that he wished the Commission would consider the moving of the road before taking action on the plat. Air. William Dale, allother property owner, stated that he has no objections to the road as shown on the plat. He also stated that he has no specific plans for the property at the present time. Edina Planning Commission Y!inutes -6- December 4, 1968 Mr. Orville Madsen wanted to knows if he would have to stand the entire expense of the road that traversed his property. He also stated that he Was happy with everything and had some development Ideas but was not as yet ready to request any rezoning. After considerable discussion with the property owners and some of the neighboring property owners, Mr. Nu&;nt stated that he was in_ggreement with the overall concept of the plat and moved that the Plat be forwarded to the Park Board before action is taken by the Commission. Mr. Hiatt seconded the motion. All_ Voted Ale. Motion Carried. 2. Planned Residential District Ordinance. Mr. Hoisington presented a report on the proposed Planned Residential District Ordinance. He stated that this concept is rapidly, emerging as a means for encouraging creativity, imagination, variation and flexibility in the development of residential area. Its basic characteristic is the clustering of housing in an effort to preserve and protect natural amenities, to provide large expanses of usable open apace, to reduce development costs and yet to maintain single family densities with the overall Planned Residential District. Its purpose is to create a new high quality, low density residential environment having a mixture of housing types in a more functional and natural setting. He advised the Commission to read over the ordinance and make comments at the January meeting. He noted that the report is in the hands of the attorney's for their review. No action taken. 3. Zoni�_Ordinance Amendment Roof line distance from nroyeziD! line. Mr. Hoisington reported that there is no required roof line setback from the property line in the R-1 District. The requirement was once deleted from the zoning ordinance and should be reinstated. It is recomended that the roof lime be no closer than three feet to the side property line. Mr. _Nugent moved that the Commission recommend approval of the proposed amendment. Mr. Hujghes seconded the motion;. All Voted Ave. Motion Carried. PZ. she Commission set Wednesday, January 8, 1969 as their next regular meeting date. Ldjourtnmsnt at 9t05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Karen Sorensen, Secretary