Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3049EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description of Property: A. 10 feet wide preservation easement contiguous with the perimeter of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Indian Hills 4A Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with the south 70 feet of the easr 145 feet of said Lot 2, subject to driveways and walks for ingress and egress purposes. EXCEPT Along the southerly line of Lot 1 and the northerly line of Lot 2, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 4TH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota 173234 INDIAN HILLS 4TH ADDITION C• DOC. NO. WN, .m.nn a .n . aa> I I Oa-- 1ru..wJM .o Ib I wOvnp ] Io aidN, udra •grw:M Nfa:vlM, na .dp«.q NI dam..nd Id Iwl N Naa •M M 1/2.rebrwL w.eidpagwn W.l. I I N m"w.A iwww1ao30 ISCALEw IN FEET I I w I SL T I H 1i} Pur A O UI w - 1, W.W.o A b.wn, dP xPab1 cmilY qet VJ. plot wva pmm1d W m. o, un/vr my d'+ml i wpvddu.; qol 1 .m •day tlwndad Exna sewn• q. slm. ar .wqN Lo-. o W npravmhtan .f uW baulN.ry m1/m': an dl m.gvmel'.:d d.l..M NW. an . tty 4 BLOCK J W " W. pat IMI .O mrvmlmrW dap.b/ o wv pmt n•.. ban, r NJ a vwmmvy vat a. nv a.l .e .aN bm N... w, ..l Imm..a d.1. 1n YNnmN POU =w WpkOS.01. Svbd. ], m 1 q. Osla d qN .-d -1 .. upon end I.Wm •n N. put •M .0a•r. •n .b..n .nd imdadti 46,415.1 SF 06 nc LOT 1 I w .da. A It— a ad 4nd S wn nrev.la lkmm Nv. 15250 STATE W_ CHIT OF I TnN Mdwwml w• •dnv.ledped bd., my ld._day d/ _. 20_ I br va.a,Pw A. enwn. I72.70 PLAT,'Z- / \\ \ L I I qSS MW W 111 PCSO16 V MESE ORLSEIJI6; TMl O.w1.. L Jenman, owmr N.Ivry P.tl:t22.66 MEAS.\ 7 and 4Ev d 11W Nk-iM daw,LN MWW 41-ld to O,• Cewly Nx•nnPmm9vM .1 Wnieada. m w:2.• YY o'nmldo mdn4 TJ J S,.• % vyNI I Int ., ®pLY 3, IxONJ Id115. Mm•.pnGanb• EEmmoly. EV m 31,002.3 SF LOT 2 Q t..YaxE50T, Mnq qel W. p.l of waw wtls .tx Aoomw .pp•o..a br qw cry1GlyNEdav, Wn1n]vm of b.M d , i ' i - bON1M Ma• °/°•° bam+`M'°d •N pvl of worp WLLN dNrv.. • pu Ilmtangmcol _ 0_ ys lNmaGmmemIIM gkvUuna• Mgxq CipNx xaw ewn by IM ]Od wtunN \ 0.71 AC i K ~ vpJAN reu wd Wm W -O-lli 7 aa.udyldmd1cammmbdbR.YmnrYadmv..v p.Ndvd M Nnlu Sbbtm. dmv M.dq dmvl.ae vii. Gq d E6na Vn P1(1.1 •v a.m anvlM detp S.. Vmv W.05 Subd2. 1 C11 EOIPJGL 0 EO.J.v. YJd250TA JO •\ . r_ IJ M 0 C Q \ n 15Q,O 2240 y •C In w; w .Mwwl edd 0•upba L bxm•n, M. Mnvnb w[ aa'r MKa T'e daY al .20_ NwovaLbw , C^\y BYE I ^T O.apwv L iUmAYOi SIFdCFS p[pARwQJT, xUJn[gn COVnIY,r1xE50a u \ Q srATE arI. COVET 1; 1 IrnbY M:h q.t l.wa p.Y•m :n i0_ wnd PIwn M's awn ad I00 d.dalbvd an wa pl.L O.IN ft—&, bm_ I Ndnm.nt "1 aM• 911 WM m. m'a_doydimby0/mL VWoo. Yvn V. Cup.. r—ty M:d•7x. by D. -Y SLMV qMS K NENNEPVJ C"W.. WMMDM hlvmnl1• W4 —SLC .wnw - ( -)' l.b pvl Ma b.wn D•awd qi• a.y .( 20_. p—..,Tx.bry Pudk. YY cwnmNNn •.pan, NJG.m P. bean, ulw ' Sur.eYv. by A 10 Int Nd. pn "I"' Nq ap iabmv pmlmdm a/ Lau 1 M 2 — 1. XpY5 mm v1 .dl2. mb dMY— - dd .a4 Ilk, Y .rid apnm wlpaxs q• EYE o II' „N y a fYl I1 dm I- nwa•dy in. .1 Ld L 1Wm 1. NOWT 1 S 4N COVNW RECORDER. RFAOMM COIPM. MW TA 1 Mwby PWIY lIM q..:wn pld d Y -Y OEVEIDPYOIT JM AOMWNInqN .RN. aN _ dal .1 Nor1iN Y.C•miq Gnn1Y Rwmldv, by A Ov MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO TREE PRESERVATION EASEMENT The undersigned Mortgagee of the real estate described in the attached instrument pursuant to the Mortgage recorded as Document No. in the office of the of Hennepin County, hereby joins in and consents to all of the terms and provisions contained in the attached Tree Preservation Easement. The undersigned Mortgagee further agrees that its interest in the property covered by the Mortgage is subject to this Tree Preservation Easement and to all of the terms and provisions contained in it and agrees that if the Mortgagee forecloses its mortgage(s) on the property, or takes a deed in lieu of foreclosure, the Mortgagee will take title subject to the Tree Preservation Easement. Dated this day of Lm STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ) 2013. Its: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2013, by , the of , a Minnesota on its behalf. Notary Public 173234 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-114 APPROVING A FINAL PLAT AT 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is requesting a Final Plat of 6609 Blackfoot Pass to divide the existing parcel into two lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lot 4, Block 3, Indian Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels') described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Indian Hills 4th Addition. 1.04 Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements. 1.05 On October 14, 2013, the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat; Vote 3-2. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Final Plat is the same as the approved Preliminary Plat. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Final Plat for the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov 9 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-114 Page Two a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. c. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street, and shall not allow any additional drainage onto the property to the south of the subject property. e. The applicant work with the city forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 2. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3. Drainage for construction of the new homes shall be directed away from adjacent property and toward the street to greatest extent possible. Drainage plans for individual homes would subject to review and approval of the city engineer at the time of building permit approval. 4. A 10 -foot preservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines; and to assist with drainage and runoff from the site. The preservation easement shall be generally consistent with the staff rendering labeled A14 in the Planning Commission staff report. 5. Trees removed for construction on Lot 2 shall be replaced in accordance with a landscape plan to be approved by city staff. The number of trees removed and replaced shall be 1 to 1. Adopted this _ day of 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2013-114 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2013. City Clerk Minutes/Edina City Council/October 14, 2013 Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Swenson Introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013-102, authorizing the certification of delinquent utility charges to the Hennepin County Auditor, as revised to change the word penalty" to the word "fee." Member Sprague seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.C. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 1, 2013 — RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2013-83 ADOPTED — PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS; GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES, INC. ON BEHALF OF DOUGLAS JOHNSON Mr. Knutson stated this was a quasi-judicial decision to apply the facts to the law and determining whether it met the standards of the ordinance. If determined the ordinance standards were met, the courts indicate it should be approved. Mr. Knutson stated the court wanted objective standards In the ordinances and indicated if the minimum standards were met, it must be approved. The Council would be the judge whether the standards were subjective. Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the request of Great Neighborhood Homes, on behalf of Douglas Johnson, to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing house would be torn down and two new houses built on the new lots. The new house on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing house was located. To avoid large oak trees and steeper slopes, the house on Lot 2 would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent house to the south. Mr. Teague stated that within this neighborhood, median lot area was 27,131 square feet, median lot depth was 183 feet, and median lot width was 146 feet. Both of the proposed lots would meet those median requirements. He displayed a map of the subject site depicting required setbacks and buildable area. It was noted that a subdivision (preliminary plat) to create two new lots and front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2 would be required to accommodate this request. Mr. Teague advised that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Preliminary Plat, on a vote of 6-2, based on the subjective finding that the proposed subdivision would be out of character with the neighborhood and inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Mr. Teague stated the plat met all minimum standards. Slopes exceed 18%, and not more than 25% of that slope area could be disturbed. He stated the buildable areas were within that 25% threshold. He described the two building pads, noting both were located to disturb as little as possible. Additionally, the proponent was suggesting a ten -foot preservation easement along all lot lines, and staff suggested it be expanded to include some slope areas and mature trees. He noted that pulling the proposed house to the street would increase separation of the existing house to the south. Mr. Teague presented variance criteria and staff's findings. The criteria was met as the practical difficulties were a result of steep slopes and location of mature trees, circumstances not caused by the applicant. Page 7 Minutes/Edina Citv Council/October 14. 2013 Another condition was an extra right-of-way along Cheyenne Trail, resulting in an additional area of setback and separation. Mr. Teague stated staff found the 45 -foot setback variance was generally within the character of the neighborhood as it contained varying setbacks, noting the location of a 42 -foot setback and a 45 -foot setback. Mr. Teague noted the location of three lots less than 30,000 square feet, which were smaller than proposed with the two new lots. In addition, to minimize impacts of pulling the house forward, the proponent had agreed to a maximum ridgeline of 35 feet when the Code would allow 40 feet in height. Proponent Presentation Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes representing the proponent, presented a two -lot subdivision request for 6609 Blackfoot Pass, noting it could be accomplished without a variance but it was felt the variance would result in a better subdivision. He described the setting of Indian Hills as having a mix of wooded lots as well as open lots, both large and small sized houses, with none being the same. Mr. Busyn then described the subject site as being overgrown. He presented their goals for the subdivision and construction of two custom houses within a natural opening in the forest. Mr. Busyn stated they had successfully redeveloped 6808 Cheyenne Circle that had a similar wooded setting. He reviewed the steps taken to engage the neighborhood and site plan revisions based on that input. In response to inquiry by the Council, Mr. Busyn presented information related to the soil borings and indicated the borings identified buildable soils in the area of the proposed building pads if the variance was approved. Mr. Busyn stated if the Lot 2 house was built without the variance, more aggressive retaining walls would be needed. With the forward -positioned building pad, the retaining walls would be fewer and shorter. Mr. Busyn agreed this was a challenging site and stated they would work with engineers to submit a stormwater management plan as part of this process. Mayor Hovland reopened the public hearing at 9:58 p.m. Public Testimony William Wilkowske, 6621 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council and displayed a video presentation. Kristin Wilkowske, 6621 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. David Frauenshuh, 6401 Indian Hills Road, addressed the Council. Tara Dev, 6804 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Dean Swanson, 6617 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Harry Joslyn, 6718 Indian Hills Road, addressed the Council. Charles Ledder, 6709 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Susan Brunn, 6601 Blackfoot Pass, addressed the Council. Mary Swanson, 6617 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Paul Shoemaker, 6820 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Christopher Johnson, 5308 Highwood Drive West, addressed the Council. Kay Laaksonen, 6404 Indian Hills Road, addressed the Council. Page 8 Minutes/Edina City Council/October 14, 2013 Douglas Johnson, proponent at 6609 Blackfoot Pass, addressed the Council. Bert Ledder, 6709 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail, addressed the Council. Tim Keane, attorney representing residents of Indian Hills, addressed the Council At the inquiry of the Council, Ms. Kreuziger stated her preference for the building pad to be closer to the street. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Knutson explained the role of the Comprehensive Plan, as it related to this application, was a guide for drafting official controls (zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance). The requirements of the Comprehensive Plan should find their way into those two ordinances. The Council addressed the issues raised during public testimony related to disturbing slopes and standard for buildability of the lot without variances. Mr. Knutson noted construction could occur on anything dependent upon the depth of pilings, and the ordinances do not address types of soil and buildability. He stated a condition could be placed on the plat to require an analysis of stormwater and buildability of the soils. Mr. Teague stated a condition could be added prior to final plat approval to submit a plan that would improve drainage and channel it away from the property to the south, directing it towards the street through retaining walls and/or swales. He stated if approved, the conservation easement area and drainage would be worked out prior to final plat consideration. Mr. Teague indicated with regard to safety, engineering staff was comfortable with the driveway locations as proposed. The Council noted the proponent's calculations were used to establish median lot area, width, and depth. Mr. Teague stated an error in the original submittals was corrected and staff was now comfortable with the median calculations as presented. He explained the difference between a median calculation and an average calculation, noting the two proposed lots were larger than the neighborhood median. The Council addressed the public's suggestion that "neighborhood" be more narrowly defined; however, there were five lots within 500 feet of the subject site that were smaller in size than the two lots as proposed. With regard to the number of trees that might be removed, it was mentioned that if a variance was not approved, the area of Oak Savannah would fall within the building pad and be impacted. Mr. Teague explained that if the subdivision was approved, a condition could be placed to walk the site with the land owner and establish (trees worth inclusion) within a preservation easement. The Council noted that if the two -lot subdivision was approved based on subjective criteria, without the Lot 2 variance, the building pad would be 60 feet from Ms. Kreuziger's house as opposed to 120 feet with the variance. With the variance, the setback would be 45 feet from the property line and 65 feet back from Cheyenne Trail. The two houses across the street were 42 feet and 45 feet back from Cheyenne Trail. With regard to water pooling on Lot 2, Mr. Teague stated that would be addressed under new regulations. An engineer was required to design a storm water plan for review by the City Engineer at the time of building permit. Page 9 Minutes/Edina City Council/October 14, 2013 The Council reviewed the areas included within the conservation easement to preserve the slopes, Oak Savannah, and 100 -year old oak, and agreed it should extend along the property line of Lots 1 and 2, as well as surrounding the proposed house location. Mr. Teague stated the Intent of the ten -foot easement would be to preserve existing vegetation. The Council reviewed the wording of conditions within the resolution. Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013-82, approving a Preliminary Plat at 6609 Blackfoot Pass, based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. And subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the Final Plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following Items must be submitted: a. if required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the District's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering Department. c. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the City Engineer. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage, or driveway would have to be directed to the street and shall not allow any additional drainage onto the property to the south of the subject property. d. The applicant work with the City Forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 3. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the Final Plat. 4. Drainage for construction of the new homes shall be directed away from adjacent property toward the street to greatest extent possible. Drainage plans for individual homes would be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer at the time of building permit approval. 5. A 10 -foot preservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines; and a preservation easement shall be established in accordance with the staff rendering shown at A14, and to assist with drainage and runoff from the site. 6. Trees removed for construction of a home on Lot 2 shall be replaced In accordance with a landscaping plan to be approved by City staff. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Members Sprague and Swenson and Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council needed to work within the ordinance and while the 500 -foot rule might create certain unintended consequences at the edge of neighborhoods that was the ordinance at this time. In addition, the Council needed to consider objective standards rather than subjective standards. Member Brindle stated the basis of her decision would be what was best for the property as well as residents within the neighborhood. Member Bennett stated she would like the issues addressed as soon as possible including the 500 -foot criteria that had been written in the 1970s -1980s. Member Bennett stated she could not support the subdivision as she found the lot contained characteristics described in the ordinance related to susceptibility of erosion, flooding, use as ponding area, and potential disturbance of slopes. In addition, she found other considerations including concern as to buildability of Lot 2, based on soils, without a variance. Ayes: Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Bennett, Brindle Motion carried. Page 10 Minutes/Edina City Council/October 14, 2013 Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013-83, approving a Front Yard Setback Variance at 6609 Blackfoot Pass based on the following findings: 1. The proposed building pad has been located on the site to cause the least amount of Impact on the site's mature trees and slopes. 2. The proposed building pad for Lot 2 would be located farther away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail, than would a Code compliant home. 3. Conservation easements would be located over the steep slopes and mature oak trees. 4. An additional 10 -foot wide conservation easement was proposed along the north, west, and south lot lines to preserve the wooded feel of the lot. S. The applicant is also agreeable to not construct a home to maximize the height allowed by Code. He would limit the total building height to 35 feet, when the Code would allow a home to be 40 feet tall to the ridge line of the home. 6. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance because: a. The practical difficulty unique to the property Is caused by the large mature oak trees and slopes on the east half of Lot 2 where a Code compliant building pad would be located. These are natural conditions not caused by property owner. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. There are two homes with similar front yard setbacks at 6621 and 6624 Cheyenne Trail. c. There is 18-20 feet of green space In the right-of-way of Cheyenne Trail, which would result in a 65 -foot setback from the edge of the paved roadway. And subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to meet the District's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering Department. c. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the City Engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed by the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. e. The applicant work with the City Forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 2. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 3. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines. 4. A slope and tree conservation easement must be placed over the large oak trees and slope areas to be preserved by moving the home toward the street. Member Sprague seconded the motion. The Council acknowledged that the subdivision had been approved and the variance would preserve the legacy of the lot and create separation between the proposed house and Ms. Kruziger's house. Rolicall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI. D. PUBLIC HEARING —RESOLUTION NO. 2013-103 ADOPTED —PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCES, 5820 BROOKVIEW AVENUE, AKARE COMPANIES LLC ON BEHALF OF JOHN PETERSON Community Development Director Presentation Mr. Teague presented the request of AKARE Companies, LLC on behalf of John Peterson to subdivide property at 5820 Brookview Avenue into two lots. The existing house would be torn down and two new houses built on the new lots. A subdivision, lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet for each lot would be required to Page 11 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Date: October 14, 2013 r7A, Ow e ` 0 NcoR oB g0 • Agenda Item #: VI.C. Action 0 Discussion Information Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013-82 & 2013-83, Preliminary Plat & Front Yard Setback Variance, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4—A16 of the Planning Commission staff report.) The new home on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. The home on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent home to the south, to avoid large Oak trees and some of the steeper slopes on the site. (See page A14.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2. Both lots would gain access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planning_ Commission Recommendation: The planning commission recommend denial of the preliminary plat and variance based on the findings that the proposed subdivision would be out of character with the neighborhood, and that it would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6-2. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50`h St. • Edina, MN 55424 The Planning Commission's recommendation is based on the following considerations from the Subdivision Ordinance. Please note that these considerations are subjective. The proposed subdivision meets the City's minimum size regulations. Subd. 1 Considerations. The Commission in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the Council, and the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider, among other matters, the following: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood; and 2. The compatibility of the size, shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on.and from the site. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development, with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. D. The compliance of the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development with the policies, objectives, goals and requirements of Section 850 of this Code including, without limitation, the lot size provisions and the Floodplain Overlay District provisions of Section 850 of this Code. E. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development on the health, safety and general welfare of the public. F. The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground. G. The relationship of lots in the proposed plat or subdivision to existing streets and the adequacy and safety of ingress to and egress from such lots from and to existing streets. H. The adequacy of streets in the proposed plat or subdivision, and the conformity with existing and planned streets and highways in surrounding areas. Streets in the proposed plat or subdivision shall be deemed inadequate if designed or located so as to prevent or deny public street access to adjoining properties, it being the policy of the City to avoid landlocked tracts, parcels or lots. I. The suitability of street grades in relation to the grades of lots and existing or future extension of the City's water, storm and sanitary sewer systems. J. The adequacy and availability of access by police, fire, ambulance and other life safety vehicles to all proposed improvements to be developed on the proposed plat or subdivision. K. Whether the physical characteristics of the property, including, without limitation, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a natural recovery and ponding area for storm water, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. L. Whether development within the proposed plat or subdivision will cause the disturbance of more than 25 percent of the total area in such plat or subdivision containing slopes exceeding 18 percent. M. Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2013-82 and No. 2013-83 Draft minutes from the September 11, 2013 Edina Planning Commission meeting Planning Commission Staff Report, September 11, 2013 Letter from Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lot 4, Block 3, Indian Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels') described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Great Neighborhood Homes 1.04 Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements. 1.05 The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. 1.06 On July 24, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Preliminary Plat finding that the resulting lots would out of character with the neighborhood; and that they would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6-2. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat for the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. c. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. e. The applicant work with the city forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 3. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 4. Drainage for construction of the new homes shall be directed away from adjacent property toward the street to greatest extent possible. Drainage plans for individual homes would subject to review and approval of the city engineer at the time of building permit approval. 5. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines; and to assist with drainage and runoff from the site. Adopted this _ day of 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2013. City Clerk w o Le v y ies8 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item M VI.A. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action 0 Discussion Date: October I, 2013 Information Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013-82, Preliminary Plat, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4—A16 of the planning commission staff report.) The request heard before the Planning Commission included a front yard setback Variance request for Lot 2. However, the applicant is only requesting action on the Preliminary Plat by the City Council at this time; as proper notice was not given for the Variance hearing. If the Council approves the Preliminary Plat, the applicant would then go back to the Planning Commission at a later date for a variance on a specific house plan. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planning Commission Recommendation: The planning commission recommend denial of the preliminary plat based on the findings that the proposed subdivision would be out of character with the neighborhood, and that it would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6-2. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 The Planning Commission's recommendation is based on the following considerations from the Subdivision Ordinance. Please note that these considerations are subjective. The proposed subdivision meets the City's minimum size regulations. Subd. 1 Considerations. The Commission in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the Council, and the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider, among other matters, the following: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood; and 2. The compatibility of the size, shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development, with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. D. The compliance of the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development with the policies, objectives, goals and requirements of Section 850 of this Code including, without limitation, the lot size provisions and the Floodplain Overlay District provisions of Section 850 of this Code. E. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development on the health, safety and general welfare of the public. F. The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground. G. The relationship of lots in the proposed plat or subdivision to existing streets and the adequacy and safety of ingress to and egress from such lots from and to existing streets. H. The adequacy of streets in the proposed plat or subdivision, and the conformity with existing and planned streets and highways in surrounding areas. Streets in the proposed plat or subdivision shall be deemed inadequate if designed or located so as to prevent or deny public street access to adjoining properties, it being the policy of the City to avoid landlocked tracts, parcels or lots. I. The suitability of street grades in relation to the grades of lots and existing or future extension of the City's water, storm and sanitary sewer systems. J. The adequacy and availability of access by police, fire, ambulance and other life safety vehicles to all proposed improvements to be developed on the proposed plat or subdivision. K. Whether the physical characteristics of the property, including, without limitation, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a natural recovery and ponding area for storm water, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. L. Whether development within the proposed plat or subdivision will cause the disturbance of more than 25 percent of the total area in such plat or subdivision containing slopes exceeding 18 percent. M. Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2013-82 Draft minutes from the September 11, 2013 Edina Planning Commission meeting Planning Commission Staff Report, September 11, 2013 Letter from Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP Interact die Maps t 41 Parcel 06-116-21-42-0010ID: Owner D L Johnson EtalName: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property ResidentialType: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft Property Map i - 4['•fS`' Jnr I. k;kl Map Scale: 1" = 100 ft. N Print Date: 9/5/2013 _t This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT© HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Think Green! Interactive Property Maps Map 6308 6600 6605 6609 6602 6404 6400 6604 6601 6613 6617 6 6616 612 6600 ` 6621 405. 6401 24 24 Parcel 06-116-21-42-0010 Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. N D: LJ T A r L" 1 S Print Date: 9/5/2013 Owner AT 6617 7 i 1A 7 6608 Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property 5, 6605 Home- Homestead stead: 6620 GLE.ASON TER Parcel 6621 3 6624 6628 66321A 6609 6620 ao a(• ' q 6212 ; 6208 6204 i 3 6216 6200 , 6624 pis rk 6705 6215 6209 6205 . 6700 6201 y , 5 as Ak+ 6704 709 6708 6713 Parcel 06-116-21-42-0010 Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. N D: LJT A r L" 1 S Print Date: 9/5/2013 Owner AT This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT© HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Think Green! D L Johnson Etal Name: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property ResidentialType: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT© HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Think Green! RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lot 4, Block 3, Indian Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels') described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Great Neighborhood Homes 1.04 Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements. 1.05 The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. 1.06 On July 24, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Preliminary Plat finding that the resulting lots would out of character with the neighborhood; and that they would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6-2. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat for the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. c. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. e. The applicant work with the city forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 3. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 4. Drainage for construction of the new homes shall be directed away from adjacent property toward the street to greatest extent possible. Drainage plans for individual homes would subject to review and approval of the city engineer at the time of building permit approval. 5. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines; and to assist. with drainage and runoff from the site. Adopted this _ day of 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA SS CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2013. City Clerk back tOck cock I II I nd 7 Ce .evv.a L ,e9e.e ,ml "I 247.10 PLAT I 246.93 MEAS. a 9OPOSED 10' Cg95 RVa CT 7 pOs a900_} tpM e90.H eee.t Tx 92.}, z1 of aooL 7 2 / /iBf2 p9ps9D IIe1 oo 27.7 s NOa 89).15 .93)1 ,9x8.] ]IS 9 i icer a 4i p' tinea 91' \ ] U ./ '.:fir \\ xaal' 9]0. \ 811's4 a ).]• ( PROPOSED HOUESE ,9ze.s FIRST FLAOR.(82E.0) a z. s9ze vox.o. 9oe. rY + ] e • 9 e]o.1 9ox\•917. , 9ze.x x ms a 2. 1 zea J6;K n60. 927., 1s.4\° .z9i N87• 10'E e. EE s° @ +. • '\ ° OVA Qp, y T 9x23 8 1 N 10'M 92x.2 ELY 'I ifl •, I Q,• 9E o e• a t Asn E .. ax Elo" '; § Iry _ I. IIIW4Gi kl". Ta• le• I , x6• wJ e9e .IIIjp7• , zz • i 9°°.e9e.s ASN uu sa lo" LORD os ElM ELY EW \ ;I,•. OIH I ' lll'':• p S _ J _ _ _-,&—' lY1 a9T . .;I I.I;:• . 910.6 °]' xr< 0` 901.a / I I ^—`\r o _ 10 ' OSEO 10 ONSEMI.IpN AHFA e9 .1 27 .01 MEAS. r ,aF A t 869.8 e90e 27 .40 PLAT — v ry L S 7.4845"W e9 695,9 ,a92.B 695.6 95.6E sw Concrete Curb Timber Retaining Woll Keystone Retaining Ylall Proposed Retaining Wall EzisUng Elevation Top of WA Elevation 1 ExtsUng Contour proposed Contour Front Yard Setback Sid. Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback 1 t Atonument Found 1/Yx 14' Plastic Cap ILS. 152-30. r[ S I F e = 420 SF eaeri7453SF 927.6919.9918.4 918.0 N30'14'3B E 22.70 PLATK 22.66 MEAS. e uer L IL or 1.07 Acro 1538 rL or 0.71 Anne s 150.1 FL HUEMLLUM t t 4. Block 3. INDIAN HILLS. iepin C.-ty, Minnoa.ta. lest Side of Cheyenne Tr. 8etwe.n 08. Elevation - DIM. 00 1\ T1 AT 10 V I uc Tr E 06KS A VICIN a NOT TO S b f O / oa rrev YQs V N30'14'3B E 22.70 PLATK 22.66 MEAS. e uer L IL or 1.07 Acro 1538 rL or 0.71 Anne s 150.1 FL HUEMLLUM t t 4. Block 3. INDIAN HILLS. iepin C.-ty, Minnoa.ta. lest Side of Cheyenne Tr. 8etwe.n 08. Elevation - DIM. 001\ T1 AT 10 V I uc Tr E 06KS A VICIN a NOT TO S SBE ADDRESS: 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS I . PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: FDINA, IAN 55139 126-13 REF: 31-13 128/63 GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES Legend O VcA2. e Lgnl b. I gPnv Po4 I F b r.. w Pltiamy •W /a. I WpLa N LUmeY S[•YW S.Wch RR Per Yah S.Wa.# f M.`_.1P..MaON5Rl1'1l21a e j ) i°cwci nnan - si¢¢o 4 7T43 Q / 22.W U. o . rr.[r..a lel 1 - a4aTJs > I.N hu•. I A i6'1J1V I _ D vN (•4 s.w.a) - tsaa n 'Y L TI < aa05r4/LPWr ilS-12C `-•• / \ ay C] anal UhD91E 1P12 - io'f `y _ %TTTTTt6a2[ QaIOPI[ TIGt - Ia.03 j -- PP9PlAIt' a6n¢Inak Mv~ CCa.' 9.9441 u.l.. `\ rr• a, v..ml.. 9EISHWAIC [Nn e n. _4wmeTwlelnY0 .ae- e94.os °. \ \ '' ad V. ¢2Cw11 4 9YPAYJ, 91C V v v _ wn. .0dil.tv P ,.••I•el) y 4 I. 1 e ] [ye. l.aby M [ne. a r v . s°p: T J 1 .S r..t - [91D , . M.e..Y+V9 t • a Wm s • °iryv..Vte z rte. ' uen 411W4aB5a •.1 k (` P- 1) von[ a H -r. iv O110 w, pcC,mslrt .0 raivsf a 1d 4ew w :• ul.ra 4.,w au[ •mf n IwI,.. c ri i2:nl... A(( NOT TO SCALE VIIINrfY MAP10 o BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. aOM Ck.. mYw s... slue am e 91.n NI may x-wsr. sa ssr[sae VR i+l: 99 -0{ -gala 126-13 5.Jl: 1 9.n - :on,l 1 Of 1 oll Elwallolr IDolour I Contour d Setback ISetback I Setback 1 Fauna 4" f 0 CoIrp Co a SF k" r) 4 / i j J l '- WE 3uT— as. N E / f. M 41 ti w. -soli A KILLS. ` naoto. \ Icnne Tr. petrveen D91.01). \ V yarn plan. ote \ be no61i°d tbvollon. T L.1 n r 1 v I j 1 d wao n.. 1 t n ro.m Isle. r W.>MI.W.A2kiiZ `_AW40 1 y,e w CJ I L — ke Ata P, I "Na" , I) t Yfall Ebvelion Wo 22. 22.6 un• 1.07 , 153.9 r 0.71 150.1 9bakp1nCour 221 side i 15. Flee: F... M.M. \ \ — lice shown ora Froin plony \ —— companles and rt panics Should Le notilled n ve datnq ony excaralian. opportunity for the property o to increase the squ ge of their home without that approval. Motion Commissioner Fischer move nce approval b on staff findings, subject to the staff conditions and noting wi the aid of a variance th 's no opportunity for the property owner to increase of their home. Commissioner seconded the motion. All voted aye; mot' rried. B. Preliminary Plat. Scott Busyn. 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. The new home on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. The home on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent home to the south, to avoid large Oak trees and some of the steeper slopes on the site. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass with a Front Yard Setback variance for Lot 2 from 100 feet to 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. Page 4 of 15 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the large mature Oak trees and slopes on the east half of Lot 2 where a code compliant building pad would be located. These are natural conditions, not caused by property owner. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. There are two homes with similar front yard setbacks at 6621 and 6624 Cheyenne Trail. C. There is 18-20 feet of green space in the right-of-way of Cheyenne Trail, which would result in a 65 -foot setback from the edge of the paved roadway. d. The variance results in the saving of mature Oak trees, protection of slopes, and moves the home further away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. 3. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 4. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines. 5. A slope and tree conservation easement must be placed over the large Oak trees and slope areas to be preserved by moving the home toward the street. Page 5of15 Appearing for the Applicant Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes Discussion Chair Grabiel asked if the proposed subdivision conforms to the subdivision ordinance. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the slopes on the property and asked if City ordinance addresses slopes. Planner Teague responded City ordinance addresses slopes in excess of 18%. Teague noted this site contains steep slopes; however, it meets the ordinance pertaining to slopes. Commissioner Fischer stated he was struck by the diagram indicating the 500 -foot neighborhood, adding in his opinion the "500 -foot neighborhood" appears to contain two completely different neighborhoods. Fischer stated he struggles with the difference between these two different neighborhoods adding to him this subdivision feels wrong. Applicant Presentation Scott Busyn addressed the Commission acknowledging that Indian Hills is a very unique neighborhood. Busyn added he believes what he has presented works best with the sloped topography of the lot. Busyn explained that he sent a letter to all the homeowners within the 500 -foot neighborhood informing them of the proposed subdivision and also held a neighborhood meeting at the site on August 8th. Busyn said the neighborhood meeting was attended by a number of the adjacent neighbors. Busyn reported as a result of that meeting he is proposing a 10 -foot conservation easement to ensure that the wooded look of the property remains. Concluding, Busyn said he was open to questions or any ideas the Commission may have on this proposal. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Mr. Busyn how he plans on implementing the conservation easement. Busyn responded he would work with the City Forrester on identifying the trees that need to be saved within the 10 -foot conservation easement. Planner Teague added that the conservation easement could be handled similar to the easement that was placed on the Acres DuBois plat. If approved the easement would be recorded with the plat. Commissioner Forrest noted that this issue was previously tabled and questioned the reason. Mr. Busyn responded that he tabled the subdivision to work out and add the conservation easement to the proposal. Page 6 of 15 Commissioner Platteter referred to the grove of oak trees on Lot 2 and asked if the conservation easement would be expanded to capture those oaks. Mr. Busyn responded that Planner Teague suggested that the conservation easement includes those trees; however, much depends on final house placement; with or without variance. Neighbors also indicated they would like to retain the stone retaining wall on the south end of Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Commissioner Scherer noted the Commission is in receipt of letters from neighbors opposing the project and asked Mr. Busyn if during the neighborhood meeting neighbors indicated which building pad location they preferred on Lot 2. Mr. Busyn responded that neighbors indicated they want the site to retain its forested look and maintain privacy. Busyn stated he is open to each option and would do whatever the Commission suggests with regard to Lot 2. A discussion ensued on the sites steep slopes, grading, retaining walls and drainage with Commissioners acknowledging this site is unique because of the slopes and the natural wooded nature of the area. Commissioners stressed if approved careful attention needs to be paid to drainage to ensure site disruption doesn't negatively impact the site or the surrounding neighbors. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Hearin The following residents addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition to the request by Great Neighborhood Homes to subdivide 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two (2) single dwelling unit lots. T. Dev, 6804 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Charles and Liberta Ledder, 6709 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Tim Keane, attorney representing residents of Indian Hills David Evinger, 4 Merilane, Edina, MN James Schwender, 6700 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN William Lund, 6308 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN David Frauenshuh, 6401 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN Mary Swenson, 6617 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Page 7 of 15 Residents that testified expressed the following: Residents indicated they purchased their homes in the Indian Hills neighborhood for the natural wooded nature of the area, its larger lots, winding roads and privacy. Residents of the area expressed the opinion that the "500 -foot neighborhood" established by ordinance captures two completely different neighborhoods; and does not adhere to the original Indian Hills plat. The smaller residential suburban lots (east of the subject site) were included in the calculations skewing the outcome and negatively impacting the character of the area. The Planning Commission has the discretion to deny the preliminary plat based on character. The loss of existing vegetation and the disruption of the steep slopes would change the character of the lot and neighborhood even with the variance option on Lot 2. Residents acknowledged the two building pad options for Lot 2; one conforming and one requiring a variance, reiterating disruption would occur regardless. To provide new building pads there is the potential for construction of high retaining walls and also the potential for drainage problems as a result of building pad placement and grading of the site. Vehicle and pedestrian safety is important pointing out the streets in the area are winding and the street also curves along the subject site. Driveway placement is a concern; again because of the safety issue. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Potts moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to close the public hearing approved. Mr. Busyn addressed the Commission and explained in providing two building pad locations for Lot 2 they felt it would make things better and create a better plat. Busyn said their goal is to pull the building pads away from the lot lines to ensure privacy and accommodate the proposed conservation strip. Continuing, Busyn reported that extensive soil testing was done to ensure that any redevelopment would improve the site not negatively impact it. Concluding, Busyn stated all testing supported the position that the site can accommodate two building pads. Commissioner Scherer asked Planner Teague to clarify the action for this proposal. Planner Teague responded the Commission can recommend denial or approval, adding if the Commission recommends approval they need to stipulate what option they want for Lot 2; variance or no variance. Commissioner Potts stated in his opinion due to multiple factors the subject site should remain one lot. Potts agreed with the observation that the Indian Hills neighborhood is different from the neighborhood to its east. Potts noted to redevelop this site too much disruption would occur. Vegetation would be loss and the site would require extensive grading and retaining Page 8of15 walls. Potts concluded as previously mentioned if approved the change to neighborhood character would be dramatic. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the project as submitted meets subdivision ordinance requirements. Grabiel said he also understands the property owners desire to maximize the real estate value of his property. With respect to trees it is difficult because at this time the City of Edina doesn't have a tree ordinance. Continuing, Grabiel acknowledged that the character of the 500 -foot neighborhood is varied. Concluding, Grabiel said from the plans presented it appears Mr. Busyn attempted to mitigate the issues of drainage, tree loss etc. Grabiel said he also appreciates Mr. Busyn limiting building height to 35 -feet. Commissioner Scherer stated this is a tough issue for the Commission; however, she continues to have concerns about drainage, tree loss, driveway safety, etc. Scherer said taking all things into consideration that she cannot support the request as submitted. Commissioner Schroeder asked Planner Teague if the City defines neighborhood character. Planner Teague responded City ordinance doesn't define neighborhood character. Continuing, Schroeder said specific factors are unique to Indian Hills and if the Commission recommends approval of this request the essential character of Indian Hills would change. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged she has been going back and forth with this proposal. She stated she agrees the City doesn't define neighborhood character; however, would the "sense" of place be compromised if approved. Forrest added she agrees that Mr. Busyn has given a lot of thought to this project; adding she could support the proposal with specific conditions. Concluding, Forrest said to would like to see more creativity in building plans. Commissioner Fischer said when he views this project it appears to him that it's one lot for one structure. Fischer did acknowledge that neighborhood character can be changed one parcel at a time; however, the builder has an excellent reputation and he would hate to take a risk with another builder. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Motion failed for lack of second. Commissioner Schroeder moved to recommend denial of the preliminary plat based on the findings that if approved the subdivision would render the lot out of character with the neighborhood. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest. Nay, Grabiel, Staunton. Motion to deny carried 6-2. Page 9 of 15 September 26, 2013 To The Edina City Council: My Name is Douglas L. Johnson. My wife Peggy and I have owned the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass since 1967. We were particularly attracted to it because we both spent a good portion of our youth in forested environments, I in northern Minnesota and she in the heart of the Ozarks. I am extremely hard of hearing to the point of being functionally deaf. I will not have understood anything that has been said here tonight either by the public or the council. I know this because I attended the Planning Commission hearing on this topic in this very room. I could understand nothing that was said, even though I was provided with some hearing devices. However, my son accompanied me and gave me his understanding of some things that were said. I would like to address two disturbing accusations, which were probably repeated here tonight: 1. I am environmentally insensitive. 2. I am sacrificing the environment to greed. Some trees were removed by the previous owner of the property in anticipation of construction but none were removed by me. Elms and oaks have succumbed to disease. They have been promptly removed and properly disposed of at considerable expense. A number of elms have been treated for elm disease at considerable expense, but even so, two of those died and had to be removed. In 193, I planted 24 walnut seedlings. Some of these directly replaced removed trees. Nine of these have survived as well as a green ash planted some time later. Squirrels have planted several more volunteer walnuts over the years. But today there are no squirrels. I visited the house on Saturday, September 21 to continue removing household items and found the parking pad littered with whole green walnuts. I was astounded. The squirrels do not let this happen. The walnuts are long removed before they drop. There is also always a red squirrel that takes over the tree next to the parking pad. He was not there. The scene was unchanged again the next day. This has happened only once before, about 8 - 10 years ago. At that time I found two dying squirrels by the driveway. Disease maybe? Then a couple of days later I found a dead hawk while mowing the lawn. Then it dawned on me, the squirrels were poisoned and the hawk had eaten one or more of them. Hawks do not catch live, healthy squirrels. So today some neighbor is again poisoning the squirrels. If that neighbor is here tonight impugning my environmental conscience,I would quote Mr. Shakespeare when he wrote "me thinks he doth protest too loud". I retired from 3M in 1987 with a fixed pension of $36,000 plus Social Security. That is now about $52,000 a year total, but the purchasing power of the dollar is about half of what it was 26 years ago. Starting in 1990 I noticed some changes in my wife's health. She became sensitive to moderate heat, became unsteady on her feet, experience0forgetfulness and other things. In 1995 after several doctors and numerous tests she was diagnosed with primary progressive MS. This is The less common type. It gradually gets worse and never remits. She preceded to develop muscle spasms, seizures, balance problems, both urinary and fecal incontinence and worst of all a near total loss of memory. I finally had to hire daytime in-home nursing help to bathe and tend to her. Finally in late June 2004, the nurse said she thought Peggy was having trouble breathing. Her nursing supervisor said we should get her to the emergency room. She had a pulmonary embolism, blood clots in the lungs. They also discovered that she had had a silent heart attack. Her heart was impaired. By then she couldn't walk, couldn't even crawl. I had to admit her to the Edina Care Center. Peggy spent eight years and eight months at the Edina Care Center. I visited her twice a day seven days a week for all that time. I have not been out of the Twin Cities for 15 years. She died February 28, 2013. The nursing home had cost $600,000 during that time. Add to that at least one hospital stay every year, medical bills, drug bills, physical therapy bills, almost 3 years of in-home nursing and it comes to at least $700,000 over 23 years. That shot a huge hole in my life savings. I am now 84 years old, 85 yet this year. I did all the car, house and yard care work myself except the last year or two when neighbor Kathryn Dusenbury's son, graciously cleared snow and mowed the grass. My children and grandchildren helped too. I may well be faced with nursing home expenses myself before long. So it came time finally to sell the property and recover as much income producing cash as I could. The realtor suggested that it would bring some $200,000 more if sub -divided. I thought long an# hard about that but decided that the builder, Mr. Busyn,was an# ecofriendly person and that the sub -division as proposed especially with the varionce would eliminate few trees. The Edina Planning Dept,report agrees with that. The variance would eliminate few trees. The trees to be removed are elms, which will die sooner or later and cottonwoods which I had considered taking out almost every spring when they make a great mess for 4 6 weeks. Others in the neighborhood have done the same. One neighbor even took down a 150 year old oak tree because it was shading her garden. I removed two tree sized limbs from a 3 foot Asw diameter oak because they were shading a neighborb grass. She has no trees. I do not know if non-technical factors are a consideration in these matters. If items such as public sensibilities, neighborhood character and environment are to be considered then human welfare is certainly equally as important. I am trying to salvage a few years of decent rest and retirement after 70 years of being in the harness of responsibility. I would not call that greed or insensitivity. I think of myself as a survivor. I leave it up to the council to decide. Thank you, Douglas L. Johnson PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda #. Cary Teague September 11, 2013 VI.B Director of Planning INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. (See property location on pages Al—A3.) The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4— A16.) The new home on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. The home on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent home to the south, to avoid large Oak trees and some of the steeper slopes on the site. (See page A14.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2. Both lots would gain access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. (See attached median calculations on page A16.) The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. (See page A.) Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the subject properties are zoned and guided low- density residential.