CC_Minutes_2010_0726 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 26, 2010 Page 18 As a large lot owner who was relatively new to the neighborhood, Ms. Scha- degg advised that she chose to live in this neighborhood and paid more for that privilege in a larger, higher-priced home with higher property taxes. Ms. Schadegg noted the lack of sidewalks and potential changes if the current lots were split; providing an example of one home on a larger lot for over a year without selling. Ms. Schadegg opined that large lots were important and asked the City Council's consideration of that. Mayor Klausing sought Councilmember Ihlan's intent for a proposal for con- sideration or how she wished to proceed. Councilmember Ihlan advised that is was her intent to come forward on the next agenda with an item proposing amendments to the zoning code to leave minimum lot sizes at 11,000 square feet, having heard no compelling reason to reduce them to 9,500 square feet. Councilmember Ihlan suggested that fu- ture discussion be held to look at the examples from other communities in making some adjustments, offering her support of the contextual approach by the City of Edina that could be done city-wide without determining large lot neighborhoods, or other options carried out by other communities in actually carving out geographic neighborhoods; but proposing that any zoning amendments exclude a reduction in minimum lot sizes. Councilmember Johnson asked City Planner Paschke if the Edina model would cover non-conforming lots for Roseville. Mr. Paschke advised that staff would need to decipher how such a model would impact Roseville, since it is mostly developed with few parcels deve- lopable for any subdivision itself. Mr. Paschke advised that, when studies were performed on lot sizes and any differences between current and proposed zoning codes, there were only a potential 70 lots in the overall City that would be created by reducing the minimum lot size to 9,500 square feet. Councilmember Pust questioned if they were all within one neighborhood. Mr. Paschke responded that they were scattered throughout the City, and that it was complicated to subdivide properties, with an expansive street frontage needed, taking a very large piece of land to add an extra lot without combina- tion of several lots and possible purchase of a number of existing homes. Councilmember Roe suggested that, from a planning and land use point of view, an argument could be made against having a specific part of Mansion Hills and Gluek Lane neighborhoods defined as Large Lot Districts and others defined as Standard. Councilmember Roe questioned if it was reasonable or feasible to create a zoning district with opt-in features for petition to the City for large lot districts among current property owners and their development of