Loading...
08-09-10 PC MinutesRegular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, August 9, 2010. Vice Chair Waldhauser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Chair Keysser was absent 1. Approval of Minutes July 26, 2010 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Eck referred to the fifth paragraph on page 3 and noted that the word "prejudice" should be "prejudiced". McCarty referred to the eighth paragraph on page 2 and noted the word "and" should be added after the word "neighborhood" in the last sentence. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the July 26, 2010 minutes with the above noted corrections. 2. Informal Public Hearing -Conditional Use Permit - 2530 Winnetka Ave N - CU-129 Applicant: Semper Development, Ltd. Address: 2530 Winnetka Ave. N. Purpose: To allow the proposed Walgreens store to have adrive-through pharmacy window in the Commercial Zoning District. Hogeboom stated that Semper Development, representing Walgreens, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the proposed new Walgreens (to be located at 2530 Winnetka Avenue North) to have adrive-through pharmacy window. He noted that all drive- through window proposals in Golden Valley require a Conditional Use Permit. Hogeboom stated that the applicant has also been to the Board of Zoning Appeals twice. The original request was for a variance from front yard setback requirements to allow the proposed building to be located closer to Winnetka Avenue than allowed. He stated that the Board wasn't comfortable allowing the building to be located closer to the street so they tabled the applicant's request and asked the applicant to come back with a plan that would meet the front yard setback requirements. Per the Board's recommendation, the applicant came back to the Board of Zoning appeals with a new plan that met the front yard setback requirements but required a variance from the required number of parking stalls. A variance for the reduction in the required number of parking stalls was granted. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 Page 2 Hogeboom stated that Hennepin County has reviewed this proposal and they don't feel that this proposed Walgreens store will impact traffic enough to warrant any improvements, however the County will be taking some additional right-of-way from the Walgreens site in order to elongate Winnetka Avenue's left turn lane onto westbound Medicine Lake Road. He added that Walgreens' original plans showed a driveway along the south side of their property and the neighboring property that would access Rhode Island Avenue. He explained that it was ultimately decided that regular traffic patterns on the site and emergency vehicle access would work without that driveway access so it has been removed from the plans. This driveway access would have crossed the south 20 feet of the VFW property. Eck referred to the City Engineer's staff report and asked if it can be assumed that the references to the access road to Rhode Island Avenue are no longer valid. Hogeboom reiterated that that the access driveway to Rhode Island Avenue has been removed from the proposal so any references in the City Engineer's report regarding the access to Rhode Island Avenue can be ignored. Cera referred to the site plan and noted that the northern most driveway shows a right turn only arrow painted on the ground and it also shows the installation of a sign that says no right turn. He questioned if the sign should really say no left turn. Hogeboom agreed that the sign should say no left turn. Cera questioned if there is any contamination on the site given that there are automotive uses currently located on the property. Hogeboom suggested that the applicant respond to the environmental issues. Waldhauser noted that she hasn't seen any comments regarding lighting on the site. Hogeboom stated that this proposal will be subject to the City's lighting regulations. John Kohler, Semper Development, referred to the site plan and noted that the drive- through window will be located on the east side of the building. Kluchka asked if there will be adequate signage from the street showing where the drive- through is located. Kohler explained the traffic patterns on the site and said Walgreens would be willing to put a directional sign on Winnetka Avenue near the southern most driveway. Cera asked Kohler about the environmental issues on this site. Kohler said he is not aware of any contamination issues and added that an environmental study will be done as a part of the purchase of this property. Waldhauser asked if the existence of adrive-through reduces the parking needs. Kohler said yes and stated that approximately 10% of their business goes through the drive- through. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 Page 3 Kluchka asked who will own the property. Kohler said Semper Development will own the property and Walgreens will have along-term lease and Walgreens will do all of the maintenance and management of the property. Kluchka referred to an ex-Walgreens store in Rogers which is now a liquor store and asked the applicant about their building re-use policies. Kohler explained that the building in Rogers was never a Walgreens store and that the City of Rogers copied the look of a Walgreens design. He said the re-use of buildings depends on what type of use is going in to the building. Kluchka asked about Semper's approach to increasing pedestrian visibility as well as bicycle visibility and access. Kohler noted that the building is as close to the street as possible in order to provide better pedestrian access and added that it is Walgreens policy to provide bike racks as shown on the site plan. Schmidgall asked what the store will look like. Kohler referred to a preliminary sketch of the proposed building and said the building would be brick on all sides. Schmidgall noted that Walgreens stores seem taller than they need to be. Kohler stated that a lot of the height is used to screen and block the noise from the rooftop equipment. Schmidgall asked about the Walgreens store in the Spring Gate shopping center. Kohler said there are currently no plans to do anything at that location. He added that Walgreens stores typically serve an area of approximately one mile. Eck asked if the businesses presently located at this site are going to re-locate. Kohler said he doesn't know the details about the businesses relocating. Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Bill Norberg, VFW Commander, 2525 Nevada Avenue North, stated that in the original proposal there was a driveway out to Rhode Island Avenue located on the VFW property. He said it was VFW's intent to fight that driveway because there is a garage located in the proposed driveway easement area. He said without that driveway as part of the proposal, the VFW has no objections to this project. Carl Hoffstedt, 2450 Valders Avenue North, said he thinks a new building will be an improvement and he doesn't have any issues with the proposed drive-through, but he is concerned about lighting being aimed at the residential area. He questioned why Walgreens selected this location when the existing businesses seem viable and added that the small restaurant to the south seems to be a more logical location. He said he assumes that there has been coordination between City staff and Hennepin County regarding traffic issues. Victoria Hopponen, 2400 Valders Avenue North, said she can see the lights from the car wash and she is concerned about having more lights shining on the residential area. She also questioned why Walgreens selected this location and why they are taking away businesses that have been there for years when they could go across the street to the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 Page 4 Midland Shopping Center instead. She asked if Walgreens knows they are building on a swamp and asked if they are going to use pilings during the construction which will create a lot of noise. Grimes explained that the City's lighting ordinance is a lot stricter than it used to be so he doesn't feel the lighting will be an issue. In fact, he thinks there will be a substantial improvement. Schmidgall said his understanding of the lighting ordinance is that there can be no glare from lights at the property line. Grimes agreed and added that the City has little control over the street lighting in the area because it is a county road. Waldhauser said she would like the developer to be aware of the neighbor's concerns about lighting. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Waldhauser closed the public hearing. Kluchka asked Kohler to address Walgreens property selection process. Kohler said Walgreens looked at several properties in the area and added that Walgreens stores are tending to move out of shopping centers so that is why the Midland Shopping Center won't work. Waldhauser said Walgreens decision to buy this property and the owner's decision to sell the property were their business decisions and not really the Planning Commission's business. Waldhauser said the staff summary and the factors used in considering a Conditional Use Permit request make sense. There isn't a similar business nearby, there is very little impact and visually it will be an improvement. She said she hopes the landscape plan includes trees and not just shrubs. Kluchka recommended that there be adequate signage installed regarding the location of the drive-through and that the walkway leading to the public sidewalk be extended and widened to create a plaza feel. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit request to allow the proposed Walgreens store to have adrive-through pharmacy window in the Commercial Zoning District subject to the following conditions: 1. The site plan shall become a part of this approval. 2. The conditions found in City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo dated June 21, 2010 shall become a part of this approval. 3. The conditions found in Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson's memo dated June 7, 2010 shall become a part of this approval. 4. All signage shall meet the requirements of Section 4.20 of City Code. 5. All future improvements to the building shall meet the City's Building Code requirements. 6. All other applicable local, state and federal requirements shall be met at all times. 7. Failure to comply with any of the terms of this permit shall be grounds for revocation. 8. Adequate signage regarding the location of the drive-through shall be installed near the southern most driveway. 9. The walkway between the public sidewalk along Winnetka Avenue and the store shall be extended and widened to provide for better pedestrian access. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 Page 5 3. Informal Public Hearing -Minor Subdivision (Lot Consolidation) - 2530 Winnetka Ave N - SU14-12 Applicant: Semper Development, Ltd. Address: 2530 Winnetka Ave. N. Purpose: The Lot Consolidation would allow the three existing lots to be consolidated into one lot. Hogeboom explained that upon review of Semper Development's Conditional Use Permit request it was discovered that the existing building is located on three lots of record so in order to construct a new building the applicant needs to consolidate the three lots into one. He discussed City Engineer, Jeff Oliver's staff report regarding this proposal and added that Hennepin County has also reviewed it and it is viewed by staff to be a housekeeping item. Grimes asked the applicant if the easement along the south side of the property that was originally proposed to be a driveway will still exist. John Kohler, Applicant, explained that the easement in question is really a lot itself and it will stay as it is. Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Carl Hoffstedt, 2450 Valders Avenue North, said it sounds like Walgreens has yet to purchase the property. Hogeboom said it is his understanding that there is a purchase agreement in place. Hoffstedt asked if the applicant will have to come back to the Planning Commission for plan review once the property is purchased. Waldhauser said no and explained that the next step in the process is the City Council review. Hoffstedt said there is little opportunity for residents to get involved in the plan review process. Grimes said residents are welcome to look at the plans. Bill Norberg, VFW Commander, 2525 Nevada Avenue North, said the VFW strongly opposes the easement along the south property line to be used for driveway access to Rhode Island Avenue. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Waldhauser closed the public hearing. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision (Lot Consolidation) at 2530 Winnetka Avenue North subject to the following conditions: 1. The conditions found in City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo dated June 21, 2010 shall become a part of this approval. 2. The conditions found in Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson's memo dated June 7, 2010 shall become a part of this approval Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2010 Page 6 3. The conditions found in Director of Transportation and County Engineer James Grube's letter dated June 15, 2010 shall become a part of this approval. 4. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. --Short Recess-- 4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Cera reported on the July 27, 2010 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting where Walgreens was granted a variance to allow fewer than the required number of parking spaces. He stated that it was the Board's desire not to grant them a variance from the front yard setback requirements but rather from the parking requirements. 5. Other Business Hogeboom stated that there has been a ruling from the Minnesota Supreme Court that appears to make granting variances more difficult. He said he has asked the City Attorney to write an opinion on the ruling and will update the Commissioners and the Board of Zoning Appeals in the future. Kluchka asked about the proposed Menard's project. Hogeboom said staff is still waiting to receive more information from Menards before their project can proceed. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:17 pm. Lester Eck, ecretary