Loading...
09-25-00 PC Agenda AGENDA . GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday, September 25,2000 7:00 P.M. I. Approval of Minutes - September 11, 2000 II. Informal Public Hearing - Property Subdivision (SU14-10) Applicant: Honeywell, Inc. Address: Southwest corner of Douglas Drive and Sandburg Road - portion of Honeywell, Inc. located at 1885 - 1985 Douglas Drive, Golden Valley, MN Purpose: The applicant is requesting a subdivision of the main parcel of land in order to create two new lots along Sandburg Road at the corner of Sandburg Road and Douglas Drive . -- Short Recess -- III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment AuthoritY, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings IV. Other Business V. Adjournment . . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2000 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 September 11,2000. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Those present were: Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, Hoffinan, McAleese, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes and City Planner Dan Olson. I. Approval of Minutes - August 28, 2000 Hoffinan, McAleese and Shaffer had changes regarding typogra Hoffinan reworded page 6, Para 4 from "Hoffinan noted to t 2000 SunPost that the addition will be built, when this pro process." To "Hoffinan noted to the Commission that the SunPost mentioned that the Meadowbrook Scho proposal is still going through its public hearing pro moved from after the motion to before the mo . ical errors and sentence structure. mmission the article in the August 23, going through its public hearing in the August 23, 2000 issue of n will built for $4 million when this ffinan also stated the paragraph should be Applicant: Moved by Rasmussen, seconded by Sh 2000 minutes as amended. ied unanimously to approve the August 28, II. Informal Public Hea . Address: venue North, Golden Valley MN Purpose: To allow Brink's Inc. to operate an armored car business (truck/van terminal) By Conditional Use in the Light industrial Zoning District. Dan Olson, City Planner, presented the Brink's Inc. request for a Conditional Use Permit of the building for an armored car facility. Their business entails a truck and van terminal as well as currency counting, coin wrapping and office use. The only change that would be made to the existing building is to put an addition of an overhead access door to the north side of the building. This addition would eliminate two existing parking spaces. Brinks will be converting about half of the existing garage space to warehouse type uses, such as vaults and a currency counting room. Olson stated there would be 81 parking spaces for Brink's and the existing tenants. This amount of parking spaces is adequate. Olson stated there is no setback/code issues or environmental issues. Olson recommended that the permit be approved with 6 conditions. Eck questioned the security in the neighborhood and building because of the nature of the Brink's business in handling money. Olson stated that Brink's would put in security measures in the building in the form of vaulted walls. Grimes stated he spoke with the city's Public Safety director, Bob Shellum, regarding the ~ Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2000 Page 2 . safety issues and Bob Shellum did not feel there were any issues because of the internal security measures Brink's will have. Stewart Ebner, Branch Manager for Brink's Inc. stated that Brink's has been in business for 30 years. At their current location they have never had any issues regarding security. Pentel asked what their current location was? Ebner stated it is located in NE Mpls. Pentel asked why do they want to move? Ebner explained the current building is too small and they cannot expand it. Pentel questioned if Brink's felt this site was big enough for their expansion and if trucks will be stored inside the building? Ebner stated he felt it would be large enough and they would park trucks inside at the end of the day and throughout the night. Pentel questioned ifthe truck make stops at the Federal Reserve before coming in at the end of their routes. Ebner stated yes they do. Pentel asked what the turret is? plained that it is a secured room with closed circuit TV's that monitor the building inside and ou. hey will also have TV's in the room that will monitor all ofthe secure doorways. Pentel asked if the turret is a room inside or outside the building? Pentel question if the turret will be at the main access door where the trucks come to the building. Ebner stated it would be on that end of the building so that they can monitor the doors and the doors will only be opened when there is someone at the doors. o 29 within the next 2 -3 years. Pentel 'th other tenants? Ebner did not feel the dual security alarms and motion Ebner stated they would like to increase their truck fleet from 2 questioned if they had any concerns about sharing the buildi there was any concern because of the internal security in t detectors . Rasmussen questioned the number of employees? E for each vehicle each route for security reason Rasmussen asked ifthey understood the conditI be exiting the property on the North si any objection to the additional condo . Boone A venue during peak traffic congestion ofthe arterial str cameras? Ebner stated they ained they have about 40 truck drivers, 2 e working in the office or currency area. nto Boone A venue. Ebner stated they would ) and not onto Boone. Rasmussen asked if they had ity reserves the right to limit access to or from en it appears that such access may be contributing to they did not. Rasmussen asked if they had exterior interior ones. Rasmussen asked if there was adequate lighting in the parking area? Ebner replied that he had only been there during the daytime hours and didn't know. He continued to state that their trucks come in at night around 5 to 6 P.M. and that after they close out for the evening it would be approximately 9 P.M. when their business would cease for the day. Eck questioned if they operate on the weekends? Ebner stated they do. They work a much-reduced crew to service their commercial customers. Pentel opened the informal public hearing. No one came forward. Public hearing closed. . Grimes questioned the recommended hours of operation as stated above. Pentel suggested we extend those hours to 10 P.M., and then questioned whether the condition was warranted because of the nature of the business. Pentel requested one of the conditions be replaced with the Airborne Express condition. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2000 Page 3 . Schaffer moved to accept the plan with the change in conditions as discussed, removing the hours condition and replacing it with the traffic on Boone A venue condition. Groger questioned if there were any lighting issues. Hoffman seconded the motion. McAleese questioned the need for future outside storage or parking. Pentel stated they should add a 6th condition - no outside storage of Brink's vehicles. . Ebner spoke to the issue of trucks being outside. He stated that trucks wouldn't be stored outside but that trucks could be parked outside when they are loading trucks in the mornings and some of them could be parked outside during the summer time. Pentel questioned if they had any security concerns if the trucks are parked outside over night? Ebner did not feel there was. Mc eese stated he was not in favor of the idea of trucks being parked outside as it is against the City's ances. McAleese was okay with a truck parked in the bay but not over night. Ebner stated only a fi would ever be parked over night outside and that most of the trucks are prepped for the day in evening and they would have to be parked inside. The question was asked as to the loc e wher the trucks would be parked if outside? Ebner stated the trucks would be parked as he building as possible, some in the loading dock area and another one around the backsid g. Grimes stated that the ordinance states that outside storage must have screening. Pente ey consider possible screening ofthe trucks from the street. Schafer felt that puttin Id only raise security issues. Groger stated he felt screening would not look very. He u on for concern but felt what was being proposed was not a problem. Richard Huffman, represen campus looked good now an over night parking now than Br questioned whether deliveries are each day. rs of the property, addressed parking outside. He felt the would take away from that. He said the current tenant has more that screening was not a good fit for the landscaping. Pentel de to the site. Ebner stated maybe 1 or 2 trucks deliver supplies McAleese still favored a condition on the over night parking issue. He recommended that any overnight storage of vehicles must be pre approved by the director of planning. That way if there were any problems the city would have a way of working with them to resolve it. Pentel stated it would be added as an additional condition. No further questions were asked. MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Hoffman and motion carried unanimously to recommend Brink's Inc. be granted the Conditional Use Permit with 6 conditions: . 1. All plans for outside storage shall be approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 2. Any signage for the building must meet the signage requirements of the City's Inspection Department. 3. The site plan submitted by the applicant shall be made a part of this approved permit. 4. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2000 Page 4 5. Failure to comply with one or more ofthe above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. 6. The City reserves the right to limit access to or from Boone A venue during peak traffic periods if and when it appears that such access may be contributing to congestion of the arterial street. III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and Other Meetings. Eck reported on the traffic study on Laurel/Winnetka Ave done by the Laurel/Winnetka committee. IV. Other Business v. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 P.M. . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Plat of Honeywell Golden Valley ~d Addition -Honeywell, Inc., Applicant Date: September 19, 2000 Honeywell has an application for preliminary plat of the 88 acres they own at the southwest comer of Douglas Dr. and Sandburg Rd. in Golden Valley. This plat will include the main Honeywell plant campus that is located at 1885 Douglas Dr. The primary purpose of this subdivision is to create one lot for the Honeywell plant and two additional lots along Sandburg Rd. These two new lots will each be about 6 acres in size. . In 1999, the City Council approved Honeywell Golden Valley Addition. This subdivision was done to create an 11-acre lot where the Little League field is located. This lot was sold to the City of Golden Valley for park purposes in 1999. The remaining 86-acre lot is the Honeywell plant lot. At that time, a smaIl1.2-acre parcel at the southwest comer of Douglas Dr. and Sandburg Lane that was owned by Honeywell was not included in the Honeywell Golden Valley Addition due to some title issues. The proposed Honeywell Golden Valley Z'd Addition will include the small comer parcel since those title issues have now been resolved. This small comer parcel will become a part of one of the 6-acre lots along Sandburg Lane. Honeywell has entered into an agreement with Industrial Equities, a real estate development company, to purchase the two-6 acre lots. Industrial Equities plans to construct two, single-story office/high-tech buildings similar to others they have constructed in the metro area. The mix is planned to be about 75% office space and 25% warehouse space. The Honeywell property is designated on the comprehensive plan map for Industrial uses. The zoning map indicates that the zoning is Industrial. The use proposed by Industrial Equities is considered a permitted use in the Industrial zoning district as long as all zoning code requirements are met. Therefore, no conditional use permit or planned unit development permit will be required for this development to go forward after the final plat is approved creating the new lots. In this case, the Zoning Code requires that the setback of buildings along the Douglas Dr. side be at least 75 ft. because the property on the east side of Douglas is zoned Residential. The proposed site plan indicates that the 75 ft. setback will be met on the Douglas Dr. side. All other setbacks requirements have been met. . Access to the existing Honeywell plant will remain as it is today. The two lots that will be created off of Sandburg Rd. will have access only from Sandberg Rd. The County will not permit driveway access from Douglas Dr. The City Engineer has some concern about the location of driveways from Sandburg Rd. The Public Works Department must approve these final driveway locations. The plan . . . indicates that the middle driveway that will be located on the northeast lot will also serve as access points to the Honeywell parking lot and to both the lots from Sandburg Rd. The City Engineer has attached a memo regarding issues related to this preliminary plat. These issues must be addressed prior to approval by the City Council. These issues include water quality, access, and utilities. Platting Requirements Because the small lot at the northeast corner of the Honeywell property is not currently platted property, this three-lot subdivision must go through the full subdivision process. In other words, it cannot be considered a minor subdivision. The first step is then the preliminary plat. According to the Subdivision Code, certain information must be provided on a variety of conditions, subdivision design features and miscellaneous other characteristics. The information is summarized below: 1. All information required to identify and describe the property to be subdivided is on the information submitted to the City. 2. The information required to describe existing conditions is also complete or found to be acceptable by the City Engineer and the Planning Director. In this case, the staff did not believe it was necessary to submit full topographic information over the entire 88 acres. Topographic information is provided over the northeast areas of the site where new development will occur. 3. The information regarding Subdivision Design Features is also deemed to be complete. In this case, no new streets are proposed. Proposed sewer, water and other utility lines are indicated on the submitted plans. The City Engineer does have comments regarding these plans. The plans do show a grading and drainage plans that will be reviewed in the City Engineers memo. Recommended Action The Planning Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat of Honeywell Golden Valley 2nd Addition. The proposed subdivision creates lots that comply with the requirements of the Zoning Code and are consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. There are several concerns that the City Engineer addresses in his memo. These issues should be addressed prior to the approval of this plat by the City Council. The following conditions to approval are recommended: 1. The memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver shall become a part of this approval. 2. If requested by Hennepin County, Honeywell shall dedicated additional right-of-way for Douglas Dr. 3. All drainage and utility easements required by the City Engineer shall be shown on the final plat. 4. The subdivision is subject to park dedication requirements as outlined in the Subdivision Code. The amount of the park dedication shall be determined prior to the final plat being approved by the City Council. 5. The memo from Assistant Fire Marshal Ed Anderson shall become a part of this approval. Attachments: Preliminary plat and other plans submitted by Honeywell Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated 9/20/00 Memo from Assistant Fire Marshal Ed Anderson dated 8/22/00 · Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Mark Grimes Director of Planning Ed Anderson Deputy Fire Marshal 08/22/00 Proposed new buildings located at The Golden Valley Industrial Site A plan review was conducted for the proposed new buildings at the Golden Valley Industrial site, located at Intersection of Douglas Drive and Sandberg Road. Listed below are my plan review comments. 1) Fire hydrants would be required on site of both buildings. Spacing and the necessary requirements for the installation will be in accordance with the requirements from the City Of Golden Valley City Engineer office. Fire Department access roads will be required. Access roads will be maintained to support the weight of the fire apparatus and be accessible for all weather driving. Turning radius for fire apparatus shall be available. . 2) 3) 4) . "NO PARKING FIRE LANES" signs shall be installed in conjunction with the City Of Golden Valley City Code and the Golden Valley Fire Department Standards. See the Deputy Fire Marshal for more details. A fire/automatic suppression system will be required for both buildings. The fire /automatic suppression system shall be designed for high pile storage for the warehouse section of the buildings. 1 September 7, 2000 . 5) A post indicator valves for the fire suppression systems shall be in installed for both buildings in accordance with recognized standards. 6) A smoke -evac system may be required for the type of storage and type of commodities stored in the warehouse area. 7) A fire department key box (es) will be required for both building. The Deputy Fire Marshal will determine the location of the lock boxes on the buildings. 8) The (FOC) fire department connection for the fire suppression system shall be located on the building and be free from any obstruction (i.e. gas meter, landscaping materials or matter and electrical transformers. . 9) The proposed buildings will require posting address numbers. The numbers shall be visible and legible from the street or roadway fronting the property. 10) Fire audio/visual devices would be required through out the buildings. Permit will be required. If there are any questions please call me at 763-593-8065 . 2 t "" . ~ . .... ; . ~~lifValley Memorandum Public Works 763-593-8030 1763-593-:-3988 (fax) Date: September 22, 2000 To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development From: Jeff Olive~. PE. City Engineer ~ . Subject: Preliminary Plat Review for Honeywell Golden Valley 2nd Addition Public Works staff has reviewed the materials submitted for the proposed Honeywell Golden Valley 2nd Addition development. This proposed development consists of two lots to accommodate two new office buildings on the northern portion of the existing Honeywell facility. The proposed subdivision is located south of Sandburg Road and west of Douglas Drive. . Preliminary Plat: . The proposed preliminary plat does not show any easements across the lots. The .easements that must be shown on the preliminary plat are as follows: . . 1) All standard drainage and utility easements as outlined in the City code must be . shown. -. 2) City code also outlines requirements for drainage and utility easements covering all watermain installation across the development. These watermain easements must be a minimum of 20 feet wide and be centered over the watermain. .. , 3) A drainage and utility easement must be shown over the proposed storm water pond. This easement must extend a minimum of one foot upland of the 100 year high water level of the pond. . The preliminary plat indicates that an ingress/egress easement will be dedicated over the main driveway that passes between the two proposed buildings. 'Specific information regarding the parties involved in this easement must be provided for review. This easement must be recorded prior t9 approval of thefinal plat. . . . There is no additional right-of-way required for Sandburg Road on the north boundary of the plat. However, our information indicates that Sandburg Road is currently' -~~ . G:\Developme~t~~~rIv.~!~\Honeywell\prelim Plat 2.doc :":,'.:-/;i}~.~:l.:j:t{~.:.;:~~~'~~-~~~':". ~ . . -..'" .~. - . ... . . < . ..- ;,".:- -". ."' - . - . '_.~ -..- ~~., '.< - -. ,. . .- -:~. "," . - " .' ,. ~ , . dedicated to the City via an easement. This easement must be platted as right.of.way on the final plat. Because Douglas Drive is a County road, the proposed plat and development must be reviewed by Hennepin County. There are several locations on the grading and utility plans where the utilities serving this site will be crossing property lines onto Honeywell property, as well as the proposed new lots. This issue may result in additional easement needs. In specific, the storm sewer system for this development will not be City owned. Therefore, the building owner of Lot 1 will need to have drainage easement rights in order to convey storm water runoff across the two adjacent parcels. In addition, the proposed watermain will cross Honeywell property near the existing building south of Lot 2. The developer should review these issues and provide additional information to the City along with the final plat submittal. The proposed parking for Lot 2 is shown crossing the property lines onto Honeywell property near the existing Honeywell building. The plans should be revised to keep the driveway and parking areas on Lot 2, or appropriate easements must be dedicated, to accommodate this encroachment. Site Plan: .. The proposed site plan poses several concerns related to traffic flow on Sandburg . Road as well as internal circulation patterns and emergency vehicle access. Based'" upon these concerns we have forwarded the site plans to our consulting traffic engineers for their review and comment. The developer will be responsible for all . costs associated with this review. The City of Golden Valley reserves the right to require revisions to the plans or to adjacent roadways based upon the results of this review. The developer will be required to construct and finance any of the revisions that are deemed necessary based upon this proposed development. The site plan indicates that portions of the driveway and parking lots for Lot 2 cross the property line onto property that will be retained by Honeywell. The plans must be revised to eliminate crossing of the property lines or cross access easements must be prepared. The parking lot cul.de-sac on the east side of Lot 1 must be designed to accommodate the turning movements of a 45 foot long design vehicle. Grading. Drainage and Erosion Control Plan: This proposed development is within the Main Stem subdistrict of the Bassett Creek . Watershed. Therefore, based upon the size of the development, the project will be subject to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC) Water Quality Policy, as well as to the review and comments of the Commis~ion. No work is to begin on the site until the BCWMC has approved the plans. / s . .;:JU~8.fi "-.:~':1~~~:;~ :~:::.,..~..,.~.,~,~. , -' < ..- ' . ~"'~-:'';:'''::\:J.,', ""-1: '"' , . One of the requirements of the BCWMC Water Quality Policy is that the entire development site be treated for water quality prior to discharge into the receiving waters. The storm water computations subrni~ted with the plans indicate that a large portion of the site is proposed to drain southward via a private storm sewer on the Honeywell property. Although it has not been confirmed, we have assumed that this Honeywell storm sewer drains to the pond located on the southeast corner of the Honeywell property. Cityjnformation indicates that this pond is a converted wetland that does not contain any consideration for water quality and NURP requirements. Therefore, if the developer wishes to use this pond for water quality requirements it must be evaluated, designed and modified to meet BCWMC requirements. The preferred alternative would be to route the entire development site through the proposed pond on site. The computations also indicate that the water quality volume for the on site pond was calculated based upon the runoff from a 2.5 inch rainfall event. BCWMC and City / requirements for this drainage subdistrict utilize a 1.5 inch rainfall event. Therefore, the pond may already be sized to accommodate most of the additi.onal drainage area that will be routed to it as discussed above. The BCWMC meets on the third Thursday of each month. 'In order to be placed on an agenda, the plans must be submitted three weeks prior to the meeting. The plan submittal must be accompanied by an application form signed by the City. . The developer will be required to obtain a General Storm Water Discharge Permit from . the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. A copy of the permit application must be provided to the Public Works Department upon application, and a copy of the permit must be forwarded once it is obtained. This project will also be required to obtain a City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit. No work is tobegin on site until this permit has been obtained. The grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be prepared in accordance with City specifications. A copy of these speCifications is attached to this memo for use by the developer. \ There is no outlet for the proposed storm water pond shown on the plans. The proposed outlet must be clearly labeled and located in a position to maximize the distance from the inlets in order to provide maximum water quality benefits. The multiple storm sewer inlets into the water quality pond must be combined into a single outlet in order to minimize the possibility of erosion and maximize water quality benefits. . The storm sewer on Douglas Drive is owned and maintained by Hennepin County. Therefore, a County permit will be required prior to connection to the pipe. .' , . The entire storm sewer system shown for this development will be owned and maintained by the developer. The developer will be required to enter into a pond maintenance agreement for the proposed pond on site. This agreement must be executed prior to approval ot the final plat. The pond must be designed to include a no maintenance buffer strip surroundingthe waterbody. This buffer strip must extend to the parking lot curb on the west side and " to approximately the Douglas Drive right-ot-way on the east side. The plant materials in the buffer area should be native grasses and/or wetland species as appropriate. All slopes that are 3: 1 or greater on site must be seeded following grading and stabilized with a wood fiber erosion control blanket. This includes the banks to the pond and the slope on the west side of the development. All retaining walls greater than four feet tall will require a building permit prior to construction. The developer should review the proposed drainage and storm sewer locations in the parking lot north of Lot 2. . The location of all storm sewer inlet protection, silt fence, gravel construction entrances and other erosion control measures must be clearly shown on the grading plan. " The developer will be required to submit record drawings of the entire storm sewe"r system, including the pond, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any" of the buildings. These record drawings must be submitted in drawing and digital format that is consistent with the City CAD system. A City of Golden Valley Right-of-Way Permit is required for all excavations and driveway installations within the right-of-way for Sandburg Road or other existing City easements. Utility Plan: All existing utilities on site that are to be removed must be clearly labeled on this plan. A watermain loop must be provided around the western building in order to insure adequate flows. There is storm sewer shown on the grading plan that is not shown on the utility plan. . The developer should review these plans and revise them accordingly. All watermain and sanitary sewer connections shown on the utility plan will require utility connection permits from the City. ,. . The street restoration note shown on the plan must be modified to note that patching must be performed according to City standards and that the replacement pavement section must. match the existing street. The location of all fire hydrants and valves on this site are subject to the review and comment of the Public Safety and Public Works Maintenance Departments. The City reserves the right to require the installation of additional watermain and utility facilities upon further review. The developer will be required to provide record drawings for all the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements on site. The same requirements for these records drawings apply as discussed elsewhere in this review. Tree Preservation and landscaping: This development is subject to the City of Golden Valley Tree Preservation Ordinance. Accordingly, a tree inventory, mitigation, and preservation plan, as outlined in City Code, must be submitted for this project. The developer will also be required to conform to all City of Golden Valley landscaping requirements. . Summary and Recommendations: This review has identified a number of issues that need to be addressed prior to . approval of the final plat for this development. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for the proposed Honeywell Golden Valley 2nd Addition subject . to the comments contained in this review. Approval should also be subject to the review and comment of other City staff and the consulting traffic engineer. All of these issues must be addressed in full prior to forwarding the final plat to the City Council for approval. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Mark Kuhnly, Chief for Fire and Inspections AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator Gary John"s.on, Building Official Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshall Doug Stahl, Schoell and Madson, Inc. .