Loading...
10-27-03 PC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY pLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday, October 27, 2003 7pm I. Approval of Minutes - October 13, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-105) Applicant: Home Run Hitters Address: 8300 10th Avenue N. Purpose: To allow for an indoor baseball/softball training facility in the Industrial Zoning District. III. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision - (SU08-07) Applicant: The Golden Valley HRA Address: Lot 1, Block 1, North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition Purpose: To create Outlot A (.57 acres) in order that it may be sold to Room and Board, the property owner to the west. IV. Informal Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development - (PUD-79 Amendment No.2) Applicant: Room and Board Address: 4600 Olson Memorial Highway . Purpose: To amend pun No. 79 which would allow Outlot A to become a part of the Room and Board PUD, reduce overall parking requirement, and allow outlet sales one evening per week, in addition to weekend sales. -- Short Recess -- V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings VI. Other Business The City Council has requested a joint meeting with the Planning Commission on November 10, 2003 at 6 pm (before the Planning Commission meeting) to discuss the Single Family Residential Zoning Code text changes. This meeting will replace the previously scheduled November 11, 2003 Council Manager meeting. VII. Adjournment ~ . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 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, October 13, 2003. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm. . Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, Key Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes - September 22, 2003 Planning Pentel referred to the discussion of the Housing Policy and density housing that the Planning Commission discus at t asked Grimes what the next step should be. Grimes s more criteria from the existing PUD list of conce the Planning Commission to review. a for higher Ing and wo Cf be developing something back to Eck referred to page three, paragraph fiv "asked". word "as" should be MOVED by Eck, seconded by K September 22,2003 minutes w 'on carried unanimously to approve the d correction. II. Informal Public 'tional Use Permit (CU-1 03) Applicant: moria! Highway w for an adult day care facility. perty on a location map and stated that it is zoned Business Ices. He said that an adult day care facility is permitted as a that the property has been used as an office building since it was said that the applicants are asking for a state license to allow for the . Grimes stated that staffs concerns have been addressed such as access to the site for emergency vehicles and Metro Mobility buses and installing fire sprinklers. He referred to a site plan showing that a Metro Mobility type of vehicle could maneuver in the parking lot. He pointed out an area where he is suggesting the applicants do proof of parking to provide better access on the site and stated that the site should have adequate space for parking because they will only have five to six employees. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 2 Grimes stated that the applicants would be disturbing less than half an acre of land so no water quality pond would be required. He referred to his staff report dated October 6, 2003 and discussed his recommended conditions for approval. Grimes referred to the Head Start child care facility just east of the applicant's site and explained that they have buses that are about the same size the applicant would have coming to their site and that there have been no problems with bus access. He said that he sees no conflicts with the Head Start site or the proposed use at the applicant's site. Rasmussen asked Grimes to clarify how buses would move through Grimes referred to site map and showed the route that the buses u and where people would be dropped off. Groger said that he only noticed one handicap accessible p that it was far away from the entrance: He asked if there wou for accessible spaces and. if that would reduce the nurFi stated that it was his understanding that the hand' to the closest to the doors and that the number Building Code. He said that not many of the clie site. site and nalneed i ces. Grimes arking spaces have by the State se would be driving to the Randy Engel, Buetow and Associates, error and that 92 is the maximum Grimes had mentioned. He exp accessible parking stall per eve Johnson, the City's Buildin applicants would agree t buses also have ramps 0 e roject, stated that he made an i'e applicant can have, not 90 as ate Building Code requires one at he would be meeting with Gary antify those numbers. He stated that the rking that Grimes suggested and that the ar to make them more participant friendly. Grimes asked how it is not an exa uld actually be driving to the site. Buetow stated that e has been told it is not many. IV buses could be accommodated on the site and if they and spend the whole day and if they would all arrive at the y would be spreading the clients arrivals throughout the day. Buetow could either stay all day or half-days.and that there would be peak s such as an hour to an hour and a half in the morning and late t lunch time. He said that the site could accommodate 12 to 14 buses that they wouldn't get that many. McAleese said he didn't think the traffic flow was going to be as smooth as the applicant was making it sound, (at least initially) but that there aren't problems that couldn't be solved. He said that accommodating that number of buses and the fact that it takes people a little while to get on and off the buses is going to make the buses stack up. Buetow said he didn't disagree with that but because the entrance to the building is planned for the south end of lot it allows the passage at the entry driveway to be free so buses wouldn't block incoming or outgoing traffic. He added that it is likely that there . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 3 would be buses stacking but that they have room for buses to stack three wide, north to south while they are discharging clients. He said he feels confident that clients can De accommodated very well. Grimes asked what percentage of the clients would be dropped off by Metro Mobility buses and what percentage of clients would be dropped off by family or friends. David Olshansky, applicant, stated that 20% of the clients are dropped off by bus and 80% are dropped off by family or by individual vehicles. . Keysser asked the applicants if they would be buying the building or Olshansky stated that they would be buying the building. Keysser k financing was in place for the renovations and if they were rea sta stated yes. Groger asked if 92 clients would be the total number of client that is the total amount of clients they could have ace t Olshansky stated that 92 clients is the maximum the building. Buetow stated that the applicants c allowed by the state license. Alexander Axelrod, could vary from four to six hour but that 9 . allowed to have. day or if icense. they could have in al of 92 clients xplained that a client's stay umber of clients there are Groger asked if the services bein Olshansky stated everything wo would be employees. Axelrod s contractors and that they R come in to the facility twO ts would be provided by staff. ofessionals. Groger asked if they would probably be provided by physician on staff and have two or three people vide services such as counseling. Grimes asked wher the Minnesota Depa orne from. Axelrod stated that they get clients from h, the County and the newspaper. Keysser asked profit and pro It or non-profit business. Olshansky stated it was for ontract with the Countywho screens the clients for them. e applicants. to explain the types of people that would use their d that it is mostly lonely, elderly.people and that they would offer rams, and in the future they would have physical health programs. Keysser a a the applicants what kind of licenses they have. Axelrod stated that he is a licensed medical doctor. . Pentel stated that she has heard from homeowners along Lilac Drive and that there are concerns about speeding. She questioned how people would get to the site and questioned if this use would be viable without county reimbursement dollars. Axelrod said he thinks it would still be a viable use. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 4 Pentel asked the applicants if their client would be living at home or in a nursing home. Axelrod said that their clients would all be living at home and that none of them would be from nursing homes. Keysser asked if there is parking allowed on the frontage road and stated that he can envision buses stacking on the service road. Grimes stated that the frontage road is not marked "no parking". Pentel opened the public hearing. Jerry Mundt, 4959 Olson Memorial Highway, Managing Partner of Park stated they have no objection to the proposal, the access' reat a excellent. He said he has questions concerning the existing d it was going to be widened. Grimes stated no. Mundtasked ighti drainage on the site. Grimes stated that .it appears the draina along the railroad and into the wooded area. Mundt a . t serving meals and if there would be service vehicl that generally the meals would be catered or th but that there would be no kitchen facilities on t e is ked if nd the o the ditch pp s would be site. Grimes stated e bringing in food, Pentel asked Grimes to address the lig Valley does not have a requirement 0 be in the applicants' best interest t lighting is planned to be placed night time operations so safet Mundt said they want it to problems in the past wit es stated the Golden Sl e nd said that he thinks it would ighting. Buetow stated that the cing south. He said there won't be any gOI , to their cars at night won't be an issue. ossible because they have had some into cars. Pentel asked if this explained that it was ceiling work w e e a major remodeling. Buetow stated nO,and e making the restrooms accessible and doing some tern is installed. this is a Conditional Use application the Planning o look at ten factors for consideration. He said he thinks this d that the site can handle it. He said he is concerned about the traffic . e and that there could be a lot of people coming and going at the aid he would vote for the proposal because he thinks the problems can ded that he thinks the City will have to be vigilant on this one, in terms and congestion. Pentel said she thinks the proposed use is fine for thisJacility especially if Metro Mobility buses use Highway 55 as much as possible and avoid the frontage road. She said she thinks traffic could become an issue but it is nice to see these building have a new life and she would be voting in favor of the proposal as well. Pentel asked the Commissioners if they would like to put something in the motion about the lighting. Groger said he was concerned about the applicants putting the lighting on . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 5 the building and shining it out to the south. Grimes stated that the back of Breck School is to the south so he did think it would be an issue. Pentel added that the maximum number of clients should be changed to 92 in the motion. MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to approve an adult daycare facility at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway with the following conditions: 1. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's sign code. . 2. The site plan prepared by Buetow and Associates and dated 9/2 of this approval. orne a part 3. The adult day care center shall be limited to 92 clients a 4. The hours of operation shall be 8 am to 6 pm, Monday-Sa 5. Up to 8 parking spaces may be "proof of parki " is needed to meet parking demand. The add" a parking shall be used to improve maneuvera . y withi nly when it is determined it p by the reduction of e parking area. 6. The memo from Ed Anderson, Dep and Development dated 9/12/03 sh ark Grimes, Director of Planning of this approval. 7. All improvements to the buil e City's Building Code requirements. 8. The State of Minnesot to Health Care Plus given to the Director f Human Services shall issue all necessary licenses he adult day care center. Proof of licensing shall be evelopment. and federal requirements shall be met. III. ring - Minor Subdivision - (SU09-05) & Rozalija Gannon Purpose: 508 Westwood Drive South and 4510 Strawberry Lane To allow an existing lot to be divided into two lots for the construction of a new house. . Grimes stated that the agenda should be corrected to state that the lot is not one lot being divided into two lots, it's two lots being re-subdivided into two different descriptions and eliminating the outlot so that the lot to the west could be sold for the construction of a new home. He said that he looks at this as a relatively simple minor subdivision but there are some sticking points with the way the existing house is located . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 6 on the east lot. He explained that there was!a variance issued to allow the home to be within 15 feet of the north side property line but when it is scaled off it is really less than 15 feet. Also, there is a slight encroachment of the deck into the required 35-foot setback area. He asked the Planning Commission to consider granting a variance from the Subdivision Code requirements for all of the existing building variance requests. Grimes explained that the reason for this minor subdivision is to get a retaining wall on the applicants' side of the property line. He said that the City Engineer will be requiring a slope stability study. He said that the applicants could build a home on the lot now without having to subdivide it, but they want to eliminate the outlot. Nancy Whitney, 4520 Stra much construction in th . construction for four year. another rain storm ot concerned about th Shaffer asked if the property line could be moved so the playhou preliminary plat would not have to be so close to it. Grimes stat doesn't like jogs in property lines. s Pentel asked if the City is hoping that the new house would fi the preliminary plat. Grimes said that the envelope sh no reason a house couldn't fit there. Butch Zelinsky, representing the applicant, stat will fit in Lot 1 without the need for varianc Rose Gannon, applicant, stated that the moving the playhouse three feet over moved. Shaffer said that property line issue. . Pentel opened the public head tated her concern is that they have had so he house across the street has been under i has been a landslide in her yard and after r person's sod in her driveway. She said she is ecting the applicant's retaining wall. lived at her house for 32 years and that they've had an d have never had a drop of water in their house. stwood Lane, stated that she lives directly behind the applicant and ,out when there is digging and building ifshe is going to lose all said she has a lot of run off from her lot into the applicant's empty lot. Pentel as Grimes if the City has a policy about one lot draining into another. Grimes stated that the City doesn't want to make any situation worse and that the Public Works Department does require drainage and erosion control permits. He said that these steep slopes aren't easy to work with, but it is the responsibility ofthe builder. He added that the. City Engineer is concerned and that is why he is requesting the slope stability . study. Zelinsky added that the builder, Dave Allen, is just completing the fourth home in the South Tyrol area on very steep lots. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 7 Pentel closed the public hearing. Pentel noted that the slope stability study wasn't listed as a condition in Grimes staff report and asked if it should be. McAleese stated that it was listed as one of the qualifications governing approval as a minor subdivision in Grimes' memo. Keysser suggested that moving the playhouse should be added as a condition of approval. . Grimes told the Planning Commission that there should be two motion the variance from the Subdivision Code and one for the minor subdi MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Groger and motion carrie recommend approval of the requested minor subdivision su conditions: 1. The preliminary plat of Gannons Addition dated se' by Schoell and Madson, Inc. shall become a p 2. The City Attorney will determine if a title revi final plat by the City Council. 3. Drainage and utility easements as on the final plat. division Code shall be show 4. A slope stability study will b taken in building a hou to the southwest. e the precautions that will have to be at has a 35 ft. to 40 ft. drop from the northeast 5. 6. a on the site will be moved so it will meet the setback ew lot line. onded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to City Council approve the variance for the current structure located use it meets all of the conditions that are set forward by the Board Is and because the existing non-conforming conditions have already and approved by the BZA. IV. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - (CU-104) Applicant: Hope for the City . Address: Purpose: 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue To allow retail sales in the Light Industrial Zoning District . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 8 Grimes reminded the Planning Commission that they recently changed the Zoning Code to allow accessory retail sales in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts. He stated that the applicant would now like to request a Conditional Use Permitto do retail sales at their location. H-e stated that staff's primary concern is parking but after he looked at the site he doesn't have any issues with the number of parking spaces but rather another tenant's junk cars located on the site. Grimes discussed the applicants request and stated that they are only expecting a maximum of 30 clients per day and would have only two to- three empl tal for the retail store. He stated that donors would only drop off their deliveries ppoi ent only. Eck asked about the relationship of the size of the retail spa of space that a tenant leases. He said in this case 3,000 sq the building footprint, but it is more than 10% of the amount 0 leasing so what could happen is that one tenant coul building footprint that is allowed for retail sales. G . would have to incidental to the primary use of th ena mount n 10% of IS tenant is 0% of the hat the retail sales Rasmussen asked if other tenants in the b 10% of the building's footprint as well. ered to opportunity to use didn't think so. Pentel asked the applicant what s anticipate selling. Brian Woolsey, applicant,state furniture and that most thi allow them to sell a cert . ave everything from hardware to ceived and freely given and that some donors the things they donate. donated automobiles. Woolsey said no. Pentel asked building in ace rtise. Woolsey said they would have a sign on the ity's Sign Code. clarify how the donations are given away. Woolsey stated ceived as a donation and in some cases they've given out . ibly can so then they could sell it in their retail store and distribute gst the.different non-profit agencies. Grimes as how the items are redistributed after the items are collected from the different organizations. Woolsey stated that Hope for the City distributes items to about 65 local non-profit organizations and that they pick the items up from the donors, secure them, them and distribute them to the organizations. Rasmussen asked how organizations hear about Hope for the City. Woolsey stated that it is mostly by word of mouth and that word travels fast. He said that they like the organizations to be a 501 (3)(C) non-profit and that every Tuesday there is an email sent . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 9 out telling the organizations what items will be distributed on Friday and that they are give a time slot forwhen they can come pick the items up. Shaffer asked Woolsey if they would be sellingfood products. Woolsey said they are not anticipating selling food products because that requires more licensing and they aren't really in the retail business per se, it is just a way to help shore up the bottom line. Groger referred to the applicants narrative and stated that he didn't thi per day seemed like very many. Woolsey said that there would be Ii retail store. He added that they are not in the retail business and t etail their operation is just for the leftover items not distributed to th n-pro I organizations. Pentel opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no on hearing. McAleese stated that this use is consistent with with the plan for the area. d is also consistent MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Ec the request to allow retail sales at 120 Light Industrial Zoning District sub' unanimously to approve venue which is located in the onditions: 1. A retail store incidental to th than 3,000 sq. ft. of the Hope for the City floor; th warehouse may operate in no more eased by Hope for the City. The attached I . ates the location of the store. 2. If additional park' stripe additional p of Planning the owner of the 1200 Mendelssohn building will as shown on the Proof of Parking Plan. The Director ill determine if additional striped parking is needed. II be 10am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the mEd Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of d Date October 2, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. 6. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. -- Short Recess -- . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 10 V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Pentel reported on the MnAPA conference she attended in Alexandria. VI. Other Business Single Family Residential Zoning Code text changes will be disc November 11, 2003 Council Manger Meeting at 7 pm. Grimes stated that the Council would like as many Planning Co attend the November 11 Council Manager meeting as possibl Family Residential Zoning Code text changes. VII. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at8:38 pm. " . . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 20, 2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing-Conditional Use Permit for Indoor Baseball/Softball Training Facility at 8300 10th Ave. N.-Home Run Hitters, Inc. (Steve and Mary Kitsis), Applicant Steve and Mary Kitsis are proposing to lease a portion of the building at 8300 10th Ave. N. in order to open Home Run Hitters indoor baseball/softball training facility. The business includes 4 batting cages, an Astroturf fielding area, and 4 pitching tunnels for live pitching and hitting. There is also space for instruction and a fitness area. There will also be a pro shop for the sale of softball and baseball products only. Several vending machines will also be within the space. There will also be offices for the administrative staff. The Golden Valley Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for this type of business in the Industrial zoning district. The Zoning Code states that "Ball fields and other recreational facilities" are allowed with a CUP. In the past, the City Council has permitted other recreational uses in the Industrial or Light Industrial zoning district including the 3rd Lair (skateboarding) at 850 Florida Ave. S. and Rico's Kickboxing on Plymouth Ave. near TH 169. The property at 8300 10th Ave. N. is zoned Industrial and is designated on the General Land Use Plan map for industrial uses. Description of Proposed Business Home Run Hitters has provided a good description of their business in the attached materials. The materials include a layout of the space they will lease in the 8300 10th Ave. building and a site plan of the property including parking lot layout. Staff will not repeaUhe detailed description of the business submitted by Home Run Hitters. Planning Considerations Overall, the Planning Department does not have an issue with this use. It is consistent with other recreational uses that have been permitted in the Industrial zoning district. The only issue that the staff would like to discuss in detail is in regard to parking and the parking lot. There are a total of 88 parking spaces on the site. The Zoning Code does not have a specific requirement for parking for this particular type of facility. In this case, staff has asked the applicant to identify the number of parking spaces that would be needed for the use. A total of 30 stalls was . . 1. . 6. identified for their use which includes the office space and practice space. The remaining 58 spaces on the site would be for the other tenant-All Systems Installation. The applicant has stated that they will have three employees on hand at anyone time. In addition, there may be one or two coaches teaching at their facility. On average, they expect to have 10-12 customers per hour using the facility. Based on the information submitted by the applicant, many of the users will be dropped off by parents. Also, the busiest times will be on the evenings and weekends when the other building tenant does not operate. I have spent a lot of time at a similar training center in Arden Hills. this training centerwas also located in a multi~tenant industrial building. Because the other users of the building left after normal business hours, there was more than adequate parking with 20-30 spaces. Because many of the customers will be young, staff recommends that there be a bike rack for at least 10 bikes on the site. There is also bus service along 10th Ave. N. for those who wantto use transit to get to thetraining facility. At this time, there is no parking along 10th Ave. N. Therefore, all customer and employee parking must be on site. Staff suggests that the owner ofthe building may want to erect a directional sign indicating that the majority of the parking is located on the east side of the building. There may be a need to reserve some of the parking spaces in front of the building for both tenants. Overall, staff does not think this is going to be a major problem because the primary hours for Home Run Hitters is in the late afternoon, evenings and on weekends. Factors for Consideration In approving or denying any CUP, City Code requires that findings be made on ten specified factors. Staff evaluation of the ten factors as they relate to the current proposal is as follows: Demonstrated Need for the Use: The City's standard basis for determining need is that an applicant has identified a market for a proposed good or service. In this case, Mr. and Mrs. Kitsis have researched the market and believe that there is a need for this facility. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The plan identifies the proposed site for long-term industrial uses. Recreational facilities, by conditional use, can be considered for that land use classification. In the case of Golden Valley, other comparable recreational uses are located in the Industrial areas of the City. 3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: Approval of the CUP will not substantially alter the extent or nature of the neighboring site development or activity. Home Run Hitters will primarily operate when other businesses in the area are not open. 4. Effect on Any Anticipated Traffic Generation Upon Current Traffic Flow and Congestion in the Area: Due to the nature of the business and its primary hours of operation, staff does not believe the new use will cause undue congestion in the area. The number of employees and customers anticipated on site at anyone time would not cause a problem with access to 10th Ave. N. or other neighboring streets. 5. Effect on Any Increase in Population: Staff does not believe that the number of employees or customers that will be on site will cause a negative impact on the area. Increase in Noise level: All activities will occur inside the building with the exception of the parking of cars. If some doors or windows are opened, this should not have a negative impact since the noise from such a facility is relatively low. 2 . . 2. . 7. Any Odor, Dust, Smoke, Gas or Vibration Caused by the Use: Staff does not believe that these are issues with this CUP application. 8. Any Increase in Animal Pests as a Result of this Proposed Use: There should be no increases in animal pests because of this use. All garbage will be stored inside or in an enclosed storage container. 9. Visual Appearance of the Proposed Structure or Use: The Sign Code would regulate any new signs. Home Run Hitters understands that all signage must meet the requirements outlined in the Sign Code. There are no other changes proposed to the exterior of the building. 10. Other Concerns Regarding this CUP: Any interior modification to the building will require approval by the Inspections Department. Both the Fire Marshal and Building Official have given a quick review of the request and find no reason that it cannot goforward. Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow Home Run Hitters to operate at 8300 10th Ave. N. The proposed use is consistent with similar recreational uses that have also been permitted in the Industrial areas of the City. Staff recommends the following conditions. 1. The site plan of the 8300 10th Ave. N. building prepared by HTG Architects and dated June 8, 2001 shall become part of this approval. This plan indicates parking spaces on the site. The interior plan for the 8300 10th Ave. N. building prepared by WCL Associates and dated Sept. 26, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. This indicates the layout of the interior space for Home Run Hitters. 3. All signs shall meet the requirements of the Sign Code. 4. A bike rack for at least 1 0 bikes shall be placed near the front door to Home Run Hitters. 5. No outside music, loud speakers or public address systems will be permitted. 6. At least 30 parking spaces shall be available to Home Run Hitters. 7. Operating hours shall be as follows: During School Year - Monday-Friday 3 pm to 10 pm, Saturday 9 am to 10 pm and Sunday 9 am to 6 pm. Summer Hours - Monday-Friday 9am to 10 pm, Saturday 9 am to 10 pm, and Sunday 9 am to 6 pm. 8. All other state, local, and federal requirements shall be met. 9. Failure to comply with one or more ofthe above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the CUP. Attachments: Location Map Site Plan Interior Plan Information Submitted by Home Run Hitters 3 "= ~I_';" \ \ r ...~.7 ,(7__j If.." " LJ\ rH\/L~J ( -A \ \ .E N PL ","OUTl< AVE N JIIIl---1 \ ~LYMOUTHA I /' ~~"E 1 /~1--,-- /' )/-(~/' / / \>Y'\ //' /" -- /' / 'I /'/.~{'~// I ~~ O~/ ~ / 10TH AVE N ] ~ryr- r --PIL~UTHAVENW~\ cr~rI ~ (( , O~; '1:', <..q DR 1\ '" / ',\ "<,, / ", '\", ";, ' \~~ ------ 18300 10th Avenue N. ~~ \ \ /"" / / // . "~, 10TH AVE N 10TH AVE N :e en o o z rn Z ~ m z / -J -- / / . I -------1 ~" "'~" ..~, ~ )c"'" / / ~ I J " ~ GOLDEN VALLEy~ "" ~ '" \ '". " \ "\" '>'''~:-- // . . . Hey Planning 763.593.80951 763.593.8109 (fax) Date: October 21 , 2003 To: Planning Commission From: MarkW. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Minor Subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition-Golden Valley HRA, Applicant Description of Minor Subdivision The Golden Valley HRA has applied for a minor subdivision of the subject 4.8 acres parcel into two lots to be called North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition. This property is the last undeveloped property owned by the HRA in the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment District and is now described as North Wirth Parkway 4th Addition, Lot 1, Block 1. The purpose of the minor subdivision is to create Outlot A (.57 acres) in order that it may be sold to Room and Board, the property owner to the west. The main lot would remain in the ownership of the HRA with access to Dahlberg Drive. The main parcel would be 4.2 acres in size. At the present time, the HRA is negotiating with a developer for the sale of the main lot for the construction of an office condominium building. As shown on the preliminary plat, the elevation of Outlot A is at about the same elevation as the Room and Board property. Outlot A would have very little benefit to the eventual developer of the main parcel but can be used by Room and Board for additional parking. (See amended PUD application for Room and Board on this agenda.) Lot 1, Block 1, North Wirth Parkway 4th Addition was purchased from the railroad by the HRA in the late 1980's for the purpose of redevelopment. As part of the redevelopment, the HRA and City built the necessary infrastructure to develop the surrounding areas. This included a substantial amount of environmental cleanup. The Subdivision Code does not normally allow for the creation of an outlot. After consultation with the City Attorney, it was decided that the creation of the outlot was all right in this case because the outlot will be become a part of the new plat for the Room and Board PUD amendment. In order to ensure that the outlot will have a very short "lifespan", the final plat of this minor subdivision will come to the City Council at the same time as the new plat for the Room and Board PUD amendment that will include Outlot A. . . . Factors for Consideration and Approval Consideration for approving or denying minor subdivisions are set out in the Subdivision Code, Section 12.50, Subd. 3. Staff findings .on each of the seven points are as follows: 1. Proposed lots must meet requirements of the applicable zoning district. The property is zoned Industrial and the Room and Board property is also zoned Industrial and is part of a PUD. The main lot in this minor subdivision meets the requirements for lots in the Industrial zoning district. Outlot A does not because it will not have frontage on a public street. However, the final plat of this minor subdivision will only go forward for approval by the City Council if the new plat for the Room and Board PUD amendment goes forward for approval by the City Council. This Room and Board addition would include the property from Outlot A. 2. Minor Subdivision may be denied upon the City Engineer's determination that steep slopes or excessive wetness encumbers the buildable portion of a resulting new lot. Outlot A is of almost no value when it is a part of the main lot. As noted on the preliminary plat, Outlot A is 20-25 ft. higher than the main portion of the lot. It would be more practicable that it be a part of the Room and Board parcel where it can be used for parking. Following proper development practices, the development of a parking lot on proposed Outlot A should be possible. As with any other parking lot development, a grading, drainage and erosion control permit would have to be issued by the Public Works Department. 3. Minor Subdivisions may be denied if public sewer and water connections are not directly accessible to each proposed lot. The main lot has access to utility connections in Dahlberg Dr. Outlot A will have access to utilities when it is attached to the Room and Board properties. 4. Approval of minor subdivisions shall be conditioned on the applicant's granting of easements for necessary public purposes as determined by the City. In this case, all necessary easements will be shown on the final plat of North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition and the new Room and Board final plat. 5. When Public Agencies other than the City have some jurisdiction over an area, approval of the minor subdivision may be conditioned on requirements of the outside agency. In this case, there is.no other agency with an interest in this minor subdivision. 6. The applicant may be required to have the title to the property reviewed to determine if there are any outstanding title issues. In this case, the HRA is the owner of the property and such title issues are not anticipated. When the HRA purchased the property from the railroad, the HRA did extensive title research to protect its interest. 7. Minor subdivisions of non-residential property may be denied if there are inadequate public facilities available to the site or property. In this case, there are adequate public facilities available to the site. 2 . . . Recommended Action The staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision to create North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition. The minor subdivision will only be brought forward for final plat approval by the City Council if the amended PUD for Room and Board is approved that includes a new plat incorporating Outlot A. This minor subdivision to create Outlot A appears to be the best and simplest way to allow for the property to be added to the Room and Board PUD. Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The final plat of the North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition shall be consistent with the preliminary plat submitted with the minor subdivision application and drawn by Sunde Land Surveying dated 8/29/03. 2. The final plat of the North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition shall not be submitted for approval by the City Council until the amendment to the Room and Board PUD is approved by the City Council that includes a new plat incorporating Outlot A of the North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition. 3. The North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition shall show all easements required by City Code as part of the final plat. Attachments: . Preliminary Plat of North Wirth Parkway 5th Addition 3 Ii t. . . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109.(fax) Date: October 23,2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Design Plan for Amendment No. 2- Room and Board Addition-PUD No. 79 (4600 Olson Memorial Highway)- John and Martha Gabbert, Applicants Summary of Request Room and Board (R & B) represented by architect Daryl Fortier, has requested a second amendment to PUD No. 79. The purpose of the amendment is three-fold. First, they would like to add a 25,430 sq. ft. of land area to the PUD. The property is being purchased from the Golden Valley HRA and will be used by R & B for future parking. (The HRA subdivision creating this 25,430 sq. ft. lot is also on this agenda.) Second, R & B would like to reduce the overall parking that is required for their operation from 400 to 323. At the present time, their existing PUD permit states that they will provide 400 parking spaces (some are "proof of parking" spaces) on their property. Third, R & B is proposing to operate the outlet store one evening a week. The current PUD permit allows the outlet sales to operate in the 4680 building only on Saturday and Sunday. Eligibility of Application as a PUD Because this is a second amendment to an existing PUD, it has been established that the R & B campus is eligible to be considered a PUD. It meets the definition of a PUD and the purpose and intent of a PUD as outlined in the Zoning Code. The applicant has submitted to the City all necessary information that is needed for the consideration of this Preliminary Design Plan. Planning Considerations The R & B information that was submitted as part of this PUD amendment application explains the changes that are proposed to the site and business at this location. R & B likes Golden Valley and would like to stay if there is adequate space for some future expansion. It appears that R & B would like the opportunity to potentially add up to 10,000 sq. ft. of office space at some time in the future or change how the buildings are used. (This addition would require an amended PUD.) In order to accommodate the additional parking that would be needed for the future office space or other changes to the use of the buildings on the campus, R & B has entered into an agreement with the HRA to purchase 25,400 sq. ft. adjacent to the northeast corner of their property. This property would be used for the construction of parking in the northeast corner of the site that could handle 78 cars. The purchase of this property by R & B from the HRA seems to make a lot of sense. The 25,400 , sq. ft. parcel is at about the same elevation as the R & B campus that makes for construction . of the parking lot fairly easy. The'overall parking on the campus has always been a concern. The existing PUD permit states that the R & B campus will have 234 parking spaces and have an additional 166 "proof of parking" spaces for a total of 400 spaces. In actuality, there are only 202 spaces now striped on the site. However, the 202 spaces appear to be adequate to meet the needs of employees, customers and delivery services. Staff has not received parking complaints since the PUD was approved in 1998. R & B would like to reduce the overall number of parking spaces required for the campus from 400 down to 323. The applicant argues that the Golden Valley requirement for warehouse space (1 spaces for every 500 sq. ft. of warehouse space) is excessive. Information was submitted by their traffic engineer that calculates how much parking would be required for R & B if it were located in seven nearby suburbs. This calculation shows the parking requirement would range from 231 spaces to 333 spaces rather than the 536 spaces required by Golden Valley. They contend that there is adequate parking for their employees and customers with the 202 spaces. They are also showing 121 "proof of parking" spaces that could be constructed if additional office space is added or parking demand increases. However, it should be noted that the traffic consultant does indicate that the current peak parking demand is slightly greater than the effective parking supply during the weekday condition with the 202 spaces. This could be alleviated by the construction of some of the "proof of parking" spaces. . One important parking concern relates to the outlet sales that take place in the 4680 building. At the present time, there are sales allowed on Saturday and Sunday when only the outlet sales employees on working. This allows almost all the 202 spaces to be used by customers. R & B states that the parking demand for the outlet store is 121 although the traffic consultant thinks it may be more on Saturday morning. The consultant suggests that employees should park in the most remote parking spaces on weekends to accommodate the customers. When the parking in the northeast corner of the campus is constructed, the consultant suggests that all employees should park there during time the outlet store is open. ~ R & B has also requested that they be allowed to have the outlet store open one evening per week. They have not specified the day of the week because they would like to leave that flexible. They believe that there may be some benefit to having the store open one evening a week in order to help shift some of the traffic load away from the weekend. They have suggested that the one evening a week sales be seen as an experiment. If the City determines that it is not working due to traffic, parking or other concerns, it would be halted and the store would then revert to weekend hours only. Staff would like to suggest that if there are weekday hours, the weekday hours should begin after 6 pm in order to fully clear the parking lot of regular employee's vehicles. This would also allow for the great majority normal traffic congestion to clear from the area after the rush hour. . 2 . From a traffic point of view, there have been few complaints about traffic from the outlet sales at R & B. With the new traffic signal at TH 55 and Schaper Dr., access to the area has greatly improved. When customers are going to R & B on weekends, the traffic in the area is relatively light. Staff agreeswith R & B that if sales are permitted on one weekday evening, it should be experimental. After a year, the City would make the decision about whether or not it would continue. There has been an issue of parking along the north frontage road. It is currently posted "NO PARKING" but my understanding is that it is often ignored. The no parking status should be maintained on both sides of the street and R & B should help the City enforce this requirement. The Planning staff will be asking the Public Works Department to improve the "NO PARKING" signs along the frontage road. Public Works and Inspection Department Concerns City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, has submitted a memo regarding the revised plan for Amendment No.2 to the R & B PUD No. 79. The memo will be attached as one of the proposed conditions of approval. As indicated in the memo, Mr. Oliver is requesting that as part of the PUD approval, the fire access doors on all sides of the buildings have access to the driveway. Currently, there is a pad outside of each fire access door but there is vegetation in front of some of the doors that prevents adequate access to the doors. This should be corrected immediately. When the "proof of parking" areas are constructed that includes head in parking along the wall of the building, adequate access has to be maintained to the fire access doors. When the "proof of parking" spaces are to be built, such a plan will have to be submitted. This may reduce the number of overall parking spaces in order to provide access to the doors. When the "proof of parking" spaces are built, the owner must apply for a grading, drainage and erosion control permit. The new parking lot will also have to meet the City's water quality and tree preservation policies prior to its construction. . As indicated in the memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson, he will require that there is proper fire department access around the perimeter of the building and that fire access doors be unobstructed. Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of the preliminary design plan for the Amendment No.2 to R & B PUD No. 79. Based on the information submitted by R & B, the existing parking appears to be adequate for both the office and outlet retail store. However, the traffic consultant does indicate that there may be a slight shortage during weekday hours. Staff will closely monitor the parking situation to determine if some of the 121 "proof of parking" spaces should be constructed right away to help alleviate an existing problem. The reduction in the parking spaces to a total of 323 (202 existing now and 121 "proof of parking") seems to be reasonable based on experience with the campus. The amount of office space on the campus (which causes the highest parking demand) is limited to the amount shown on the site plan. Conversion of warehouse space or other support space to office space that would increase parking demand could onlybe done by amending the PUD again. The addition of the 25,400 sq. ft. area at the northeast corner of the site will only come into play if additional parking is needed. Access around the building will remain for fire department purposes. . 3 . . . Staff recommends the following conditions for approval of the PUD amendment: 1. All requirements of the PUD Permit for Amendment No. 1. to PUD No. 79 shall remain in full force except as noted in these recommendations. 2. The master plan for the Room and Board campus prepared by Fortier and Associates and dated 9/24/03 shall become a part of this approval. (This master plan replaces the master plan approved by Amendment No.1.) This includes the designation of "proof of parking" areas. At any time City staff determines that the existing parking is not adequate to meet the needs of the on-site uses, the Chief of Fire and Inspections shall order any or all of the "proof of parking" spaces be constructed ina timely manner. 3. The R & B campus consists of the following uses and space dedicated to those uses: Office-32,449 sq. ft. Outlet store/warehouse-19,200 sq. ft. Warehouse areas- 168,797 sq. ft. Support Areas (such as exercise space)-14,970 sq. ft. The amount of office space and outlet store space shall only change with an amendment to the PUD. 4. The memo and recommendations from Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer, to Mark Grimes dated October 20,2003 shall become a part of this approval. 5. The memo and recommendations from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes dated October 13, 2003, shall become a part of this approval 6. Outlet retail sales shall be limited to the 4680 building and can occur only on Saturday and Sunday. The sales shall be limited to overstock and "scratch and dent" items from Room and Board stores. During the remainder of the week, the 4768 building may only be used for warehouse purposes. For one year after the approval of the ordinance giving approval to Amendment No.2, PUD No. 79, Room and Board may also use the 4680 building for similar sales on one additional weeknight. The weeknight sales shall not begin any earlier than 6 pm and end by 9:30 pm. If deemed by the City Council that the weeknight sales has functioned in a manner as to not have negative impacts on the site and surrounding area, the one weeknight sale may continue. 7. A revised plat adding the 25,400 sq. ft. at the northeast corner of the campus shall be prepared and submitted for approval by the City Council after approval of the General Plan of Development.The preliminary plat of Amendment NO.2 is attached. It was prepared by Lot Surveys Company and dated 9/2203. Attachments: Location Map Supplemental Information submitted by Fortier & Associates, Inc. Memo from City Engineer, Jeff Oliver to Mark Grimes dated October 20,2003 Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal, Ed Anderson to Mark Grimes dated October 13, 2003 Room and Board Addition, PUD No. 79 Amendment No. 1 PUD Permit Preliminary Plat prepared by Lot Surveys Company, dated 9/22/03 Site Plan "Master Plan" prepared by Fortier & Associates, Inc. dated 9/24/03 4 CHT In In >- -c( =: :r Cl :E--~GH -....,-----, I HIGHWAY 55 ../~ --'--7 . <~~ ~~ /~t- /^~ /0" . / / , / Memorial Highway I 14600 Olson /\ /.:.,'/ . . /' :/ ,0 / // / / / ,/ LSQN MEMORIAL HWas . t:ffGHWAY 55 . ,. -I . . . September 25, 2003 - FORTIER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIOR DESIGN ROOM& BOARD, INe. Comm: 01-02 PUD No. 79 AMENDMENT Supplemental Information. Room & Board, Inc. is a retail seller of custom manufactured residential furniture. Their operations at 4600 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, include corporate administrative offices, art photo studio, design studio, warehousing, distribution center, and outlet sales on weekends. All manufacturing and retail saleS are conducted at numerous facilities intended solely for those purposes, located in other cities and states. In 1998 Room & Board received approval for the above operations and consolidation of their properties in Golden Valley as PUD No. 79. To facilitate growth and long-term objectives, Room & Board is purchasing Outlot A, North Wirth Park, from the Golden Valley HRA. It is the primary purpose of this Amendment to modify PUD No. 79 to incorporate this property. Room & Board would also like to take this opportunity to: 1. Update the city as to long-term growth and land use, 2. Establish reasonable parking criteria, 3. Expand outlet sales opportunities. INCORPORATION OF ADDITIONAL LAND The land immediately east of Room & Board is currently undeveloped and presents unique topography such that development by a single user us unlikely due to a steeply sloping hill and its truncated shape. The upper portion of this land (Outlot A) is useable to Room & Board as parking as it is at about the same elevation as the roadway about Room & Board. Thus we are proceeding with the purchase of this property as part of future parking expansion. (See attached drawing "Master Plan".) Acquisition of this land will allow for the development of78 parking spaces along the east side of Room & Board. Construction is not anticipated until the need anses. We are making application to amend the PUD to add this property. 1804 Spring Valley Circle, Go1den Valley, Minnesota 55422 Ph. (763) 287-8092 Fax (763) 287-8093 .. , September 25,2003 PUD SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Page 2 . LONG TERM GROWTH AND LAND USE Room & Board, Inc. has experienced considerable growth over the past decade and currently employs approximately 165 persons providing corporate administration, design and photo services, catalog sales, distribution, warehousing, and outlet sales on weekends at their facilities in Golden Valley. While continued growth is anticipated, it is of course difficult to accurately predict and flexibility remains important, as spaces for different uses must be balanced based on their respective growth. It is anticipated that the open space between the outlet sales building and the main building will be in filled, connecting the two buildings and providing office space of about 10,000 sf It is also anticipated that the outlet sales building may be converted to another use while the outlet sales be relocated off site. Depending upon actual special uses, this provides Room & Board with a significant potential to continue its growth. Currently Room & Board occupies 235,416 sf of space on a 12.87 acres (560,685 sf.) parcel of land. The breakdown by special use is: Office Outlet Sales Warehouse Support Spaces 32,449 sf 19,200 sf 168,797 sf. 14,970 sf . The land area is broken down thus: Building Area Paved Area Landscaped Area Open Space Ponding 235,416 sf 216,276 sf 59,546 sf 39,697 sf. 25,430 sf 42.0% 38.6% 10.6% 7.1% 1.7% (202 parking spaces) The addition of the land to the east is limited by topography in usable area to about 25,430 sf and will facilitate an additional 78 parking spaces. With this acquisition the land area breakdown will be: Building Area Paved Area Landscaped Area Open Space Ponding 235,416 sf 244,776 sf. 59,546 sf. 33,627 sf. 12,750 sf. 40.2% 41.8% 10.2% 5.7% 2.1% While there is significant potential for Room & Board to continue managing it's facilities for growth with only a minor building addition, it is clear that parking presents a unique concern. . ; . . . September 25,2003 PUD SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Page 3 Room & Board is exploring the potential addition of small portions of land or parking rights from the Railway and also MinnCom, the two adjacent property owners north of our site. REQUEST FOR REASONABLE PARKING STANDARDS Room & Board currently does not have a shortage of parking, for either employees or visitors. They can meet their future needs and cannot foresee any difficulties. Too meet their growth, they can add about 73 additional parking spaces, which should be adequate. To further assure they can meet their parking needs, they are purchasing the North Wirth Park parcel of land to the east. This will enable them to add a combined total of 121 spaces, resulting in an on-site total of 323 parking spaces, all of which are shown on the attached Master Plan drawing. An additional 50 spaces could be added on the south side (streetfront) of the buildings, however that is clearly not desirable as it significantly impairs the aesthetics of the front yard landscaping, which is currently between 100 - 160 ft. . Room & Board has commissioned a parking study by transportation engineers and planners Benshoof & Associates, Inc.; a copy is attached. This study confirms that we meet the parking standards of the Ordinances for all of the surrounding suburban communities, specifically Crystal, Eden Prairie, Edina, Minnetonka, New Hope, Plymouth, and St. Louis Park. Those communities parking requirements for the Room & Board facility range from 231 to 333 spaces, with the average being 266 spaces. This facility is clearly marketable and exceeds the parking that could reasonably be expected in the west suburban area. As a condition in granting PUD 79, the City relaxed it's parking standards to require up to 360 parking spaces for Room & Board (Council Approval, September 1, 1998). For Room & Board to manage it's growth, be it construction of new additions or conversions of interior spaces from warehouse to office (as suggested in our Long Term Growth), it is important that we are able to project parking requirements not only for our needs but also to a reasonable standard that we know can be acceptable to the city. We are therefore requesting a specific parking rate of 1/1500 sf of warehouse space. . . . . . September 25,2003 PUD SUPPLEMENT ALINFORMA TION Page 4 EXPANDING OUTLET SALES HOURS Typical of all retail sellers, Room & Board has a modest amount of inventory which does not sell. Some of this furniture are discontinued items, returns, or requires minor repair or fitment, and accumulates in the warehouse/distribution area. This limited inventory is offered for sale at reduced cost to the public through "Outlet Sales". Outlet sales are not intended to compete with, nor does it offer the current, full line of the Retail Sales Stores. Over the past 5 - 6 years of Outlet Sales operations, sales have been limited to weekend days only. Sales hours have been 10 AM- 6 PM Saturdays and 12 - 5 PM on Sundays. We are pleased to report we are aware of no parking or traffic difficulties. We are pleased that the Outlet sales have proven popular and are successful with the public. Saturday and Sunday mornings are the most popular hours and at times can be rather congested. While the Benshoof traffic study suggests a weekend parking demand of 121 spaces, our experience suggests a higher demand, especially in the morning hours. We have noted occasions where our parking lot was effectively full. To meet our customer's demands and to assist in shifting some of the traffic load, we believe adding sales hours for one weekday evening each week would be appropriate. We suggest we try this for one. year to monitor traffic, parking or other concerns. If difficulties were noted, we would agree to end weekday sales. We are therefore requesting approval for extending Outlet Sale to add one evening per week One of the stated goals of a PUD is to allow flexibility in land use, including parking requirements. We believe our requests are prudent and beneficial to the public, the city and Room & Board. We respectfully ask for your consideration and approval. ~T~ . BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343/ (952) 238-1667/ FAX (952) 238-1671 . July 22,2003 Refer to File: 02..76 MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Martha Gabbert, R & B Properties Mr. Daryl Fortier, Fortier & Associates, Inc. Edward F. Terhaar e F-r FROM: RE: Results of Parking Review for the Room & Board Offices in Golden Valley, MN PURPOSE This memorandum is to present the results of our review of parking requirements and needs for the Room & Board office in Golden Valley. As we understand, this review is needed to investigate a reasonable parking requirement for this property based on the land use and size. . BACKGROUND Development Characteristics The Room & Board development is located at 4600 Olson Memorial Highway in Golden Valley. The development consists of multiple buildings used for office and warehousing purposes Monday through Friday. On weekends, a portion of the warehouse space is used for retail sales of discounted merchandise. The current land uses and sizes are as follows: Table 1 Room & Board Land Uses and Sizes Office areas 32,449 s uare feet Outlet warehouse 19,200 square feet Warehouse areas 168,797 s uare feet Su port areas 14,970 s uare feet Totals 235,416 snare feet . Ms. Martha Gabbert Mr. Daryl Fortier -2- July 22, 2003 Parking Spaces . The site currently contains 200 parking spaces. An additional 74 parking spaces are planned to be added on land adjacent tothe current development. In conjunction with adding these spaces, 20 more will be added on the north side of the existing building. A total of 94 spaces will be added, resulting in 294 on-site parking spaces. PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND NEEDS City of Golden Valley Requirements The City of Golden Valley requires 1 parking space for each 250 square feet of office space and 1 parking space for each 500 square feet of warehouse space. These requirements equate to the following parking requirements: Ci of Golden Valle Land Use Office areas Outlet warehouse Warehouse areas Su ort areas Totals Table 2 Parkin Re uirements for Room & Board Size Parkin S aces 32,449 s uare feet 130 19,200 s uare feet 38 168,797 s 'uare feet 338 14,970 square feet 30 235~16 536 . Parking Requirements for Nearby Cities The parking requirements in nearby cities were researched for comparison purposes. The results are shown below: Community Table 3 Parkin Re uirements for Nearb Communities Office Requirement Warehouse Requirement Eden Prairie Edina Plymouth Minnetonka St. Louis Park C stal New Ho e Applying these rates to the land uses and sizes for Room & Board results in parking space requirements ranging from 231 spaces to 333 spaces. . Total Re uirement 263 263 231 333 265 265 243 . . Ms. Martha Gabbert Mr. Daryl Fortier -3- July 22, 2003 Parking Demand and Supply Comparison Using nationally published parking data, the peak parking demand forthis development was calculated for a weekday and weekend condition. The weekday condition accounts for typical office and warehouse activities that occur Monday through Friday. The weekend condition accounts for the retail activities described earlier and minimal office and warehouse activities. For the weekday scenario, parking rates of3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of office space and 0.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of warehouse space were used. These rates resulted in a peak demand of 199 spaces. For the weekend scenario, parking rates of 0.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of office space, 0.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet of warehouse space, and 4.5 spaces per 1,000square feet of retail space were used. These rates resulted in a peak demand of 121 spaces. The current parking supply is 200 spaces. For parking calculations, the total available supply is reduced by 5 percent, resulting in the total effective supply. The effective supply takes into account parking inefficiencies due to space turnover, two spaces occupied by one vehicle, spaces occupied by things other than vehicles (e.g. snow), handicap spaces not used, etc. Therefore, the current effective supply available is 190 spaces. The calculations for parking demand were based on the entire building space as exists today. Some ofthis space, as shown in Table 1, is designated as support space. This space is used by occupants of the office and warehouse space and does not add any employees. Therefore, the calculations shown are conservatively high due to the nature of this building space. . . . Ms. Martha Gabbert Mr. Daryl Fortier -4- July 22, 2003 Parking Lot Operations Observations at the site indicate that during the weekday period, the on-'site parking supply adequately accommodates the actual parking demand. Visitors and employees are able to find a~ailable parking spaces with minimal difficulty. During the weekend condition, the parking supply is heavily used. The main lot north of the retail building is often full, resulting in customers parking in the spaces near the main doors or on the side of the frontage road. The addition of the proposed 94 parking spaces will help the weekend condition. While the proposed spaces will be located in the northeast portion of the property, which is not immediately adjacent to the retail area, customers will use the spaces when the main lot is full. We recommend that all employees park in this area in order to leave the spaces in the main lot available for customers. We also recommend that any customers with trailers or large trucks be directed to this lot for the same reason. We feel that the result of these recommendations will be improved parking lot operations. .- . . . Ms. Martha Gabbert Mr. Daryl Fortier -5- July 22, 2003 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information presented in this report, we have made the following conclusions and recommendations: · The City of Golden Valley code requires 536 parking spaces for the land uses found at the Room & Board facility. · Other nearby communities would require 231 to 333 parking spaces for the same land uses. · The calculated peak parking demand using national data for the weekday condition is 199 spaces. For the weekend condition, the peak demand is 121 spaces. · Under current conditions, the peak parking demand is slightly greater than the effective supply during the weekday condition and lower than the supply during the weekend condition.. · Under the future condition, the supply increases to 294 spaces, or an effective supply of279 spaces. The future supply is greater than both the weekday and weekend peak parking demand. · Based on the information contained in this report, we recommend using a parking rate of 1 space per 250 square feet for the office space and one space per 1,500 square feet of warehouse space. This equates to a requirement of 265 spaces, which will be met under the future condition with 294 spaces.W e feel these rates are conservative and result in an adequate parking supply for this facility. We also feel that the supply of 294 spaces will allow for some modest growth in the future. · We recommend that when the new 94 spaces are built, all employees be required to park in this area on weekends in order to leave the spaces in the main lot available for customers. We also recommend that any customers with trailers or large trucks be directed to this lot for the same reason. With the implementation of these recommendations, the parking conditions on weekends during the operation of the outlet sales facility should improve. Hey Memorandum Public Works 763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax) . Date: October 20,2003 To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer d Subject: Review of PUD No. 79, Amendment #2, Room and Board Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed plans for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment for Room and Board, PUD No. 79. The Room and Board site is located north of Trunk Highway 55, east of Schaper Road and west of Dahlberg Drive. The proposed PUD amendment consists of incorporating a portion of a property owned by the Golden Valley HRA into the existing site. The HRA property is located at the northeast corner of the Room and Board site. Room and Board intends to utilize the HRA property for additional parking as the existing business grows. Site Plan: . It is our understanding that the applicant does not plan on constructing the parking lot expansion shown on the site plan at this time. The expansion of the parking lot would occur as the need develops on site. Staff has identified site plan issues that will need to be addressed at the time of future construction, and issues that need to be addressed immediately. The proposed parking lot layout in the northeast corner of the site includes head-in parking along the east and north walls of the building. As proposed, this layout does not adequately provide access to the emergency doors located along each wall. The layout will need to be revised to provide access from each door to the driveway. This revision should be incorporated into plans that must be submitted at the time the parking lot is constructed. In addition, staff reserves the right to provide additional comments regarding the site layout at that time. Emergency access to the existing building also presents an immediate issue that needs to be addressed. Each of the fire access doors along the perimeter of the building has a small concrete pad immediately outside of the door. The rest of the area between the curb line and the building has been planted with native grasses and plants that grow as tall as four to five feet high. This tall plant growth makes access to the fire doors difficult . G:\Developments-HRA\Room and Board\Review 102003.doc . . in the summer; and limited snow removal prevents use of these access doors during the winter. Therefore, in order to provide adequate emergency access to the building for the entire year, six foot wide sidewalks must be constructed as soon as possible from each of the access doors to the curb. These sidewalks must be maintained, including snow removal, all year long. GradinQ, DrainaQe and Erosion Control: A City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit will be required at the time the parking lot is constructed. This permit application will include a grading, drainage and erosion control plan. Because this site has been previously expanded, the future parking lot construction will be required to drain entirely into a water quality pond. It appears that the existing pond to the north of the building can be utilized for this purpose. Tree Preservation: The construction of the future parking area will require compliance with the City of Golden Valley Tree Preservation Ordinance. Plans must be submitted at the time of construction. Summary: Public Works staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Room and Board PUD based upon the comments contained in this review, which are summarized as follows: 1) The applicant must construct, in a timely manner, sidewalks between emergency doors and the driveway surrounding the building. 2) Subject to the review and comments of other City staff. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections Gary Johnson, Building Official Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal . G:\Developments-HRA\Room and Board\Review 102003.doc P alley Memorandum Fire Department 763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax) To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: Memorandum - SU08-07, Room & Board Minor Subdivision Date: October 13 2003 cc: Mark Kuhnly, Fire Chief Listed below are the plan review comments for the proposed conditional use permit for Room & Board Minor Subdivision: 1. An approved fire department access road shall be provided around the entire building. Twenty feet minimum clear width is required. 2. The inside turning radius for fire department apparatus access road shall be 45 feet. 3. An approved access walkway leading from the fire apparatus access road to the exterior opening shall be provided. 4. Install no parking fire lane signs in accordance with the City of Golden Valley ordinance and the Golden Valley Fire Department installation procedures 5. The fire department access road and the required access doors shall not be obstructed by any materials including parking of vehicles, trailers and other materials that would hamper the operation of the fire department. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065. . . . Amendment No. 1 Room and Board Addition, P.U.D. No. 79 . City Council Approval: January 19.1999 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Project Name: Room and Board Addition, P.U.D. No. 79 Location: 4600,4650 and 4680 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN Legal Description: Room and Board Addition, PUD No. 79 Applicant: John and Martha Gabbert Address: 4600 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Owner: John and Martha Gabbert Address: 4600 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Zoning District: Industrial Permitted Uses: Development shall be limited to office, warehouse and outlet retail sales in a manner outlined in this permit. Components: A. Land Use Component: 1. Allowed uses within the three buildings at 4600, 4650, and 4680 Olson Memorial Highway are office, warehouse and outlet retail sales. The site plans (A 1 and A 1.2), prepared by Fortier and Associates, Inc. and dated 9/8/98 and 12/8/98 respectively, shall become a part of this permit. 2. Outlet retail sales shall be limited to the 4680 building and can occur only on Saturday and Sunday. The sales shall be limited to overstock and "scratch and dent" items from Room and Board stores. During the remainder of the week, the 4680 building may only be used for warehouse purposes. 3. A final plat of the lot consolidation shall be filed with the County. The plat must have "P.U.D. No. 79" in its title. . . . Room and Board Addition, PUD No. 79 (Amendment No.1) Page Two B. Construction 1. An office addition of 13,000 sq .ft. may be constructed between the buildings located at 4600 and 4650 Olson Memorial Highway and a warehouse addition of 56,000 sq.ft. may be constructed onto the rear of the building located at 4650 Olson Memorial Highway as shown on Site Plan A 1. 2. A fire lane around the site, as indicated on Site Plan A 1, shall be paved and have concrete curb and gutter. It shall be completed as soon as the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization and the City Engineer give approval to its construction. 3. All signs must meet the requirements for the Industrial Zoning District. There will be no signs that refer to the outlet store other than a small sign on the door and a directional sign near the street. No sign indicating an outlet store may be visible from Olson Memorial Highway. 4. Parking Assessment Plan Sheet A2, prepared by Fortier & Associates and dated 9/8/98, shall become part of the approved PUD permit. Of the 400 parking spaces indicated on the plan, at least 234 shall be constructed immediately. The remaining 166 parking spaces shown on Sheet A2 may be reserved as proof of future parking availability. At any time subsequent to the completion of this and other site improvements, if City staff determine that existing parking is not adequate to meet the needs of the on-site uses, the Chief of Fire and Inspection shall order additional construction, on one or more occasions, of some or all of the 166 "proof of parking" spaces indicated on Sheet A2. This action may be repeated as many times as necessary until all of the 400 parking spaces are constructed. The property Owner may also choose to construct any of the 166 "proof of parking" spaces at any time without being so ordered by the City. 5. The storm water management system proposed for the site shall meet the requirements of the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization and the City Engineer. 6. Except as otherwise specified in the conditions of the General Plan approval, all phases of site development shall be subject to the standards, approvals, fees, and other requirements that would arise in connection with a similar project outside a PUD. 7. The Landscaping Plan (L.1), dated 1/4/99, prepared by Fortier and Associates, Inc., shall become a part of the PUD Permit. This plan shall be submitted to the Building Board of Review (BBR) for review and approval. If the BBR requires changes to the landscaping plan beyond those indicated on plan L. t, such changes shall also be made part of the approved permit via an amended plan sheet signed and dated by the City's Building Official. 8. The uses on the site shall meet all applicable City, State and Federal standards. . . . Room and Board, PUD No. 79 (Amendment No.1) Page Three 9. Any new development or uses on the site shall require an amended PUD. C. Utilities and Grading 1. The architect has submitted a DrainageArea Plan (C1) dated 9/28/98, Grading Plan (C2) dated 8/28/98, and Contingency Grading Plan (C2) dated 8/28/98. These plans shall become a part of the PUD Permit subject to such changes required by the City Engineer or the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization. D. Circulation ComDonent 1. Fire lanes shall be established and posted along the private road system as required by the Public Safety Department and in conformity with City Code Section 9.12. It is hereby understood and agreed that this. amended Use Permit is a part of the City Council approval granted on January 19,1999. Any changes to the amended P.U.D. Permit for Room and Board, P.U.D. No. 79 shall require another amendment. Wftness:~~ (~ \ John and Martha Gabbert Date: ;J,/r/ 7 / CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Witness: 17JfJiJ t,rcfL By: \ .~ l Witness: Date: /. By: Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other City Code provisions, regulations and ordinances.