08-25-97 PC Agenda
:'.
.
.
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, August 25,1997
7pm
I.
Approval of Minutes - June 23, 1997
II.
Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning
Applicant: GBC Partners, LLP (Gary and Connie Larson)
Address: East side of Zane Avenue about 400 feet North of TH 55 Frontage
Road
Purpose: Rezoning of the property from Open Development to the Industrial
Zoning District. The applicant is proposing to add this piece of
property to the empty lot at 5828 Olson Memorial Highway in
order to construct an officelwarehouse on the site.
- SHORT RECESS -
III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council and Board of Zoning Appeals
IV. Other Business
A. Attendance Review
B. State Planning Conference in Rochester, MN
V. Adjournment
Planning Commission Guidelines for Public Input
The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. ( .
The Commission will recommend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon;. .
the Commission's determination of whether the proposed use is permitted under the Zoning
Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the proposed use will, or will not, adversely
affect the surrounding neighborhood.
The Commission holds informal public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to learn,
first-hand, what such proposals are, and to permit you to ask questions and offer comments.
Your questions and comments become part of the record and will be used by the Council, along
with the Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision.
With the completion of the informal public hearing(s) there will be a short recess before the
commission continu~s with the remainder of the agenda.
To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Commission
will utilize the following procedure:
1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the re~ommendation from staff.
Commission members may ask questions of staff.
2. The proponent will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the
Commission.
3.
The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so
indicate by raising their hands. The Chair may set a time limit for individual
questions/comments if a large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak.
Spokespersons for groups will have a longer period of time for questions/comments.
.
4. Please give your full name and address clearly when recognized by the Chair.
Remember, your questions/comments are for the record.
5. Direct your questions/comments to the Chair. The Chair will determine who will answer
your questions.
6. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had the
opportunity to speak initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information,
not rebuttal.
7. At the close of the public hearing, the Commission will discuss the proposal and take
appropriate action.
.
.
.
.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley
City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley,
Minnesota. The meeting was called to order by Chair Pentel at 7pm.
Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Groger, Kapsner,
Johnson, McAleese and Prazak. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of
Planning and Beth Knoblauch, City Planner, and Administrative Secretary, Mary
Dold.
I. Approval of Minutes - June 10, 1997
Moved by McAleese, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to
approve the June 10, 1997 minutes as submitted with the rewording of a
sentence found on Page Seven, Paragraph 6, second sentence.
II. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning
Applicant: GBC partners, LLP (Gary and Connie Larson)
Address:
East side of Zane Avenue about 400 feet North of TH 55
Frontage Road
Purpose:
Rezoning of the property from Open Development to
Industrial. The applicant is proposing to add this piece of
land to the empty lot at 5828 Olson Memorial Highway in
order to construct an office/warehouse on the site.
Mark Grimes gave a brief summary of his staff report dated June 18, 1997.
Grimes related to the Commission information on the applicants business, as an
acoustical ceiling distributor and where the business is now located.
Grimes told the Commission that in 1989 the property fronting Olson Memorial
was rezoned by the City from Open Development to Industrial to allow for the
construction of a parking lot. The request was made by FluiDyne who occupied
the building across from the subject property. Grimes commented that the
parking lot was never constructed.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Two
Grimes continued his report by saying that the present owner of the vacant land,
FluiDyne appeared before the Board of loning Appeals (BZA) this past winter
seeking variances in order to construct a small office/warehouse building on the
site. The BZA denied the variance requests and FluiDyne appealed to the City
Council, who then approved the requests. Grimes said that the proposed
building was never built. The owner, Len Frame, had intended to use the
building for his business but then decided that the building would not work for his
business. Grimes told the Commission that GBC Partners likes the area and
Golden Valley, and would like to stay in the area. He said that the applicants are
looking for a larger building. GBC are proposing to buy the property from Mr.
Frame and the approximate 11,800 sq.ft. parcel to the north now owned by R.L.
Johnson. The northern parcel would need to be rezoned and then the two
properties consolidated in order for GBC's proposal to work.
Grimes reviewed the zoning map of the City noting that this particular area has
several different districts with Residential and Business and Professional to the
east, Residential to the south (across Hwy. 55), and Industrial to the north and
west. He told the Commission that the residential homes to the east pre-date the
industrial buildings of the area in that they were built sometime in the late 50's or
early 60's.
Grimes commented on the topography of the proposed land relative to the
residential homes, noting the extreme difference from where the homes are to
where the proposed building would be. He also commented on issues of noise
and the structure of the building and how it would be viewed by the residents to
the east. Grimes noted that the applicants have talked with each of the
homeowners and reviewed its building plans and design.
Director Grimes talked about the need for an additional 1 0 feet of right-of-way for
lane Avenue which makes the proposed lots only 108 feet in width. He said that
the Subdivision Code requires all road right-of-ways in industrial areas be at
least 70 feet in width; lane Avenue right-of-way is only 50 feet in width.
Chair Pentel asked staff that when the FluiDyne land was rezoned from Open
Development to Industrial in 1989, if it was intended to be used as a parking lot.
Grimes said that the owner, Len Frame, said it would be used only as a parking
lot. Grimes continued to comment that today, employees from the existing
business, on the west side of lane, park their cars on the street because it is
closer to the entrance of the building.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Three
Pentel asked staff the depth of the residential lots. Grimes commented 136 feet
east to west, plus the street which is 60 feet in width. Pentel asked if the site
plan indicates how deep the back yards are of the residential lots. Grimes said
that the survey indicates that the houses are approximately 50 feet from the rear
property line.
Commissioner Groger asked staff if it is anticipated that these four single-family
lots would ever be rezoned to Industrial and does staff have any idea of how
these homes would be taken. Grimes responded that this area is not in a
redevelopment district and at this point in time any development would be a
private matter between a developer and the four home owners. He said that he
believes that because this is such a small area for redevelopment, he doubted if
the City would get involved. Grimes continued by saying that the land, where the
four single-family homes are located, would have to increase in value in order for
someone to want to develop; the market needs to catch up in order for a
developer to want to develop this area. He believes that the single-family homes
will remain for quite some time. Grimes said if the road east of the homes and
single-family parcels were combined, the site could probably support a smaller
office building. Groger noted that the businesses to east of the residential homes
are nonconforming, and that if the single-family homes were redeveloped to an
office building, there would be very long buildings along the frontage road.
Grimes commented that many years ago buildings were allowed closer to the
street than what is allowed today.
Commissioner Kapsner commented that it seems that in the past, and now, the
residents have enjoyed the island-liked area and have not anticipated any kind of
pressure to change. Grimes said that the property owners like living in this area
but there are concerns with noise from Tennant and odor problems from another
industrial use in the area which has been remedied. He commented that
recently one of the single-family homeowners bought one of the four homes in
this area and knew about its surrounding uses.
Applicant, Connie Larson (GBC Partners) came forward to answer questions.
Pentel asked Ms. Larson to confirm that she had an existing business on Zane
Avenue. Larson commented that she and her husband now occupy space at
1150 Zane Avenue and their business is known as Twin City Supply.
"
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Four
Commissioner Kapsner asked the applicant about the noise that would be
generated from the business. Larson said she runs a distributing business and
the trucks used in this business now run on Zane Avenue so no additional traffic
or noise would be generated.
Pentel asked the applicant about the height of the building. Larson noted that
the height of the building would be 22 feet on the outside. There was some
question as to whether this footage was accurate. After review of the plans, it
was noted that the building height would be 29 feet.
Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing.
Jim Trettil, 5802 Olson Memorial Highway believes that a building cannot be
placed on the site due to the lot size. He said he was upset about FluiDyne
originally having the lot rezoned to industrial for parking and then earlier this year
wanted to put up a building. Trettil talked about FluiDyne receiving variances for
a building they wanted to occupy and now finds out that someone other than the
owner, is proposing a different building for the site. He had hoped that the
industrial lot and single-family lots would all be taken one day and believes that
this development will cause his property value to decrease. Trettil talked about
the noise coming from the Tennant Company.
Georgia Goodman, 5804 Olson Memorial Highway, commented that her biggest
concern is the steep hill behind her house and the possibility of erosion. She said
that she requested from the City a variance some 20 years ago and was denied
which caused hard feelings. Goodman said she moved to this area because she
could afford the house.' She would hope that there would be some preservation
of trees on this site.
Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing.
Pentel informed the audience that the City Council granted variances for
FluiDyne to construct a building on the proposed site in the winter of 1997.
Commissioner Prazak asked what the elevation is between the homes and the
proposed building. Pentel said between 15 to 25 feet. Grimes review the survey
noting the elevations. Prazak asked if the top of the building would be even with
backyards of the single-family homes. Pentel answered that the top of the
building would be above the back yards. Grimes briefly talked about the
proposed building height.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Five
Grimes said that he could asked the City Engineer that if the homes were
removed could this land somehow be lowered to that of the proposed lot. He felt
that it would be very difficult to develop a site that consisted of the proposed land
and the single-family homes no matter how it was approached.
Pentel commented that she represented the Planning Commission on the Board
of Zoning Appeals (BZA) when FluiDyne requested variances for a building it
was proposing. She said she finds it difficult to support a rezoning that will
become a nonconforming lot.
Kapsner asked Grimes when taking into account the existing variances, and with
the additional 1 0 feet of right-of-way, could a building pe built on the site today.
Grimes said that a smaller building proposed by Mr. Frame could be built right
now according to the previous variances granted.
Commissioner Johnson asked staff the likelihood of the small 11,800 sq.ft.
parcel, to the rear, would ever be developed on its own. Grimes commented that
it is unlikely.
Kapsner commented that the proposal is not an ideal situation but it does work
on the proposed land. He said he doesn't see the proposed land being added to
any other business in the area; and therefore is inclined to go along with the
request knowing the BZA will hear a request from the applicant for variances.
Groger commented that it is difficult to separate the required variances from the
rezoning request. He ~aid that he would save judgment to the BZA and believes
that the rezoning makes sense because it is consistent with the area.
Johnson said that she agreed with Groger that the proposed 11,800 sq.ft. piece
of land to the rear should be rezoned.
Commissioner McAleese commented that he would prefer to see a residential
use but agrees that at an engineering standpoint, it would not be feasible. He
agrees with his fellow commissioners that the proposed small piece of land
should be rezoned to Industrial.
Prazak said that he also supports the rezoning noting the reasons already given.
He sees no USe for this small piece of land by itself.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Six
MOVED by Groger, seconded by Johnson and motion carried by a vote of 5-1
(one seat vacant) to recommend approval to the City Council for rezoning of the
property from Open Development to Industrial.
III. Informal Public Hearing - Subdivision
Applicant: GBC Partners, LLP (Gary and Connie Larson)
Address: 5828 Olson Memorial Highway and the north 100 foot Lot
Purpose: Consolidate the vacant lot located at the Northeast Quadrant
of Zane Avenue and the Olson Memorial Frontage Road
with the lot located directly to the north which is
approximately 11,800 sq.ft. in area. The applicant is
proposing to construct an officelwarehouse on the site.
Director Mark Grimes gave a brief summary of his report noting that the request
was for a full subdivision procedure because a portion of the proposed land is
unplatted. He said the proposed land is 1.2 acres in size (Lot 1 = 44,000 sq.ft.
and Parcel 2 = 11,800 sq.ft.). He said that if the City Council approved the
rezoning of the property, both pieces would then be zoned industrial.
Grimes talked about the issue of an additional 1 0 feet of dedication of right-of-
way for Zane Avenue. He pointed out according to the Subdivision Code, Zane
Avenue is required to be 70 feet in width. At present there is a 25 foot easement
on either side for a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. Another 10 feet would need to
be added to the east side from the proposed subdivision. Grimes said that he
has talked with the City Engineer which was also his recommendation.
Grimes briefly talked about the lot being only 108 feet in width after the right-of-
way dedication. He noted the applicant would be appearing before the BZA to
resolve setback issues. Grimes talked about the grade and elevation of the
proposed land and believed that many trees would have to be removed. He
reminded the Commission that the City does not have a tree preservation
program but would hope that as many trees as possible would be saved,
especially along the east side as a buffer to the single-family residences. Grimes
commented that the Board of Building Review would review the applicant's
plans, including landscaping.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Seven
Grimes said that based on the. Planning Commission's action of rezoning the
smaller parcel, consolidation of the two pieces of property makes sense. He
believes something could be built on the consolidated land, if not the building
being proposed, which is acceptable to most of the neighbors according to the
applicants.
Grimes commented that the applicant will need to supply a grading plan before
the proposal goes before the City Council. He said that MnDOT has been sent
the required information for review, because it abuts a county road, but doubts if
they would have any comments.
McAleese asked Grimes to review his five conditions found in the staff memo.
Grimes reviewed the conditions. He commented on the site plan noting that
more ideal placement of the southern driveway would be placed farther away
from the Olson Memorial frontage road. He said that Zane Avenue on the east
side may need to be marked as a "no parking" zone.
McAleese asked if the additional 1 0 feet on the proposed land would be by
easement or right-of-way. Knoblauch said code requires it to be by right-of-way.
Connie Larson, applicant, talked about her family's business in that it is a good
business for their surrounding neighbors, for Golden Valley and for themselves.
She told the Commission that she met with the neighbors. She talked about
meeting with the residential neighbors and knows of their concerns. Ms. Larson
said that the her business has been in Golden Valley for 22 years, that it is a
family business and that they are concerned about its customers, business and
those around the business. Ms. Larson talked about the building plans and the
design of the building noting the portion to the rear which would help shield the
business trucks from the single-family residents.
Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing.
Jim Trettil, 5802 Olson Memorial Highway, asked the applicant when they found
out the land was for sale. Larson commented that she never considered the
vacant FluiDyne land until a Realtor told her about the smaller parcel to the rear
of the FluiDyne lot. She knew about the property being for sale sometime in
March or April of this year. Larson also said that she was looking for a piece of
land to build a building large enough to allow the business to expand.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Eight
Trettil commented that, when FluiDyne was proposing its building, parking was a
concern. He said that the building now being proposed is larger with more
employees. Larson explained that they took the building being proposed by
FluiDyne and extended it by 100 feet in length. Larson told the Commission that
she had read through the BZA minutes and was aware of the residents concerns
and that was one reason for the way the building was designed. She talked
about the parking situation and that the business only has nine employees, that
most of the building would be used for storage of their product. Larson said that
most of the materials are delivered by truck, although their is some walk in traffic.
She said trucks deliver about three times a day and that the business trucks
would be parked inside the building at night and on weekends.
Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing.
MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Kapsner and motion carried by a vote of 5-1
(one seat vacant) to recommend to the City Council approval of the Preliminary
Plat subject to the five conditions as follows:
1. The Commission recommend approval of the rezoning of the north lot of this
consolidation from Open Development to Industrial.
2. The final plat indicate an additional ten feet of right-of-way for Zane Avenue.
3. A grading and drainage plan be submitted for review and approval by the
Engineering Department.
4. The comments of MnDOT be received prior to final plat approval.
5. All driveway cuts to Zane Avenue be approved by the Engineering
Department.
IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority,
City Council and Board of Zoning Appeals
A. Update on Medley Hills Townhome Development.
City Planner Knoblauch updated the Commission on Medley Hills Townhome
Development. She said that Hennepin County would not allow another driveway
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Nine
on Medicine Lake Road. Knoblauch said that the developer would be looking at
placing the driveway on Ensign closer to Medicine Lake Road and place it
between the houses.
B. Hennepin County Bike Trails
City Planner Knoblauch told the Commission that the proposed Hennepin County
bike trail has been delayed for two years but the Schaper property bike trail
would probably be built.
V. Other Business
A. Discussion of State-Mandated Comprehensive Plan update
City Planner Beth Knoblauch reviewed her staff memo to the Planning
Commission.
VI. Adjournment
Chair Pentel adjourned the meeting at 8:35pm.
Emilie Johnson, Secretary
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
AUGUST 20, 1997
William S. Joynes, City Manager
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment for Parcel 2
of the proposed "GBC Partners Addition" (Parcel is the north
1 00 feet of the property located at NE Quadrant of Zane Avenue
and Olson Memorial Frontage Road) from Open Development to
the Industrial Zoning District -- GBC Partners (Connie and Gary
Larson), Applicant
At a regular meeting of the City Council of July 15,1997, GBC Partners
presented its request for a rezoning on the above mentioned property. At that
meeting two of the four owners of the single-family residences to the east were
present. They told the Council they were opposed to the construction of the
office/warehouse. (See attached Council minutes dated July 15, 1997 for
resident remarks.)
Council action was a 3-2 vote in favor of the rezoning. A rezoning request
requires a 4/5's vote. As noted in the Council minutes, Council Members
Johnson and Micks stated their reasons for denial.
GBC Partners has again applied for a rezoning of the property. The applicants
believe that information was lacking for the Council to review the proposal
adequately. The Larsons have talked with Council Members Johnson and Micks
to get a better understanding of their concerns. They have also met with three of
the four residents to the east. Attached are two signed copies of a statement,
prepared by GBC Partners, noting two of the residents' acceptance of the
project. The Larsons told staff that another resident is taking a neutral stand on
the issue and did not want to sign the statement. Mr. Trettil, 5802 Olson
Memorial Highway, was not contacted because the Larsons were told by the
neighbors that he has not changed his opinion concerning the proposal. The
statement also notes how GBC Partners would work with the neighbors to
screen the building.
.
The Larsons have submitted revised plans which show the building to be 25 feet
in height, not the previously shown 29 feet. They have also submitted an
elevation plan that shows the relationship of the height of the building to the
residential properties. There is also a colored rendering of what the front and
side of the proposed building would look like.
Attached are the BZA minutes from June 24, 1997 which have not previously
been submitted to the Planning Commission. Also attached is information
presented to the Commission at a prior meeting.
The Subdivision request that also went before the City Council the night of July
15 was tabled until a future City Council meeting. This item will be put back on
the agenda when the Larsons go before the Council with their rezoning request.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the subject property be rezoned from Open Development
to Industrial. It is still staff's belief that leaving this small parcel zoned Open
Development does not make sense, and in the long run it should be the same
zoning as the properties to the north, south and west.
mkd
.
Attachments: Minutes of the City Council meeting dated July 15, 1997
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals dated July 22, 1997
Narrative, Statements, Colored Renderings
Comments from MnDOT dated July 30, 1997
Memo to William Joynes dated July 10, 1997 with attachments
Plans (attached)
(Additional background information is available, if needed)
.
2
Regular Meeting of the City Council
July 15, 1997
Page 2
---- --!>
.~~
~.;...-j>.
MOVED by JOQ, seconded by LeSuer and m()tion>earried unanimously to authorize the
issuance of gener~I~.I~~enses #16702/-/#16706 and #6952 - #6954.
*Minutes of Boards ~'nd C~m~to.ns~///
.,.:&0' "':.""~ // '~" .
---,7 ,-"",_ ./._ ~__
MOVED by Johnson, secondedobyteSuer and~c~rried unanimously to receive and file
the minutes received as fol~ws; ~;_"'
. 4'/. '''''-.-.;
Planning Commis~04une 23, 1997
~-:.>/
Public Hearinll :-qjj;llnao,," #163 - Rezoolng to Industrial Zoning Dis,trict - I\!or\h j 00 F:llJ~f
Northeast Quadrant of Zane Avenue and Olson Memorial Highwav Frontage Ro~d ~~d I'c
Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Gec Partners Addition
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Russ~1I and motion carried unanimously to bring on the
table for consideration the Rezoning to Industrial Zoning District - North 1 00 Fe~t of Northeast
Quadrant of Zane Avenue and Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road and Preliminary Plat
Approval - GBC Partners Addition.
amnie Larson, Applicant and Mike Leuer, Moen Leuer Construction, reviewed the request and
"'nswered questions from the Council.
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, presented the staff report al1d an~wered
questions from the Council. Fred Salsbury answered questions from the Council.
Kevin McAleese, Planning Commission, presented the Commission report.
. ie Mayor opened the meeting for public input and persons present to do so were afforded
the opportunity to express their views thereon.
Jim Trettil, 5802 Olson Memorial Highway, opposed to the rezoning, asked how high the
retaining wall is going to be, doesn't want to look at a 2 story building Qut his back door, asked
if there is going to be a sound barrier wall, feels the value of his property will be lowered, feels
they have been lied to by Mr. Frame, and doesn't want snow to be removed or plowed in the
middle of the night.
Georgia Goodwin, 5806 Olson Memorial Highway, stated she has built a 6 foot fence which
she was not going to and stated that was a hardship, expressed concern over the possibility of
lighting coming in her back window, that the lights are directed down and away from the
neighborhood, expressed concern over hill erosion, sewer capacity, drainage, preservatIon of
as many trees as feasible.
_e Mayor closed the public hearing.
/91
.
.
.
Regular Meeting of the City Council
July 15, 1997
Page 3
~~~~~ - ~~~ce ~3 - ~~ ~~I~~ D~_ N~ 1~~ F~~
~~::;~:~t~o...~~~:~~~~~~~=~: G~G ';::e':Z~~~~~~=: ~ge d d r
The following ordinance was MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Russell:
ORDINANCE #163, 2ND SERIES .
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Rezoning from Open Development Zoning District
to Industrial Zoning District
The North 100 Feet of the Property located at the Northeast
Quadrant of Zane Avenue and the Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road
GBC Partners, lLP, Applicant
MOVED by leSuer, seconded by Russell, and motion carried to deny Ordinance #163, 2nd
Series. Upon a roll call vote, the vote was as follows:
ANDERSON - YES JOHNSON - NO LESUER - YES MICKS - NO RUSSELL _ YES
Council Member Johnson- stated the following rationale for denying the rezoning request:
1.
3. The extreme number of variances that are needed to make the building possible on the
property indicates that it is the inappropriate use.
Council Member Micks stated her rationale as follows:
1 . The fact that the residences to the east were built long before this proposal for
industrial use of. the property is an important factor because the residences are
established in the area.
2. The rezoning requested requires us to rezone it to an nonconforming structure absent
the number of large variances requested of the BZA.
3.
Variances should not be used to push residents out of their homes and into selling their
property which may be an effect of the rezoning and proposed use of the combined
parcels.
I';
Regular Meeting of the City Council
July 15, 1997
.age 4
Public Hearing - Ordinance #163 - Rezoning to Industrial Zoning District - North 100 Feet of
Northeast Quadrant of Zane Avenue and Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road and Public
Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - GBC Partners Addition - Continued
4. The variances necessary for the proposed use of the combined parcels are too great.
A 72 foot variance is inappropriate for the combined parcels; the structure that the
variance permits and its impact on the residential neighborhood to the east is
detrimental to the residences.
Mark Grimes, Director of PJanning and Deyelopment, stated the Council may want to ask the
applicant about consideration of the preliminary plat because without the rezoning of the
property they may not be interested in purchasing the property from R. L. Johnson.
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Russell and motion carried unanimously to table the
requested action on the preliminary plat approval of GBC Partners Addition until staff has had
an opportunity to talk to the applicants.
PUQlic Hearing - Ordinance 164 - General Plan Approval - PUD #75 - Menards. Inc.
The following ordinance was MOVED by LeSuer, seconded by Johnson:
.
ORDINANCE #164, 2ND SERIES /
,AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
'.A.pproval of General Plan of DeveloPl11eht
. Menard Addition, PUD #75 /'
''', Menard, Inc., Applicant/"
Robert Corey, representing the applic'ant,. stated they/are not going to subdivide the land and
doesn't feel the property needs to be p'iatted as the survey will take several weeks and
additional money and he doesn't feel it willserv~ }any purpose.
. ''4t.
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Dev~16pmentpresented the staff report. Allen Barnard
answered questions regarding the PUD prP"cedures.' ",
// '''""
.The Mayor opened the meeting for p{Jblic input and personS'lJresent to do so were afforded
the opportunity to express their vi~ws thereon. Hearing and seeing no one, the Mayor closed
the public hearing. /
/
//
MOVED by LeSuer, secqnc:ted by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve
Ordinance #164, 2nd.Se.ges. Upon a roll call vote, the vote was as follows:
/
ANDERSON - YES /JOHNSON - YES LESUER - YES MICKS - YES RUSSEbL;., YES
./
.pproval of R~{~sts for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park
MOVED by/Johnson, seconded by LeSuer and motion carried unanimously to approve the
requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. 15Z
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24,1997
P e 10
.
-3.5 feet off the required '20 feet to a distance of 16.5 feet fot the
oversized overhang facing Flag Avenue. ,.
~/
/-
To make the existing house legally nonconforming and:to allow for the
construction of the wood decklwalkway on the front of'the house.
",//'
;'.
T
Grimes stated that to the steep slope, the Village Council iry,October of 1965 granted a
waiver for this lot, an ers along Flag Avenue, for 15 feet qffthe required 35 foot front
yard setback to a distan . f 20 feet. The applicant is proposing to construct a wood deck
from the front entrance of house to the south. New steps, which ar~ not part of the
variance, will make it possib " get from the front yard fo the garage area on the south
side. The applicant is putting., ,osts which will help support the large overhang. The
posts are located 3.5 feet into th~" equired setbac~' of 20 feet. The deck will also be 3.5
feet into the side setback. The po' on the nor:th side of the front entrance will have
footings into the ground; the deck w ot be continued to this side of the house.
"
/
Knisely stated that he hired an arborist ssist in regrading in reference to the oak trees
in the front. The grade was raised in th~ .'; 's due to the construction of the street and Mr.
Knisely wants to stop the choking of the tre' " Since the existing steps were in bad repair
and had pulled several inches away from the" ,puse, Knisely removed them and relieved
the grade around the trees. He wa'nts to repls '; a porch and take care of the sagging
overhang which is causing the siding to buckle. e posts become a structural element
requiring a variance. The porch is a raised structu requiring a variance. The neighbor to
the north has a similar situation; the neighbor to the ,; uth does not.
.~ '1
~' .
Swedberg asked the owner if his wooden porch will 100 ',~.ke the neighbor's and Knisely
answered yes, but it will be smaller. Shaffer stated that s ' it looks like the neighbor's
porch, and will be ip"j(eeping with the neighborhood, he se ',0 problem. Swedberg also
stated that the pqtch would be compatible with the neighbor' d.
, / ~
MOVED by R6lachek, seconded by Swedberg and motion carrie'" nanimously to grant the
Waivers o~ection 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback - 3.5 fe~ " ff the required 20 feet
to a distance of 16.5 feet for the proposed wooden deck/walkway; a " -3.5 feet off the
requir 20 feet to a distance of 16.5 feet for the oversized overhang g Flag Avenue
to ke the existing house legally non-conforming and to allow for the c. ruction of the
od deck/walkway on the front of the house.
s in attendance.
.
(7)
Property located at the Northeast Corner of Zane and Olson Memorial Highway
Frontage Road (Map 12) (97-6-29)
GBC Partners. LLP - Gary and Connie Larson
.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24, 1997
Page 11
Request:
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Front Yard Setback - 20 feet off
the required 35 feet to a distance of 15 feet for the lack of green space
on Zane Avenue North for both the building and parking areas; and
.
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(1) Side Yard Setback - 72 feet
off the required 100 feet to a distance of 28 feet for the proposed
building on the east side; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Side Yard Setback - 35 feet
off the required 50 feet to a distance of 15 feet for the proposed
parking at its closest point on the east side of the lot; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 7 Loading and Parking Requirements _
- 12 spaces off the required 38 spaces for 26 parking spaces.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of an office/warehouse in the Industrial
Zoning District.
Gary and Connie Larson, of GBC Partners, LLP; Brad Moen of Moen Lever Construction;
Dan Swartz, realtor; and neighbors Florine Larson, Vickie Trettel, and Georgia Goodwin
were in attendance. .
Grimes first recou':1ted the history of this property. In December, 1996, the BZA denied
several variances that would have permitted FluiDyne from constructing a smaller, 10,075
sq. ft. building on the same property. FluiDyne appealed this decision to the City Council
and the Council decided to grant the variances. Since that time, FluiDyne has decided not
to build on the site. They have tried to market the site to others to construct a building
using the variances granted by the Council. FluiDyne now has entered into a purchase
agreement with GBC Partners to purchase the site in order to allow for the construction of
a 16,575 sq. ft. building. This building would become the headquarters for Golden Valley
Supply, a distributor of ceiling tiles. They have been located in Golden Valley for 22 years.
They are currently a renter in a building to the north at Golden Valley Road and Zane
Avenue. Their desire now is to own their own building in Golden Valley. They have stated
that sites are difficult to find.
In order to make the site large enough to accommodate a building that size, GBC has
entered into a purchase agreement on the small, 11,800 sq. ft. Parcel 2 to the north of the
FluiDyne site which is now owned by R.L. Johnson. (The preliminary plat submitted to the
Planning Commission shows the two lots as Parcel 1 [FluiDyne property] and Parcel 2
[R.L. Johnson property].)
Last night the Planning Commission reviewed two items relating to this property. First, the .
rezoning of Parcel 2 from Open Development to Industrial which the Planning Commission
recommended. Second, the preliminary plat of the "GBC Addition" which combines the two
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24,1997
Page 12
.
lots into one which they also recommended. The BZA may take those recommendations
into consideration when they make their decision.
The proposed GBC structure is.significantly larger than the FluiDyne proposal. However,
the lot is 11,800 sq. ft. larger. Before the necessary variances are listed, there is one other
issue that will effect this proposal and the extent of the variances. Because the property
must be subdivided, the City requires that all streets in the Industrial Zone have a 70 foot
right-of-way. Zane Avenue is only 50 feet wide in this area. As shown on the survey, the
curb is only three feet from the right-of-way line. The staff is recommending that an
additional 10 feet of right-of-way be dedicated for Zane Avenue from the GBC parcels.
This essentially n:'Iakes the lot 1 0 feet narrower. Because of the traffic in this area, the staff
believes that it is necessary to take this additional property. This means that the proposed
GBC building will be even closer to the Zane Avenue right-of-way.
The staff also believes that landscaping of any site is important, especially in this case
because of its adjacency to residential properties. There may also be concerns about the
design of the building and placement of equipment on the roof.
Golden Valley Supply has been in Golden Valley for 22 years and plans to stay but if they
try to sell this property it may be difficult due to the lack of parking. Although parking is
allowed on street at this time, that could change in the future.
.
Groger asked how trucks would access and turn around and Grimes asked the Larson's to
talk to that issue. Groger stated that either cars wouldn't be able to park next to the
loading docks or trucks would not be able to reach the dock. One option would be to have
proof of parking meaning that the space would be available but not striped. If requested by
the City the space must be turned into parking. Groger was concerned about adequate
maneuvering space. Also, substantial grading is needed as the residential owners are
about a20 foot drop from there. Grimes pointed out that when Zane first went in it took
space from the lot which resulted in this narrow property.
Swedberg stated that the two parcels will be combined when the City Council agrees to it.
On the assumption that it will be approved with the 10 foot right-of-way for widening Zane,
the property can be dealt with whether or not the proponents continue with this plan.
Grimes stated that the rezoning made sense but variances are other issues. Depending
on what the Board does tonight, it still goes to the City Council as a whole package which
gives the Council the entire picture.
.
Shaffer invited the proponents to come forward. Connie Larson stated that Golden Valley
Supply is a 22 year old acoustic ceiling tile distributor. They bring in product and resell it.
There is no manufacturing. It is a family owned business and their children have shown
interest in continuing in the business. Their trucks are smaller and are kept inside at night.
The trucks and the building are well cared for inside and out. She showed pictures of the 4
docks now and the interior showing how well everything is cared for. Inventory is racked.
There are nine employees including the two owners. They deliver to most customers using
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24, 1997
Page 13
five trucks of different small sizes. All their traffic passes in front now so there will be no
increase in traffic. They are interested in owning their own building and want to stay in
Golden Valley. Mark Grimes provided them with a list of available properties and they
looked at several. They put in an offer on Boone and 10th but lost the property. They
looked at other buildings and properties and none fIt their needs. Then they became
aware of Parcel 2 adjacent to the FluiDyne property and together the lots are big enough
for their proposed building. They understand that it is a difficult piece of land due to the
needed variances. No building could be built without variances. They worked hard trying
to make the building more agreeable with the neighbors. They jogged out the loading dock
to screen the trucks from the residences to the east. Customers come one or two at a time
and they drive ins.ide of the building to load. They are there for only 5 to 7 minutes. Larger
trucks use the pull-in dock but only once or twice a week.
.
Sell asked what type of trucks come into the dock and Ms. Larson said over the road
trailers come from Chicago once or twice a week directly to their dock. Sell stated that the
site plan shows that a 60 foot trailer could access the site. They used the largest truck
dimensions to make sure it would work. Ms. Larson stated that they planned the building
this size to keep it for another 10 to 20 years or more since their children are interested in
the business.
Ms. Larson then talked about the office area which is at the south end of the building. The .
vestibule is handicapped accessible and there is one more office than needed at this time.
There is also a break room for employees.
After the plans were drawn Ms. Larson went to visit four neighbors. One neighbor did not
want to talk to Ms. Larson possibly due to FluiDyne getting the variances and then selling
the lot. Ms. Larson stressed that GBe had nothing to do with the first plan. Ms. Larson
talked to the other neighbors including the Epsons who are not here tonight. Golden Valley
Supply operates form 7:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, no weekends and no
nights. There is no manufacturing so there is no smell and no noise. They take care of
their property and their people. They intend to keep as many trees as possible. The
neighbors with whom Ms. Larson spoke seemed happy with the plan.
Swedberg asked about parking. Ms. Larson said that there are 26 parking places and only
9 employees. There will be one or two will call customers at the max but they will drive into
the building. Employees stay with the company a long time due to the family feeling of the
business. Swedberg pointed out that the swing of the trucks will take some of the parking
spaces. Ms. Larson said the plan is for 70 foot trucks but typically the trucks are only 50
feet. She indicated that Sell recognizes that it will work.
Polachek asked about the height of the interior of the building and Ms. Larson stated that it
is planned at 24 feet. Polachek asked about the elevation of the houses and the building .
being about 10 feet higher. Grimes stated that the homes range from an elevation of 291
feet to 303 feet (as indicated on the preliminary plat). The street elevation is 283 feet and
the site will be graded down to 277 feet or 273 feet and the goal will be to lower the
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24, 1997
Page 14
. building as much as possible. They will try to balance the building and estimates that the
height of the floor will be 277 ft. Polachek indicated that the roof will be higher than the
floor of the houses. Brad Moen, of Moen Lever Construction, indicated that the outside
wall will be decorative and attractive and that there will be no noise. The building will be
25.6 feet high. Grimes pointed out that the homes will be about 70 to 90 feet from the
building (60 to 70 feet from the property line plus the 28 foot setback). Ms. Larson stated
that the windows will be in the front and the decorative block walls will face the homes.
Moen added that there will be plantings, too.
Shaffer asked where the heating and air conditioning equipment will go and Moen stated
that it can be screened on top of the building or placed on the ground. The air conditioning
will be a small unit, approximately five ton. The warehouse area will not be air conditioned.
The other ventilation equipment can be put inside.
Groger commented that the size of the building is approximately 2,500 sq. ft. larger than
the FluiDyne plan and Moen responded that although the company doesn't need that much
space now, they are building for the future. He also pointed out that when Parcel 2 was
added the building coverage is less than with the FJuiDyne site. Golden Valley Supply will
use 26% of the site for building.
.
Groger asked about lowering the height at the north end where the homes are and Ms.
Larson answered that the space is needed for storage. Sell asked how inventory is
handled and Ms. Larson answered that it is racked using fork lifts.
Swedberg stated that the parking bothers him the most. Ms. Larson indicated that she
knows it is a difficult question but they have only 9 employees and are not likely to have
more. Swedberg stated that they may not be the owners in the future. Moen stated that
the parking requirements are very high in Golden Valley. He believes that the building has
plenty of parking long term. Ms. Larson added that new buildings have larger warehouses
and smaller offices due to downsizing and that the parking needs have dropped
accordingly. Grimes said that if the owners wanted to sell the building, a small
manufacturer could use the it but parking could be a problem. Sell gave the example of a
larger building that needs only 4 people to run it by using computers and robots.
Shaffer invited the neighbors to speak. Georgia Goodwin stated that she believes that the
City Council will override the vote if it is not approved tonight. She stated that this is a
better proposal than the last one because no one will be parking behind her house but she
is worried about the loss of trees and about the hill collapsing. When she moved into the
house she expected the lot to stay as a parking lot. Now it is hazardous having parking on .
the street due to the curves. Swedberg asked when she moved in and she answered 7
years ago. Sell commented that a parking lot could be poorly maintained and worse than a
nice building that is well taken care of. Besides that, parking lots are plowed at night where
this building would be shut down at night.
.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24, 1997
Page 15
Sell continued that this property could be sold to an absentee owner. It is an advantage
having the owners actually working in the building and living in the area. Grimes added
that the Building Board of Review will require a landscape plan.
.
Swedberg clarified that in the last 25 years the City Council has overruled the Board no
more than 5 or 10 times, it is a rarity. Goodwin said that the Council didn't even
compromise. Swedberg pointed out that the Courtcil cannot compromise. It must either
accept or reject.
Swedberg stated that he voted in favor last time because he thought it was a' good
compromise. This one is also a good deal and if Goodwin thinks it is a better deal then it
makes him even more in agreement. He wants to make the best deal for the neighbors.
The next neighbor, Florine Larson, has lived there since 1952. She stated that she has
nothing against the plan but wants a green strip. She was concerned about losing trees.
She also asked what will keep the hill from washing down. Shaffer responded that a
grading plan will be required. Moen added that they will keep as many trees as possible.
Florine Larson restated her concern about the hill. Swedberg asked her if she thinks this is
a better plan and she answered yes. Sell stated that she remembers how it used to be but
it will not stay wild. Swedberg added that it will only stay green if someone owns it and
keeps it green. The Board is wrestling with the issues. Florine Larson stated that the .
street parking is dangerous. Sell stated that the City could no park the street. Florine
Larson's last question was why her house number is 5808 when the house across the
street is 5800. Swedberg said she would need to talk to whomever made that decision.
The other neighbor in attendance, Vickie Trettel, spoke next. She has lived at 5802 Olson
Hwy for 20 years and her husband has been there for 22 years. They are not happy about
the building because it will be 9 to 12 feet high behind them. They want the BZA to know
that they are not happy. They have already called the police several times because of
after hours noise, motorcycles, and beer and pop cans in their yard from another industrial
neighbor. Swedberg said that this parking lot is pretty small for motorcycles to roar. Trettel
responded that if it is big enough for semis, it is big enough for motorcycles. She added
that if anyone wants to come to their house with a checkbook, they will listen.
.
Since no one else from the audience wished to speak, Shaffer closed the public
discussion.
Groger stated that he is bothered by the parking issue and asked Grimes if Golden Valley
parking is adequate. Grimes stated that for warehouses it is more than adequate. Existing
warehouses don't have parking problems, they tend to have empty parking lots. But they
could sell the building and the new owner could have more employees. He gave an
example of an existing building that won't sell due to lack of parking spaces.
.
Groger said he would like the setbacks maintained and asked Grimes what the setback
would be if the property is Industrial and Grimes answered 20 feet. This plan conforms.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
June 24, 1997
Page 16
.
Grimes stated that in some situations with Industrial next to Residential, the City has
required a buffer zone that can only be used as a parking lot. In other situations buildings
are next to each other and there is generally no problem. Companies have been
cooperative resolving problems with neighbors. He added that in Golden Valley there are
28,000 full time jobs and 20,000 residents, a bigger percentage than the entire area except
one small town to the south. In the long run, things tend to get worked out.
Swedberg stated his concern about the parking but added that there is a risk in every
decision. In this case, the business is quiet, there is minimal traffic, the company has a
reputation of being a good neighbor. The owners will review the trees and landscaping.
He stated that this is the best they can do and that it is a good risk. He stated that he is in
favor.
MOVED by Swedberg and seconded by Groger to approve the variances as requested
with the condition that no equipment go on the roof. The motion was amended to include
that the Building Board of Review give consideration to the greenery to make the building
as suitable as possible in reference to the neighbors.
Polachek stated his concern about a 280 foot long building.
'.
Shaffer stated that this is probably the best building for the site and that the proponents
have done a good job with the plan. It will be a quiet building, and a good neighbor, but
that is as far as he can go. He stated that in his opinion, the Residential predates Industrial
use. The property was originally zoned as Open Development It was pushed into being a
parking lot expansion for FluiDyne. This may be the most nondisruptive but future uses
could be anything. The proposed parking is enough for this company but the future is
unknown and it could end up an empty building due to the lack of parking. The space may
be adequate for semis now but in the future that could change and trucks would be backing
off the street. The variances requested are the biggest the Board has seen and a normal
property would be declined. BZA variances shouldn't be used to push residents of the
homes into selling their property.
The question was called. The vote was Swedberg, Sell, and Groger voting yea and
Shaffer and Polachek voting nay. The motion passed 3 to 2.
III. Other Business
. Board h dis.< ion about the S~rd~d conditions ~ihe issuance of
nces. affer wa ~ oncerned ab# the numb~r of varia~;;r~~~~s~~:\~at the City has
rec ed r ted to three.: r garageS!, 'he stated th~\ he. belieyes that it is tti'l.. BZA Ai!Jl"''''''
resp sib to maintain ance : etween homes al. stip~ed in the Zoni~ ~
Ther discussion on wA community standa~arding building setbacks has ,
changed due to the desire for more cars and the need to store those cars. \.
.
.
.
.
GOLDEN VALLEY SUPPLY CO~lPANY
1150 ZA1~ AVE. NO.
~lI~T}lAPOLIS, MN. 55422-
612-544-8907
FAX: -612-544-2920
TO:
City of Golden Valley
Planning Co:mm.ission
Gary and Connie Larson
August 4, 1997
Rezoning of property on Zane _Ave. and Highway 55
FRO~I:
DATE:
RE:
Dear Planning Co:mm.ission:
OnJune 23, we cam.e before you with two'requests: to'rezone a
small parcel of land on Zane Ave. -and olson Memorial Highway
from Open Developm.ent to Industrial and'to plat that piece
together with the larger piece of land directly to the- south of it.
Our purpos~ is to construct an office/warehouse on the two
properties. As you will remember, your conumssion approved
both. requests. The following evening we went in front of the
Board of Zoning Appeals and they granted _us the required
variances for our project, stating that they felt that -with this
difficult piece of property, our project was the best solution for
the neighbors and city.
On July 15, "re went in front of the City Co~ncil for app;roval of the
actions your co:mm.ission too:k. Two council people, Gloria Johnson
and Marty ~lic:ks, voted against your actions. They were both
concerned with neighbor's reactions and the variances the BZA
granted. I am afraid we did not do a very good job presenting at the
Council meeting, but since that time have tried to rectify-what we feel
was a lac:k of correct information. We had our architect draw up
elevations showing exactly what the residents would see (~r not see)
from their homes (attached). We have taJ1ed again with the neighbors
and have two signed support statements (attached) and conditional
support from Edson's.
.
We have met with Marty Micks. During the meeting we showed her
all of our plans, discussed the relationships we have made_with the
residents, walk~d the property and measured a 1uilding across the
street to show her the size the building would he. We have asked
Marty for her support and she is considering the new information
we gave her. We are also anxious to meet with Gloria. We have
spoken to her a few times, hut she will not meet with us until after
the next Planning Comm.i.ssionmeeting.
Since the rezoning expired on August 1, we are again coming
before your Commission. We hope to receive your approval for
the rezoning for this small piece of property. We sincerely feel
\hat our building will he a win-win-win situation: for our company,
for the city .and also for the neighbors. Thank you for your
-" consideration.
.
The infonnation contained in this facisimile is private and confidenLidl, intended for the use of tile
-individual or entity named almve. If youhilve received this fax in error, please notify us immediately
by telephone and return the original message to us by mail at the above address.
. USG*Celotex*Armstrong*Capaul Ceilings*~IC*Donn Grid Systems
Glasteel FRP Panels*T ectum Wall Panels*ALP Light Lens/Parabolics
Flooring and Base*Acoustilead*Specialty Ceilings*Acoustical Wall Panels
.
.
.
I,
f. LQ(50n
am a resident at 5~o~ Olson ~lemorial Highway.
Connie and Gary Larson from Golden Valley Supply Company have
spoken with me regarding their plans for a building on Zane Avenue and
olson Memorial Highway. I understand that their building will be ~ I
above my back properly line. Connie and Gary have offered to screen my
properly line if necessary (new trees added to existing trees) to provide
screening. I understand that their business is family-owned, is well cared
for with owners who work directly in the building, and operates during the
weekdays from 7 am -5pm. I believe that Golden Valley Supply Company
will be a good neighbor for me, is the best solution to the use of the
land in question and I give them my support.
Signed::-; /~
Date: ~.:3 /~ /'
/ /'
:
.
.
.
I, Geor~; a.. {,;-OOdlAli y"\ am a resident at 5 gO f; OL.on Memorial Highway.
Connie and Gary Larson from Golden Valley Supply Company have
spoken with me regarding their plans for a building on Zane Avenue and
olson ~lemorial Highway. I understand that their building will be C:, I ·
above my back properly line. Connie and Gary have offered to screen my
properly line if necessary (new trees added to existing trees) to provide
screening. I understand that their business is family-owned, is well cared
for with owners who work directly in the building, and operates during the
weekdays from 7 am-5pIn. I believe that Golden Valley Supply Company
will be a good neighbor for me, is the best solution to the use of the
land in question and I give them my support.
Signed: }1-1ff)~IJ!hJ(}(./;.~ Date: 9u ~ )-.1 J 197
.
I "
~=-1I
.
. ~ ,/ l\
\).)
g ~
/-' J
~ ~ .::r:
~~ :t
~
.:.1
\8
2
'f
~
J
r
.
/
.
.
"\
~J
~ 3
'~ (~
.-q ~ <~
cO'f
.-S
iJ)~
.
1 I
I
r-
I
--
.
Pr~ LccoJ1rrJ
Vcxic Dco'<5
.
pr~~ Lexxdtn0
T ~ 5wJJ-Ld - /+Gs/1s (!htJJU
I PrQsehtt UYcch'ry0
u ~ tts[L;./ V1udlryrt/
PY1~ LoC(d(n~
'imciJJJ1X 6Y\ RaJ1tts
'. c, '.
. ",:
';; ,...,' ':,
, ;~'~::1i\~rt'?;~ I~:; ./'. ." " ,> ,;:
,./~ I~':~:
:";" "
:::~>:' .'; ~
/" " . .c,' ,::
..' '/ ,if :.1". \
' ",.;:
, -. ,~'I..' ;: \ " .j
. .'~. " ,'.,
"~:.. !'?L' . , ',.."
..' .:~.Y , ....:~....._..; ~l'S8'
.... ":c' _,'
, f "C: '. ~.': '.~~ ~'".,
, ." I ~,';, CIT"':"{':N' ',",'C ~~'-
i ie."' '. ~.\" -,"' .." ll/::,' "-
:::,<'=}:" ",.' '. .
':";"'~"',:c':""':':'::'"
~2'.::"t " .,'. ,','
':';-~,:":.:";:::::f'::'~' ,
. ,--I '"
'. '
....."..~, .
~." I'fi.'
~
= .
..,~
I
({\
.-:-.,
~\.-
:::t
-+
I
. ..""
) I: ~l
i
l
"~- -
,
; ':
':....'.. '~ ,:" h ':' ",
c,' J...:. ". ,;:: '>:
~:;kc~ . c
;, . ~
',".C: ,:;
r,
-
~,.,
';",}..,.'
.,' "'. c.
. ':, '
_,.' ',;,C';: ..'
::,::";"'. ':",;' ""
;~:~ "
. '.'>:~':,./,';,;::., ,
'-'-
<-.: ~""~'-,-' -:-~- . ~
- <'. - , - ~;
. ~.;:... i,..
,. ", . .',
oFf:'fbr=
"';J~ l)(t3 I
,~",j ':' ';~;~<~".~:'~'."" '.
'-'~~"
"
-~: ','i':;.-;'">,'::::C-}: .
eOOK.-. '.
KEgFlt~G .'
- . - -
..~ 1.'>1""11~," .,
l..:.,t,.".. , :.._
, ,;. .'"".",.-
',.; ,; ';;::./51"/
, ,: ; ;\'>..
. ~~;4kE:~:~C,
.' '~FF' f~E"'i:':
',?',.,.l~" ."..'.....'.
,.-:'" '., "X'" al,',,'.:~'
"" ";j.. '....,
' ' :0i'~'~~:'-~~}j~Yi::}~':f{--:-f~~,.(;r~;::~;:~
'., :
'.;~t::. . '\":.,, ,"}: "'.~,..': ',':( ,,', "',;~::,'}~'" ,',,;~, '~"";
.: ."0.' , ", ......Y: .;:';;,!,.
;i~{:;;!~;!>;..; :. ,- ,.(; .. . .:",;':', c<' ,< c
. c, ""'::'<:":;''':,.,,,:1' '.<: ""';",,' :',; ,'V.
"':',,:;, -,.-' , .......,; ".:,.:,' ;" ,:''- - ",'
,:,.:<,;~::;,;~,~.. . -, ",:'. ',',:';" :'r.,,'"' ';'0; .<,' "
~ """""." ,,,.";, """"""'.":':":':;", '::.>,
',:':';? ">: ',: ,,'./" :" ,'",' ,: -"',;'."" : .;-::,' ,
';"--"""~'!/::,':; . . ,-,':,;: :~:' :,:, r.:;;':,' , :' '::. .'
'. ~ ' ..( :: ',<"~.~'~' :.. ;,' :,:':' . ", :;. ,; ,', : <:..
OFF f t:;t=: ,~:~L '
Jo:>d3~:;~.:':;~ "'"
j " ,-:(",
,.; i <~~~ ~j;-
jo-
.,,': _,,'<i::.:
, :., --', '
". " , "
~(';,,::{nfJ>""--';'
"
i:,S;!~'{~;~'a~$;: ';, .......
',' \,' ";??'l'xe.rj~ I,'. "..' :", ~,",""{'!f
f: . ..........,~:.::~-',7.~,_ ..'r'. ..~'-~ ;\i:.>,':',;,.,'{:f" '\', :
,At'l:j;;L.i~;~~.jj ,..J;; ii';,,;;/; "
:~,.. '.. ',.' .....:," :""":"'C-'" _:'~
':".' ;:"'.":':.: i,/' .::'->;<';M;:t'i;j;:~,,_. ;}:, ,-':::f2::::',~;,J :"':~3
.... : ii. i{&5e&G>N', "'. :,:.,.' ..'~;~\~f~'E "'<,( .;;
:T"-;;;'_::~ "~'.<C':;~);":~:~;R6~.'. . & ;;~;f1~;0t i/';'; ,'::
',"; ;,.",,:, '::':'i>';: :.",;-0,;':".<,,0: "!ii',"',,:/:".,
, ,;' ;...,.~.{t14Ixl~;'~':t:"~' <,' .- i:,;t,C;' ",c';",,>: .C"
,. >~:\,.,<J,.' ;.~:;::C~jV,.' .- " .
~
\ I9P i .l.",_"~ . ,
-'f~lII~ lIe . . _i? '.
., . .....~:"< ','
,.;' .. .' ~,~ 1<1 :.....~ .;1,.;. .~,:"" ..J';
! _,,"~' --,c'.... ~, ", \........_ '
, ~OfLE~ f(D....'(t::'
.,......... ......'<: ..'.>ti',~"'- ';:'r:~~ r'~
. ",.
"
"
: ,,:"':' "" .-'.
;.;,,{
" :~':,
,',
, '."
~;.}
;:.,,:,.
,
,"
: ::
....
i.".,;,' ;',.','
, i ;';:::';;" . '
"
'-:",':/,}'.<,
.
.
.
~IEt\~
\~.J
OF~
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road 82
Roseville, MN 55113
July 30, 1997
Mary Dold
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Dear Mary Dold:
SUBJECT: G.B.C. Partners Addition
Site Plan Review S97 -051
Northeast Quadrant of Trunk Highway (TH) 55 and Zane Avenue North
Golden Valley, Hennepin County
C.S. 2723
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the G.B.C. Partners Addition
site plan. We find the plan acceptable for further development with consideration of the following
comments.
· The project proposer should maintain the site's existing drainage patterns and rates of runoff.
· Any use of or work within MnlDOT right of way will require an approved MnlDOT permit.
The permit required depends upon the nature of the proposed work. Bill Warden of our
Permits Section may be contacted at 582-1443 for further information regarding the permit
process.
Please contact me at 582-1654 with any questions regarding this review.
~j{(d
Scott Peters
Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison
An equal opportunity employer
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
July 10, 1997
William S. Joynes, City Manager
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planing and Development
Public Hearing -- Zoning Map Amendment for Parcel 2 of the
proposed "GBe Partners Addition" (Parcel is the north 1 00 feet
of the property located at NE Quadrant o~Zane Avenue and
Olson Memorial Frontage Road) from Open Development to the
Industrial Zoning District - GBe Partners, Applicant
.
At the June 23. 1997 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted 5-1
(one seat vacant) to recommend approval of the rezoning for the subject
property from Open development to Industrial. This rezoning would allow for this
parcel to be consolidated with the parcel 1 to the south. These parcels would
then become a building site for an office/warehouse building. Attached is a copy
of the Planning Commission minutes that reflects the Commission's deliberation
on this matter.
I am also enclosing a copy of my memo to the Planning Commission on this
subject dated June 18, 1997. This memo covers pertinent planning issues
related to this rezoning.
Recommended Action
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the subject property (Parcel
2) be rezoned from Open Development to Industrial. Both staff and the
Commission felt that leaving this small parcel zoned Open Development did not
make common sense and in the long run it should be the same zoning as the
properties to the north, south and west.
Attachments: Staff Memo dated June 18, 1997 and attachments
Planning Commission Minutes dated June 23, 1997
Ordinance No. 163 .
.
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
.
.
June 18, 1997
Golden Valley Planning Commission
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment for Parcel 2 of
Proposed "GBC Partners Addition" (Property is the North 1 00 feet
of the property located at the Northeast Quadrant of Zane Avenue
and Olson Memorial Frontage Road) from Open Development to
the Industrial Zoning District ~- GBC Partners, Applicant
GBC Partners are the owners of Golden Valley Supply, a local acoustical ceiling
tile distributorship. Gary and Connie Larson are the general partners. They are
currently located at 1150 Zane Avenue North (Golden Valley Road and Zane
Avenue). Their goal is to construct a 16,575 sq.ft. office/warehouse for their
company on a 55,814 sq.ft. site at the northeast corner of Zane Avenue North
and the TH 55 frontage road. A copy of their plan for the site is attached.
This site currently is two parcels. (Please refer to the -preliminary plat of the
"GBC Addition" that is in this agenda packet.) Parcel 2 or the north parcel is
quite small. It is 100 ft. by 118 ft. or 11,800 sq. ft. in area. This parcel is owned
by R.L. Johnson, a local commercial real estate company. GBC has entered into
a purchase agreement with R.L. Johnson. The parcel is zoned Open
Development as it has been for many years. Parcel 1 to the south is 44,014 sq.
ft. in area or a little over one acre in size. This parcel is currently owned by
FluiDyne and GBC also has a purchase agreement with them. This parcel was
zoned Open Development until 1989. At that time FluiDyne requested that the
property be rezoned to Industrial in order to allow for the parcel to be used as a
parking lot for the FluiDyne business across the street. The parking lot was
never constructed because of reduction in the number of employees at FluiDyne.
In order for both Parcels 1 and 2 to be used as a building site for GBC, three
actions must be taken by the City. First, Parcel 2 has to be rezoned from Open
Development to Industrial. Second, the property has to be replatted into one lot.
This requires a full subdivision procedure because the property is currently
unplatted. And third, the Board of Zoning Appeals must grant significant
variances to allow construction of a building on this new site.
Parcel 1 was originally rezoned to Industrial because the owner of FluiDyne
stated that the property was needed for additional parking. The property had to
.
be rezoned to Industrial in order that the property could be utilized for this use by
FluiDyne. At the same time the City amended the Comprehensive Plan Map for
the both Parcel 1 and 2 from Business and Professional Offices to Industrial. It
was indicated in the Planning Commission minutes in January, 1989 that a
variance would have to be issued in order to allow the construction of the parking
lot. This variance(s) was never applied for because the parking lot was never
built.
In 1996, Mr. Len Frame of FluiDyne applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals
(BZA) for certain variances to allow for the construction of a 10,075 sq.ft. office/
warehouse building on Parcel 1. I am enclosing a copy of the report to the BZA
dated December 11, 1996 which describes the variance requests. The BZA
denied the variances. Mr. Frame appealed the denial to the City Council and the
Council granted the variances. A copy of my memo to the City Council dated
February 11, 1997 is attached. The minutes from the February 18, 1997 City
Council meeting where the City Council granted the variances is also included.
Since the variances were granted, Mr. Frame reported to the City that the
proposed building for his company would not be built and that he was putting the
property on the market. It was hoped that another company would want to build
the same size building and use the variances granted by the City Council.
Several months ago, Connie Larson of GBC approached City staff about buying
this property in order to build an office/warehouse building for Golden Valley
Supply. Staff explained the issues that would have to be addressed including
the replatting of the property I rezoning of the Parcel 2 and new variances.
When the Planning Commission and City Council first reviewed the rezoning of
the property from Open Development to Industrial in 1989, the intent of the
proposer was to use the property as a parking lot. Although this was the
understanding at the time of rezoning, the rezoning could not be made
conditionally. In other words, the City Council cannot state that the property can
only be used as a parking lot within the Industrial Zoning District. Because there
are no restrictions on rezonings, the owner had every right to request variances
to construct a building on the property in 1996. Without variances, construction
of a building is impossible because of the 100 foot sideyard setback requirement
when Industrial is next to Residential. (The width of the lot is only 118 feet.)
Parcel 2 should not be left as a separate lot. It is only 11,800 sq.ft. in area and it
would be impossible to build on it due to parking, landscaping and setback
requirements. Adding Parcel 2 to the FluiDyne parcel makes sense. It could
also be added to the Tennant parcel to the north. As of this time, Tennant has
not shown interest in buying it.
The proposal is to rezone Parcel 2 to Industrial which is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan for the site. All property to the west and north are zoned
and guided on the Plan Map for industrial uses. The property to the east is
zoned Residential (four single family homes on a dead end street) but the Plan
Map indicates that the land is guided for Business and Professional Offices.
There has been concern by the residential property owners to the east regarding
the development of this site. They are concerned because of the potential
impacts of the building, and activities at the site, on their properties. Because
.
.
2
.
the residential properties are higher (15 to 25 feet) than Zane Avenue, there was
concern when FluiDyne proposed the building that the residents would have to
look at the top of a flat roof. Also there was concern about trucking noise.
Unfortunately for the residents, this is an industrial and business area. The four
houses are the only ones left on the north side of TH 55. Noise and other
nuisances that would not be acceptable in residential areas exist in industrial
areas. These nuisances can be mitigated or reduced but they will not be
eliminated. (In this area, the largest noise generator is probably TH 55 and TH
100.) In this industrial area, the City has worked with several of the owners to
help reduce or eliminate nuisances that have been offensive to residents
adjacent to the industrial area. -
By rezoning this property, the Planning Commission is stating that they believe
that the appropriate use of this property is Industrial. GBC has submitted plans
that indicate how they would use the property which is consistent with other
Industrial uses in Golden Valley. This property is somewhat of a special case
due to its location next to a small residential area. As long as the lots where the
four homes are located are zoned Residential, the use of the subject site for
industrial uses will require substantial variances. If the property, where the four
homes are located, was zoned Business and Professional Offices (which is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan), a building could be built on the subject
site with significantly less or no variances. (Rear and side setback from _
Industrial to Business and Professional Offices is 50 feet rather than 100 feet as
it is to Residential.)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends amending the Zoning Map from Open Development to
Indust~al for Parcel 2 on the proposed "GBC ~dditionn. The rezoning is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the overall development plans for
the area. With careful planning and design, a building can be constructed on this
site that will have minimal impact on the -residences to the east These issues
would be addressed by the BZA as part of the forthcoming variance procedure.
.
Attachments: Location Map
Planning Commission Minutes dated January, 1989
Report to the BZA dated December 11, 1996
Minutes of the BZA dated" December 17,1996
Staff Memo to the City Council dated February 11, 1997
City Council Minutes dated February 18, 1997
PrelilJlinary Site Plan - enclosed separately
Proposed Plat: GBC Partners, LLP (Note: The plat now reads
G.V.C. Partners and will be changed to reflect the correct name
of G.B.C. Partners) - enclosed separately
.
~
J/~' ~ 8 ~U\"-I' - ii-t-l-
,~ N ~.:: .
~, ~ ~i\"''''''' . It'J.ZnD.W 4S5.~ :l.
- - \~ ~~ -~ ~~ I>
10 - --__Un ..... ""/fz'..7W
'. f.lTU1~
. i M 1.1 IISS. )"'"1'1' .-~-'_ ~80'~ ...__
'" ; .11 JU1 -.10 Q' Il;R .-.
~ -.
If · ,---
, OO',t" .,
'O~7.8 IV .
'7(1
to
l:;!
ell
C)
...
,
~
,
~
.
6.H. Tenn.;nf Co.
Hole: Pislances and hearln9.s puf"'. 1 to G.H. Tennanf CD. and acliace.
are taken From IJiifr' vtunorlal flat Case No./30U;!
:-~,
o'UV>.~ , \....J ..
. D s\\t. "'j..'\ \\\~\\\t. '" \/
~RC~ii~~\~\{i~ \5 rC~ ~S'
JJI''' \l:\\a.D\~\ c.\\t. ::: \ JLM 10
4C;. 5\J~ O~;;) ... III 10'
.. t.~\\~ ....~) '\ I)' JU1 \
-
q,
~
'.-< ,a
1>- \ , ! 0
.
~ C~..\ . ~ ,,, .
".. \ ~ .... .
t ..... -' .
1> ....-:
I i
.. .
~ ~ v
-
!: ""
~ I .,.
I'
('
-
. .
!S7:SS !ST:sa
...
o
o
~ .:A
~ 0
'\!L-:-_ _ '!.e:~d-
~t);-
._11-_____
...
0
!S801
IU.'
0 8 '0 .
0 0
. ..
0
't'"
It'
go
"
.
i .
~
;.
,J.
...
.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
~DRAFT ONLY
Has Not Been Approved
June 23, 1997
lar meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden V
cil Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valle
lied to order by Chair Pentel at 7pm.
I.
se, seconded by Groger an
June 10, 1997 minutes as submitted WI .
on Page Seven, Paragraph 6, second sentence.
carried unanimously to
ewording of a sentence
II. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning
Applicant: GBC partners, LLP (Gary and Connie Larson)
.
Address:
East side of Zane Avenue about 400 feet North of TH 55
Frontage Road
Purpose:
Rezoning of the property from Open Development to
Industrial. The applicant is proposing to add this piece of
land to the empty lot at 5828 Olson Memorial Highway in
order to construct an office/warehouse on the site.
Mark Grimes gave a brief summary of his staff report dated June 18, 1997. Grimes
related to the Commission information on the applicants business, as an acoustical
ceiling distributor and where the business is now located.
Grimes told the Commission that in 1989 the property fronting Olson Memorial was
rezoned by the City from Open Development to Industrial to allow for the
construction of a parking lot. The request was made by FluiDyne who occupied the
building across from the subject property. Grimes commented that the parking lot
was never constructed.
.
Grimes continued his report by saying that the present owner of the vacant land,
FluiDyne appeared before the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) tbis past winter
seeking variances in order to construct a small office/warehouse building on the site.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Two
DRAFT ONL'f
Has Not Been Approved
The BZA denied the variance requests and FluiDyne appealed to the City Council,
who then approved the requests. Grimes said that the proposed building was never
built. The owner, Len Frame, had intended to use the building for his business but
then decided that the building would not work for his business. Grimes told the
Commission that GBC Partners likes the area and Golden Valley, and would like to
stay in the area. He said that the applicants are looking for a larger building. GBC
are proposing to buy the property from Mr. Frame and the approximate 11,800 sq.ft.
parcel to the north now owned by R.L. Johnson. The northern parcel would need to
be rezoned and then the two properties consolidated in order for GBC's proposal to
work.
Grimes reviewed the zoning map of the City noting that this particular area has
several different districts with Residential and Business and Professional to the east,
Residential to the south (across Hwy. 55), and Industrial to the north and west. He
told the Commission that the residential homes to the east pre-date the industrial
buildings of the area in that they were built s-ometime in the late 50's or e~rly 60's.
.
Grimes commented on the topography of the proposed land relative to the
residential homes, noting the extreme difference from where the homes are to
where the proposed building would be. He also commented on issues of noise and
the structure of the building and how it would be viewed by the residents to the east.
Grimes noted that the applicants have talked with each of the homeowners and
reviewed its building plans and design.
Director Grimes talked about the need for an additional 1 0 feet of right-of-way for
lane Avenue which makes the proposed lots only 108 feet in width. He said that
the Subdivision Code requires all road right-of-ways in industrial areas be at least 70
feet in width; lane Avenue right-of-way is only 50 feet in width.
Chair Pentel asked staff that when the FluiDyne land was rezoned from Open
Development to Industrial in 1989, if it was intended to be used as a parking lot.
Grimes said that the owner, Len Frame, said it would be used only as a parking lot.
Grimes continued to comment that today, employees from the existing business, on
the west side of lane, park their cars on the street because it is closer to the
entrance of the building.
.
Pentel asked staff the depth of the residential lots. Grimes commented 136 feet east
to west, plus the street which is 60 feet in width. Pentel asked if the site plan
indicates how deep the back yards are of the residential lots. Grimes said that the
survey indicates that the houses are approximately 50 feet from the rear property
line.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Three
DRAFT ONl~~(
Has Not Been Approved
Commissioner Groger asked staff if it is anticipated that these four single-family lots
would ever be rezoned to Industrial and does staff have any idea of how these
homes would be taken. Grimes responded that this area is not in a redevelopment
district and at this point in time any development would be a private matter between
a developer and the four home owners. He said that he believes that because this
is such a small area for redevelopment, he doubted if the City would get involved.
Grimes continued by saying that the land, where the four single-family homes are
located, would have to increase in value in order for someone to want to develop;
the market needs to catch up in order for a developer to want to develop this area.
He believes that the single-family homes will remain for quite some time. Grimes
said if the road east of the homes and single-family parcels were combined, the site
could probably support a smaller office building. Groger noted that the businesses to
east of the residential homes are nonconforming, and that if the single-family homes
were redeveloped to an office building, there would be very long buildings along the
frontage road. Grimes commented that many years ago buildings were allowed
closer to the street than what is allowed today.
.
Commissioner Kapsner commented that it seems that in the past, and now, the
residents have enjoyed the island-liked area and have not anticipated any kind of
pressure to change. Grimes said that the property owners like living in this area but
there are concerns with noise from Tennant and odor problems from another
industrial use in the area which has been remedied. He commented that recently
one of the single-family homeowners bought one of the four homes in this area and
knew about its surrounding uses.
Applicant, Connie Larson (GBC Partners) came forward to answer questions.
Pentel asked Ms. Larson to confirm that she had an existing business on Zane
Avenue. Larson commented that she and her husband now occupy space at 1150
Zane Avenue and their business is known as Twin City Supply.
Commissioner Kapsner asked the applicant about the noise that would be
generated from the business. Larson said she runs a distributing business and the
trucks used in this business now run on Zane Avenue so no additional traffic or
noise would be generated.
.
Pentel asked the applicant about the height of the building. Larson noted that the
height of the building would be 22 feet on the outside. There was some question as
to whether this footage was accurate. After review of the plans, it was noted that
the building height would be 29 feet.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Four
DRAFT ONt y
Has Not Been Approved
Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing.
Jim Trettil, 5802 Olson Memorial Highway believes that a building cannot be placed
on the site due to the lot size. He said he was upset about FluiDyne originally .
having the lot rezoned to industrial for parking and then earlier this year wanted to
put up a building. Trettil talked about FluiDyne receiving variances for a building they
wanted to occupy and now finds out that someone other than the owner, is
proposing a different building for the site. He had hoped that the industrial lot and
single-family lots would all be taken one day and believes that this development will
cause his property value to decrease. Trettil talked about the noise coming from the
Tennant Company.
Georgia Goodman, 5804 Olson Memorial Highway, commented that her biggest
concern is the steep hill behind her house and the possibility of erosion. She said
that she requested from the City a variance some 20 years ago and was denied
which caused hard feelings. Goodman said she moved to this area beQause. she
could afford the house. She would hope that there would be Some preservation of
trees on this site.
. Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing.
Pentel informed the audience that the. City Council granted variances for FluiDyne to
construGt a building on the proposed site in the winter of 1997.
Commissioner Prazak asked what the elevation is between the homes and the
proposed building. Pentel said between 15 to 25 feet. Grimes review the survey
noting the elevations. Prazak asked if the top of the building would be even with
backyards of the single-family homes. Pentel answered that the top of the building
would be above the back yards. Grimes briefly talked about the proposed building
height.
Grimes said that he could asked the City Engineer that if the homes were removed
could this land somehow be lowered to that of the proposed lot. He felt that it would
be very difficult to develop a site that consisted of the proposed land and the single-
family homes no matter how it was approached.
.
Pentel commented that she represented the Planning Commission on the Board of
Zoning Appeals (BZA) when FluiDyne requested variances for a building it was
proposing. She said she finds it difficult to support a rezoning that will become a
nonconforming lot.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 23, 1997
Page Five
DRAFT ONt Y
Has Not Been Approved
Kapsner asked Grimes when taking into account the existing variances, and with the
additional 1 0 feet of right-of-way, could a building be built on the site today. Grimes
said that a smaller building proposed by Mr. Frame could be built right now
according to the previous variances granted.
Commissioner Johnson asked staff the likelihood of the small 11,800 sq.ft. parcel, to
the rear, would ever be developed on its own: Grimes commented that it is unlikely.
Kapsner commented that the proposal is not an ideal situation but it does work on
the proposed land. He said he doesn't see the proposed land being added to any
other business in the area; and therefore is inclined to go along with the request
knowing the BZA will hear a request from the applicant for variances.
Groger commented that it is difficult to separate the required variances from the
r~zoning request. He said that he would save judgment to the BZA and believes
that the rezoning makes sense because it is consistent with the area.
.
Johnson said that she agreed with Groger that the proposed 11,800 sq.ft. piece of
land to the rear should be rezoned.
Commissioner McAleese commented that he would prefer to see a residential use
but agrees that at an engineering standpoint, it would not be feasible. He agrees
with his fellow commissioners that the proposed small piece of land should be
rezoned to Industrial.
Prazak said that he also supports the rezoning noting the reasons already given.
He sees no use for this small piece of land by itself.
MOVED by Groger, seconded by Johnson and motion carried by a vote of 5-1 (one
seat vacant) to recommend approval to the.City Council for rezoning of the property
from Open Development to Industrial.
alP
. isio
Applicant:
Address:
e north 100 foot Lot
.
.
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 163, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
REZONING FROM THE OPEN DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT
TO THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT PARCEL LOCATED AT
THE NORTH 100 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
QUADRANT OF ZANE AVENUE AND THE OLSON MEMORIAL FRONTAGE ROAD
GBC PARTNERS, LLP, APPLICANT
'The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1. City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" is amended in
Section 11.10, Subd. 2, Section 11.20, Subd. 2 and Section 11.36,' Subd. 2, by changing the
zoning designation of a certain tract of land from the Open Development Zoning District to the
Industrial Zoning District.
Section 2. The tract of land affected by this ordinance are legally described as:
The north 100 feet of that part of Government Lot 2 and 3, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21,
described as beginning at the intersection of the West line of said Government line of said Lot 3,
with the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 55; thence North along the West line of said
Government Lots 3 and 2 a distance. of 674.6 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark
set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence East parallel to said center line 143 feet, which
point is marked by Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence South
parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 16.2 feet to the Northwest comer
of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark, set
pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence continuing South parallel to the West line of said
Government Lots 2 and 3 to said center line; thence West along said center line 143 feet to the
point of beginning, according to the Government Survey thereof.
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions ana Definitions Applicable to
the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a
Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim
herein.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as
required by law.
Adopted by the Golden Valley City Council this ~ day of JJ.J.h!, 1997.
Mary E. Anderson, Mayor
A TrEST:
Shirley J. Nelson, City Clerk
Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Post on
uncodified, and will be referenced in City Code Chapter 25.)
(This ordinance will be
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
Date:
August 19, 1997
To:
Chair Pentel, Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mary Dold, Administrative Secretary, Planning and Development
Subject:
Review of Attendance
According to the Planning Commission By-Laws, the Chair is to review the attendance
of the Commissioners in February and August. Below you will find the attendance
record for 1997 and I've also included 1996.
* Lewis available for 8 meetings before resigning her post.