Loading...
08-23-93 PC Agenda e AGE N D A GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber August 23, 1992 7:00 PM I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 28, 1993 II. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (NO. 63) Applicant: Address: Request: Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company 825 Louisiana Avenue, Golden Valley, Minnesota Allow for Automotive Sales, Service and Body Shop III. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - MINOR SUBDIVISION e Applicant: Address: Request: Wendy's International Inc. North Side of Golden Valley Road West of Decatur Avenue/ Red Lobster Shift Common Lot Line about 28 Feet to the West of Two Existing Lots IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (NO. 61) Applicant: Address: Request: Wendy's International Inc. North Side of Golden Valley Road West of Decatur Avenue/ Red Lobster Operate a Class II Restaurant in a Commercial Zoning District V. REPORTS ON MEETINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS VI. OTHER BUSINESS e VII. 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 Conunission's determination of whether the pro- posed 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 Commission1s recommenda- tion, in reaching its decision. To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Conunission will utilize the following procedure: 1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recommenda- tion 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/conunents to the Chair. The Chair will deter- mine 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. . I L ________________ . e e MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION June 28, 1993 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chamber, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chair Johnson at 7:00 PM. Those present were Commissioners Groger, Johnson, Kapsner, Lewis, McAleese (arrived 7:05), Pentel and Prazak. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development; Beth Knoblauch, City Planner; and Mary Dold, Secretary. I. Approval of Minutes - May 24. 1993 MOVED by Kapsner, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to approve the May 24, 1993 minutes as submitted. II. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision Applicant: Dr. Daniel Ahlberg Address: 4440 Tyrol Crest. Golden Valley, Minnesota Request: Consolidate three lots into one Beth Knobl auch, City Pl anner, revi ewed her memo dated June 23, 1993 with the Planning Commission, specifically commenting that this meeting was to review only the request for a minor subdivision (combine three residential lots into one lot) -- residents' concerns regarding the tennis court are not addressed in the memo because they are not relevant to the request being considered. Commissioner Kapsner asked if the Commission's action tonight is a legal necessity to so because of the tennis court. Ms. Knoblauch commented that no legal action is necessary regarding the tennis court. Daniel Ahlberg, applicant, talked about the need for repair on the house and property. Mark Kemper of Kemper Associ ates (surveyor) answered questi ons regardi ng the boundary lines. Ms. Knoblauch asked if the monuments marking the new property line resulting from MnDots 1-394 taking were done by him and he answered yes because MnDOT does not set markers. Dean Bailey, landscape architect, talked about the setback requirements, court location and related items, and landscaping. Commissioner Lewis asked about tennis court lighting. Mr. Bailey commented there would be low level lighting. Dr. Ahlberg commented that the court would be used as an all-purpose court with a basketball hoop and practice board; there are no plans to use this court as a tournament court or for playing tennis late at night. Chair McAleese opened the informal public hearing. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 28, 1993 Page Two Dr. Myer Leonard, 1340 Fair1awn Way, commented on the "P1anning Commission Guidelines for Public Input", pertaining to the language of "adverse use" and feels this would be an adverse use to the neighbors, objects to Dr. Ahlberg's back yard facing the neighbor's front yard, questions the low lighting for the tenni s court and what wi 11 thi s use do to the area that the nei ghbors have chosen to live in. . Pat Leonard, 1340 Fair1awn Way, commented that the former property owner, Mr. Griswold, kept his yards beautiful; now there is dirt coming from the corner; does not want to hear ice hockey pucks; does not want traffic up and down their road and feels neighbors will be against each other. Paul Lynch, 4520 Avondale Road, recommends the Planning Commission reject this application; felt staff conveyed the message that this application request is a done deal; asked about height of fencing; asked about height of lighting and how long the lighting could stay on. Mr. Lynch requested six things: 1) rejection of application, 2) permission to speak at the City Council meeting, 3) all work stopped, 4) copies of all applicable ordinances, 5) information on height of lights at the court and 6) if ordinance approved - would like City to update or re-evaluate the outdated ordinances that would allow the construction of the tennis court. Mr. Lynch talked about the residue that comes down the street from this property, because of the construction work, when it rains and feels land is eroding. Chair McAleese commented on Mr. Lynch's remark of this application being a "done dea1": the Planning Commission has not discussed this request among themselves. e Staff's comments that the tennis court is allowed under the existing ordinance may be what Mr. Lynch is referring to as a "done dea111. Ahmed A. Sonbo1, 1420 Fair1awn Way, commented on the City notification, that it only mentioned the consolidation and not the tennis court or swimming pool. Questioned whether the construction is crossing easements; was concerned about a back yard being a front yard in his neighborhood; feels it is an implied right as to what to expect across the street and this request violates their right. He questioned Dr. Ahlberg's back yard as being a multipurpose use, the noise level and how late play will occur; feels chain link fence will affect the value of homes in the area; feels the "vil1age fee1ing" will turn into a commercial compound if tennis court built. Charlotte Leonard, 1430 Fair1awn Way, turned in two letters from residents who could not attend the meeting; these will be placed in applicant's file and will be given to the City Council. She wants to know how Dr. Ahlberg can assure the neighbors the facility will not be used late at night; spoke about the Planning Commission Guidelines and whether the proposed use will or will not affect the surrounding neighborhood and feels the tennis court will adversely affect the neighborhood. Bill Feist, 1320 Fair1awn Way, is upset about past construction along 1-394 and the lack of notice from the City regarding the proposed tennis court. He has listed his house for sale and hopes the tennis court construction will not pre- sent a problem, believes this is a neighborhood problem. Chair McAleese com- - mented that the City did not have to notify residents about the tennis court - because the request was conforming with City Code. e e e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 28, 1993 Page Three Thomas Deans, 1401 June Avenue supports Dr. Ahlberg's request. He feels the property was not maintained properly - the grass was cut but trees needed work; feels the tennis court will not be disruptive and the landscaping will help impact against any noise. Mr. Deans feels the project will increase property values. Dr. Leonard asked what would prevent Dr. Ahlberg from placing a bubble over his tenni s court. City Pl anner, Beth Knobl auch, commented that accordi ng to City Code a bubble would qualify as an accessory building, and the maximum size for such a building in a residential zoning district is 1,000 sq.ft. Dr. Ahlberg commented that he appreciates the neighbors concerns but feels many arguments against the tennis court are hypothetical and are extreme arguments. Chair McAleese closed the informal pUblic hearing. Commissioner Kapsner commented that he assumes that the City Council will want to know how the Planning Commission feels about issues that the residents have raised. Ms. Knoblauch stated that if the Commissioners felt strongly about the matter it would be appropriate to add a recommendation for staff to review city code and make changes, if needed, so any future questions regarding tennis court issues or back yards would be answered in the city code. Commissioner Kapsner feels the neighbors have real concerns regarding the silt running down the street but this will only be temporary. He feels Dr. Ahlberg is correct in saying that when kids play they make noise, this is not a neigh- borhood problem. He feels there may need to be an ordinance regarding someone's back yard facing a front yard. Commissioner Kapsner commented that people do have rights with their property. He commented on the fencing by saying that 10 foot trees would front the fence along with other trees that will continue to grow. He recommends approval of the lot consolidation and ordinances do not need to be expanded in the City. Chair McAleese feels the tennis court lighting may be a real problem in a resi- dential area. Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development stated that Mr. Becker, Director of Zoning and Community Services, said City staff would have to see a lighting plan and it would have to be approved by the Inspections Department. Chai r McAleese questi oned staff about where the di rt that the resi dents are complaining about is coming from. Mr. Grimes commented that some of the silt is coming from around the corner where MnDot has been working and the silt from the subject property should be eliminated once sod is in place. Ms. Knoblauch com- mented that the City Engineer has approved the grading plan and drainage is ade- quate for the site. Chair McAleese commented on Mr. Lynch's six requests: that he would be allowed to speak at the City Council hearing; the City cannot stop construction of the tennis court; he can get copies of the ordinance from the Planning Department; there are no lighting standards for the tennis court; and when the project is completed the drainage should be the same as before or better. Chair McAleese commented on the Planning Commission Guidelines and the Planning Commission is bound by City ordinances which take precedence over the Guidelines. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 28, 1993 Page Four Chair McAleese feels there is an implied covenant to maintain the character of the neighborhood and the City should work hard to maintain this character. People do have some property rights. The consolidation meets the requirements of the ordinance but Chair McAleese does not feel this is a good idea to put in the tennis court but is perfectly legal for Dr. Ahlberg to do and will support the application for a minor subdivision. e Commissioner Pentel agrees with the application for consolidation but feels the City needs to look at back yards that are across from front yards and what can and cannot happen in these back yards. Commissioner Johnson agrees with the approval for the subdivision. Commissioner Prazak commented that there appears to be a carefully designed ten- ni s court and the owner is concerned about the nei ghbors; is in favor of the consolidation. Commissioner Groger commented that the City does have setback requirements which Dr. Ahlberg's tennis court does conform with; feels the quality of the plan is well conceived and feels if more ordinances are implemented will just make City living more difficult; approves of the consolidation. Commi ssi oner Lewi s commented that the request meets all the requi rements and supports the request for a subdivision. MOVED by Kapsner, seconded by Lewis and motion carried unanimously to recommend e to the City Council approval for a minor subdivision to combine three lots into one. III. Informal Public Hearing - Amendment No.3 to P.U.D. No. 44 Applicant: Roy Wirth (PEM Millwork Addition) Address: 800 Mendelssohn Ave. No., Golden Valley, Minnesota Request: Amend P.U.D. No. 44 to allow parking, storage and rental of moving vans Mark Grimes gave a bri ef summary of hi s memo to the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on dated June 24, 1993. Staff recommends approval of the amendment to P.U.D. No. 44 that would allow up to six 26' to 30' trucks or vans to be parked on the site for rental purposes along with four conditions which are outlined in the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Pentel asked in which parking lot would the trucks/vans be parked. The applicant, Roy Wirth, commented that the trucks/vans would be parked in the rear of the Pem Millwork building. Chair McAleese opened the informal public hearing, hearing and seeing no one he closed the informal pUblic hearing. e Chair McAleese supports the request for an amendment to P.U.D. No. 44. He would like staff at some future meeting to explain the philosophy of why a P.U.D. is used for certain requests. . e e <;: Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 28, 1993 Page Five Commissioner Lewis asked if there would be storage of any hazardous materials. Mr. Wirth commented that no chemicals will be stored. MOVED by Pentel, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to recommend to the City Council approval of the request for an amendment to P.U.D. No. 44 to allow parking, storage and rental of moving trucks/vans at 800 Mendelssohn Avenue North. IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housinf and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Board of Zoning Appea s Commissioner Kapsner reported on the HRA meeting he attended on June 15, 1993. Commi ssi oner Lewi s attended the City Counci 1 meeti ng of June 1, 1993 and com- mented on the Medicine Lake Subdivision item. Chai r McAleese was excused from attendi ng the June 15th City Counci 1 meeting due the lack of Planning Commission items. Commissioner Johnson briefed the commission on the most recent BZA meeting. V. Other Business No other business presented. VI. Adjournment Chair McAleese adjourned the meeting at 9:10 PM. Jean Lewis, Secretary M E M 0 RAN DUM --------- . DATE: August 18, 1993 TO: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN FOR P.U.D. NO. 63 - LUPIENT AUTO DEALERSHIP - JIM LUPIENT OLDSMOBILE COMPANY, APPLICANT Introducti on Jim Lupient has made application to the City of Golden Valley for a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) that would allow him to construct four buildings on a 7.21 acre site at the NE corner of Market Street and Louisiana Avenue. As part of the P.U.D., the site would be divided into four lots - one for each building. The site is "kitty corner" from his existing "Olds" dealership on 1-394 and Louisiana Avenue. The site would include a Saturn dealership, Infiniti dealer- ship, a Lupient new/used car sales building and a Lando-Lupient Body Shop. The existing Mr. Steak building now used for used car sales would be torn down. Mr. Lupient has requested a P.U.D. for this site in order to maximize the use of the 7.21 site and allow future sales of individual parcels. The P.U.D. elimina- ~ tes the internal yards along property lines as shown on the site plan. There ~ will be cross parking and access agreements that will permit all users of the properties to enter and exit at any point and park anywhere on the entire site. As part of the P.U.D., Mr. Lupient is also requesting a reduction in the normal setback requirement for Market Street (20 ft. instead of 35 ft.) and along the east property line adjacent to Menards (5 ft. instead of 10 ft.). Along Louisiana and Laurel Avenues the site meets or exceeds setback requirements. General Description As indicated on the enclosed plans, Mr. Lupient's plans to create a four lot P.U.D. that will allow him to operate four distinct businesses on the 7.21 acres. A brief description of each follows: A. Saturn - It is my understanding that the Body Shop and the Saturn Dealer- ship are the first buildings planned for construction this fall. Mr. Lupient currently has a Saturn dealership in Brooklyn Park and due to Saturn's success, he wants to open another dealership in Golden Valley. The store is of a design dictated by Saturn. Doug Sailor of Lupient has told me that the Brooklyn Park store is somewhat similar in design to the proposed Golden Valley store. (If you want to view the store it is located at 7900 County Road 18.) The outside of the building is a colored stucco design. The Saturn dealership does not plan any service on site other than a lube ~ bay and service write up area. All service will take place in the existing ~ Lupi ent 01 ds servi ce facil i ty on 1-394. Body work woul d be done at the proposed Lando body shop or some other shop off-site. e Page Two The plan does indicate a future service area that could be added on to the the Saturn building. The building addition would be about 3,600 sq.ft. This would eliminate 10 parking spaces. It is not anticipated that this would happen as long as Lupient owns the Saturn dealer or there is an arrangement to fix the cars at the Lupient Olds service center. Staff asked the Lupient representati ves to prepare a parking cal cul ati on for each of the buildings based on the requirements found in the Industrial Zoning District these calculations are on the site plan. Based on those requi rements, the Saturn si te meets or exceeds those requi rements. The Saturn calculation include the future service area. If the ten parking spaces were removed, the display area would be reduced by ten cars. e B. Lando-Lupi ent Body Shop - The northeast lot of thi s P.U.D. is to be used for the operation of a 22, 760 sq.ft. body shop. It is my understanding that the body shop will be owned by Lando Inc. with some financial backing from Lupient. The body shop is available for body work for each of the Lupient dealers. With the construction of this body shop, the body shop at Lupient Olds will be shut down and converted to service bays to handle the service require- ments of the Lupient dealerships. More and more dealers are eliminating the body shop operations and contracting with outside body shops. The proposed Lando shop will have 29 work bays and several bays for paint- ing and washing. The building will be state-of-the-art for body shops. It will include a second story office over a portion of the building to pro- vide offices for Lando Inc. The building will be a decorative concrete block building. The majority of the bui 1 di ng wi 11 be 16 ft. hi gh wi th the second story offi ce about 24 feet. Because this building is closest to the residential neighborhood to the north, concern was given to its layout on the site. .There are no doors on the north side facing Laurel Avenue. Access to the building is from the west, east or south. The outside car storage area is located east of the building where a maximum of 15 cars would be stored. Most cars are kept inside for security purposes. This area would be fenced. Landscaping will be placed along the north side of the building and fenced area to screen the building and storage area. Access to the body shop will be primarily from Laurel Avenue, although anyone can gain access to the enti re site from any of the three streets surrounding the P.U.D. The body shop will operate normal weekday hours of 7 AM to 6 PM. Currently they do not have weekend hours and have no plans to expand hours of opera- tion. e C. New/Used Car Sales - Lupient plans to bring all or a portion of his used car sales to the southeast corner of the site from the existing Olds dealership. I have been told that the primary emphasis will be newer model used cars although there may be some new cars sold on the site. Again, this building would not have service bays but only a wash bay and area to clean cars for display. Page Three The plan is to use the same materials on this building as the Saturn and Infiniti buildings. The design is shown on the enclosed plans. The e exterior is basically a colored stucco with metal bands and windows. The new/used car sales is primarily for the outside display of vehicles. D. Infiniti Dealership - This dealership is proposed at the northwest corner of the site. The design of this dealership building is shown on the attached plan and is a design dictated by Infiniti. It appears to be an attractive building using similar materials to the Saturn building. The Infiniti dealership also shows a future service and parts area. The hope is that Infiniti would also do its service at the Lupient service center. If Infiniti does not want to contract its service out to Lupient, the plan indicates a 6-8 bay service area (about 6,000 sq.ft.) attached to the back of the bui 1 di ng. The proposed servi ce bays were made a part of the parking calculations. As with the Saturn dealer, if the service area were added, 10 (ten) display cars would have to be eliminated to make up for the spaces lost for the service area. There are numerous issues that relate to the entire site that must be addressed. They are listed and discussed below. 1. Landscaping - Enclosed is a preliminary landscape plan. I have reviewed the plan and it appears to provide a good number and variety of plants on the site. The landscape plan does a good job along Laurel Avenue in order to help e screen the site. Next to the outside storage area for the body shop, the plan provides for 4-6 foot high spruce trees on a raised grade to hide the parking area from Laurel Avenue. All along Laurel the grade is being raised to screen the area. 2. Setback Areas - The site exceed the setback requirements along Laurel Avenue. The parking area and buildings will be setback 60 feet due to the required ponding area and railroad tracks. Along Louisiana Avenue, the site meets the setback requirement of 35 feet. Along Market Street the proposed setback is 20 feet. Adjacent to Menards, the setback is only 5 feet from the parking area where a 10 foot setback is normally required. The staff is somewhat concerned about the proposed 20 foot setback along Market Street. It would be better to shift the entire development north 10-15 feet. This would reduce the Laurel Avenue setback to 45-50 feet. However, thi s cannot be done due to the rai 1 road tracks and the requi red ponding area. Also, the additional setback area along Laurel is good because it gives greater separation from the residential area to the north and allows more area to be landscaped. Because of the large setback on Laurel, the staff can accept less setback on Market. However, the staff cannot recommend the "Hardscape Vehi cl e Display Features" in the Market Street and Louisiana setback areas. Within these areas, cars are proposed to be displayed. Staff does not believe this is an appropriate use of a required green space area. The 5 foot set- ~ back next to Menards is acceptable since this is a sidewall of the Menards ~ bu i 1 din g . e Page Four 3. Signs - The staff suggests that the total signage on pylons and on the buildings meet the normal requirements of the City's sign code. This matter would be addressed by the Inspections Department. It appears that there are more pylon signs on the site plan than would normally be allowed by code. 4. Lighting - Lupient has submitted a lighting plan. Lighting is a concern of those living in the area to the north. The plan indicates the area will be lit by lighting fixtures on 24 foot poles. The plan indicates that the fixtures will have a baffle on the back side of the fixture so that light on Louisiana, Laurel and Market Streets will illuminate only the site and not the street. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Director of Inspections. In some cases, the City works with a lighting consultant to insure that the lighting is properly directed. Staff proposes that the lights to on no earlier than 7 AM and be turned off by 11 PM. e 5. Pondi ng Requi rements - The enclosed gradi ng plan i ndi cates the size and location of the on-site ponding. The City Engineer has reviewed these plans with Lupient's engineers and it appears that the ponds along Laurel Avenue are large enough to handle run-off from a design storm. The final desi gn of the pond must be approved by the Ci ty Engi neer and the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization. There is a concern regarding the filling of this property that took place in the late 1980's. A large portion of the property is a US Army Corps of Engi neer des i gnated wetland. These types of wetlands cannot be fi 11 ed without a Corps permit. Unfortunately, the area was filled as part of the 1-394 construction project when Lupient permitted the area to be used for road construction storage. The City became aware it was a Corps wetland this past year. Lupient met with the Corps and has reached an agreement. The agreement allows the land to be utilized for development if Lupient agrees to provide a compensating wetland area somewhere else. The new wetland area would have to be in a location approved by the Corps. The new wetland would then remain IIforeverll. The City would not give final P.U.D. approved until the City has received a letter from Lupient stating he agrees to the Corps requirements. 6. Traffic Generation - It is estimated that the four businesses will generate 360 vehicle trips per day. This number of trips will not add a significant burden to the existing street system. The low traffic volume from this site is due to the type of businesses. Car dealers do not generate large numbers of customers due to the high cost of a sale and limited customers. The body shop also has a limited amount of traffic. The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) shows that Laurel Avenue will be rebuilt in 1994 from Pennsylvania to Florida. The rebuilt road will be similar to Laurel east of Florida. e If traffic increases on Market Street, a traffic signal may be required at Loui si ana and Market. The amount of traffi c to be generated from thi s P.U.D. would not alone cause the need for the traffic signal. If and when Page Five the area south of this P.U.D. is development for more retail uses, a signal may have to be considered along with some widening of Market. Market e Street can be widened using existing right-of-way. 7. Street Vacation - As shown on the preliminary plat, there is a "bubble" at the southeast corner of the site. This is currently street right-of-way. Since there is no need for this "bubble" area, the City is now in the pro- cess of vacating it. It would then become a part of this site. 8. Cross Easements - As mentioned in the memo, Lupient will have to prepare easements that allow access and egress to any of the businesses across each of the lots. Also, there will have to be cross parking agreements established. Recommendation Overall, the staff believes that the proposed use of the property for three car dealers and a body shop is a good use for the land. Auto sales and body shops are permitted in the Industrial District with a Conditional Use Permit. The uses are also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the overall development of the area. The P.U.D. also is sensitive to the residential area to the north by providing a 60 foot setback from Laurel and providing raised landscaped areas to screen cars and buil di ngs. The site is fully uti 1 i zed and I do not expect a lot of vacant parking spaces on the site. However, the cross easements allow employees and customers to park where there is space on the entire 7.21 acres. In addition, ~ Mr. Lupient is providing an employee parking area just north of the Samari _ restaurant. This parking area will provide all Lupient employees to park away from the dealership and allow as much customer parking on site as possible. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. The City receives a letter from Lupient stating he will agree to the requirements of the US Army Corps of Engineers. 2. The lighting plan be approved by the Director of Inspections and that the Director of Inspections have the right to require changes to lighting pat- terns after the lights are operating. 3. The lights be off between 11 PM and 7 AM. 4. The ponding area be given final approval by the City Engineer and the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization. 5. All signage meet the City's sign Ordinance. 6. There be no "hardscape vehicle display areas". 7. The number of display parking spaces at the Infiniti and Saturn site be reduced by ten (10) each if the future service areas are constructed. 8. The requirements of the Fire Marshall be met. e MWG:mkd Attachments: Location Map Site Plans (enclosed separately) - 6"""" 'C~ -n...,,~,- !;;=---- - ~ ~ ' : ..,( __---- -,1, ~---=--~ -~--~ wi " w '" --: . IJtn'Jf'll.'r 8.JD 23 ~ .., ~ - ~ ;! r ~. .0 ....... "'. 8..12 H )~. 38 ~ AVE, : ;/ ;~(ie' 'e:{ 1- (I) :Sl' .0 ~I . 't' -' " . .,_,.~ ....3 Z~ '.. '''1 . ,,: 0- ....~.. .,.-,' ~ ...", -\ ... . "4'1. U"l I:;~ ,'~ii.' __J!, ~,------- ---,\-;~-S;!,.t JI.~.i05"-- I---_-_.-'~-:'J~';'f __j.:J'il I ~ .;>:S654H/_-f "'~.rd~~Jr54~'~~_~__-- '" r---7::.'-' .--.\ :...,..---- ~;j." I.... /' I Go' ','\ eon ' A. oa .~., ..~ :: ...' -. '~l."O (~. I I ,-'J 1.; , l' t- oe'" Q 0 . _ _ .-----. _..I 0 _ - -.' o' ,..0 : I "P'of~ 1M' ioo.,O ~__ It"""'U"V NO 12 .1 Fas,' 33;38, s. I 1__ 'fO.,' ...." .0.. .,:g' 7~" o' _ ',~ ~ 6'G5) LAUREL Z9..H ". QI) llQ 00 U ;:- .::: I ". Il: ,. , to. ,.. , .."J .V17 .3"~Z y:",~ _ _ 29':6 Ii: (') z J.,;;..:l !"IJ :::: ~ J r 2,,"06 \<I MARKETo ~ ~ 00 ~~ 4106 I /50' 1.,1 .~ .~ 'w i~ I I I Z...&'J ~l/\ t~ ~ ~I'" 1<' ... I ~ ~ I ~'''1,)6 tl\ 1- .!:l.t1r~IWI~ I CO ~ I I:' I ~I'" - <:: I~ 3 .01 I~ ~ Ii'; 2 . '7 ,'~ t" .' 1'>,,,4 ~. L'2.,~ I :; ~ ~~ o .... ~-=-~ ~'-=:)) ; . tit ~ O~ '" '" '" .... 't Ii,T'rr 'z(J'i!' 744. 77 '" :-'I~ "".., ",I.. .,. -'0 .J'.311.8" S",..J",,', ,I <:> ... ----- --- G N (1 .td "'21.5" ~ SS"40'IS'E .:c._ 6'0/ 4...()^- ~ PROPOSED SITE 2 o ~ . - ,~\- I STREET '5 I'. J, ';' t. -: "'4'16 Q \l) :!~ ., ,1'J R: L Q 2 . Et:' . ;!OfJ 1 .~I~' ~I !'\ , " ~". ",...' , 6'& 45'~ . -i-e: I ~'? 5'5,14 _ _ _ _ ~.., I (.~ _ _ _ _ 1~"1'~;.._ - - - - - ZJO.Z _ _ (1tt!:.!/~ ....~ .~- - - - - - -.- - . ~ - - - 6700 - 68!J0 0,75 . . . 6990 6950 ~ Co O~ ~~o.L .__0'-"-.'. .~-- :.D elT ... OF ..F GOLDEN VALLEY ST, LOUIS PARK ,,1' ~ ,..U! !1lU ~, : e M E M 0 RAN DUM ---------- e DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: August 10, 1993 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing -- Minor Subdivision - "Wendy's of Golden Valley" - North Side of Golden Valley Road West of Decatur Avenue/ Red Lobster - Wendy's International Inc., Applicant This application involves taking portions of two existing lots (located on the north side of Golden Valley Road west of Decatur Avenue/Red Lobster) and shifting their common lot line about 28 feet to the west. The request qualifies as a minor subdivision because: a) the land involved is part of a recorded plat, b) it will result in the creation of fewer than five lots, and c) it will not necessitate any additional public investment in new roads or utilities to serve the proposed lots. As a minor subdivision, there are clear-cut conditions for determining whether or not to approve this request. Staff evaluation of each condition is as foll ows: e A. Lots must meet applicable zoning requirements - The property is commer- cially zoned. There are no applicable minimum lot size or lot frontage requirements. The lots are currently vacant, so there are no questions with regard to eXisting development having to meet new setbacks. The westerly lot, which is being made smaller through this application for mi nor subdi vi si on, wi 11 have a somewhat 1 arger setback on its west lot line because it is adjacent to a multiple dwelling property. However, buildable width after sUbtracting required setbacks (30 feet on the west and 20 feet on the east) will still be 129 feet. B. Lots must not have steep slopes or excessive wetness - The City Engineer has declared that neither of these conditions is of significant concern for purposes of the minor subdivision. C. Sewer and water must be directly accessible - They are. D. Necessary easements must be granted - These are shown on the preliminary sketch. It should be noted as a condition of approval that easements along side and rear property lines will have to be increased from the five foot width shown to a width of six feet as required by code. E. Where applicable, other affected agencies must approve - Staff identified no other agencies needing to be consulted in this matter. F. Any title issues must be resolved - Staff identified no reason to require e a title review. e e e Wendy's International, Inc. Page 2 G. Subdivision of nonresidential land must not cause a strain on roads or utilities - The City Engineer gave particular attention to the question of whether Golden Valley Road, which goes from an 80 foot right-of-way down to 66 feet near the easterly limit of the affected property, should be widened farther to the west. He ultimately determined that the existing width is adequate. On-site drainage/water detention require- ments will be determined during the construction process. H. Park dedication - as a nonresidential subdivision, no park dedication will be required. Recomendation Having reviewed all of the conditions for approving or denying minor subdivision applications, staff recomends that the proposed minor subdivision called "Wendy's of Golden Valley" be approved, provided that the utility easements be increased to six feet along side and rear lot lines. EAB:mkd attachments: Location Map Preliminary Plat DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M 0 RAN DUM ---------- e August 18, 1993 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing -- Conditional Use Permit to operate a Class II Restaurant in a Commercial Zoning District - North Side of Golden Valley Road West of Decatur Avenue/Red Lobster - Wendy's Interna- tional Inc., Applicant Wendy's Inc. would like to purchase the easterly portion of the property being proposed forresubdivision as Wendy's of Golden Valley (proposed Lot 2). The proposed Wendy's Restaurant would be a 2,900 sq.ft. structure with a drive- through facility and an indoor dining area capable of seating up to 88 customers at a time. The drive-through lane will have parking on both sides to the north and east of the building; access to or from some parking spaces could be restri cted at peak busi ness hours by the presence of dri ve-through patrons if that feature proves to be enormously popular. Proposed hours of operation at this time are 10 AM to 10 PM. Several plans and detail sheets (enclosed separ- ately) have been submitted along with the application for Conditional Use Permit, to assist the Planning Commission and City Council in evaluating this _ request. ., Factors for Consideration City Code identifies ten factors to consider in terms of making findings and recommendations on applications for Conditional Use Permits. Staff findings on each of the factors are summarized as follows: 1. Demonstrated Need - The applicant has identified a market for a Wendy's outlet at this location, which is the standard that has been used for determining "need" for conditional uses in Golden Valley. While several other fast food chains have outlets within a mile of the proposed site, the closest existing Wendy's is at Ridgedale. 2. Consistenc~ with Comprehensive Plan - The comprehensive plan identifies the site as belng in an area designated for commercial uses. The proposed con- ditional use is commercial in nature. 3. Effect on Neighboring Property Values - With the exception of the apart- ments to the west, neighboring properties are all developed for office, commercial or light industrial use. No significant impact is expected for those uses. The proxi mi ty of a fast food operati on to the apartments is cause for special care to be taken in protecting against spillover of light and noi se or other factors that coul d make the nearest apartment units undesirable to renters, which would have an effect on the overall property _ value. With appropriate conditions incorporated into the use permit poten- ., tial impacts on the apartments can be minimized. Eventually, the develop- ment of the rest of the site between the apartments and the proposed Wendy's will also serve as a buffer between the two. Page Two It 4. Effect of Traffic Generation - The City Engineer has looked at the plans and determined that the existing road system can handle the number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed use. 5. Effect of Increases in Population or Density - There will be no increase in population. The density of the proposed development is within limits established by the Zoning Code for commercial districts. The applicant's preferred site plan does not include enough parking spaces to meet zoning requirements, but the site itself is large enough to provide full parking if necessary. A parking expansion area is indicated on the site plan, in lighter print, in the northerly 74 feet of the property. As with other cases in the past, staff will recommend adding a condition to the use per- mit to allow initial development with the preferred plan but require full build-out to meet code requirements if parking problems occur. Streets and utilities are able to handle the level of development. As indicated in the accompanying report on the application for minor subdivision, plans for dealing with increased run-off of storm water will be evaluated during the site construction process. It 6. Increase in Noise Levels - Obviously, going from a vacant lot to a deve- loped site will result in more noise being generated. For the most part, noise levels are not expected to be excessive in terms of other uses that could locate on the site by right. There will be a drive-through, which means a loudspeaker system and idling car engines. The currently-proposed hours of operation are from 10 AM to 10 PM, which means no early morning or late night noise. Putting a CUP restriction on hours of operation would provide protection against future changes, should the Planning Commission or City Council have any concerns on that score. 7. Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas or Vibration - These are not expected to increase any more than they wou1 d for a sit-down restaurant, whi ch wou1 d be per- mitted on this site by right. Most are not expected to increase at all. 8. Flies, Rats, Animals or Vermin - This is a food processing operation, so of course there is the possi bi 1 i ty of pests bei ng attracted to the dumpster area. Again, this is not expected to be any worse than for a sit-down restaurant. e 9. Visual Appearance - This will be all-new construction on a long-vacant site. The preliminary landscape plan indicates a profusion of bushy and potted greenery around the bui 1 di ng and at strategi c 1 ocati ons across the front of the property. Larger p1antings scattered around the site include a good proportion of evergreens. Pushing the parking to the sides and rear of the lot instead of across the front is also a nice touch. A brick veneer is proposed all the way around the building with contrasting detail work. Contrasting copper-co10rded facing above the windows around the front portion of the building also incorporates the standard Wendy's logo. This is all subject to review by the Building Board of Review, but seems to present an attractive package. 10. Other Effects - No other potential sources of impact on the general pUblic health, safety, or welfare have been identified by staff as of the time of writing of this memo. Page Three Staff Recommendation tit Staff recommends approval of thi s appl i cati on for conditi onal use permit to operate a Cl ass II restaurant in a Commerci a 1 Zoni ng Di stri ct. No specifi c recommendation is offered regarding limits on hours of operation, because it is unclear how big an issue that is likely to be, and there are several ways of dealing with it. Staff will be prepared to discuss such a condition should the Planning Commission consider it advisable. Other conditions are recommended as follows: 1. The following plans, submitted as part of the application for conditional use permit shall be attached to and made part of this permit: a. "Site Plan", Sheet C2, prepared by Loucks and Associates and dated August 8, 1993 b. "Floor Plan", Sheet 4J, dated July 21, 1992. 2. The preferred parking lot layout shown on the "Site Plan" is permitted for initial construction. However, as this layout does not fully meet code requirements, the entire parking layout as also shown on the "Site Plan" shall be constructed if and when the Director of Zoning and Community Services determines that the smaller parking area is inadequate to meet on- site parking demand. 3. Plans for drainage and temporary stormwater detention shall be approved by ~ the City Engineer. .., 4. Outdoor lighting shall be designed, located, and used in such a way as to minimize unnecessary off-site spillover. If necessary before or after construction, the Director of Zoning and Community Services shall have the authority to require the site occupant to hire a lighting specialist to see that this requirement is adhered to. 5. The use and the site itself shall meet all applicable city, state and federal regulations. 6. Failure to comply with any of the terms of this permit may be cause for its revocation. EAK:mkd Attachments: Site Location Map Packet of 13 Plans (attached separately) e ,SI. i;- ~ ~ III ...r- ~a\ ... . ..U> . ... . :/t) Ol~ .. iii;;. 0 D. "'5 .. c ~ .-" '-' ~ rfi '" ~ ~ C:l ~ 560 () ... 0 ":l ;e ~ 'l0825 ~ 1.\ VI I .~ VI East 6Z/.6 v ~~ 2 .:: Q) 4 620.25 Z06 I \.., ~ ~ I I I "1- .z I' s<t,~ 15 <l~~~~ ~ I~ 't ~"E -.; _ole'" - .. ~ . C) I'i ~ ~ 'It ~ o It) O~.~ Qj ~\O '-..... 6 ~~ 5 3 ,.....i., ~ ....... I 'LLEY ." ... .(:10. ~I'" 4 ~I~ I J4 to- .... I 8900 'i"I: " ;44.' ':.3 4 Ca. (do P:-o.:. iI.l+ ---___80 i ! . 9/~O c:i d ... z w ~ ~ ci ... ~ t <t !" ...... C) ~ OJ6',,-. ," East %4'. H 2/'1.41 ~. ... 14'1 :t 1(\0 "" .... I . C) ... Q) 5 ... .~ C) ",. -. 2 N 880ZZ"G"W 3 76.3 8 2'4.12 7(,.oJ I I I I't' :!:\D ~I~ I I I Z~4.005 7ft N8"43'/S"E 588.01 <II .... ... ! t:l ~ ",'" ... . -. - J; .. r-'- " ~ ,. ... ~;;, &. .... ~ ~. C) ~ .... '" "' ~ - - rn... \Q~ 00 Ifl.. o ~ .~ I If\ .... C) N III ;;; l"- N ...' ...... ,0 .- ~ g. .... 0:: :J ~ ~\'\<t, 't' ... Zl/.SG 'l16.07 ~ ~ 3 8840-8804 - -:1- 7-TH__ 588 AVE. East-.NO. J'-- 2 ~. ...::-- 10 ~ zoo 6lJ ,sc " INDUSTRIAL 885 3 · l(\ G) . .n ., CI' :t. ..... -IP_ 218.005 00 r-= A ,on :{~ ...'" 000 :':'Ifl 2 3 . m Qii N . ".--: .tJ~.,. . ___ "0 : .(..... ..."" ...... 00 ~'" - rll'O' 8-6.70) ,. , ~~ "-,,' "l 88.'1 0 . A . '0 cD lJ no . .----. 1 " ~ o ~ C -- . -- -.... 0 > ! ''t,." ... .aa,q''''"'I \\\.'l." . l' . . 1\ , 'q .... ?..\i. qlf)l.'" '. ,... ~ 0 III a~ ... M . a: .... '..-. I~.l' ~;... -. ... Ilo . 00 -.D' -... . . :J o' '" ~/47- 9141 of' ~.~ Z '0 ti ~ d> 'Q-... ~ C) ..; . ; 0 .. ~. 'no en C? II &aI - ..;"