04-23-84 PC Agenda GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
(Civic Center, 7800 Golden Va11ey Road)
� April 23, 1984
7:00 P.M.
,
AGENDa
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 9, 19841
-- — —
II. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARINQ - PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPLICANT: City of Golden'Yallley
LOCATION: 4010 Bassett Creek Drive
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat I�pproval of "Mary Hills Park"
III. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPLICANT: City of Golden Valley
LOCATION: 4130 Bassett Creek Drive z
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat Approval of "Rice Lake Park Reserve"
�
IV. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPLICANT: City of Golden Valley
LOCATION: 5000 Olson Memorial Highway and 801 Ottawa Avenue No.
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat Approval of "Schaper Natural: Area" t
V: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PUD AMENDMENT PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
APPLICANT: Stanley M. Chasney r
tOCATION: 4959/4969/4979 015on Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Preliminary Desig� Plan Approval of PUd #28, Pondwood
Office Park, Amendment No. 2 '
;.
. i
4
�
;
�
Page Two
• AGENDA
VI. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING = APRIL 18, 1984
YII. REPORT ON BZA MEETING = APRIL 10, 1984
VIII. REPORT ON HRA MEETING _ APRIL 10, 1984
�
�
MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
• APRIL 9, 1984
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers
of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Vice
Chair Tubman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Those present were Commissioners Leppik, McAleese, Russell , Singer and Tubman.
Commissioners Forster and Prazak were absent.
Also present were A1da Peikert, Assistant Planner, and Allen Barnard, Housing
and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Attorney.
I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1984
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner McAleese and
carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 26, 1984 Planning
Commission meeting as recorded.
II. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PUD AMENDMENT PRELIMINARY DESIGN
PLAN
APPLICANT: Stanley M. Chasney
• LOCATION: 4959/4969/4979 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Preliminary Design Plan approval of PUD #28,
pondwood Office Park, Amendment No. 2
Vice Chair Tubman introduced this agenda item. The proponent, Mr. Stanley
Chasney, was present
It was moved by Commissioner Singer, seconded by Commissioner 1 eppik and carried
unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of April 23, 1984 to consider
the request received from Mr. Stanley M. Chasney for Preliminary Design Plan
approval of an amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, to allow conversion
of one of the office condominium units to residential use and to allow addition
of a three stall garage structure.
III. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 15 OF
G�6� - - - -
Vice Chair Tubman introduced this agenda item and called on Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Attorney Allen Barnard to present the proposed
amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance. Mr. Barnard
explained the HRA staff recortanendation for the amendment designed to facilitate
redevelopment projects undertaken by the HRA.
�
Planning Commission Minutes of Apri1 9, 1984 -2-
•
In response to a question from Cor�nissioner Singer, Mr. Barnard confirmed his
opinion that the proposed amendment would withstand any scrutiny under statute.
Co�nissioner Leppik asked for clarification of the effect of PUD Preliminary
Design Plan approval on a property. Mr. Barnard explained that the proposed PUD
Ordinance amendment allows City initiation of the PUD process on property the
HRA intends to acquire for redevelopment but allows processing through the
Preliminary Design Plan approval stage only prior to actual acquisition. This
limitation is a safeguard against the event that the HRA does not follow through
with the intended acquisition and redevelopment. Preliminary Design Plan appro-
val has no lasting or binding effect on the property. The developer does not
have PUD approval until the General Plan of Development approval stage of the
PUD process. Mr. Barnard stated his personal opinion that the PUD process
should not proceed to the General Plan approval stage until either the HRA or
developer owns the land.
Commissioner McAleese questioned the effect of initiation of the PUD approval
process on saleability of a property. Mr. Barnard explained that under the pro-
posed amendment City initiation of the PUD procedure is allowable only where the
HRA has by resolution stated intent to acquire the property. Mr. Barnard
suggested that under these circumstances the property is already affected by
anticipated redevelopment and that initiation of the PUD process would not add
to the impact on property owners.
• Commissioner McAleese expressed agreement with the goal of the proposed amend-
ment and stated that he finds the proposed procedure to be reasonable. He
suggested, however, that the proposed amendment to Section 15:14 Subdivision 11
of the Zoning Code does not go far enough in dealing with specifics in the event
of City initiation of the PUD process and that additional sections of the Code
should be revised to include special provisions for City initiated PUD applica-
tions. Commissioner McAleese listed the following as discrepancies or points of
confusion:
1 . Payment of application fees. Commissioner McAleese suggested provision for
waiver of fees in the case of a City initiated application.
2. Requirement of 20 copies of plans. Commissioner McAleese questioned
submittal to the City of information presumably already compiled as part of
the redevelopment planning process.
3. Deadlines for submittal of and action on the General Plan of Development
following Preliminary Design PTan approval . Commissioner McAleese suggested
that delays in the acquisition or condemnation processes could result in
need for waiver of time deadlines and that provision for waiver of time
deadlines in the case of City initiated applications should be included in
the amendment.
�
Planning Commission Minutes of April 9, 1984 -3-
�
4. Referral to the Planning Commission. Based on the assumption that the City
Council would approve an application which the Council itself submitted,
Commissioner McAleese questioned whether Planning Commission review has any
meaning in this case.
In addressing the points raised by Commissioner McAleese, City HRA Attorney
Allen Barnard first noted that ordinances are drawn for general application and
may not make perfect sense when applied to specific cases or developments,
whether or not unusual due to initiation by the City. By way of background, Mr.
Barnard informed the Commission that HRA staff at one time considered recommen-
dation of a separate zoning district for the Valley Square Redevelopment
District but dismissed that alternative as overly complicated.
Concerning Planning Commission review of HRA redevelopment proposals, Mr.
Barnard stated that the problem of prejudging the PUD process has been under
consideration by HRA staff for a long time. HRA procedure in use at this time
calls for referral of preliminary redevelopment plans to the Planning Commission
for review prior to inclusion in HRA development agreements. However, comments
offered by the Planning Commission at the development agreement point in the
process require careful wording in order to avoid the appearance of prejudging
the Planning Commission hearing on the PUD Preliminary Design Plan.
• In response again to the question of Planning Commission review of a City ini-
tiated application and also in response to suggeted waiver of other infor-
mational requirements for City initiated applications, Mr. Barnard concTuded
with the observation that the real applicant in the process remains the deve-
loper despite the fact that the City may initiate the application officially.
The developer would actually be the one providing the plans and information
required for the Preliminary Design Plan.
Vice Chair Tubman asked at what point City involvement in the developer's pro-
ject would become great enough that the City would be obligated to allow the
project to proceed. Mr. Barnard pointed out that the developer becomes the
official applicant at the General Plan of Development stage of the PUD process.
The HRA does not actually wish to be the applicant, but merely wishes to get the
process moving, and this can be done by the City. The proposed amendment simply
recognizes the need for PUD approval processing concurrent with acquisition or
condemnation of the property in order to minimize delays in the construction
start and to minimize land holding costs. Postponement of the PUD process until
after conclusion of condemnation constitutes a significant impediment to the
redevelopment process, and the proposed amendment offers a partial solution to
the problem.
Commissioner Leppik moved that the Planning Commission recommend City Council
approval of the Proposed amendment to the PUD Ordinance providing for City ini-
tiation of the PUD approval process through Preliminary Design Plan in the case
�
Plartning Comrnission Minutes of April 9, 1984 -4-
• of roperties the HRA intends to acquire. Commissioner Leppik stated that the
P
City should take any measures possible to encourage developers to participate in
redevelopment and that the proposed amendment facilitates the redevelopment
process.
Conmissioner Singer seconded the motion, and a vote was taken. The motion
passed by a vote of four to one, with Commissioners Leppik, Russell, Singer and
Tubman voting in favor of the motion. Cor�nissioner McAleese voted against the
motion, stating that he feels the goal and concept of the proposed amendment are
fine, but that there is need for clarification of details. Commissioner
McAleese suggested that the Drdinance language be rewritten to eliminate
problems with application of other sections to City initiated applications and
stated that he feels there is no excuse for confusion in an Ordinance.
IV. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - APRIL 3, 1984
Vice Chair Tubman provided the Planning Commission with a report on the Apri1 3,
1984 City Council meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
�
Lloyd Tubman, Vice Chair
•
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 18, 1984
� FROM: ALOA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "MARY HILLS
PARK°
The City of Golden Valley is proposing platting of three parcels of City owned
property. The purpose of platting the City owned property is to clearly define
boundaries with an accurate survey and to clear title. �
The first of the City owned properties proposed for platting is Mary Hills Park,
an area located between Bassett Creek and the Burlington Northern Railroad Line
in northeastern Golden Valley. Anticipated use of the property is passive
recreation.
It is suggested that the Planning Commission set an informal public hearing date
of May 14, 1984 for consideration of the Preliminary Plat of "Mary Hi11s Park".
AP:kjm
Attachment: Site Location Map
�
•
r
r '
• �
�t'1�i1 w .�0. �-!- ('N.N=S�t I�S.R :)
. ... � �AVE sN�.
io
g.! �•��t� �: �z � �w�,. ti +. o
: 'x �IOT � � �' et���'
A.+ 1 .► z .�
q Z �
¢.,+� st. 6+ f '
. • � � r 'r
� � I
:
t �� . � t � Z�4� � s � . .
�
w � M ~; J � s � s �
z � • } � M�,
. .. _ ss - e ,�y
�f- ,
� �: �' ' �i.p y . -T� �f�•
�- h� S•Z� �� ~ � k - .
�, s.. � :;:.,•
� . � 1 � .+f1 ti
2 .� o �.. , fJ '��
`�. f� � � � �l �• .
�� � ;� 'p,y�; �
s• �. �
.
a'� _ _ . ,
�s�S�, g � r.. `_�,pl ' �
0
eP`.
/ - f ��.
�
� � �f�
��6• � .+� �► `+ � .` '"�,�t �- /� t'� - •o'�
� y cn � , , -•� .�
�c � tiµ ° s � ..�a 4 •� y �:.i v.
o .' 3 �►• ° �� .1 ,f� � $ �
; � 7„ � �'g a���, i � � 1 ,� , �'�� �} ' � s '.�, .
D~�� ' � ~� • � A _ '\' � � '�d ',�, '- �
�. �f'�4' M, '� ,o .1 � S � �1� , "`L� A ; i
rh • � �i ♦ } �¢-
' . �1 � ,�„ �,Sy '►� � �
wo�1. ,�.�� *�o o• � a•
� s. c ,p�'� . � � � �1 •s " '
� � L 1" !
� ►�'e� G � � � ` M�� t
�. � ,..
r1 4� ��' °�` �f 90E' � ` w r L
� � � � �,�--
/�N� � J�
T6°•'�'� �L � � ��, ` �!
•� 71� � 1 1�s 'I°�' o . ,w ' ..
'Q * • $• `� '�" s �" ' e tn
�• `� '• - ..t. �, a ' ` • .• � M
3 "' 4 �' � �_ °,,,� •�
J��7� ` ���'4' t��j�1 i ��' �v�o �-:. ` ..
y ' ,� ��� � • � 1�1 ��. ���/— fn
4, �
/ : J,e•� I��,1 r>j 40 1`' S,�p) � - M ' • �,�;' , �"
a
$�. I �;, '+��� �� �� . �1,i�, �1) 4 +�s '��� "� = �
:�,� `� � `��� ,� ,0 3 � � ;� .,
T�r w � [uf _� �E,�t _s.it•a�-- - � - - - - - - - ,°���
� ��2) " �b a�s . T i�T -�1r. �� � � _
OUTLOT Y � � � ��► .r �� �.'� ���''4- "�
� •10 '' t41.��.' ��o ���t . ��. ` ' ' �
.s '�.
�15�� ' • .,p�p 2 �r� , :R�,�S y,•• ,�':�,� .,, ' �1 y e
� . .�t'�:• M,, � : ,►1 qs1 �. ,
.� �� '�� s �o j ,. _ : _ _ �
.,1: - . , , G
hS�o� s� . ��'` ��'�, ,.r }�y ;, � � � ==j :: _ •p
� ��� �Fr . �y �y q'{r$ � :�''�. ..
� � '� t �� �4� � � ;l , �• � � `��
.� L
i� •� � � 1 � i � r �1 y C
�520� ~�� l� �j �'i � � � ,� � - ��
4�." .,�r ,�• `1� v. �- �+'3 �; � O '1
, �- -� t k `s �,� �, ,_ t7,t,,,. • •
� t D : �� L�► �Q i,. � , .+.. s �i� ',
�y ,: � � ,� i,� • • .,.
,IS��� � _ �� w \ �.,r �. ;`� MJr. `�) ,� ,• _/W� '� ..� r .
_. � � � �' • R•
� — � �• '" ,r� �
� �t- - --�s �' � �.�,`�u� J � � e :�� � �''�' y�' �,V, � �
w � � � �. � � . � �^'S
' O �'~• � � �O� � 1�' « m IZ� � r � �<
� - 3 �. � b� ��r��� ��_� � -A1 � ,�0 ',� �: -.!�, �
• � .�. r � : it�' � 'b � s3-
� } ���. E t:,w�,• M � � J ° �.. t�`�: ��,' `
' � -s- .
� 'n�'� � . �� _ "°jac.�`- � .�"N� s •a :' ' ���� r i x—sd
� � �.'C� .
1 N �I . .' - N�x7� _ , � . _ y � �.��_�-i��-�
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 18, 1984
• FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT OF °RICE LAKE
PARK RESERVE°
The second of three City owned properties proposed for platting is Rice Lake
Park Reserve located north of Bassett Creek Drive in northeastern Golden Valley.
City use of the property is for storm water ponding area.
It is suggested that the Planning Co�nission set an informal public hearing date
of May 14, 1984 for consideration of the Preliminary Plat of ���;ice Lake Park
Reserve".
AP:kjm
Attachment: Site Location Map
�
�
v ' �
Q f•o _ °• s Q
I � �
"� � � �� � r
A7� ° �� ' --• ,;-s 6 -t .S I Q� ..._... e ,, .
J�Y ,
��� �K. CRY OF SINSDALE wN'S1�w i0.. �`
� ; � � +�• !'ti'f� !I.tf 60LOo N �$. � � S.o � '`4 G'
� � Y
Y :r � o! s.��s+e' r��i�z.a; G ;
. �t p ,
�,i :M . "i t�.l 0 1� : '���e �1'LOT= (�'
� � � M • r :,
"'_ ��' " ♦:• t1'�I.. . � _- /�
••R. L. S.' , � }� ' s. c+ �",'
o � � ., �
� �
. , . � � o .
~ J
���,--' M�� � .
� Y� � �-� � � If0
� w2 � � Z 4
s�i� �� No. 1298 N �: �' ° � �
• � w � N � v�. � �e J
L
e�' f
:= Z�j ��� ' ��`•�,,' ���t ^ t15�,yo�W: e, ! (��.o 'l
p'M' £ �
�y � �QN'� �y" � p � r � Y m 3��.° ± 0�2� . ,
i � � x` _ $
. � '.
�' !D +��a11�C�r �D M =5'0'•` ��.' �, �. f N � �� � .
T
4� ����It=�C ` J 7 n•N� � � �'yti�e 4 � � 3
� W • '�' ��
��� � � �191 � ' a �� �� � «
:�� f'�r � �� � � ' f ��' � ��� '� Z,�
`'r O � ° � g : �
� •'�� �' e �-�- -- ` 1�' :r S a.
� u f .
., M o s �15 :/ �, k
r !�i f �
� Yo , sg t �g � . f. ,��
� - _ � �
O °
� '�-• r ,. � r 6 e
�vn•�ru °: • r� � � Z � �Z " ,N
� ':/ � -f o • � ►` y � ��� c s
� . ;� `r3 . 1 l i � o ' �.
� ^ � o i w - ' °�c 6 :.....
_.2� W �� ,,• • . , �• �g da � . �
� �' -� •
� '�� `
__� ; . o � °!,�. � �r p �l.lJ ��7 5��
� � v.. i '� . � � ti�' .�.
h �
� ho� ,' �a • �, � CREEK `b , .o ,
� Y `:�.�Zy 0-y ^ � '�I'a 1- �Gi�l E�e� s�:
N $ � �S - 2
N 1 �Z.I4 w t ' � 3r�6of o� ,s�, allo�G� �� 7 i
rr-, `^ •19 i. � � � -- _ �-` H'� S . � � . CO`''�o . t�,
4� � � C
, W ti o o �� y�► • s 2 �. � o �:� ����
f Kr.t � o � �;� � _ • o= + � �;r .,-
r =S I �� p v r ' � 4- � . Q��,�� /�' ti5�1 et��y °�-JOI
3 `
� n �� � � �:•,oE.• . � F .. . �oz,b � ,� .
'°.�Q18 e ���,s,� N � .3 � ,�E �4 � .r �.
t�1..;� ' t=M1a� � �T , �p:- .�. . St lkt . y «� ti�r 5;
seASS� �`° • �� �,��� a• • : �a�. Q` _.-o� c3� t
W , . ,,�CR�EK � ti• .• �„A g�2 � ± o o � }�
� ���E� •g i �, �� "'�j � ` '� °-g
W S.lS _S ,03 !!o . „i N.. .r Y� 23 ����� ��o�� � s i P � ° � s`
•�.� � I i � NpG � �1f, . .w�' ,
�'/I � ' ��. 2 `� 1 ;ti�'�/ '' � 'R� �' . ��v •,`'J.'• u� �• !� i', �iD� ,,9 � p . �4`.
i ,f N/�'!?1✓. '� 6 ��p . �4�]ti-+ r4r�-�tFIK �$�. 1 ; w. � ��°' � � ���
, �t e iOJ 1'O • j'.IT �� Tf4Y� r '.r ��_� `� e ,� `*� . •c�,o .
` K 13�N � L � � r r �� -�-- � !IV ' , �sf '�� E,i.fS i! S
' �i�4��0 � . z �- asn•�n�m E !�[�t �� ` � �� (`u471 a ,.; � ':��
• ,4 � � a� _ '� �o . • e• � � OUTLOT 2 ��, , �° �
!Z``''�,•�� �� `�ti � f�x� • g 'O � � �• �t�'� �',o'. c-
y ;��, � 1 -- �tt s � �� � � (1Soo ���, � • � �;F o
�• /� �w � �..2 � . � �r�/ � �'9
. o�- � � � b r. ;o �f!^ 'fo Z • c � p� � � �� � ;S�i ��1� � • J�• S.
:1i� � ! �(�,. � 2 ��� � � �
�y 3 —N�. 'A�'-:'�'- r :^� :•�i� M � c (7.B?' R ('�5,,; f,� � .` / o ,5�1 �
�i► •
y r �Y• z�'� j ��'y W i � _ e � $ • , �� �4t04 T.t.
ti� �-� � . 41 � � ti • �
t � '� '"' 0 _ � . "� ' �� ►,
. �� �../� . V �tS � a
� 1i+:- 1_/___ • � � �'��'' �IS?o) ''`�tr� �Z t �� o �
'��� ��'��t i�.i� � ��� s ,3 � • � � • . �f-- -� ;'�"° st;e Q�
• . �
� "� � ''+ � ' �2 �` � ,�.� -- � � ,t � '• �r '�'O•'
.,� s �u.1� � � ,R i c»os,' (yS�) 2 2 � � � �, �`
M,�►w : � � � t g � � • •.� ^ q .,,^,:.
M� � � � � 4 : � .
4 S "' �'�'° � � -- �- �--�6 �. � ~
y � 1 •, !�►' � ;"�;,o,' S�o) 0 4 �"a•� ' �s %*o.o�, _
_:� � � •� �►. 1 � f ; � 2 Z :_�• "' 3 i. •, ' �O� s;�412
• �to �w , "�"':�" O, ` a �. }. • , ,@,�:� �E f,w i.�
= - - - ., -- .- . . n � O . t . � , `
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 18, 1984
. FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "SCHAPER
NATURAL AREA°
The third of three City owned properties proposed for platting is the Schaper
Natural Area located northeast of the intersection of Highway 55 with Highway
100. The property consists of land dedicated to the City for natural open space
combined with additional land acquired for storm water ponding purposes.
It is suggested that the Planning Commission set an informal public hearing date
of May 14, 1984 for consideration of the Preliminary Plat of "Schaper Natural
Area".
AP:kjm
Attachment: Site Location Map
�
�
� �� � '
.
--':� �l.
� � �f o• �r �of-.. �y t ���� r7 -S•�s.. \ i � r • u • s ri �
� � � �IT. tT�2. E.o{ _ _ _
� � - ta.yK-� ;� . .,M�r ur. • Ssc. +F r ;
� ao ��e • NIS� / ..� '�.+ � ,� cc
� � 1��..• .+ �r�� � � ±
I ' Y
�� �. �•� _'� ~
3 I � �• �'.� � '' � . �;; �w''' r•'2�
. ��o b�. �• .
, .�_ '�.r� � y / , -jy:S� '��l�{�� ,s�� 3 L�� -::d�LL t
K• •���, � � .� + I/ `� �, �� �.11�,. j0.
� � r .r+ 4
,'L � �� �'S r' • � ;,h' � � O i� � �'•
e
i !ff � �
i �' u .1 • / It. .A.� r S t, � �.
*� �� � �� • ~ ` ' ~ '�� �� �J�
M � ' � � �� Z Q , �j� /�� , C O �6�`
� � - � w � � � S � �
� f
` w`" �� 77-OG �. � � '�� � f \ �
'► `,'•' _ �j _ ' ..' � 23G.� � ,��' �-� � �
� '� =x � � ~� 4�y� ,' ,'+` �� ,� ,},�, 2
10 , e ��� !3 ���" ���,� �� ��� y • y�• y s,y� '
� � �� s� r' �i
r� � o � i� '�1:. �' .
1 • IK �• �. � � � � '�-�.� .� ,,1��� �?;J � t � �q z.�'. ���3
�. �v �+• ...� \ ; � i'� �9 �� • � � � '� o �
��` e 1-- 4 — � •�ssv s �� �` � _/ �-- ,,�� -. ��� — � ' i5 _
o .
Jj 1 �� _/ . � � ' .� j-•'--
. 41 ' w
� . 0 12i' �4 � �°�° �- , �� � �' •* �� �1 ° � � �
5 ��M \/ s; 1: .__,� �, t �= a��-- y� • 2 � �a. 4
; • ,��,,,►, � sre ' "'►9rs-,� ,.�_ lo . "�- �+} 3 '
I . � xr�(4210) N • f 4. «� - A'r � yt i� �.. :So ♦ t!G.S 1 0
G.G�_ . ��j,� - � 'k�.. �,�__ ��oo) !!e!� � �S liws d M 14d5 N_ef N��(1 �.....
�L I�tS.�Z' . -—
�..F M.line ck,.l� �dtnk�cd trceP} (3ooj -
;NORTNWESTERN Mh,n ,��� .� ,h.N�
)36 ps 5i2) ,
i��.�� Gto. Jeo•4 0 ;
30 30
j
i
s� � � � � � � �� � �
; � * � i �
� �
'C� I � ° '�
t p,�'�•� �I '��� ' �
,� � � ��
I � �
P�'� ' ,
� � / O.O
� 0 i r�
iO O�
' o � __ -
O �
� e Z I ��
� �N ; � s �� •
��� Z�� � . �
p,0 ��e � 4
� R: .
�« r8115) o •�6065)
� -
, �o
� q .
.. ) � �'
l
-- �7 `` (GotS)
:' . �:s.ts (�oSo) .� �'
t
� � �
� ' �s� . � � ! °� •
� . �soo ).�s. � o
. ; : ,•_ � ,. � hos
. :�•.
x uT t� ,
• • . -�- -�Ao...
•-iSIt.S-•
„_ Zb0.�3�li. ---
T0: GOLDEN YALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 18, 1984
� FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN FOR PUD #28,
PONDWOOD OFFICE PARK, AMENDMENT N0. 2
Application for a second amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, is made by
Mr. Stanley M. Chasney, one of the partners in Pondwood Associates, owners of
the office condominium Planned Unit Development (PUD) located at 4959, 4969 and
4979 Olson Memorial Highway. Mr. Chasney requests approval of the Preliminary
Design Plan for a PUD amendment to allow conversion of one of the office con-
dominium units to residential use and to allow construction of a three stall
garage for use in conjunction with the residential unit.
The original Pondwood PUD, approved in late 1981 , consists of eleven office con-
dominium units arranged in three buildings situated on the east side of the pond
located southeast of the intersection of Highway 55 and Highway 100. The
buildings are one story in height and residential in character. Although adja-
cent to Highway 55 and bounded by office development and zoning on each side,
the setting on the pond further enhances the residential feeling. From the
standpoint of outside appearance, the develapment could be either residential or
office use.
The first amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, was a minor revision
� approved in June 1982 when construction was substantially complete. The origi-
nal plan included construction of garage units along the east boundary line for
office use. It was determined that occupants did not require or desire the
garages, and elimination of garages was approved with provision of adequate out-
side parking for office use of the buildings.
The second amendment currently proposed and under consideration calls for the
addition of a three stall garage structure along with residential conversion of
the end condominium unit farthest from Highway 55. The proponent provides two
plan sheets, one showing the previously approved PUD site plan and the second
showing the proposed site plan with addition of the garage structure. There is
no loss of outside parking spaces with the proposed garage addition. The same
number of 19 outside parking spaces is maintained in the vicinity of the
southerly condominium building. Outside parking space partially block entrance
to the garage. The garage is designated for storage as well as garage use, and
this apparently is the explanation. At any rate, parking is adequate to accom-
modate either residential or office use of the subject unit.
The reason provided by the proponent for the requested residential conversion is
accor�nodation of a special need for combined residential and office use in one
building to allow the proponent, Mr. Chasney, to be located near his wife who
requires care due to Multiple Sclerosis. Mr. Chasney explains this request in a
letter submitted with his PUD amendment application and points to the residen-
tial setting as making the location ideal for his needs. The PUD mechanism is
specifically designed to provide for mixed uses and to accommodate unusual
circumstances. Pondwood Office Park is an excellent selection for combination
�
of residential with office use due to the residential character of the develop-
• ment as discussed previously. Choice of the southerly unit for residential use
is most advantageous both from the standpoint of best accommodating the residen-
tial use and from the standpoint of least interference with the office use. The
unit is the farthest from highway noise and the most secluded, and the unit is
also the most removed from other units in office use.
At the same time that staff feels this is an appropriate place for combination
of office and residential , staff cautions against continuation of the concept
with future additional conversions. Staff recommends that any approval of the
requested amendment stipulate no future consideration of further conversion to
residential . Underlying zoning of the subject site and adjacent sites both to
the east and to the west is Business and Professional Offices. Provision of one
handicapped housing unit in conjunction with the office use is appropriate, but
indiscriminate mixing of residential into this development would not be
desirable. It is suggested that the amended PUD Permit further provide for
reversion of the unit to office use if desired by the owners in the future. In
other words, the PUD Permit would provide for either office ar handicapped resi-
dential use of the one end unit designated.
The proposal includes one variance, a variance of the side yard setback to the
proposed garage structure. The setback required by Ordinance is 20 feet, and
the setback from the east property line to a corner of the garage is only 12
feet. Staff finds the location of the garage at the southerly end of the deve-
lopment to be pleasing in a visual sense. The garage structure finishes off the
development, providing a visual barrier between the interior parking and cir-
culation area and the railroad track located adjacent to the property on the
� south. The proposed garage location would not have a negative visual impact on
property to the east. The property to the east adjacent to the proposed garage
site is natural wooded area. The portion of the adjacent property developed
with parking and landscaping extends only as far south as the second building in
the Pondwood de�elopment.
Staff suggests that the Pl,anning Commission recommend City Council approval of
the Preliminary Design Plan for PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, Amendment No. 2,
requested by Mr. Stanley M. Chasney to allow conversion of the southerly office
condominium unit to residential use and to allow the addition of a three stall
garage structure, subject to the following conditions:
1 . There shall be no further conversions of Pondwood office condominium units
to residential use.
2. Either handicapped residential or office use of the southerly condominium
unit shall be allowable in the future.
AP:kjm
Attachments:
1 . Site Locatiorr Map
2. March 26, 1984 Letter from the Proponent
3. PUD Preliminary Design Plan Application
4. Site Plans (Full sized plan sheets distributed separately)
�
i - -
� . �
� �+
k � •: • �r
� .
� i0o 0
�
;
f :_ sca le
� • 28�0.73 Res. •
� '�
j _ ��. . � t�3f
� Dt5
� �-�-�e.o-__�_71£5 __ '__
� � ± c�.�
{
;
� � . � - iFLOYD B. OLSON
' ' � -J
� SIO/ S�P/ Si�t ' ! 30or .�+ ��Q C.D. /2�IZ i0
�� 100 �2A __ _______ ____ __ - _ - ________ ___r.__
� OC.R!!•/76l * �
_— ----.
�� �Z �� o ' � ' 1 - � 3 ��t9�9 �90i � �3�'
� w� � , F---,ls•� ,zs-• ---�-1'J__ . �_�� � •
J
� '� 00� �tl�i �I./� � , i � \�� I� (SB-��
'� � (ss4�1
-,.o--. u ►oo � - "� "
„►%2�` � ,, � Sbol '� � ,
,
�� !o liti� � ( y „p:' 9� ; (sasz; (5848,' . p`' �
��' �� � � 1� 0 9 \\ �
�. ,, ro *k, i- / � '; .
. �k � ro � � � �
g � . �
' s� 11 �' ; 'S �'��
�/ `
� 't` `� � , � � � �� \� �
4� `y Y y •
�� b t+ � ' \ � `�`
h�a � b � l� .��jek�
. 4 � (58/5)
' 0� • W
�� �0 O
.�t .a.'" g o ,�
. . ... .... .
, : . ------ -• -----
o ,�o - 749 0, � ..��
t i g'Fy� ;��� 14 5 �
�n� 'M �-' 1�
4 a 12.12 D�C
�_ T E A
�` .��� N � �r �
f �'* 1 N ti v�• . � � .
` .�7~ �N �3 . �0 .
` 1. � ,
! �
� '�e �f*� � .o?
��� ��'R°'�2 .
� p 0.�
, AD . k.
t��'� �� ' '��
;� 1����
— ..... ..._. __
1 . �' � ---�__. �
1'� --,---�
j _ ..it��.�4" p,.
, � b
�b�� ��.��1
i � �°`` 1h
h�'�
, ; :
�
,
� ; ��
� ---- - _
� ^
.__.._ ' f: .
_' '_'_ _'.��.��.
��� . _.'__'__._'' �-___'"_.__' i
, . _.._._....'____ . ,��. '_ `�
� j ..����h
�} � �
� t ' Q.
•.A! PfWTo=SG _ � �78i2) �
h �A
, '*1 . . . � . .�+/ . � ` � � N . . .�
- _- �
; i.. �65!3� `�.N �
, _ _ .
�`R� CHASNEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
� ` CONSULTiNG ENGiNEERS ' �
,..��:�..,..._ :�__-__ ._ �_ � _..:�,.. .... .� _ .._�.m.
4979 OISON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55422 PHONE 612/546-3355
March 26, 1984
Mr. Michael H. Miller, City Planner
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Re: Pondwood Office Park
P.U.D. No. 28
Dear Mr. Miller:
Enclosed are the preliminary design plans and application for consideration
of ammendment No. 2 to P.U.D. No. 28. Drawing A-1 indicates the present
conditions and Drawing A-2 indicates the modifications requested by this
ammendment.
� The applicant is a partner in Pondwood Associates, Owners of Pondwood
-0ffice Park and is also President of Chasney Associates, Inc. , a
Mechanical and Electrical Consulting Engineering firm, a tenant in
Pondwood Office Park.
The ammendment is requested in order to provide a solution to the need
for combining residential and office functions. In 1972 Mrs. Chasney
was diagnosed as a victim of Multiple Sclerosis. Rapid deterioration
took place and she was confined to a wheel chair within two years. We
have been very fortunate in that her condition has essentially stabilized
in the last 10 years with little added deterioratiQn.
Because of the wheel chair confinement and the unpredictable nature of
Multiple Sclerosis we feel we must be prepared for the eventual need for
increased care. This care can be best provided by combining the residen-
tial and office facilities in the same building. The residential and
office mix in the area and the residential-like setting of Pondwood Office
Park make this location ideal .
We sincerely hope this ammendment will receive favorable consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
.��✓• :��
� Stanley M. Chasney
� `�MG !y` � .
. . � . .. � � i .
J f
�
' A
e
V 4
� - . . � . t�4.N��♦
P.U.D. NUMBER: 28
CITY OF GOLDEN VALtEY Ammendment No. 2
APPLICATlON FOR CONSIDERATION :
� OF
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
PREtIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
DATE OF APPLICATIOPJ: 03/23/84
AMENDMENT FEE PAID RECEIPT N0.
$75.00 (�Ck9;9��t9C�
APPLICANT NAME: Stanley M. Chasney PHONE N0. 546-3355
ADDRESS : 4979 Olson Memorial Highway, Minneapolis, MN 55422
Number � Street City State Zip Code
PROPERTY OWNER: Pondwood Associates PHONE N0: 542-8219
ADDRESS: 4969 Olson Memorial Nighway, Minneapolis, MN 55422
Number � Street City State Z�p Code
STREET LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION: 4959/4969/4979
Olson Memorial Highway, Minneapolis, MN 55422
� LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach separate sheet if necessary) : See attached Sheet
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY IN QUEST10�1:
(Attach to Application along with an area Half-Section Map)
TYPE OF PR�POSAL:
SMA"LL AREA: X LARGE OR COMPLEX AREA:
RESIDENTIAL: X COMMERCIAL: tNDUSTRIAL:
BUSINESS � PROFESSIONAL OFFICE: X INSTITUTIONAL: MIXED USE: X
REDEVELOPMENT AREA: N/A
PRESENT ZONING OF PROPERTY: Professional and Business office -
� PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: Professional office
PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY (Attach Additional Pages if Necessary) :
� To convert a 1200 sq. ft. portion of an existing professiona'1 office to
residential use and to add a garage/storage facility.
STRUCTURES: NUMBER 4 TYPE wood frame '
HEtGHT $'-17' NUMBER OF STORIES 1 AMENITIES AND/OR RECREATtONAL
FACIL)TlES (i.e. Tennis Court, pool , etc. ) nOne
NUMBER QF PEOPLE INTENDED TO LIVE OR WORK ON PREMISES: ADULTS: 55 CHtLDREN: �
NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES PROPOSED: ENCLOSED (Garage or Parking Ramp) 3
NON ENCLOSED 61 TOTAL ACRES OF LAND IN P.U.D. 3.71
DENSITY: (Number of Units per Acre) N/A
� INDICATE THE FOLLOwING DATA BY PERCENTAGES:
inside
AREA COVERED BY STRUCTURES: 7•� � AREA COVERED BY ��['8X� PARKING: 0.6 �
AREA COVERED 8Y QU7SIDE PARKlNG: 12•� � AREA COVERED BY INTERIQR STREETS: 2•� �
AREA LANDSCAPED: 34.4 � NATURAL AREA AND/OR OPEN SPACE 0 � PONDING AREA: 44.0 �
ZONING VARIANCES:
List below all variances from the standard zoning requirements that will be requested
as part of this P.U.D. , and the justification for granting said variances (Attach
Additional Sheets, if needed) . A variance is requested to reduce the side yard
setback requirement from 20'-0" to approximately 12'-0" to allow a 3 stall
garage and still provide for drainage to the west of the structure.
! NEREBY DECLARE THAT ALL S7ATEMENTS MADE IN TN15 REQUEST, AND ON ADDITIONAt MATERIAL,
� ARE TRUE.
/J i�� 03 Z3 ¢.
Signature of Applicant Date
Signature of Applicant Date