05-10-82 PC Agenda GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY l0, 1982
. � (CIVIC CENTER, 78Q0 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD)
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 26, 1982
II . SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARI�JG - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: Green Stuff, Inc.
LOCATION: 735 Colorado Avenue South •
REQUEST: Approval to operate a Lawn Treatment Company
including storage � handling of liquid and
solid materials that could be considered
hazardous and/or toxic
III . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO PUD #28, PONDWOOD OFFICE PARK '
� APPLICANT: Pondwood Associates
LOCATION: 4959, 4g69 � 4979 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Approval of Modification of PUD #28,
Pondwood Office Park
1V. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - WEST SUBURBAN SURGICAL CENTER, INC.
APPLICANT: West Suburban Surgical Center, Inc.
LOCATION: 6681 Country Club Drive
REQUEST: Favorable consideration of request to establish
and operate a "same day" surgical center
V. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL PIEETING - t1AY 4, 1982
� `�
Minutes of the Golden Valley
� Planning Commission
Aprit 26, 1g82
A regular meeting of the Planning Cflmmission was held in the Council Chambers
of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN. Chairman
Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Those present were Commissioners Forster, Leppik, Polachek, Prazak, Singer and
Thompson. Commissioner Tubman was not present at the beginning of the meeting.
Also present were Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator, and
Alda Peikert, Assistant Planner.
I . Approval of Minutes - April 12, 1982:
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and carried
unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 12, 1982 Planning Commission meeting
as recorded.
I1 . Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Amendment to PUD #28:
APPLICANT: Pondwood Associates
LOCATION: 4959, 4969 � 4979 Olson t4emorial Highway
� (T.H. 55)
REQUEST: Approval of Modification of PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation
of a May 10, 1982 informal public hearing date.
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Singer and carried
unanimously to set the date of May 10, 1982 for an informal public hearing to
consider the proposed amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park.
Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Miller distributed plans for the
proposed amendment to PUD #28.
Commissioner Tubman arrived at the meeting.
III . Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - West Suburban Surgical Center, Inc. :
APPLICANT: West Suburban Surgical Center, Inc.
LOCATION: 6681 Country Club Drive
REQUEST: Approval to establish and operate a "same day"
surgical center in an I-3, Institutional Zoning District
•
Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 1982 Page Two
�
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation
of a May 10, 1g82 informal pulil�i.c hearing date.
It was moved by Commissioner Singer, seconded by Commissioner Leppik and carried
unanimously to set the date of May 10, 1982 for an informal public hearing to
consider the application from West Suburban Surgical Center, Inc. for location
of a "same day" surgical center at 66a1 Country Club Drive in the Institutional
( I-3) Zoning Districte
IV. Continuation of Consideration of General Plan of Development without Concept
Plan Approval - PUD �34: •
APPLICANT: Golden Valley Lutheran College
LOCATION: 6125 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Approval of General Plan of Development -
PUD #34, Golden Valley Lutheran College
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item, and Assistant Planner Alda Peikert
reviewed the staff report. Chairman Thompson then asked for Commissioner questions
of staff or the proponent. Present to represent the proponent were Dr. Bernt Opsal ,
• President of Golden Valley Lutheran College, Mr. Curtis Green, Architect with
Hammel Green Abrahamson, Inc. , and Mr. Jim Goulet, Engineer with Hammel Green
Abrahamson, inc.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether the variety of evergreen tree used for screening
purposes, Black Hills Spruce, is a type which retains fullness to the ground.
Mr. Jim Goulet replied that the Black Hills Spruce trees are dense to the ground and
will provide screening to the ground.
Commissioner Tubman expressed concern that neither the current College development
plans northe plans for future development possibilities include installation of
tennis courts and ball fields for which the College has a current need. Chairman
Thompson noted that the action recommended by staff includes a condition concerning
provision for student recreational needs in future College expansion plans.
Commissioner Leppik asked what materials would be used on the exterior of the new
dormitory and how much of the dormitory would be visible from the south. t�1r.
Curt Green said that the exterior finish would be grey stucco and that the end of
the building, 60 feet wide and two and one half stories in height, would be visible
from the south. Mr. Green added that the dormitory cannot be relocated to the east
due to inadequate subsoil conditions.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether the parking facility for the possible future
gymnasium, if eventually built, would provide enough additional parking to allow
elimination of the parking area on the west side of the campus. Mr. Green replied
that the parking requirements for the gymnasium, if built, would be substantial
. and that the proposed parking facility adjacent to the gymnasium would be designed
to accommodate the gymnasium and the College probably would retain the parking
on the west side of the campus.
Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 1982 Page Three
s
Commissioner Leppik asked Dr. Opsal whether parking in the west parking area
could be restricted by permit to reduce traffic. Dr. Opsal replied that the
Coliege already uses a sticker system to restrict parking in each campus parking
lot.
At the request of Chairman Thompson, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator
Mike Miller explained that future additions to College facilities, including
those shown at this time as future development possibilities, will require amendment
of the PUD.
Commissioner Singer moved that the Planning Commission recammend approval subject
to conditions suggested in the staff report. Ms. Peikert informed the Commission
that the condition in the staff report requiring a Fire Department siamese on the
Comrr�ns building should be eliminated because standpipes will not be required in
the Commons Building. �t was moved by Commissioner Singer and seconded by Commis-
sioner Polachek that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the
General Plan of Development for PUD #34, Golden Valley Lutheran College, subject
to the nine conditions suggested in the staff report.
Chairman Thompson asked for discussion on the motion. Cor�nissioner Leppik stated
that she would like to add another condition to the motion specifying the planting
of vines on the south side of the:new dormitory. Following discussion of whether
• specification of building exterior was appropriate to the Planning Commission role,
Commissioner Leppik stated that she would like to make two suggestions rather than
conditions to accompany the motion:
1 ) That vines be planted on the south side of the new dormitory.
2) That large signs reading "Parking by Permit Only" be posted at the entrance
to the west access road and in the west parking area.
Dr. Kenneth Valentas, 401 Edgewood Avenue North, addressed the Chairman and asked
whether neighboring residents present would have an opportunity to speak to the
motion. Chairman Thompson explained thatthe public hearing was closed at the
March 22, 1982 Planning Commission meeting and that although action was deferred,
the public hearing was not continued. After Planning Commissioners expressed a
willingness to hear any new testimony offered by residents on the revised plans
for PUD #34, Chairman Thompson opened the meeting to comments from residents.
Mr. John Paulson, 320 Edgewood Avenue North, stated that he had not seen the revised
plans prior to the meeting and that he had received the impression previously that
the plans would be presented to neighboring residents prior to Planning Commission
consideration and action. It was verified that the plans had been made available
at the College as requested at the last Planning Commission meeting.
• °
Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 1982 Page Four
�
Mr. Juel Svenkerud, 6421 Westchester Circle, stated that the new parking con-
figuration along the west access road brings .the parking area closer to his home
due to the Curve in the road. Mr. Svenkerud expressed concern that access to the
new dormitory from the west would increase traffic on the west access road and
requested that the road be closed at least in the summer. Mr. Svenkerud also
requested that the garbage dumpster behind the southwest dormitory be relocated to
the main building area due to noise generated by garbage collection in early morning
hou rs.
Mr. John Paulson, 320 Edgewood Avenue North, requested that the College vacate
the road connection to Edgewood Avenue which he feels is unneeded.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether it would be possible to relocatett�e northern
portion of the west access road to the east. Mr. Curt Green replied that a substantial
bank in the area to the east would present difficulties in relocation of the road.
Mr. Jim Goulet pointed out that relocation of the northerly section of the access
road would necessitate addition of curves which present difficulties for fire
equipment access. Commissioner Leppik suggested that the existing section of road
could be retained for emergency vehicle use only.
Dr. Op5a1 expressed willingness to put chain across the west access road during
the summer.
• Commissioner Leppik said she would like to make four additional suggestions to
accompany the motion:
1) That the west access road be chained during the summer.
2) That the City Council examine the possibility of relocating the northern
portion of the west access road to the east.
3) That the new parking area along the west access road be relocated to the south.
4) That the southwest access from Edgewood Avenue be abandoned if not required
for emergency vehicles.
Mr. P1iller pointed out that fire equipment can be dispatched from two different
fire stations resulting in fire emergency vehicles approaching from both the north
and the south and that other types of emergency vehicles may elso approach the
College from the south. Mr. Miller suggested that the southwest access from
Edgewood Avenue, which is chained for emergency vehicle use only, should be retained.
Dr. Opsal requested that Planning Commissioners consider the beauty of the College
campus and the negative aesthetic impact of cutting the campus green areas with
additional roads.
Chairman Thompson reviewed the motion that the Planning Commission recommend City
Council approval of the General Plan of Development for PUD #34, Golden Valley
� Lutheran College, subject to nine conditions and accompanied by five suggestions.
The recommended conditions of approval are:
Planning Commission Minutes - Aprit 26, 1982 Page Five
.
1 . Installation of wet type standpipes in the new dormitory building.
2. Installation of sprinkler system in all trash chutes and trash collection areas.
3. Approval of fire alarm systems by the City Fire Marshal prior to installation.
4. Addition of a second new fire hydrant to the northeast of the new commons
building adjacent to the new walkway/emergency road.
5. Installation of a Fire Department siamese, a connection accommodating two
fire hoses, on the west side of the new dormitory as near as possible to the
new fire hydrant.
6. Design of all radiuses on the new walkway/emergency road to accommodate
City fire equipment without wheels going off the pavement on curves .
7. Vacation of exist�ng watermain easement and dedication of new watermain
easements prior to issuance of building permits for thg �new dormitory and
commons buildings.
8. Addition of signage at the west access road to reduce unwarranted traffic.
• 9. Provision for student recreational needs in any future expansion of Golden
Valley Lutheran Gollege facilities.
The suggestions accompanying the motion are:
1 . That vines be planted on the south side of the new dormitory.
2. That large signs reading "Parking by Permit Only" be posted at the entrance
to the west access road and in the west parking area.
3• That the west access road be chained during the summero
4. That the City Council examine the possibility of relocating the northern
portion of the west access road to the east.
5. That the new parking area along the west access road be relocated to the south.
The motion carried unanimously.
V. Informal Public Hearing - PUD #34, Busch Site Office Warehouse:
APPLICANT: Kraus-Anderson Realty Co.
LOCATION: Northeast Quadrant of the Intersection of lOth
Avenue North and Boone Avenue North
� REQUEST: Approval of General Plan of Development without
Concept Plan Approval for PUD #35
Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 19a2 Page Six
•
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and asked whether there were any
questions of staff.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether the ten percent land donation for park and open
space purposes required by the Platting Ordinance had been waived. Planning and
Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Miller replied that the requirement can be waived
only by the City Council , but that in the case of a PUD there is usually adequate
ponding area and open space provided to fulfill this requirement.
Commissioner Singer asked Mr. Miller about the question of underutilization of
the site mentioned in the staff report. Mr. Pliller replied that the question
of highest and best use of land should be considered in the case of a redevelopment
project such as this proposed PUD, that the subject site is a choice piece of
property and that the City should take advantage of the opportunity to better
develop the property.
Chairman ThQmpson recognized Mr. Vince Coughlin, Kraus-Anderson Realty Company,
who was pre5ent to representthe proponent. Mr. Coughlin introduced Mr. Ray Reese,
Coldwell Barnker, and Mr. John Pope, Architect, who were also present on behalf
of the proppnent. f1r. Pope presented the plans for PUD #35, Busch Site Office
Warehouse.
Commissioner Singer asked whether the building design would allow opening of
� windows as �n energy conservation consideration. Mr. Reese informed the Com-
mission that this question had been a matter of interest to a number of potential
tennants and had been explored, but that regulation of heating and cooling
systems becpmes a problem when windows are opened at random locations throughout
the building.
Commissioner Forster asked what type of tenants were expected in the building.
Mr. Reese explained that it would be an office warehouse building with� intensive
landscaping and premium finishing materials which would attract high technology
type tenant� in fields such as electronics and computers. The typical tenant
space would include office, showroom, and possibly some assembly or service area.
The average tenant would occupy 5,000 to 8,000 square feet of space, although
the proponemt is working with one potential tenant requiring 35,000 square feet
of space in the southerly building. At this point, the proponent envisions having
approximately four tenants in the southerly building and ten in the northerly building.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether the warehouse space could be used as a showroom
on the order of a merchandise mart. Mr. Reese replied that a tenant might have a
demonstratian room equivalent to a large conference room but that the proponent
would not b� able to provide the parking required for a merchandise mart.
Chairman Thpmpson opened the informal public hearing for public input. There �vas
no one present who wished to speak on this agenda item, and Chairman Thompson
closed the informal public hearing.
�
Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 1982 Page Seven
•
Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Mi } ler recommended the following
fourth cond�tion of approval in addition to the three provided in the staff report:
Proposed signage for this project must be approved by the City Building Inspector
and Building Board of Review.
Commissioner Forster asked what zoning restrictions would apply to PUD #35 as an
office/warehouse complex, considering the mention of assembly orlight manufacturing
by potential tenants. Mr. Pliller replied that the approvat would be for an office
warehouse a�d that the PUD Permit may restrict uses to office/warehouse or may
require that uses conform to parking provisions. Parking requirements for assembly
are the same as for warehouse, but addition of inezzanine area is possible considering
ceiling height and could result in parking deficiencies.
Mr. Reese offered an example of the ty�e of assembly anticipated as coordination
and modification of computer components to customer specifications.
It was moved by Commissioner Forster, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and carried
unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the General Plan of Development
for PUD #35, Busch Site Office Warehouse subject to the follotiaing conditions:
l . The proponent be required to comply with the recommendatlons of the City
Fire Marshal .
� 2. That all necessary engineering requirements be met as determined by the City
Engineer.
3. The proponent shall comply with the City landscape standards currently in
effect.
4. Proposed signage for this project must be approved by the City Building
Inspector and Building Board of Review.
VI . Requesk for Waiver of Platting Ordinance:
APPLICANT: Holiday Motor �1ote1
LOCATION: 812 Lilac Drive North
', REQUEST: Divide one (1 ) commercial parcel of land into
two (2) commercial parcels
Chairman Thompson informed the Commission that the proponent, �1r. Richard blilliams,
was present as the beginning of the meeting and notified staff that he wished
to withdraw his application for waiver of the City Platting Ordinance.
�
• � i
Planning Cormmission Minutes - April 26, 1982 Page Eight
� �
VII . Consideration of Revisions to the Commercial Zoning District:
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and referred Commissioners to the
study provided by staff on parking ratios in existing Golden Valley shopping
centers. CHairman Thompson noted the staff recommendation that the parking
requirement 'for retail use be revised from the current requirement of one parking
space for each 75 square feet of retail floor space to one parking space for
each 150 square feet of retait floor space, instead of one for each 100 square feet
as previously under consideration.
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Singer and carried
unanimously Ito amend Section 5.05 Item t . of the proposed revised Commercial
Zoning Distr!ict section of the Zoning Ordinance to require one parking space for
each 150 square feet of retail floor space rather than one for each 100 square
feet of retajil floor space.
It was moved by Commissioner Forster, seconded by Commissioner Prazak and carried
unanimously !to recommend that the City Council approve the revised Commercial
Zoning Distnict section of the Zoning Ordinance.
VIII . Report on BZA Meeting - April 13, 198Z:
� Commissioner? Polachek provided a report on the April 13, 1982 Board of Zoning
Appeals (BZp) meeting.
IX. Report !on HRA Meeting - April 13, 1982:
Commissioner Prazak provided a report on the April 13, 1982 HRA Meeting.
X. Report dn City Council Meeting - April 20, 1982:
Chairman Thompson provided a report on the April 20, 1g82 City Council meeting.
XI . Review of City Capital Improvements Program:
Chairman Thampson informed Planning Commissioners that the City Council requested
Planning Commission recommendations on revision of the City Capital Improvements
Program. Chairman Thompson reported that City Engineer Lowell Odland has agreed
to meet with the Planning Commission the second meeting in May to provide a
briefing on 'tiwo projects of interest to the Planning Commission: Completion of
Laurel Avenue and the storm sewer system.
XII . Consideration of lmplementation of the Housing Policy:
Chairman Thdmpson requested that Planning Commissioners review the adopted City
Housing Poli'cy in preparation for discussion in June of recommendations for imple-
mentation of the Housing Policy, as requested by the City Council .
� The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p•m•
Respectfullyi submitted,
David Thomp5on, Chairman Margaret Leppik, Secretary
� T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COM�4ISSION DATE: MAY 5, 1982
FROM: , MIKE f11LLER PLANNI�dG � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECfi: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PER�11T
Green �tuff, Inc. , 6122 Olson Memorial Highway, a lawn treatment company,
has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to establish their operation
at 735' Colorado Avenue South in an Industrial Zoning District. A
Conditional Use Permit is required in this situation because the pro-
ponent intends to store and mix herbicides and fertilizers from concentrates
on sit�. Since these materials and/or chemicals may be considered
hazardbus and/or toxic, a Conditional Use Permit in an Industrial Zoning
Distri�t is required. Green Stuff, Inc. is requesting the Planning
Commission to conduct an informal public hearing on this matter. I
would �uggest that the Planning Commission set Monday, May 24, 1982
as the', date for this hearing.
�
MHM:kjm
. °
,
�
�
• T0: 60LDEPJ VALLEY PLANNIPdG COMMISSION DATE: MAY 5, 1982
FROM: /#LDA PEIKERT, ASSISTAtJT PLANNER
SUBJECT: I'NFORMAL PUBL IC HEARI NG - AMEPJDMEPJT TO PUD ,'�2a, POP�D4JOOD OFFI CE PARK
Pondwood Associates, developers of PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, a three buitding
office complex currently under construction at 4959, 4969 and ;4979 Olson
Memorial Hi�ghway, requests an amendment to PUD �28 to remove a seven car garage
structure and add outside parking spaces.
� The Planning Commission reviewed the original General Plan of Development without
Concept Plan approval for PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, on A�ril 28, 1980, and the
City Council granted General Plan of Development approval on June 2, 1980. The
City Councll granted Pondwood Associates several extensions of the 90 day time
period allmwed for signing of the PUD Permit after General Plan approval , which
extensions ',were requested by the proponent due to delays in arranging financing
for the prqject. The PUD Permit was approved by the City Council on October 6,
1981 after ',which construction commenced.
The approved General Plan of Development for PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park, calls
for construction of three one story office buildings comprising a total of 11 ,806
• square feet of space, a seven car garage structure and 49 outside parking spaces.
The proposed amendment to PUD #28, Pondwaod Office Park, involves revision of the
Site Plan, ;Sheet A1 of the approved PUD Plans, only. All subsequent sheets of
the approv�d PUD plans remain unchanged and are not under consideration as part
of the amendment procedure. Proposed revisions to the approved Site Plan include
the following:
1 . Removal' of a seven car garage structure located near the east property
line opposite Building 2. The revised site plan shows seven regularly sized
parkinc� spaces and one handicapped parking space in place of the garage.
The rey�ised plan also indicates space for six additional parking spaces directly
to the north of this location for future parking expansion if desired.
2. Addition of three parking spaces in the location of the former fire lane
in froMt of Building 2, with the fire lane moved to the north.
3. Additidn of one parking space parallel to the east property line opposite
Buildir�g 3. The additional parking space is located to the south of the five
parking spaces previously provided op�osite Building 3 and is situated at
almostla right angle to the other parking spaces.
.
. , li
• RE: Informal Public Hearing - Amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park
May 5, 19t32
Page 2
The reasons provided by the proponent for requesting the PUD amendment, which
reasons are outlined in the attached letter fromthe proponent dated April lg,
1982, are rneed for additional parking, aesthetic considerations and financial
constraints. Parking provided in the approved original PUD plans is adequate to
meet City Olydinance requirements, but the proponent states that building tenants
require add'itional parking space. The proponent states a preference for site
appearance �without the garage structure. Finally, the proponent cites inability to
recover garage construction costs from garage rental .
Staff has no objections to removal of the garage structure. Garages are not a
City Ordinance requirement for office buildings, and removal of the garage structure
will not be detrimental to the approved PIJD from either a land use or an appearance
standpoint. The property to the east of the subject site is zoned Business and
Professionail Offices and is currently occupied by a one story office building.
Parking setiback from the east property line is the ten feet required by Ordinance
adjacent ta Business and Professional Offices zoning. The original garages, on
the other hand, required a variance from the 20 foot building setback. Parking
on the adjalcent office building site to the east is less than the required ten foot
setback fram the property line, but a hedge of substantial height screens the
• adjacent site parking from the subject site and at the same time serves to screen
PUD #28 new construction from view of the existing building to the east.
The additian of parking spaces in the location of the former garage structure,
in front of Building 2 and opposite Building 3 is acceptable except for relocation
of the fire lane in front of Building 2. The fire lane, previously located in
proximity af the Fire Department wall hydrant on the front of Building 2, has been
relocated tio the north. The fire lane should remain in the orig�inal location near
the wall hy�,drant, with the new parking located to the north.
The origina;lly approved PUD plans provided more than the number of parking spaces
required by Ordinance, and the plan amendment proposes addition of another five
spaces. The number of spaces required by Ordinance for the 11 ,806 square feet
of office biuilding is 47 at the ratio of one for each 250 square feet of gross
floor space. The approved plans called for 49 outside spaces plus 7 garage spaces
for a total of 56 parking spaces. The amended site plan proposes provision of
61 outside parking spaces.
Staff sugge�sts that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the
requested Aimendment to PUD #28 Pondwood Office Park, which proposes removal of a
seven car �arage structure and addition of 12 outside parking spaces, conditional
upon maintaining the..fire lane in the originally approved location near the wall
hydrant an� location of the three additional parking spaces in front of Building 2
to the norXh of the fire lane.
Attachments :
� l . Site Lacation Map
2. tetter from the Proponent dated April l�, 1982
' � .
� • � �
� - ' . . . �oo O
.� _:
r
. . � scale
.... 2800.73.�es. .. .
1639 ers
.. .. ��o . "125 -- --
. o ,;.
�o, ' � :h�o
�
�� S i - (FLOYD � B. OLSON
• � � BUS I NESS AND PROFESS I OiJAL OFF I CES ZOFJ I IJG
520i ��?/ 5iii � � JOOi `.� -�QC.D. /2•1260 • - ��������� � 1.
.. Ioo Ito S - ------ ---- --�OC.R!//76/ �, * —�—
1 ' � ° ' t ' I S 4949 490/ �._ _ C .�doo�-
' , •--- - �
•7 Z ' e a � .ZS• i2s • --271-- +` � �
.. ioo i:�3 �o:,,,�. ;1 '�� � 'Ame r i ca ! ,se3s, t
... � i11� ►oo � a.. �5841)
q �Federation
,��,,as�,.- .� • ..� � .
/ ' ' (5bo1 � '`'�
�,C^�'O" 10��a s. W -O' y' i°,�ses2i �5846� . .•a`'°.
.,• .� . � G ra i n
r�'�� ,,k,`~~ �� y ; ;- � � �1411 lers
si tie, ro Z 1 � \ � '•
`''i��j ' ye, �'� � �, \_ ' � I 'y•.
�� � ,y ,��.• �e!° '�=
�� o� �` o ; ` ••o�r
. p � I� �,o .t ��'.
'' a a, < ` o ..'� r58/5)
�y`0.�; • 5 °�a �1� e l o 's
6
�o ' '�49�0, .�------::�•--
0
����'± N Q• 14 .�'�� � �
a , �,,,. 92 zx Da�
.. ,. T� �
•. .,. v m a
N
;�'' .:l� `~�• �3 tio.. ,
o ,\o •.,,`P�I, ?DI o 'l
e:� �'+`�A�o�
i � �2 `p ��� �h
�Ap �*�, ��.
�4 �czs�
��t - - �j' � ..... ..... �— ---Z6194 .a�
�� p�b' �1•
�� �
.� �'
:o _� � ��,0 1h
�� ��.
�Q ti� 4o i
� . -..- - - i . --.— ---------.----.- - - -. - -- ---..--- ` -'a_.-- �
� : . o - -�:o�^b
.� � ' � �'
. � g ' �Q. Z
Ae � PHOTo�56 � ;�o�z> A �
. ° �
` ' / N �
; (65�3) �� " �
�WALLACE &MUNDT, ARCHITECTS,A.I.A.
5275 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD.,MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA
PH.(612)831-3509 55435
�
�'�, PRINCIPALS-GERALD E.MUNDT,THOMAS A.COFFMAN,W.GLEN WALLACE(RET.) =�-OO
. ,
April 19, 1982 '
I�,
Golden Vall�y Planning Commission
Golden Vallley, MN 55427
Re: PtTD #28, Pondwood Office Park
Commission Members:
We havje submitted an application to the planning staff for amending the
original P.�J.D. Sheet A1; revision dated 4/9/82 illustrates the amendment being
requested. When compared to the original Sheet A1, you will note the 7 car
garage building along the east property line has been deleted and 8 parking
• spaces show�n in its place. 3 additional parking spaces are shown in front of
Building �2' and l additional space in front of Building 4�3. The total number of
parking spa�Ces, with these changes, will be 61 instead of 49 as originally
shown.
The re�sons for amending the P.U.D. are: 1) To add parking spaces (the
actual counit of parking spaces required for the tenants leasing the spaces is
greater tha�i originally shown); 2) The appearance of the garage on the site is
a distractibn both to the office park and the neighbor on the east; 3) The cost .
of construction exceeds the amount af rent that can be realized on the garage
building.
We app�eciate your considerations on this matter and we will be happy to
answer any questions you may have.
', 5incerely,
� Gerald Mundt
Pa�
Enclosures
• cc: Aicharid A. VanSickle .
Pondwobd Associates
',
t�tEMBER OF THE AyIERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS AND MINNESOTA SOCIETY,A.I.A. ��
• T0: GOLDEPd VALLEY PLANN I NG COt1M I SS I ON DATE: �1AY 5, 1982
FROM: MI KE �11 LLER, PLANN I tJG � REDEVELOPMENT COORD I PJATOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A "SAME DAY" SURGICAL CENTER AT
6681 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The West Suburban Surgical Center, Inc. , and the G681 Group Partnership, owners
of the existing building at 6681 Country Club Drive have requested a public hearing
for approval of a "same day" surgical center on that site. The property in question
is zoned Institutional (I-3) which allows for such land uses only after a public
hearing has been conducted by the City Council (section 11 .05 of the City Zoning
Code) and also upon vote of the Council . Prior to the City Council hearing on
this matter on May 18, 1982, the Council has requested that the Planning Com-
mission conduct an informal public hearing on this proposal and submit a report
and recommendation to the Council .
Prior to this request, the 6b81 Group Partnership had sought to rezone the property
at 6681 Country Club Drive from Institutional (I-3) to Business and Professional
Office (BP�O) . That request was heard by the Planning Commission on April 12,
• 1982 and subsequently recommended for approval to the City Council . This request
for rezoning was subsequently withdrawn from consideration as of P1ay 4, 1982.
Surrounding zoning and landuses include the Teachers Federation Credit Union,
zoned B � P 0, adjaeent to the east. On the west is an attractive single-family
dwelling neighborhood which is zoned accordingly. To the north across Country
Club Drive from the subject site is the Golden Vatley Country Club which is also
zoned Institutional (I-4) . Also across the street and to the northeast is the
Pako Corporation facility which is zoned Industrial . The south boundary of the
property in question is Olson �4emorial Highway (T.H. 55) , which provides a natural
barrier from single family land uses on the south side of the highway. Existing
landuse on site at 6681 Country Club Drive is primarily that of inedical and dental
offices with associated laboratory facilities which are permitted uses within the
Institutional (I-3) .
The proposed use, according to the proponent, is quite similar to the St. Paul
Surgical Center which has been in operation for a year or more. That center now
provides operating rooms and general anesthesia for surgeons wishing to use the
facility located in the St. Paul Midway area. Like the St. Paul facility, West
Suburban Surgical Center will be owned and operated by anesthesiologists (and �,others)
that will provide anesthesia for ambulatory surgery-namely, surgery that done 'on the
same day that the surgical patient is sent home under his or her own power.
It is proposed that the West Suburban Surgical Center would begin with three
operating rooms with 12 to 15 recovery room beds, witl� eventual expansion proposed
to four operating rooms. However9 it should be pointed out that the Certificate
• of Need granted by the State of Minuesota for this facility authorizes only three
operating rooms. The proponent optimisticatly projects expansion from �0 square
RE: Request to establish and operate a "Same Day" Surgical Center at
. 6681 Country Club Drive
May �, Ig82
Page 2
feet to as much as 11 ,000 square feet over the next three to five years. When
considering the impact on the adjacent neighborhood it is somewhat doubtful whether
approval could be granted by the City for such expansion. PJot only would the State
have to modify the Certificate of Need for this facility, but the City would
have to review the proposed expansion through the public hearing process. '
It is anticipated by the proponent that the average length of stay at this facility
is approximately three hours .
The purpose of surgical centers of this type, according to the proponent, is to
provide a lower cost surgical service to patients.
At the present time, the building located on the site is a two-story structure
comprised of a total of 21 ,g60 square feet of gross floor area. The proponents
are proposing an addition to the building of approximately 10,000 square feet,
ostensibly to be used for medical office space. The proponents have indicated that
one floor of the existing building (10,980 square feet) would be converted to',
use by the surgical center, and an addition of 10,000 square feet would provi�e
related medicel office space. It has not been explained why 10,980 square feet
would be converted to surgical center use when the proponent has stated that they
• would only need 8,000 square feet.
Expansion of the building can take place and comply with all applicable zoning
requirements. The site plan provided indicates that the Proponent has the cap�bility
of providing parking for 216 cars on site. Due to lack of information, it is'
difficult to estimate the minimum parking requirements in accordance with Chapter 13
of the City Zoning Ordinance. However, it would appear that adequate parking would
be provided with the existing parking lot at 216 parking spaces. Parking require-
ments under the existing Zoning Ordinance would have to be determined as the sum
of the following requirements forthe �ses contained in the structure:
1 . One parking stall for each two employees;
2. One parking stall for each four beds in hospitals, etc. (this would
include recovery room beds) ;
3. One parking stall for each doctor;
4. One parking stall for each 100 square feet of floor area for clinics; and
5. One parking stall for each 250 square feet of gross floor area used
for office purposes.
All of the above information would have to be provided prior to issuance of any
building permit, and probably should be provided prior to City Council action on
this matter.
s a
• RE: Request to establish and operate a "Same Day" Surgical Center at
6681 Country Club Drive
t4ay 5, 1982
Page 3
Attached you will find a copy of "Traffic Analysis for Proposed l,lest Metro
(Suburban) Surgical Center provided by the proponent. While Staff agrees that any
increase in traffic will be minimal as a result of development of the surgical center.
However, Staff does question certain aspects of this report. Some of these concerns
are listed as follows:
1 . The report does not completely address the second question on the first
� page of the report.
2. The report completely fails to address A.�1. peak hour traffic. Only P.M.
peak hour traffic is addressed.
3• Staff questions the validity of traffic distribution as shown in Figure 2.
It is highly doubtful that the Country Club Drive - Dougtas Drive intersection
wilt be used by out-going traffic as much as is indicated. ,
RECOMMENDATION
In reviewing this request, it appears that the proposed surgical center would
� not be totally outside the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan with respect
to land use. The proposed use would be in the public interest and provide a service.
I would recommend that the Planning Commission give favorable consideration to
this request subject to the following conditionse ,
l . Thatthe proponents understand, and the City Council stipulate that the
surgical center would not ask for, nor would they be permitted to expand this
facility on this site at any time in the future.
2. That all parking information be provided prior to City Council action on
this matter.
3. That all uses now located within the existing building on site that are not
in conformance with the City Zoning Ordinance be removed from the premises
within 12 months of Council action on the surgical center. Failure to do so
would render any approvals by the Council null and void.
In conclusion Staff requests permission of the Planning Commission to either with-
draw, or modify, its recommendation at the time of the informal public hearing if
any new information or evidence is provided at said hearing.
MHM:kjm
•
:;o �iC�, e,�ac. --- �1 ���g'�''_ON . ����-....�a,nJ��t . . . ;�\. ' � � �
j►"^. ��rtu Titi�m • � '�;��• ,'• _ ol 50 5'9d1, i
� : otie lti�„� "'j i:t° �' ,=SY�1�'a,B _ �::
N N a1 N�5 ���o��� -.:j •''��, t �:�41 01 r+ Q - .�� F
p 1 ,n,a�.sec_,-a j"" = e;, , - o
� ' �:��,� ' � o� . �s�t 50► oi lo�lli �ti�•.te �
Z Q � 'J o 1; �.�, ,_R ' 1 00l bl roo' i �s��e o
� F
} � ' a� ,d t � ��-� " �.�p�"� N ,� � o°� '= S9I
p '3 I �Er9}01f�1• �; � .� p • '' /c s' 1Us9:e.•�';, s�>9 ..Q '
_ -f�.' ��l1. i �,-
� `° o---r -- <-- £.� � . . ,..:- 'oyZ� ,=a'..oR5 6�l.."° a:�t:Ei�p .�.�F���� � hN �;
;� < , �1 �f` 'a � ���-�--- o. ..e,.��a9 �o. o .
/ f , i,J . � t � .IS:bb�.1 ' •�. ♦
'L o W 1 ? ' �LB 4'S9';" 5'f11 '�y p � .t�• ;� �'`
,u Y ~ � � 'sf;� b9 d�09, ..11;6i� p: l�, Bf'r�Nn� � !
7 a y I � �� f � 1 �� � �iN �B ,?�.!% �•' '�''� a
� c � � �o o` � � - , ^p• d269g/,g o. '�. ��r� ;- �,y`'-;
� � . � � , . d' .• lli °f .
� - � �p � � '►� .'�.''�: °i ! / \�
i � 9
V ��� �ep � � � � 1 � 10 0 1.�� �V,' $s ��:'� g' yyr
�. Z 1-"'+.�v r� I � 1 �' • ;,, Q' � � oo �sg •f 4.
Z a 01`--� '� u,� .r �0 � m�' � -'� 9p�'
C W �: � + Q ° � .`p' as ,.�C�s. �
0 � -Ey �' ',,ff W � • 1 � o � � \� ;oe,o� r
� ut � _ h - .�fi s `� . � • °ae's� .�
� � � .ol. -�� • ..o ;.
. . �' -.�F_ u � c `° � !�' ' �'+1 / � �\ ,'`u.s '.
r. '
'p W' -' - �,,`�� � '• �06 .., �, so, � ',�a°s�Q`
Q? -° �° .-� Do n1 : ��, `� e!� � „ l s °��• ,�
� I o ^ � . a � 6665 � v 1 .
N U o� � � ° % g °s�7z.82:p 0 N ' � 0 0�°�1ec
�� I; -- ('J C � G r , B6d Q 0•bn DpOba�, � �10
� � L ---1� - I N�O J.� i ,n ,o5g ' . o,p1�� � '.` I �
�. I. /I r�� O �
Y �t�
�. 1 � F!` h N�tn N c0 ' r ,....e 01� 8F`l1 d ' °d
v = ,� � °.� ,C � t� � °� - � � •,_Y1.21. l, �X.' egg�� ,�.�6 Ibl.t
t�i '�r uf O r0 'o ' 9 -'!' g6y9 • '!('9 ,', � y
o.
•i L 1 • `� a•, o°i 1 r �'' ' .sl.
c T ��s �� m d 1� �i , � �_ ,ti�•'�j I --- —4&i -
O a� � -...-�i'1o21 -- -- - ► ••� .� � �p �•,� a
� ^ � , j i'� .. � 11 •in a J� • �
o : •-"s�. �
�-�+ � �N i .:�"' -.f1 �•�. �� � o�'ee � � o• ° •�'�6�°° ,..��•,
�.-- - 1 - � • p � ���� '� � �. a .
� +; c ^ o � 'n° - .• ! �,. � e
C "� �' t7 `.� p y\ • 11 sa��o,��y��:l� [ .
� d � io � o ��p s '�l,.
� `�? � po N � e � ,lj,f o� �lo�� .
0
� � b tD� 1 � o�'!' S'lb:;h'� .�S;Gfi4L'Q
' ^, N
' � ' b � A
N fc i9
e°� a� I N+x � a � � r n � v �t
.:. a:o � � M,6tol;
.a : :v- ...4 1521...., •L21 ..,
� , = a ... - - - - - - _ O�j
.r :'� ...�..i- ..Z,I'9�41:.. soSE� z8 e. Z51 :� . Sb
� . , v�aGSb o� �,!� ��OfO� •N . ;�0,
a9�111 �,. 4q °', ° Rti��o N'.s�� ,4�oZ.0E�var+,^,
:,� ��.e n, o •r ,� � OZD
. � o, , .n �; .,°� °t'L '- 54:p � y 4��86 ..��<� i
0 0 -,r„ o�•43..` ,,� o �,b 1w yBfS,
.e ,;, : i/ .� 6'.• 99'ZS ,,-:4�9'�i71:
"'t 1= �:� �!��O1`Li'ee'Y�?at4'tt79:'�l54�1�� �'61•.6:� Z(4f�.b�
_ .d ��.-'I,��,I, ���i? 2:E ��+? � ; ~�b II �
Eb `+ _ �l�I �MLOtli1► .�,4o e�, . 'S`� ..�.SE�o'��'�� 9 0 p�
51�421 :� �� ,���¢?;`� 5t ��¢ c51y� PZy2l�
1 a .,d..� �y. 1 •�..' •
� '.°+°°� 3yL��� V:w� o��.. � w SZ6
,�E� .e �tl � .n oe q6 M tp!
00 • ' - - - -- .� - -- ' �,6590`'o 'a�rt �' �1S
Z
� � .-.�.- � , - -; • nsu� �' 3LC?t .�so `
� , S'1�5 £b • ��: l� � � s�. � .�� f aed �
� d �44 b � � � ry ' �) e 1i.4��:c��y;;��,�a of� °y ,
� • . h .� � �1 N.� p N�b ��� �
? ►+= � •tly " i -... :F 54 J N s 'r �"^3.,�c St,Bt .
T Fp � � o e • a �.14c� �� _
U b t �n oo�� Q{�� d 1 � �; ��
` �_ . 5��7�.� \ ..s. - ,� o ? � O'v p, ~ � b p� � ��
d '21 .i,... a � N� .o e c i!�y�� g4.b's`,<
S � �:..�.-.- ,� . •�g ��tl����(� � 't�Yy tSoA b Y� fi;�`�.3,04, �� �
m '►' a� � O � o��� vi� 'rr'fi�.°l.•'t S .. �ttb�.a a 3,t
d E � '4 '�0+�1► N oES �a- gd F:;a r-:
ag �fs J , ' w� .. `, . :1 ... � w. �.�'rtie'l�v�.�` .+ ��N�,.
e •�. "S_�gf • ���.y �^ p o°
��;„r '-'�—��- ��f— —Jr?5��=� -- �— — a`4 eoP. '�.'��ti.� �e,��, �
!
� v'¢� � o .. ..,;- oor-r - - M�oioos tti5�� 9�e; a
� � `N o � �q v Db5 � LFS SdS ;� i F+, �..� �� 144';�8'Q :BEr �o
4 � ?: �°, , e u � � o,,, � � o �d � 1' w d�3 0�-� .9s0/y�.
Q � -�'A _ t,� �r ^ o N'd o� .� e
,�y � � � O// g`7 o V �N ;N r�3 N , �y `.- � r i° � �O�°s
��.:.� �V N N � � ��:r � � ,� �°�p �,,0� -�.�ro'
-�! .°� o'^ �.s �' '`�-' �'O � � c '^ �"k°�� •�pp1E°s
o A.
z b o � o , � p. � 011 \ 0 i
T, 001 �I ' OOI ` _�� ....�� 3..0>.60�:M ��'oa��.
•97'0(Z M,OI�OUa I l 9?�1 14'Sll `��°bb'b1El.--. '+ � 6a, e I i12 �, _���1
:� � M biYO/ �y � �-'i ,D �'C• r m t�f
� �� r-w,^, M ya��I,S�el91*�7 �� a a o'�; 1 "t`_ e��b�L9f O�° „�c'Oi:
Ja rl�Vl QQ Y \. `��b� o Q: �� � �M.5550.4� F " ' .... ; o
� � t'Z4Z .o�O �' .a��F61�'^8Z to'6oZ ��:::c- ,,:s ' c�"r, :�. 4• o
� �.. , __ ._
• v � /a��af — — ztd 9^S f+N�P°v Yi�71•••.v�" •v� —
I I / �/, , _. "' .Fi./l.IS tZP7l..._
J � �• .- -�lli- '� 3 .u./ro»ui/Jnw�riMY
/ I� ,\
c v:I (�� � # I
NL I
r �ry �l �'$ � �
i � , � I
�
y �I �1 � � 1 1
I* r ( I .
� I I ' � u+ � � �
� � � _ �" �I � I! �
� I /� / Q� z z � j io
i ; I y 3� � � 9 � i? � �
l , � m � , ,
; � �
w � �:
, � ; �'I�_� .� � i r
� �
, � i I i
� i �� � I I
' � '� s ��;,�, I I
� � � _� so �,� ��l . �' _..
� ' ,, � `""'r'°"'°' �
' I � � \\\\ :::ow�\.^ � E
� s � � � \\�;�\�\\\`�� o�� `� �oo�'�
i � ,� � \ �;;\�;� �.�:= ��y
I � Z .
\ 2 �U
' ' °\—\F �� \ o
� � t � V'� ' \ �\�N\U�F-\\..
i t � . � �'` \ ,.\ N\\.\\N\\ ',
� ` v
•� .
, + , �I a �.� •�\\\\�\\�� I
I s _ `��`������07Z1 � �
�i
�
G1�E�'
� ' I n°,p"'�
. I � ,j/ y �� �
I i (a 1 'i #tS �r�y""� 1 t'� aw,+�+..., �A
• � e
�l I ' ��
I s �Ft -• __ 22f v+5'P•� �/I// ��•��...r+0-�y wnnl�� '_ '- ,:. t�g
I � w
I � i � i � �6
I ' f �5 �f ``
Y i � � j `Y� �\
.� �� � yr .n `;
� � I � wa
I y�
� g :�g
i I +� ^ g � � .s�
� '� q � Z � `$
I � d Z i- � �n
�- `�.�—�a N '` g � � o o��
J � � �� m � � �y
j i � * \ v� .'j .J �o
I I f � �w
I � a
i ° 3 3
� ct 3 ; ?*. #�
I � ' � ,�a� * . 1
I I $ -�
s �� .�, '
I i � o d,�i �r, �
� i�..,,i
I � : �; �� �� °r`V7 f• ) ,*, lY* t
� ; �N�
I � .' o lV�
i � �
�;$� � � �a
s , ��_�
( I Ia _...M.ia.co.,nr z�zc�6..._ ia ,,E —
e� ��k .fF i 221 4) s�of f'd ti r°11a�a/ �um qL�- M �"i�'
� � � '
STRGAR-ROSCOE , INC.
� CONSULTING ENGINEERS ■ LAND SURVEYORS
� 630 Twelve Oaks Center, 15500 Wayzata Boulevard
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391-7485
(612) 475-0010
May 6� 1 982 Refer To File: OH2O324
MEMOR ANDUM
T0: Gary Z. Gandrud
Stolpestad, Brown & Smith
FROM: Jamea A. Benshoof�� ,,
SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis for Proposed West Metro Surgical Cent�er
BACKGROIIND
• The purpose of this memorandum is to document a traffic analyeis
for the proposed West Metro Sur�ical Center to be located at 6681
Country Club Drive in the City of Golden Valley. The analysis has
been conducted to respond to specific questions raised by inter-
ested local officials and residents, including the followin� two
points:
• How much traffic would the proposed surgical center develbp-
ment generate,° and how would this compare to the number ' of
trips generated if the proposed development is not approved?
• Would traffic to and from the proposed development cause any
adverse effects on Country Club Drive or on other roadways in
the area?
As a first step in the analy�is, it is important to understand the
basic characteristics of the proposed development. The existin�
building in which the proposed surgical center would be located
presently is 20,000 sq. ft. in size and is occupied primarily by
medical offices. The proposed development would involve the fol- •
lowin� two chan�es:
�
�
�
1 ) The West Metro Sur�ical Center would occupy one floor of the
exiating buildin�, initially usin� 8,000 sq. ft. with �,the
remaining 2,000 sq. ft. on the floor utilized for atorage
o� leased office space.
2) A 10,000 sq. ft. addition would be constructed to the exist—
ing building, intended for occupancy by medical offices.
The existin� and proposed future development conditions on the s�ite
are summarized as follows:
Existing Proposed Future
�pe of IIse Square Feet Square Feet
Medical Office 20,000 22,000 ,
I
Surgical Center 0 8,000 ''
Total 20,000 30,000
�
EZISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS ''
Country Club Drive is designated as a collector route in the City's
Comprehensive Plan and presently accommodates 1 ,730 vehicles per
day over the segment east of Glenwood Avenue. Concerns have been
expreased regardin� the impacts of these existin� traffic volumes
due to the residential character of Country Club Drive. The Elks
Club, which formerly occupied the proposed development site, was' a
� particular source of concern regarding traffic impacts. To re$pond
to existing needs regarding Country Club Drive and other roadwa�s
in the area, the City of Golden Valley, in cooperation with other
agencies, is planning a series of roadway. improvments. Ma�or plan—
ned improvements, most of which are scheduled for construction in
1982, are shown in Figure 1 . Two changes which will distinetlg
improve conditions for the residential neighborhood west of the
site are: �
. —2—
� � 0
Zo = �
antaa svi�noa � � � . z
F- NO � �"
F- 3 Z � W
�
J O ~ J C
.;: �' 11'f G.7 �
' J � �O �
,t;�:::::�:;i::�:
� Z 2 0 H
`: �+.: �.;;;�:;: O J I-- O �
;:`i,;,.:.:i:'"� Q
- �
Q
Q
O
a
�A
� � �
� z
� W
ti o � �
= o° i � .-a
1r Z �: �7 j w
'3AV �� �-
c. o
Aasaar o � �
� w
•a�� � Z F-
�
> aaHavn o � '' w
O o 6� � ¢ V
. �
od � ���yj�J � Q
v J� s ;H II �
� P � y OC
� �
j� Z O 'tl 1 w �n LL. �
; 0 3 s i„a J `� a �
Z C� � ,c x �'� H
p �� 'aa A31�3� ° � °z �"'� W
J W O ct �
O � � �
= 2 N
� a �� �W V/
'3A11 VINVA'1ASNN3d a Cz � °o� 3
¢ s
Z � �_
E' o o F° U �
0
� o =� z �
�
z Z N 3AV aNVISt 3QOHa ¢ °_ ��� . N
m o
QN OU �J � ZN r> O ..
\�
J� • W � N�-Ni NQW (� � N
Q LL a' d' W �,z„� J Q O � �
Nc'L NZ 3C] • O
Q
O � • O W � � O
~ ~ U U� �� cL � ~ � �
N �i
= Z '3AV �13NNIM � o � C�3 � �
.
� �--� o cn �i � �
W w �-- cc t-
� > zw �w � � V
Q �--� N «-+ E
. �
•
• Closure of Country Club Drive west of Rhode Island Avenue,
which is plarined in con�unetion with redevelopment of that
area
• Closure of the north leg of Glenwood Avenue at T.H. 55• W3.th
this change, Glenwood Avenue north of T.H. 55 will becom� a
local street with no direct access to/from T.H. 55
� Another beneficial planned improvement near the site is the con-
struction of double left turn lanes on T.H. 55 at Dou�las Drive. ',
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
A key point in the traffic analysis is to pro�ect the numb�r' of
trips that would be generated with and without the development.
For the purpose of this analysis, the t0without development" condi-
• tion consists of the existing buildin� occupied with medical •
offices. This assumption is considered reasonable because medical
offices are a ma�or existing use in the building, and this type , of
use is fully consistent with both the existing I-3 zoning and with
the business and professional office zoning earlier recommended. by
the Planning Commission. The "with development" condition, as dis- '
cussed earlier, involves adding an 8,000 sq. ft. surgical center
and 2,000 sq. ft. of additional medical office space.
Applying typical trip generation ratea (1 ) , the projected dail�t and
p.m. peak hour trip generation for the condition without the devel-
opment are presented below, followed by the trip generation witY�
the development.
(1 ) "Trip Generation", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1979
� -4
�
• Pro,jected Trip Generat3on Without the Proposed Development
Daily Trip Generation P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation
Inbound Outbound
Type of Use Rate per2 Rate per2 Rate per2
and Amount 1000 ft. Trip Ends 1000 ft. Trips 1000 ft. Trips
Medical
Office - 2 75. 0 1500 1.2 24 6.�4 ' 128
20,000 ft.
Pro�ected Trip Generation With the Proposed Development
Daily Trip Generation P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation
Inbound Outbound
Type of Use Rate per2 Rate per2 Rate per2
• and Amount 1000 ft. Trip Ends 1000 ft. Trips 1000 ft . Tr3p�
Medical
Office - 2 75.0 1650 1. 2 26 6.4 141
22,000 ft.
Surgical
Center - 2 11. 3 90 0. 1 1 0.5 t�
8,000 ft. _,
Totals 1740 27 7-45
NOTE: P.M. peak hour is about 4 : 30 to 5 : 30 p.m.
� -5-
�
�
The precedin� statistics indicate that the trip �eneration with
the proposed development would be �ust 16 percent greater on a
daily basis and 13 percent greater durin� the p.m. peak hour. 'It
is important to note that the surgical center has much lower trip
generating rates than the medical office. On a da.ily basis, the
surgical center would generate only five percent of the to�al
trips to/from the site. Since most trips to and from the surgical
center would be in the morning and early afternoon, the sugical
center would contribute only three percent of the total p.m. peak
hour development traffic.
After determining the trip generation, the next step is to allocate
the development traffie among the various approach routes that
would be used to travel to and from the site. IItilizing market
characteristics for the proposed surgical center and �eneral popu—
lation patterns, it is expected that traffic to and from the site
would disstribute as shown in Figure 2. As ahown, it is expected
that 75 percent of the development trips will be oriented 'to
Douglas Drive, with only 25 percent using Country Club Drive w�st
of the site.
� Applying these trip distribution percenta�es to the trip generation
statistic$ results in the pro�ected daily development traffic vol—
umes shown in Figure 3. This figure indicates that the proposed
development would add onl� 60 vehicles per day to Country Club
Drive west of the site over the volume that would occur if �he
existing building is occupied as medical offices per existing zdn—
ing. The 60 vehicle per day increase represents �ust three percent
of the existing daily volume of 1 ,730 vehicles per day.
For the p.m. peak hour, specific projected turning movement volumes
for development tra�fic are shown in Figure 4• As on a daily
basis, this figure indicates that the proposed surgical egn�er
would add verg little traffic to the volumes that would occur with
just medical office usage in the existing building and without the
surgical center. For example, on Country Club Drive west of the
site, the proposed sur�ical center would increase the volume by
�ust five vehicles during the p.m. pea.k hour, one vehicle every 12
minutes.
� -6- '
�
O �
� Q '
� � �
N o
3A1!!a SVIJnOa w c�
oH
Hz
� W
V: U
� a
� ' F--I f'
;, ,:i ; ' E-� C.�
' w �
�� O f.�
. �
z v�
0
Ha
� E�
1�t� N � �
[�
� � � �
� � H W
f• (7 Q 3
'3AV LL
� A3Sd3f` �
� W
'al� '� I—
aaHavn Z
! W
6 , C�
�0 ���� 6'/J �: J
d 'S'JS ' V
P� y' �
�
� �
r�j p ,v1 � cn
7 i SIll3 Q O
�
�
p � 'aa A3113� ~ W
J �
� y
� W
•3/►f/ VINVAIASNN3d �
_ �
.
�
Uo
�
� �
'N 3AV aNV1S1 3aOHd O � ' M '
(f� • N
� � �
� � W O
O �
�• � � '� 2
= z •3A � �
� � �
� W � � �
o � � � � c°�
r1
^ n
�� � ��m W
�"��y ��� � 4 H
V �
� �
3n�aa sv��noa �
a^h �
N� O �
�� � o �
��, �. �„ �
y : �; �' ��1~ w � I �-1
�� .t , N��D c� f- � O
N�v � 3 � >
O Z U
¢ O U C=.
U J �
� a
� o ¢ ca.� M PG
Ei
^^ � � � �, � �
b p b = ¢ w° n � a
��d' ~ � o �° LL A
y '3AV o � w
A3Sd3f J � �
� x f- �
�b�.7 Z 3 3 'i �
> aar�ddn N � � ' W
oc a. � � 3 V
� W E W �
� �o m ��4y 6�J � � � Q
d � ,�s 3 � o � V
� �� � � � ',y �
�n � o �
r j Z � tl'l 0 4� � LL �
a � � � u. p
V = SIll3 � Q
� o � � ¢ �
Z �v '- a� � � F"
p �� 'at7 A3'113� � o W � , WC
J � J U J G
O --� Q '-'
o z � ¢ �,,.
@f � o¢ o �
h � �� z W
•3AV VINVAIASNN3d � °� ►- 3
,= o °¢c=n °
. o
F�
� k ��C[ >C �j �
J ` �J �
W � `_ F�� �
'N 3AV aNV�SI 3aOH!! �' �+ ~y ,�
O � - ; .
o�^, � ■ �
��� n�.� o�o � � o
� v �, � , �
� Z z
• z '3AV �13NNIM � � Z
O tu h�'h �'" ' �
r Q ^�'^ � $ �
V
.
�
v W
H
� 3niaa sd��noa � � �
t�r� �'
a w
Ld] t07 � > 2
—� —�� � U U
^ ^ H
N p� N � � o ¢
v
V ^ � EfZ- \ �F..i.^,
�
m O' � �ry1 � O �
N �' w �`' o �
� O�Z �' �
� x F
� a w
� � w �
z a
� W N
. � a � � �
L� c� O a 3
� � �
_ � 1t
. �
�"' v�
o �
� W
> � � W � 2
� � � � � N W
� � � ^ t� 3 W U
m �' _����_�� O O W Q Q
J �—_ y I � � z J � V
o ¢ sr E- ('
V n ,� 4aj � ¢' � a � � OC
'o� `, n• � I o �
� V � � v Z � m ¢ N N U V�
Z � � � � � I � � a°. o l�L
C� I o � �
� � � � r � � � � �` �
V � � = I M o0 F-- F- r L
� .. r-r t/)
,w � Z 3 3
V I
� r— O � ( 'N N ~ F"' (�
�
� � h � � � N �
7^1r f�l � W E 3 �
� � ~ � i � ~ � r-~i
� �
� � ~ I "� 3 ° N U �
`,, w F'- �
o� � � o � � � Z >
I � � � �
y � � °` � O < - A
� �
� �
^ ^ --- � � o ¢ � ■ �
v � � ~ O � � °� p
V O
� W '� f- C
� � a o o � �'' � �
� Z
v � � �. • o � ¢ o � o
L � EW-' c.W.�s � � � �'i 7 �
� 1��. z J � � '�' V] � V
_ �
•
ANAI�YSIS AND CONCI,IISIONS
Utilizing the preceding in�ormation and traffic forecaste, poten-
tial traffic implications of the proposed development have been
addressed. Three particularly important traffic items of interest
and the associated findings are presented below.
Conclusions Regarding Potential
Implications of Proposed
' Traffic Item of Interest Surgical Center
Amount of traffic generated As previously presented, the
number of trips generated by
the proposed development would
be only sli�htly �reater than
the trip �eneration that would
occur if the existing building
is occupied with medical
offices per the existing zon-
in�. Trip generation during
• the p.m. peak hour would be
particularly low because the
surgical center would .be vir-
tually closed at that time of
day.
Impacts on Country Club Plans by the City to close
Drive west of the site Country Club Drive west of
Rhode Island Avenue will reduce
existing volumes on Country
Club Drive. The proposed de-
velopment will have no signi-
ficant effects on Country Club
Drive west of the site for two
reasons:
- Most of the development
traffic will be oriented
to/from Dou�las Drive; only
25 pereent of the develop-
ment trips would be expect- '
ed to use Country Club
Drive west of the site
e _,o_
..
�
�
— Considering the �eneration
and distribution charac—
� teristica, the proposed
surgical center would add
only 60 vehicles per day
to Country Club Drive west
of the site (three percent
of the existing daily vo1-
ume)
Im.pacts on the Country Club As shown in Figure 4, the pro—
Drive/Dou�las Drive/T.H. 55 posed sur�ical center would
Intersection Area have little effect in terms of
increasing volumes through this
intersection area. IInder this
circumstance, it is expected
that the proposed development
would cause no perceptible
change in traffic operations.
�
Considering the above findings, it is concluded on an overall basis
that the proposed West Metro Surgical Center would have no adverse �
traffic effects. The. existing roadway system, with improvements
planned by the City and other agencies to alleviate existing diffi—
culties, is expected to adequately accommodate total traffic vol—
umes.
� —11—