05-24-82 PC Agenda i
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANPJING COMMISSION
� (Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road) '
May 24, 1982
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA �
�
I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 10, 1982
II . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: Green Stuff, Inc.
LOCATION: 735 Colorado Avenue South
' REQUEST: Approval to operate a Lawn Treatment Company
. including storage and handling of liquid and
sotid materials that could be considered hazardous
and/or toxic.
;i
� III . PRESENTATION OF THE PRELIMINARY VALLEY SQUARE REPORT �
�
IV. REPORT ON BZA MEETING - MAY 11 , 1982 �
V. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MAY 18, 1982
VI . REPORT ON HRA MEETING - MAY 11 , 1982
� �
Minutes of the Golden Valley
• Planning Commission
May 10, 19�2
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission 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,
7hompson and Tubman.
Also present were Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator, and"Alda
Peikert, Assistant Planner.
! . Approval of Minutes - April 26, 1982:
It was moved by Commissioner Singer, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and carried
unanimous)y to approve the minutes of the April 26, 1982 Planning Commission meeting
as recorded.
II . Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - 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
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff suggestion
of a May 24, 1982 informal public hearing date.
It was moved by Commissioner Singer, seconded by Commissioner Leppik and carried
unanimously to set the date of May 24, 1982 for an informal public hearing to
consider a conditional use permit requested by Green Stuff, Inc. to establish and
operate a lawn treatment company including storage and handling of liquid and
solid materials that could be considered hazardous and/or toxic at 735 Colorado
Avenue South in an Industrial Zoning District.
I11 . Informal Public Hearing - Amendment to PUD #28, Pondwood Office Park
APPLICAtJT: Pondwood Associates
LOCATION: 4959, 4g69 � 4979 Olson Memorial Highway
REQUEST: Approval of Modification of PUD #28
Pondwood Office Park
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and asked whether Commissioners had
� questions of staff. In response to a request from Commissioner Prazak, Assistant
Planner Alda Peikert pointed out the locations of the fire lane in relation to
the wall hydrant on the previously approved �:ite plan and on the amended site plan.
Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1g82 Page 2
� Chairman Thom son reco nized the
p g proponents represented by Mr. Gerald Mundt,
Architect with Wallace and Mundt, Architects, and Mr. Dean Van Horn, Managing
Partner for Pondwood Associates. Mr. Mundt explained that the fire lane in front
of Building 2 had been moved to the north with the addition of pa�rking space in
order to maket�e �arking space more convenient to the entrance of the building.
t�r. Mundt expressed willingness to move the fire lane back to a location .i.n front
of the wall hydrant as suggested by staff.
Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing to input from th� public.
There was no one pres�r�t who wished to speak on this agenda item, and Chairman
Thompson closed the informal public hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Prazak and carried
unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the requested Amendment to
PUD #28 Pondwood Office Park, which proposes removal of a seven car garage structure
and addition of 12 outside parking spaces, conditional upon maintaining the fire
lane in the originally approved location near the wall hydrant and location of
the three additional parking spaces in front of Building 2 to the north of the
fire lane.
IV. Informal Public Hearing - West Metro Surgical Center, Inc. :
APPLICANT: West Metro Surgical Center, Inc.
� LOCATION: 6681 Country Club Drive
REQUEST: Favorable consideration of request to establish
and operate a "same day" surgical center
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and asked whether Commissioners had
questions of staff.
Commissioner Leppik asked why staff suggested as a condition of approval that
no further expansion of the facility be permitted even if the surgical center
receives State authorization for an additional operating room in the future.
Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator �4ike Miller replied that the primary consid-
eration is the site itself and the need to set a limitation on development of the
site.
Commissioner Prazak asked what current building uses were referred to in the
suggested third condition of approval stipulating removal of uses not in conform-
an�e with the Gity Zoning Ordinance within 12 months. Mr. Miller replied that at
one time it had been the understanding of staff that the building was partially
occupie� by office uses not in conformance with the Institutionat zoning. Mr.
Miller stated that as of the afternoon of the meeting he had been informed that
all uses in the building were medical , but that it would stitl be a good idea to
include a condition requiring removal of any nonconforming uses.
Chairman Thompson recognized Mr. Gary Gandrud, Attorney with Stolpesta�, Brown
and Smith representing the proponent. Mr. Gandrud introduced Mr. Bill Reiser,
� holder of the option on the property, Dr. Stephen Brzica affiliated with the St.
Paul Surgical Center who would be one of th2 principals in the West Metro Surgical
Center, and Mr. Jim Benshoof, Traffic Engineer with Strgar-Roscoe, Inc. , who
prepared the traffic analy�.is for t:�e proposed surgical center.
Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1982 Page 3
� Mr. Reiser reviewed the history of his involvement with the subject property at
6881 Country Club Drive. Mr. Reiser originally took an option on the property
with the intention of becoming an owner/user of the building. However, Mr. Reiser
learned that his business as representative of an electronics firm would be more
suited to Light Industrial Zoning than to the Business and Professional Offices
zoning previously proposed for the subject property. Mr. Reiser is now acting as
business manager for various interests in the subject property inctuding both
the proponents of the surgical center and the existing building tenants, some of
whom are part owners of the building.
In response to a question from Chairman Thompson, Mr. Reiser verified that current
building tenants occupy 10,000 square feet of building space and that all have a medical
connection.
Dr. Brzica described for the Planning Commission the St. Paul Surgical Center
operation which the West Metro Surgical Center would resemble. The St. Paul
Surgical Center has four operating rooms compared to three authorized by the State
and proposed for the West Metro Surgical Center. At the St. Paul Surgical Center,
10 to 30 operations are performed each day between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 1 :00
p.m. Recovery time is two and a half to three hours, so patients are released by
3:30 or 4:00 p.m. The Center has approximately 15 employees including 7 to 8
nurses, 4 surgical technicians, 3 or 4 bookkeepers, and 3 anesthesiologists. There
are 4 to 5 visiting surgeons performing surgery each day. Space occupied by the
surgical center is 10,500 to 11 ,000 square feet.
� Commissioner Forster asked whether there was a shortage of this type of service
available in the area, and Dr. Brzica replied that the facility was originally
requested by surgeons in the area.
Commissioner Leppik asked whether the proponents would change their building plans
or would view the site differently if restricted to three operating rooms. Com-
missioner Leppik noted that the total building space proposed appeared to provide
more square footage than required for immediate needs. Dr. Brzica stated that the
proponents could accomplish their purpose with three operating rooms and that they
woutd not change their building plans if restricted to three operating rooms. Dr.
Brzica explained that considerable space is required for storage of inedical supplies,
linens and files generated by the large number of one time patients.
Commissioner Singer questioned Dr. Brzica concerning the number of truck deliveries
to the proposed surgical center, and Dr. Brzica replied that there would be two
deliveries per week.
Chairman Thompson asked who would manage the building considering ther� would
be medical office tenants in addition to the surgical center. Dr. Brzica replied
that building management would be a combined effort including the surgical center,
the owners and Mr. Reiser.
• .
Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1982 Page 4
� Mr. Jim Benshoof reviewed the traffic analysis for the Planning Commission and
addressed concerns raised in the staff report. Mr. Benshoof stated that the
traffic analysis addressed p.m. peak hour traffic and not a.m. peak hour traffic
because total trips in and out of the facility would be higher during the p.m.
peak hour than during the a.m. peak hour. Total projected trips would be 172 in
the p.m. peak hour and 148 in the a.m. peak hour. �1r. Benshoof verified for
Chairman Thompson that the figures provided are based on full occupancy of the
building as proposed.
Chairman Thompson as�ed the basis for the assumption that 75 percent of the traffic
generated by the surgical center would use the Douglas Drive/Highway 55 intersection.
Mr. Benshoof replied that the assumption was based on consideration of the surgical
center market area.
Chairman Thompson asked how the proponents and traffic engineer determined the
market area. Dr. Brzica replied that the Certificate of Need process included
analysis of the locations of doctors requesting the service and analysis of the
locations of their patients. This analysis indicated that patients would come
primarily from the east, north and south.
Mr. Miller asked why, considering the bulk of the�patient load coming from the north
and south, the traffic engineer had not considered use of County Road 18 and had
assumed all users would use Highway 100. Mr. Miller speculated that there would
be more use than anticipated of Country Club Drive to the west to avoid the congestion
• at the Douglas Drive/Highway 55 intersection.
Commissioner Prazak suggested that due to the one time trip nature of surgical
center use, peopte will use the most obvious major roads to reach the site and will
not have the opportunity to learn to avoid congested routes. Dr. Brzica stated
that the surgical center will disseminate literature for users which will include
a map and that traffic could be directed to preferred routes. Mr. Miller suggested
that the Rhode Island/Country Club Drive route would provide better access and
stated that he did not feel the volume of traffic on Country Club Drive would be
significant.
Mr. Gandrud addressed the question of expansion and suggested a limitation on
expansion of the building rather than a limitation on the number of operating
rooms within the surgical center. Mr. Gandrud stated that the proposed initial
10,000 square foot expansion in medical office space was required to provide the
initial capital necessary for the project. However, after a period of three to
five years, the proponents would be in a position to expand the surgical center use
within the building if allowable and replace some of the medical office space.
Mr. Gandrud stated that expansion of the surgical center use in place of inedical
offices use would not intensify use of the building and would result in less traffic.
Mr. Miller stated that he saw no problem with expansion of the surgical center use
to a fourth operating room if the expansion absorbed additional space within the
building as currently proposed and did not require any further addition to the
buildirg. Mr. Miller noted that future expansion of the surgical center use,
whether within the existing building or involving addition to the building, would
• require application before the City Planning Commission and City Council under the
conditional use procedure.
Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 1982 Page 5
r Chairman Thom son o ened the informal
p p public hearing for public input.
Mr. Dennis Jackson, 6745 Country Club Drive, said that he had been contacted by
Mr. Gandrud earlier in the week concerningthe proposed surgicat center and
appreciated that contact. Mr. Jackson stated that he shares staff concerns
regarding overuse of the property in the future and regarding traffic.
Mr. Anthony Benkusky, 6495 Westchester Circle, expressed sympathy with Rhode Island
Avenue North and Country Club Drive resident concerns over traffic. Mr. Benkusky
asked what type of surgery would be performed at the surgical center. Dr. Brzica
reported that 40 percent of all surgery can be performed in a "same day" surgical
center and stated that the predominant user is ear, nose and throat surgery, followed
by orthopedic surgery, obstetrics/gynecology surgery, and piastic surgery in that
order. Mr. Benkusky stated that at the present time when hospitals have vacant
beds, he feels there should be an overall look at the proposed surgical center.
Chairma� Thompson explained that the question of need had been examined by another
agency and that the question before the Planning Commission was land use.
Mr. Marc Nelson, 1955 Zealand Avenue North, stated that he and persons in his
neighborhood support establishment of the surgical center at the proposed site for
the following reasons: 1) The building has adequate parking, 2) the building
has good access, and 3) the building has not had a good tenant for a long time.
Chairman Thompson closed the informal public hearing.
• It was moved by Commissioner Singer and seconded by Commissioner Tubman to recom-
mend City Council approval of the request from West Metro Surgical Center, Inc.
to establish and operate a "same day" surgical center at 6681 Country Club Drive
subject to the three conditions suggested by staff with the first condition
prohibiting expansion of the "building" rather than the "facility".
Commissioner Leppik proposed an amendment to the motion prohibiting expansion of
the building "beyond 30,000 square feet". Commissioners Singer and Tubman accepted
the amendment to the motion.
Commissioner Polachek suggested that the Planning Commission provide the City
Council with a reason for the recommended prohibition on future building expansion.
Following discussion, Chairman Thompson stated the reason as adverse impact of
intensified use of the property on the adjacent residential neighborhood.
Chairman Thompson reviewed the second and third conditions and suggested that
the second condition be clarified to refer to parking information "on the proposed
structure" and that the third condition be eliminated since there reportedly
are no nonconforming uses in the building at this time. Commissioners Singer and
Tubman accepted the amendments suggested by Chairman Thompson.
Mr. Gandrud addressed the Commission and pointed out that the exact current building
size is 21 ,9b0 square feet and that with the proposed addition of 10,000 square feet,
it would be 31 ,960 square feet. An amendment of the first condition of the motion
� to prohibit buitding expansion beyond 31 ,960 square feet was accepted.
Planning Commission Minutes of �4ay 10, 1982 Page 6
• A vote was taken, and it was carried unanimously to recommend City Council approval
of the request from West Metro Surgical Center, Inc. to establish and operate a
"same day" surgical center at 6681 Country Club Drive subject to the fotlowing
conditions:
1 . That the proponents understand, and the City Council stipulate that the
surgical center would not ask for, nor would they be permitted to expand this
building beyond 31 ,960 square feet on this site at any time in the future.
2. That all parking information on the proposed structure be provided prior to
City Council action on this matter.
V. Report on City Council Meeting - Ma 4, 1982:
Commissioner Tubman provided a report on the May 4, 1982 City Council meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
� David Thompson, Chairman Margaret Leppik, Secretary
�
� T0: GOLDEN .VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 19, 1982
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 735 COLORADO AVENUE SOUTH
BACKGROUND � ANALYSIS
Green Stuff, Inc. , Golden Valley, a lawn treatment service, is requesting
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to operate their business which
includes the storage and mixing of herbicides and fertilizer. Such
chemicals could be considered hazardous and/or toxic thereby requiring
a Conditional Use Permit. The site which Green Stuff, Inc. wishes to
acquire and use is located at 735 Colorado Avenue South and which is
zoned Industrial . (See attached Area I�ap.)
The chemcials stored are packaged in a highly concentrated form and mixed
with water within the building in tank trucks which are used for lawn
treatment application. In diluted form, the chemcials could be regarded
as being reasonably safe and harmless. However, in their concentrate
form these chemicals could pose a potential hazard without safety precautions
being taken.
� The primary concern in a matter such as this is the potential of a chemical
spill while filling or mixing the tank trucks, as well as the possible
danger of inetal containers and/or bagged material that could rupture.
Without proper safeguards within the building, a clear and present
danger would exist whereby chemicals in concentrate form could be flushed
down floor drains, and without any hinderance enter the City sanitary
sewer system.
An investigation of the site proposed for this use indicates that the
structure woul_d have to be remodelled to accommodate this use. The
attached site �plan shows building and site modifications that include
a new parking lot and vehicle storage yard enclosed by an eight foot
cedar fence and an overhead door on the west side of the building to
" allow entrance to the designated chemical mixing area. In addition, the
proponent proposes to place an eight inch high and six inch thick concrete
dike around the chemical storage area, a flammable combustion waste trap
in the floor drain to collect any chemical spillage, and a "back flow
preventer" on the municipal water supply to prevent contamination.
The site plan as submitted would require three possible variances from
the Zoning Ordinance if it were to remain unamended. These variances
include:
i
RE: Request for Conditional Use Permit - 735 Colorado Ave. S.
� Page 2
1 . Waiver of the 10 foot setback requirement for parking lot along
the North property line.
2. Waiver of 5 feet from required 35 foot setback for front yards
adjacent to Colorado Avenue.
3. Waiver of setbacks and landscape area for existing parking on South
side of building adjacent to Colorado Circre.
RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to Section 20.03 (G) of the City Zoning Ordinance listed below,
the Planning Commission shall make findings and recommendations based on
the ten points listed.
The Planning Commission shall make findings and recommendations to the
City Council based upon any or all of the following factors (which need not
be weighed equally) :
1 . Demonstrated need forthe proposed use.
• 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
3• Effect upon property values in the neighboring area.
4. Effect of any anticipated traffic generation upon the current traffic
flow and congestion in the area.
5. Effect of any increases in population and density upon surrounding
land uses.
6. Increase in noise levels to be caused by the proposed use.
7. Any odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibration to be caused by the proposed
use.
8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals or vermin in the area to
be caused by the proposed use.
9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure or use.
10. Any other effect upon the general public health, safety, and welfare
of the City and its residents.
�
• RE: Request for Conditional Use Permit - 735 Colorado Ave. S.
Page 3
In response to the above ten points, I would suggest the following:
1 . Noting that there are a number of firms involved in lawn treatment
services, it could be presumed that there is a demonstrated need for
the proposed use.
2. The site is zoned Industrial and is compatible with the Comprehensive
Plan.
3. There should be no significant effect upon property values in the
neighboring area as a result of this industrial use.
4. The proposed use is not expected to generate any significant traffic
volumne increase or conjection in the area.
5. Item 5 is not applicable in this case.
6. There is no anticipated significant increase in noise levels to be
caused by the proposed use.
7. All mixing of chemcials would take place indoors with proper ventilation.
• No odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibration would be caused over and
above what is presentty experienced in the neighborhood.
8. This is not the type of operation that would attract flies , rats, etc.
9. Visual appearance of the structure and site should be improved as a
result of this use.
10. With proper safeguards such as diking, flammable combustion waste
trap (35 gallon minimum) and a proper back flow preventer, the health,
safety and welfare of the community should be properly safeguarded.
Therefore, I would recommend that the Planning Commission give favorable
consideration to this request for a Conditional Use Permit subject to:
1 . Approval of all necessary variances by the BZA.
2. That the proponent provide all safeguards shown on the site plan and
listed under item 10 above.
3. Failure to comply with the above conditions could result in revocation
of the Conditional Use Permit.
MHM:kjm
• •
� •�� • - Colorado Avenue
i • : - � .
� ' O � _ ...._.�.----•:••• . _.._. _._.... .._._..-----•�oa:u�—, �
r �� - --ti - .. . _-_ _ _ , __ _ � �
• o � � � �
m rn B� � � , ;
z tT1 � a ,
< Z . � �
n j�- I
� � . . � � ;�. -- -- �=�� --
m �
� '
�� C � �. � � .
� .�.� � . � ' � ,
,
� Z � a i � ; � � � �
. � �
N � n : �I . _ I � E-- , �a
�
c� � � , ' � "'
oZ � � . �
nn �
_ .� _
� � ; °
6� � �
. y��—
e j ��
� ��
----2�0•----- b . ��
� , � �-
� � °p'� s'
' ' .
. J' � � ,- • _ . • -�a=t= i
�T• k: . . , � \ � �—�.
I ` � � 1^�WWWt �Y W � �
� - ' � TN � Y? �
§. ' � €� �
. � : ���
. � ,
� .
. ,� i� . i �
. ( � �»
. , ;- �' � �
i _.. � � . �� �
I �� , �� �
_
. � � .� � ... � , :
I • 6 �
. , � �
��� � �� � �
a�� rs
�' '�'� c�(�G� .
�� ����� .
a �� ii
�� � ,
��� �� . � i
� � �
� � --- -- --- --- -�
.��. �� .
. . �,
' ' 0 5 10
� V �l ) V � � �j33p� ' � ^` ,
. .f�<'u c � _Z 2� �� � "f D �c' Ta� ; '� ` �
J< 6 rn, `-• s �; J 3 • G ., ` = • � ° � , - .,e " �a -
4� 9 �__ 4Jq, .�- 'e .9:98 ��o. ^ ^ .q�ot °o. M 3',' � �8 S1
. .' ��I'� �C 0' '4.^_F � 4:0�+ �i� t/3p9g� ,9 v� •a
i •�J � �Cs o p �� <\* ^� - • y .,.
� • i y , ,� rn '��� 4 �, � �`Ow` ,
• • _ � � �� � +4 • +Q ' ` Q` ,`,
� � � j' i AD 9=
; za - ozo > > N � a � �
� � � O • /2� N '.. �.
° , O � �' �� N ■`�i��� 009 ,
a =OJ�°•rJ ' .G�'3 `':r 3 °Z r ;O ' �y• - 3 ,y '6_ �/<
o :iJq.� � los- •?S n �c, ��S oe � - ._ _ L
�,; � � . O ac?- _s - '� _
>' ,
aa �- ��� _ �: : -. :.
� ;:�. 4 � � <o,�m ���c���:` ;; � .�
o�:, y� : �J� r.' y �E�S� �' '��/` a-, � 1% �O
s�,oa,jji . `�.c;' ' � � • _ o I
`Oy 4,� �S� �e�N O
� �J N
o . "' ,' � _"� n �. ,_� -_ _
: OU7�0/�7�� => r-�'- � .� -a I
�V 1�•'• !;,��F �� '�",
,� �ti =�{: .
c
-- Q� - - o ,qQ .. �-,s,
��; , � ;o� p _ �.
!M y' Q
� '� ��f
�', �� .q� `, '" _ ::6r os n /
` � iE'�,. .
� lc 3` ,j _ _-- �g-`c: .00E `,t` . _ - - - - �
� � Jr, � D -_. . --` LAUREL
__ Oz :_. G �o� j ' � '
�A D L
J
.. _ �Z �.� f � ��Q � �
- - T- � -� b a . � �I . , �� i _�
; � ; o � �, ` � ^ ; �:_.��__
� . � �.�S/TQ=:, : _ , _'�::: A ,. _ -
r ,.Q:�.i� i' -_ ` �, C'3'.DC.+ , . ,. , ` . .
�, ' ; �E +;.-, I�9 � �
;: �• . "J::;;- � .., a?•'��
� � I � _ '�h.�'Y _ oGd` � � '• 6: I,� - I �. .rn •
I � , .:: ' .. ��.^ � ��'
_ _ i � � ��.5`EGE Gt��—_ ,�.'—`a9�. - �,ti� �
.�� " 'q'� r� ^� �. ���.�c�.:.
I , \ �:
---�—�--�(+1 °� �
v • �� � .� . •:
c : i v - '` _;�'�`'��. 'A�y y -0
m , , '��. �
_ i I ' ` �o: �s: , .�
I f n' � ��' .. . r � ,� ',, vti
--- ; _ t � _ , :: _
, .
, � . � � -
__ i T; � ' _ _ _
� . _ 'a 'y ' /
r 1 .
I c .r
—' � L_J • �_ - �
_s: , ` - .. � � `''�' .��: ;�: �< �s �,; ��� 4es: o
'�, �; • _{ �
_` Q L
� '' ..
.i �: �,. _ .. i. .,•. i," ��' —
._ , -_ �p v� v� , ��;
• �r J.� � f? .N z �.�.. .. r �. J ' `' o , ..�i- _ .
� `,.44n . • O _ 7,
. _ . rs��,Nt„ . • • • . � � .,- ,�
:_< .
. si 3C '`�' . ` ,J � -�5 -
.. � - . ., vooc �> .. � _� .
�4 ��.. � -- � �" • O� GO�QEN ,a� AI.�Ev -----
S'J' � S� S� 86 4 ;�C!Tr OF ST lOU�S PARI(;;;. . .
�: 2 ��. T ,6 , ao ,�,�_ .� ,_ _' , .. . h �' �
• T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 19, 1982
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING & REDEVELOPMENT CORDINATOR
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY VALLEY SQUARE REPORT
Dave Thompson, who is not only Chairman of the Planning Commission
but is also Chairman of the Valley Square Commission, will present,
and review, the preliminary "Vatley Square Report" which contains the
background, findings, and recommendations relating to redevelopment of
the Valley Square Area. Included for your review is a copy of the
report. Any questions, or comments that you wish to make should be
directed to Dave Thompson, who as Chairman of the Valley Square Commission,
is responsible for the content of the report.
MHM:kjm
•
•