The URL can be used to link to this page

12-13-82 PC Agenda GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION � (Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road) December 13, 1982 7:00 P.M. AGENDA I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEPIBER 22, 1982 II . SET DATE FOR ItJFORMAL PUBLIC HEARItJG - P.U.D. #39, COUNTRY CLUB SURGICAL CENTER APPLICANT: Country Club Surgical Associates Limited Partnership LOCATION: 6681 Country Club Drive REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Design Plan for P.U.D. #39 (A "same day" surgical center) III . SET DATE FOR INFORr1AL PUBLIC HEARIfJG - REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO R-2 RESIDENTIAL FOR 9 WESTBEND ROAD APPL I CANT: Ba'rba ra G rove � LOCATION: 4960 West Bend Road REQUEST: Request to rezone from Residential (single- family) to R-2 Residential (two-family) IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - At4END�4ENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERHIT, 7925 WAYZATA BOULEVARD APPLiCAPdT: H. I . Enterprises LOGATION; 7925 Wayzata Boulevard I�EQUEST: Approval of modification of site plan for Conditional Use Permit allowing a gasoline service station and convenience food store in a Commercial Zoning District V. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.D. �40, EWALD IJAY . APPLICANT: Monson/Ueland Architects LOCATION: Southwest corner of intersection of Xerxes Ave. North and Golden Valley Road � REQUEST: A.pproval of Preliminary Design Plan for P.U.D. #40 including 10 Townhouse units. . �; AGENDA -2- VI . REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 7, 1982 VII . DISCUSSION OF PLANNING INSTITUTE AND LAND USE PLANNING WORKSHOP . • MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION � November 22, 1982 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, NW. Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Those present were Commissioners Forster, Leppik, Prazak, Singer, Thompson and Tubman. Corrrtinni ssioner Pol achek was absent. Also present were Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator, and Alda Peikert, Assistant Planner. I. Approval of Minutes - November 8, 1982 It was moved by Comrnissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Singer and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the November 8, 1982 Planning Commission meeting as recorded. II . Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - P.U.D. #40, Ewald Way APPLICANT: Monson/Ueland Architects, Inc. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Golden Valley Road and Xerxes Avenue North i REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Design Plan for PUD #40 which proposes ten townhouse units Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation of a December 13, 1982 informal public hearing date. The proponents, Mr. Jon Monson and Mr. Chris Ueland, were present. It was moved by Cor�nissioner Prazak, seconded by Commissioner Leppik and carried unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of December 13, 1982 for consideration of the Preliminary Design Plan for PUD #40, Ewald Way, which proposes ten townhouse units on the site of the former Ewald parking lot located on the southwest corner of Golden Valley Road and Xerxes Avenue North. III. Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit APPLICANT: H. I. Enterprises, Inc. LOCATION: 7925 Wayzata Boulevard REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for Gasoline Service Station and Convenience Food Store in a Commercial Zoning District �� Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 2 Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item for addition to the Planning � Commission agenda and called on Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Miller for an explanation of the request. Mr. Miller explained that the request is for amendment of a Special Use Permit granted to H. I. Enterprises for a Gasoline Service Station and Convenience Food Store under the former Co�nercial Zoning District Section of the Zoning Code. The proponent requests an amendment to allow installation of an overhead door not included in plans accompanying the original Special Use Permit application. Under the revised Commercial Zoning District section of the Zoning Code, both Gasoline Service Stations and Convenience Food Stores are Conditional Uses. Therefore, the amendment follows the Conditional Use Permit procedure in the Zoning Code. Mr. Miller informed the Planning Cormnission that the facility is currently under construction and that framing for an overhead door has already been installed. The proponent maintains that the overhead door would be used for loading and unloading of large barrels of antifreeze and other supplies, but there is potential for use as a service bay. At the time of issuance of the original Special Use Permit, concern was expressed over possible future use of the building storage area as service bays and over the fact that the site does not provide adequate parking for the addition of service bays. Mr. Miller recommended a December 13, 1982 informal public hearing date for consideration of this Conditional Use Permit request. It was moved by Commissioner Forster and seconded by Commissioner Prazak to set an informal public hearing date of December 13, 1982 to consider a Conditional Use Permit requested by H. I. Enterprises for addition of an overhead door to their Gasoline Service Station and Convenience Food Store located at 7925 � Wayzata Boulevard in a Commercial Zoning District. Commissioner Leppik asked staff how the City became aware of the intended addition of an overhead door to the gas station and convenience store under construction. Mr. Miller replied that the City Building Inspector noticed addition of the overhead door during an inspection of the construction site and stopped that portion of the project. The motion carried unanimously. IV. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning APPLICANT: Mark Hurd Aerial Surveys, Inc. LOCATION; 305 Pennsylvania Avenue South REQUEST: Change Zoning from Residential (Single Family) to Business and Professional Offices (B & PO) Chairman Thomspon introduced this agenda item, noted the staff recommendation for denial , and asked Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Miller to ela- borate on the staff report. Mr. Miller offered discussion of an item in the neighbors' petition for denial , which discussion was omitted from the staff report apparently due to clerical error. THe neighbors' petition states that � Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 3 they feel approval of the requested rezoning would harm the character and iden- � tity of the neighborhood. Mr. Miller stated that this is a very valid point and that the proposed three story structure on a side hill would constitute an intrusion with an adverse impact on an established very low density single family neighborhood. Mr. Miller reviewed the three reasons given in the staff report for the staff r�commendation of denial . Cortanissioner Prazak asked the use of the property on which the existing Mark Hurd building is situated prior to rezoning of that property in 1973. Mr. Miller said it was his understanding that Mark Hurd had a small nonconforming structure on the property prior to rezoning to Business and Professional Offices in 1973. Chairman Thompson asked for comments from the proponent. Mr. Louis Moriarty, attorney for Mark Hurd, spoke for the proponent. Mr. Moriarty stated that representatives of the proponent presented proposed plans to the neighborhood at a meeting at Mr. and Mrs. J affe's house and that the plans were not well received by the neighbors. Mr. Moriarty stated that Mark Hurd has always been a good neighbor and has been above board and honest in dealing with the neigh- borhood. After discussion, Mark Hurd decided to submit an application for rezoning despite the opposition of the neighbors for the following reasons: 1. At the time of purchase of the subject property, Mark Hurd was under the impression that the property was zoned Business and Professional Offices. Mr. Moriarty said that he was informed over the telephone by City Planning staff that the zoning was Business and Professional Offices and that he has in his possession a letter emanating from the City Planning Office stating � that the zoning of the property was Business and Professional Offices. Mark Hurd would not have purchased the Zimmerly property had not the City con- firmed Business and Professional Offices zoning. 2. Architectural plans prepared by Mark Hurd strive to blend with and enhance the neighborhood, and the proposed addition to the Mark Hurd building would be an improve�ent over the existing house on the subject property. 3. Mark Hurd needs additional space in order to adequately carry on its busi- ness. 4. Mark Hurd has been and intends to continue to be a good neighbor, keeping the premises secure and clean and maintaining the property as well as any house in the area is maintained. Mr. Moriarty introduced Mr. Richard Powers, President of Mark Hurd Aerial Surveys. Mr. Powers explained the nature of the Mark Hurd business, stating that Mark Hurd is a specialist in the mapping business and that it is a clean industry consisting of drafting and photography departments. Mark Hurd had 110 employees prior to the current recession, is currently down to 77 employees, and expects to go back up to 110 to 115 employees. The proposed addition is pri- marily to accommodate computer mapping machinery. Mr. Powers stated that the proposed Mark Hurd project, which includes improvement of the exterior of the existing building as well as the addition for which the subject property is required, would enhance rather than detract from the neighborhood. � Minutes of the Planning Cortanission - November 22, 1982 Page 4 Mr. Powers introduced Mr. Bob Brantingham of Brantingham and Associates, archi- � tectural firm for Mark Hurd. Mr. Brantingham introduced Mr. Elmer Nelson, designer of the proposed project. Mr. Nelson explained that his firm was origi- nally hired by Mark Hurd in January 1980 to conduct efficiency studies of the building interior layout. The architectural firm prepared plans for redesign and refurbishing of the building interior and for improvement of the entrance and landscaping. When the subject property became available, plans were expanded to include an addition. Mr. Nelson described the proposed addition using a model of the Mark Hurd building with the existing house on the subject property and replacement portion of the model showing the proposed addition. Mr. Nelson described efforts to blend into the area and to enhance the existing structure along with construction of the addition. Mr. Nelson concluded with the statement that the proponent requires no variances for development of the property as proposed and requests the rezoning only. Cortenissioner Leppik asked the proponent whether expansion within the current site is possible. Mr. Nelson replied that expansion to the north is ideal because it fits in with the layout of the existing bui,lding in which offices are situated at the north end. Expansion to the south would encroach on existing parking, while at the same time requiring additional parking. This would necessitate construction of a parking structure, which would be prohibitive in cost and which the proponent feels would be more offensive to the neighborhood than the proposed addition to the north. Coimnissioner Singer asked whether parking could be placed on the subject pro- perty to the north as an alternative. Mr. Nelson replied that use of the � subject property for parking would require extensive regrading and that he questioned whether parking on that property would be preferable to the proposed addition. Cortenissioner Prazak asked what buffering was planned on the east side of the property. Mr. Nelson replied that proposed grading would meet existing grades to the retaining wa11 now located at the east edge of the property and that there would be no change in the view of the existing house to the east. Conenissioner Tubman questioned the statement that the proposed addition would be screened from properties to the east by the retaining wall , noting that the existing house on the subject property is visible for six blocks and is referred to as "the lighthouse". Mr. Nelson said that the addition will be visible if neighbors look upward above the retaining wall. Commissioner Leppik asked what facilities would be located in the proposed addi- tion and whether the hiring of additional employees would accompany the building expansion. Mr. Powers replied that the executive offices would be moved to the proposed new addition and that the additional space in the existing building would be occupied by machinery. The space problem is large machines rather than additional employees. Mark Hurd expects a maximum of 115 to 120 employees. � Minutes of the Planning Co�mnission - November 22, 1982 Page 5 Commissioner Leppik said she understood that Mark Hurd previously owned adjacent • property to the southeast which could have been used for expansion but was sold. Mr. Powers replied that the property to the southeast was owned by a pension fund controlled by a trustee and that Mark Hurd exercised no control over sale of the property. Comnissioner Tubman asked about prior zoning of the property on which the existing Mark Hurd buiding is located. Mr. Miller stated that he believes the zoning was Residential prior to rezoning in 1973 to Business and Professional Offices. Mr. Powers continued with an explanation of the misunderstanding con- cerning zoning of the subject property. Mr. Miller clarified for the record City staff correction of zoning information on the subject property. Mr. Miller stated that he received a r�quest from the previous awner of the subject pro- perty, Mrs. Zirtnnerly, for a written statement of the zoning. Mr. Miller pro- vided Mrs. Zimmerly with a letter stating that the property was zoned Business and Professional Offices based on a check of a current zoning map maintained in the City Planning and Redevelopment Department. Subsequently, as a r�sult of an inquiry made by a party other than Murk Hurd, the City Manager asked Mr. Miller to investigate the background of the zoning of the sub�ect property. Mr. Miller found that the property had been zoned Residential and that there was no record of rezoning to Business and Professional Offices at the time of rezoning of the Mark Hurd property to the south. At that point, Mr. Miller sent a letter to Mark Hurd notifying them that the correct zoning of the property is Residential . At no time did City Planning Department staff receive a request from anyone identified as a representative of Mark Hurd for clarification of the zoning on the subject property. • Conanissioner Tubman asked the proponent whether anyone representing Mark Hurd had ever investigated the zoning of the subject property. Mr. Moriarty replied that he could not answer that question because he was not aware of the actions of all persons who might have been involved in the matter on behalf of Mark Hurd and that the answer to that question would be a matter for the lawsuit. Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing for public input. Mr. Gregg Corwin, 210 Nevada Avenue South, introduced himself as attorney repre- senting the Southern Golden Valley Residential Association, as well as area pro- perty owner. Mr. Corwin termed the Mark Hurd presentation in the nature of a threat. He said he had heard nothing in the presentation concerning the merits of whether the proposed rezoning meets land use planning criteria, only an argu- ment based on a zoning information mistake coupled with the threat of a lawsuit if the City fails to approve the rezoning. Mr. Corwin said Mark Hurd claims to be a friendly group of people even though they are a�rned by a foreign corporation and that they told the neighbors they want to make theirs a pretty site for their visiting Saudi Arabian friends. Mr. Corwin continued with the following points concerning the proposed rezoning and building addition: 1. Previous City Comprehensive Plans indicated that the area north of Laurel Avenue was to be Residential . The area has already been subject to a couple of rezonings and the neighborhood does not want a third one. � Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 6 2. Residential development has taken place and is continuing adjacent to the � Mark Hurd property. Lots immediately to the north of the property proposed for rezoning were recently sold and have been staked for development. Plans are for significant residential structures of a very high value. Construction of a two to three story office building obviously would have an effect on development of the remaining lots on Pennsylvania Avenue. 3. There is adequate room for expansion on the site. Furthermore, Mark Hurd until recently owned additional property to the southeast controlled by a pension fund trustee appointed by Mark Hurd. Mark Hurd allowed the property to be sold and another building to be constructed there, which building the neighborhood is not happy with. 4. The proposed addition is a massive structure which would be situated on ground high above the surrounding residential area and which would dominate the area. The proposed office development is ,different from the existing house on the property apart from height comparisons. The dominating struc- ture on the highest ground sets tfie character of the area. 5. The neighborhood does not wish to be a transitional area. 6. Once the property is rezoned, the owners are not bound to build according to - plans presented at the time of rezoning. Developers may build any structure which meets zoning requirements for the zoning district. 7. Mark Hurd states that one reason for the building height is to place parking � underground and out of sight. In fact, the underground parking consists of 12 executive parking spaces only. 8. The proposed building addition is a large structure in a residential area. The proponents admitted that the existing building is unattractive in discussing plans to upgrade the outside appearance. By adding to the building they are only making it worse. Mr. Corwin concluded with the statement that the proposed Mark Hurd addition is the last straw for the neighborhood. Mr. Corwin introduced Mr. Bruce Barton, 155 Oregon Avenue South, who spoke on behalf of the neighborhood from the viewpoint of a realtor as well as that of a neighboring property owner. Mr. Barton explained that he has been in real estate for 12 years and that he is associated with Merrill Lynch Burnett Realty. Mr. Barton stated that the proposed rezoning would definitely result in devalu- ation of surrounding housing and a longer selling time for houses in the area. Mr. Barton reported that conference representatives from the large area real estate companies agree that one thing they would never do is guarantee sale of a house next to an apartment building, an office building or a commercial develop- ment due to the fact that selling time of houses in such locations is at least doubled. Mr. Barton said he understood that the purchase agreement on the lots adjacent to the parcel proposed for rezoning contains a contingency which allows the buyer to back out up until December 1, 1982. Mr. Barton predicted that the buyer would back out if the proposed rezoning is approved because he would not wish to build $200,000 homes next to an office building. Mr. Barton added that � he is concerned for the safety of the neighborhood children, whose average age is ten years, in view of potential increased traffic resulting from the proposed Mark Hurd building addition. Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 7 � Mr. Dan Herbst, Pemtom Company, spoke on behalf of Pemtom which owns residential lots in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning. Mr. Herbst stated that Pemtom investigates surrounding zoning before investing in property. Mr. Herbst reported that Pemtom was assured by the City Zoning Department that zoning of the sub3ect property was Residential . Mr. Herbst stated that Pemtom would agree with Mr. Barton that an abrupt change from residential to commercial use is going to affect property values. Mr. Herbst concluded that due to the prominent location of the subject property in the neighborhood and due to the need for buffer zones between residential and cortanercial land uses, Pemtom is strongly opposed to the proposed rezoning. Ms. Rhoda Jaffe, 420 Pennsylvania Avenue South, stated that her concern is the traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue. Ms. J affe stated that she is tired of having dogs hit and of not being able to park in front of her own house. Ms. Jaffe stated that Pennsylvania is a dangerous hill and that the entrance from Quebec onto Pennsylvania is a blind entrance. Ms. Jaffe concluded that if the City continues ta add rezonings which add cortanercial property to the area around Pennsylvania, the City should be prepared for lawsuits. Ms. Pearl Berdess, 170 Oregon Avenue South, stated that she is the �rner of the house to the east of the site below the retaining wall . Ms. Berdess reported that there is already a problem with the wall caving into her property. Ms. Berdess stated that her concern is the vacant lot next to her which has been left with rr�untains of dirt. It is her desire to see the lot developed as a home site, but she fears that if the proposed Mark Hurd building addition is allowed, that lot will never be used for a residence. � Mr. Dan Greenstein, 7621 Ridgeway Road, stated that he is a new resident in the area and that his main concern when considering purchase of his house was the traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue. Mr. Greenstein stated that he is concerned that an addition to the Mark Hurd building will result in additional traffic. He concluded with the statement that the main issue in consideration of the rezoning is preservation of the neighborhood. Mr. Jim Smuda, 5001 Circle Downs, stated that he is president of Marin Corpora- tion which is acquiring the property immediately to the north and east of the subject property. Mr. Smuda stated that the model presented by the proponents shows the proposed building addition to be more massive than he had realized from reviewing plans at the City Planning offices. Mr. Smuda stated that he plans to develop single family residences of high caliber in the price range of $200,000 and up. Mr. Smuda concluded that he objects to the proposed develop- ment because of lack of buffering and because of the massiveness of the structure. Mr. Jim Zimnerly stated that he grew up in the existing farm house on the sub- ject property. Mr. Zi�nerly stated that he considers the proposed Mark Hurd addition to be the best use of the land and the proposed Mark Hurd structure to be more pleasing to the eye than the house currently on the property. Mr. Zirtanerly reported that his parents have been dealing with Mark Hurd for 25 years and have found them exceptionally fine to deal with. Mr. Zirtenerly stated that the proposed expansion move would benefit the City of Golden Valley in terms of employment and taxes. In conclusion, Mr. Zimenerly cautioned that if Mark Hurd � is not allowed to use the property for expansion, it will become r�ntal property. Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 8 4 Mr. William Rosenberg, currently residing in the City of Plymouth, stated that he is building a house at 70 Oregon Avenue South. Mr. Rosenberg stated that no matter how aesthetically pleasing the proposed new building might be, the point is that it is a commercial building and not a house. In that sense, the existing house on the subject site is more suitable to the neighborhood. He stated that the proposed development would detract from the housing investments made by every one of the families in the neighborhood. Mr. Arnold Kanarick, 150 Nevada Avenue South, stated that the plan presented by Mark Hurd at the meeting is the same plan that the neighbors reviewed and objected to six months ago. Mr. Kanarick offered the opinion that if Mark Hurd wished to act in good faith and good citizenship, they would have incorporated into their plan the reactions of the neighborhood. Mr. Moriarty requested the opportunity to refute untrue statements made during the public hearing testimony. Mr. Moriarty stated that Mark Hurd is not awned by a foreign corporation and that Mark Hurd feels a responsibility to its employees as well as to the neighborhood. Mr. Bill Kreykes, 95 Oregon Avenue South, stated that the rezoning question is simply a question of commercial encroachment into a residential area. Chairman Thompson closed the informal public hearing and invited Commissioner discussion. Cononission Leppik asked who provided Pemtom with the correct information on the � zoning of the sub�ect property. Mr. Miller replied that the information pro- vided may have depended on timing of the request. Mr. Miller stated that he never personally talked to Mr. Herbst. Corienissioner Forster asked why this property was not included in Pemtom's resi- dential development. Mr. Herbst answered that Pemtom buys vacant lots for deve- lopment and was not interested in the sub3ect lot because of the existing house. Mr. Moriarty added that Mrs. Zimmerly .chose to live in the existing house until recently and that it was not for sale. Commissioner Forster asked whether the City has available any traffic studies on Pennsylvania Avenue South. Mr. Miller replied that the City does not have any recent studies. Mr. Miller added that the proponent did not address the issue of traffic and that the responsibility for providing a study is with the proponent requesting the development. Mr. Nelson stated that the proponent did not make a traffic study because the proposed development involves no additional traffic or parking. Mr. Nelson explained that the increase in building size is to accommodate machinery rather than additional employees. Ms. Jaffe offered the information that the last traffic study was conducted at the time of the last addition to the Mark Hurd building and that the study at that time showed 1000 cars per day on Pennsylvania Avenue. Ms. Jaffe said that the State of Minnesota confirmed that the traffic count at that time was high for a residen- tial street. � Minutes of the Planning Cortanission - November 22, 1982 Page 9 Chairman Thompson reviewed the staff recor�nendation and the three reasons given � for the staff recorronendation of �nial . Commissioner P razak stated that he sees no compelling reason to change the zoning of the subject lot, that the proposed zoning would detract from the current character of the neighborhood and that he is in opposition to the rezoning. Cortonissioner Tubman stated that the purpose of a r�zoning should be to upgrade a property. There is no way to shield the proposed building located on the hill , and a cortenercial building on the top of the hill would dominate the surrounding residential neighborhood. Commissioner Tubman concluded that his would be inappropriate. It,was �ved by Commissioner Tubman and seconded by Commissioner Leppik to recommend City Council denial of the request received from Mark Hurd Aerial Surveys, Inc. to rezone the property at 305 Pennsylvania Avenue South from the Residential to the Business and Professional Offices Zoning District on the grounds that the proposed rezoning is not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and would be an unwise land use decision. Commissioner Leppik stated that she opposes the rezoning because she sees no compelling reason to rezone the property and sees negative impacts which could occur as a result of the rezoning. Commissioner Leppik stated that she does not think that continuation of commercial use northward into the residential neigh- borhood is desirable. � Cor�anissioner Singer stated that he concurs with opinions expressed by other Planning Commissioners. Co�nissioner Forster stated that he agrees with the statement in the staff report that the problem started with the original Mark Hurd rezoning. Commissioner Forster said he thinks that the situation should not be compounded by expanding the use any further and that it would be better to allow the subject property with t�e existing house to remain as a buffer. The motion carried unanimously. V. Report on HRA Meeting - November 9, 1982 Chairman Thompson provided the Planning Commission with a report on the November 9, 1982 HRA meeting. VI. Report on City Council Meeting - November 16, 1982 Chairman Thompson provided the Planning Commission with a report on the November 16, 1982 City Council meeting. VII. Report on City Council/Planning Commission Subcommittee Meeting - ovem er , Chairman Thompson provided the Planning Commission with a report on the November � 10, 1982 City Council/Planning Commission Subcommittee meeting. Minutes of the Planning Commission - November 22, 1982 Page 10 Chairman Thompson reported that the first item on the agenda of the Subcommittee • meeting was Planning Commission r�presentative presentations at City Council meetings. The City Council requests that the Planning Commission representative make a presentation including the recommendation, whether the vote was unanimous and the rationale for the recommendation. Planning Commissioners discussed the fact that City Council members have copies of the staff report and Planning Cormnission minutes which provide that information and that they feel they are repeating information which is already available to the Council . Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator Mike Miller suggested that the purpose of presen- tations on public hearing items is both for the public hearing record and for the benefit of the public. It was suggested that the Mayor request that the Planning Commission representative give a presentation of the Planning Co�nission recommendation, rather than asking whether the Planning Commission representative has any comments, to which Planning Commission representatives tend to reply that they have no comments in addition to the agenda materials provided. Chairman Thompson reported that the City Council Subcommittee was receptive to the suggestion of a Zoning Plan for the Valiey Square Redevelopment Area and that he had informed the City Council Subcommittee that the Planning Commission is willing to make a study of the Golden Hills area if the City Council wishes. The Subcon�nittee thought that the City Council might call on the Planning Corr�nission to review the Golden Hills Study Area in the future. Chairman Thompson reported that the Subcommittee also discussed examination of the land uses bordering the Valley Square Redevelopment Area in order to guide uses to those complementary to Valley Square. • The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, avi ompson, airman argaret eppi , ecretary � • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DEC. 8, 1982 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.Q. #39� COUtJTRY CLUB SURGICAL CENTER Country Club Surgical Associates Limited Partnership, St. Paul , Minnesota plan to develop a freestanding Outpatient Ambulatory Surgical Center in addition to an existing two-story medical office (clinic) building on a site located at 6681 Country Club Drive (zoned I-3 Institutional ) . The proponents are requesting that the Planning Commission set a date for an informat public hearing on this matter. In view of an anticipated busy schedule for the Planning Commission during the month of January, 1g83, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission set the date of Monday, January 24, 1983 as the date for this informal public hearing. • MH�4:kjm • � T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DEC. 8, 1982 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING 4960 WEST BEND ROAD Ms. Barbara Grove, St. Louis Park, Minnesota is requesting a zoning change from Residential (single-family) to R-2 Residential (two-family) for the property located at 4960 West Bend Road. The stated purpose of this proposed zoning change would be to erect a two-family dwelling on the property in question. Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission set the date of Monday, January 10, 1983 as the date for an informal hearing on this matter. MHM:kjm . � • � T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DECEMBER 8, 1982 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNItdG � REDEVELOP�IENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7925 WAYZATA BOULEVARD BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS On March Z, 1982 the City Council approved a Special Use (Gonditional Use) Permit to H. I . Enterprises to erect and operate a convenience food and self-service gas station at 7925 Wayzata Boulevard (zoned Commercial ) . Due to the fact that the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) had granted certain variances from setback require- ments, concern was expressed relative to a proposed storage area (see original site plan) that appeared as if it were designed to accommodate auto service bays in the future. To allay this concern, the proponent provided a site plan showing a building that woutd have only a single 36 inch walk-in door on the north face of the storage area. This was found to be acceptable by the Planning Commission and subsequently by the City Council . Within recent months, during a standard inspection by the City Building Inspector, it was discovered that the building plans involving the north face of said storage � area (see alternate site plan) include not only a 36 inch walk-in door, but an 8 X 10 foot overhead door capable of admitting motor vehicles into the storage area. This facility was never intended, at least in the purview of the Planning Commission, to provide auto service bays or vehicle storage. Granted the ceiling height of the storage area would prohibit a service hoist from being used to lift motor vehicles. However, there would be nothing to prevent vehicles from being lifted by auto jacks, or repairs to be made while the vehicle is on the floor. Storage of vehicles would still be possible as well . RECOMMENDATION The purpose of this whole amendment procedure is two-fold. First, the approving authority (City Council ) should be made aware of significant plan changes in the case of a Conditional Use Permit. Such proposed changes could make a difference in approval or disapproval . Second, the proponent must be made aware that plan changes can mean use changes, and are a violation of the agreement made between the proponent and City Council . Although the proponent maintains that an overhead door is necessary for ease of loading and unloading goods, Staff is very doubtful whether this is the only solution for the purpose stated. Therefore, Staff reluctantly recommends favorable consideration subject to: 1 . There being no further changes to the building or site plans. 2. The proponent understands and agrees that no motor vehicles will be repaired or stored in this storage area at any time. • MHM:kjm .:. �. �w`. �. � .� 4 , ti . .j�' ..< -.. A . _ �j. ��_.. F.. ... ♦' �^« ,1 , � ,,�� 's:.�r • • ' • r' .� .•>.' s ' a� �+ M �18� P~ ��!S Y��v]�.-� - . . . • '� . �:, ,s.r_ �! $ �i �v�i y,' .�• tt�'�': . . • '��, � ��+.T" l.'�'. :�'�6 . �f1'� � '� 'fi�'.7� Z ' _�r •> `�� -`, `�-.� . • . � � .. • ch -+# ,,.�r' �► �},.�;-� �p �t�� 9 .�� • r • aa`-o-� . . • _ , s:-,�,,.«�*.�*'�� .�i�y,Dx ��p� rA � z � ;i.�--"i:'ti`�.` +' ! _ .. . _ . ,,, t w'q��S •'+ p = � �p 0 O=� �-� ��z �-. ,a� r��. . ' ..�. , . � �a"�,'�r 4�7 4� +�a ��A. Z�N �j ' wi ; _ . . � ' . � ' �"s ' r��. '. �' �, �� 3� d �p= pF • � . '�Y' . !a '�. i. . . �'�� ! ,�� , ��.-,'� � r. ��. 3��`.�`,� = �'� ' '.x � , . .�� .�.� '{n,�:.•�.�:-, �r?-'R� �-� � .,� \,`� \. � ww'� �j ;�� t�"'ia'�� ;,fiS{'�` T.' D d� � r ��-� �F � ro. .: , . i��... �� -� �� f` ,+ ay�� ` �n , • ,,��,'�'i.[�' - \� .. �`'� � '�.:. � .;f� + ' ��'..-Zl� � � ,.Z,� i R !��,�` S� � 2'..S �. �% O ,r • i��y, ' D r(� z' c "' '` t, , /�!{� • �� j, �C��'� ' '�. ��w• ' j, ,� . , ' w1�C � � �ft r.�.} ;� .� �' � � .r �. �,�►�`�L .\ A�G �- �r a. �s X \' l't �: `� �' �C � ?.v�\,\,,\ �� gr-A �r�, ....:� �:- .. a��. A � t7 . ! �-�'?;x t�j . �° \� �, r� � .`\ � a'$: -• �'�;, - �•-+� �+ y .� � ,A� � }j �. �,,,oR\ Q,o ... � � ;g�.,�,�'�=::-�-:��° `�� - r ,:- �-a� �.ti ` �\ � � .«- �, ' ;�. i � � �s�l e �'�'.'' t..� �'c (� � ��ti� , \ •� '�'y�N •� � F s T :� l�1 5 -E � � A \ � �` � �,�r 1 =:.�; �o"�►, g "� � \ ��,, ,� �� . �d,�`�"° ,'t��.�'�°= __. � �`." l 6� � ' � .��L �` ` ,'. +►a +'�`; , ��:;. :: t- ,� , � ,. �.;�. t , i :,..— 1 0- �'^ �\ � \ �`,. v ,�. �r -rR. .r. � ' '�1 � :i � /�� .�� ,' �s .4 �g 't.`....i;-., � _� _ ; �``'. I _ -. _ —_ . �� ,�?Zo �.�w . � - �� z �� ..,��+,�-�- , �,�.., , - - ,,. . . . 1� � "�:� � '��' a� � y/� . � • r;�� .� ` �:�. w .� e �' �'/o + n' - �; \., �o��`�\�, . . . -a, i � �� +� j p Q6t .� �9/�` ��, �`l, . \.,' a9�• y�6 Q ! . • ` �� `,�' � � � � c� '� m, �; �,.� ',o;�b�: � '�\ _yi , - \ ��9� •\. _ . ` � �•'� ` �a� . ;� � , r�j� �o .� }�=}-1 � �c •\ \ pJC� � .�\ �9�, � 1 3 \ �'.•. +�r • y " � t � I \ ' ;' '`� \ c �� ' �.� � L ` \ y�J ' � `' 7 � '��\ � O� . � � � � �L�.�•�J a� ' . �' �" 1{ _ __'�+ /'� a� \ ;• � '�•i cA }� '� Id �! �",��" j:�q' _ �p \ \ ��1� �ya .� .� , . _--_'_'-i '�ti� � � \" � • ,J�.� �\\\ �� '� fl ' . 2� � + � ��\ \ �l,�a�}c i��, ,x d " . � � w• • � • S��" � � Q�. '�ir;gk� - � t�. ��&•e ----�1� R^��op�.� . �� 1 'o�C \�` `` �� -�r .. �� .'rac�� '� . '{ � � �'7� \ ' � � ,., - • �!� _ `_�_ `� � � B•� ��j , �i � ��• \ '�'-'_ Q ,�• . �s� +1�- . . 47 •.� , \ ��.+` fl. � .�• a _ b ',�� 'N P /' a:. •�, z '+. �, ..�p .t• • s� 1 --�-- - �: �. • :. �` `�, - `' _� .�� .��f4 4 1,`�s�� '- p.� '/ /�: '\ • .� \ } :' 1 .�� , r - _�--—� ` � �i. r , \ � 1 � ,. .� r'. � �, � �. `, 'i " '` �,� � � , �^� ,�_.�_ Yl�- . �:_.,-'-�-'�-: ��, °`, � � f ' N � :+ � �--=-�� - _ �� ( i' .?��p�'� �� _�� a�2 i ,�� a �.°s,'y' M• '"��j�x g �: / 'a:+8,•.1��' QP•'�' /' ��( 4�r\J�, l , 1 1�03• . _ '�x y y�� . -. . , �� `. � j� �/�•j . °L, •�' :�fl. .-�; - '8 ' , ��` •: a,. � _ y � �� Yv '�'s ` t: . '': 1, '�'�'� a.��7i' .�� , � � �f i .♦,�i ,3�C .f��.' �� /.•�� t� '.P �+7.� i ` ^� /ih 3 i� � rY� .. �' ',f �/'• , � �� i ��,� *�9 �� ;� ; �.�,i . ..-� �` __e.� � .i � 6 ,� � ��, ' a. , f ' • j- _{ .�' ,. l.-- _� _ _ .t �� i. J .r � �.,,•'� � � �'�S�" t+ ./ 1 i.- - �. , o ..i ' , o x.' / ?�, i�, \�� D v � �} . ,_-i _ -- '"' ' '\ � =� �- '�°°a ' ;' z � . ,.y.� � . C ti ��C . ' -Y-- "- -- `• �� . 1 � : .�;;. �. , , �. � .'� �'• �3 • . • •.�, . • ,�. ' �• �` ,r ,• 0 �,, °`�� . � ' � � �r '�\ •, '' i�' !�'�' � ` ' .'a��,y k'"'� ��+.Q � , � � �<�J; .��/ ' a'�y,,�;b' f, ` . u� e�• . �� y'" .4�`,�� /' �� :.�b . 2 �; ��4, p � � - . ,r, . � � ' .� .y , �y�( � 9� ��, i k , � � �ri��p .��4' ' . T . " � �g'� �' �30'/ � Jti'• , �� i�0 • t� m�(. ♦ f� � .. � � b.$ '-�e..c � � . �/r ' �rT�� ' �'. � ��b. �e, �`� i .'��'x � . �S�• \ � i� . , �,5, oy/'. / � ,��z�� . �-' '�. : , y i , �� r, ,ky •� '\�=�9 .'�.�. r�t,� ti�a;� �,. �'r�. �\ 4_�9 � ca�' 'b.� r `�� .. . G � • „, /� �� o., '�yf �•' . '.1 :1� - . �A s' � �t�I'��S � l� � � �-��a�.�' •�_{ - ..is . _�-/ e' �. . ' �,'�oo�cy: �j�.4� D If4' ' . ' ' �� l7=�� y, , � ; " . � " . \ .k„' . . `p�`�, : . ` . • . � � ; . ' �� • �04 \� ' . • .c°, � .. • . � � �• ' . : . . .. . . ' .. : . . s � .:- •. ." � : • . . ?° .,� . . . ,. , _ . . . / o . � , �R , _ . • - - .� � . _ _ _ �_ �,..�_.��_, .:_. __ _ __ �'�. . . '*'�x �+`s.+�y��_ #� aey:..''.L�.r.�;,�p-�-k��.�F Y' �1 Y4�- `�'t k� '� ' � tit. .4 '� fi a ' ' "�.4 C�'� +`A£'�-�� ."�. .c 4." -�. s�t- ,�.P -� ,r-� ,� �P� c .�^� s �gR�r • ��'.�+�� a;�;}<.,�y��.. �° '"."... a'-i ♦ �"-.��v'''.:e a -E: � s'` 1�1 :: -�� :�� ,� +rr - :�'� ..RT: a.tv�`Pr2.�� . f��v'. � l�,r+ �,t.�:.y ^ :t � �� i_'� . .>�. �1R. �� • i'�z � �v-Sn '�:�,". 'b''d.�� . `:@.� :+ � ? �..+Y y •ia. � . s . . F k�' !�'1►, ' '_•,`��t'�' �� -K;C'.[v9 * n� � f. 1 A fr M•�i �Lf. ��tl� � .�S <� -a� 4L d � .f ro�s� •. 1 � i��- • �O ti.:�'o�;��? �,r'' �'� _�, - � f''"�a_ NO'..rt V` y c� � , K.-i�� , : .T'- .:�.- -�C�x:�.cw �.aFy{t't ! �1':��.,�7�.- t1I� �1'�' . - ' " •'J' yA _ l s.ii.�'4.`., d �,�:� �srt..�,.'� 4' iY. � • :Y,� �'P�il ' � 1 y� N ��: ' ' -� �.� � � �d ti : ,Fs -=.-'.;'��&. :s�t s 1 �� ,: 'r f' ' _ - =� .�` "��+,� >.�•.y � .,� .. �M► . „ �a .. .•� � '�'°T .'!t 1�t. '3��'�?;..>�r�_.� �'��.lG..p'4.. :• � �,'Xt,,ma� . {� ��• � +a .� ,,.,�. ^Y� .. .w �$'i--------�-•- c ! �yn'��'sdi'.,<�.�� '�,'�rr d,t r r �L��. +i++y,. !�.�� ,4h. St. '!�-.a r � �. .t "�a �'�O s ' !� / ';� �� 1 S. '�'!� Y` ` it .� .�'�.. R' } ' •_ dy ++• sl��'G.�' ,i�f ��5�,�,� .y l� ��Y: f i d� ��. r . . . ' ; F�'t•i'. �� r ,,�, �� Y I r. • . 'b- fi �',t i �j�r C�` .. 1t � �#„.( r a - M t � , ._.. .�.�,h�v�.'�qt ,a' . ' w' ,}`..F'� ' � T�{' •ti � . � , � ' it�cyi'"y�i-�S,ti'r �.i.,- .� � ,,��3y.�,;� ._"Q+'1'1� ., -t- x��y�;S,� z= .,,n�' 3 ° � .M`�,l�sa,'y,+�.� .. :� �,.%� .e �.i'%. 9 i'� �M1 s� �Sl... ti � . t��!'�� p' ? } , ;�.X.. � T�, � __ .+�� Y �t +,�P ..b'�Lti,� t�. ��i � �',� �s.�,�... � � :��y�. i V .- , r +.... s ji� � �� t' ,.1 ti�-, y,�y r7��,r� w�'Ki'� Y s x�� y. • �„� . +1 ` �!� � '6`� "Sa��,• ��R ".' aJ" 1j�S.`5"y�? � ��:i�-T*f'� .' - .7. }i��, ^t 'i�'� .�i ' t �� ii' _�!!5•: L r� H+ " • . �' v '!��• EY t.� ��,� �� .r� �,�•.7. Xr: .1�.'.� .�ti�f�' ��f `�'�°�`a i.,- 1� r r'�. 4 €��i+c +� .'��s ��'� .. .P,�:.'Jtd �7 4e . � t�y .�{��. �}rt �d.� .� .�) 'YI '':d�i+t "k �� +z 'q.cf'� • '�. ,n c � � ys+ r '4 :."s-�l v�i 3 ?r.�;'cst��':�. �.'',' � .•i,,, y - �Q .��rt �, �: 1�'! ;��<� 'ui �39� P�. ..F Q ,��e� �c. S. Y' J .. .. � ''��C��[A� �� . . ,T��` �-� :�..: .�..� , , �� ,n,� ,,. �" ��y: •$�. �" .��`y -� i* }• '��4�l�A� �'}, ]: .� �, ��.�� c,s,• ..%.,t`C `_i-+ -� ,� , -� ..v y4 � • •` ,�• _ .. i '�'�+0 A _ � �. ` :�,� ;�",�� ;�r 1� •-°i.:4 -,�.�, a. s l�,. •k ;� •� ..'�O''��a p:Z�. ��i If��1 ' . . , °,. .� �. ,�-. � i 1 —O r �s"��y; �. M,tiy��_ _. �i� S_��a4 •,'#�a! y i 'y'} i�• . _, �. .,y:{ .°�i7f� �' � � K•�rj} �r� ��:.. .y,p+c n: + °�_s'�'�'F. �'"'_��.L '1K�� r.. „i.L� '�. 1 �.J !,��_�� ¢ i:4. �t� '� ly. �ir e W . . , �' J�W :�y�j.�. � u a ��' 1�1 . , �1 � + , ::�� . ;� ' ♦ � r, �.. � � �r� �{ ? � v'�`"a.t_y K .y,�,� �. � $j ;� � : � � :" �'axF { `c++ i "�y ^ .�: .r ' ' � �-`r`} • } � � �ti �$� • �* '�• m x�,.� �k� sk: �. t.c � �'S �. . !; J l�' .r . t ' �k�' i 'i 'Ii�r, f � �, -f�, .�0, ,'�' ,r�. i. �+r �.•S .� a�.y..�. e r- � :. . 1.� •,�� P'� '� ^"a`� �P'� �d"� yn's.�?Y�,a'�i>•.fi t _�;1 ,.1�''� A .• J f� i J• . . .... . 7 i;�.. � ♦ '.� :r..a �y ; • .y _ �%=7�i 4i �� +`%[� ,:iv - r-. '�� 11 r ; 1��`v � .° Y+ � ^ p�y ;�' ti s� :� �i� •�•.- , * . ' ''r '+�G��► -f `'i .�..s,'.f� k , 1•' . . .a' t- *. __._�, .d,� i�?s.�i:►� +. ,.,� .•, ! �.►e:.t A� �F' r _ � 1,.... �-- � �,j� -':t�� _�, y'�' s � �a 4 �ac.. �t��,. �ly• . ��rri.� ;�` .$i �� ,l� ". � �}. �y °��S � .��.,;�,.:5 _�p�r9 � • �.�� . ,!�.� .:i� - �. �-' a-a.i^t��Z i� :�•�a" � '.'y.YC ' l 2��t► 6'"} ♦t"r4.": P. -�=:- •. ' � '• .1.' � �''.. �4 �i�' aY d ` -+T� �y.{rrf.. w-r >:.p9�HI�Yr_ . _ ; , .wl� ;: •�..7` ... � f .. -"F'Y. . � ,M � �.rt�. _.:r- :�'�1 -��.� w . 'R= � , M �. �.i . ' ' . .-.Y 'Y� r 1- ��q�� '� y,i � ,t, i �.��"' �. �r� � �." v'C ' f`�.'� ' ' �� _ � r :'�e..�' .� ,e a +t s .. M. �r . . r e Ur s'+�a+;� z �:e�;� L r• , ,�y �, • r-� .�.' • . .* . a�r xi N'i ta 31'e�� .�'n ,f.�� '� �l � ^� - •� � • �+�*� ._: � � `t � ��' �t�,� .�� r.c.4`� ,_ � �y � '� �_ ��- ` � . � Fsr - y�'°�'.t t '� - ( . : _ ,. .' P �"''v" �r��,�% ,s-� �,' �-t k�})� •t 1 '�'°.�'� _ '• ' � �'. �z�,,!m �a �• '`� ' ` � '� �1_. e� E f �td ` j�r-� 'b e� --:��p � �� r:�S'e_',�, i� � �'_ :��0�� . �� t-� � ��• � � - k�,,,'',t'. f��L+. 3. y� �. �;� r:':... '�';: � ,.<< �� w _ �j A.+w�.� * �. sc . ,.. �: T 1 O t� $� d!`y��. ��ti 1-.{�\ "� .��-�� :'�..rJ� �.'yt: _��' - .. _. . � � 8��rj6 7i� x �. •'� � � : �'r,.,,;fi. .�.' i .Fpr� 'i' :i o:<' � e _ - �, }i*�1i� = � t ; r -; �~��c �iA�z�"��- �:�� a. � - .^" �. +l„ m ;_� f � � J;��+`a �� .:�':^ _;. � t '_ � � � { � �� :�u`.+ '`-4- .S't .a „/� � �"� �-� .�.. r� >. �y • p ¢ � 'A .3 5� .��t. . y�"� Y�ir 1J��f�a - � 'K+r. ./ +Z'-. .� : ro ,i� ... -�;. �� . •s y.h� ��. T� t��. :.^�s . e. ' � � � ``.} � i� �. �� _ �,�: � F;�•s �"i��`" . ' _�J :, �,:: R� : . +- , i �j i• �y '�5+.� t> � "6t c.�.. ,�,r �•� 'e' •` a3 � P �,,L g �e'�" F f �4�. .� � � ' - F "�Y� . �.l� '�t �4a. � . ��.� � f 'u �'s '.�. .1`�� : '�} � � {J,r �." �F .<: ��,�� ,�... _ �� .w . - •�• ' tJ� � .J :NA v <''� '�q � I hC �,� ^.e� a�M, t � 4 � pb s, .` i � , .•-,. •.t �Z � � . , , � r y� 'C ' _ , .7`.,i+j'��['� s.r � fl K. { �'. �,'°` �ar'nF ;.�y_'+��...��`� � .t 4 M^�s�y b.' a.z,. 1' •J�D.� � . , �-t'.' i .�'' '' � ° � vA.-�� r.y�"i-�`+-? '',�` +.�qO �1,�'�� •�� ' � .s• .x� .� � �� 7�.� �� '� •f� 4 1�,• C, �� _'� � . '�S - � ' •i . �4 i.;��. Y�' S �. .�".y"�1 .f„ • y, +u ' �4� 'y' . a� .R��y b},q�5r.;.a: J,�c s . .. :°.F�: �.�.: Y{%'fi � .:'}" � " �{{� � �� f 1 .i, M.'�3��rf: ! 4f �" ' 1 t:� �:�, a� S+. S. 'y, �fr,l� ,� f� 4 . WY yr''• � ��,3_�i.l`4'� f ,�;• "L . � .�g �.... �"L ae.'w �� .� 1 [ .�{ "t. tp.b.lb �"�� k� d' .��. r +� ,AjJ Y :p��jjb�� .I •.j''1 ' �+.� :t�'i�y�„ntr�y� v'��,.;,p. r.� ��. ,.y��,�'f sy �� } '� 1¢ } • V ,v --.t. �` s��y* '��` S�.e ��3'. ap.-_.. � ' '� �� --M'-— . . ��. h°��' � � ��4 .� '�.l .�. � � ; ~�• . .p F • .. t. .�� U. v�4 � �j� . �_ �.�� • ' y�`�' ��Y'' � ��-�.+,A�!'""'yy. ;�` �s '� ?�� . w.i_, t a :y� S '�� .� . . ' 7 ar 9 O �': Y .� �v' < "� '; �' 1 :S, �4 .. .. . ., ,,� �E . ,�� ",�'�s�' .s... : .,,t„G•ax;y�..-:r _ ,�,��i!�I . . �,. "f,�-- r . 3ti..;. '{tY.<.:-�;t�!' _:��' ��. ��'�! ��{{t�t ' .. p � . ' � 3' .L . a_.4 �t .. . i.� � i �.S •� 1 . ' �1. � °� ?� •-: ��a'r '�C a i'�-� j '' '.l��)�� . � ' • A . . ��. �..li . � , J - . � ,i'�►:11' h J .��' .� yq r . • . .� �F� � .. }7 e!� -� ^ . C� .a i L ' {} • � .. �.��'�..�. 11 '�rx .b��cd�'X � �yy�'t � '►� i � � �� l'��1�. � - . . ; ��'X �,� .� � . � n � � >- d �ua�t�'-b. � •, . � ' � - ' � � fl � : ��.,. y 7� ze.,,x; s. e�'� � ��` '�r�� 't . '�'� r � . ,.f,t�.� •� ;� � , ..�":�• i. �s�" "�rl�,.r 'fti.v �� •��;�e. 4�.S.v,J1 ' .. . . +; � . >��r:� y.P�. �, f �"'�. w ��2t�� 1'. 1 [{� �' � f�, ,,�- '..►, r . �. i :.� '1�y� •f`�. �.� � �' •., - i ie�' �f--�+�' ts.��i. � �i"- +s,+.*} „r �� :.r�,o'8,i �_; . , t jr, �,��*,:� �?� � • . �a�, . a.- . r �� S+�a'.,�, �_ .. •, � -� s �� !`Er. 5• b.� -s� w:cr•� � ,0,. � .£ :��_I . �^,, :Mt. ��• .:i _ . . .L=. • - . .��< � ..' _ ; _ .i • . . + .. }. � - , _ _ _ _�. .a.__..._..__._ -- ---- .�. �„�. . : . . . ' r .'. . r� " .. ' • ' j ' . . . ,,� i , , - .f''t : : . ''� 1•,". .. • �• . �%r'/�(„� •� . . - - _ . � .,.� , •� 1 .�. ._ . '; -' • ' -r ' Ir�-��i�� ~ -��.-�� . - � � • • • t /F�� ZO � � • � . �~ . ' yt \ - '� V' �1 -1��o � �o ,^ � i . , � ' • � � f . � ,�sc�R �' - �.�-v� • % � ��P�►,�, ; ., � ,,� v �y�* . �� ,�.�r � � s _ ^ Z v� •�Z t . ' � ._ •;''°-�°'�-:«.-� '�,r.. ' ,i� �� Na � �p `�, �p : � 'a o �'- , O �3 x ,� \ a �°s� °f - • ' �L^'� � � � ' , � �J`� C . \ • .' - • . , , �. w ��- � r 'v � �`� 6r \�. •i-�e,p � � . �S��NN � ' _ ' ' �. (1 .. . ' t o• -� : �D � -1-a^'-� � . �'t' c;`'�tt�, �� S �w�i'� .'$ ' D Li� ''3Za�� ' '- • 4'i.��'e � t'd�m °� =s .. • . ��'p.,-i1� `'� $-�y � � �! . .,�. U . �`.� �� d S j " F t o�p�W 4� i 1 �f � . L= •(� a \ � C\�''�. ' (-��M r. O � . . �*��. E � � S '�0 � E '�, r \ �; C • .-•::�,.., o s . . wi?� �-C �F-C , w .;� � v �; �w�,os '° � � � a+�* . .4Rw i 1 � �., �� ?. �,�\\ \ R � g.� � � . On � '�fF i''t*C j �� !*i Y (T '�` � p\ � � v''p `R � �M o a .� • .. C ��' ��Tt�� •,� i� �� j t � _ '* \ �,a ,� �, .�..w- .... � • ��' _�as��T �I �,�' �� , T . � N ^. Q"N�• �•tiJ � \ �f r.3' .w s 1 a�� winW.1� � � � 4 ��i�j �i•a ¢�`f'-� i � � . \ � to� � � c �~ •� a o'-`�'� 7� � .ta o,+ i5 0 . s�,, a��, � ` 7 � ��f 0�� x � � 1 �'.l� I �� \ r�ti \� \. . � �n, '�' r+ q• t � v, l ! . � �1 e � Jq�, \\° �kd"a d' � n�p �' i ' � .d�+at ' I� °' 1'.. � ,3,.i� ,,.. o �. �,��.'�= ! � � �ZtZ � , �> •`�• � ' Q� �N� " 1 `� ' �`�. � � �r• /-q��_ ,\ � 'i�2� \ `1{�\` • .1. ,'��. ' � �Ip a� ! 1\t�:,,� a`Vi"+ u/. �•, \ �j,� l• ,\ \ t�! • I +-•..;� � 4�� I� '�bb a � � t•/ \ \\ 3 0,��'��. '. ! P 4 �1f.c,� ` ,, �,; � O. i .' . .,�� i . �/�. .rj�.'1, � � a c :�• � . /r' t � � �'� ,'6�` .Cj. �� f-.�T�.T "1. ��• 'w i �a �Y� =� , �-;4, fa: • -�', �� ` ; � /j�� ,�,��_r= IG �/ ` ;,�;s��.-�"""1 - �, Is�,�"(��"� \ \ D �`� �w-=+-� i i� � t, � r�•v F�\ � ^'. - O � �� -��'j '�C _; �_ --� -�1 �i �C \ \4 \\` .6• . . 'r ~� ° Ij��j'��I � y �u 1`� \ .//, \ f �� 4 � .�'_ , � -��l '� ;y.�a ,�' � � �r1 1 �! � � ; . e ;T. ,.' `\ � ''_, ��-"* �• -,�� - _�-----_'". � �� .`\ :`� �\ � . . � : -. � i � a� . a4 ti� \ .0 � \ �� 1 � �': i. � �.O�1 10 7� ) � ��6.� � i� w � `'\ � ♦ � �� --� � \ � �� i :�r , ,: �� i / � _ —--1 's' �' �• � '.-� `' .,� `o `�o�I �� rt +�---+— �`��, . � a � `� �� n � ,i _t � � F i .; . • �f C • `� � ��^`�FN� � � �Y �,��DZ� �• .� / \ � �. Oi o .�t > l .A y� �,--__�� Os � � ` � ��,'. � �. � �-��.�V� i(� '"'� � � �. I�•,�tt' if'o_ �jT �f1�� `� y,� ��ig��==_��s ( � E`O . \ 3s � �\� � - 4 N�•.._�_ ✓ ��r+il' ,��"i t `i� _�1 �6 . � �^ .� \ 2e. � / �Ca ��. ,(�'j i , s�� .�1 q"=� A � \ � .- .�;`r i i� , � �'E . � r j,�' � � c �� ; �� . �, � � ' ' .t.�� '1 . 1 _ '\ , � � � •�� ., � (' F \ r �; � � / �� \ ;�! k �,• � � � �ya��!�`� •�$' "��— � p �• � '� � . .� /',� � � �� ,`�: ��,..�. ___---' _ - - 1 n '�,;, • ,,.' �� _ .� � .� �z=' " .�. �-• : � \ ; � , N �f'-e � -:- '17 c� � , \ • �� .• , �1'i .� � 'i.- � /}'"� ~p�j :.'�:�i.c�►f ,}'. / J,D vv.cJ,�,Qv.' \ �.�'�.,% � i j ( � Q� �=�� -'-"��. F s:n �*�'� _ �A�•,. p \ •�- __.L �� 4� �`4• iS •a d1 1 1��'!,� �• \ . \ =v y�u T. ;� : � % /5 . ��✓ �f T p�•1 i � "'.�. � �: u t�. 3 y F n �I ; ' �� I , i � `�� c� ,t�� '�. � / - " �i` . � +� � �. �'� � �D� .} � { X � �,. � � � / � \ �C . ��OT. � �i •� � �.+, � �� R. r /� \�� " iC. • �� \ I��L s (-T ,1 _ -- ' r� � �. � . � := � F �; � i � � � �_ — �'t' > , � ,�,,i ,�•. �. yi,"� �I � L ---- � -- �� . e � .� `. r. �:� ��•, � •,�� _ _ _ r N� � �` �:� � _ � � .� �.•. m�� 't?y V`�!'- t�� .�� .��j\i P�, • ,�` _Y ' ' �� • rb�, `��•'..� Y • �� . '_ • J .� oo�s�,. � . �. :�;;� �,• ' � � `�:;, `�u�� .T � • 5. • ; �.flr��✓��tQ' y� ��b�b \ `' • �'��kN F � C .` `� i� !. \'�� • ,�' � �-'' , � . � � y n��, � ' T _ - \ •�'� \ �6tj`.```� '�, ''Y��' ,►.'\ . . � 'A C � i Q� 't• ♦ 18•�.. a� ` 4� � ti,�� • \ e. � 4'p`�r �� ' �\ � ,`�`� ��iO 9� � G * A � a j� �'\ • .C. � ` �O � � � � 4.� p.i i{1 � ��4 \ ? � , p�1 �+ 'r t,�° \ ,�t ♦ �� . \• �7. r 'Y�...,� . �.�•s.t' - r� a.. 0�1 o G ��l `�\. � 1.��'v,J+` k �(•�jss•� \'��'^Qy�'`� Y.ns � ,•� •�' a a. ,� ,-�.�/!� �\�t'4,�� t' '�s I' e � f � ' \ ,� �/ %' ��,y:r•,, !' o' ��4 � �� \ t�J� y / �.� � I � '� �1•� � ', 4CC � � � . •. . � 'a `_ / �,.� ..-. � . � 1. _. .., -��-�, •.•. : „f =�. � _ y'�t „ :� . . , ' � ' �� _�. i � t� ,s ' �� . c •e r ' �ti. ! , } ' ., t _� '� - .- • � �. .. t.: � •. .\� � : _ ;. / ,. � . . J �� . � `.�r • +• . ' •."r- _ yt . _ e.' . /�. -` -,. . ... �-� ,�� `�� ' , . _ � t s '�' °' f� l� . r '�'� ..ka'� �' � : .: �� , - . . _ 1 �� . �g: �+o . . . �� - � � . �� Np . . S . � . w • . • r€ I M . D � r � � .� � . �o �Y • � �M� f �� ' �,+.C� � 1 ' �� , �,• c' ��'4 ' f . ' . . , ��. . . �« � ,' � . . a:o -��.o. � , y� i b } �. ��i m�� ' . .•• • r p� � � �a ., • ' ` 'y �� Z��p_�3, �g - � F . �� 'y..r � f Ira�p�W9� �1 ! I • • �° . �A (i ' I` ��I��1� 7f-C�u+ lL � : ,P ' ' -+� m i ! i�l"' � n'�i� t � N ,a �i � ( 1 il� �� ,' >o� s��} 1 � �'� p I � �� r �', c � ' a 7 � �lii�l� i I �, 0 TP �r. �* � � ' ' I1: i vM_�4 ; �* �� .�` , - o � � �� - , L�a°Sm�i� � � � � ''� ' I � ,� � �� . �o �� '1��j�1�i 1 '.,;�" �s��A�= ` � `��' „ � z ' ill 1 � ' -�i r V P � 0-1'� . 1�� I �. 1�� ' On� 1'@. w e' z::. .. � � , � o��. ! �� .�'`i,*_ , . I � � � � , ��,� t ':� ' -'i�� t�,�f ''�u�G � s� , �.�j +4° � � Q ��' ' ' 1 I ` � - 1 � � �� .� • ��,; ; . �..� �� n . ' .j � I!��- ��I � . � �--c�± : i l-. '° � � • + ! I '�" ,*� � • ( ' ' '•;�� ;!�+'', � + iO� ; � ` �' � � ; ; 1 ,�1 � -`��+� � i ' ,';;i�'''!1� �� ' 'O� , --1 L , , �-- p /7'� � „�, _ . ! ��_�Y � � +� E�' !�" �'� (.� -s� ' . r" ' �� . a�� T "'1" ' � i � � . � � ,'; ?c'� i�-! ;r.; :o� � ��,, � -�'I ,�,� ;^+ i;��.�;�It':. _ � � - �. � � �,.• J�" i� �' �Z� a j6 s� ��-�� i -�i_ ''� N' � �1� !=='`'� •°" r'�I � .-'`O . - 1 I !'' , �^� �'p i��e m �'�'��o ��,.� � ':�. _ 4 ( � � ��k�'� � '°F:i� �*��.� ji . '+c - F- — '--'l 'aii p : - '"TI �:`c Q .o��i '� � I I) j • � �E�Os { .. - r s��' �. ; ' � -:'� i��• r f�i�►� c° � ' 4 �. , � - �_�_� Q��► � , ;-�:, ��s: � �� ti `� ��lj: 1 - �� N� ��.��T"��-�'��; 3 g �m.� � � -��+�� ..� �.� �--• 1 i �;��. - —--,;;� � r , 7F Z g�� ' �I�i� • � — +1' ,.. . '"�� t i �_._y� L L$� w . �j�� ' :i . �.I � ! � � en �� ?.�; � � �'f' I i ''r' - t i � � � . ;� ;�� ,�,� . �Di � � i �� ;3�; � I jl��i;,;�{;��i:,�;; .� ��: � ►� �� . ;,� I �� i�;,�i �l * � ; , � , � , ► . � �� j � � �,'S1i1�'I'�� i i :�i , .1'-c s �� j/� � ) �,�i�� , �� i � �, �1�.J' � � � r. � �Q � j I ' � �zi � $ l � `�� 1• �� r �� ; � ; �� i , ; . . �1;;; � � � �z ��Dn _; . ; .F �✓. , . , " �: i � �� ;�� .+ ,� ��3 �`�- ,1 � l `� 4 + 1 �' ��';� • o�u� t+ i ( / � � �� a _ I ' � �; '�.i'�;;'�� ; •, n:*� o� � •.�,i 1 ; ._ v � � � � "�I�fl��l�!'�. -� .`�• ' ��° � --�-- -i- � - � � � • ��y, '� � . s �pQ f �r l +----`; _ �g . �.. _ _ *..�. t ,� ,! �!{`l�,�� _ .. � 8n`�� c�• \ • .. $ �� ' � �, � ��o� s � . � �,,, � .. . � � -+ - • ' f, �uN •f �o b � � , �' ,1... • �� F . . C , � , � , � Q � �°^m�4 T V . � � . � � ` Q � . � � ,� i' •., , . ' ' "'i x � � N . ` � I , V ' ` ' C�� D � � . p 9 � � � ' � �C G . � � P � � ' � �' @ � ci b i ' . , . � . + � � � � ; : , _ � � ��-- � w i • � ' �. �, � m �-- i, � � �y � _�. � � �' -� a � � , • �a , � �� _ o T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DEC. 7, 1982 F ROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER S UBJECT: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN FOR PUD #40, EWALD WAY The proponent, Monson/Ueland Architects, Inc. , requests Preliminary Design Plan approval for PUD #40, Ewald Way, which proposes ten townhouse units in five double unit structures on the site of the f ormer Ewald parking lot located on the southwest corner of the inter- s ection of Golden Yalley Road with Xerxes Avenue North. The site con- sists of six and one half originally platted lots with a total site a rea of 1.049 acres. Density is 9.530 units per acre, which falls within the medium density range of 5 to 12 units per acre as defined in the adopted Golden Valley Housing Policy. Plans for the Preliminary Design Plan of PUD #40, Ewald Way, distri- buted to Planning Conmissioners following setting of the informal public hearing date, consist of the Site Plan, Sheet PD 1, and the P rel i mi nary Pl at wi th accomp any i ng Prel i mi nary Gradi ng and Uti 1 i ty Plan and Boundary and Topography Survey, Sheets 1, 2 and 3. As a courtesy, the proponents included two sheets prepared for HRA review O in selecting a developer for the site, Sheets PD 2 and PD 3, which show building elevations and sample floor plans. The building elevations and floor plans are not required until the General Plan of Development s tep in the application procedu re. Monson/Ueland has inclu ded them with the Preliminary Design Plan for the inforrr�tion of the Planning C omnission, which does not see the General Plan of Development. The building elevations and floor plans do not exactly match the Site Plan, Sheet PD 1, and wi11 be modified for submissian with the General Plan of Development. Th e site plan on Sheet PD 2 should not be used f or revie►+r. The correct site pl an i s on Sheet PD 1. The sub�ect property currently belongs to the City of Golden Valley H RA. The HRA purchased the main portion of the sub�ect site, the f ormer Ewald parking lot on the southwest corner of the intersection, along with a triangular parcel on the northwest corner of the inter- s ection, from the former Ewald Brothers Dairy in Apri1 1982. In a s eparate transaction, the HRA purchased a 30 by 60 foot parcel c entrally located on the Xerxes frontage of the site from the Hennepin County Historical Society in November 1982. The HRA solicited propo- s als for medium density residential development of t�e site and offered the sucessful developer a write down on the cost of the land. M onson/Ueland's development proposal was one of five submitted, all of which were reviewed by tl�e Ewald Neighborhood Comittee appointed by the H RA. The HRA selected the Monson/Ueland proposal in Septe�er 1982 and concluded a Private Development Agreement with Monson/Ueland in 0 November 1982. -1- . Features of the Monson/Ueland proposal to the HRA, Sheets PD 2 and PD d 3, which are retained in the PUD Preliminary Design Plan include pro- posed construction of ten two story townhouse units in five double s tructures, arrangement of the buildings in two clusters, use of one access drive placed at a maximum distance south of the intersection, p rovision of one parking space per unit in addition to double garages f or each unit, and restoration of the Ewald sign located on the former Historical Society parcel. The proposal to the HRA included two tot lots, and the PUD Preliminary Design Plan reduces this to one tot lot i n the southwest area of the site. Z oning of the sub�ect site and surrounding property in Golden Valley is Residential (single family), and the surrounding area is an e stablished single family r�sidential neighborhood. Xerxes Avenue N orth forms the boundary wi th the Ci ty of Mi nneapol i s, and su rrou ndi ng property in Minneapolis is also single family residential except for the site of the former Ewald Dairy building directly across Xerxes on the southeast corner of the intersection. The Minneapolis zoning classification of the former Dairy building site is R-4, and the maxi- mum number of residential units alla�►able on the site, which is �ust u nder one acre in size, is 27 units. The Minneapolis Comnunity Development Agency (CDA) acquired the former E wald properties on the northeast and southeast corners of the inter- s ecti on and removed the former Ewal d Dai ry bu i 1 di ng on the southeast c orner. Th e Mi nneapol i s CDA adverti sed for bi ds on the Mi nneapol i s p roperty, and a Mi nneapol i s si de Ewal d Nei gh borhood Comni ttee i s � c urrently in the process of reviewing proposals for preparation of a recort�nendation to their Cortmission. According to Minneapolis staff, , w hat appears to be the favored development proposal calls for t�ro single family homes on the northeast corner and a three story develop- ment of 20 townhouse/condominium units on the southeast corner. This is considered medium density development in the City of Minneapolis but would be high density residential development by City of Golden Valley standards. The a�dopted City of Golden Valley Housing P olicy labels any thing over 12 units per acre high density. S taff feels that the density proposed by Monson/Ueland is appropriate f or the Golden Yalley Ewald site. In promoting residential redevelop- m ent of the sub�ect site, the HRA recognized that single family resi- dential redevelopment probably would not be economically feasible, but at the same time emphasized the importance of continuity with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. The Monson/Ueland p roposal attemp ts by maximization of green space and by selection of exterior building design and materials to blend with the existing n ei ghborhood. All buildings within the proposed development meet the required set- backs for Residential zoning, which are 35 feet from the street right of way and 15 feet from side property lines. The developers allowed a dditional building setback from the south property line to provide separation from a private driveway easement over the southern ten feet � -2- of the property. The 15 foot building setback from the aest property Q line does not appear to provide adequate separation from residences to the west when viewed on site. This is due to the fact that the west p roperty 1 i ne abuts resi denti al back yards rather than si de yards and due to the fact that the Ewald site ranges from 10 to 20 feet higher in elevation than residential back yards to the west. The proposed site plan incorporates variances of parking and drive setback requirements. The entire front setback of 35 feet is to be landscaped and half of the side yard setback, or the 7 1/2 feet along the property line, is to be landscaped. Monson/Ueland requests a variance of the front setback for a corner of the front parking area which is 16 feet from the front right of way line. The Monson/Ueland application states that shrubs will be used for screening and that the wide boulevard on Xerxes Avenue North, approximately 22 feet rather than the usual i5 feet from the paved street to the right of way line, will mitigate exposure of the parking area. Staff feels that this variance could be acceptable with provision of screening. The second variance involves setback of the drive where it curves into the second cluster of buildings. At this point, the curb of the drive c omes wi th i n one foot of the west property 1 i ne. Th e appl i cati on f rom the proponent explains that the drive is brought close to the property line in order to maximize the radius of the curve and that shrubs will � be used for screening. The property drops off sharply at the property line, and the drive would extend up to the edge of the embankment. E xisting shrubbery on the sub�ect site at the top of the bank would be removed in construction of the drive, and a one foot setback does not allow space for installation of screening shrubs as proposed by the p roponent. In addi ti on to 1 ack of room f or i nstal l ati on of screeni ng, there is lack of room for storage of snow removed from the drive. Sn av removal will result in the pushing of snow over the bank onto n eighboring praperty. Staff feels that the setback of the drive from the west property line should be increased. P rovisio� of on site parking meets requirements of the Multiple D welling Section of the Zoning Ordinance, which stipulates one covered p arking space for each unit up to one bedroom in size and an addi- tional half garage space for each additional bedroom, plus one outside p arking space for each unit. Double garages are provided with each tawnhouse unit, which may be two or three bedroom in size depending on buyer choice, and there are ten outside parking spaces to accomnodate the ten units. Th e ten parking spaces provided are 18 feet in length rather than the 20 feet stipulated by Ordinance and must be ad3usted to meet the Ordinance requirement. As required by the PUD Ordinance, the Preliminary Design Plan for PUD #40 was revi ewed by Ci ty Engi neeri ng, Inspection, Publi c Safety and � Parks and Recreation Department staff. -3- I t was the Ci ty Engi neeri ng Department which poi nted out l ack of space � f or snow removal f rom the dri ve borderi ng the west p roperty 1 i ne and the possibility of problems wit� dumping of snow on neighboring pra perties. If and when a final recommendation for approval of PUD �40 i s made, the City reserves the right to include in the approving reso- 1 ution and PUD per�ni t a statement absol vi ng the Ci ty from any 1i abi- lity resulting from proximity of the drive to neighboring properties. The Ci ty Engi neeri ng Department di rected correcti on of ori gi nal pl ans which called for surface water drainage onto neighboring property at approximately the same point, the location of the angle in the west p roperty 1 i ne. Th e Engi neeri ng Department i s naw sati sfi ed wi th the drainage plan, which directs the ma3or portion of surface water drainage down the center of the drive to the street. The Engineering Department has prepared sewer and water service plans in response to developer petitions for City installation and assessment of utilities. The utility installation pro�ect will be presented to the City Council at the same time as the General Plan of Development. Additional sti- p ul ati ons of the Engi neeri ng Department i nc1 u de i nstal l ati on of cu rb to separate a11 bituminous paved areas from landscaping and a maximum four percent (4�) slope of the drive in the boulevard. The slope indi- cated is 7.3�, and the Engineering Department prefers a 2% slope to accomnodate possible future installation of sidewalk in the boulevard. � The Engi neeri ng Department further di rected wi deni ng of the pri vate a ccess dri ve to a wi dth of 24 f�t not i ncl udi ng cu rb at the entrance and 20 feet not including curb for the remaining length in order to accorr�unnodate emergency vehicle access, as well as to accomnodate trucks such as moving vans. The City Fire Marshal states in his report that he woul d prefer two means of access to the development, because dead ends such as proposed create problems with fire equipment vehicles blocking each other. In addition, he noted that resident parking on access drives has created problems in the past and stipulated posting of fire lanes to prohibit parking along the sides of the private access drive. The City Inspection Department offered comments in the nature of pre- 1 iminary information for the benefit of the proponents in preparing building plans. Building elevations and floor plans are not required until the General Plan of Developmer�t application, and the Building Board of Review examines building plans for the building permit only after PUO approval. The Building Official pointed out stipulations to be reflected in future plans related to handicapped accessibility to units, fire wall separation of units, separation of water, sewer and heating service for individual units, and provision of amentities i ncluding roughed i n connections to washer and dryer faci lities, out- side faucets for each unit, and outside air for fireplaces offered as an option. � -4- The Parks and Recreation Department conrmented on tot lot equipment and � on pedestrian circulation. Th e comment on the tot lot concerned ina- dequate size, noting that the size is sufficient to acconmodate only one limited pla�y structure and that the area should be increased to accomnodate additional structures or one structure large enough to include swings and sliding or climbing elements. The Director of P arks and Recreation suggests that the tot lot area also include benches for sitting. The proponents indicate that the tot lot is designed to contain a simple play structure requiring minimal main- tenance by the Home avners Association. A description of equipment to be installed in the tot lat is required for review and discussion. C oncerning pedestrian circulation, the Parks and Recreation Director suggests paths or walk s for access to the garden area near the Ewald sign as well as for pedestrian access to residential units. The pro- ponents should address this suggestion, with provision of a walk from the northerly of the two courtyards to the street as a mi ni�m. S taff recommends that the Planning Conmision defer action until the p roponents address staff concerns noted above. Staff feels that w i deni ng of the access dri ve combi ned wi th provi si on of addi ti onal setback of the drive from the west property line could require ad�ust- ment of bu i 1 di ng 1 ocati ons to the east. My ad3u stment of bu i 1 di ngs to the east would encroach into the required 35 foot front yard area. W hile certain ad3u stments to a Preliminary Design Plan may occur bet- ween Prel imi nary Desi gn P1 an approval and submi ssion of the General Plan of Development application, any adjustment affecting building � locations or waivers should be reviewed by the Planning Comnission p ri or to referral to the Ci ty Counci 1. The P1 anning Comni ssi on sees only the Preliminary Design and must conclude its recomnendations to the Council at the PUD Preliminary Design stage of approval. S taff suggests that the Planning Conmission direct the proponents to return to the Planning Comnission after making plan adjustments and p repari ng i nformati on i tems as fol lows: 1 . Ad3u stment of the setback of the dri ve from the west property 1 i ne to allow adequate space for screening from residential property to the west and for storage of sn�► r�moved f rom the dri ve. 2. Widening of the private drive to a minimum width of 24 feet not including curb at the entrance and 20 feet not including curb for the remaining length of the drive to facilitate emergency vehicle access. 3. Ad3u stment of on site parking space length to the 20 feet required by Ordinance. 4. Provi si on of a 1 i st of vari ances requi red as part of the PUD approval, and narrative justification for granting of the variances requi red. � -5- 5. Provision of a landscape plan at least adequate to illustrate buf- � f ering required for screening of development from residential pro- p erties to the west and for �u stification of waiver requests. The P UD Ordinance d�s not require the complete landscape plan until the General Plan of Development, but landscape information is n ecessary in this case for assessment of setback waiver requests. The landscape plan may incude installation of fencing as well as plant material. 6. Addition to the plans of curb separation of a11 bituminous sur- faced areas from landscaped areas, including addition to the pro- posed access road cross section on Sheet 2. 7 . Reduction of the slope of the drive to a maximum of four (4) per- c ent in the boulevard. 8. Inclusion of detailed plans for tot lot equipment. � 9. Inclusion of walks for pedestrian circulation and consideration of benches for pedestrian use. 10. Reference to PUD #40 in the plat name. 11. Placement of the six (6) foot utility and drainage easement on the s outh property 1 i ne to the north of the 10 foot exi sti ng dri vewa�y easement. � Any future recommendation for approval of PUD #40 should also include the following conditions to be addressed by the proponents later in the PUD approval process: 1 . Submission of Homeawners Association Agreements and Bylaws, ease- ments and any appropriate deed restrictions or covenants with the General Plan of Development and approval of these documents by the C i ty Attorney pri or to Ci ty Counci 1 approval of the General P1 an of Development for PUD #40. 2. Posting of fire lanes along the entire length of the drive to restrict parking to the designated parking spaces off the drive and to prohibit parking along the drive. 3. Provision for handicapped accessibiity to individual units. 4. Separation of sewer and water service to each indivi�al unit, separation of interior plumbing for individual units and provision of one lawn faucet (hosebib) for each unit. 5. Provision of roughed in connections for washer and dryer facili- ties if actual equipment is not furnished in each unit. 6. Provision of individual cold air returns for heating systems. � -6- � 7. Extension of fire wall in accordance with building code standards to the roof line between units with no penetration. 8. Provision of integral autside combustion air for optional fireplaces. A ttachments: 1. Si te Location map 2. Application for Preliminary Design Plan approval � � -7- � . � n' O ..y��.V.a`` Z� '6 6 ' �' ( �* =� ' �,•s��'y 6� ��•� ,�1t� go ,rt yj6' e�E�.�� i �� t�� l r �� i �E ... �� '.t� � M ��'i� '�,'j � � �' ��, 1 ` �S` '��'�Z 1 ` � '. Ci� 'Zo ��J .1•!d'� ,y�,9 ,' .�� i�� j3 �[�Y2,'� '�' ``�. ,i�j0 ' '��-� w � R•637• 7 ` .��•.' �� ir({ ' i9,. I 'e`� u°,v �^�b � �i � , : - _. rt. � �as n Z 5Z ��,o��.!�ie '�5y :' � w '� w 5 I � �S.ltiz�� i34 e7 ��i � �q, ! I� � ,.} .. �1�r •e:'��• � �. �"i. � p 4, (�cio) � �:�:r�• �% 7�' .. '� .�pi4 �D�.,�,m •-' �.°f 1;."'� .: '° �'' u .� � �e � a „ . �.. . � ti ' " .�f J 440. / �9 io� ��t�peq ' ..lS ao 4-Ll� � m �o w � ' rc/..r�>' f . S .� M- e �i , iu k . o W Clrr.i�acDEV a . �.- , / ., ' �. � c I i / °o �!o '�' plif � X /�—� �v� �N '� � '�' �1 �'` � • Tl�f4 � "• !i ' N.:� N n1 - � �° �t " •.�:i 77j ,�ZS /+�, .�ii�';�T• �`°.oj� �e , tid u� w- --- �� f 4!� /•9° .�� ? c��,� '`• ;!''►�+—� ��,t, �q0 • .�.N/ .,� 'Iy �^., J� o . ��--..:•�� 1�3p�/+ 1� w � � ' , �. �p u p� ��yb� �C .ti• ` N ��,y ` �� •e ° : �_—. t o�� p� Stj � �p �C 10� ° �`��' rr, N a O � � f ��. . �, � m� f ; �' �N 0 ��S°.tf . � ,�.0� 1 � e��, J�`v '�9,� ° + W � . �` 1 , e`S � A�� oti yi . � �� . � � ��`e -:Qsi is�6!'4!y �� n� � s"•o• N . ,: I / °M�� °� `''�' ` � �° O o � ° �� .{c /� � _�I t ; �� /�b 4K �6 ` Oi e°� y0� �N tO.d'�� r ��,4 -M SITE : /. •e! � �l :�'Ct q 6 J��N`� �o /�!�� 1��,, � . . -��, �1. � g —..� • � � e ;,,ti ,�, ; �,��'� ° °�,�' - --._.. � f . � , � `� 94`• ��A y'Lg` '��, e.� W � �i4i•'`+ �a� ,,f•s ' �i, : t �� . °o� q{�°h w �� . `g� `� e�' e .o'�`a \ ,,•� ��b'��'��' s �im�.ri°�`�. �� y�( {y� ,.. . A ♦ J 1 4 ��-y's ` ^ y'0�-!�,. �O � �,,` �' `� �,`t `,'�W � ?*ef ,�r � _J' �� ... ..�OO,¢�'L�eS..... �— --- '__ +' � '-e ` � "�'• .i5,TQ __ - „ -� ' A�� " ..A � : � "� W L�' - ° ��: 94�, °�^�� _� � ' r °� ' !. a�.'y� '-'�-�- o ' ��n . o� � � �� .S f) 0.- �i N /RS.... 0 � v.� e � /�O °6py �`��` oC�' •r;.��; 've��'.� `�',- �. -13�.4 O - y�o�• �,'r � � � • � ` i?1 \ � m e N,f m I __��_j � 1C� � 9 , m �'1 ,j I�i N � N N j�O o O�Sl� v a O � S �!`7 , � ,�6�. � m m __��_ m k .�-. I \ - "-e ----- � N o e� � •q8Z= ' N w � � : �4� '"G; �\`. y a` ? .-- '�'Y 12 f o� Nr.� �- - N �, -Q �,�y� i�� a \ �' '-------�a8.7__ ° ° "''i --- � � � � o \ +° � -�" �v � �,, -�- v 1 � r j> ;0 t� o �y� o �I c�t�, i ' � 9A=• --�S� - - `� A__ '' � e `� t i \ � O� - ------ I/o �: _� u, • ; 1 ` � � + M � � z A � I A � � I� • � w � � , 00 ---.��0_- ---- � - �' � � v v� O � �� a v � --i-- •--�- � d O 1 � � � w � D ts`a►J °' y� � � � N v �e • 1 / o a i ��./1 ° v w�p � I W p JP J.�.._v.0 7 1 0� O 1'� •� 2 'NI9fS � � a�+ � - r.le �7 i � ^' M X .�tl t1�1 1" ° a : � 8r a6 .:4N � ,. ,. '*�°� • � a _.- _, ;,, �e�.t IV �s ; ' a ' , �� _*,� W ��.Ne On�� tn - � � c,. �' �w o A � � O `m 1 - - - - - - -- z !�' o , � b �. LOCATION MAP ° � °�� ° •�� ' o EWALD PROPERTY �p;�;*a �--�ss` �• � � � � DEVELOPMENT ,,N _._., e2 ! e � . .___:i 4�� _ , . � . .� , - ,��-T � y, �n a1�S+j�^b' � . � � _ ... . . • _ . \ •- . ' • " �ne r" ��,e — .1°e A ji . . .. '• 1+ - ' , �� f �• M� r► 0 .-- . .s • . . , � ', ' ' � ,UO• � IIOa r . . � ..- ' , - , . . . �� .. _ . . � - - ' . � � -�pZ/.Q� - . ' ' , 5+Y•' - ` . _ ' � 0� .��6 �ZO�/ ._� . t ' . ��..� �a. ..� .L ... � 1. �. .. ,` . 1 .• f � ... ' � ' y.. ��. � • . .�� _ � • ♦ . . . � , . P.U.D. NUMBER: � CITY OF �GOLDEN VALLEY � APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION - OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN DATE OF APPLICATIOP�: FEE PAID RECEIPT N0. ($100.00 APPLICANT NsMF: MONSON �(,�EL.,aNO AT�GHITBGTS, JNG. PHONE N0. 33'S'42(e0 ADDRESS: IIZ NeRTH THIRD ST.R.EET�_M�NNr�tl�c.ts M�NNESOTa SS40� Number 8 Street ` City '� State Zip Code PROPERTY OWNER: Sar1E As APPe.rc�� PHONE N0: ADDRESS: Number � Street City State Zip Code STREET LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION: INT�125FLTtoN eF C�o�a�u 1l,�LC.eY IZe�v � X�txes Ave. NazTH ""' SO vTH WEST Qv��NT. �• LEGAL DESCRI PTION (Attach separate sheet i f necessary) : �..OTS °�� , �� 12� !3, I�{' AcND 'Tff'AT PART OF L.DT B LYI1�[-� t�OR'Tfl OF TffE QSot�Tt�! 30 � Ttr�oF. �,�xic 3, Mc Npttz MaNarz.. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION: (Attach to Application along with an area Half-Section Map) TYPE OF PROPOSAL: SMALL AREA: Y LARGE OR COMPLEX AREA: RESIDENTIAL: _� COMMERCIAL: INDUSTRIAL: BUSINESS � PROFESSIONAL OFFICE: INSTITUTIONAL: MIXED USE: REDEVELOPMENT AREA: , �'�� D �Q. � rJ. O�°� AG�S' PRESENT ZONING OF PROPERTY: R�.�Slp�f3Tt�kL... PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: a8A►iJDOr►1�'sD �ARKtN� L-oT �. • ' ' � � PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY (Attach Additional Pages if Necessary) : (��s(D��iTt4�- To WN HoVSe � pEVELDPf�IENT • vINEU-�A3�6 UNiTS Tc t3e' soe..o er•� ope� MrrrttcET CNor FoR- F�uT� • STRUCTURES: NUMBER fi TYPE StDE^ B�• SIAE TW1N �oMC'S ' HEIGHT 2*T FttET NUMBER OF STORIES �j_� AMENITIES AND/OR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (i.e. Tennis Court, pool , etc.) fi1oµ�' 'w` Nore: ��i4.sTet+.�e`S IS sT/47LD Tb lNflt4l�E 2 a�cbRt�S � H�4LstTA� 5'r'RtXT�K�,I pND 'BTaR`� DF � 3TRt�CT E .(/ NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTENDED TO LIVE OR WORK ON PREMISES: ADULTS: �O CHILDREN: I S NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES PROPOSED: ENCLOSED Garag or Parking Ramp) 2� NdN ENCLOSED 1O TOTAL ACRES OF LAND IN P.U.D. 'I.O�I'°I /rGR�S DENSITY: (Number of Units per Acre) q.�J pcJli4GR.t? � INDICATE THE FOLLOWING DATA BY PERCENTA6ES: � AREA COVERED BY STRUCTURES: 2.D.rf % AREA COVERED BY OUTSIDE PARKING: 3.S i AREA COVERED BY OUTSIDE PARKING: 3.J'� % AREA COVERED BY INTERIO STREETS: ��o � PWVeW�4`�S AREA LANDSCAPED: �pD.S % NATURAL AREA AND/OR OPEN SPACE O.O i PONDING AREA: O.Oo ZONING VARIANCES: List belov�r all variances from the standard zoning requirements that will be requested as part of this P.U.D. , and tfie justification for granting said variances (Attach Addi t ional Sheets, i f needed) . � (y O�tr 'f.e w�,�,�.„,� �'b,c r�dids .� �r►'✓tw,ev.i��l eurb JN tt-�- bt wi fkPn 1�Ou �rs.�+ rt�r nnr�ve��r l�'�G �zo�P� n,rrr.,i�s 7�/�-��. `•��tw6'� w�LL b,� vse� �w scrreK��•.w. l�I iw ...der� to et�rv,•d�i �ea war�tt'«•r s�i ll s �t s•+.�.11 cerr�rr� �,. � e'F. tsNrk+'•,h �..�I/ bt wi�'yih 20 � �ri•+� �'royf nron,rr-1v I��G �zo��.u� vtrrsr�fs 35��Ctl�. 51�rv6� .r,•ll bt vser �er-��r,�e�.ti.� �►..J t e �•dt LOVId✓�1rd �4 ssE 22'� e•� X�� R4hl. �.•,�t r ,�,��t.�gfG .��a e��..a�.�c. I HEREBY DECLARE THAT ALL STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS REQUEST, AND ON ADDITIONAL MATERIAL, � ARE TRUE. � � cv$ !48"L ture f pplicant Date NarB I z Si ature of Applicant Date