The URL can be used to link to this page

07-27-81 PC Agenda : f s GOLDEN VALLEY PLANP�ING COMMISSION � JULY 27, 1981 (Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road) 7:30 P.M. AGENDA I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 13, 1981 II . (NFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING APPLICANT: D.P. Blomquist LOCATION: 1710 Douglas Drive � REQUEST: Change Zoning from Business and Professional Office to Light Industrial III . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARiNG - REZONING APPLICANT: J.P. Poole, Minnesota Communications Corp. � LOCATION: 4680 Olson Memorial Highway REQUEST; Change Zoning from Industrial to Radio Zone District IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICANT: Independent School District #270 (Hopkins) LOCATION: 5400 Glenwood Avenue REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat of "Meadowbrook School Addition" � .• � AGENDA (con't) V. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICANT: Dimitrios � Beverly Kottas LQCATION: 1031 Pennsylvania Avenue North REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat of "Kottas Addition" VI . DISCUSSION ON THE ROLE AND CHARGE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION VII . REPORT .ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS - JULY 7, 1981 � JULY 21 , 19a1 � VIII . REPORT ON HRA MEETING - JULY 14, 1981 IX. REPORT ON SOUTH WIRTH PARKWAY PROJECT X. UPDATE ON PROGRESS OF VALLEY SQUARE COMMISSION • • Minutes of the Golden Valley � Planning Commission July 13, 1981 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:35 p•m• Those present were Commissioners: Eastes, Forster, Leppik, Singer and Thompson. Commissioners Moede and Polachek were not present at the beginning of the meeting. Also present were Michael Miller, Director of Ptanning and Redevelopment, and Alda Peikert , Assistant Planner. I . Approval of Minutes - June 22, 1g81 It was moved by Eastes and seconded by Leppik to approve the minutes of the June 22, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Singer questioned Chairman Thompson regarding his offer to send a letter to the Mayor expressing Planning Commission concern that Planning Commissioners be covered by liability insurance. Chairman Thompson informed the Commission that he had discussed this concern with the Mayor and would be following up their discussion with a written communication. The Planning Commission °unanimously approved the � minutes of the June 22, 1981 meeting. II . Set Date for Informal Public Hearinq - Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Independent School District #270 - Hopkins LOCATION: 5400 Glenwood Avenue REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat ofi "Meadowbrook School Addition" Chairman Thompson introduced this item and noted that Planning and Redevelopment Director Michael Miller recommended setting a hearing date of either July 27 or August 10, 1g81 . Commissioner Moede arrived at the meeting. At the request of Chairman Thompson, Mr. Miller reviewed agenda items expected for the July 27, 1981 meeting and concluded that there was no reason the hearing could not be set, for July 27, 19II1 . It was moved by Leppik, seconded by Singer and carried unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of July 27, 1981 to consider the preliminary plat of "Meadowbrook School Addition." • Page 2 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 13, 1981 ' • II1 . Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning APPLICANT: City of Golden Valley LOCATION: 9211 Plymouth Avenue REQUEST: Rezone Property from Industrial to Light Industrial Chairman Thompson introduced this item and opened the meeting to questions from Commissioners. Commissioner Forster offered the opinion that rezoning of this parcel from Industrial to Light Industrial would be an unnecessary gesture, as the property is already bordered by Industrial on several sides. Commissioner Eastes voiced agreement with Commissioner Forster's comment. Commissioner Polachek arrived at the meeting. Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item, and Chairman Thompson closed the public . _ hearing. It was moved by Singer, seconded by Leppik, and carried to advise the City Council that the Planning Commission concurs with the Council initiated rezoning of� 9211 Plymouth Avenue from Industrial to Light Industrial . Commissioners Forster and Eastes opposed the motion. � _IV. Informal Public Hearing - PUD 30-B Concept Plan Approval APPLICANT: Bor-Son Building Corporation LOCATIOPJ: Hitlsboro Avenue and Mendelssohn Avenue North REQUEST: Concept Plan Approval for Partially Subsidized Townhouse Develop�ent Chairman Thompson introduced this item and opened the meeting to Commissioner questions of staff. At the request of the Commission, Chairman Thompson called on Planning and Redevelopment Director Michael Miller to explain the proposal and present the staff recommendation. Mr. Milter reviewed the proposed plan � and answered questions from Commissioners concerning the drainage plan, inclusion of the ponding area in density calculations, HUD financing commitments, and status of negotiations for purchase of the eastern parcel referred to as the Galant property. Mr. Miller explained that the entire acreage, including ponding areas, should properly be included in PUD density calculations. Concerning financing, Mr. Miller reported that it was his understanding that the proponent has secured a commitment of HUD Section 8 rental subsidies for the subsidized portion of the project and has applied for HUD Section 234 mortgage insurance for the market rate housing portion of the project. Concerning the property acquisition negotiations, Mr. Miller reported that he understood that the proponent had made an offer on the Galant property and that negotiations are • in progress, but that he had no knowledge of conclusion of a purchase agreement or earnest money contract. Pa ge 3 Minutes of the Golden Vatley Planning Commission July 13, 1981 • Chairman Thompson then called on the proponent, represented by Mr. Donald Jacobson, Director of Development, Bor-Son Construction Companies. Mr. Jacobson began by introducing other representatives involved tn the project, who accompanied him at the rr�eting to assist in answering questions: Lynn Burton, Northland Mortgage Company Bill Hennemuth, Architect, Rieke Carroll Muller Betty Kaelke, Development Manager, Bor-Son Construction Companies Ms. Lynn Burton answered questions from the Commissioners concerning the HUD Section 234 and Section 8 programs which the proponent proposes to utilize in financing this project. At the request of Commissioner Moede, Mr. Jacobson reviewed his letter included in the staff report which outlined adjustments to the plan made in response to concerns expressed at two meetings held with neighboring homeowners. In response - to Kings Valley resident concern regarding drainage, Mr. Jacobson informed the Commission that he could not say that existing drainage problems in Kings Vatley will be solved by the drainage improvements planned in connection with the proposed project, but that the Kings Valley residents will have better insurance against drainage problems as a result of construction of the two drainage ponds proposed as part of the project than they would have without any improvement to the property. • In response to questions from Commissioner Eastes and Chairman Thompson regarding a Homeowners Association for owner occupied units and a management plan for rental units, Ms. Betty Kaelke outlined the proposed management plan, explaining that the rental project will be managed by the management component of their company, Realty Management Services, and that both management and fair marketing plans must be submitted for both MNFA and HUD approvals. At the request of Commissioner Moede that City requirements for a management plan be communicated to the proponent, Chairman Thompson called on Mr. Miller, who explained the role of the City Human Rights Commission in review and enforcement of the management plan. Chairman Thompson asked Mr. Jacobson to outline for the Commission, in as much detail as possible at the concept stage of development, the financial assistance the proponent will request of the City in order to make the project financially feasible. Mr. Jacobson answered that atthough he did not have detailed financial information available at the concept stage, he was willing to review what his company was thinking about in terms of City financial commitments. Mr. Jacobson explained that the objective of the project is to provide low .and moderate income rental housing and starter homes for owner occupancy. The proponent wishes to cooperate with the City in providing quality housing, and the strategy for arriving at financial requirements is to first start with the quality desired and then work backward to the financing required to provide that quality. Mr. Jacobson said that in order to provide the functional ponding, landscaping and ott�er quality amenities desired by both the proponent and the City, he thinks the City should authorize both tax increment financing and expenditure of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. Mr. Jacobson did not as yet have figures for the amounts of funding that might be required from each of these • two sources, but he felt that it would be necessary to involve both programs .• Page 4 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission �uty �3, �9a� • in the project in order to provide the City with the desired assurance of quality. Mr. Jacobson described an elderly housing project which his company constructed in New Hope, where the City provided financial subsidies in a similar manner in order to provide for the inclusion of amenities desired. Mr. Jacobson did not as yet have a cost estimate for the ponding to be constructed as part of the project, but he informed the Commission that the value of private utilities already installed on the Galant property, which must be acquired for the development , was estimated at $68,000. Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing at 8:40 p.m. Chairman Thompson recognized Mr. Bruce Duffy and Mr. Steven Wells, spokesmen for the Kings Valtey Homeowners Association. Mr. Steve Wells, 2228 Kings Valley Road East, stated that in the excitement over combination of the previous PUD site with the Galant property and over the meeting on the revised proposal between the Kings Valley Homeowners Association and the developer, people had lost sight of points agreed upon by the homeowners,. - Planning Commission and City Council at the time the previous proposal was under consideration. These points included avoidance of concentration in one area of the subsidized housing units, a reduction in density, prohibition of apartment type units, and connection of storm drainage to the City storm sewer system. Mr. Wells concluded that very little had been accomplished in terms of achieving these goals previously agreed upon by City officials and the Kings Valley residents. � Mr. Bruce Duffy, 2304 English Circle, Kings Valley, presented Kings Valley Homeowners Association concerns including loss of wildtife habitat, proximity of proposed ponding levels to elevations of Kings Valley residences, inadequate parking space, and assurance of sanitary sewer system capacity to handle additional flows, After Mr. Duffy answered questions from the Commissioners regarding ponding and wildtife concerns, Chairman Thompson called on Mr. Miller to address these two issues. Mr. Miller informed the Commission that the larger of the two proposed ponds was approved with the Galant townhouse development but was never completed by the developer, and that both ponds would have outlets ultimately entering a City storm sewer interceptor. Concerning wildlife on the site, Mr. Miller stated that wildlife habitat will necessarily be altered by any development on the site, and that while it will not be destroyed in its entirety, change must be expected in an urban environment. Commissioner Moede asked Mr. Miller whether an Environmental Assessment would be required due to the change in ponding. Mr. Milter stated that environmental review requirements apply to natural wetlands but not to man made water bodies such as in this case. Joanne Levine, 2203 Kings Valley Road, asked how much the southwest entrance had been moved in relation to the property line and whether existing trees could be preserved. Mr. Hennemuth, architect for the project, stated that the entrance had been moved from 5 feet from the property line to 35 feet from the property • Page 5 Minutes of the Golden Valley Ptanning Commission July 13, 19$1 a • line and that the landscape plan called for an upgrading of the trees in the area. Ms. Levine expressed concern regarding additional traffic on Mendelssohn and inadequacy of parking space. Lynn Baudhuin, 2136 Tamarin Trail , Kings Vatley, expressed concern that the subsidized portion of the project might be constructed without completion of the market rate housing in the event that financing of the market rate portion of the project proves infeasible. Chairman Thompson assured the residents that approval of the project would be valid only for the development as a whole and that the developer could not proceed with only a portion of the development. David Baudhuin, 2136 Tamarin Trail , Kings Vatley, expressed concern over density, effects on neighboring property values, and parking provisions. Dennis Rock, 2404 Hilisboro, Galant Townhouses, stated that he was speaking for himself only and expressed concerns regarding loss of wildlife, inadequacy of parking, increased traffic, and reported problems experienced by a relative who lived next to a subsidized housing project. , Beverlee Lutz, 2318 English Circle, Kings Valley, stated that she had chosen to move from en apartrr�nt to Kings Valley for the home environment and did not wish to live next to rental property. Ms. Lutz asked rental and price ranges of the rental and ownership units. Chairman Thompson informed the residents that details of unit rentals and costs are not avaitable at the concept stage of planning, but that the developer had indicated the price range of the ownership units would be � $55,000 to $70,000. Mr. Jacobson said that the rental figure used for application purposes was approximately $440 to $450 per month for a two bedroom unit. Grace Grady, 2109 Tamarin Trail , Kings Valley, stated that she would like to raise the issue of quality and asked about income limitations for ownership of the Section 234 housing units. Ms. Burton, fi.nancial adviser on the project, explained that Section 234 is a mortgage insurance program which does not involve income limitations on buyers of the housing units. Bob Pearson, 2402 Hillsboro Avenue North, Galant Townhouses, expressed concerns regarding density, parking and traffic. Mr. Pearson, as a handicapped person, pointed out the special problems which increased traffic presents for disabled persons. Patty Ostrov, 2213 Kings Valley Road East, questioned a statement made by Mr. Miller in his presentation of the proposal to the effect that the proposed plan rectified traffic speeding problems. Mr. Miller clarified his statement that the intertor street system had been adjusted to discourage speeding. Ms. Ostrov further stated that she did not feel that loss of wildlife was necessary or inevitable. Joy Reis, 2113 Kings Valley Road, asked whether a traffic study had been done for Mendelssohn Avenue North and stated that waiting tirr�s at stop signs during peak traffic hours are already prohibitive. Mr. Miller explained that Hennepin • County would be responsible for installation of signal lights at Mendelssohn and Medicine Lake Road and that the County approves signals based on a traffic � Page 6 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 13, 1981 ° • count formula. Ms. Reis asked whether the proposed plan still includes a berm on the curve along Mendelssohn and expressed concern that the berm might obstruct visibility of children playing and possibly running out into the street. Mr. Miller stated that a berm is shown in this location on the plan and that a sidewalk is also indicated but would not be constructed by the City. Mr. Jacobson stated that Bor-Son Construction Companies intend to install the sidewalk but may ask the .City for assistance as necessary. . LeRoy Altermatt, 2222 Kings Valley Road East, suggested use of four way stop . signs at congested intersections, and Mr. Miller confirmed that installation of four way stop signs would be a City decision where City streets are involved. Mr. Altermatt questioned how this proposal could include extensive ponding work when Kings Valley residents had experienced difficulty tn obtaining permission for dredging. Chairman Thompson repeated that the proposed large pond on the eastern portion of the site was previously approved as part of the the Galant development. Mr. Altermatt concluded with a reference to apparent uncertainty as to whether financing will be available to install the sidewalk shown on the plan and questioned whether other features of the proposed plan were dependent on availability of financing. ' Steve �Jells, one of the spokesmen for the Kings Valley Homeowners Association, was recognized a second time to make concluding remarks and asked the same question as Mr. Altermatt, whether amenities included in the approved plan could be eliminated due to funding limitations. Chairman Thompson assured residents that the developer � would be required to carry out the plan as approved by the City Council , and that the City of Golden Valley is not in the business of financing development and the developer may not come back to the City for funding. Ben-Zion Goldstein, 2124 Tamarin Trail , Kings Vatley, questioned the density of the subsidized portion of the development viewed separately, and Chairman Thompson informed Mr. Goldstein that the Cor�nission was required to consider density based on the whole development. Chairman Thompson closed the informal public hearing at 9�50 p.m. and turned the meeting over to discussion by the Commissioners. At the request of Commissioner Moede, Chairman Thompson explained for the public subsequent procedural steps for City approval of the PUD concept plan and general plan of development. Mr. Miller added an explanation of the PUD permit which constitutes a contract between the City and the developer assuring development in accordance with conditions of the PUD approval . Concerns expressed by Commissioners during the following discussion included the proponent's requests for both tax increment financing and CDBG funding, lack of traffic projections, project density considering the buildable land area exclusive of ponding, and failure to integrate subsidized and market rate housing units. In response to a concern over segregation of the subsidized housing units from the market rate units expressed by Commissioner Eastes, Mr. Jacobson explained • that integration of the units would create management and maintenance problems, due to the fact that the owner oecupied units would be maintained through a horr�owners association white the rental units would be under separate management. Page 7 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 13, 1g81 ' • Commissioner Singer asked whether it would be possible to move the subsidized housing units to the northern portion of the site away from the Kings Valley development. Mr. Jacobson replied that the east and west arrangement of the two types of housing was the result of balancing numerous overall design consider- ations and constraints, including ponding requirements, natural buffers and access points. Commissioner Forster asked how much a denial of tax increment financing would escalate the cost of the market rate housing units. Mr. Jacobson estimated that without tax increment financing, the price per dwelting unit on the ownership side of the project would increase approximately $5,000. Commissioner Moede requested information on persons who would quatify for purchase of the market rate units, and Mr. Jacobson expressed willingness to obtain and provide that information. Commissioner Leppik requested clarification of the division between the managements of the two housing types and asked whether the homeowners association would be able _ to contract for services from the rental managers. Mr. Jacobson replied that it would be left up to the homeowners to initiate such an arrangement. Commissioner Moede stated that she recognized the need for housing, both subsidized and market rate, in Golden Valley but had a number of concerns and unanswered questions concerning this proposal and would feel more comfortable acting on � the proposal after obtaining additional information. Commissioner Moede r�ved to continue discussion and defer action until the next meeting. There was no second to the motion. Commissioner Forster stated that he liked the concept, that it was the best proposal he had seen for the site, and that he would like to recommend City Council approval with a recommendation that the Council not consider tax increment financing. Chairman Thompson stated that the primary concern of the Planning Commission at the concept stage should be whether the development would be a valuable addition to the City. It was moved by Forster and seconded by Eastes to recommend City Council approval of the concept plan for PUD 30-B. Commissioner Polachek proposed an amendment to the motion specifying that the concept plan include the following features, the first five of which are listed in a letter from the proponent included in the staff report and all of which are shown on the revised concept plan under consideration: 1 . Reduction of the number of units from 70 to 64. 2. Construction of two on-site storm water retention ponds with a combined storage capacity of 15.7 acre feet. 3. Adjustment of the southwest vehicle entrance 45 feet to the north and provision of a landscaped buffer along the south boundary of the Gunderson property. • Page 8 Minutes of the Golden V.alley Planning Commission Ju1y 13, 1g81 � . • 4. Retention in a natural form of the wildlife and lowland area at the south portion of the Galant property with relocation to the north of the walkway to the park. 5. Adjustment of the garage locations for the one bedroom ownership units away fram the existing Galant townhouses. 6. Construction of a sidewalk on the north and west boundaries of the site along Mendelssohn between the two access points. 7. A parking ratio of two spaces for each unit with an additional 19 visitor parking spaces. The amendment was accepted. Commissioner Moede proposed a second amendment to the motion specifying that the proponent continue to meet with the neighboring homeowners and present to them future plans for PUD 30-B. Mr. Jacobson stated that he would welcome the opportunity to share future plans with the neighboring homeowners. The amendment was accepted. , The Ptanning Commission unanimously approved the amended motion to recommend approval of the PUD 30-B concept plan. V. Report on City Council Meetinq - July 7, 1981 . Chairman Thompson represented the Planning Commission at the July 7, 1981 City Council meeting and reported that the Council requested staff to attend future Council meeti�gs to answer questions concerning recommended revisions to the Industrial , Railroad and Radio sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Thompson deferred a complete report on the July 7, 1981 Council meetino until the next Planning Commission meeting. VI . Discussion of the Role and Char�e of the Planni;a�Com�ission Chairman Thompson deferred this item until a future meeting. VII . Set flate for Informal Public Hearin� - Preliminary Ptat APPLICANT: Dimitrios Kottas LOCATION: 1031 Pennsylvania Avenue PJorth REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat of "Kottas Addition" Chairman Thompson introduced this item and noted that Planning and Redevelopment Director Michael Miller recommended a July 27, 1981 hearing date. At the request of Chairman Thompson, Mr. Miller reviewed the other hearings scheduled for July 27, 1981 and explained the proposed preliminary plat under consideration. It was moved by Forster, seconded by Moede and carried unanimously to set an � informal public hearing date of July 27, 1981 to consider the preliminary plat of "Kottas Addition." Page 9 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission Ju1y 13, 19�1 ' , • The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfutly submitted, David Thompson, Chairman Mona Moede, Secretary • • • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR REZONING - 1710 DOUGLAS DRIVE NORTH - D.P. BLOMQUIST The pr-oponent, owner of an existing building located at 1710 Douglas Drive North, requests rezoning of the site from the Business and Professional Offices Zoning District to the Light Industrial Zoning District to atlow lease of the building as a film processing laboratory and as office with storage warehouse space. The lot is an irregular parcel approximately one acre in size with Z00 feet of frontage on Douglas Drive. The building is two story with approximately 5500 square feet of floor space on the main floor and an additional 3500 square feet on the upper level for a total of g000 square feet. Parking • space includes approximately six parking spaces in front of the building and 24 spaces in a separate parking lot toward the north of the site for a total of 30 parking spaces. A loading dock is located at the rear of the building with a trinagular maneuvering space inadequate to accommodate futl sized trucks. The bituminous surfacing of both the parking lot and the truck loading area is in poor repair. � The current zoning of the property is Business and Professional Offices, but past use of the building has been as a food testing laboratory under an agreement constituting a temporary use variance granted by the City Council in 1977. The agreement, signed by Swanson and Associates and the City of Golden Valley, granted Swanson a variance from Section 10.02 of the City Zoning Ordinance, which specifies the purpose and permitted uses for the Business and Professional Office Zoning District, for a period of three years to expire on January 1 , 1g.80, with the additional provision that the City could terminate the agreement at any time with g0 days notice to Swanson. The agreement has expired, Swanson has vacated the premises, and the property is now available for lease or rental to another party. The proponent seeks a rezoning to Light Industrial in order to lease to a business able to make use of the research laboratory facilities in the building. Information provided by the proponent on intended use of the building is in- complete. The application form indicates proposed use of the property as "Film Processing Laboratory and/or Office Storage Warehouse." Staff under- stands from conversations with the proponent and his realtor that the proponent contemplates leasing the upper level of the building to a film processor and the lower level for off.ices combined with warehouse space. The floor plans submitted with the application reflect not proposed use, but layout of the previous use by Swanson and Associates. On the plans for the previous use, approximately 3500 square feet of the 5500 square foot first floor is laboratory, • Planning Commiss�on -2- July 22, 1981 • and the remaining 2000 square feet is office, conference room and lobby area. Approximately half of the 3500 square foot upper level is laboratory, while the other half is office, conference room and lobby area. Parking requirements for the Light Industrial Zoning District are based on the ratio of o�fice space to warehouse and manufacturing space, so it is not possible to deterine parking adequacy without floor plans for the proposed use. Under provisions of the current Light Industrial section of the Zoning Ordinance, parking space calculations are dependent on number of employees as well as floor space, so a figure for number of employees would also be required before parking requirerr�nts could be determined. Under the proposed revised Light Industrial Ordinance, parking requirerr�nts would be one space per 250 square feet of office area and one space per 500 square feet of manu- facturing or warehouse use space. If the ratio of office to manufacturing, processing or warehousing remains the same as shown on plans of the previous use, parking space would be adequate under the proposed revised Light Industrial section of the Zoning Ordinance. The building has the one loading berth required in both the current and proposed ord.inances. The limited maneu- • vering area, however, would restrict truak size. Properties immediately adjacent to the subject property are zoned the same Business and Professional Offices Zoning District or residential . Zoning to the north of the site to St. Croix Avenue is Business and Professional • Offices, with the adjacent parcel to the north occupied by Ames Management Companies. The adjacent parcel tothe�.northeast is zoned Multiple Dwelling and is occupied by an apartment house. The property to the east and south of the site is zoned single family residential . There is a single family residence on a large lot to the south. East of the site directly behind the loading dock is the back of a narrow single family lot fronting on St. Croix, beyond which are the back yards of single family residences fronting on West Constance Drive. Directly across Douglas Drive from the site is a City owned ponding area, and to the northwest of the City property is the Honeywell plant zoned Industrial . Setbacks from property lines to the existing building are approximately 120 feet from the Business and Professional Offices property to the north, only about 15 feet at the closest point from the Multiple Family site to the north- west, approximately 75 feet from single family residential development to the east and approximately 60 feet from single family residential development to the south. Light Industrial zoning requires 100 foot side and rear yard set- backs from single family residential and 50 foot setbacks from Multiple Dwelling and Business and Professional Offices. Under the current Business and Pro- fessional Offices zoning, required setbacks are 50 feet from single family residential , 30 feet from Multiple Dwelling and 20 feet from Business and Professional Offices. The setbacks are adequate for the current Business and Professional Offices zoning use except for proximity of one corner of the building to an irregular diagonal property line of the Multiple Dwelling site. Under the requested Light Industrial zoning, setbacks from single family • residential to the east and south would also be insufficient. Planning Commissi`on -3- � July 22, 1981 • Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request for rezoning of 1710 Douglas Drive North based on incompatibility with sur- rounding zoning and land uses. Staff feels that due to proximity to single family residences to the east, as well as to the office building and apartme�t house to the north, the most desirable use of this property is the office use for which it is currently zoned. Any adjustments made to the building facilities to accommodate the previous research laboratory use were made based on written agreement that the use was temporary and allowable for one . specific company operation only. A rezoning to Light Industrial would make the property available in the future for any of the manufacturing, packaging, processing or warehousing uses permitted in the Light Industrial Zoning District. The existing loading dock at the rear of the building is at a higher elevation than the residential land to the east and is clearly visible from residences and back yards. Truck traffic associated with manufacturing or warehouse use could be the source of disturbance to adjacent residential properties in terms of noise generation as well as unsightliness. Staff suggests that the range of �ffice uses permitted by current zoning offers sufficient suitable options for use of the property. � • Attachments: 1 . Site Location Map 2. Sketch of Site 3. Floor Plans • , y • i �1 1 L �I •°I� �v � -� � SITE LOCATION MAP o � � 7 = 1710 DOUGLAS DRI VE NORTH —, __—__ .--_ '. I gea I I I� U ^ _Q o • ry a �v' d�:5:j? LC .o -" c, Vf n A � h e w .. m ; , . 4y. �Z J � ,�. o,� i - - ^�� r`.t`�� -�� "�g � `F�9,J DOOV h � �' 4 9. V •',ti• 'oo }:+5�- h � � - - �?�o�� P Q `� �J?�� o � � h` .. , yc^ -,�'f c d=;;4�4C" C°105162C _..:'. � ..� 3 p pz R�i5.64 ,r; w U t � ��-rr, � �G+�� T- -------�. 9•:5'.1'. ..6'p� ,.°2883�� 6pe°c c�; �-... •93� K>S89°io'ob°E 6/35 - - - "' " � ,�� Cop�o l•.�r.�1)4:4b3 � , ,Nb�:�o n a f,�iSia �19 � �cno �` ^ ,A(� �� 5f.5 � L=):5 � ,r..: : i; . q 1°C°3o � 3°n'a9 3 . 6,.a;aon • i`'��I 6033-35 07 9 -_ P � , . s< <- r � � �s R q�p� �Z»,,x. �: e�1 F�� 5 i M�. 9 � � O F' • S . � � L 4 - 3 � � � @R ` � .... i33 0. • , Q _ � � 9 CO � � �v Q`S ��1 �..__; � .. � V�T � � I M II � _ ; ,' <, P � �„� s Z ^ . ,�' �_ . . fc� .0 � � ' r .�y ' J�O /54�..7� �k �.3��.� g � a` •o Y. � a: � � � M �� R .4FIRST ° z• � ; � �•I �.i ' 3 15f.38 �,. 3 _�Y.39 -2 b04 , (n M:; � ' ' � t 1 j � �� 0 F.,. 3 �� , 8 R I� Y� � _ � a � .� � � a � "' � �.� 6030� � � � o� i m 134.;8 ivo 1�ti 'y =� e ° .�', `- ,PULUTHI:r'�'C E.'-. " pt•� i � ' ,� =r � .;o v' s e o=� o � L_A.� � H�. - T � � � O � 8<51 �uo ,�o °5.45 '-•c . . _ �I , �: : � � C a. � � � � .�,� as ' {� � ,, � ��, _ .� 0 . � =�;s�� , �� '` _` � ° 2 G�0UR1T.4 ° Q" . - �" K� J� � n � i'- �i�5 a? tCO :0 3 f:5 4'� 5; � ,a i. � �.. `\ e. � .v ' b JJ . ,� i?. - — � ti ,�� 9`�u`Vq �s . -, � M '� E f� 4 �J � � `% 3 �ti� • A �� 9 _ �•"ST.� 3 �'�CR IX - • �►.• � ,-0�� • , �� ~ 2 , ��'Sn 602^� I 6:c7��• f,=.,1� o�'' .__ � W � �,•. v _ . l l..�m /J9 iu9 :i� S3 \ ._l,.` � '`` � 'p" , �WOLFBERRY � Sy� v �Paj4; ; � 3 � � o�f a. � � n � ,�i � �� O Ez�t-�d 5, ,5 � 83.u4 ,_ �� a 6i-, �I s �..0055 N; 601f. �. ��•.�. a •.�9 �w � � � . - -- � � S, �, t� ,; ,� �.;: � 2 �;� 3 .,�,, ,` - T i � �n -, ,, � fJ� .s 2 J i�' s �� 5� ? � � -t 6953 r- �. � � •n . �� i '.: ;58:'S$'�.:.i '4i3 ,� d ..4;Z>�ya>; � � �� , I tto ''' � 22� .�: ,�.�:�. 5o N M •' 2°02 ..�5'.-' -- --- g � d c _ i�:,.�.. �6 j�� ST CROIZ GRO�'E �' N GROVE `� , � 130 03 ;�„'. ' � Z - ,,,, - « a a a� -" 'i,�' �'� �S°'�d w� �_ m ' �' ��d>� f �n ° 2 �o � °Q \ga' 3 I�.'_42 � 144.�i - r,d� .v ° �,� `:;, SEC�ND ADD ,00 � r.n _...�i_ � � o N : O /Z 9'4J� �� `'` O�✓ bbd, w. �� o� � • � �, ; � �, � • °��o' �y��..� � YARNALL S GC - --- Z �+ � 01 � . 3 W �_ � �°°i 5 4 3 2 � � ,. i . h v� v_, "� c;° e_ - —,�seb � r, � ��° 6�3�/�4LLEY QUTL� � � L . i : `' .r; • y "^ � ' R � � �' �� C.i 4 'a0 '..b 1 YJ6,�zq, t`�L�J. �Ie � � � ,- ioC6 5�,;_ � ` � %c ."- W • �-�-. 6 'ti� � ,a 59�; _ � N � �Y~ _.� t18 28 So, °��CDl 303 p �bq� Cp� R C� �; o �� I� 5 •°o `'?' . e. . " � � � s. �� Q ;? -° �� &J43, � 33 �:, e b,'��o • i2' ' ` H- '°o-= °S � - —- -- --- - ,•� � ' � 18, ira.3;2a2 3i : � 0 205.55 205 55 `�•04 n��, �9 �� I � ♦ a 6 •�� O • I o� _ 9 � 0 7�Q` � � �' � CJ " C� �8� ' (�0 �� o� �43�25 � � • � J�� _i83 3 ___ -- - - _ o � ° � � 0 2 0 .�IK F Q ,•�a .� '� 5p 5� 0 7 �o ��. � • oJ 8 • o � . ry ny 2n � � - � 53__ l56 j5 � � /�8s iM -' �� ,4..3 � ---C---__ �v o -�_ � 0 • • v - - � � .. 8 • �-�� $• 3 0°; ' 7' ILQ ° • �, -_ wv • <•N, �, °o i Z� WV 125 9_.-r�30_95 �G � ,�, Z? ( °� ~ � � ° � � '` � °O� '�� 5 � A �o �ia • 4 M� � ��; � � II o� � � °� 9 � �D I�'T61� ,� '6 `�� 8°°� �f • 28 \ � pD6 90 1' F4�' 'y h� �`,�o `4s�� (��0� b,�-,r / �� _? = �°v 5 �_� Q �:�.,/ 1� � ,-, „ _ I T ,T':,a• , �" �•. . �' ; - .� ' ' • ..�� L`. . :'� C. F .. � �_ •;. ,�� ~: . i � .. .J .� •� '.Y�. ,ti"' � y _�'�l,x ...i i.�• . a ' � i -�� I: 'Ys ' .. . . � . � - •� '� • S�, .�, �'�' .. :r� , , • � . � .�� +. �'. '+�F.. �''°�:i''� . _ . . �. • . `� - !-- i , � v . _.. . . ' . . . . . �v� r�. ` , :4y '1 f �� ; y ' . Q � � �, , - . � �.,� P� . . ,." ' i i° '--., � ,.' .,,� F �+ . � S� �i;� �C ` , ��) ,� v - ��-�---�--------------�.�..--- - ------ � _ _.------- ------------- --� . ' � i ` � , �------ o _---__.____...�� . . � Z • .. .. ' n ' ~ .� i L . -�;. . , ; . � •Si . — ...,..._- .��. _ar._ ..,.. � , ' . . � � � � �'i — ,�., .: , � ��4�:' r ! 1�'7° -."N!,Y�+�:;� . . �' � -- . ; - < <.' ''i y� �.. �a � �' " R � ��. .sn oN ,; y� i;l�y . ; ; . � . . � � � � � � � � . � ' � ' - � I � , , . . • . b I I s , n ? ' J � , . • . L . •� ' 't. y � : ' . � i n v e . I `1� . . . � , A. _ ' i � � _a, � n - � J � I � � "'! `T }. C: �n ,� . � , � � .� , •� 0 3 � Vil �"� � �_"�_-- . . �� . . M , �� .�:+i � ------- , x��• � -� �� ' `� Q yo sn a �y ► tivnl� � ' , ! . , ! . "Y . � � � _ ' .... . . - ` ` • . � M , .r . o � �.. . . �. .. �� ` .. � , �` � \ , � • ' \� . ' t .. • .. i . ( . . � . ' � . ~. . �. ' , . ' � I 1 � � �� . . ; . , .� -- ��•�.- �f�.� . .. ..� . .. .. ..�_ � ':b 1 • __�� j� . .... ._..-_ . _.. . � --------�----------�I � I --�— � • • y `• r '�j ' ' � � � 1 � � r� A � ► � `: .� . � ,1 � y. � � � i r K 'a �� '�1 1 � W �C k h � � �, � � r� *� � � � � . �c G;; � . � �: -- J ti ^�,�`,�. a-� u de � �'� � * ' � '4- � �� {: j � ^:.b� M � � ` �� \ � � I a �� -�c . y,\' `, r, f ( --------- ---�--'— �, ' � N t ry O �'` �� 4 i N ' � � � 1 � ' T � � ' I � .� � � � � � -r � ' • � � �� , I � ; � � � � � �e � ti�', , , � ; , i , � � I I . ; , � \ fi �^ w � - � � . � • u � t� . + 4 . � � Y ..q~ � � � ` � =• b O �= O . t' M � � v � _ � -,. .."''�_� • � • a ` '` � t � j " !'•� � . .•+� � �r ♦ �+ � � ; � I i �c v � �c{ � ! �` — I .,�L- � �� ! � 'Z . � � - ;. 1. •Y� sin � ��.q ��►.�` -- `� t. • � - '�� F + o'r R'0 1. �X �� •. X J . ��tr, F e I . . i,. .s o '�`� a�'a o � __ ° � � . ,� � 7.: ,y .Y:__ i. `C� � . ' �. � - _1_ . a . � _ . . `• / _• ��- � � t � � '� � �,• : . � - : � ^ G j � � .. I v v . �' � � � �, ,�+� _� �1� — —— 41 i ° ; '� a � I ' � � �� 3° . : I � � � o � 1 F V ! � 0 4 I ; u � �\ , u � ' � i ' ; \ - o j . � � I � ,� e . �N u ., . : � ti � � � � � f 1 0 ' ° 'l , � a � 1 ' ' � � � ' � � • w I � i , �� l� � � � __. • 9: . �r._ �. . � _ = � '' � � ; �� ; , � �- � i i � � � , ~\ � ' � t ; � j' , i c, i • ( 1� .� .» i. I I ,� ' ` , ' t 4 � ` • I I �`\ . . j y =�: x� ^ � r ,_. .. . ; � . � � , :� . :. { • �, . r � �` � _.. . + ' y `•^ • 1 � � � , i - � i �� , ! •` , � i . � .,; ; + �� ' `� ^ .. , � � � * 1 � 1 1 \. \\ � S � I ,' • ��? �" `. Q r^ ' q i ^ '. •+ nt �. i � ` } r � I 0..c j —_� 1� � T .� -�o^ � � � � �� .c . � - . y� o j � � �c, � C . ♦ , ' � � . � � r � � � . � / I . � �� i Ix � �c � ` � ' r � � Y I • � � � ,` •!'T` F ! �.; L � � { V� ` � � :q � � � u m �' . , ' u.�i I �—? i I L-� � t J_., t �----� j � � �� `i �C'� . . � . � � ` ��' ! ..: , � , !- i � � � d • I C I , y � ` 1 � 1 I _ �y � ♦ ! � F e' � I ° . �i • � � W �� i--,,� '� , _-► � I �� ------ � . � �� ( ( � �,o . r� �l . � I ,.J.` � ! � c� � � • � � c 1 ,. � , I'. � � � � J . � e ;i �r`� 11 �; '.J _� `� �u� J I LL �. i � � o i y � Q � I , .� � ��, � � i ; `.\ � Q � i+ 11 � 11 ; �� . �� , .:: . ; � j ------ � T0: GOLDEN UALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR REZONING - 4680 OLSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY - MINNESOTA, COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION The Planning Commission on June 8, 1981 unanimously recommended approval of a request from Minnesota Cort�nunications Corporation for waiver of the platting ordinance to permit division of an Industrial lot located at 4680 Olson Mert�rial Highway (Highway 55) . Minnesota Communications Corporation proposed to use the new parcel , located to the rear of the existing lot and accessible from Highway 55 by a proposed 25 foot easement on the west side of the front parcel , for construction of a radio communications tower and unmanned equipment building. The Planning Commission recommendation of approval was conditional upon rezoning of the proposed rear parcel from the Industrial • to the Radio Zoning District. The City Council on June 16, 1g81 approved the waiver of the platting ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission subject to the proponent's obtaining rezoning of the proposed radio tower site to the Radio Zoning . District. The proponent, Mr. Jean A. Poole, of Minnesota Communications Corporation, now requests rezoning of the rear parcel at 4680 Olson Memorial Highway, as directed by the Planning Commission and City Council in the conditional approval of his request for a waiver of the platting ordinance. Land surrounding the proposed Radio parcel is zoned Industrial and Railroad. The lot to the south fronting on Highway. 55, from which the subject parcel would be divided, is the Tupperware site zoned Industrial . Adjacent property to both the east and west is zoned Industrial . The north boundary o� the property abuts the railroad line and is zoned Railroad District. Staff suggests the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request for rezoning from Industrial to Radio of the proposed radio tower site located at the rear of 4680 Olson Memorial Highway. This recommendation is based on compatibility with surrounding land uses and on suitability of the parcel , accessible only by easement, for unmanned radio installation use exclusively. Attachments: • l . Site Location Map 2. Sketch Plan of Site � _ - et. - �� - E, a —�--- �. ,n—�--_1=_-___ �r o c ' .b . •bf , S I TE LO CATI ON MAP 4680 OLSQN MEMORIAL HIGHWAY bh � 99� _ � . _ � � , � +,"�� . � � 0 oA' o --` ' E`` T � � . •`, �` o ,vy J � _ot'• � ,� 6 �� .�.� °o �� ' ?? P� • � � (� r.�^�_ � ,`�> �•� � oo � �v `�z _➢ ` � •_ N � � � � �h V v r a � �. f � 'o o �Z e� j� �,� � � � .Q _ 1 , �i f „f •s�,'�'f o,o y�h ��. d �� ;;. � � � � . o. s�,� �d° �; 0 ? s Fp . u c, Q �' �",r �' ,,a ,o �r �- ..�� 0 '� �,. Q • ��F O4 . r� �� . '\ � ..r .� ri o ._..� �� ` �a �� s. �J Q �� ta ,� � �� B r � o _. � � J -'a '� C< � p �y � �' c c- • c � v � �`�� C i m ' S: � �+_c\ bp. on e � ��,�ti': y�1' m . 6"`\.v rf,i. .`r •n�!. d' s. i \ o d. -� 't'.r r� �'-� 2 • Z �� N '� � M • • N N O� � � � � C � � �. Q = � V � d n�,� r � � - ._ _'_ '-r+ ` Q '_ "___'___ _�-.-_-_'____ _—_ _.__ F�i � o� v (D ,�`'' ��1 ui ,,,,� -- �M � � .:�.° � V �� i � "a d �ba� m � �• i _ \% sopri � y ___�__-- �� -A _ ..Z f'C2 b y{-c~' 6 p . �"� °�. �, 1 o --(' � o �� e' � ;I � Sif U • J — � � � � p `� I �,o r �,o � ��,E9�p O Q '� . - O (CC�/ � q�Cpo � ►�✓y � v �+. I W �9� 60_� ;I � If� X A`�' p Iz oo: ; 54i � i � _ v 1 � �� N � � ) s� � ` !-- ¢ �p 'v i (/�J[^p 1 � o b oW W � � '� : � � i 111j�. . • ,.0 � {\(i�il':� ''.D N- �Di� �t!� p N .. , 59 12� 2. � � ; �G C �� G w~- - w o° °° `, •�/`d ` � •�- C7 C7 „t � ; �; '`c,�; � ? �,,"dIM1'd3i4 � .. �,��z a c�a.:�c� - '1 4 ; �c:'o9 � ; i �^nr�.l.� � . c W ;� i I`� .� e I i � � ,� N o� j rv = � � N a, ` �� SSb _�� . . o ' �3 p • �w� v;� I`o�. � � �z e �- �j .:,�� I� xr �� r — f� i �� p:, � ii a, '� �' �� ` .. 6 I /�/_ °�°��, N r �° u � O � � � lf1 � 0 7 c 1¢ vi � I-"';..�0 2 "' r- b� B ,3-+ � T �, . .— � N '.Q � ��- o� � �O I � r o j ' <<? 1 � � C. � ( � � ? 1 .'1e;5,Q`Fr'S' p ''� >•v ^' t.. a'}9�e ,y g� v. eC v L :C£i'`�r.'.� �o,tig � ler � 3 y£ ,. ;,'�,fi ��V��S �� . — d9Z _ fs� � '`�.c� �° �Gs �i .�'s 9 , .rn � fs%,-�c � '�cv � ' ,� ;i\` b 1 *j � I � PJORTH ' ��h� /1/orfhPcs� Ca�-. o� Ti-ac� ,C� • � - 147.8s- 0 l•ti 900 Q' 1 e � , � �re�nCed Ra./:n Towr�- 1�l N '�, �G o � � �, / �� °' �s �,� �,� - �� z�� y\ . Ro�,ase E�L :�mart y ��0 �eQ. � �`a t�P'' � � o � 1. P • � � � - � _ � � ` � o _ � �, o � � � � � � � � . � � o � N P � M � M' � N � „ �. 1Y � \ � ao - - - - - - - - � — a � ti ° � � _ N - Z 18.87— f I • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: PRELIMfNARY PLAT OF "MEADOWBROOK SCHOOL ADDITION" BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: independent School District No. 270 (Hopkins) is proposing a single lot plat encompassing 0.785 acres of land with a two-story 8820 square foot office building located on it at 5400 Glenwood Avenue. The Hopkins School District acquired this property atong with the Meadowbrook Schoot when the Golden Valley School District merged with District 270 more than one year ago. The subject property is currently zoned Institutional as is Meadowbrook School . A 100 foot wide strip between the proposed plat and the office building to the east is also zoned Institutional while the office building to the east, adjacent to the intersection of Glenwood Avenue and T.H. 100 is zoned Business and • Professional Office. The southerly side of Glenwood Avenue is zoned residential and has been developed with single family dwellings. Inasmuch as Glenwood Avenue is a County Road, the preliminary plat must be reviewed by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. We have � received no response as of this date from Hennepin County. It is anticipat�d that they will request at least seven (7) feet of right-of-way be dedicated to the County along the northerly side of Glenwood Avenue to allow for future roadway improvements. It has also been pointed out by the School District that they do contemplate subdividing more of this property at a later date (possibly at such time as Meadowbrook School is abandoned) . RECOMMENDATIONS: I would recommend that the Planning Commission defer action on this prelim- inary plat until the following items have been decided: 1 . When it is known that Hennepin County requires right-of-way and how much; and 2. When the proponents can determine whether they intend to donate land for recreation and open space purposes, or donate cash in lieu thereof. . .. . � ��] . - S�ti y- a�ti`� �`° `'• `�''��'��, � ��i q ` 1 ,�v ` a 3� z i t � �L O J _ - '� o.., ��,°`, .�,�� o.�, '�� r o�c 4 n d ,�. _ _ �, �. �R ,., .� : ., � '.. :r " e�� T- !("if f �Ya�� g ' \- . '7 � _'t� •• � i f� + b�b ! T �z] , � �-^�'��l '� • /T''y� b` � ' �~..�5'{`'rl� s � �1�/IM � ��' � /rJ� OODSTOCK AVE. io3� _ � i.:o`.Z�.° ��e � �,e•o '�� `7 s�� 4 ,�• 1 y T E • • . - . me . :e1 � .. �,'_ �-.�1°a��ir-�i.s 1. "� . � .p� � �;� � �(3z)+ ��`' p6�t1..�/�R �s �1 i, � - -�. . 1� 5_- pu e �. R.�, .r �� (7i� � � O�I� �d I��N=L1.:�Y �..' ►�y '°•� g\ .,1��.� c`y��"`d`f�� >;_ ;j� �� i 5N..`J ` � ' ^,stt�.t: �� s`3�� 6' �0� i►,' Y/s � �iiO�Y �°r _ 1 ~'O ��"y\e � �� (L�.'p'��A��D•I��i-- � i . . W15 N.5 �CltS IC. I:'1! �6OJ(��• �1� 2nd t,'i.. S.c � �"�' ,`�tJ.° �� 'J}, � � .N�.fai�� ,,ti ) 4 �i S �� \�� (fwJJ�� __�—_- t '� --+ .��'I .. of � -, p_ �� \ 7 / �' ��:•' a I� � � �141 �'��151 `,bl �Z��!� N 1�9e' �. C �° L�S �r h \r �P1 �L .c sr . . .� s ' �r � 'e�y'r _-f.�ti�' . �1 Sf ��: ��' �s- C _d:,� . •, i ' , '"E. \ � = 11 s " � / � •�••�.rTi_ .- _�'t.r�� lZo> (� �/22 Ja i :6`�.r �'^:`�� "j a c►• c ,: �t; .e:. ' 9 110 �❑ _ �� 9 .. '�/ / �� ': � - o ,`�• �� ' / _ 1 32 I 313 F1�3L� '6-,i S �rt� s� � - >�" . �'3 . v .- Cy �s ��`'`� ~ \ .�s'�~ , �. 4 z��33�; cs �.:�f� 3i�C�— �/ ��' �%" -t., — — -— \S — � ` � � .y�Y �S �[ y � �. '� 'w I:.. J' :` 464' : ` ��JT/ � 'If '�Tl• L i•�: • _�y G� \ 13y� _ ya� � 6 �, - S.. !'ir's. �rZ4) G. �o�� t' �l'�`_,� \\ \ � I I 1C{r�♦ �O � �' //�! 2 P l .. � - '2:' 4r( n ! "� `•J"� � 9�!Y� S f �' �Z�O•r'�y,S, "I�i�1 G � �� ' r :ai..: ..� i � �.. eSi�C•CN( . �r:i \ � 7 _ .r �.?�� 8� � : •'�; 9 w�f! 't:1 :j, � Jq,oi�4G_ Di�C� ALRI�- '�:::.t .� ��. �v""�•' �3F8 � � , '� r' ` �� — � � — — � cr � o �\ r Y_ 1 � 7 - ^°' _ �:x —=�' �`�6- -�e- -_�---• ; � :�, l,e �r/`� � . _ ��' ' • � .:f;•� ti �1 � • C�(�9 ,�J/ � A . ,�n,n',r �� >.`u� ` \ � p�'��°�`�. _7�r ��i u o< - — — — — —? — —{�,. — -- — C: � � •t�f o !p> �O. to6� i S �e A r� �JS��1. '��\ .� l � 1 �� _er•c�e <� r � '�e ki � , c�•, , '1 \ �a PQ�LtM/NARY � 6 1 7032 B .' /`` �:�° PLAT OF � `; , •` , � o - .�M�AOO�tDRdoK . ` i j % , � o � i /, �4�� S G►1 ov L ��D�T�ON (�� a . .i c � �: r / �'' - ------ I �� .p�. �� '` -1 d '�+s. �\0�5 r�'' ' •'� `r �/L � � Q�1 i � � �- ledependa�t Scnoc'. is�tit� No S9 , � ' Av n e i . i 8� � �� rS� `—_o. ''� �3� ' 3� s-` 1 a � ��"'yi sY "�� I I k�11 F i�^�� . °: .1.: r'' ' 1�/• �� O� =� ° _ ti r �= ��5� ' cE-., . .. Q.:.i:� ' � :�y ' --fi i '� , •�,°' +,!� ` '•' �P� aa �. �.++a � i�u Ri�' ` ' � •�: ' 1 1 SJ9.c � � �� 'a¢f 7� �T„ � _ O �,-' , � '• 1 r. ',1 � + iY � .� il j 1•. _ C •� !�!� �l � .r � _ 111+� + ��t�•' ''• - � V i v � �. � 1 ~ t�� t . �,.J Q , ;� ; �,8 1-{ �A�+'� ��Aa. - � . w,- i _- �� 1 �,, �. �H l$J� �� 1�1 . ! o��w0� �y.i �p.... a � �J1 � � � m j � � �'•i� r ��._ Z +,. .!' . . L_ � ave ra,� � �i�{ ; ' � ,•_'- ° �A, 1+y�11; 4. •'� �- 1��J� �:4.. •• {.."'' `. �- G\ ti s �ZL . ,� -.. + �v ' ' 25��"1.._• "�';y e• `•i2(Q� _ °, `` ti "r� �`� '•• �., ;� � •y i �'�. ,n•`�� •\ - ��A,� � . e� • , ; �� _� - �TUR `e , RQ � ti1�,9� 1t�1 � p � '' ,s " ':. 'Z �, � . � ��` �� .° 1 � . .. � ' y -- - � — '� ✓ �1�1, z - _se��+�° 4 � '"� : � . ,._. � - - .1�" ' � - ^�,' � ��. �� , .ru a . ie... _ _ o �? l� 5 �, � 2 . - ��i '�1• �� f` ^ ' � �' �j��1 <V,�3 � ��` • -. , �.--� . E �\2- ,� , ,,. rn ,- .- ~ �� _—____ --- u�� 4<<•� ��,h� ' I ° �~ / - -=� =�1�1 41� W - _- -\ E ;_ • °:: y. \+` . ,r � • 7YS.Y ��-�� _ � � Y n��l� ��)� ��M �,,P.;, � /'�. 11 i �•�1 YI.t. .. • / •° � -� t �� • _ �,��_ b �,�� Z __ .',=a ,�� l� _\'� .;. . � ,., , J � '4G,Q �Z� � � t � l � K��= � �� °l = ` � l` , � € • . = n1�N� .� � �� - " t`�`= � - .•�`' -: �`�.� .° 9 .�� < naf! __�� ._1__ __-__ � �(�L��.:-��a S� �� f• : •�� " � / Z 4a � t � It l'�1 1 Cd' �n� — L.� s ��-� COLONIAL DR;1' p� S�' �� 1 el� `. �,e`�=- �F- Q , , _'� � 1 r�0 4)' -�-� - -- �*�1�'`--- •° -�s -+o- 1 � _ u e �o � � � . --- --� � - � N FS � ! � .``�',' �� ° �� '°l `�' �«1 ��' �� -- � Y' � —� -- ' .� � ` � o:..�� ?' �,�_��,�_ N 4� ��.�—.�� _��,. . wrs /s•-� , ��.t ' Nt• r ts u_c_s�ses_ s_�� f'��' � �°+ .(��° I� iZ I ; 14 -� �5 IG oAVE. � --- �e'asc.ce:�c— -- _ i¢ �' ��e.�o�� t - 3 - S!Ll92 c i �Aon� �� \N ,.'� y;,J,:e;�; r x�. J ' ' .a� ' C�\` ^ � ! N ♦ � ' 't i4 �' iA a °° i°°,;:;;;�RNPIKE �. '':•� ; - `� . � .'� _. .- ' p ° � �3,� °0��' •8°.�lr - w . �, e. -1 "o�P � . � � 3 'V � _ � ttyMwt "� eTiC:i �� ,��j�1� 8�' � � I J � � "� � N Q`� �� •/ c° '`�� +` ,o��,1Y,�;.�' - � . �� . � -.•� .._. � _ . � V\��: � �3 ��s�- .o d'.� - �� s.. �� e� � � � : • W � � „��,�;, �s�� '��I� � = �� ' : � `�� - .�--- �- � / — o _ . '�� __�� 1� p h . / � � -� / �--''� �— �� L Q � . �� . . . , -� Q - - t � , . � _ , h � _ �,;I // � �� . , - � - . _L_1 _, . . �.�- _ _ � ,, ` _ , :I_ �-'_ __ _ ; . - . _ .. _ _ _ '_� .-,t. '..5: 7^��,.:,� � � s .� . �'='� '�""_ . ..`�. . �7 � .,..� � � � = „ .�I` p -F Y � _ �.? ,»� �-L f "'� '/ � !� r ` . J j_ .. a ° . .�'- �- �. � ; ' " . _ � ; � 1� > _ _ �,�� . '��.� v,,4 hy"�`a�r�� ' r �'K� � r �!b � �� `; / � = - _ -�` ' �✓ .� _ / 74 � � _ . �' r- • •. L� �,\ �/�O l� � / � � � 7 � �_ . � � ,,.,.1 e i ::� �_ -m ;� �iq� // _/ 1 � _ ;�� _ : '`:^�'``�� /� � J � � �_ � � ' �- __ � y� � �� _-� / � J L � / ` 1 _ - � Y _ _ V �'�=� �-�–_-__�__� ' � � 0 : �� __ � - � � � _— Y_ _ __� '� � � E _ ,. -..., - ni., ..----�••; _ �_� �t � _ - . - / r �' �� b� _ _ _ I�'� -� -- C - � _, . ." -- '. ., � - =- /� . - �'� —_ v, w - = � >: / / �- .--.3{.� - 0 � ::; � _ � _ / _��i`��C.�� -- J '�: - _ - / ��_'� . ��`:� 'A'�' , 4 v ,-� = , _ _ Y.0 �__"-�� `_�Z� � y� � - - � 3� �a ;� - �"- � � � J' .� � - = � ;; �--- /�::��. � _ - �' -- -°° _ _ � � �1 �► �� ,:� i , � �_ �_ `� _�/ ��_ .T_� :O'`I _ :_ � _ � � i �. — ---1� t i f , � - Q __ ` �� 1 1 1 i . �� C l / � � ----i� : � ",, ' j I�- ="- .w�: t:_: Y ti s E "_ L. _'}�� .__��d A•��-�. �.3► a!'-'1� p• L z � � ,,� , � -.-<: � r _ : ; �.�< z � _ - _ I I ♦."•� ,1 /� `��''.a�`'.,. � � ' _ " � _ _ � e� _ � � �'� I �-ic:s` .rrri�r- u� \ ' � _ ' ' a� ��.-�i� � J� _ L � _ S � Y• . ��0 � ' „_' i_ I ��/� `\l� �i ..� � _ S x x _ 3 3 � 0 9s � .. _ _ i �y'�� ` � � ' = ' - \ � � V L _ - � � � v. > � 1 � � � ` T c z E -- ,;..; \ I' �1 c � = - _ - y C C! G .>�� \ 1 Z �. j � _ .. � ` � � = 7 C �' .~a J �1�� , G .' � _ _ - � v ` m� � - __ /.:� � < <. ,., .. _ _ _ _ _ � C 3 � '- ' _ 9Ni07//1B = = 2 = I L F 4 C L • " � 1 C • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "KOTTAS ADDITION" BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: Beverly Kottas, Golden Valley, is proposing to replat two lots at 1031 Pennsyl- vania Avenue. The purpose of this resubdivision is to create two single- family lots which meet the minimum zoning requirements. This site is located along the west side of Pennsylvania Avenue north of the Chicago Northwestern Railroad tracks and south of Bassett Creek. Zoned Residential , adjacent land uses are singte family residential except for the Golden Valley County Club to the east (see attached area map) . � Being adjacent to Bassett Creek, this proposed subdivision lies partially within the flood plain, which precludes the construction of any buildings at, or below, elevation 884 (see attached preliminary plat) . It_ should also be noted that the Metropolitan Waste Water Commission (MWWC) has a force main . in place adjacent to the east boundary of the plat at an unknown depth which raises the question of whether or not City sanitary sewer service from the east side of Pennsylvania Avenue can be extended across the force main to serve either, or both, of the proposed lots. The area of Lot 1 within the proposed plat is 11 ,055 square feet, and Lot 2 would have 10,000 square feet. Both lots would conform to the minimum lot width requirements of the zoning ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: I would recommend that the Planning Commission consider deferring action on this preliminary plat until the following items have been satisfactorily addressed: l . That the Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission reviews the plat; 2. That the MWWC force main is properly located and documented assurances that City sanitary sewer service can be provided to both lots; 3. That the flood plain be clearly noted on the plat; and 4. That the proponent inform the City of whether land will be donated for park and open spaces, or cash donated in lieu thereof. � � - �J n �•- : ,,,- - ,� - 2 ,� � '= �7 �. S i5 - _2 � `� . � � �, °' �-- - 3 p �16 • - � • . � ' < • ti � 3 � ` � 14 3�� - 4 � ' �15 �-• � ��3 ' _ „ .t :.� 4 � � W ' i4• - - 3 q; W �2 v. •;;, 7 , ,, ■� ` � � p. Q 5 2 � 6 •- -�5 � z � 6• , (i� ; � � ` � �� 'I � 6� � . 7� � a �i2 � � •` a � 10 7 _ � v-� 6 • - p � �� e �' �'° • g 8� � __�" � = �' - � <_ � »'; ' '` � � 9� �� 0 � 9 ^' -=:.a:.a_t�.=.e,---- t � y` ' • � .R N 4� C7 ti y I ,�1 '� STREET' d ° ��• io .�.� ; ;� „ ' , � c: - 4< � � � _ . � ,•s S �6 �' ° � �c .o;b 2 Q � � . � � o:.:� 9 �, 9=s , 2 �; z � , 2 � ' e �` 3 �",' f �\ — _ � 3 � N ti 14� 3 �, v � 7 ,'4 -s� .^�- , �� c_ J.� .�•4: PR�l,i�n►u aR Y ptAT 6 d o•' p� Q 4 W \� 13� 4 � � �• �� ti '� w'KOTTAS .� D01Tttl^/ �� r 5 • � . i,F . O 12 ' S �' W e�.5 , �. 2 , � 4G'�� ✓ +"` - 6 • � I I• , 6 0 G�v _ , " , �_ • �. P,5 � � �. � �o � � � � - � � `c :. �0 3 W 8 � � 9 y a �. " �� - 1 '� 9 4a' ZI 9 • ��'`�� - !�� •W �4s s `oD I �� 8 L � � i'�o � ,.;:- ��gb �=. ��.. . �s � �5 a c� / e : , �- .'`��3 d 2 -� � . 6 �°�. ` � ' 1�AIRBAUL'F•�'.,-_� ` T ��'� °jk c � � �� 1, � � '`�� ` � � � CHfCAGO _�i10RIHWE�IFR ( .- 5___ �' ?6: ' i — 5 Ba o^ 1S1�4 ;` .a� r� . � � Q. • Q � . � p � I �, W �; •Q ti M • e � —� Q � '_ � � -34-` � -- — N Q , � Lu� v K Z o �' � p' 'a Z W '1 S7 74 � � `� J O ? . .f:f' � . , a � � � ° tu O � � o — ( O � h p� . � Q N y .1--�___ i• � � °uQ • I � o"'. m � 3 � O ,•�••• V1 �v OD . W ^ ::K, tn _ � --- -- < o -. • o cc m (/� 4 m � Oi6b be .... N __ �9� - ------ - - _ ;;J IQJYC.T7 • � \.... •�� 3�� ' s a =1 � .�' ~ - i�� ti , � 0 � :" 2 5 � � � Q. ,-�' / . ��.� ' � 2 w �O 3aq � �� J � � Q 1 oa. : `,.�a.'i.'`,V "~' M� � . � ., P R 0 P 0 S E D: K 0 T T A S A D D I T I 0 N � - i � ; i + i � i ; ; . � 'y,�; a '� , . 2 � � i � �� , ,'i�'r:�� k � , ��.,� �ggb' �� . � �� , - , �,� ! B' .� . �" � � . B , � � � ,.'. �� , '88 , � � i . A�., . .�. p� :.- , � ►' � � :� -'- . �� . � W ,l.�'�. � ''�'' '" Q �. � � � �a ^, ' �. "890 � �i i� � ,. Z�___ �� M� , �� ,- - ,� �on! �� t. � • , � �; � �. -- , . , � � �'°m ` 8g2' + o�� , � ��;� � Q ,' - � �ti -- ---- , �.• I �—� � � , ,. , �4 _ ; ;�� + � � Q 1 , 8 � � : �� / `�f , ;�, �r'� 1 ' '' I ;�-G-_ ----'" - '�' ; � ' � � � Bgg Q __ --------^;"+" . _ �, �1 = , � . 89� -- -- ?� � I W , . • `r -''" ; - r� . �-,89� y� ; I e5Z Y L _r'�E.�,,.,a.�, �T�-r 7 I `- � ! II ' 1 1 ! �aG ? """' - ` � v� I-_-- -��^-� 1 � I i �_ G--c---- I; :�y . . ^ .,, i j `, � � I¢ . • • C! I �� '• -�Fi • ' -/- � ,� ,,�1 � \ � • a� f CcnYOVi In�ryal 2 �'eet . Mr � I �' ' � � « .,¢; � i • B I ; '-8s6 I . ; OWNER & DEVE-LOPER: SURVEYOR: Beverly Kottas Egan, Field & Nowak, Inc. 1042 Quebec Avenue North 1415 Wayzata Boulevard � Golden Vailey, MN 55427 Minneapolis, MN 55426 � Phone: 546-6837 ' DESCRIPTION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 21, "Winnetka". + � i I hereby certify that th(s plat was prepared by me nr under my direct super- ; visien and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the � State o-f Minnesota. ' Dated this 25th day of June, 1981. EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. ; • Revised this 20th day of July, 1981. �- Surveyors � b /,J,� � / . ` y r�_,. � � ! � Minnesota Registrat on No. l�53 -, � NOTE: Bearings shown are assumed. z � Area of proposed Lot 1, Block 1, KOTTAS ADDITION - 11� 055 square feet � Area of proposed Lot 2, Block 1� KOTTAS ADDITION - 10, 000 square feet ; � �;^?Er Tnrooranhv ehtained frnm Gitv of Golden Valiev_ i • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF THE ROLE AND CHARGE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION While the above matter was on the last two agendas (June 22, and July 13, 1981) the matter was referred to the July 27, 1981 agenda. Attached, you will find an ordinance dealing with the composition of the Planning Commission, which was approved by the City �Council earlier this year. Also attached, you will find a "Motion with Duties of Planning Commission" which was also amended as indicated at the same time upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission. • � � • ORDINANCE N0. � AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE (Composition of the Planning Commission) The City Council for the City of Golden Valley does hereby ordain as follows : Section 1. The City Code is hereby amended in Section 170 thereof by deleting therefrom, in its present form and entirety, Section 170: 05, and by enacting and substituting in lieu thereef the following: "Section 170 : Q5. Planning Commission. There is hereby created a Golden Valley Planning Commission � consisting of seven (7) members , the duties of which commission shall be not as individual members , but as a body, to advise, recommend, and assist the Council in matters relating to planning and growth - � of the City. This shall include matters relating to the social, economic and physical environment , as follows : l. The Planning Commission shall develop and make recommendations to maintain, on an up-to-date basis , the comprehensive plan for the City. 2. The Planning Commission shall develop and make recommendations to maintain, on an up-to-date basis, the land use regulations needed to implement the comprehensive plan. 3 . The Planning Commission shall develop and make recommendations for policies on other matters related to the social, economic and physical environment that are' not include3 in the compre- � hensive plan. 4. The Planning Commission shall carry out such other functior�s or procedures as may be assigned by other city ordinances or the City Council. " • Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the date of its passage and publication as required by law. Passed by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley this day of , 1981. Rosemary Thorsen, Mayor � ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk Robert M. Skare, City Attorney 4040 IDS Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 � Motion with Duties of Planning Commission The ordinance establishing the Ptanning Commission has several charges and general duties giving direction to the Commission. The City Council by motion approves the following list of duties which amplifies and/or gtves more specific direction to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall : a. Review specific development proposals made by private developers and public agencies. b. Review and make recommendations on proposed rezonings , subdivision plans, amendments to the zoning text, platting regulations and variances and similar items having to do with administration and regulatory measures. c. Conduct special studies dealing with items such as renewal , civic design, maintenance of a suitable living and working environment , economic conditions, etc. These studies may be conducted at the . - initiative of the Planning Commission and/or specific direction from the City Council . d. Review major public capital improvement plans against the policy and goals stated in the Comprehensive Plan for the area. • e. AddTSe-and-made-recommendetfons-tn-matters-re}attng-to-hoa�tng and-commonTtq-deve�opment-not-�orered-bq-other-�tatements-of re�pens'rbrirtq-sach-as: ADVISE AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO HOUSING, NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PROPOSED BY THE HRA PRIOR TO THE FINAL COMMITMENT OF SUCH PROJECTS BY THE HRA. THIS CHARGE SHALL ALSO RELATE TO SUCH RESPONSIBILITIES AS: 1 . Meke-recomn+ende�tbns-te-the-Ettq-£etine*�-en-tbe-dse-e€-€tlnds r�ceTVed-throagh-the-Hoasrng-and-Eommdn+t�-Bede}eprt+ent-Act-ef � �9�b. MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE C.ITY COUNCIL AND/OR HRA ON THE USE OF FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDS RECEIVED FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 2. Make recommendations to the City Council on the City's participation in other Federal , State, Metropolitan Council , County and Multi-City Housing and Community Development programs. ' f. Advise and make recommendations in matters relating to and affecting the environment such as: � 1 . Taking into account environmental concerns and the impact on • the environment of any Planning Commission recommended action. 2=. To cooperate with and coordinate environmental proposals and programs with other city groups and Federal , State, • Metro, County and other municipal groups. 3. To make such reviews of land reclamation, filling, excavation and grading applications as are required by City ordinance or referred to the Commission by the Council ; provided that no review or recommendation shall remove or limit the right . - of a property owner in accordance with City ordinances and the statutes and constitution of the State of Minnesota. • • • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: REPORT ON SOUTH WIRTH PARKWAY PROJECT An update on the progress of the South Wirth Parkway Project by the Citizens Committee reviewing developer proposals will be provided by Bill Forster, who is atso a member of the South Wirth Citizens Cortenittee. Also attached, you will find a memo relating to how the HRA proposes to handle the South Wirth development utilizing the services of both the Citizens Committee and the Planning Commission. • • • T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 22, 1981 FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR SUBJECT: HRA SUGGESTED PROCEDURE FOR SOUTH WIRTH PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT The following procedure has been suggested by the HRA as a guide f.or ��fiollowing through on the South Wirth Parkway Development Project. 1 . Attorney for HRA has determined that a Development District must be established for the project, and that a Development Plan must be adopted for this project. 2. To accomp}ish the above, the HRA intends to utilize the Citizens Committee and the Planning Commission in the following manner: � A. The Citizens Committee (with Planning Commission Representation) will bring a recommendation on a development proposal to the HRA in August; B. HRA will request Staff to prepare a Development Plan; • C. Staff will take proposed Development Plan to the Planning Commission for review and comment prior to submitting P��an to HRA. Planning Commission can comment to Staff, and to the HRA; D. HRA wilt receive the Staff proposed Development Plan, along with Planning Commission comments, at the September HRA meeting; E. HRA anticipates adoption of a Development Plan at its September meeting; F. The adopted Development Plan would then be transmitted to the Planning Commission for their comments and advise to the City Council ; and G. The Development Plan would also be transmitted simultaneousty to the City Council to set a date for a public hearing. As stated above, this is a suggested guide by the HRA and is presented as such for the Planning Commissions information. •