09-28-81 PC Agenda .. _ , . .. , ._.. ..,. : � . . a,.,. _ _
I `'
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNIN6 COMMISSION
� SEPTEMBER 28, 1981
(Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road)
*7:00 P.M.*
AGENDA
I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 14, 1981
II . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PE.RMIT
APPLICANT: James Yunger
LOCATION: 670 Mendelssohn Ave. N.
(Westview Business Center)
REQUEST: Permission to operate a Weight Lifting Studio
, in a Light Industrial P.U.D.
III . INFORMAL• PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT
� APPLICANT: Robert L. Halseth
LOCATION: Southeast Quadrant of Intersection
at County Rd. #18 and Medicine Lake Road
REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat of
. • • "Westview Development"
IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY
APPLICANT: City of Golden Valley
LOCATION: Former Schaper Property lying West of Ottawa
Avenue and adjacent City property tying South
of Sweeney Lake and West of former Schaper
Property
, REQUEST: Rezone from Commercial and Multiple Dwelling
to Institutional
�
Page 2
� AGENDA
V. I��ORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.D. #32� BASSETT CREEK OFFICE PARK �
APPLICANT: ADDA Corporation
LOCATION: 5000 Olson Memorial Hwy.
REQUEST: Approval of P.U.D. General Plan without
Concept Plan Approval
VI . REPORT FROM CHA�RMAN ON APA EDUCATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
VII . REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 15, 1981 - DON SINGER
VIII . RESCHEDULING OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
�
�
Minutes •of the Golden Valley
Planning Commission
• September 14, 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 7:05 p.m.
Those present were Cbmmissio�ers: Forster, Moede, Polachek and Thompson.
Commissioners Eastes, Leppik and Singer were not present.
Also present were Mike Mitler, Director of Planning and Redevelopment and
Alda Peikert, Assistant Planner.
I . Approvat of Minutes - August 24, 1981 :
It was moved by Commissioner Moede, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and
carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the August 24, 1981 Planning
Commission meeting as recorded.
;
II . Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit:
APPLICANT: James Yunger
LOCATION: 670 Mendelssohn Ave. N. (Westview Business Center)
• REQUEST: Permission to operate a gymnasium
(weight lifting) in a Light Industrial P.U.D.
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation
� � 'that the Planning Commission consider September 28, 1981 as an informal public
hearing date. The Commissioners had no questions of the proponent, Mr. James
Yunger, who was present.
It was moved by Commissioner Forster, seconded by Commissioner Moede and carried
unanimously to set September 28, 1981 as the date for an informal public hearing
on the application received from Mr. James Yunger for a conditional use permit
to operate a gymnasium within Westview Business Center, a Light Industrial PUD
located at 670 Mendelssohn Avenue North.
II1 . Set Date for Informat Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat :
APPLICANT: Robert L. Halseth
LOCATION: Southeast Quadran°t of Intersection
of County Rd. 18 and Medicine Lake Rd.
REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Plat of
"Westview Development"
• Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation
that an informal public hearing be set for September 28, 1981 • Chairman Thompson
recognized the proponent, Mr. Robert L. Halseth, who was present to answer
questions, accompanied by his engineering consultant, Mr. Ron Alwin of Consulting
Engineers Diversified. The Commissioners did not have any questions of the
proponent. •
' Golden Valley Planning Corrmission Minutes of Sept. 14, 1981 Page 2
•
It was moved by Commissioner Polachek, seconded by Commissioner Moed� and
unanimously approved to set an informal public hearing date of September 28,
1981 to consider the application received from Mr. Robert L. Halseth for pre-
liminary plat approval of "Westview Development," a proposed 2.9 acre plat
located southeast of the intersection of County Road 18 and Medicine Lake Road
(County Road 70) . �
IV. Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - P.U.D. #32 Bassett Creek Office
Park:
APPLICANT: ADDA Corporation
LOCATION: 5000 Olson Memorial Hwy.
REQUEST: Approval of P.U.D. General Plan without
Concept Plan Approval
Chairman T�ompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommendation
that the Planning Commission consider September 28, 1981 as an informal public
hearing date. The proponent was represented by Mr. John Pluhar, ADDA Corporation,
and Mr. Tim' Menning, Amcon Gbrporation.
. It was moved by Commissioner Moede and seconded b.y Commissioner Forster to
set September 28, 1981 as the date for an informal public hearing to consider
the application from ADDA Corporation for General Plan approval of PUD 32,
Bassett Creek Office Park, proposed fora 2.g4 acre parcel located at 5000 Olson
Memorial Highway.
� � 'Chairman Thompson asked for discussion on the motion. Chairman Thompson asked
the proponent whether ADDA Corporation intends to make a request to the City
for tax exempt financing. The proponents replied that ADDA Corporation does
not intend to apply for tax exempt financing. Cor�nissioner Moede questioned
whether the proponent plans to request tax increment financing. The proponents
replied that the company does not intend to request tax increment financing
and plans to use conventional financing for the project.
The motion to set a September 28, 1981 informal public hearing date was passed
unanimousty,
V. Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning of City Owned Properfy:
APPLICANT: City of Golden Valley
LOCATION: Former Schaper Property lying West of Ottawa
_ Ave. and adjacent City property lying South
of Sweeny Lake and West of former Schaper Property
REQUEST: Rezone from Commercial and Multiple Dwelling
• to Institutional
Planning Commission Meeting - Sept. 14, 1981 Page 3
•
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and noted the staff r�commendation
that the Planning Commission consider a September 28, 1981 informal public
hearing date. Planning and Redevelopment Director Mike Miller gave an explan-
ation and hi�story of the two City owned parcels proposed for rezoning.
It was moved by Commissioner Forster, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and
passed unanimously to set September 28, 1981 as the informal public hearing
date for the City initiated rezoning of City property located at 801 Ottawa
Avenue North.
VI . Informal Pubtic Hearing - Rezoning:
APPLICANT: West Suburban Builders
LOCATION: 6835 Sandburg Lane
REQUEST: Change Zoning from Residential
� (Single-Family) to R-2 Residential
(Two-Family)
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and recognized Mr. Earl Wilson,
who was present to represent the proponent and to answer questions concerning
• the rezoning application.
Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing.
Ms. Linda Smith, 6830 Sandburg Lane, located across Sandburg Lane from the lot
proposed for rezoning, stated that she had several questions to address to
� " �the Planning Commission. First, Ms. Smith asked how large an area was proposed
for rezoning. Chairman Thompson explained that the area proposed for rezoning
was one lot 19,141 square feet in area and gg feet in width. Secondly, Ms.
Smith questioned. whether rezoning of this lot would set a precedent for re-
zonings in the neighborhood and make it easier to rezone other surrounding
properties to multiple dwelling use. Commissioner Polachek .replied that City
policy would dictate that the northeast side of Sandburg Lane remain residential
and Commissioner Moede informed Ms. Smith that the Golden Valley Comprehensive
Land Use Plan specifies long term single family residential use for the adjoining
residential neighborhood. Thirdly, Ms. Smith asked whether the subject lot
proposed for rezoning for use for a two family dwelling is large enough to
accommodate that type of dwelling considering the location on a busy street
and the restriction against on street parking. Chairman Thompson informed Ms.
Smith that the lot dimensions meet the City Zoning Ordinance requirements for
the propose� rezoning and use for a two family dwelling. Commissioner Polachek
reassured Ms. Smith that the City Council is well aware of the setting of
precedent, and Commissioner Moede assured Ms. Smith that she would not vote
for the rezoning unless confident it would pose no threat to the adjoining
residential neighborhood.
• Mr. John Ferry, 6825 Sandburg Lane, located adjacent to the lot proposed for
rezoning, expressed opposition to rezoning of the subject lot for use for a two
family dwelling. Mr. Ferry stated that he would like to see a one family home
Planning Commission Minutes of Sept. 14, 1981 Page 4
•
on the property. Mr. Ferry presented to Chairman Thompson a petition signed
by 14 residents addressed to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) and _r�questing
that the BZA not approve a waiver of the lot width requirement for construction
of a two family dwelling at 6835 Sandburg Lane. The petition cited too much
traffic in the area et the present time as the reason for opposition to the
waiver. Mr. Ferry explained that although the petition was addressed to the
BZA, it had not been presented to the BZA and was being submitted to the City
for the first time. Mr. Ferry stated further that he felt construction of a
two family dwelling on the lot adjacent to his home would lower the value of
his house, which he built in 1950, at which time the sucrounding area was
entirely farmland.
Mr. Wilson, the proponent, requested permission to speak and informed the Com-
mission that he had owned the lot proposed for rezoning for some time and that
the lot was currently being used by Mr. Ferry.
�
. At this point Mr. Wilson was asked to answer questions directed to him by the
Commissioners.
,
Commissioner Moede asked how long Mr. Wilson had ow�ed the lot proposed for
rezoning. Mr. Wilson answered that he had owned the lot for four years. Com-
missioner Moede asked whether he had talked to the neighbors about Mis proposal
to rezone the lot for construction of a two family dwelling. Mr. Wilson replied
• � that he had Spoken with Mr. Ferry and with the people in the house directly
across Sandburg Lane, the adjacent property owners from whom he was required to
obtain signatures for his application to the BZA for a waiver of the lot width
Requirement. Commissioner Moede asked Mr. Wilson whether he had considered
building a single family home on the site. Mr. Wilson replied that he had not
considered use of the lot for a single family home due to the adjacent Light
� � Industrial and school parking lot uses.
Ms. Smith inforrr�d the Commission that she considered her property to be adjacent
to the subject lot and that no one had talked to her about the proposal .
Commissioner Polachek asked Mr. Wilson whether the proposed two family dwelling
would be rental property or owner occupied. Mr. Wilson replied that he expected
it to be owner occupied.
Commissioner Forster asked Mr. Wilson how the structure would be placed on the
property. Mr. Wilson replied that the dwelling would face Sandburg Lane, but
that he could not explain the structure placement further because the buyer
of the property, not Mr. Wilson, has the construction plans.
Chairman Thompson closed the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Commi-ssioner Forster requested clarification of the status of the amendment to
the lot width requirement for the Two Family (R-2) Residential Zoning District.
Planning and Redevelopment Director Mike Miller informed the CortBnission that the
amendment was scheduled for first reading before the City Council at the September
. 15, 1981 Council meeting. The Planning Commissioners discussed two options
for handling the rezoning request prior to the effective date of the Zoning
Ordinance amendment, those two alternatives being either to recommend approval
conditional on a�ndment of the Ordinance or to defer action until the amendment
has been approved and pubtished.
• Planning Commission Minutes of Sept. 14, 1981 Page 5
It was moved by Commissioner Forster and seconded by Commissioner Po�achek to
recommend that the City Council approve rezoning of 6835 Sandburg Lane from
the Residential to the Two Family (R-2) Residential Zoning District, subject to
amendment of Section 36.03 of the Zoning Code to reduce minimum lot width in
the R-2 District from 150 to 100 feet.
Chairman Thompson asked whether there was any discussion on the motion. Com-
missioner Moede stated that she felt reticent to take action on the rezoning
request prior to City Council action on the proposed Ordinance amendment.
Planning and Redevelopment Director Mike Miller offered clarification of the
status of the amendment, explaining that the City Council had previously approved
the reduction in the lot width requirement and that it was due only to clerical
error that the Ordinance had been publi�shed without the reduced requirement.
Council action is a formality �equired to correct the erroneous publication.
The motion to recommend conditional approval of the rezoning was passed
unanimousl�. • - _
VII . Report from Chairman on APA Educational Subcommittee:
Chairman Thompson reported that he was unable to attend the last rr�eting of
the APA Subcommittee on Planning Education held September 9, 1981 and that he
� had been unable to reach other Subcommittee members for information on the
meeting. Chairman Thompson will contact other Subcommittee members for an
update and will make a report at the next Planning Commission meeting.
VI11 , Report on BZA Meeting - September 8, 1981 - Bill Forster:
Commissioner Forster gave a report on the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) meeting
held September 8, 1981 , which included the following agenda items of interest
to the Planning Commission:
1 . Consideration of a waiver of parking space requirements for Calvary Lutheran
Church, located at 7520 Golden Valley Road. The BZA found that no waiver
was required based on calculation of parking requirements for the sanctuary
only, as directed by the City Attorney, rather than calculation of require-
ments for mixed uses.
2. Consideration of waivers of setback requirements for construction of a
geodesic dome dwelling at Duluth Street and Flag Avenue, which the BZA
denied due to the fact that the lot was not large enough to accommodate the
dwelling.
3. A_request for a front setback waiver to allow construct�ion of a detached
garage in front of a home located at 4540 Golden Valley Road, a house with
a new brick wall along the front property line which screens operation of a
commercial buslness from the location. The request was not heard due to
• absence of the proponent.
Planning Commission Minutes of Sept. 14, 1981 Page 6
•
4. Withdrawal of a request for a waiver of the permitted uses section of the
Business and Professional Offices Zoning District Ordinance to a�low con-
tinuation of a nonconforming use at 1710 Douglas Drive North. The question
of use was not an appropriate item for BZA consideration.
IX. Report on City Council Meeting - September 1 , 1g81 - Bill Forster:
Commissioner Forster gave a report on the City Council meeting of September l ,
1981 , including the following agenda items of interest to the Planning Commission:
1 . Consideration of a rezoning petition for 1710 Douglas Drive North. The
proponent requested deferral of the rezoning request to allow exploration
of other means of obtaining approval for continued office laboratory use
of the building. The City Council chose to take action and denied the
rezoning.
2. Approval of revised sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. Conditional approval of the preliminary plat of "Meadowbrook School Addition"
in.accordance with the Planning Commission recommendation.
D
X. Report on HRA Meeting - September 8, 1981 - Dave Thompson:
• Chairman Thompson gave a report on the HRA meeting of September 8, 1981 , at which
the major item of business was selection of Pembco/Sherman-Boosalis as developer
for the South Wirth Development Project.
XI . Letter from the Mayor Regarding City Indemnification of Planning Commissioners:
� Chairman Thompson distributed to Planning Commissioners copies of a letter
received from Mayor Thorsen stating that the City Council will not establish an
official policy on indemnification of Planning Commissioners and will take action
on an individual case basis.
XII . Planning Commission Representation at City Council Meetings:
Commissioner Forster pointed out that the rotation system for Planning Commission
representation at City Council meetings occasional.ly results in representation
by a Commissioner who has been unable to attend the last Planning Commission
meeting. The Planning Commissioner is required to report on recommendations and
discussion which he or she did not have the opportunity to hear. It was suggested
that staff review assignments of Council meeting representatives and arrange adjust-
ments i.n the schedule when a scheduled representative has been unable to attend
the Planning Commission meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
�
David Thompson, Chairman Mona Moede, Secretary
•
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 1981
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 670 MENDELSSOHN AVE. N.
James Yunger, Brooklyn Center, owner and operator of THE GYM, a weight lifting
studio, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit that would allow the location
of his weight lifting studio within a Light Industrial P.U.D. (Westview
Business Center) located at 670 Mendelssohn Avenue North.
The newly adopted Light Industrial Zone District portion of the City Zoning
Ordinance allows such a use (Recreational) as a Conditional Use which may,
or may not, be recommended based on specific findings made by the Planning
Commission ,relating to ten factors listed in Section 19.03 (G) of the City
Zoning Ordinance. '
The site in question is located within the eastern portion of the WEstview
Business Center P.U.D. which was originally an elementary school site, and is
� now devoted to office and office/warehouse use. Mr. Yunger's operation would
be in the office/warehouse portion of the P.U.D. (see attached site location
map) . If approved, Westview Business Center would lease Mr._ Yunger 3,890
square feet of office/warehouse. The structure in question is presently
unoccupied and would be renovated to provide 2,896 square feet for the weight
lifting center, 590 square feet total for mens and womens �showers and locker
. • �ooms, with appropriate areas devoted to office and storage. Parking for this
facility as well as other tenants within the office/warehouse complex is
provided for in a common parking lot (see site plan of Westview Business
Center) .
Adjacent land uses and zoning classifications include office and office/warehouse
to the north (Industrial) ; Medicine Lake Bus Lines garages and repair facilities
( Industrial) ; Light Industrial and Commercial undeveloped land to the east
and southeast; and office building and multi-family housing (Business and
Professional Office, and Multiple Dwelling Zoning) .
Section 19.03 (G) of the City Zoning Ordinance states that:
"The Planning Commission shall make findings and recommendations to
the City Council based upon any or all of the following factors
(which need not be weighed equally) :
1 . Demonstrated need for the proposed use.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
�
Golden Valley Planning Commission -2- September 23, 1981
� �
3. Effect upon property values in the neighboring area.
4. Effect of any anticipated traffic generation upon the current
traffic flow and congestion in the area.
5. Effect of any increases in population and density upon surrounding
land uses.
6. Increase in noise levels to be caused by the proposed use.
7. Any orders, dust, smoke, gas, or vibration to be caused
by the proposed use.
8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals or vermin in
the area to be caused by the proposed use.
9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure or use.
10. Any other effect upon the general public heatth, safety, and welfare
of the City and its residents.
After a careful analysis, including an on-site inspection of the proponents
� � present locations, I would offer the Planning Commission the following findings
for their consideration.
1 . The proposed use itself does fulfill a general need for a place to provide
for this type of physical exercise in Golden Valley. iiowever, the use
, . itself does not provide for an essential need or service within the
� Community.
2. Inasmuch as the use has been more or less integrated with light industrial
land uses, it could be said that the proposed use is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City.
3. Effect on property values in the neighboring area would be negligible.
4. Effect on traffic generation and/or congestion would be negligible.
5. This item is not applicable.
6. This item`is not applicable.
7. This item is not applicable.
, 8. This item is not applicable.
�
Golden Valley Planning Commission -3- September 23, 1981
�
9. Visual appearance has already been approved with approval of Wes�view �
Business Center P.U.D. -
10. There do not appear to be any additional applicable items to be concerned
with.
In addition to the above, you will find attached a letter from James Benson,
Partner, Westview Development Company, endorsing the location of the use
within his development.
RECOMMENDATION: °
In view of the findings listed above, and after investigating the use personally,
I would recommend that the Planning Commission give favorable consideration to
the request for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a weight lifting studio '
by James Yunger.
,
�
MNM:kjm
�
� Q U r •- --- --• _ _�.9 � ---- �--:o.r o,+ _- --
o ' 2 �Q� �F " • 7
oQ � aic• '��•�,.+:�. _ . oy ti;...' , ,
O•-� , `�G_.� ,„"p � , �'�'., F..'h', ,�.;^ .
. �.,. /^� v � ' '� _'.'_ �E, ; � .
( _ ',`' i.:;V7 y .'�O. .
.' j , ^�� � i7d1�BC. 'II �.,� �A ..'G. A. d• i
• ' p 5eS e ���^. Q �.�ut o y�����, ���p$ �
�.��. •I ��� .? •9�'[� �.;`:t11` �.• h6:�:;�i4 t pVE ` t�
, _I_— -s: ,6., . ,�„ ,. .. , _IOTH
� 'i`�• `'.rr�. � ••�:i�� � y
e,9�' , 25 'e:8 �
�.7 � .9. f�l••:7'S'C /7961 oe(/..o 3-i, OL���'.' �82' 4 � �';. . �
Z a • ���G� . � �.
o_ �G�S�( SvR
� • vF�':8101 � o. V' � � Z �-
TRACT A
'I r[�°:F Y t
.T
� ' - ---- ---�- � ��9 � - -� .
� �� -- —--- y � \ ; :o=-
Q Z 1'��O rSlf�-ree �0• C 61�6 .�
� �� -:��- - - ..�: - . �- _ ._. `e,v w
� �� e �'.7. - '. .�- .. � .. _ - z V •tl. � a
�r ��. � •�c , y r
� � _ :r � ..__=.�S1NESS _ t � .
� -._ •—f'a�' w ;�,�►__ '-_U _ - -. . _ 4' -
� W EST��E 'N�: m . � __�- , .:.o.—_ ° - Fo .
4. i3'S F e:C 2i
� . _ � �-; �� ` _ 2 .- 2C8:. - "° ' 2:.e
� , � i ^=�E�yS, R o :..��_=. . . _ ; _ � � � ;
� � _ -_ - -
� -� - - - ���i � 3 � -
� �. � _ � � - — (\+'w) 6 e`�� 5 �_._,-- �
� + � I � . , . .. • V � ' r :C6 '
o � � - . � � � :GOLDEN 4 VALL�Y .a IE
;� .
U � • - . . f ' �: V .1, 4 � -
• ' � � -� �• • � • • '' • -�.. • �
� ' -. . � � � tia. d•ipy'•{e(-y'� <�:-
_ ' sr. „r e;. � _:a55'Ss �. �
� v.. . t.eC9'.. �5� • - •
$ . ' - . �,. . . �. . . - -fi�lDfN .:5=',.`�- —YALLfY -- __ � �,:,«f_ _e�
v . . . ._. ::- 0�9� ,_ , RQAD
, �� , �„a ,,-• e .. W, � s O
� � -: i, �'S j .,. � . ..,y � �`'. ..tFrs». �F;.. ...�
� ' .e" � � . �tc. I � . . • _ F .�
;5 ' 9
- �t � • s`' f �• �l'S' Y ,
�_ � 'L °� i� v7.c v t t; — "jJ't' ±V .
� H ,e �Sd�j ' : lie�� �����- � � ,
!>.rEi4 ��j0 p '''': 'a +•:�:f' � /�� , .�-� N ,,.�. , �
� !'' :e- ''� .
Q �� . .. �:. - .`ca' � �° e�� • ;:� ' '
� _ t.-6' .' •` - . o I
<J .�..,s 1 ����'`e I i�:� • 'i• �
V _ ' . • .. ''�.�` "y�9•` yi��' ; M : a 225 �� � � '{
V . .. -- � — �. !� :v m N �^ -• �• P � .-�:� -
� .. � ti.a:;� i ,�u•s,., .•�p"'' � �e Z �� . . ._ ---,
. t . �• • �eo _1. 9c � o .
_�p � t:a: . Kc � W :.: • »• '.R ' i
. � :o
�, • ' �c•;WALLY r AVE' ���
v -.i! �V. � � n � b'aR cply •9'• ` __ •
p `�'• Ti' ^�•;�G: '� ae �F•.;.�E.� D
• , . - H �, 4A ' .
�
� `','`� �
c:• �
.
� �.e��� o��2,PTioN Q� � a
w
� S � N
E
_ a
; �,�
a3 p�
. � -+= —,—� •-;-•i—
O "J +12
o -�----�-� -
a� �
�y �
• • ��
� eC q L p e5�c R�P T i�0 N e'F
�� � (�ueSTU �ew '6�e.S� NeS 5 Ge.�e 3� , a
_.;-- f - ,- �
� � � Lor a �Lo�� t, �L �
2
;-: _ t —t--- .
d��`_;' T1—�� �'0 4'L�VI i S 2 N gl ¢
1 -� �' �
4 . • •
a - . 34
°�� 'r- 35 . a
, 5 °y _ �
o n �.-
. z 3� .
b ° � •
�' o
��-%' '� 33
.0 7 ` • rj'� 3� i
g �_ . . _�____
Tr" 31 P
4T—�—9� � _ ,
0
_a; l �
_1 • -
� 30
1D , -
�r • • �
^�_.T F, • .
; `_" . � �9
a �1 ,+a
e
•n',L-�'
s
a �3 � I �
I ' -
� �. m
_ / -- 3O :. ,� I L �' i ' ' 27 � 2$°
,
�� —�---�- � � � � 1 ��, -� t-23 Za
, i
C ;►' p. � � —1 1
.� j I i � Zz ; -� —�
� � ��:. -� �- 'te lq 20 21 _ - �P �
{`•°' ° I !
� —� � �:�:- �s ; �4 � ,, � �g I t� t fi -
�� ��:- _ � �
� � :.� T fi �� �k__-, � r ��
� � , � � � � _ . _
E;xhibit A
�` O�-�r��� -V1lA�����Sc C������C
� , .� �
._ .�
.. _ .
oe �
' ' y_' " ' �. . " 1.��-'__.�.' '- ' ' ._ . . . '�' �_�" ��"'�
� . . . ... _ _ ' " . '.. � ...._. :Q •�. ' ' ' .. _
• ' .
August 27, 1981 � �
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427
Re: James Yungner �
Weight Lifting Studio
To Whom it May Concern: �
It is our understanding that Mr. Yungner intends to apply to the City of
Golden Valley for a Conditional Use permit to allow a weight lifting
studio in Westview Business Center under our present PUD zoning.
Please be advised that we are prepared to enter into a Lease Agreement
with Mr. Yungner for the approxtimate 3,890 sq. ft. of office/wareho�!se
space sub�ect only to his gaining approval from the City of Golden
Valley for a Conditional Use permit.
We have personally inspected his present location and feel very satisfied
with the manner in which he operates hi's business and the clientele
• • which he is servicing.
If we can be of any assistance to the city in this matter, please contact
us at your convenience.
, : Sincerely, �
�� �f�sl'1�---��j'.1��I7��
estview Dev�fopment Company
James Benson, Partner
JB/dbb
�
�
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPT. 24, 1981 �
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "WESTVIEW DEVELOPMENT"
The proponent for the pretiminary plat of "Westview Development" has requested
that the informal public hearing scheduled for September 28 be cancelled and
reset for Monday, October 26, 1981 to allow time to make necessary changes to
the proposed plat. I would recommend that the Planning Commission grant this
request.
,
�
•
.
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPT. 23, 198�
f ROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CITY INITIATED REZONING OF CITY OWNED
. PROPERTY AT 801 OTTAWA AVENUE NORTH - COMMERCIAL AND MULTI.PLE
DWELLING (M-2) ZONING DISTRICTS TO INSTITUTIONAL (I-4) ZONING
DISTRICT
The City of Golden Valley proposes rezoning of 11 .39 acres of City owned
property located at 801 Ottawa Avenue North from the Commercial and Multiple
Dwelling (M-2) Zoning Districts to the Institutional (I-4) Zoning District.
The eastern portion of the property, referred to as the Schaper property, is
a parcel 6. 17 acres in area donated to the City in 1g80 by Mr. and Mrs.
W. H. Schap�r. The City Council resolution accepting the donation specifies
use for park, open space or other public purposes determined by the City
Council . The resolution further provides for placement of a comnemorative
marker on the site indicating it was donated by Mr. and Mrs. Schaper "for the
improvement of the environment".
, The City has placed the marker on the property in a location visible from
Ottawa Avenue North and is currently completing berming along Ottawa Avenue
designed to prevent use as parking area for the Twin Lake beach in Theordore
Wirth Park. City plans at this time for use of the site are to maintain the
property as open space. •
The western portion of the property is a parcel 5.22 acres in area which the
City purchased in 1975 for drainage and storm water retention purposes, as
required under the Bassett Creek Management Plan. The City has plans for
construction of ponding areas on this site, but a time schedute for the con-
struction work has not been established,
The Schaper property is currently zoned Multiple Dwelling (M-2) , and the low-
land to the west purchased for ponding remains in Gommercial zoning. With the
acquisition of the Schaper property, City staff felt it would be appropriate to
rezone the two contiguous City owned areas at the same time to the Institutional
(I-4) Zoning District, which is the proper zoning category for parks and City
buildings. , ,
The proposed Institutional (I-4) zoning is compatible with surrounding zoning
and land uses. The northern boundary of the property is the railroad line
zoned Railroad District. The east property line is Ottawa Avenue with Industrial
zoning on the east side of the street. The Schaper property is bordered on
the south by the Golden Valley House and White House, which are zoned Commercial .
The portion of the site to the west is bordered on the south by the proposed
• site of the Bassett Creek Office Park PUD, which is zoned Industrial . Directly `
to the west of the City owned land proposed for rezoning is a narrow strip of
property zoned Commercial , which probably never will be developed due to the
narrow and deep lot configuration. To the west of that strip of Cottgnercial property
are the Valley Village Apartments, zoned Multiple Dwelling (M-1) . The proposed
rezoning of the combined City owned parcel to Institutional (I-4) for long term
Golden Valley Planning Commission
� September 23, 1981
Page 2
use as open space and ponding area will enhance the surrounding apart�ment,
office building, restaurant and motel uses. .
Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of
the City initiated rezoning of City owned property located at 801 Ottawa
Avenue North from the Commercial and Multiple Dwelling (M-2) Zoning Districts
to the Institutional (I-4) Zontng District.
AP:kjm
Attachment:, Site Location Map .
•
• •
\ � '�. _ " h -p� =i_'� i��J 7Y s '� . �� r � � o'
�;, �-,: � . e , _ _l_ . .
G ✓ r � i r
j� � • er i> �� r �► ��O�' _ � � �
-. I : r- :� R : � 4 � . � ., 's..-2���. i,.�_. ,
e •u"
�i �• i � i�• . �t � 1 '�� 'l 3 � ✓ t e" �' �
.. , Q ' ��.. � �-.
� '�5 a� � ( � .it.5: • • : �:�' � ! � �� i��Y�� �Q
�, r.�' jj�1 r � , �• ', � �� • 1� s �•, �~►�\
1 ' • �.'r, o _`* ° s. ° � l 4 � t
► i
� O e ' � � � � ,r � 'r��J'�.
` wrt- � � � °" � S �' �` � i .
: '��� 0 3.`• � � : b. ' `'.r • �c (11' Jv �
:-, :��,�� z � ec � � .f., �::,
.s -y a
� �� O =�� I ` s S �� O\_ � �.
° 0 3 . Q o .. -� � . . r, ��
� 1 � '��J ' 1 I �
� =.t. �_ _ N•�` _ 'O f, '' �: s 6 r., Z3x� �� � � �
� 2 ' � � � .. :�s L .r . : ,r� (`1 '• ° (1� /�� ` ^
i `7`�
� ,R' � �r••' � � �. 4 . ' � 4 v I\ �� ��t ��^ � 2 J.�J
� . ♦ __ a � v � .` �i� � r 1• f� �
1 „ � 'y \ :M �. V, . , ♦ � 'S� y � J;.i �� ♦ ' � � .r
�e,k.3 :o ,`• ,`' � �, ,' � = • � � =� � .. , ''' ��
+�� �: �f.��� '�t.a � ��` • '�� � 8 �e• �� �o' �°y� � _ •- 3�� o c „ �
. �� r� ,,..�. ;_ � _ z��:���= ,,P �,b� ..:- � �= : .�� .�,
� � 5��. _ . ^ ,_���� � ,,, .�= , : - � - -� .
,:�. �► v I� f ! < yg�; .i•�• � � fI� ' _ .' �
' , a� :����N� ,� r- � `. ♦ •� � .
\/ O r' � � i � `\ � : � �-y 6 W �
5- ..' f � . .,. ., -r • :
° =� � \ '' .�: • �o s: �� 3 y�p 2��4� a. '�`,�
fc, .�' `,. t r,` •Ca• � �: �Z) .. ` A R� �0 �:�6� `�� cC �' :t� t ' c- `.,lta c- .
,.v ��� . . , '
.. �1 . re .a � e .
_ ` � Y •., c� t �rK�• � .:f�}1 t• A.. C r --.
e: � o� R'� - h: . �., ---- -_ ..
^, jp° �NORTHVI�ESTERN � �J - °�� � __'�� �°= -���"
� /: -t'Y ��.• �'t s'�pw�
5'` ---� RAI LP,OAD
,._ � `� `� � � � '� 3: 3: �
COI�;ER�CIAt, t�� �'�. `. \ �\ ��, , ' ,
' �;� I-4 � �• � �\ P`4'� tt� I-4 '�` '�� • r
. '"., `��. , ,',,l ,, ..,\. .`, ,, .
, ��. �. .
. ., ., P , .,., .
. \ .`\ �G� h .�^ , , •� �
., P�-1 �; _, � 1,� , . � �� � \ `••� � i
�► �r " �. .� - �.. �. � '� ItdDLSTRIF�L �
� ��l �' � �� �` . � \ , .
. �s � � '� ; '� '
� '`. � i
� � v , ���, ,
'� `�� �- - t � , t� ' , � ;
� ¢ �� �\ �oc. •- `.- � --�;;;� � �.
G� � 2 . � � � , � .,, _ ��, - , �,, - -� _ _ --- �
i � � . ,\ l�) ^ �,'y �°� I .
a �32�.= `' ` 4�N;2'I� a I
U - ' ;
�` IN DLST RI P.L Q��' �'COP1t�"E RCI�L ' � �
'C 0`� � s �41 O '
`� — ;�= - - — •. - �
�i0� �" :, -_"�� .. �
,�b. � .:� e� •- , ,
�D � � 't�' a h.� 2�� �B� �1 i
-. , ; b_
� �. � .. �
� ��- 1 �� ����� n 1
. . � n' . o.'i:�" � �1 =� ! .�
-1 . � ) = ' : . 'V , "�tCa9� -
4 . ° '�• � ' �� ' �f t0 �� �
_ ' • n : � . .
� ►' :-' +6_ .1 .
�VY. �' N0. - 35 % . . .- - - ... . ___ ..�� ,,- - --- y
. E� F�i ghway 55 • � .. . . ,
:
:a� - r�, . � .
� .
. .� . . � : . . : .. _, : _ _ � 24 �
- . ' .>.. � .� �..4'r:.. : . .- ♦ _ :.. . . �_ _ -' � � ` - � .. • . . ..
- =� _ . � , � . • , � ' ; : . . ' . � • ;_�.RE A��E
-• . _ - 3:� �,-f ; �.E
� - _ - - �_ : - . .. - . .. _. , _ . - . - _ ` tit�A � �,�_, fi£ �5s -� �:+,_�_=w � �
.. • .._ - . .. _ _ . - • ' - - �'--�—".-- �— ° —-'--- . r i.._ _�:�- ° r.�+ _.. a
�
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPT. 22, 1981
FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER -
SUBJECT: INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PUD GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT
CONCEPT PLAN - PUD #32. BASSETT CREEK OFFICE PARK - 5000 OLSON
MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
The proponent, ADDA Corporation, proposes development of a PUD consisting of �
two one story office buildings on a 2.94 acre site at 5000 Olson Memorial
Highway. The proponent chose to proceed directly to General Plan of Devel-
opment without first obtaining Concept Plan approval .
The proposed use is permisstble under current zoning and compatible with
surrounding zoning and land uses. The site is zoned Industrial , and the long
term land use indicated on the City Comprehensive Land Use Plan is also Industrial .
Adjacent on+ the east is the White House, which is zoned Commercial . Immediate-
ly to the west is a narrow strip of vacant land also zoned Commercial . � Beyond ,
this property to the west are the Valley Village Apartments, zoned Multiple
Dwelling. The property to the north ofi the PUD site is City owned property
purchased for drainage and ponding purposes and currently proposed for rezoning
from the Commercial to the institutional Zoning District. To the east of that
• property, northeast of the site, is the Schaper property, donated to the City
for open space purposes and currently proposed for rezoning from the Multiple
Dwelling to the Institutional Zoning District.
Although flexibility is allowabte in setback and green space requirements under
. �he PUD Ordinance, the site plan reflects substantial compliance with setback
and .green space requirements for the Industrial Zoning District. The site plan
indicates the required 35 foot landscaped building setback from the road right-
of-way and 50 foot building setbacks from side and rear property lines. The
50 foot setback complies with the setback requirement from the proposed Insti-
tutional Zoning District to the north and exceeds the 20 foot setback require-
ment from the Commercial Zoning District. The Zoning Ordinance specifies that
one half of required side and rear setbacks be landscaped. The proposed PUD
plan meets this requirement along the side property lines with a minimum of 10
feet of green space abutting the Commerical Zoning Districts to the east and
west. The plan maintains a minimum 10 foot green space along the rear property
line as. well , which complies with the setback and landscaped area requirements
under the current Commercial zoning of the adjoining City owned property to the
north. However, the required 50 foot building setback from the proposed Insti-
tutional zoning of the City property would require a corresponding 25 foot
green area along the north property line. The plan does not meet the rear yard
landscaped area requirement for the proposed zoning of the City property to the
north: Reduced green area along the north boundary of the site should n�ot
adversely affect planned use of the adjacent City property for ponding and open
space purposes.
� .
� Golden Valley Planning Commission -2- September 22, 1981
Parking provided exactly meets Ordinance requirements of one parking°space for
every 250 square feet of gross floor area in office use. The two proposed
buildings are 12,512 square feet each for a total of 25,024 square feet of
office space, requiring the 101 parking spaces shown.
Direct access is provided by two driveways off the Highway 55 service road,
which serve each of the two separate buildings on separate lots, but are con-
nected for circulation within the integrated PUD office complex. The two access
points onto the State owned Highway 55 service road require Minnesota Depart-
ment of Transportation (MnDOT) State Highway :�ntrance Permits, for which the
proponent has applied only recently and which have not been issued to date. The
MnDOT �office issuing entrance permits has .informed staff that based on initial
review of the application he anticipates no problems with issuance of the neces-
sary permits for this PUD, but the review process will require three to four
weeks. Therefore, approval of the PUD General Plan of Development should be
conditional upon MnDOT issuance of the required entrance permits.
At the sarr� time, the preliminary plat for PUD #32 is under review by another
office of MnDOT. Again, the MnDOT engineer in charge of the review i_ndicates
that preliminary review revealed no major problems with the preliminary plat
as proposed. However, approval should be conditional upon compliance with any
requirements which MnDOT may transmit in the official review letter.
� Access to the proposed PUD off Highway 55 definitely does present problems, but
the City Engineer adds that the problems would be similar for any development
proposed for this site. Access is by way of either of two uncontrolled highway
crossovers, one to the east and one to the west of the site. The City Engineer
does not anticipate either State or City installation of a signal at either
� � one of these points in the foreseeable future. The proponent estimates that
100 employees will work in the proposed PUD office complex, and traffic generated
by these employees will be added to an already congested traffic situtation
resulting from morning and evening traffic fromthe ap�rtment buildings to the
west and from primarily evening traffic to and from the restaurants and
motels in the immediate vicinity. In considering the impact of this proposed
PUD on the traffic situation, however, the proposal must be compared to other
development possibilities for the site as Industrial property. The alternative
could be a manufacturing or warehousing use which would instead generate truck
traffic, potentially more detrimental . It has been suggested that staggering
of work hours could help to alleviate the additional traffic congestion anti-
cipated as a result of morning and evening traffic to the proposed office complex.
Based on requests from the City Engineer for additional information on utility
service, the proponent has provided the City with an additional Utility Plan
sheet, which is attached. The new utility plan shows tocations of utility lines
to each building and sh�vs the addition of a fire hydrant at the southwest corner
of the northerly building, as requested by the City Deputy Fire Marshal . The
review from the Public Safety Department specified both addition of the hydrant
� and provision of sprinkler systems in the buildings. Addition of the fire hydrant
required extension of the utility and drainage easement tothe hydrant location
as reflected on the revised preliminary plat, also attached.
� Golden Valley Planning Commission -3- September 22, 1g81
The profile of the sewer and water lines notes that piling may be required to
support utility lines. Soils analysis is not required by Ordinance for the
General Plan of Development stage of PUD Plan review. However, soils tests will
be required for preparation of the final building plans prior to referral to
the Building Board of Review and issuance of building permits. Past experience
with development proposals for this site has been that soils correction costs
proved prohibitive and proposals have been abandoned once potential developers
became fully informed of soils correction required. The City Engineer has �
considered the impact soils reports might have on the PUD General Plan of
Development as proposed and has concluded that soils correction would increase
the costs of implementing the proposed development but would not require alter-
ation of the plan. This question was addressed for assurance that the developer
would not be returning to the Planning Commission and City Council to propose
substantial revision of the PUD General Plan of Development as a result of new
information revealed by soils tests. In any case, the proponent should be made
fully aware of the fact that substantial or numerous changes in an approved
General Plan of Development require reapplication for a revised General Plan
and repeti�ion of the entire review process.
The site of proposed PUD #32 is lowland which, along with the poor soils, is
also below flood elevation. The Grading and Drainage Plan has been reviewed
by the Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission, as required for development within
� the floodplain, and a copy of the Commission review letter is attached. The
Bassett Creek Flood Control Corrrnission finds the plans to be in conformance
with the Bassett Creek Management Plan, but specifies that the two ponding areas
shown on site should be completed early in constructimn and that erosion control
measures should be taken to minimize siltation. The proponents have added
notation of the suggested erosion control measures on a revised site plan, which
� - is attached.
The storm drainage overflow to the south discharges into a State storm sewer
located in the Highway 55 service road. Use of the State storm sewer requires
a dralnage permit from MnDOT, for which the proponent has made application along
with application for the Highway Entrance Permits. Approval of the General Plan
of Development should be subject to MnDOT issuance of the drainage permit.
The City Engineer has noted that the landscape plan submitted with the General '
Plan of Development shows trees and shrubs planted in the utility and drainage
easement. The landscape plan is not reviewed in detail at this stage and will
be reviewed by the Building Board of Review along with final building plans
prior to the issuance of building permits. However, staff wishes to notify
the proponent at this time that plantings located in the easement should be
moved to another location. The Acting Park and Recreation Director noted in
his review of the plans that the landscape plan showed "concern by the developer
for aD aesthetically pleasing site" and suggested that the proponent include
benches in the landscape, plan to allow future employees in the office complex
the opportunity to enjoy the site.
•
• Golden Valley Planning Commission -4- September 22, 1981
City subdivision regulations require dedication of ten percent of land area
platted or contribution of an equivalent amount in cash for park, open space or
storm water ponding purposes. The Senior Hennepin County Appraiser assigned to
Golden Valley estimates the market value of the proposed PUD #32 site at
$70,400. A copy of the letter provided by the Appraiser is attached. The pro-
ponent may request credit toward the park dedication fees for provision of on
site ponding areas. Any such request should be made to the City Engineer for
his consideration and recommendation.
Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of
the General Plan of Devetopment for PUD 32, Bassett Creek Office Park, conditional
upon the following:
1 . Prior�to the City Council hearing, modification of the plat name to include
"PUD #32" as part of the plat name and to avoid confusion with Bassett's
Creek Plaza, the plat name of an office complex located at 5801 Duluth St.
2. Prior to the City Council hearing, compliance with MnDOT requirements and
recommendations regarding the preliminary ptat.
3. Prior to the City Council hearing, MnDOT issuance of State Highway Entrance
Permits for the two proposed access points to the State Highway 55 service
� road.
4. Prior to the City Council hearing, MnD'OT issuance of a drainage permit to
allow the proposed discharge of surface drainage from the site tnto the
State storm sewer located at the service road.
� " 5. Prior to referral to the Building Board of Review, inclusion of building
sprinkler systems in final building plans.
6. Prior to referral to the Building Board of Review, elimination of trees
and shrubs in the utilitv and drainage easement �on the finat landscape plan.
7. Prior to recording of the final plat, compliance with Section 440:80(2) of
the City Subdivision Regulations, which requires dedication of ten percent
of the land area of the plat for park, open space or storm water ponding
purposes, or payment of a cash equivalent estimated at $7,040 based on an
appraisal of $70,400.
AP:kjm
Attaclaments:
l . Site Location Map
2. PUD Application
. 3. August 31 , 1981 Letter from the Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission
4. September 21 , 1981 Letter of Appraisal
5. Revised plans, including Preliminary Plat, Utility Plan, Grading and
Utilities Plan and Site Plan
�— e`�. ; _ — { . o ---� W
'yy � M' '•5�„ • . ..
e 5�64°i o - �; � , �� (00�9 � \a.`';g °
� � y�o - Q �
�o ey,� ' zf; �, , 542 '
oo,�s �I i
�
�.- � { . •-� ,
i �n .r` �
� � � � `� � Z 09 0 0 � o � � :
o �; I � 6 � e
'�si31 � •CCe ° `�� � . �o �c o
• � �
i ��
1', ,pp o � 511.� �� I •9 ,,,y.
+� ,;3b�ot :.'� .y ti I o - --- -- -- — - - - — GSy�IIM1Vil� -` �C� �_/ .8 � --� --
v
� ,6� : to�r� , ` � > i aua�n T
�94�08 . q � � �
�Qp• _A11., � c • � � r
. 'L •� ' '—' +.+ • °
F • ; N g; I c, � . . .SSb--. ... �
� �- N
q = ��
'L er° � � .
� � �y �� �
. �(��,� / `� i° � � '� �f � �r- f��
_ �. Q / .� N� i '; u� � N � �
� �� 6 [� o
�Z
� /,_ °-:� �'^ ' °u � � � � �'r �� r
` �:c•�° o ' a �`'�o"� � �3�-� �. �ivp � � c0 0 � - '�'.
. . __b� � , � ; � � �+� �. � �
� . ' , . „� �� J O r 'r j�p �
O ' �0 ! I � �l {� {.� f� N
s 1 a_ P
� ~,t�•`���� � e+ , � � � , C � bf
3
.t. e��t'#�o.o -c ' IC .'i .c° � I 1� � �,.t
��30i:•�� ' 6 I t� " ; d!Z �� F- tb� -
s'. �'�'y3�A��h5` o i .Gs9 ~
� �c!.'�y`?�° Da'4y �y� � - - - - - - - O � C � �
�� .t�/�� N V
� \ C � � O 7 t� i
`�.\ `. ' ��Ih �
� " I
u I ,
� 1, m oo S6/
,, � � '��r o � I, ' -
. .� \ . . I i .
.Y' .,..r_ �a,:j, I;
y: \ T O� p QS 'i
� . � , � � � � I
�
-i �
' � 1? i � v� � � r' o ti! m �
��~ ; � � � � .;-°+� ; i
/ °''� -� > o c� � � _'-i
�1£ � / ' +$;�4 „v�i `-� � o L +� ,s —
__ ,�„-.� y Z v � �� ,
�'?�.�.;' � ' � dei ' a. � I
sm �. SL s"� V1 �
�t 4*'q�,'� C F— U ►-Ci
y s_ °.-,9 C` I
,Kc �.,,0''�� W
*, �N-�-`�''` N 3 -o� Carranerci al
I Q a ` N ~
` N � �
c �� T
� �4�'? �f 0 • � ' ��
�= � . �4 I C' .. y �n
y :6 1°- � ,a
�; a o p w r-;
s � Z �
:s H Z _ - -- - ----- -- --- -- ---- -- — oD o9 --- O
�o r o0
,,,:� g.g - i"
°° °�D `�� °� o '
�� o� o � N A A .
~ ° ,A v h
� a; � V O M ,�,
,, � � / h - -of�-- �
� r _ o
O � �i �
.o r", � s�' y '
M '„D� °-' � t
� "� �� ' N � N Q�Baa �
� o e _ � y � ��
a_ ,,;
`- 1 ° �
..,� �
F: , o H �
�o: � ^ e u� �
o —
a��-f_ ' o
, � ,N/�Z s� ? � J �
�v T M o+
O � � � �' n�
- e.t.!:.°��o . `g � O n � • h
� +
'o,r f,��' �sr, e (tJ yo ��; � ,-�, �
••-'��t'�l!�_; �, � °- � �,°I
•�„' / z�, q � �Jil�N��� S g�4 Du�� 'C�• f09 �
.��i�
� 80�� �Q a' N �; i 4il � �a�;649�. � � u
C2o '` + � i �9�'S2 �. --- --- - - � ✓�`
i3�Ol,r. �°�n� ` � ' , .a � 5:. � �
� :s � a � � N a
o. B:.2 'J' �a °i o ~ o a '� ` � ~
� � � ' �. N�� °�° m N � � SZ� .
• m .n1 • 'i : u vri --� �°M,++t Fji - ,n v . ` ��I .
ti� �. � q.� ��ti.�`���oy : , � I� � I a � �
�t N �I � � O/ O � I
�'�1 � ` � I
�. e�� � tebl; '" �O �/ � �'' - .r Se, 'S• - i8tt7 to'Z'r � �
t b OEf 1 +' v" _1 � . � .
t ... � � i I�j �.:o��o, > 5'b 45• _ ��
.
. P.U.D. NUMBER
. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
'� APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
of
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE -
Date of Application Auqust 31, i9s1
Fee Paid
` Applicant �
Name' �DA CORPORATION 925-5690
-� Last First Initial ' Phone
Addre55• 3510 WEST 70TH ST. EDINA MINNESOTA 55435
� Nu�er and Street City State Zip Code
Owner •
� ��. GOLDMAN M. M - 331-6680
� ast First Initial Phone
r
Address: BOX 580 MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55440
� Nurfier and Street Ci ty State Zi p Code
Street Location of Property in Question:
. - 50G0 OLSON MEMORIAL HIGEWAY
Legal Description of Property:
SEE ATTACHED LEGAL
iVame and Address of Property Owners Within 300 feet of the Property (Attach to Application�:
Type of Application:
Concept Plan (Fee-$150.00) General Plan (Fee-�150.00) �
6eneral Plan without Concept Plan Approval (Fee-$250.00) X
Type of Proposal:
Small Area X Large or Complex �Area
. Applicable City Ordinance Nurt�erPLANNED UNIT DEV. SeCtion 15 -
Present Zoni ng of Property: INDUSTRIAL -
�Present t)se of� Property: VACANT LAND �
Proposed Use of Property: OFFICE '
�
5tructures: Nur�er 2 Type Height 13 � Nurr�er of Stories 1
,
N.A.
� Recreational Facilities (example, tennis court�
Nurt�er�of People intended to live or work on premises: adults l00 cf�ild�en ---_
Number of off-street parking spaces proposed: not enclosed 101 enclosed ------
7ota1 Acres of Land in P.U.D. 2•94 . Acres excluding dedication of, for example,
City streets " N•A- . Qensity N.A. �
number of units/acre
Indicate the following Data by percentages: Area covered by Structures 19.5 0
' Area covered by Outside Parking 31� Area covered by Interior Streets -----
Area Landscaped 37.5 a Area left Natural ____ Ponding Area 12 0
I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional material
are true. ADDA CORPORATION
!
. ��3/ �3/
. ' nature of Applicant Da e
Signature of Property Owner Date
QFOLLOWIN6 TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY OF 60LDEN VALLEY:
CHRONOLOGY DATE BY �
Appijcation Ftithdrawn or Cancelled
� Plann�ng Commission Action
Park and Recreation Commission Action �
Environmental Commission Action
Other Corr�ni ssi on � �
Other Commission
_pplication on Counci Agenda
Ad�acent Property Owners Notified
Council Action
Planning Commission Recarmendations '
On this . day of , 19 , this petition was (approved)
�disapproved) subject to the following conditions:
Action by the City
On this day of � . .19 , the Golden Yalley City Council
�approved disapproved) this petition subject to the following conditions:
�i��
Bass�tt Creek Ftood Control Cor�mission
• 7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota SS427
August 31, 1981
Mr. Lowell Odland
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427
Re: Proposed Bassett Creek Pffice Park - Amcon, Inc.
Dear Mr. Odland:
The Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission has reviewed plans for
. the above referenced office park and finds that the proposed plan is in
accordance with the policies of the Watershed Management Plan for Bassett
Creek. The developer should either construct the proposed ponding areas
as soon as possible to accommodate runoff from the site during construction,
or take other erosion control measures to minimize siltation of the creek �
and Sweeney Lake.
Sincerely,
. �?
�
Peter Enck, Chairman
c: Timothy L. Menning - Amcon, Inc.
�
• � ��� �
City of Gotden Valley `
September 21 , 1981
Mr. Lowell Odland, Director of Public Works
Subject: Proposed Bassett Creek Office Park
�t
In accordance with the policy of estimating the value of
l�nd involved in plats, platting waivers and P.U.D. 's, i
hereby submit the following opinion: �
Based on my experience and recent appraisal of the subject,
it is my opinion that a fair and reasonable vatue for the
• � subject as of this date is $70,400.
SEVENTY THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS
Respectfully submitted,
� ����
• v�'�' �tiT'-'�./'�-r��C
RQBERT H. HANSCOM
Senior Appraiser
RHH:ga
. .
Civic Center,7800 Gotden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 ���-,w