The URL can be used to link to this page

03-10-80 PC Agenda _._,__.-_.. ..._..-- . ...._ ._.__."_."_._... ._...._._"--� . . . ___. .... .—.T.—,_—_—_'_�._..... "__.. .... ....... ..Tr-.��cr� .� I • I .:��'�I � � i6olden Valley Planning Commission i , � � ,.. , Ma rch 10, 1980 � 7:30 p.m. � 'i ' (Civic Center � , 7800 Golden Valley Road) ! � � r_ A G E N D A � . � ' 1 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 25, 1980 ':i I ;i � II . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING � I APPLICANT: Calvary Lutheran Church I LOCATION: 830 Rhode Island Avenue N. ;; REQUEST: Change Zoning from Residential to Institutional ; I11 . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.D. 26 � i � APPLICANT: Calvary Community Services, Inc. � .i LOCATION: Northeast Quadrant at Golden Valley ;� Road and Rhode Island Avenue N. - � REQUEST: Concept App�oval of a two structure complex for elderly residentlal . ° FV. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.D. 27 i APPLICANT: Gittleman Corporation � I LOCATION: Gittleman/Neslund Property ! ; South of Glenwood Avenue � I 'i � REQUEST: Concept Approval of a two structure � � 54-unit Condominium Development � V. PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW '': ; APPLICANT: G�ttleman Corporation LOCATION: Gittleman/Neslund Property , i South of Glenwood Avenue I ; REQUES'F: Approval of Preliminary Plat , � VI . SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING i APPLICANT: L. N. Lundstrom ' � � � ' LOCATION: 1725 N. Lilac Drive ' � REQUEST: Change Zoning f rom M-1 (Multiple Dwelling) � to Business and Professional Office Building ; ; . — _ -• - - - _ ___ ----- � Agenda Golden Valley Ptanning Commission � Page 2 � VI . SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING APPLICANT: Hennepin County ' LOCATION: g300 Naper Street REQUEST: Change Zoning from Residential to I-4 Institutionat 1►III . DISCUSSION AND FINAL REVIEW OF DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Terminal Warehouse District i IX. REPORT FROM SUBCOMMlTTEE ON TAX EXEMPT FINANCING � Sue Eastes X. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION REGARDING ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR THE � COMING YEAR. � � i i ; � i i ' i i , ' i i � � i , � � i ; � ' i ' - . _ _ _ . _ _. � Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 25, 1980 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at 7:30 p.m. on February 25, 1980 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Vatley, Minnesota. Commissioner DeSautels cailed the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners: DeSautels, Edstrom, Hughes, Polachek, Levy, Sehlin, Swanson and Thompson. Also present were Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator and Martin Farrell , Assistant City Planner. G�mmissioners Eastes, Forster and Specktor were absent. I . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES In section IX. Report on_ Area Development Activities, of February 11 , 1980 Planning Commission Minutes, "Planning Council" was changed to "Planning Commission." It was then moved by Thompson, seconded by Levy and carried unanimously to approve both the Minutes of the January 28, 1980 and February I1 , 1980 � Planning Commission Meetings. II . SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - P.U.D. 27 APPLICANT: Gittleman Corporation , LOCATION: Gittleman/Neslund Property, South of Glenwood Avenue . REQUEST: Concept Approval for a 2 Structure Condominium Development. Mike Miller recommended March 10, 1980 for the date for the Public Hearing. It was moved by Swanson, seconded by Thompson and carried unanimously to set the date for the Informal Public Hearing for Concept Approval for a 2 Structure Condominium Development for March 10, 1980. III . DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - TERMINAL WAREHOUSE DISTRICT. Mike Miller initiated the discussion stating that the amendment follows the same format as the existing ordinance and that Staff feels tf�ere is a definite need for this type of zoning classification in Golden Va�ley. He then cited several existing land uses that would be better classified � as a Terminal Warehouse Zoning District than their current zoning. The Planning Commission then went through the proposed amendment section by section and recommended the following changes: Minutes of the Golden Valley Ptanning Commission � Page 2 February 25, 1980 Section 18.01 - "Village" was changed to "City" in the last sentence. Section 18.04 - Swanson requested it be noted that she had reservations regarding the parking requirements for office area. Polachek expressed concern for dealing with parking spaces designed for compact cars. Section 18.042 Commissfoner Edstrom stated he felt that the phrase "in no case" in the last sentence was a bit too restrictive. Swanson stated she thought that at least one loading and unloading dock should be required. Mike Miller stated he would rewrite the section and add that requirement. Section 18.07 - This section would be replaced by the same requirements in Section 505 A (1) and B. Mike Miller stated he would insert the recommended setbacks from the Commercial Zoning District for final approval . � Section 18. 12 - Edstrom stated he thought the 50% maximum structure occupancy of the parcel of land was not necessary. The Planning Commission requested the Staff draft � sketches showing the setbacks required by the proposed amendment. Section 18. 14 - The Planning Commission recommended omitting Section 18.07 (C) and combining that section with this Landscaping Section. '�, it was theFl moved by Swanson, seconded by Edstrom and carried unanimously that the Staff prepare a final draft of the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District Amendment and action be taken at the March 10, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting. Mike Miller requested that when the final amendment comes before the Planning Commission for finat approval , the Commission make a motion that they will in effect review the entire zoning ordinance every three years. It was then moved by Swanson, seconded by Sehlin and unanimously approved to allow Bob Martinson, Architect and local developer, comment about the proposed Terminal Warehouse District. Mr. Martinson stated he would like to see the 20% office space in Section 18.03 (6) changed to 30i. Commissioner Swanson then stated she would like to occasionally have developers address the Planning Commission in order to keep them abreast of the private business interests and the market for development in � Golden Valley. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission • February 25, 1980 Page 3 IV. REPORT ON AREA REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Mike M� ller briefed the Planning Commission on the status of Redevelopment Activities currently ongoing in Golden Valley. Commissioner Swanson and Commissioner DeSautels tnformed the Planning Commission that this would be their last meeting. From this point on the Planning Commission will consist of nine rr�mbers and only five members will be needed in the future to establish a quorum. Meeting adjourned at 9:25 p•m• Albert DeSautels, Acting Chairperson Martin Farrell , Recording Secretary � � February 28, 1980 � T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Miller, Ptanning and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Request for Rezoning - 810, 822, and 830 Rhode Island Avenue N. g BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley is requesting that approximately 1 .84 acres of land lying south of the Chicago Northwestern Railroad tracks, and east of the relocated Rhode Island Avenue North, be rezoned from Residential to Institutional . This property is adjacent to other property owned and utilized by Calvary Lutheran Church, and was recently acquired from a priyate owner and from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and For the City of Golden Valley (see attached map and site plan) . Al1 structures have been removed from the property with the exception of three single family dwellings. The dwelting located at 810 Rhode Island Avenue was acquired by Calvary directly from the owner who has reserved a life estate in the property. When the life estate is terminated the structure will be removed. The single family dwelling at 822 Rhode fsland was acquired from the Golden Valley HRA and is currently occupied by a Laotian family sponsored by Calvary Lutheran Church. � When the current occupants of this dwelling vacate the house, it will not be reoccupied according to the information provided to me. The dwelling located at 830 Rhode island Avenue is being used for a diagnostic, education and treatment program serving twenty 12 to 18 year old clients with drug and alcohol problems. It is intended that this use will continue at this location for some time to come. At the time that the property sold by the HRA to the Calvary Lutheran Church, a condition of the conveyance was that the Golden Valley HRA would have the right of approval of all development plans on the subject property. As a matter of more detailed background on the use of the building at 830 Rhode Island Avenue North, I have attached a copy of a brochure which describes the program. The use of the subject property is in general compliance with the intent of the Redevelopment Plan for Valley Sq,uare. According to the information provided to me by the proponent, the future use of the sub,ject property would include removal of all of the remaining structures and development of the property for some church related use. As the Planning Commission is aware, Calvary Community Services, Inc. , a non-profit corporation, is planning to develop a two building high rise complex for the elderly on the property located immediately south of the subject property. This development, which is consistent with the Valley Square � Page 2 February 28, 1980 Memo � Redevelopment Plan, will contain 200 units of housing for the elderly, 80 units of which will be subsidized. It should also be mentioned that the area to the north of the subject property, north of the railroad tracks, is a developed, single family neighborhood. Recommendation Obviously, the rezoning of this property would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use of Calvary Lutheran Church as well as consistent and compatible with proposed land use to the south. The two single family dwellings currently being utilized as residences would become nonconforming uses, and their use as residences would eventually be terminated. The structure being used for the Renaissance Program would be consistent with Institutional zoning and provides a valuable needed Community service. This use could continue in its present structure provided that the building complies, or is made to comply, with all applicable requirements of the Building Code, Fire Code, and Life Safety Code. In addition, it would be highly desirabte if there were a 50 foot buffer (landscaped) created along the north boundary of the property along the railroad �tracks. This would provide a buffer between the residential neighbor- hood to the north and the building used by the Renaissance Program. • Such conditions cannot be attached to any recommendation for rezoning. However, the Planning Commission may, in a separate action, or motion, recorrunend any conditions that they deem appropriate to the HRA to impose on the use and development of the subject property. The HRA, in turn, can require such conditions as part of their development approval for the property. In view of all of the aforementioned considerations, I would recommend that the Planning Commission consider favorable action on this request to rezone from Residential to Institutional . • ..,<,r. a�, , .fH•.: - - • r;;; � . Y � � � � � D � � �-- -- -- -- -- -- � 2Af LR�f�D � ZoNINU ��C��EST' - _ _ _________` , ,t� . , --� , . , � -- • .. ��., � -- ,� , `+�.�� `� � � ii ` , �I i i ,` � f , il l .( ' t i / \ _� i . '_.._:.. :��eG�� \ 1 ��. Z � � t t �� i � \` �\ i22 t��.. � � ' i ' . � � � . � , ( �t • � � ��-t � 1 •� � � i _ _ � � __ �� __ '=_� i � I � ' ��.1' ' J ; 1__. � -- � � � � � : � �� !; ` r- j+ ,24 13 ►� � Z3 � � �i � :; w 1.► - :� � .... ,.\ � f � > -- �' --" � -- � ' . � �-- � o - . � rr .. . $ t - .7� � • • , . ..«... �T� � ' � H ..M1 i .� I,•.� � M��Z �'1�� - . . ' ._ . .F � � ::�_:. � M •u ro � �. � � .5�� S � *� � _b -- ---- . . o o��u .� c u. o .,�-_ s� � , � „� o -�-Q� _.;"ti• � _ Z�B?D , 4� 40 4�5� 1 � . IIS� ��Ife.fR�!ry �2 � u. ' "__ s �,r • . »_.. � � 37�.� ' i c !S� It° t{3. �i r�� u ! . ..r .... � tMr . . 0[ _ '� '-��i.�- 3Zt �7�s � r Q :- , � -•: r — �, •_ 131O.t-- . ' • �1036 �6 5l21 . . ��..'~` : N � . . � --- ---- . . � CHICA60 .,� �Aud..SYI+d.II�li�� +•J .'�-. r M � .n., �,�., �,. .. ` { �'rr. ri� , . . . ' o , . , . . , . — . `3� �:� ' .. -- '" .�0 � 1 -- -��I _ . �, � , .. - , • o . - r h � ..; ` ° � � M . � r ' �/ �. . _ - 33� al w . Q Q - � . -� �► . � • � . . e. . � - r . p o �. « �� , � _ � ---�. . Z 2 � � s� ,�.� - z a _ d ,� . J � • y M + O. � . ' .. � V � w . - •_=Z5;•4-�:==fz= � J � � . .. ' /I9.i • 2es �� - � .� .>. i 3 �� , `� ... ----- � � - . . w jt/ ' . , . ,� . p J 'L 4 �,. ^ . ' �i , � . V _ j /�f,( �� . \/ A � .. `r . . . " � � � � . . '�1��---� . { • . ' - —� . .. �1 . ,- � -. . . �. . tSl.l 1 .� � • . �f j� • � � - . • ' t �� , � . � � ' � ' _ .• j� . � 1�7.[ --- . _ . 3g " � '. -•--- '�.,�;;.� � '� . . � � . . i �� j � , » , . . ig�a o� - � % � • �p1n`'.�_ , {�.�p f� ° �. / , L�' �"'t �.MA p��' H4Mr1 1 �2�-. � i� - 7S �� 2'� �fF� ( I � � . U� � i� 1Y! '�. ` f .�. ^��- f 'T � ' '� �ti� . �� • . ' r� .��. ... 4 . ,�' $� � . . • , � ' 1�1� dQ Nrw •� _ H�Z/� �wl �a I .... - j �� I�j s Y �� 40' 41 ' - � � , �. n� �� S2 ��_� = I � +� �'►��'. . � �1p0 _ � •+=�'j � � 6 cc � . .� �— r � — �a:.� � �1t t �n • � � � I � iwRs 0/ ` � � �`:. 133 ''� :i � 78� ' �y5' �`' � � Di t.r ?S i � 47 �� r,J�$ ' �� ; . �s � �ac.. .,� -----' ; �� ".• ti � _ L�r �o � . R� • — ; � .1" .�� '�-• s Fi/•• 6 4J.II �.N /e%N i 15 d � 13 �+ � rl �`�" • � e 2-2-67� !Lt a•i•t3' �' 't ' � 1�13.� t •- o.•oc�:vt °`z'4°� . . . , . ' t'ss3.Sl D,o.�'.u-� � ' ---Zfi24. e!.—j��ivar T�t:�.c f N � ?`� �•��c.t t ��uc.9 t . . � • , �. ECUR�Ea PLXT. . - • • . . t.173iE DESCRIP- • _ ' ��'OIT�R'S 7AX ' AQ�� •�- • � � rHF cou�►r � A�tr� . �. . �f11E STATE � ++ . A�;tlWENTS/LYD � . - ' �� / • -� s�w ��'I�� $*• � yy �v:F i�� ;x:=� The Renaissance program is based upon the principles �:..��'` of Alcoholics Anonymous and views chemical dependency r,.. -�d _ �: . THE REBIRTH TO UGHT � as a disease which affects the entire family. tn addition to a program geared toward the special needs of the ado- lescent, the entire family is evaluated and a treatment is developed to include all of their needs. ADMISS101`I Renaissance serves twenty 12-18 year old clients. Referrals should be made to Ren- aissance at 544-2525. • • Admission into the program involves a staff enalssanee is a decision based on interviews with the indi- viable alternative to viduals and their families. Physical examinations may be required or rl�nary inpatient recommended and can be administered by �S ital treatment our consulting physician. • � � PROGRAM In t at It offers the • A free diagnostic interview is held with client ol�ovving advantages and parents to determine the need for chem- ical dependency evaluation and/or treatm,,�ent at Renaissance. Renaissance offers a week lon evaluation/ �Pon admission, clients are placed in the 9 one-week diagnostic phase of the program, diagnostic component;the purpose of which during which time they are evaluated as to is to assess the client's use, the family dy- ° .�✓hether they are chemically dependent and namics, and determine the most appropriate able to benefit from the Renaissance program. treatment plan. Treatment consists of individual and group Renaissance ofFers a special education com- counseling sessions, individual family and ponent to clients undergoing treatment so family group sessions, lectures and physical they do not have their class work inter- exercise programs, and special activities on rupted. Students work with certified teachers weekends. The treatment phase is 5 to 7 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m: daily, weeks in length. Since the clients are treated on an out- A twelve-week after-care program is avail- patient basis, they avoid the hazards which able for all clients. often occur as a result of institutionaldzation. They avoid the problems of re-entry or re- turning to the community as they re-enter COST daily. � Renaissance has been approved under Min- Renaissance intends to offer servaces at nesota Department of Public Welfare Rule one-third the cost of the inpatient hospital 43 and is eligible for third-party insurance programs. coverage. � , ' vvn�r�zzi�a� �rnrc��ia:.��it,�:n� ` Jon D. Benson,Administrator Dee Rasmusson,Office Manager Developer and former program director of Way-12 Halfway B.A. degree in education; eight years experience working House;past chairman of the board of Shanti House Halfway with children,parents,and in administration. House; former director of aftercare, Pharm House primary � treatment center; certified as a specialist in chemical de- Peter Settli,M.A. Evaluation Coordinator pendency by the Clniversity of Minnesota. Former Coordinator at Relate Chemical Dependency Pro- Betty Triliegi,Treatment Consultant gram;Director of Pharm House Day Care Program;Master Degree through the College of St.Thomas Counseling Director of Shanti House Halfway House; formerly coor- Psychology Program. dinated Freedom Fest; Counselor at Pharm House; certified chemical dependency counselor;B.A.from the(Jni- Judith Halgren,Treatment Coordinator versity of Minnesota. Former evaluation and treatment counselor on Adolescent William Bergquist,Board Member Chemical Dependency treatment unit at Lutheran Deacon- ess Hospital. President of the board of directors of Shanti House;Finance Committee member for Freedom Fest; President of P.T.A. In addition to the above staff, certified teachers attend to ror Sigurd F. Olson Elementary School; Calvary Lutheran the academic needs of the students while they are in the Church member, having served on the church council and program. It is our belief that students should not lose class ��zrious committees, current member of the Family Life time in treatment. Committee; Associate Vice President and Investment Office�, Dain,Bosworth. Inc. � qr ;;;�,: . ' ��::" �:�'1 � s� �� .�: ,.� _� ��T�'1 G :.,�: . • w� AI`I ADOLESCENT, O(IT PATIENT PRIMARY TREATMENT CENTER � <,Y. =�: . `X�v:i - • 830 Rhode Island Avenue I`lorth Golden Valle y, MN 55427 THE REBIRTH TO LIGHT Phone: 544-2525 � /%��1 /o a OGvnJ�✓i�✓c �o� 7 .� March 5, 1980 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator `�SUBJECT: Calvary Square Apartments - P.U.D. 26 Concept Plan Approval BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Calvary Community Services, Inc. , a non-profit corporation, is requesting Concept Plan approval at a proposed Planned Unit Development on a parcel of land approximately 1 .65 acres in area and located within the northeast quadrant of Golden Valley Road and Rhode Island Avenue North. The proposed project calls for the development of two apartment towers, � joined with a commons area. The northerly structure which will be approx- imately seven stories will contain 80 units of subsidized (Section 8) apartments for the elderly. This structure is proposed to be constructed late in 1980 as phase I of the total project. Phase II will involve the development of the second structure which will be approximately eight stories in height with 120 cooperative apartments favoring the south portion of the � site. According to Calvary Community Services, Inc. , Calvary Square will provide "open" housing for the elderly. Occupancy will be open to senior citizens of all income levels and ownership needs through Calvary Square's provision of both market-rate and subsidized housing, including both rental housing and housing for owner-occupancy. In addition, Calvary Square proposes to provide a means for strengthening and maintaining the independence of its occupants through the lifestyle that it will offer through carefully designed residences and common use facilities, as wetl as through responsive management support services. As mentioned above, Calvary Square will be developed in two phases: 1 . The first phase, Calvary Square Apartments, wili provide 80 subsidized units (one bedroam) under non-profit rental ownership. Construction is ant�cipated to begin in the fall of 1980. 2. The second phase, Calvary Square Cooperatives, will provide 120 market-rate units with a common center under cooperative ownership. Units witl be located in a mid-rise tower adjoined to the community center, which will contain the majority of common facilities. Construction of this phase is anticipated for late 1980, or early 1981 . � Page 2 � March 5, 1980 Memo For the use of the residents, each tower will contain laundry facilities and an emergency call system. The common center Is planned to house a library, dining facilities, workshops, lounge areas and multi-purpose community rooms. Adjacent land uses on the east and north are basicatly institutional in nature, being land owned and used by Calvary Lutheran Church. The area to the south across Golden Valley Road is currently being developed as a mid- rise office building as part of the Valley Square Redevelopment Plan. To the west lies�the City Center complex including the Public Safety Building, City Hall , Public Works Building and City Garage, all of which are Institutional land uses. It should also be pointed out that this proposed mid-rise facility for the elderly is consistent with the Valley Square� Redevelopment Plan. As required under the terms of the P.U.D. Ordinance, the various City Depart- ments have reviewed the proposed Concept Plan for this development. Comments from the Departments are attached to this Memo. I would suggest that the Planning Commission give close review to the concerns expressed by the Fire Marshal and the Crime Prevention Officer. The concerns expressed by the Supervisor of Zoning and Inspections have been conveyed to t�e proponent and the matter has been taken under advisement with respect to the General Plan development. Obviously there will be some more detailed concerns by both the Park and Recreation Director, and the City Engineer when more � detailed plans are submitted for General Plan approval . RECOMMENDATION The land use proposed in the Concept Plan for the P.U.D. 26 app�ars to be a compatible land use for this area. This particular locatlon for elderly housing appears particularly advantageous with respect to the close proximity of such services as bus transportat�ion, comrr�rcial services, and health �are facilities. In addition, the proposal calls for use of the facility by alt income groups which is also a needed service to the Community. 7herefore, I would recommend that the Planning Commission give fiavorable consideration to the approval of this Concept Plan. . �li.�� rLt � l� 2 .�'$ �s ��c C� e�` 5� �'��, � T0: Planning � HRA Coordinator � FROM: Park � Recreation Di rector DATE: February 25, 1980 RE: � Calvary Square Apartments After reviewing the site index plan for the Calvary Square Apartment complex that was developed by Miller, Hanson, Westerbeck, Bell Architects, Inc. , I have noted a number of circles drawn on the site plan that depicts trees at various locations, but the plan does not depict the type of tree or shrub or their sizes. When one looks at a seven story building, the type and size of planting materials is very important. I am sorry, but until a site plan with the appropriate landscape details is available, I am unable to make any further commants. � � � t John L. B enna Director Park and Recreation Department � � � Memo Date: February 28, 1g80 To: Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator From: Lloyd Becker, Supervisor of Zoning � Inspections Re: Preliminary Concept - P.U.D. #26 - Calvary Square Apartments Having reviewed this preliminary plan, at this time my comment is the requirement for parking spaces. At the present fime, 27 spaces are shown. The requirements are for 80 indoor and 80 outdoor spaces. This would have to be addressed by the City Board of Zoning Appeals. � � ! DATE: February 28, 1980 , T0: Mike Miller, Planning � Redevelopment Coordinator FROM: Sgt. Mooney, Crime Prevention Officer SUBJECT: Calvary Square Plans, Crime Prevention Recommendation 1 . The shrubs surrounding the front entrance should be chosen and planted in such a way as not to obstruct the view of the entrance from the street, or provide a hiding place for persons lurking in the area. 2. Sliding glass doors should have a locking system which will prevent� them from being lifted out of the channel from the outside. ' � . � /nld � � DATE: Februaxy 20, 1g80 T0: Mike Miller, Planning & Redevelopment Coordinator FROM: George Erickson, Fire Marshal SUBJECT: Site. Approval As per your request, I have received the site plan for the proposed seven story mid-rise being constructed on Rhode Island Avenue North. The Fire Department's concern fbr this building would be access to all sides of the building for ladder a.nd rescue operations. The site plan shows that the area to the Northeast corner is approxi- � mately 90' �o the road an.d parking lot; also the area to the Southwest is approximately g0' from the road. This distance would create a problem of reaching the building with our 100' ladder truck. fiowever, if the building is completely sprinklered, we could accept this condition. � � � V J� . -"., >: �� ; J� = "-- ---- __`_RR,�TRACKS _ �' � � . � � � � ��._._:� � �� . % �:::::::::::::::::.::::::::::� . � �:::::::::::::::::::�:::::::�::::: � � .��:::: ) � �� a CJ tro�oat v ��` � G+nc . {:�':::��:�:::�:'>:::::;::::�:`'� \ . �, O � ��::` ::;� � :;::� . �, �, -�..r::::::::::::�::::::::::::::� �� • �. � , d � OF�CE BLDC. Q �� b O�� p�� n � a ° � ° t� A � � � � 4 QQ ] � � �] n '� � � ��< � � � � � � a � � 0 � � � �,, � � � � � — r---- _ , �0 a � � � , , . � March 5, 1980 . T0: Mike Miller FROM: L. E. Odland SUBJECT: CCS PUD The Engineering Department has made a review of the concept plan for the CCS P.U.D. Since na utitity locations are shown on the concept plan, those items wilt be reviewed on later plans. The grading and roadway design appear to be in conformance with our proJected driveway - locations and grades for Rhode Island Avenue. Therefore, information as submitted appears to be acceptable for the concept stage. • _ -` � April 23, 1980 • T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission _ FROM: Martin Farrell SUBJECT: Request for General Plan Approval - P.U.D. 27 Gittleman/Neslund Property BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS In the past, there have been a number of proposed plans for the development of the 22.3 acres of land located south of Glenwood Avenue, north of Laurel Avenue and just west of the M.N. � S. Railroad tracks. The two developers, as already stated when this P.U.D. received concept approval , have reached an agreement and divided the two properties using the creek that flows northeasterly through the property. The 11 acres north of the creek are to be developed by Gerald Neslund into 17 residential lots and the 11 .3 acres lying south of the creek are to be developed as a P.U.D. by the Gittleman Corporation. The request for general plan approval of the P.U.D. involves only the 11 .3 acres of land to be developed by the Gittleman Corporation. • The property is currently zoned for residential development. The surrounding land uses are residential on the west, proposed residential on the north and bordered by the railroad tracks on the east. The comprehensive plan calls for a rt�dium density P.U.D. development on the site. The proposed development seems to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and should be compatible with the surrounding land uses. The proposed development will consist of two condominium buildings (identified as Buildings I and 11 on the attached site ptan) . Each building will be Type V one hour construction, consisting of three stories of wood frame construction over one garage level , with concrete block walts and a precast plank deck. The building's exterior will be face brick. The two buildings will provide a total of 108 condominium units on this 11 .3 acre site. Building I and II will provide 36 one bedroom plus den units and 18 two bedroom plus den units for a total number of 54 units each. The average density for this development would be 9•5 units per acre (or 4,558 sq. ft. . per unit) . Approximately 16.8% of the property will be covered by structures with 32.8% of the land area landscaped. About 3•5% of the site will be left . in its natural state with 8.8%, or one acre, proposed for ponding. 2.7% of the site will be used for exterior parking. � . Page 2 , � Memo - General Plan Approval - Gittleman/Neslund Property April 23> 1980 This development requires 126 interior parking spaces and 108 exterior parking spaces for a total of 234 spaces. The proposal allows for 144 interior and 70 exterior for a total of 214 parking spaces. This is twenty spaces short of the requirement and a parking waiver will be required through the BZA. The Gittleman Corporation intends to dedicate approximately 2.3 acres of land to the City of Golden Valley, part of which will be for the Laurel Avenue extension and part of which will be for park and recreation purposes along the existing creek bank. Any easements required will be noted on the final plat. The Engineering Department has reviewed the drainage and utility requirements and has found them to be adequate. The landscape plan has also been reviewed and conforms to Staff's general satisfaction. Attached to this memo are copies of the City Department Heads' reports regarding the general plan approval of the P.U.D. Also enclosed are a copy of the general plans as submitted for general plan approval . RECOMMENDATION � After considerable debate over past proposals, the staff feels that this P.U.D. is a good development. Both the City Council and the Planning Commission have given concept approval and this plan has not substantially deviated from the Concept Plan. Therefore, I recommend that the Planning Commission give favorable consideration toward the General Plan Approval _ of P.U.D. 27. - • . �, � � � March 5, Ig80 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Review of Prelimina�y Plat - Golden Valley Development Due to lack of sufficient information relative to the proposed grading and drainage ofi the preliminary plat, the Engineertng Department has been unable to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of Golden Valley Development. The proponent has been requested to provide a • more detailed grading and drainage plan for proper evaluation. � Therefore, after discussing the matter with the proponent, Gittleman Corporation, it was agreed that consideration of the pretiminary plat should be postponed until the March 24, 1980 Planning Commission meeting. . � � • � � March 3, 1980 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Miller, Ptanning and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning L. N. Lundstrom is requesting a zoning change from M-1 (Multiple Dwelling) to Business and Professional Office for a parcel of property located at 1725 North Lilac Drive. The property is presently known and utilized as the Copacabana Apartments. It is Mr. Lundstrom's � intention to convert the apartment structure to an office building if the property is rezoned. I would suggest that the Planning Commission consider setting the • date of Monday, March 24, 1980 for an informal public hearing on this matter. • • . � . March 3, 1980 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Milter, Planning and Redevelopment Goordinator SUBJECT: Set Date for Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning Hennepin County is requesting that the property which they own � at 9300 Naper Street be rezoned from Residential to t-4 Institutional . This property presently contains the Sheriff's radio dispatch facility, a radio tower, and a sl�ooting range. _ All of those uses are nonconforming under the present zoning. I would suggest that the Planning Commission set a date for an informal public hearing for Monday, March 24, 1980. • • .� • • "� ! March 3, 1980 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator SUBJECT: Discussion and Final Review of Draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment. Attached you will find a revised draft of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment for the proposed Terminal Warehouse District. This draft contains all of the changes proposed by the Planning Cormnission at their February 25th meeting. Hopefulty, this amendment can be finalized on March 10, 1980 and sent to the City Council for consideration. • � � s � 18. TERMINAL WAREHOUSE ZONING DISTRICT � � 18.01 Terminal Warehouse District. Terminal Warehouse Districts are established as follows: (Legal Description of Areas) 4 (Note: This Section number is used in Ordinances rezoning tracts . of land from Open Development to this Zoning District and from this Zoning District to any other. As to any specific tract or district, reference is made to the 1955 City Code and subsequent rezoning Ordin- ances as they appear in the City Ordinance Book.) 18.02 Terminal Warehouse District Defined. The Terminal Warehouse District is established to provide appropriate control for the development of land devoted primarily to the storage, distribution, transportation, and/or trans-shipment of goods and commodities by rail and/or truck transport. 18.03 Permitted Uses. In the Terminal Warehouse District the following uses are permitted if and when a building permit, or a use and � occupancy permit shatl have been issued by the City Council , and it shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to erect, alter, enlarge, move, demolish, use, occupy or maintain any building, structure, improvement or premises without having first obtained such permit: � 1 . Storage Warehouse � 2. Truck and/or Rail Terminal 3. Wholesale Distribution Center 4. Wholesale Establishment (selling only to retailers and contractors) . 5. Food Storage and Distribution; providing that there are no retail sates, or processing of food or food products. 6. Offices: Only when incidental to9 or acc�ssory to the above uses. Office space shall not exceed �more than 20 percent of the total floor area of eny building. 18.Q4 Off Street Parking. Adequate off street parking for rr�tor vehicles shall be provided in the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District in accordance with the following ratio: 1 . Warehouse/Storage Area - One parking stall for each 2,000 square feet odf gross floor area, or fraction thereof; 2. Office Area. One parking statl for each 250 square feet of gross floor area, or fraction thereof. 18.041 Off Street Parking Dimensional Requirements. Each off street parking stall required within the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District shall be at least nine (9) feet in width and at least twenty (20). feet in depth with a driving, or manuevering aisle of not less than twenty (20} fieet. . • • 18.042 Loading Areas. At least one loading and unloading area shall be � provided for motor vehicles in the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District in connection with all buildings or additions hereafter erected having • a gross floor area of 10,000 square fieet or less, which is to be occupied by a use or uses requiring the receipf and/or distribution of material by vehicles. One additional loading space shall be provided for each 20,000 square feet or major fraction thereof over the original 10,000 square feet. In no case shall a loading space, or loading dock, be located along the street side of any building. • 18.05 Accessory Uses. Motor vehicle maintenance facilities may be permitted as an accessory use when such facilities are determined to be incidentat to the primary use within the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District. In no case shall such motor vehicle maintenance facilities be used to service vehicles that are not owned and/or operated by the on-premises Terminal Warehouse Facility. 18.06 Outslde Storage. In the Terminal Warehouse Zoning District, no materials or equipment shall be stored outside, unless totally screened and fenced in such a manner as not to be visible from adjacent properties or streets. Only those materials or equipment directly related to the principal use may be stored outside. No storage shall be permitted within the required landscaped area. 18.07 Yard Requirements. Front, side and rear yard requirements in Terminal Warehouse Zoning Districts shall conform to the following standards: • A. In the case of a premises abutting a street, front yards . and side yards shall be at least 35 feet in depth or width. Such setbacks shall be measured from the right-of-way line of the abutting street to the buildtng line. ` B. Side and rear �ards not abutting a street shall be at least 20 feet in depth or width, and shall be measured between the property line and the building line. � C. In the case of premises facing a Residential or Open Development Zoning District across a street, the yard abutting that street shall be not less than 75 feet in depth or width, provided, however, that if said street is more than 80 feet in width the required yard may be reduced by the number of feet that said street exceeds 80 feet in width, but in any � event shall not be less than 35 feet in width or depth. D. Other side and rear yards shall be as follows: In the case of a premises adjoining a Residential or Open Developrr�nt Zoning District, required side and rear yards shall not be less than 100 feet in depth or wtdth. In the case of premises adjoining a Multiple, Business and Professional Office or Institutional Zoning Districts, required side and rear yards shall be not less than 50 feet in depth or width. � In the case of premises adjoining a Commercial , Light Industrial , � Industrial , or Radio and Railroad Zoning Districts, required • side and rear yards shall be not less than 20 feet in depth or width. One half of the required side and rear yards, as measured from the lot line, shall be landscaped and planted � and maintained as a buffer zone in accordance with Section � • 13.02 of the Zoning Code. 18.08 Screening. Screening of outside storage areas, and buildings adjacent to residential areas must be provided by the owner of a Terminal Ware- house Building. Such screening, either of planting, fence or wall , shall substantially block eye-level vision of the building and/or storage area. Plans for screeni�g must be filed, with building ptans, with the -Supervisor of Inspection, and must be referred to the City Council for approval . The Council may refer the screening plan to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. A bond shall be provided as required by Section of this Ordinance. � 18.Og Lot Area. Lot area shall be a minimum of one (1) acre in all Terminal Warehouse Zoning Districts. 18..10 Lot Width. Lot widths shall be measured along the public right-of-way line and shall not be less than 100 feet in all Terminal Warehouse Zoning Districts. 18. 11 Building Height. Building height shall not be greater than 40 feet in any Terminal �arehouse Zoning District. 18.12 Maximum Building Coverage. No building on a single parcel of land within a Terminal Warehouse Zoning District shall occupy more than 50 percent of the total land area of any parcel . � 18. 13 Access Driveways. • A. Distance of Driveways from Street to Intersections. The distance of the driveway entrance from the street intersection shall be not less than 50 feet, provided, however, that if in the opinion of the City Engineer, present or future trafric conditions warrant greater distance, such greater distance shall be required. B. Minimum Distance Between Driveways. Minimum distance between driveways shall be 25 feet at the curb cut. C. Minimum Driveway An le. to Sfreet. Minimum driveway angle to the street is 0 degrees unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. D. Mtnimum distance 6etween driveway and adjacent property line shall be at least 10 feet at the curb. cut. 18. 14 Landscapin�. All minimum setback areas shall be landscaped by the owner of the premises for all areas of the site not devoted to the buitding or parking areas. All front, side and rear yard setback areas that abut a street shall be landscaped in their entirety. In the case of side and rear yards that do not abut a street, one half of the . minimum setback area shall be landscaped. e 18.15 Curbs. Interior curbs shall be constructed within the property to separate driving and parking surfaces from landscaped areas. Interior curbs required by this Section shall be a normal 6 inches in height, and shall be of concrete construction.