09-25-72 PC Minutes ��
MINUTF� OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANAIING OONIl+�ISSION
September 25, 1972
A regular meeting o.f the Golden Valley Planning Commission was held at 8:00 P.M.
on Monday, September 25, 1972 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road,
Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Chairman Lundsgaard presided and the following members were present: Vice Chairman
Franzen, Cc�mmissioners Anderson, Becker, Christiansen, Edstrom, Sampson, Swanson,
and Van Horn. Also present W�r� Consultant Carl Dale and Recording 5ecretary
Jon Westlake.
Members absent: None.
1. APPRpVAL OF MTNUTES: MOVED by Anderson, seconded by Swanson, carried
unanimously, ta approve the minutes o�' the August 28, 1972 meeting as a�mended.
2. WAIVER qF THE PLATTING OFtI1IRTANCE
(a) L. J. Lage Realtors (2 Residential lots)
2505 and 2555 Ork1a Drive
Mr. Lage e�lained that Mr. Leider owns I,ots 1!� and 15 Block 2 Richland Hills.
The home on Lot 15 is approximately 11� from the south property line, and in
order to make the existing structure conform, they are requesting to move the
property line further south into Lot 1!� so the structure will be 15� from the
side lot line. The Commission noted that Lot ltt will contain more thaxa °the
required 12,500 sq. feet.
It was moved by Christiansen, seconded by Franzen, carried unanimously, to
approve the waiver of the Platting Ordinance, subject to a location survey.
(b) A1 Schwankle (2 Residential lots}
1730 and 17t�0 Kel1y Drive North
The proposal is to divide a parcel into two lots, each containin� 78 feet of
frontage and 9,360 square feet of area.
Mr. Schwankle was present to answer questions regarding the request.
The Planning Commission in discussing the request noted the lot will require fill
which may alter the drainage of the I.ot.
It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Swanson, carried unanimously, to table the
request until a report on drainage can be done by the Engineering Department
and notification is made to adjacent proper*.,y owners.
3. PUBLIC INFORMpTIONAL MEETING - VALLEY CLUB APARTMENTS (General Plan)
75 units
Wil7.iam Rova, Reese/Rova Assoeiates, Architect
Owners M. J, Mikulak
97
Planning Commission
September 25, 1972 page 2
Location: South of Highway 55, North of Woodstock Avenue, East of
Meadow Lane, and West of France Avenue
The Chairman of the Planning Commission, Warren Lundsgaard, reviewed the
history of this proposal and then asked the Village Consultant to review the
planning analysis of the site, which is as follows:
"1. Al1 planning considerations and comments submitted in an earlier report
still seem quite valid (see Planning Commission meeting minutes of
June 12, 1972). More detailed plans submitted since that date seem to
be in eonformity to the requests and the results should be a rather
good development for the community.
2. �onsideration of the requ�st as a Planned Unit Development would seem
appropriate for several reasons:
a) Better community control over planning, development and maintenanes;
b) Multiplicity and complexity of uses in a single building structure; and
c) Maximizing amount of open green space to be retained (land coverage
f actnr).
3• It is understood that a traffic study has been condueted and that results
of that study will be presented at the meeting. Traffic conditions should
be add�i to provisions of the PUD Permit if study results warrant such.
!�. It is assumed that the proposal wi.11 be referred to the Building Board
of Reqiew for architectural critique and recommendations.
5. As of the writing of this report and drafting of the PUD Permit, details
of the proposed Home Owner�s Association had not been submittad for reaiew.
It is exQeeted, however, that only minor changes may be required and this
can be easily accomplished by the Village staff.
6. The need for Village staff to properly enforce and supervise site mainten-
ance is again illustrated by the project with the added dimension of
rather e�ctensive exi.sting tree cover to remain. Proper maintenance of
the pond and larger old trees as well as natural undergrowth requires
specialized knowledge. Suitable maintenance for ecology preservation
should not rest solely with a future home owner�s association; the Village
should be involved as per conditions suggested in the PUD Permit draft.
7. Current plans are not totally clear as to proposed "future addition"
(Pool Side Walkout). This matter should be clarified; pre�fera�,ably,
this portion of the development should be included at this time.
8. Landscaping should be required along the entire length of Woodstock
Avenue; this may be of a type suitable for placement over utility
easements.��
Messrs. William Rova, architect from Reese/Rova Associates, Ken Benson of
Benson-Orth Associates, and Charles Coulter, a partner in the Valley Club
Condominium, presented the proposal to the Planning Comtnission. Mr. Charles Coulter
stated their proposal is to build a nine story 75-unit condominium on thirty seven
!�0-foot lots bounded by Woodstock Avenue on the south, Meadow Lane on the west,
��
Planning Commission
September 25, 1972 page 3
and Hw�,�. 55 an the north. The land is owned by the developer, except for
Lot 222, which could not be purchased. The price range of the condominium units
will be from approximately $25,000 to $50,000.
Tli�re wi.11 be a home owner�s association, and the management of the building
would be contracted for. The proposal will oecupy less than 20� of the land.
The project will also contain a ponding area. Mr. Coulter then stated they have
had meetings with the residents of the area-the most recent meeting being
September 21, 1972. Mz'. Coultsr stated they felt the major concern of the residents
at this mesting was the height of the structure. The soil conditions are such
that it will require extensive piling which is another reason why the proponents
are requesting the type of building indicated on the plans. Mr. Rova explained
how the ingress and egress will function as to the service drive a.nd informed the
Commission they have not done a traffic study of the area. He explained how the
drainage would funetion w:ith the pond and the landscaping plan on the site. In
relation to the trees on the site, the building will be approximately 85 feet in
k�eight, and the trees range from 50 feet in height to 88 feet on the Northeast
corner of the site. The two floors of underground garages wi11 be below grade,
containing 126 stalls. The following different types of one, two, and three
bedroom units are planned for a total of 75 units:
Type A - 2 bedroom 1,069 sq. ft. 36 units
Type B - 2 bedroom 1,C�0 sq. ft. 13 units
Type C - 3 bedroom 1,�2lt sq. ft. 13 uri:its
�y�e D - 3 bedroom 1,1t15 sq. ft. 10 units
Type E - 1 bedraom 852 sq. ft. 3 units
Mr. Rova indicat� they would like to be flexible as to the types of units but
they would not excee� a tota2 of 75 units. They are proposing an exterior of
pre-strESSed panels with a very course finish.
The following residents were opposed to the project: Mr. Larson, lt25 France Ave. N.-
corcerraed about landscaping and trees not holding their foliage year around.
Mr. Schutr:acher, 243 Ardmore 1?rive-concerned about trees not holding their foliage
year arovr_d; thus the project urill not be screened. She feels that the building
height will destroy the ecolagy of the area. Mr. �r���ell, 1�16 Meadaw Lane-opposed
to the height of the structurs and feels tYae public is being mi.slead by the height
of the trees. Mr. Gilbert, 321 Sunnyridge Lane-stated he is opposed to the nine-
story buildir_g, and trees will not screen building year around.
A lengthy discussian followed with the Planning Commission and the developer.
The Planning Comm���ion referred to the previous June 12� 1972 Planning Commissian
minutes and the Village Cour,cil minutes of July 17, 1972. The Planning Commission
in discussing the structure felt there should be a definit.e restriction as to the
total numbe�r o� two and three bedroorri units allowed and that the units should be
no larger than three bedroom units. The Commissian also asked if eight of the
units� could be sold for $25,000 or less. The proponent stated he could provide
eight ur�its at this cost and he would limit the number of bedrooms in the units
to the followi.ng; 26 three bedroom and tt9 two bedroom. The Comm�.ssion also
felt there were still certain area� l.acking in the material presented, such as
a traffic �:��ponent, home owner�s association, etc. The Commission also
99
Planning Comt�issi.on
September 25, 1972 page 1t
referred to Ttem ? of the planning analysis and felt the recreational area
and walkway, if any, are not defined in detail. The Planning Commission further
pointed out that their plan is slightly over five acres and that other secti�ons
of the Planned Unit L�evelopment Ordinance may apply if the Plannirig Commission
feels it is applicable.
The Chairman summari�ed the discussion by pointing out the property is zoned
M-2 which will support a four story building and that the same number of dwelling
units wi11 be al.lowed on the site. They are requesting 75 units with a nine story
building occupying less than 20� of th� land. The Com►nission should also consider
whetr.er this is an appropriate area for a nine story buil.ding.
Commissioner Van Horn stated the project is more attractive with a nine story
building rather than a sprawling four stor.y building, and we have an opportunity
to require some of the units to be at a lower cost under the Planned Unit
Development Ordinance. Commissioner Sampson suggested �onsidering the project
in two stages-the first being the nine stor� building and the second being the
sp�cif.ic details of the proposal. Commissioner Christiansen reviewed the
June 12, 1972 Planning Commission minutes pointing out the Planning Commission
approved the nine story building by a 5 to 3 vote. Commissioner Anderson
stated that under a general plan all material should be available for review. ,
Commissioner Franzen stated he is i.n favor of the nine story building with the
85-foot height limitation, but he would like to see more specific components.
St was moved by Van Horn, seconded by Christiansen, carried to approve the
genera2 plan for P.U.D. #9, subject to:
l. a density of 75 units or les�,
2. 10� of the units to be $25,Ot?0 or less (thess units to be two or
three bedroom),
3. maximum of 26 three bedroom units (no larger units than three bedroam),
!�. to be reviewed by the Building Board of Review,
5. reqnire a home owner�s association and other documents as required
by staff, and
6. requirements of P.[T.D. Permit #9•
t?pon vote being taken by roll call, the following members voted in favor of
the motion: Franzen, Christiansen, Swanson, and Van Horn. The following
voted against the same: Lundsgaard, Anderson, Becker, Edstrom, and Sampson.
The motion did not carry.
It was then moved by Swanson, seconded by Christiansen, carried, to re-affirtn
the previous position for a nine story condominium with 75 units. (see June 12, 1972
Planning Commission minutes) . t�pon vote being tak�n by roll call, the following
voted in favor of the motion: Franzen, Anderson, Christiansen, Fdstrom, Swanson,
and Van Horn. ThE following vated against the same: Becker a,nd 5ampson. The
motion carried.
!�. PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF GOLDE�T VALLEY OFFICE PARK
Ken Stensby of Northland Company and Fritz Rohkohl of Bergsted Wahburg
Bergquis� Assoc.
���
Planning Commission
September 25, 1972 page 5
Two affice units five stories and eight �tories in height.
Location: South of Highway 12, West of Arcridge Addition, and
approxirnately 300 feet East of Boone Avenue South
Mr. Ken Stensby of Narthland Company and Fritz Rohkohl. of Bergsted Wahburg
Bergquist Assoc, reviewed with the Planning Commission a ,proposal for an office
park containing two office buildings-one being eight stories and the other five
stories in height. Mr. Stensby pointed out they will appear before the Board of
Zoning Appeals for a paxking waiver because they are proposing one parking space
for every 1$0 square feet. Mr. Rohkohl explained haw they will phase the
construction �aith the five story building first and the eight story under Phase II.
He continued by poir,ting out they have developed two site plans lmor�an as Plans A
and B which take advantage of the nature study center in St. Louis Park. The
difference in the two plans is the parking arrangement. The Planning Commission
discussed traffic, soil, the availability of office space in this area, etc.
The Commission further discussed meeting with St. Louis Park and Howard, Negdles,
Tammen, Bergendoff on the proposed upgrading of Highway 12 because of the proposed
project.
5. LAUR,F�., AVENUE - PROPOSED SKETCH PI,AN BY RESIDENTS
Mr. I,ee 5andErson, representing a group of residents on Laurel Avenue, submitted
a sketch of Laurel Avenue from Turners Crossroad to Pennsylvania Avenue and
from there running south on Pennsylvania Avenue to the service c?rive detaching
Laurel. Aver�ue west from the intersection and Pennsylvania Avenue north from
the intersection. The Planning Commission asked the reeardin� secretary to
forward the proposed sketch to Larry Giesler of Midwest Planning and Research
for his review.
6. GENERAL
(a) Suitable parcels for acquisition (preserving open space)
The Planning Comm�ssion discussed areas which might be suitable for acquisition
to preserve open space as designated on a large Village map. The Commission
asked the staff to provide a map sho�ri.ng the areas the Village now awns prior
to further study of the project.
(b) Proposed Land Reclamation and kTetlands Ordinance
Mr. Gary Bickel, Chairman of the Environmental Commission, reviewed with the
Planning Comzni.ssion and Consultant Carl 13a1e an ordinance relating to land
reclamation and control of water courses, lands abutting same, marshes and wet-
lands. The Planning Commission recammended approval of said ordinance, subject
to changes as noted on the recording secretaxy�s copy.
(c) Housi.ng Institute
Warren Lundsgaard, Chairman of the Planning Commission, asked Gommissioner
Ancerson if she would represent the Planning Commission to meet with th�
Human Rights Commission to review the plan for the housing institute.
���..
Planning Commission
September 25, 1972 page 6
There bei.ng no further business to come before the meeting, it was on motion,
duly seconded, adjourned. at 12:50 A.M.
Chairman Warren Lundsgaard Secretary Lowell Swanson