Loading...
08-13-73 PC Minutes ��� A�INUTES OF THE GOLDII�1 VAT,L�'X PI,ANNTNG OOMMISSION August 13, 1973 A regul.ar meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission was held at 8:00 P.M. on Monday, August 13, 1973 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Va]1ey Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chairman John Sampson presided and the following members were present: Commissioners Anderson, Becker, Christiansen, Edstrom, Herje, I,eonard, and Lundsgaard. Carl �ale, Planner, and Jon Westlake, Recording Secretary, were also present. Members absent: Commissioner Hughes. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOVED by Anderson, seconded by Edstrom, carried unanimously, to approve the minutes of the July 23, 1973 meeting as amended. 2. t�7AIVER OF THE PLATTIAIG ORDINANCE (a) William J, Halluska (2 Residential lots) 731t0 Harold Avenue The request is to divide Lot �2 A.uditor�s Subdivision No. 312 into two parce�ls. The west parcel would have a frantage of 91 feet and contain 24,750 square feet. The east parcel woul.d have I27 feet of frontage. The Plannin� Commission in discussing the request asked Mrs. Halluska the reason they were proposing a lot that did not meet the Ordinance in frontage when it was possible to do so. Mrs. Halluska stated they pl.an to make a double garage out of a single garage located on the west end of the present house, and the Ordznance requires a sideyard setback of 15 feet. Th� Planning CAmrr�.ssion also discussed placing a restriction on the lot for front yard setback because of the lot bein� very deep. It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Anderson, carried unanimously, to recommend approval of the waiver of the Platting Ordinance. (b) Jerome Conrad (2 Residential lots) 3900 Glenwooc3 Avenue The present parcal is 363 feet deep by 109 feet wide and contains a house and a garage that has been remodeled into a dw�lling unit. The proponent is requesting to divide off the North 135 feet of this lot which has an easement access fram Block 2 Lot 2 Russell�s Wirth Park Addition. The Planni.ng Commission studied the area to the west of this parcel with respect to the future divisian af other lots in this area. Mr. Conrad stated that if the division is approved, the smaller parcel will be 135 feet by 109 feet and will contain 11t,715 square feet. It was maved by Lundsgaa,rd, seconded by Christiansen, carried unanimously to approve the waiver of the Platting Ordinance� subject to the Village receiving a copy of the agreement for ingress and egress on Lot 2 Block 2 Russell's Wirth Park Addition and meeting the requirements of the Village II3gineering �epartment in refersnce to gradi.ng the site. 1�� Planning Commission August 13, 1973 page 2 (c) Harry Hamman (2 Open Development lots) 6001 Glenwood Avenue The proponent is requesting to divide a tract of land approximately 13.5 acres in area into two parcels-one parcel containing 11 acres and the other containing 2.5 acres. In discussing.the proposal with Mr. Brian Bennett, who has a pur- ehase agreement on the property from Mr. Hamman, the Planning Commission expressed the following concer�s: 1.) Irregular shape of the proposed division, 2.) A 60-foot frontage on Glenwood Avenue, 3.) No proposed layout for either parcel, !�.) No thought was given to the adjacent pareels on the east and west as to how these parcels may function in relation to this proposed division (proponent should review his proposal with the abutting property owners). It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Christiansen to tabl.e the request for the waiver of the Flatting Ordinance. The motion carried with one na�y vote. 3. PLANNFD UI�TIT �EVELOPME@1T - P.U.D. #1-A (General Plan) Applicant: Benson-Orth Associates, Inc. Location: North of St. Croix Avenue and to a point approximately 330 feet East of Bassetts Creek Proposal: 37,55o square feet - Office Building The total land area in Phase 1-A of this planned unit development is 3•45 acres of which 120,863 square feet is a drai.nage easement for Bassetts Creek. The structure has approximately 20� more area than what would be allowed under the Business and Professional Offices Zoning Code. I+4r. Carl Dale, Planner, reviewed the following Planning Considerations: l. The developer desires at this time to proceed with Phase 1-A of the PUD as per the Construction Order Component of the PUD Permit granted for the total Bassett Creek Plaza Office Building PUD. 2. This latest progosal is one of a series of revised plans submitted over the past several months; a general observation is that this current plan for Phase 1-A construction is superior to all earlier plans. 3. If approved, Phase 1-A should be governed by amended and/or added conditions to the original PUI3 Permit. Records of previous meetings, hawever, i.ndicate certain additional information has bee,n requested: a) Current traffic study; b) Completion date for landscaping edges of entire PtJ� area; e) Landscape and/or maintenance plan for all remaining vacant land; and d) Review comments and recommendations from Bassett Creek Flood and Drainage Commission, Trails Committee, - and Building Board of Review. Such information was not available on the date this report-was prepaxed. !t. In a staged construction program under PU� procedures, a good way to consider eonditions for later stages of construction is to enaluate the actual results of Phase; I. Our observations and recommendations would be as follows: � �� Planning Commission August 13, 1973 page 3 a) Require concrete curbing rather than asphalt i.n the parking and drive areas; b) Require added landscaping adjacent to and near the building structure (Phase 1-A construction plans seem to meet this requirement). c) Require added landscaping in pax king areas (islands). d) Continue "relaxed" pax°king requirements but with "reserve" capacit�r provided if needed in the future. Spot checks of the existing building indicates no parking problem to date although it is realized that the building is not yet f�zlly occupied. 5. The current PUD Permit states that no access is to be permitted anto St. Croix Avenue; this apparently applied onl.y to the first stage of construction since it would not be practical for the total development to proceed without some access onto 5t. Croix. The current proposed access would seem to be in keeping with earlier discussions and recommendations that traffic access onto St. Croix be limited and that direct -traffic through the project between St. Croix and �ul.uth 9treet be discouraged. Subject to findings of a traffic survey and other evidence, the current plan seems to accomplish this objective. It should be stipulated i.n the Permit, however, that the current office building be utilized strictly for pure office use rather than containing some other commercial activity also that might generate added traffic volume onto 5t. Croix Avenue. 6. Comments on the site plan submitted are as follows: a) A 21 ft. landscaped yaxd is provided along St. Croix Avenue as opposed to the 35 ft. required by Ordinance; the degree of site plan detail submitted is not adequate to determine if such a variance is proper. The height of the berm and tree planting may or may not be adequate for suitable screening in this area. b) The five (5) ft. planting strip along the east property line is not adequate; a seven (7) ft. strip is recommended with some trees added. c) �.dditional landscaping should be required in the parking areas in the form of planted "islands!�. d) Improvements could be made to Bassetts Creek in this area; the landscape plan should indicate such improvements and ,al.so a pedestrian trail location. if requested. e) Additional landscaping detail should be submitted prior to issuance of building permits including details for landscaping adjacent to and near the office building. f) Information should be submitted indicating the height of the building in relation to the curb level on St. Croix Avenue. g) Current ordinance requirements are for 255 off-street parking spaces while 21lt spaces are provided for on �he site plan; this should be adequate and in accordance with the recommended ehange in office building parki.ng (zoning code). In any event, the wooded area between Phase No. 1 Phase No. 1-A should be retained as being availab�.e for additional parking if and when needed by actual usage of the site. Summar The current pl.an for Phase 1-� construction seems to be an improvement over previous plans submitted for review. As noted in this report, however� certain refinements should be considered in the light of additional information as suggested herein. ��� Flanning Commission August 13, 1973 page !t NIr. Jor� Westlake then reviewed a memo from the Public Safety Director which contained four points as follows: 1. The entrance and exit to the South of this proposed building is not designed for use by emergency vehicles. We recommend eliminating the curved driveway as shown and substitute a 30 foot minimum roadway from St. Croi�c A.venue to the proposed building. There is a possibility of an emergency exit and entrance on the Southeast corner of thi.s building, however, it would require a chain or some other device to assure com- pliance with the intent of this driveway. 2. The trees, shrubs and parking on the East side next to the building should be removed, this must be a designated "Fire Lane". We must have access to this building from at least three (3) sides, especially the East. 3. We strongly recommend hydrant placement as recommended by the Fire �epartment, there must be an adequate water supply close to the building for our use. This requested water supply shauld be loaped to provide greater water flow. �. There must be standpipes in the smoketowers with a 2 1/2�� and 1 1/2t� IdST connection on each floor, both standpipes must extend through the roof for the protection of the mechanical. The Planning Commission expressed interest in the two items relating to egress to St. Croix Avenue and access to the structure itself for fire and safety protection. A memorandum from the Village Engineer was also reeiewed with respect to access to St. Croix Avenue not only for the proposed building but the total concept for this office park, which is as follows: After studying the proposed addition to Bassett Creek Plaza, some changes are suggested regarding the traffic using the complex. Prior to approval af PUD #1, it was suggested that access be provided for the ultimate developtnent from both Duluth Street and St. Croix Avenue. Some alignment changes were proposed to eliminate the "straight-thru�� type pattern as proposed. In order to alleviate some of the problems now evident on �uluth Street, it is recommended that access to 5t. Croix Avenue be limited to one opening at the intersection of St. Croix Avenue and Yosemite Avenue. This will a11ow some type of traffic control at the intersection if conditions warrant in the future. Some of the problems outlined by the Public Safety D�partment could also be eliminated by providing one efficient openi.ng at Yosemite. The parking for the total complex could then be designed to function adequately and still eliminate and � "through" traffic bet�een Duluth Street and St. Croix Ave. Messrs. Charles Colter, Attorney, and Bernard Herman, architect from the firm of Cottle Herman Architects, Inc., were present to review the proposal with the Planning Commission. Mr. Herman reviewed Phase I and then explained that the boulevard drive in Pha,�e I has been carried into Phase 1-A from Duluth Street, minimizing the access onto St. Croix Avenue. Because of the radio tower guy wires being anchored in the site, the parking, landscaping, and building had to be designed around it. The site and internal landscaping is layed out in such a manner to discourage through traffic. .�.�� Planning Commission Augtzst 13, 1973 Page 5 Mr. Herman continued by e�cplaining some of the landscaped area, including the areas of berming and briefly discussed the traffic study (which was distributed to the Commission at this meeting). Mr. Herman al`so referred to the concluding paragraph of the traffic study which, in general, stated that at least one access point should be provided as a secondary access paint to provide access for emergency vehicles and to facilitate other internal circulation. Mr. Herman i.n explaining the design of the exterior of the building stated they did not want to duplicate the structure of Phase I but have a representation of material and color from the Phase I building. The brick, glass, frame, and anodized color are the same as Phase I. The building contains three floors with a total area of 37,7�1 square feet and a rentable building area of 30,800 square feet. The site plan indicates 214 parking spaces. More spaces are required by Ordinance, which there is sufficient land for, but are shown in green area. The following concerns were voiced by the residents: Mr. Kuns, 1610 East Constance �ive, was concerned about: l.) the encroachment on the residential area, and does not seem to be in good keeping with the ecological considerations of the area, 2.) the nursi.ng home to the south needs a quiet approach, 3•) a buffer area is needed between the uses now on the property and the residential area, 4.) concerned about the traffic. Mr. Munn, KTIS Radio, was concerned about: 1.) the cable from the tower which runs to the guy wires anchor point, 2.) pile driving and excavating for the structure may topple the tower, 3.) grading the site which may affect the radio ground system, ?�.) concerned about security, 5.) the drive area in relation to where the tower cable comes down to the ground-may be clipped by a vehicle. Mr. and Mrs. Swendsen, 1620 East Constance �rrive, were concerned about the traffic generated by the site. Mr. Culhane, 1l�30 Yosemite, was concerned about traffic. Other comments were made regarding the zoning on the site and the traffic situation. The Planning Commission discussed the June 25, 1973 Planning Cammission minutes at which time Mr. Benson appeared before the Planning Commission to set a date for the hearing for the planned unit development. Certain items were requested by the Commission for review prior to the hearing- including other meetings Mr. Benson would have to attend. These requirements still have not been met. The Commission also noted that in Phase I the developer had an over-all land- scaping plan, including general grading of the sj.te, which has not yet been completed. In the present Phase 1-A the Commission discussed the traffic impact as to St. Croix Avenue. What wou3.d be done with the natural area to the west of the proposed building? Landscaping plans were not detailed enough and questioned the smaller green area adjacent to St. Croix Avenue and on the east edge of the plat. Referred to the questions raised in the Planning Considerations and re- quested that a11 Planning Commission members receive a copy of the traffic study. Because information the 1'lanning Commission requested was not available, and because the traffic problem is of such concern that it should be addxessed before an,y further development is approved, it was moved by Anderson, seconded by Becker, carried unanimously, that the Planning Commission delay a decision on this request until: 1�J Planning Commission August 13, 19?3 page 6 1. An access plan is proposed for the total PUD development whic� would be compatible with the neighborhood and traffic patterns in the total area bounded by Highway 100-�buglas Drive and Duluth Street-Golden Valley Road. 2. All other details requested and required by the various boards, commissions, and staff be available to them in time for their study so their comments can be forwarded to the Planning Commission members in time for the Commi.ssion to review before the meeting at which time a decision is requested. 3. Any prablem with the radio tower and its guy lines be resolved. �. A compliance date be set for the completion of the peri.meter and open space landscaping which was promised in Phase I. !t. OKII�T�S AN� SHERMAN, INC. (a) Request for Rezoning 1109 Zane Avenue North Open �evelopment to Light Industrial Southerly 1l�5t of Lots 1 and 2 Li.ndsay's Second Addition Mr. Jon Westlake reviewed with the Planning Commission the June 11, 1973 Planning Commission minutes at which time Oken's and Sherman, Inc. requested a rezoning of Lots 12 and l3 of Lindsay's Second Addition to Light Industrial which included a parking agreement and a 64 foot landscaped area �djacent to the east property line. The present request is an extension of the previous request £or a rezoning from Open 77evelopment to Light Industrial on the south 1Lt5 feet of Lots 1 and 2 Lindsay�s Second Additi.on. Because of the small remaining open area, the Village staff recommends that the remainder of Lots 1 and 2 be zoned from Open �evelopment to Light Industrial. Also, the proponent has agreed to include in this area the 60-foot green area requirement off the east property line. Messrs. Marshall Sherman of Oken�s Supreme, Inc. and James Nielsen from the firm of Nielsen, Stock & Blackburn LTD we�re present t,a answer questions about the proposal Mr. Wilson of 1125 Welcome Circle was present as an interested resident. � It was moved by Christiansen, seconded by Leonard to recommend rezoning Lots 1 and 2 Lindsay's Second Addition to Light Industrial. The motion did not carry. After further discussion it was moved by Lundsgaard, seconded by Becker to recommend rezoning the South 330 feet of Lots 1 and 2 Lindsay's Second Addition from Open �evelopment to Light Industrial, subject to the 60 foot agreement on landscaping and the e�rtension of the parking agreement as an added protection to the Re.Sidential area, the northerly parcel (adjacent to Golden Valley Road) was left Open �evelopment. The motion carried with one nay vote. (b) Waiver of the Platting Ordinance 1109 Zane Avenue North Four (!�) Parcels-�,ight Industrial and Open ➢evelopment . In conjunction �rith the rezoning request as above, the proponent is proposing to re-arrange and combine certain lot lines into five (5) parcels in Lindsay�s Second �ddition. ��� Planning Commission August 13, 1973 page 7 It was moved by Christiansen, seconded by Lundsgaard, carried unanimously to recammend approval o�' the division of the five (5) parcels as described in " the petitioner's application dated August 8, 1973. 5. c�a� (a) �i.scussion of Proposed Motion for Planning Open Land The Planning Commission having discussed a proposed policy guideline at the ' July 9, and July 23, 1973 Planning Commission meetings asked Carl Dale, Planner, to further study this palicy guideline for further suggestions (which was mailed to the Planning Commission members). After discussing the policy guideline, it was moved by Leonard, seconded by Edstrom to approve the policy guideline as follows. The motion carried with ane nay vote. '�The Golden Va11ey Planning Commission has taken an affirmative approach to co- ordinate planni.ng in several areas which still remain vacant within the Village. The Planning Commission will continue to meet with affected property owners in a variety of planning and development situations when it is believed that coordination of planning is needed when one development may have an affect upon adjacent and nearby land parcels. The Planning Commission wi11 eontinue to meet with developers and the owners of adjacent and surrounding land to promote better cooperation, communication, and good.will between developers, nearby land owners, and the Village. As a result of such meetings, the Comprehensive Municipal Plan may be amended and/or made more specific as it applies to the site, situation, and general area involved. Such coordination meetings will occur at regularly - scheduled meetings of the Golden Valley Planning Commission or at scheduled special meetings. The staff shall make the neeessary preparations including graphics, background reports, recommendations, and assure proper notification of all affected paxties to the situation. Coordination meetings may be scheduled for the following situations although not necessarily limited thereto: 1. 4�hen one owner of a land parcel contained within a larger segment of un- developed land or abutts undeveloped land and such development will affect the larger area to the extent that planning coordination is needed to develop the total area involved in consistency with the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. 2. Any attempt at subdivision or resubdivision in which such action has direet or indirect implications for potential similar requests on adjacent or nearby property. 3. Ar�y situation in which streets, walkways, or fnture access to other properties may be involved that has or could have an affect upon the surrounding area. 1�. Any development whieh may have a direct or indirec-t affect upon the futtare development or redevelopment of adjacent or nearby land parcels. ��� Planning Commission August 13, 1q73 page 8 It is believed that this coordination and communications procedure will en- courage mutual understanding and alleviate the concerns of neighboring cititienry. When deemed appropriate and proper, the results of such coordination meetings shall be documented and reco�nended to the Village Cc�uncil as additions to and/or amendments to the Comprehensive Municipal Plan.�f For the Planning Conunission i.nformation, the motion as originally proposed`is repeated here for comparison purposes. PRAPOSID 1�TION AS UISCUSSED BY COMMISSIONER LDDNARD AT PLANNING OOMMISSION MEETING July 9, 1973: In that the t3olden Valley Planning Commission has tc�night (July 9, 1973) taken a new, affirmative approach ta coordinate planning in the Northwest corner of the Village as an example of that sma11 percentage of as yet un- developed parcels of land in the Village, And that this will undoubtedly further cooperation, communication, and goodwill between the Village and land developers, And that this eventually encourages mutual understanding and concerns with the neighboring citizenry and the general citizenry, Be it resolved that the Golden Valley Planning Commission continue to take this posture and attempt to meet with the various land developers when one owner of a parcel contained in a large segment of undeveloped land applies for planned unit development concept hearing in order to conjointly develop the remaining Village land with consistency; these meetings shall occur at regtzlarly scheduled Golden Valley Planning Commission meeti.ngs or at specifically called Go].cten Valley Planning Commission meetings. (b) Report from Sub��mmittee on Moderate Housing in P.U.D. The Subcotmnittee, consisting of Commissioners Anderson, Edstrom, and Herje, reviewed with the Planning Commission their progress report as follows with respect to Moderate Housing in P.U.D.�s: I. . Moderate Income Housing in PUU9i)�s Following are some suggestions which we feel will better achieve �he goal of economic diversity in housing available in the Village. l. ftequire a greater variety or range in the cost of units in a development. . �2y PUD proposal containing 20 or more dwelling units should have a certain � of the units in several price ranges. At least 10� of units should sell for less than $30,000 At least 30% should sell for less than $lt0,000 At least 50� should sell for less than $50,000 . These various priced units shall be geographically integrated throughaut the development. . Developments of less than 20 units, will be looked at individually to determine how they might achieve similar goals. ��� Planning Commission August 13, 1973 page 9 2. Require the units to more accurately reflect their worth. This could be achieved by such as; a. Iess square footage b. fewer amenities such as extra baths c. lower deeorating costs d. slab construction e. 1 car garage f. ap,pliances o,ptional 3. Require the developer to sell the lower priced units to persans within a certain income-net worth range. . The Village Attorney feels it is possible to require a develQper to use some accepted lending or mortgage agency to verify income level and assets of a prospective buyer. . Planning Commission could set range acceptable. - Income of buy�ers not exceed limits set by HU�9 for mod_erate income housing - Net worth not to exceed limits set by HU� for moderate income housing. (averaged over past three years) . Within the PtT� contract a provis�.on should be added which requires the developer to certify to the Village that he will and l.ater that he has fulfilled these requirements. - He should provide the addresses of units in moderate range - He should give some certification of income legel of buyers of these. II. �iOUSING and Redevelopment Authority The sub-committee feels that an HRA might be helpful to Galden Valley to work toward the solution of the following problems; A. Providing housing for low-moderate income families B. Redevelopment of area north of High�ay 55 and west of Glenwood Parkway C. Redevelopment of the Civic Center area We recommend the Planning Commission investigate the feasibility of estab� lishing an HRA in the Village in the following m�nner: 1. Ask Dick Brustad of the Greater Minneapolis Metropolitan Iiousing Corpora.tion to speak to the comma.ssion about:�. a. The use of his group by the Village with or without an HRA. �. His knflwledge of various HRA operations in this area. 2. Ask people from other communities with HRA's to speak to us. (Hopkins, St. I,vuis Park, Robbinsdal�, etc.) 3. Di.scuss with housing staff of Metro Council the pros and cons of a Metro HRA, how we.�might use one and what future possibilities are for legislature to establish one. 4. Planning Commission come to a conclusion and present a recommendation to the Village Council. The Planning Commission thanked the Subcommittee for their progress report and will further discuss the report at future me€�tings. (c) 33iscussion on Proposed Ordinance for 79edication of Land in Subdivisions ���� Planning Commission August 13, 1973 page 10 N1r. Westlake reviewed with the Planning Commission a sample ordinance for d�dication of land in subdivision and ask�d if the Planning Commission would like further research done on this type of ordinanc�. The Planning Commission asked Mr. �al.e and Mr. Westlake to work on a sample ordinance for Golden Valley and, prior to the Planning Commission reviewing it, have the Park and Recreation. Commission review the proposal. (d) Comprehensive Plan Hearing �ate Mr. John Sampson informed the Planning Commission that the Village Council has set October 15, 1973 as a hearing date for the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Sampson did inform the Village Council at their August 6, 1973 meeting of the progress of the plan. The Planning Comm3.ssion members congratulated Mr. Sampson on his presentation to the Village Council. There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was on motion, duly seconded, adjourned at 11:35 P.M. r� n �� ; � ��,„�� / �� �� __. � '��c..�...�. � � � � ..�._ Cha man John Sampson Sec etary on !