01-14-74 PC Minutes 229
AqINUT�S OF THF GOLDIId VALLEY
PLANNING OONIl�IISSION
January 11t, 197t�
A. regular meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission was held at 7:30 P.M.
on Monday, January l�t, 1974 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road,
C�lden Valley, Minnesota.
Chairman John Sampson presided and the following members were present:
Commissioners Becker, Christiansen, Edstrom, Herje, Hughes, Leonard, and Lundsgaard.
Car1 Dale, Village Consultant, was also present.
Members absent: None.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOVID by Christiansen, seconded by Hughes, carried
unanimously, to approae the minutes of the December 10, 1973 Planning Commission
meeting as mailed. .
2. PLANNET9 UNIT DEVELOPMEI�T - SET PUBLIC IId�ORMATIONAL ME�'TING
P.U.D. �1.2-A Concept Plan
Applicant: Jack Galant
Location: County Road 18 service drive
Proposal: Three-story building containing 60 units
Chairman Sampson opened discussion by stating that this item is before the
Planning Commission for the purpose of setting a public informational hearing date.
Messrs. �'ack Galant and Richard Diamond were present for the proposal. Mr. Diamond
stateci they are proposing a three story building containing 60 units with 60
parking spaces above ground and 75 parking spaces underground. Total surface area
of the parcel which would be built upon is 9�.
Comrnissioner Herje felt that the development is still over the nine units per acre
as indicated in the October 23, 1973 Planning Commission minutes and as indicated
by the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Sampson felt that because of the substantial
revision of the proponent�s_plans, a date for the-public hearing could be set.
It was moved by Leonard, seconded by Becker that the public informational meeting
for -the coneept of P.U.D. �7.2-A be set for February 11, 197�, in lieu of the
following stipulations: �. that Mr. Galant forthwith notify area residents and
hold a meeting with the area residents prior to the informational meeting, and.
2. that before the informational meeting all necessary maps and information be
mailed to the Planning Commission members for their review, and 3. the proponent
to have a site plan complete with dimensions, elevations of the building, typical
floor plans, slightly more detailed landscape plan, and a cross section of the
building (e�rplaining what use occurs on each level of the building). The motian
was carried with Commissioner Herje voting nay.
3. PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR REZOIJING RE�UEST
Convenience Center
Medicine Lake Road and Hillsboro Avenue
Open Development to Commercial
���
Planning Commission
January l�t, 197lt page 2
Carl Dale, P1anni.ng Consultant, e�lained the total development for the area
as proposed by the proponent and explained that the proposal is for a restaurant
on the west side of Hillsbora Avenue and a convenience center on the east side
of Hillsboro Avenue. Presently only the North 250 feet of the property is
� zoned Commercial, and also waivers will be requested from the Board of Zoning
Appeals for parking, setbacks, and green axea. The following concerns were
e�ressed by CarT I�ale: 1. Is the proposed zonin� in conformance with develop-
ment of the Comprehensive Plan? 2. Will this development cause any problems in
the area? 3. Items Planning Commission may require from the proponent.
R. C. Ernst, owner of the property, was present to e�cplain the proposal.
Mr. Ernst stated that the convenience center would hause a ?-11 store, barber shop,
hardware store, and other commercial businesses on the first floor, and real estate
offices, insurance offices, etc, would be housed on the first 1eve1 walkout at the
south end of the building. A family type restaurant is planned for the west side
of Hillsboro Avenue. Mr. Ernst stated the proposal does not meet parking spaces
or green area requirements, and an attempt was made to purchase additional property
in order to more comply with parking requirements, but the attempt was unsuccessful.
Commissioner Herje expressed concern with regard to traffic congestion on the
service road. There was discussion on what the present and proposed Zoning Code
parking requirements were.
It was moved by Herje, seconded by Hughes that the Planning Commission point out
that this is in conformance with the proposed land use of the Comprehensive Plan;
however, the Planning Commission has no recommendation as to any specific proposal
at this time and would recommend that it not be zoned until such a time there
is a specific proposal. The motion was carried unanimously.
It was moved by Becker, seconded by Christiansen, carried unanimously, that the
following concerns be expressed to the Board of Zoning Appeals: 1. In considering
the parking waiver for adequate parking on the site the question of possible traffic
congestion in the area should also be a consideration. 2. If waivers are granted
by the Board of Zoning Appeals, the proponent will then have to reappear before
the Planning Commission for the rezoning request.
1t. PUBLZC INFORMATIONAI, MEETING (PLANiVING UNIT DEVELOPM�fiiT)
P.TJ.�. #13 Concept Plan �
Applicant: Cheyenne Land Company
Location: East of County Road 18 service drive and North of Duluth Street
Proposal: 172 Single Family Homes with Zero Lot Lines
Car� �?ale, Planning Consultant, began discussion by stating that the developer
is presenting concept plans to try to determine if the plan as proposed by them
is generally in conformance wi.th land use under the Comprehensive Plan in this
area. If the proposal is acceptable, then it will be presented to the Village
Council for approval and returned to the Planning Commission for general plan
approval. Mr. Dale explained that the Village should be concerned with net
density, especially in the Southern portion. The net density in the southern
half of the parcel equals 7 units per acre. The amount of actual open space
left between the units was also discussed.
Carl Dale then read the followi.ng Planning Condiserations:
���
Planning Commission
January 1�, 197� page 3
"l. The proposal is to develop 172 dwelling units on 3� acres of land with a
density af 5•9 homes per acre. The development plan is to utilize a form
of the "zero" lot line concept with two attached single family units being
repeated as a building unit throughout the project; in effect, this is a
type of side-by-side ��duplex" structure.
2. As a type of land use the proposal would be in conformity to the Comprehensive
Village Plan which calls for a Residential PUD on the site; the current project
proposal, however, calls for a gross density of 5.9 units per acre as opposed
to a miximum of four (4) recommended earlier by the Planning Gommission.
By way of comparison, density to the south is developed at approximately five
(5) units per acre and land to the east is platted at about 2.5 units per acre.
The Village Plan calls for development of land to the north of this site at a
maximum of eight (8) units per acre.
3. It should be noted that multiple dwellings or higher density residential use
of a property in question meets normal or generally accepted planning criteria
for the proper location of such units. For example, they are located at the
edge of a single-family neighborhood rather than within it and traffic is
channeled onto major streets rather than minor residential roads.
!t. Although all buildings would be composed of two attached single family homes,
some diversity would be offered by having six different models with one being
a single story structure to meet a specific need and market. It is probable
that this project would add needed diversity to the housing supply of
Golden Va11ey and assist in the implementation of a suitable community
housing policy.
5. Properly designed and developed, the project should not create adverse effects
upon adjacent or nearby single family homes.
6. At this time, zoning and development plans are being proposed and considered
for the larger undeveloped area involved; it should be possible, then to
coordinate total. neighborhood development along guidelines prepared earlier
by the Planning Commission.
7. As a "general development plan concept", we would judge the project proposal
to be acceptable. Further study and evaluation is needed concerning certain
plan details and elements including but not necessarily limited to the
following:
a) The proposed net density is quite high resulting in poor relationship
between land covered by structures and usable open green space.
b) Zero lot line development is an acceptable approach to planning a resi-
dential environment provided it serves the intended purpose of creating
an imaginative and desirable living enviror�rnent. Planning considerations
involve space and use relationships and "scale" of development. Detailed
considerations include provisions for family privacy, visual impact,
recreation areas and facilities related to the anticipated population
component, pedestrian circulation, and the like. These matters should be
explored further with respect to the current project proposal.
c) It should be determined if traffic circulation is adequate. Items of
concern include adequate emergency vehicle access, the very long "dead end"
road situation, ��slippery�� road conditions� adequacy of curves for turning
of fire trucks, and even the visual aspects of building, road, and parking
relationships.
d) An agreement must be reached concerning storm water storage and drainage,
as this must be coordinated with adjacent properties.
�p3�
Planning Commission
January 14, 197� page �
e) While provisions have been made for the potential extension and
development of Duluth Street, the building setback distance seems
rather minimal as well as that proposed along the Caunty Road 18
service r�ad. This would be especially critical if family private
areas are to be located near these roads.
f) Adequate provisions should be made for snow storage and removal; it is
noted that in many higher density residential projects, snow storage
tends to become a visual, traffic, and space problem.
g) More detailed drawings should be submitted showing lease and lot arrange-
ments with respect to the spacing and location of private and public areas.
There may be a problem of conflicts between the spacing of private and
public areas due to the high net residential densities involved.
h) Consideration should be given to providing additional guest parking.
i) Specific details of a public trail or walkway through the property should
be considered.
j) Under the proposed density or even a someWhat reduced dwelling unit density,
adequate landscaping will be extremely important; as the project develops,
detailed landscaping plans should be required for the first stage of devel-
opment including an area beyond the model homes; landscaping of the model
home area may or may not be representative of landscape treatment for the
entire project.
Summary
Approval is recommended for the "concept�' only but at a somewhat reduced net
density. Such approval would be subject to later approval of more detailed over-
all plans and very detailed plans for the first stage of development. Al1 required
conditions would be included in the PUD Permit to be drafted later by Village staff."
Messrs. Jim Hawks, Planner for Centurion Company, R. Knutson of McCoombs-Knutson,
and Richard Neslund, Centurion Company, wer2 present for the request. Mr. Hawks
stated that area residents were notified of a neighborhood meeting and such a
meeting was held on January 7, 197�t with approximately 15 residents attending.
Mr. Hawks gave a description of the location of buildings on the parcel. The
distance off County Road 18 service drive to the baek of the buildings is 25 feet�
and from the North line of the Duluth Street right-of-way the buildings will be
25 feet from the south property line. No building is closer than 25 feet to
anather buildin�. Paxks and pedestrian pathways have been included in the plan.
P�r. Hawks stated that he has discussed this with John Brenna, Park and Recreation
�lirector, and the developer is providing two tennis courts on land which will be
giaen to the Village as a permanent eassment. The proponent has also met with the
Village Engineer with res.pect to water storage on this parcel of ground, and the
proponent is presently planning to pond 13 acre feet as indicated in the plans.
One pond will be loeated on the east side of the parcel, and the second pond will
be located on the west side (located parall.el to the road entering the development. )
A double entrance off County Road 18 service drive has been provided for, and
23rd Avenue or E1gin Place could be developed as emergency access also. Traffic
is totally directed to the County Road 18 service drive.
2�;�
Planning Commission
January 1Lt, 1974 page 5
Mr. Hawks stated that a double attached garage and two guest parking spaces are
provided for each home. Common maintenance fees would pay for cutting grass and
snow removal in the streets or private driveways. Commissioner Edstrom questioned
if there was any way maintenance could be guaranteed to which Garl Dale replied
that the Village will assume responsibility if necessary for maintenance and the
cost is assessed to taaces.
Mr. �'}ick Knutson of McCoombs-Knutson explained soil conditions and general drain-
age, utility location, and noted the depths of unsuitable soil in certain areas
of the development. The proponent will work jointly with the Village as to
placement of water and sewer lines, drainage, etc.
Mr. Hawks indicated that 65� of the land area will be left open, 16� will ha.ve
building coverage, and 19� will be used for street and driveways. The distance
from the front of the garage to the �urb line is 22 feet plus parking for two
vehicles in front. The distance between homes is 30 feet (of which 12 feet is
taken up by the patios, leaving 6 feet of distance between two structures). '
The front yard equals 30 feet to the front of the street.
The Planning Commission members expressed concern as to how the special assess-
ments would be dealt with, the width of the streets being 28 feet and 32 feet,
emergency access, traffic congestion on Medicine Lake Road, the location of some
of the southernmost buil.dings and their nearness to Duluth Street, and density
in the southern half being too high. Commissioner Christiansen suggested that
_ emergency access be upgraded and felt that more green area could be accomplished
by removing some structures. Chairman Sampson e�cpressed concern about density,
especially of the southern portion, and stated that a density of 5.0 units per
acre would be more agreeable. The price range of the units ranges from $27,900
to 38,900, and if the density werelessened, the proponent indicated that the
cost of each unit �ould increase approximately $1,500. Commissioner Leonard
expressed concern for the distance between the tennis courts and the immediate
residents, indicating a noise problem might arise if the homes are located too
close to the tennis courts.
Chairman Sampson ask�d for comments from the residents in the area. The comments
were as follows: Mr. Nordhaus, 231t0 IIlsign Ave. N., expressed concern that
there is no strong legal bind to make the residents of the development pay the
maintenance fees or maintain the property. Richard Larsan, 9036 �lgin Place,
does not lik� the closeness of five houses in the north corner near the skating
rink, and is in favor of the open space left in the development, but feels that
the southern portion is a little overbuilt. Marilyn Gulbrath, 2016 F�sign Ave. N.,
feels density is too high.
It was moved by Herje, seconded by Christiansen, that the Planning Commission
recommend concept plan approval with the stipulation that the den�ity be lowered
and that more open space be made available for residents for their use on the
southernmost portion. Commissioner Lundsgaard moved to amend the original motion
by adding "to remove 20 units, and these units to be removed from the southern
portion of the property to provide more gresn space. The amended motion was
seconded by Hughes. Upon vote being taken on the amended motion, the following
voted in favor thereof: Hughes and Lundsgaaxd. The following voted against the
same: Becker, Christiansen, Edstrom, Herje, and Leonard. The amended motion
���
Planning Commission
January l�t, 197lt page 6
was defeated. Upon vote being taken on the ori ginal motion, the following
voted in favor thereof: Becker, Christiansen, Edstrom, Herje, and Leonard.
The following voted against the same: Hughes and Lundsgaard. The motion carried.
5. PRII,IMINAFtY REVIEW FOR ftEZODtING REQUEST
Trevilla of Golden Valley
7505 Country Club Drive
(5th Avenue south to T.H. #55)
Business and Professional Offices to Institutional (I-3)
Carl ?3ale, Planning Consultant, explained the proposal. The proposal is to
ea�pand the existing nursing home and to vacate �th Avenue North which is located
directly south of the existing building. Mr. �ale stated that under the Comprehen-
sive Plan this entire area, including the Civic Center, is designated as a re-study
area and has many severe problems in development. The entire parcel, including
the proposed expansion is proposed to be Limited Business under the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff comments on this propos�l are: The proposed land use is adequate,
and the land use seems appropriate. Traffic circulation may need further study.
The proposed addition is four stories in height, which the Planning Consultant feels
will not be out of place because the contour of the land becomes lower on the
south portion of the parcel.
Paul Pink of Gingold-Pink Architecture was present to explain the proposal.
Mr. Pink stated the additian will consist of 102 typical bedroom units and �
12 studios, making a total of 11]� dwelling units in a proposed building contin-
ing four stories. The parking spaces required for the existing building is 5lt,
and 61 parking spaces will be required for the addition (1 car/!t patients)
making a total of 115 required spaces, and the plan for the proposal shows
121 parking spaces.
The existing site area is 96,8l�0 square feet. The new site area would equal
lOb,398 square feet and vacated 5th Avenue North would consist of 8,300 square
feet making a total of 211,538 square feet of site area. The total site coverage
for the proposed four story addition is 2l�.06�. Mr. Pink noted that the Village
Zoning C�de allows a maximum of 25� site coverage; however, this is figured on a
2 1/2 story building basis. The proponent�s theoretical site coverage for a
2 1/2 story building is 28.��. The proponent is looking for comments from the
Planning Commission so that when he appears before the Board of Zoning Appeals
he may receive some type of definite action.
Chairman Sampson asked for comments from the audience. There being none, the
Planning Commission members discussed. further the "theoretical site coverage"
and proposed employe� parking, and vacation of 5th Avenue North.
It was moved by Leonard to recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals that the
Planning Cammission ap.proves of the broad general concept of land use and
requests a formal trafPic study of the area which is to be presented to the
Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Edstrom and carried unanimously.
6. GENERAL
(a) 1�iscuss Open Spaca Report with the Ad Hoc Committee on Open Space
�
���
Planning Commission
January 1}�, 197�t page 7
Syrille Ellisan and Virginia Levy made a limited presentation to the Planning
Commission. Mrs. II.lison stated that the reason the Committee was on the
Planning Commission agenda for this meeting was because the Ad Hoc Committee
wanted the Planning Commission to have an opportunity to review the Report
before the Comprehensive Plan hearing on January 21, 197�.
Chairman Sampson stated that because of the late hour, a complete detailed
discussion should not be held. After a short discussion it was agreed upon by
the Planning Commission and the representatives from the Ad Hoc Committee that
the Open Space Report should be distributed to other Village boards and commissions,
including the Ehvironriental Commission, Park and Recreation Commission, Bassetts
Creek Flood Control Commission, and any others involved, in order to obtain
additional input from other interested groups. It was agreed to tentatively set
February 2s, 197l� at 7:30 P.M. as the date on which the Ad Hoc Committee on Open
Space will present the Open Space Report to the Planning Gommission.
(b) Appoint Temporary Representative to the Board of Zoning Appeals
Glen Christiansen was appointed temporary representative to the Board of Zoning
Appeals until a new Vice Chairman is appointed to the Planning Commission.
(c) Sub-committee - Park and Recreation Commission
Chairman Saznpson introduced a request from John Brenna, Park and Recreation
�irector, that one or two members of the Planning Commission be appointed to a
sub-committee to study crossings for trails at hazardous intersections.
Commissioners Kathryn Herje and ibnald Hughes were appointed to serve on the
sub-committee of th9 Park and Recreation Commission.
(d) Scheduled Meetings for Planning Commission
Chairman John Sampson stated the Village Council hearing on the Village Compre-
hensive Flan is scheduled for January 21, 197�t and urged each Planning Commission
member to attend the meeting. Also, a meeting is scheduled with the Village
Council for January 28, 197l� at 7:30 P.M. regarding the Planning Commission�s
housing policy in planned unit developments.
(e) Institutional Area Study - Glenwood Hills
Chairman John Sampson reviewed a letter from the Village Manager to the
Planning Commission regarding the study of the Glenwood Hil1s Hospital area.
N'ason Wehrman Ghapman Associates, Inc. was chosen for this study by the Village
Council to work with the Planning Commission on conducting a study to develop
a guide which will serve as a basis for consideration in local land development
policies for the Glenwoad Hills Hospital area.
Commissioner Herje stated that the Village Council stressed that they wanted
representatives of the neighborhood to meet with hospital personnel to discuss
and better understand the area development. T)iscussion foll.owed on when the
consultant should meet with the Planning Commission or neighborhood representatives.
lJ.7�
Planning Commission
January ltt, 19?!� page 8
Chairman Sampson stated that the consultant would attend three meetings,
according to the contract set up with the Village for the study, and he felt
that to have a meeting or discussion without the consultant being present was
not a good idea.
Chairman Sampson reminded the Planning Commission that they will be meeting
with the Village Council on January 2$, 1971� and that if there were any questions
on the procedure of the above matter, questions could be asked of the Council
at that time.
There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was on motion,
duly seconded, adjourned at 12:35 A.M.
. 1+ .
,� �, f �°��'������
Ch a John Sampson � Se etary Ron .�'ud om
'°a