06-13-77 PC Minutes J 1��
MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 13: 1977
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission was held at
8:nQ P.M. on Monday, June 13, 1977 at the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road,
Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Chair Sehlin presided and the following members were present: Commissioners
Edstrom, Forster, Mindess, Polachek, Specktor, and Wagman. Also present was
Jon Westlake, Staff inember.
Members absent: Commissioners Herje and Hughes.
l . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOVEO by Forster, seconded by Edstrom, carried
unanimously, to approve the minutes of the May 23, 1977 Planning Corr�nission
meeting as corrected as follows: Item #4, the name Grahm should be changed to
Graham, wher.ever used.
2. P.U.D. INFORMATIONAL HEARING
P.U.D. #20 Concept Plan
Proponent: Elmo Ginkel Construction Company
Location: 270' West of Ensign Avenue on Medley Lane
Requests Construct 3 Townhouse Rental Units
The proposal is to construct two buildings containing four living units in each
structure for a total of eight (8) rental units. The proposal is on 2.34 acres
of land resulting in 3.42 units per acre. Plans submitted are very general
because the proponent has chosen the concept procedure under the Planned Unit
Development Ordinance. The following is noted regarding the plans:
1 ) Each unit has a double garage, and the total exterior parking is 24 spaces.
2) The South elevation of the units is three stories, which is where the
garage entrance is located.
3) Because of the terrain the design of the North elevation is two stories.
In reviewing the site and the surrounding area, the following items should be
decided in the concept stage:
a) Land Use — Is the proposed land use correct and does it conform to the
Comprehensive Plan?
b) Density — Is the density appropriate for this land use?
c) Traffic — Are there potential traffic problems?
The reason for the structure location on the Northeast area of the site, which is
the highest point, is that the sanitary sewer is approximately 37" deep, which� is
located to the East of the property. To provide a gravity flow the units would
have to be constructed on the higher terrain. This area of the site is wooded
and a majority of the vegetation would be lost.
The present zoning of the site is Residential . Th,e Comprehensive Plan indicates
Park and Open Space for this parcel of land. The area to the South is park land,
to the North (East 1�2 of site) is Residential , to the North (West 1�2 of site) is
Institional , to the u+est is Galant Patio Homes, and to the East is Residential .
� .
Planning Commission
June 13, 1q�/ page 2
Some of the major points to consider at the concept stage are:
a) The Park and Recreation Commission recommended at their June 2, 1977
meeting, in the best interest of the Park system and City, not to
devetop the land multiple because of the value the land has for
Park and Recreation use.
b) Land Use and Density. The land use and density are key points for the
development of this land because of the terrain. The terrain is
approximately 18 feet lower than the Galant Pation Homes. The site
also contains the start of the higher terrain in the Northeast area of
the site, which is the location of the cluster development. The
Comprehensive Plan for the area to the North and East of the higher
terrain on the site indicates a density of 2.5 units per acre while the
density of the Galant Patio Homes to the West is 6.8 units per acre.
James Cooperman, Architect, and Woody Ginkel , representing Elrr� Ginkel Construction
Company who is the owner and deveioper of the subject property, were present for
the request. Mr. Ginkel stated that their intent is to own and manage the town—
house rental units, and they felt this was an appropriate time to develop this
property because of the recent development of King' s Valley and the Ga�ant Patio
Homes on adjacent properties. The proposed placement of the buildings on the site
was decided upon because of the terrain and sewer elevations. Mr. Ginkel noted
that they had met with the surrounding neighbors on Thursday, June 9, 1977.
Chair Sehlin then opened the public hearing and the following residents expressed
their concerns: Craig Carrison, 9010 Medley Lane, stated that this property is
basically unusable because of the sewer situation, and if the western portion of
the site is not built on, the density in the portion to be developed would be
6.�3 units per acre. Bonnie �c4Jilliams, Government Liaison Chairperson, repre—
senting King' s Ualley Homeowner' s Association, stated that the two main concerns
are density and rental units. Ms McWilliams then read a letter addressed to
the Planning Commission dated June 13, 1977 from the Government Liaison Chair—
person and Board of Directors, representing the HomeoHmer' s of King' s Valley.
The letter indicated that there should be individual home ownership, not rental .
Other concerns noted in the letter were traffic congestion, noise pollution,
vehicle parking, and destroying one of the last remaining natural habitats in
this area of Golden Valley.
Burt Brown, Vice Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission, indicated that
this area of the City does not have sufficient park area. The specific recommend—
ation of the Park and Recreation Corr�nission is that this area not be approved for
Planned Unit Development because of the importance this land has for park use;
however, the Park and Recreation Corr�nission in their specific recorr�nendation did
not ask the City Council to acquire this land for park purposes. The Park
Corr�nission will discuss this parcel again.
Mrs. John Brenna, 2401 Ensign Avenue North, noted that this area is presently
zoned Residential . Dave Albrecht, 8925 Medley Lane, felt that the West portion
of this site witl never be developed for park purposes because of elevation and
open drainage. If this development is approved, it will reduce the size of an
already small park. The land should be acquired by the City to maintain the
park area as it now exists. Richard Larson, 9036 Elgin Place, stated that this
area is now over—populated and a heavy traffic problem exists. If this development
is approved, he will attempt to get Dututh Street run through. Emile Johnson,
*"s;,� �
Planning Cornrnission
June 13, 1977 page 3
2315 Decatur Avenue North, expressed concern in regard to losing the open space
area and wildlife in the area. William Sermeus, 2425 Cavell Avenue North, felt
that open space should be preserved. Mr. Schmidt, Trustee for Good Shepherd
Lutheran Church, expressed concern over valdalism in the area.
Chair Sehlin closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Edstrom stated that if the Park and Recreation Commission felt the
land should be purchased for park purposes, their motion should have recommended
this to the City Council . Some Planning Comnission members questioned the
legality of government specifying whether units can be rented or sold. The
Planning Commission also expressed concern in regard to the proposed density and
the denser population in this area of the comnunity. The proposal also conflicts
with the designation of Park and Open Space as indicated by the Comprehensive Plan.
It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Wagman, carried unani�usly, to recommend
that this request be denied, based on the fact that the request conflicts with
the Comprehensive Plan map which indicates this area to be used for Park and
Open Space.
The Planning Corrxnission asked that the Open Space Commission Chair receive a
copy of these Planning Commission minutes.
3. F.U.D. INFORMATIONAL HEARING
P.U.D. #14-A General Plan
Proponent: Jack Galant
Location: 2400 Hillsboro Avenue North
Request: Construct 28 Townhouse Units (To Complete Project)
The Planning Report for P.U.D. #14-A includes sections of the October 25, 1976
Planning Commission minutes and current information. When the six townhouse units
received general plan approval in April of 1975, a concept plan was submitted for
the remaining 28 units. The site plan indicated a total site development which
included an interior trail system, pond, and a City trail located North and East
on the site. The six-unit structure completed on the site will be repeated in
five and six unit buildings for a total of 34 units, or 6.8 units per acre.
The following has been reviewed with the architect and landscape architect:
l . Details of the site identity sign,
2. petails of the mailboxes,
3. Units to be identified for City Housing Policy
a) Three to be at $30,000 plus cost factor
b) Five to be at $40,QQ0 plus cost factor
c) Six to be at $50,OQ0 plus cost factor
4. Information sheet on
a) Type of exterior lighting �ixtures
b) Details of kitchen area
c) Details of bath area,
5. Detail for, and location of sedimentation traps,
6. Oetail of interior street construction.
Nk ,
t=a',$�
P 1 anni ng Corimi ssi on
June 13, 1977 page 4
The Planning Cormnission asked if staging could be done in connection with bonding
in Phase II because of the incomplete work on Phase I. This can be done. The
bonding for Phase II could have a completion date of November 1 , 1977 and it
coulci cover, for example, all pro�osed structures east of the existing structure,
th� first bank of units to the south of the existing structures, poo) building,
pool , courtyard, landscaping, streets, and curb and gutter. A clause could be
added stating that no construction can take place on the remaining twelve units
until the Fhase II area is completed. 7he bond for Phase III would s�ell �out
the same items for the southerly area of the site. This bond would also have a
completion date, for example, of October 1978.
If the Planning Commission recorrunends approval of the Planned Unit Development,
two items should be considered: 1 ) Rezoning the area from Open Development to
Residential , and 2) Use Permit to contain the following additional item: There
shall be no rental of units by the developer—owner, or knowledge of such for the
2$ units in Phase II. The six units in Phase I shall be sold by January i , 197�.
Carl Dale, Planner, reviewed the remaining stage of construction at �he
October 25, 197b Planning Corr�nission meeting—which are the same plans
the Corrrni ssion has for the present request. Mr. Dale' s corrrnents were
as follows:
"1 . The detailed plans appear to be in conformity with previously
approved generai plans and conditions imposed by the PUD Permit.
2. Landscaping details are excellent as to species, placement, and
�ize of materials to be planted. It is assumed that landscaping
wi11 be implaced under time requirements as imposed and constru—
tion will be adequately inspected by the City both during and
after development.
3. Other plan details such as the trail (pathl , pond shoreline
treatment, recreation area, and the ]ike seem quite good.
4. 7here are no changes that we could recommend at this time.
In our opinion, submitted plans indicate that this wili be a very high quality
residential development and a very desirable addition to the corrvnunity' s
environment."
The Planning Commission then discussed the use and implementation of bonding if
that method were used in an attempt to complete the phases of construction and
landscaping. Also discussed was the type of penalties that could be incorporated
in the performance bond, wording of bonds, stipulations, and dates to be placed
on the bonds. The Corr�nission also discussed a letter of credit.
Jack Galant, own�r of the property, and Forrest Russell , Landscape Architect, were
present for the request. h1r. Galant explained that a portion of the sod has been
put in; however, they have not completed sodding in the areas where landscaping
and paving are to be done because of the probable destruction of the sod when
further construction is started. Mr. Forrest Russell stated that complete interior
landscaping and final sodding cannot be completed until Mr. Galant has completed
Phase II of the development. Blacktopping, curb and gutter will have to be done
at a later date because of the future construction of the Southerly units.
Mr. Galant is now in the process of obtaining financing for 1$ additional units.
Jerry At1en, Architect, felt it is essential to build the next 18 units in
order to sell the existing units.
� �
Planning Commission
June 13, 1977 page 5
The ,P�anning Corrrnission discussed the proposed order in which the remaining units
wouid be buiit and expressed concern that the concrete curb and gutter, pool and
pool building would not be completed until the irrrnediate surrounding structures
have been completed. It was felt by the Planning Corrunission that curb and gutter
and paving should be completed with each phase of construction in order to obtain
a more pleasingly aesthetic situation, which might help the proponent sell the
units.
Chair Sehlin opened the public hearing and the following residents expressed
their concerns: Bonnie McWilliams, Government Liaison Chairperson, King' s Valley
Homeowner' s Association, read the following statement in a letter addressed to
the Planning Commission dated June 13, 1977 from Ms. McWilliams, representing
the King' s Valley Homeowner' s Association: "To state our views on this project
would be redundant and we are aware of the Planning Commission' s position on
this matter. However, we would like t� reiterate our opposition to any further
building permit being issued until present construction has been sold to
individual home owners." Emilie Johnson, 2315 Decatur Avenue North, felt that
no additional units should be approved until the existing units are sold.
Craig Carrison, 9010 Medley Lane, questioned why Mr. Galant wants to build more
units when he cannot selt the units he has built and is losing money. Richard
Larson, 9036 Elgin Place, stated that the water levet is a very big problem on
this property. Dave Albrecht, 9025 Medley Lane, recommended that before any
further construction is considered for this development, these existing units
must be sold, and the Planning Corr�nission should request and obtain a bank letter
of credit definitely stating the total number of dollars credit for Mr. Galant.
Chair Sehlin closed the public hearing.
The Planning Commission expressed much concern in regard to the P.U.D. #14
requirements not having been compieted by the owner and the performance in this
development. The Planning Corrrnission also expressed concern that financing has
not been obtained for the total project, and the Corr�r►ission discussed the
probability that the total development may not be completed in the future.
The Planning Corr�nission indicated that plans should be developed by the owner
specifying what units are to be constructed, including the pool and pool
building, and the possibility of stipulating that the buildings are not to be
sold or rented until all requirements have been complied with.
It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Wagman, carried unanimously, to table
this request pending the following:
1 . The proponent is to submit a written statement or schedute indicating the
order in which development wilt be completed and the approximate completion
dates in terms of months.
2. The proponent is to submit details of financing.
3. The The proponent is to submit complete detailed plans of the structures and
pool building, interior road design and landscaping.
4. Units to be identified for City Housing Policy.
a) Three to be at $30,000 plus cost factor
b� Five to be at $40 000 plus cost factor
� Six to be at $50,�00 plus cost factor.
5. The lending institution is to submit a letter of intent stating rr�ney will be
a�aailable to 'the proponent and indicate for which units.
��$
Planning Commissian
June 13, 1977 page 6
The request for P.U.D. #14—A is not to be placed on the agenda for Public H�aring
until the criteria of the motion has been met.
4. WAIVER OF THE PLATTING OROINANCE
Applicant: Dr. Orbuch
Location: 3920 Glenwood Avenue
Request: Divide 120' off Roanoke Circle
_�oni ng"c . Resi denti al ' ,
The proponent is requesting to divide off the rear 120' contiguous to Roanoke
Circle. The square footage of the lot would be 12,500 with a frontage of 110'
at the 35' setback line. The South parcel off Glenwood Avenue would have a
depth of 240' and a square footage of 26,400. The parcel of land is presently
divided as shown on the map; however, the City has no official record of the
parcel being divided. Years ago land was divided by Hennepin County without
City approval . If the Planning Commission approves the division, they should
consider two requirements: 1 ) an additional 10' Right of Way for Roanoke Circle,
which the proponent has been made aware of, and 2) interior lot to be combined
with southerly parcel .
The proponent, Dr. Orbuch, was present for the request and explained that they
' are requesting to divide off the Northerly portion of their property which is
on Roanoke Circle because of the taxes and assessments they incurred when
Roanoke Circle was constructed.
It was moved by Edstrom, seconded by Mindess, carried unanimously, to recorronencl
approval of the wa�,ver of the Platting Ordinance, subject to an additional 10'
of Right of Way for Roanoke Circle and the interior lot to be combir►ed with the
southerly parcel .
5. WAIVER OF THE PLATTING ORDINANCE
Applicant: R. LaVerne Johnson
Location: 234 Sunnyridge Lane
Request: Change in Legal Description
(Approved by Planning Commission June 1976)
Zoning: Residential
This request was approved by the Ptanning Commission on June 14, 1976 and by the
City Council . A letter by the proponent' s attorney indicated that the legal
description is incorrect and therefore the proponent is requesting that the
minutes be changed to reflect the new legal description. The smallest parcel ,
or East parcel , would have a frontage of 125' with 13,750 square feet in the lot.
It was moved by Forster, seconded by Specktor, carried unanimously, to recorrxnend
that the wording in the legal description be changed to read as foltows:
234 Sunnyridge Lane North — Lot 1 except the East 125 feet of said Lot 1 ,
SUNNYRIOGE ADDITION.
3905 Poplar Drive — The East 125 feet of Lot 1 , SUNNYRIOGE ADDITION.
� �1� �
�5 F6�
'�
Planning Commission
June 13, 1977 page 7
6. P.U.D. #16—A General Plan
Proponent; Cheyenne Land Company
Location: 5616 Glenwood Avenue
Request; Construct 52 Townhouse Units
This item was not heard by the Planning Corrmission because the proponent was not
present for the request.
7. GENERAL
Plat — Golden Valley Estates
Chair Sehlin read a letter from the City Manager stating that the proponent has
requested withdrawal of the plat (Golden Valley Estates) , and because of this
the Council did not set a hearing for platting or rezoning.
Corr�nissioner Mindess informed the Planning Corrrnission of a letter from Fran Hagen,
Engineer, stating that the building sites are 11 ' above water level . 160,000
cubic yards of fill is needed for this site, which would incur a total cost of
$370,000; therefore, the purchase price of the tots plus land improvement costs
would merit lots with a cost of approximately $25,000 each.
There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was on motion,
duly seconded, adjourned at 11 :05 P.M.
Jody Sehlin, Chair G. William Forster, Secretary