Loading...
01-23-78 PC Minutes � l�IWtJTES OF THE GOL�EN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Jan�aary 23, 1978 A reg�alar meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Conmissio�` �as held at 7:3� P.M. on Monday, January 23, 197$ at the Civic Center, 78�� Golder� Valtey Road, 6olden Va11ey, Minnesota. Chair Sehlin presided and the fAllowing mer�ers were present: Cc�missioners Edstrom, Forster, Nerje, Nughes,MiAdess, Polachek, Specktor and Wagma�a. Also prese�t was Jon Westlake, staff inember. Members absent: None. 1 . APPROVAL �F MINElTES: It was moved by Edstrrxn, seconded by Mir�dess, carried rananime>usly, to defer the approval cf the minutes to the er�d of fi�is meeting, at which tim� it was MOVED by Herje, seconded b�r Forster, carried �nanimously, to approve the Novere�er 28, 1977 Planning Co�ission �inutes as mailed, noting as a clarificati4n to paragr�ph l of Item l that ih the opinion of the Plar�nit�g Cvnmission the developer of P.U.D. #1 and #�1-A has not lived up to the intent of the P.U.D. . 2. PLANNED EINIT �f�IEL�PMENT P.EI.D. ##1-B Co�eept Pl an Propor�ents Cotoni al Acres Hc�me, Inc. : Location: 58�� St. Croix Avenue Referred to tt�e plar�ning Commission for furtMer information fror� the December 19, 1977 City Council meeting The City Council at their December 19, 1977 meeting deferred actio� on P.U.�. #1-B �nd asked the Planni�g Ccxnmission for further information and recommendatians in ' reference to buiiding height, setback, traffic planr�ing and Managen�ent Plan. The Counci 1 's rrbtioe� i s as fot lows: "MOVED by Swartz, seconded by Thorsen a�d carried that the decision on ' the appticationfor P.tl.D. #1-S be deferred until the Coc�r�cil meeting of Februar�r 6, 197$ and that the matter be re-referred to the P1 ar�ni r�g CcHnmi ssi or� ari th aa i�di cati on of the Cout�ci 1 � s i nterest i n purs�ing the ge�eral concept and with a req�e�st that th� Planning Commission provide fc�rther information and make further rec��dations to the Council with respect to matters of building height, setback, traffic plannir�g, and Management Plan." The Cou�cil has asked the Plan�ing Co�ission to respond back before the February 6, 1978 CoWncil meeting to help the Couc�cil ir� makicig a decision far eoncept plans for P.U.O. #1-B. The Councii is aware cf ite.�ns such as no acc�ss to St. Croix Av�nue, land use of the prcperty, emergency veMicle access, etc. Building Height. The previous plans a+ere. for a six story buildic�g. The present plan is for a fiWe storq bt�ilding contai�ing the s�e �unt of units-which is 100. r1 Planning Commission January 23, 1978 page 2 Previous Plan — Ir�dicated a height of 62' for the proposed structure, and the Benson—Orth building at 46' . Some trees to tl�e West of this area are approxir�ately 54� high accordi�g to the plans. Pr�sent Pian — �, better way to determine tk�e height in relatior� to other structures is by elevation — which the proponent has done on the revised ptans. The esti�ated elevation of the Benson—Orth office buildir�g is 905' (mass of structure). The elevation of the congregate living building is 9�7' (mass of structure) or 2 feet I�igher than the office building. Setbacks. The concern of the Council is that the building be located further back on the site becawse of single family to the Southeast and Southwest of the si te. PKevious Plan — Nad a fro�at yard setback of 32' ar�d a green area of 1�' adjoining the parking tot off St. Croix Avenue as measured frc�m tlae property 1 i�e. Present Plan — Nas a front yard setback of 60' . It contains the s� green area aff the parking lot as the previous plan; however, there is room for adjust�ent to provide rnore landscaping. The design of the structc�re has char�ged to a step design altowing for a fe�rther separa— tion between the str�cture and the hon�es to the Southwest. Traffic Planninq. The plan indicates the same as before, which is 49 off street spaces with 12 enclosed spaces. Parking for 12 staff inembers is located to tk�e Nortk� of the structure, which is also the tocation for service to the building. Aceess to this area is from Oulut�i Str�et. The propo�ent indicated at the Planni�g Cc�mmission meeting that t�ro similar operaticns to this pro— posal are located in Minneapolis: The Ebenezer Towers — 190 residents — 2U vehicles, and Presbyterian Hc�mes — 195 residents — 1� �rehicles. Fsarther information on parkir�g �as been sr�pplied with the agenda material by Coloniat Acres. Other information on parking can be found in the agenda information of the November 14, 1977 Planning Cc�mmission meeting, ineluding those Cc�mnission minutes. The City Engineer has reviewed the site plan and has indicated that it appears that the proposed use of the propert�r will not have any mo�e adverse effect on traffic revisions in this area than the previous office b�ilding with respect to the 197� Barten Asctman Traffi�c Flow Improve�nent Study. Manaqer�ent Plan. The concern of the Councit regarding the Mar�agen�ent Ptan is such as asswrance of continuing care should individWals resor�rces be exhausted. If an individual is in a two bedroom apartment and cannot afford to stay, is the individc�al aitowed to mc�ve to a less expensive urait without additional costs? Colonial Acres — Changes between Previous ar�d Present Plan: Previous Proposal Pr�esent �Pr� _o o__s_��al Lot Area — 2.59 Acres Lot Area — 3.14 Acres �ensity — 38.6 Units/Acre �ensity — 31 .2 Ur�its/Aere Landscaping � Activity — 51`� landscaping F� Activity — 62.3� Ge�erai Informatian on Ber�son—Orth Buildings: � P1 anni ng Con�mi ssion Jar�uary 23, 1978 page 3 By ►r�ving the lot line further North the following is noted regarding parking — I, ' West Office Building—three stories ir� heigMt a) Total square footage — 38,000 b) Useable Area — 32,25� square feet (excluding mechanical , stairways, g corridors, etc.) c) Paved parking area - 164 spaces d) Available area for or► site parking — 65 spaces for a total of 229 e) Ordinance reqraires t parking space per 150 square feet of building area, or 215 spaces f) Parking lost on site due to lot line change is 5 spaces g) Prciposed code wot�ld require l space p�r 200 square feet, or 161 spaees II. East Office Building—three stories in h�ight a) Ider�tical to West office bwilding b) Identieal ' t4 West offic� building c) Site plan indicates 176 parki�g spaces . d) Site plan indicates a� additional 39 spaces for a totat of 215 e) �rdinance requir�s 1 parking space per 150 sqc�are feet of building area, or 215 partcing spaces f) Parking lost an site d�e to lot line change is 45 spaces g) Prc�posed code would require 1 space per 200 sqc�are feet, ar T61 spaces. (215 minus 45 = 17� spaces) h) Credit — The City Council gave a credit of 54 parking spaces in exchange for the park area in approving P.U.O. #1—B a�t tt�e October 1 , 1973 Eneeti c�g. The mi nutes dc> not i ndi cate v�h�ther the credit is for P.U.D. �#1—B o� a future building on the South site; tx�wever, the 54 spaces were part of Phase III (open pa�,cei) because they were shc�wn in the area that is nc>w dedicated as City park land which was a rec�taireme�t: for approval of P.U.�. #1—A. Therefore, the credit of parking is fcr the open parceT . (Ccxnmissioner Herje arrived.) The Planning Cc�mission after reviewing the above i�formation heard Mr. Tc�an Horty, Archi tect, wlac> poi�ted o�at the di ffere�ce between thi s pl ar� and t�ae previo�rs pl an. Mr. Norty stated they are �re comfortable with tMe design of the five stcry building tk�an t�ae pr�vious six story building. The I�ighest point of the pentho�se of the East affice b�ilding is at an elevation of 917 feet and the mass of the structure is at 905 fe�t. The top of the congregat� living b�ildi�g would be at an etevation of 913.5 feet and the �ass of the structure at 9�7 feet. Frcxn grade to the top of the be�ilding wc>utd be 49.5 feet. In the changed plan the room sizes are the same as the pr�vict�s plan. Mr. James VanVugt, Administrator, answered questio�s raised by t� Planning Co�missior� oA traffic regarding their present total care facilit}r loeated south of St. Croix Avenue. Mr. Van Vugt thet� ar�swered questio�s in regard to the informatio� Color�ial Acres had supplied the Co�mi ssion on the Ma�ag�e�t Pl ar�. He fei t o�e of tk�e concerns by the Cour�ci 1 was that the use would be for senio� citTZens now a�d that at a later date this r�ay change. This Mas bee�a answered in the agr�ement wk�ich also includes an ot�tl i r�e of servi ces prcvi ded for the resi dents. (Com�issior�er Specktor arrived.) � Planning Cc�nnmission January 23, 1978 page 4 The follc�wing residents expressed their concerns: Mr. Caliahar�, 1530 Yosemite Avenue [Vorth, q�restioned the road location in the Barten Asct�man report. Mr. Kreber, 1500 Yosemite Ave. .Nortk�, sfiated only 25 apartments can be put on the site and questioned th� height of the building. Mrs. Klein, 1450 Yosemite Avenue Horth, stated-traffi� is a proble�r-what about allowing 50 �nits? Mr. Cervantes, 1626 wetcome Avenue, said property v�o�ld be exdnpt, traffic will be a probl em, and sees no adr�antage for the Ci ty. Mr. At,c>, 56�31 St. Croi x Ave. , questio�ed the height of the str�cture and elevatio� of St. Grcix Avenue ir� fror�t of the structure. Cat��ot see kww the organi2ation could keep an indi— vidual if they cannot pay. Mr. Hovde�, 1245 Angelo prive, feets that becat�se of the �lderl�r, high�r dec�sity can be allowed and they produce less traffic. This type of ccm�plex is being built ail over the cou�try. The Planraing Comnission then referred to a ietter from Mr. Kuns of 1610 E. Constance �riwe supporti�g t�e project. The Planning Conmission had varied opinions in discussing the project. In a�swer to the tax exempt question Mr. Va� Vugt stated they intec�d to make a contri— bution equal to the miil ratt and in no case wi11 it be less tha� taxes paid on the open parcel . In discussing traffic the Cc�mnissio� questioned the present nursing home operatioe� which has 15� residents and �O staff inembers ar�d the amount af visitation during peak times. I� reviewi�g the height and adjusted setbacks tt�e Cc�mmission felt the plan was sc�mewhat improved, but it is still the feeling af the Cc�nmission tMat the land use is incorrect. The area req�ired for parki ng for the offi ce park—sc�me of whi ch i s pav�d ar�d scan�e not—stwul d not be red�ced b�causc the uses will chac�ge, which eould requnre �nore parki�g. The qwestion was raised bq the Conrnission of what agreer�:nt they would have with Benson—Orth to keep the road plowed for serv�ice ar�d employee parking to the north of t�e strt�ct�re. The Ccxnmission disct�ssed the question as to what wc>ald be a better land use—srach as offices or the current proposal . Discussion was atso Meld on the length of stay of a resident in referenc� to the founder's gift and how a space is left open for an individraal in the tofial care unit, (nursing home) if that is needed. The question was also asked, becat�se of escatating costs, if any of the units in the country are havi�g or have had financiat probtems. The Pla�aning Commission reviewed the sumnary of the eongregate hotasing Mana,gement Ptan and questioned the proponents about it. The Cc�mmission felt this area is not a Planr�ing Cc�nmission item because it requires knowledge of State and Federal regulations. If the Cot�ncil approves the concept, t�is area showld be reviewed by tt�e City Attorney in the general plar� stage or other appropriate boards. It was mc�ved by Nerje, seconded by Wagman that the Plannir�g Cc�mission reiner— ated the positiora taken at the Nov�er 14, 1977 Planning Ccxrr�ission meeting, which was to deny the request for P.U.�. #�l—B. In denying the request, the following is noted: 1 . There should be �o aecess onto a neighborhood street that prodaces added traffic when Duluth Street is located to the [�orth of the property. 2. There is r�o public benefit to the citizens of Golden Vali�y that warrants the exceptionally targe waivers needed or� height, parking, and square fc�otage, which is a disadwantage to the neighborhood. � Pianning Commission January 23, 197$ page 5 3• The Plan�ing C�mnission realizes the property fits the pla�ned use for the developer but not t�e residents of the corm�unity. 4. The i00 units is too high a density for this parcel of land. 5• Height consideration of the existing bwilding is a different perspective than the proposed b�ilding.as it is closer to the residential area. 6. A low prafile office b�ilding is the best tand use for tMis parcel �it� access to Dul�th Street. 7. The Management Plan should be referred to th� apprcpriate bc�dq wMich has expertise i� that area. The P1a�ning Ccxnmission then discussed the seven items as tisted, and sc�me Ccxnmission mei�bers felt they shc�wld respond more specifically to the fo�r items of the Council . Ccxnmission�r Herje pointed out that there sho�ld be a paticy that when Planned Unit Developments are approved, the bc>a�dry lines remain for that as built phase and cannot change because of development on the open site. It �as moved by Mindess, seconded by Edstrom to table the m�tion. Cc��missioner Mi�dess indicated the present plan shc�ws a vast i�r�prov�nt although there are still co�cerns to work out — such as traffic to St. Croix Av�nue, an improved landscape pla� which sho�ld i�clude la�ge trees—especially to the soutM of t�e site, a contract with Bensoca—arth for overflow parking, etc. �pon vote bei�g taken by rotl call the following �oted in favor of the �tion: Mindess, Polachek, and Edstro�; and tMe following voted against the same: Specktor, Herje, Forster, Hughes, and Wagman. The r�tion to table did not carry. Upon vote being take� o� the original motio�, t�e following voted in favor of the rrption: Specktor, herje, Forster, Polachek, �ughes, and Wagman; and the following �oted agai�st the s�ne: Mindess and Edstrom. The r�otion carried. 3• WAIVER �F TNE PLATTING ORDINANCE Applications Dan Wanc�aacher Locaticn: 5�60 Alfred Road — 1301 � 1245 Angelo �rive Request: Create t�ree (3) lots from five (5) Lots Zoni�g: Residential Mr. Homden, property owner, was present for the request and explained that Mr. Wanc#�ac�er wc��ld like to create a new lot to the vaest of his p�operty, and �r. Assam, 1301 Angelo Orive, is interested in purchasing a part of Mis land to the Northwest, making the division �ch more acceptabte to the Planning Con�ission. The req�est is to subdivide five lots into three parcels of land. The lots involved are Lots 1-5 Novde�' s Addition. The first part of the req�est is to add 40� to Lot 4 from lct 3 Hovden� s Addition and cc�bine the remaining East 60� of Lot 3 with Lot 2 Hcvde�'s Addition. The second part of tMe request is to combine Lots l and 5 together with the Northerly 35' of Lot 3 hbvden' s Addition. It was rr�c�ved by Edstrom, seconded by Nughes, carried una�i�ously, to approve the request to create three parcels of land frcxr+ five lots as described abc>ve, subject to the ow�'er of Lot l Hovden' s Addition becoming part of the petition. 4. GE�ERAL (a) State P1 anni ng Act--Ci ty Cc�mprehensi ve P1 an Planning Ganmission January 23, 197$ page 6 Mr. Jeff Sweet, Assistant City Manager, reviewed with the Ptanning Co�mission the State Planning Act a�d what the City of Golde� Valley is required to do in order to meet the requirements i� reference to the City Ccunprehe�sive Plan. Mr. Sweet then revi�wed areas of the Plan that rvt�uld require updating cr areas that are �t covered in the present Cc�mprehensive Ptan. Also, the time tabte was rewiewed as to v�en the material was to be conapleted for Metropolitan Cowncil re�iew and acceptance. (b) Valley Square Mr. Jeff Sweet briefty reviewed with the Planni�g Ccxr�cnission t�� plan the Valle� Square 7ask Force has developed for the Valley Square area. ('c) Planning Commission Work Session The Planning Commission set the fourth Monday af each mont�, which is a regular scheduled meeting �ight of the Planning Cor�nission, to hold work sessions on the Ccxnprehensiv� Plan. There bei ng no further btrsi ness ta ccxne befare the �eti r�g, i t was o� n�tion, duty seconded, adjourned at 10:45 P.M. Jody Sehlin, Chair G. WilTia�n Forster, Secretary