Loading...
06-11-84 PC Minutes41 1 MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION June 11, 1984 A regular meetiny of the Planning Commission was held in the Valley Room of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chairman Forster called the meeting to order at 7:00. P.M. Those present were Commissioners Forster, Leppik, McAleese, Prazak, Russell, and Singer. Commissioner Tubman was absent. Also present was Alda Peikert, Assistant Planner. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 29, 1984 It was moved by Commissioner Russell, seconded by Commissioner Leppik and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the May 29, 1984 Planning Commission meeting as recorded. II. SET DATE FOR INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICANT: Clarence Volp 1 LOCATION: 765-775 and 875 Colorado Avenue South REQUEST: Preliminary Plat Approval of "Merchant's Industrial Park 2nd Addition" Chairman Forster introduced this agenda item and informed the Commission that the proponent is unable to attend the June 25, 1984 Planning Commission meeting and requests a July 9, 1984 informal public hearing date. It was moved by Commissioner Singer, seconded by Commissioner Prazak and carried unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of July 9, 1984 for consideration of the Preliminary Plat of "Merchant's Industrial Park 2nd Addition". III. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: Renaissance of Golden Valley, Inc. LOCATION: 2445 Winnetka Avenue North REQUEST: Approval of an Outpatient Adolescent Chemical Dependency Treatment Center in a Business and Professional Offices Zoning District 1 ~~ Nlanning Commission Minutes June 11, 1984 Page 2 Chairman Forster introduced this agenda item and noted the staff recommen- dation of a June 25, 1984 informal public hearing date. It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner Russell and carried unanimously to set an informal public hearing date of June 25, 1984 for consideration of the Conditional Use Permit requested by Renaissance of Golden Valley for location of an outpatient chemical dependency treatment center at 2445 Winnetka Avenue North in a Business and Professional Offices Zoning District. IV. INFORMAL PUBLIC_HEARING - PUD AMENDMENT PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN APPLICANT: Gary Properties, Inc. LOCATION: 1100 through 1200 Boone Avenue North REQUEST: Preliminary Design Plan Approval of Amendment to PUD #24, Midtown Chairman Forster introduced this agenda item and called on Assistant Planner Alda Peikert who reviewed the staff report and recommendation. Ms. Peikert suggested elimination of the third recommended condition of approval requiring submittal of homeowners association documents due to the fact that homeowners association documents were previously prepared and filed. Chairman Forster recognized Mr. Greg Kopischke, Westwood Planning and Engineering Company, who was present to represent the proponent. Mr. Kopischke introduced Ms. LaVonne Barac, President of Gary Properties, Inc., who was also present to answer questions. Mr. Kopischke responded to the five conditions of approval recommended by staff: 1. Mr. Kopischke stated that the proponent prefers not to relocate the northwesterly building to maintain a uniform setback from the private access drive. Relocation would require variance of the 35 foot minimum setback from Plymouth Avenue, and the proponent pre- fers to retain the setback from Plymouth Avenue in order to pro- tect the rear of the subject structure. The proponent desires to retain vegetation existing in the setback from Plymouth Avenue and desires a buffer from the traffic and noise on Plymouth Avenue. Mr. Kopischke expressed the opinion that the shorter setback of the first building from the access drive does not present a problem both due to the shortness of the access drive and due to the fact that the private access drive is curved rather than straight. Mr. Kopischke added that the shortened driveway still allows adequate parking space in front of the units. 2. Concerning integration of the existing duplex into the completed project, Mr. Kopischke stated that proposed treatment of the new duplexes will fit in with the existing duplex. Mr. Kopischke stated the the proposed new duplexes will have exterior siding Planning Commission Minutes 43 June 11, 19$4 Page 3 similar to that of the existing duplex and that color of the buildings will vary but that all will be finished in earth tones compatible with the color of the existing duplex. The main dif- ference in exterior materials will be the roofing materials. The existing building has asphalt shingles, and the proponent intends to use cedar shakes for the new duplexes. The new roofing material represents an upgrading of materials, and the two materials should blend when the cedar shingles become weathered. In conclusion, Mr. Kopischke pointed out that the street forms a natural separation of the existing structure from the proposed new structures. 3. Concerning the homeowners association and easement documents, Mr. Kopischke stated that the required documents were prepared and filed prior to construction of the existing structure on the site. 4. Mr. Kopischke stated that the utilities already installed provide for separate sewer and water service to each unit. 5. Mr. Kopischke confirmed the intent of the proponent to conform to all Code and City Building Department standards for separation walls. Ms. LaVonne Barac added a caution that following purchase of remaining building lots by her company, Gary Properties,. Inc., there will be more than one owner involved in the Homeowners Association and that Association approval will be necessary for implementation of recommendations. Commissioner Russell stated the opinion that the aesthetics of uniform setback from the private access drive are not as important as maintaining a buffer from Plymouth Avenue. Commissioner Russell suggested leaviny aesthetics from the viewpoint of the private drive in the hands of the developer. Commissioner Leppik expressed concern for safety of children and a preference for maintaining a safety buffer from Plymouth Avenue. Chairman Forster suggested that the difference in setbacks from the private access drive is not as important in the case of a curved drive as it would be in the case of a straight street. Chairman Forster opened the informal public hearing for public input. There was no one present who wished to speak on this agenda item, and Chairman Forster closed the informal public hearing. Commissioner Leppik expressed the desire for inclusion of a small tot lot on the site for use by children up to age five not old enough to walk unattended to neighboring parks. 1 44 Planning Commission Minutes June 11, 1984 Page 4 Commissioner Prazak pointed out that there is no access for some units to the outlot except through the narrow side yards of other units. Mr. Kopischke cautioned that there is the potential for storm inundation of the outlot suggested for tot lot construction. Ms. Peikert pointed out that there are individual yards attached to each unit adequate to accommodate swing sets or other play equipment and that in this respect the project differs from an apartment complex or a townhouse project in which all outside space is common area. Commissioner Prazak suggested that the Homeowners Association could choose to install a tot lot, barbeque pit or any other amenities in the future if desired. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that such decisions are best left up to the Homeowners Association. It was moved by Commissioner Prazak, seconded by Commissioner Russell and carried unanimously to approved the Preliminary Design Plan submitted by Gary Properties, Inc. for amendment of PUD #24, Midtown, subject to the following conditions: 1. Provision for integration of the existing duplex into the finished PUD in terms of compatible exterior appearance. 2. Submittal with the PUD General Plan of Development of appropriate homeowner association and easement documents for review by the City Attorney. 3. Provision in the building plans for separate sewer and water ser- vices for each unit. 4. Provision in the building plans for separation walls in accordance with required Code and City Building Department standards. Commissioner McAleese asked the proponent about the time schedule for construction. Ms. Barac stated that the proponent intends to start construc- tion this year. V. REPORTS ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS - MAY 15 AND JUNE 5, 1984 Commissioner McAleese provided the Planning Commission with a report on the May 15, 1984 City Council meeting, and Commissioner Russell provided the Planning Commission with a report on the June 5, 1984 City Council meeting. VI. CONTINUATION OF REPORTS ON APA CONFERENCE SESSIONS Chairman Forster called on Planning Commissioners to present remaining reports on American Planning Association (APA) National Conference sessions attended. 45 Manning Commission Minutes June 11, 1984 Page 5 Commissioner Singer reported on materials received on the subject of manufac- tured housiny. Planning Commissioners noted that State legislation requiring provision for manufactured housing necessitates completion of the Planning Commission study of manufactured housing and drafting of an appropriate Zoning Ordinance amendment for referral to the City Council. Commissioner Prazak and Chairman Forster discussed a session offered on the role of Planning Commissioners. Commissioner Prazak suggested development of an orientation manual for Planning Commissioners covering the role of the Planning Commission in relation to other City bodies and including a pamphlet for the public on the role of the Planning Commission. It was suggested that instruction on plan and map interpretation would .also be helpful. Chairman Forster reported that the session leader emphasized team building and suggested development of understanding of how other Planning Commissioners think as a means of operating better as a group. Both Chairman Forster and Commissioner Prazak suggested meeting for discussion of the Planning Commissioner role outside of regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting times. According to the session leader there is no problem with the open meeting law as long as Planning Commissioners do not discuss specific cases before the Commission. Commissioner McAleese stated that the question of the open meeting law in connection with Planning Commissions has not been liti- gated in the State of Minnesota but that he feels the Minnesota law is broad enough to include Planning Commissions. On the other hand, Minnesota courts do not find violations of the discussed. Chairman Forster reported on a Chairman Forster reported that Metropolitan Council should be body and that the Metropolitan open meeting law where specific cases are not session evaluating the Metropolitan Council. discussion participants agreed that the a policy body rather than an administrative Council needs strong priorities with con- centration on two or three areas at a time. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, G. William Forster, Chairman Gary Prazak, Secretary 1