Loading...
04-24-89 PC Minutes~`~ MINUTES OF THE CIJLDEN VALLEY PLANNING OQVMISSION April 24, 1989 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the meeting room of Golden Valley Fire Station #3, 370.0 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The meeting was called to order by Chair Prazak at 7:05 P.m. Those present were Commissioners Kapsner, Leppik, Lewis, McAleese, Prazak, McCracken-Hunt and Russell. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and Beth Knoblauch, City Planner. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 10, 1989 Commissioner Lewis wanted the minutes amended to read that she thought that the one stop shop was a great idea.. Commissioner Leppik thought the paragraph regarding how many customers the SuperAmerica station could handle in a day was confusing. There should be a better distinction between the maximum capacity of 700 customers a day and the expected use level of 450-500 customers a day. Also, Commissioner Leppik stated that she had not made the statement regarding the effect that the SuperAmerica station would have on traffic at the intersection. The statement was made by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt. It was moved by Commissioner McAleese, seconded by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the regular April 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting as corrected. II. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CpNDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: Valvoline/Instant Oil Change LOCATION: 8950 Olson Memorial Highway REQUEST: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow for Reconstruction of the Structure for Oil Changing Business Chair Prazak introduced this item and asked City Planner Knoblauch for a brief summary. City Planner Knoblauch went over her report. She stated that this pro- perty has been an oil changing facility for several years and has an existing Conditional Use Permit. The property has recently been bought by Valvoline. They want to tear down the old building and rebuild based on new oil changing technology. 1 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 2 In order to redesign the site, they need new approval. It is a difficult site to make workable within the city's zoning restraints. The owners will go before the Board of Zoning Appeals to get landscape setback waivers; the new building will meet setback requirements. The new structure would have a drive-through arrangement like a car wash where they come in one end and go out the other end. It would accommodate a maximum of four cars instead of the three they now have. They want to decrease their parking spaces from 13 to 12. Five of the new spa- ces would be "stacking" spaces rather than actual parking stalls. The Planning Commission, in 1986, agreed that an oil changing business needs less long term parking spaces because they are a short term facility. City Planner Knoblauch went over the ten findings. 1. Demonstrated need for proposed use. Need was established in 1986, and cannot have changed much since then; use the market as a indicator. 2. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan It is consistent. 3. Effect on neighboring property values No adverse affect. 4. Effect of traffic generation More traffic - but Golden Valley Road can absorb. Adequacy of stacking spaces might be of some concern, but only because facility type is unfamiliar in Golden Valley. 5. Effect of increases in population and density No impact. 6. Increase in noise levels No Impact. 7. Odors, dust, smoke, gas or vibration No change. 8. .Flies, rats, vermin No problem. 1 ~~~~ . _ , `~` Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission. April 24, 1989 Page 3 Ten Findings - Continued 9. Visual appearance Improvement. 10. Other effects on public health, safety, and welfare None. City Planner Knoblauch recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow reconstruction of the site with five conditions: 1. Site layout shall be as indicated on the site plan dated April 10, 1989 and filed in the City Planning office, except that signage must be approved by the City's Zoning and Inspections Department, and any necessary variances must be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. 2. Landscaping on the site shall be as indicated on the landscape plan dated April 10, 1989, except for changes required by the Building Board of Review. 3. To the extent possible, employee parking shall be limited to the row of stalls on the east end of the site. The three parallel parking spaces on the south side of the site shall be used primarily by customers who for some reason need to leave their cars rather than waiting in the stacking area. 4. The business shall conform to all other City and State requirements. 5. Failure to comply with any of the terms of this permit shall be grounds for its revocation. Chair Prazak asked what happens now? City Planner Knoblauch stated that they go before the Board of Zoning Appeals before they go on to the City Council. They will then go to the Building Board of Review for landscaping. Commissioner Lewis wanted to know if there was any way the building could be placed on the site so as to meet both the setback requirements and the landscaping requirements. • City Planner Knoblauch stated that it was almost impossible to meet the landscaping requirements. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt wanted to know if there was parking on Golden Valley Rd. and whether or not there were "No Parking" signs posted. Director Grimes stated that they do not anticipate a problem with parking. .t .:~ Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 4 Commissioner Lewis asked how three employees could handle four cars at a time. City Planner Knoblauch stated that there were 2 parallel pits, each of which can take two cars. The employees could go back and forth between cars Commissioner Kapsner stated he has used the facility and has never seen a parking problem. Chair Prazak asked if it was clear that the employees should park on the east side of the parking lot. City Planner Knoblauch stated that .she had originally insisted on it but changed the wording to encourage it. This would accommodate for overlap between shifts. Commissioner Lewis asked how the old building would be removed. City Planner Knoblauch stated that it was the intent to move as quickly as possible, but to keep business open throughout the reconstruction process. Mr. Kosmas, from K.K. Design, gave a brief recap. He stated that the building would be removed in stages. The construction should take 60-75 days. Regarding the adequacy of the stacking spaces, he felt there would only be a 20 minute wait cycle - this is about all people are willing to wait. He was agreeable regarding the employees parking at the east end. They now service about 60 cars a day. The new facility will service about 70-75 cars a day. Commissioner Russell wanted to know what was done with the used oil. Mr. Mikulak, Rapid Oil, stated that it is contained in a 1,000 gallon drum and trucks remove it. Commissioner Russell also wanted to know if they would accept used oil from the public. Mr. Mikulak stated some of the stations do accept used oil, but would have to check to see whether or not this one would. Commissioner Lewis wanted to know the hours of operation. Mr. Mikulak stated hours will probably be 8:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday are usually the busiest. Chair Prazak wanted to know if there would be any variations from the archi- tectural pictures shown. Mr. Mikulak stated only the landscaping will be different. Will adapt to the site. .~ , v Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Conmission April 24, 1989 Page 5 Chair Prazak opened the informal public hearing. John Williams, 1910 Adair Avenue North, asked if there would be any seepage to the water table in Golden Valley. Mr. Mikulak stated the building is designed to contain the oil. It was felt that the EPA and the Fire Department do a good job of monitoring. Commissioner Leppik asked if the tank was above ground. Mr. Mikulak stated it is an above ground tank. The old underground tank will removed. John Williams, 1910 Adair Avenue North, wanted the City Council to recommend putting in a holding tank so that there are no problems in the future. Cliff Roark, 6025 Wolfberry Lane, asked if this facility would do radiator flushes. He was concerned with how the fluid was disposed of. Commissioner Leppik asked how the non-oil materials were disposed of. Steve Johnson, 8951 Olson Highway, asked how the facility was lighted;'he has had many problems with lighting at nearby Avis. Arlen Turnquist, 433 Ensign Avenue, also voiced concerns about the lighting. Mr. Mikulak stated that the signage would only be on during business hours. Security lighting would be on around the building, but would not distract neighbors. Informal public hearing was closed. Commissioner Russell was concerned that Avis is causing a lighting problem for the neighbors. Should we place restrictions now so there will b no questions later. Chair Prazak stated that the Building Department usually checks on this. Commissioner Russell felt we should make restrictions for all lighting in resi- dental neighborhoods. It was felt that a condition should be placed that the lighting on the property shall be hooded so as to prevent spillage over to adjacent lots. Further discussion was held on the lighting. 1 1 1 1 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 6 Commissioner McCracken-Hunt moved for approval of the Conditional Use Permit. subject to six conditions. The sixth being that the lighting shall be hooded so as to prevent spillage over to adjacent lots, and shall be limited to security levels when the business in closed for the night. Commissioner Leppik seconded. The motion was carried unanimously. Discussion was held on the Avis lighting problem. Director Grimes will speak with Mr. Becker of the Inspection Department and try to talk to Avis again to see what can be done. III. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - RECONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT 'ID OOVIPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP APPLICANT: Parker & Associates LOCATION: 1950, 2000, 2010 and 2020 Douglas Drive REQUEST: Amendment of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map to Change the Land Use Designation From Medium Density Residential and Semi-Public to Commercial 1 1 Chair Prazak introduced this agenda item and asked Director Grimes for a review. Director Grimes stated that this same issue was before the Planning Commission in November of 1988, at which time the Planning Commission gave it a positive recommendation. It went to the City Council in January, at which time they voted not to change the Comprehensive Plan. Also, at the November meeting the the Planning Commission recommended that a Conditional Use Permit for a Conven- ience Shopping Center be approved but not for gas pumps. These issues also went to the City Council at their January meeting. The Council recommended tabling these issues until the Comprehensive Plan Amendment was re-evaluated. The Council asked the Planning Commission to take a look at the Comprehensive Plan regarding the spillover effect of that proposed change. In other words, how would changing the Comprehensive Plan for that small, 3.1 acre area, affect the adjoining properties in terms of pollution, noise, and traffic. Would there be a higher likelihood of other properties north on Douglas Drive to be rezoned for commercial development. It was also requested that we do extensive notifica- tion. Normally we do properties within 500 feet but this time we notified properties from Medicine Lake Rd on the North, Douglas Drive on the West and Bassett Creek on the East. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan in this area is to maintain low density residential uses along Brunswick Avenue. The zoning map is different than our Comprehensive Plan Map. Before we can change the zoning, we have to change the Comprehensive Plan. ~~ Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 7 i Traffic is an issue in the area especially with SuperAmerica across the street. The traffic issue is now being studied by a consultant. They will address the traffic both at the SuperAmerica and at the convenience center across the street. We will have the report before our next Planning Carrmission meeting. on May 8th. Commissioner Leppik felt that the City Council wanted us to look at land use and felt that it would be a good idea to consider just the land use for that property and address this plan later. Commissioner Lewis also felt that we should consider the land use only rather than a specific proposal. It was felt that the attention should be focused on the Comprehensive Plan and not on this particular issue. Chair Prazak stated that we would not discuss this particular proposal at this meeting. Commissioner Leppik felt we should direct our attention first to the Comprehensive Plan and see how far we get and make some conclusions. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt felt that the people in the audience were interested in this proposal. Commissioner Lewis asked if the proponent had agreed to delay his request until the decision has been made on the Comprehensive Plan. Director Grimes stated that it was tabled. Commissioner Kapsner stated that he agreed with Commissioner Leppik that the Council wanted us to look at the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner McAleese stated that the Council could choose to act with no advice from the Planning Commission. We need at least a brief overview of the proposal. The Commission discussed the church property at great length. Commissioner Leppik asked that the Commission go through the different zoning possibilities and decide which ones might be considered feasible and which ones are not. Commissioner Kapsner felt three or four should be selected and then focus on them. A member of the audience asked that the informal public hearing be opened. Chair Prazak stated the purpose of going through the various zonings was to eli- minate some and, therefore, save discussion on them during the informal public hearing. ,. x,~ ~ a Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 8 A member of the audience asked if the Commission was stalling, Commissioner Leppik told the audience it was a sincere attempt on the their part to look at the situation, The Council asked them to look at the Comprehensive Plan and make a recommendation. Director Grimes stated the informal public hearing was called to look at changing the Comprehensive Plan to commercial designation, It was felt that the Commission should address what was on the agenda, Commissioner Leppik assured the audience they would not make any decision without the people's input, Commissioner Russell stated that she agreed with Director Grimes that the Public Hearing was called and that was why the people were here. Chair Prazak opened the Informal Public Hearing, Gary Gandrud, Faegre & Benson Law Firm, represents Welsh Companies & Parker & Assoc,, the applicants. Mr, Gandrud stated that they started talking to the City of Golden Valley about a year ago about this project, They didn't want to ask for a Comprehensive Plan Use Amendment without showing what they intended to do with the land, They attempted to go door-to-door to all residents to see how they felt about this application. They also talked to the neighborhood at a City Hall meeting, They feel it is the best use of this land. Mr, Gandrud introduced a professional planner, Tom Loueks. Mr, Loueks stated that we should only be dealing with the best use of the land. This property is not a good residential piece because it is a small parcel, There are 30,000 cars a day that go by that intersection, No families will want to live there, Jay Johnson, real estate broker for the church property, stated that they have been trying to sell this property for five years, It is difficult to add to the existing building, In five years, he has had 150 people interested in that pro- perty and none of them felt it was priced to high. John Williams, 1910 Adair Avenue North, is afraid of the traffic on Duluth and Adair, Feels property values will go down. Commissioner Leppik asked Mr. Williams what he would like to see it zoned, John Williams, 1910 Adair Avenue North, asked what was wrong with a church, it has been a church before, Maybe single family homes, He stated they would boycott any comnericial establishments that go in there. 1 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 9 Commissioner McAleese asked is their children were going to Sandburg Middle School from this area. It was stated that the children do go to Sandburg, but the parents will not let the children walk to school because they fear them crossing this intersection. Lee Weber, 2430 Brunswick, stated he would like the traffic study to include Brunswick and all other parallel streets. People will use Brunswick as an alternative. 'I1~e shopping center will increase traffic on Brunswick. He questioned the economic feasibility of the shopping center. Bob Schultz, 1520 Constance Drive, said the area between Byerly's and the proposed shopping center will eventually became a new shopping strip. Bill Clifford, 6020 Wolfberry Lane, said children cannot cross safely, traffic is always in three lanes. The traffic study will show only the number of cars, not the fact that you cannot cross safely. He stated that he was against the change. Years ago, Golden Valley decided not to strip zone. If the church needs to expand, maybe they should buy the surrounding single family homes. He stated that he does not believe that apartment dwellers create more traffic than three gas stations. Perhaps the Commission should look at what the com- munity wants. Joe Larson, 6121 St. Croix, said that he rides a motorcycle to and from work. With all the distractions in this area, cars don't pay attention to anyone on a motorcycle. We don't need any more distractions. Kathy Roark, 6025 Wolfberry Lane, said it is congested. Why should the home owners always be the ones to suffer. Feels real estate values will go down. Cliff Roark, 6025 Wolfberry Lane, stated that, the developers should go somewhere else. George Duncan, 1920 Brunswick, said it is an attractive parcel of land because of the traffic flow. He felt the commercial entities were holding the residen- tial areas hostage. Pat Hildebrand, 2041 Brunswick, said the opinion he gets is that the zoning is going to change. He felt we should clean up the area. Yetta Cram, 1880 Adair Avenue North, questioned why we need another service station. Elinor Snodgrass, 1945 Brunswick, stated she is not interested in looking at a boarded up building. She would much rather have an office building. She would prefer to go to the proposed shopping center rather than to Byerly's. Dorothy Prest, 6000 Duluth Lane, stated she would prefer a mortuary - less traffic. 1 1 1 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 24, 1989 Page 10 Nancy Newman, 2301 Brunswick, stated that the area does not need any more stores. She feels it may go down hill. John Williams, 1910 Adair Avenue North, stated that he feels the Byerly's strip is not very successful. The area does not need any more shopping centers.... Gary Gandrud stated this project will not be a traffic generator, the shopping center will only be 21,000 sq, ft. A large part of .the center will. be a day- care facility. Jerry Unger, 5945 Westmore Way, stated that he moved into this area because it was a good area. He is afraid that this will spread like a cancer and through Golden Valley. He works at Honeywell and fights the traffic everyday. He feels we don't need anything else to draw more traffic. Randy Warren, 5920 Wolfberry Lane, asked if the City stands to gain financially with such an entity going in. Pat Hildebrand, 2041 Brunswick, stated that he was never contacted regarding the project. He lives within 500 ft. of the proposed project. He feels the City should clean up the area. Joe Prest, 6000 Duluth Lane, stated he does not understand why we need another gas station or convenience store. He feels the property values will fall. Randy Morgan, 5921 Wolfberry Lane, wanted to know what gain Golden Valley would have in comparison to the loss the residents will suffer with this project. Director Grimes stated that because of the impact of the Fiscal Disparities Act, there will be no tax gain out of this project. Randy Morgan, 5921 Wolfberry Lane, asked if the City will not have any gain from this project, what iS the positive side to this project. City Planner Knoblauch stated that it was a way to clean up the area. It was looked at as a benefit. Chair Prazak closed the informal public hearing. It will be open for discussion again on Nlay 8th. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt stated that it is possible to do something aesthet- ically pleasing to the church property without tearing it down for redevelop- ment. It might be difficult, but felt is was possible. Jay Johnson, realtor, stated that it is not feasible to add to this building. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt stated she did not feel it was impossible. The Commission continued discussion as to whether or not it was feasible to use the property for other uses. This issue will be discussed further at the May 8th meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 P.M.