Loading...
10-13-03 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, October 13, 2003. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, Keysser, McAleese, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes - September 22, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting - Pentel referred to the discussion of the Housing Policy and developing criteria for higher density housing that the Planning Commission discussed at their last meeting and asked Grimes what the next step should be. Grimes said that staff would be developing more criteria from the existing PUD list of concerns and would bring something back to the Planning Commission to review. Eck referred to page three, paragraph five and stated that the word "as" should be "asked". MOVED by Eck, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 22,2003 minutes with the above noted correction. II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-1 03) Applicant: Health Care Plus, Inc. e Address: Purpose: 4949 Olson Memorial Highway To allow for an adult day care facility. Grimes referred to the property on a location map and stated that it is zoned Business and Professional Offices. He said that an adult day care facility is permitted as a conditional use and that the property has been used as an office building since it was built in 1961. He said that the applicants are asking for a state license to allow for the maximum number of clients for an adult day care which is 90, but that they would not have that many right away. Grimes stated that staff's concerns have been addressed such as access to the site for emergency vehicles and Metro Mobility buses and installing fire sprinklers. He referred to a site plan showing that a Metro Mobility type of vehicle could maneuver in the parking lot. He pointed out an area where he is suggesting the applicants do proof of parking to provide better access on the site and stated that the site should have adequate space for parking because they will only have five to six employees. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 2 Grimes stated that the applicants would be disturbing less than half an acre of land so no water quality pond would be required. He referred to his staff report dated October 6, 2003 and discussed his recommended conditions for approval. Grimes referred to the Head Start child care facility just east of the applicant's site and explained that they have buses that are about the same size the applicant would have coming to their site and that there have been no problems with bus access. He said that he sees no conflicts with the Head Start site or the proposed use at the applicant's site. Rasmussen asked Grimes to clarify how buses would move through the parking lot. Grimes referred to site map and showed the route that the buses would take and how and where people would be dropped off. e Groger said that he only noticed one handicap accessible parking spot on the site and that it was far away from the entrance. He asked if there would be an additional need for accessible spaces and if that would reduce the number of parking spaces. Grimes stated that it was his understanding that the handicap accessible parking spaces have to the closest to the doors and that the number of spaces is dictated by the State Building Code. He said that not many of the clients in this case would be driving to the site. Randy Engel, Buetow and Associates, Architect for the project, stated that he made an error and that 92 is the maximum number of clients the applicant can have, not 90 as Grimes had mentioned. He explained that the State Building Code requires one accessible parking stall per every 50 stalls and that he would be meeting with Gary Johnson, the City's Building Official to quantify those numbers. He stated that the applicants would agree to the proof of parking that Grimes suggested and that the e buses also have ramps on the side and rear to make them more participant friendly. Grimes asked how many clients would actually be driving to the site. Buetow stated that it is not an exact science but that he has been told it is not many. McAleese asked how many buses could be accommodated on the site and if they expected clients to come and spend the whole day and if they would all arrive at the same time, or if they would be spreading the clients arrivals throughout the day. Buetow explained that clients could either stay all day or half-days and that there would be peak times for drop-oft's such as an hour to an hour and a half in the morning and late afternoon and at lunch time. He said that the site could accommodate 12 to 14 buses end to end but that they wouldn't get that many. McAleese said he didn't think the traffic flow was going to be as smooth as the applicant was making it sound, (at least initially) but that there aren't problems that couldn't be solved. He said that accommodating that number of buses and the fact that it takes people a little while to get on and off the buses is going to make the buses stack up. Buetow said he didn't disagree with that but because the entrance to the building is planned for the south end of lot it allows the passage at the entry driveway to be free so buses wouldn't block incoming or outgoing traffic. He added that it is likely that there Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 3 would be buses stacking but that they have room for buses to stack three wide, north to south while they are discharging clients. He said he feels confident that clients can be accommodated very well. Grimes asked what percentage of the clients would be dropped off by Metro Mobility buses and what percentage of clients would be dropped off by family or friends. David Olshansky, applicant, stated that 20% of the clients are dropped off by bus and 80% are dropped off by family or by individual vehicles. Keysser asked the applicants if they would be buying the building or leasing it. Olshansky stated that they would be buying the building. Keysser asked if their financing was in place for the renovations and if they were ready to start. Olshansky stated yes. - Groger asked if 92 clients would be the total number of clients for any given day or if that is the total amount of clients they could have according to their state license. Olshansky stated that 92 clients is the maximum number of clients they could have in the building. Buetow stated that the applicants could only have a total of 92 clients allowed by the state license. Alexander Axelrod, applicant, explained that a client's stay could vary from four to six hour but that 92 is the maximum number of clients there are allowed to have. e Groger asked if the services being provided to the clients would be provided by staff. Olshansky stated everything would be done by professionals. Groger asked if they would be employees. Axelrod stated that services would probably be provided by contractors and that they plan to have a physician on staff and have two or three people come in to the facility twice a week to provide services such as counseling. Grimes asked where their clients come from. Axelrod stated that they get clients from the Minnesota Department of Health, the County and the newspaper. Keysser asked if this was a profit or non-profit business. Olshansky stated it was for profit and that they have a contract with the County who screens the clients for them. McAleese asked the applicants to explain the types of people that would use their facility. Axelrod stated that it is mostly lonely, elderly people and that they would offer mental care programs, and in the future they would have physical health programs. Keysser asked the applicants what kind of licenses they have. Axelrod stated that he is a licensed medical doctor. Pentel stated that she has heard from homeowners along Lilac Drive and that there are concerns about speeding. She questioned how people would get to the site and questioned if this use would be viable without county reimbursement dollars. Axelrod said he thinks it would still be a viable use. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 4 Pentel asked the applicants if their client would be living at home or in a nursing home. Axelrod said that their clients would all be living at home and that none of them would be from nursing homes. Keysser asked if there is parking allowed on the frontage road and stated that he can envision buses stacking on the service road. Grimes stated that the frontage road is not marked "no parking". Pentel opened the public hearing. e, Jerry Mundt, 4959 Olson Memorial Highway, Managing Partner of Pondwood Office Park stated they have no objection to the proposal, the access is great and the use is excellent. He said he has questions concerning the existing entrance road and asked if it was going to be wider1ed. Grimes stated no. Mundt asked about the lighting and the drainage on the site. Grimes stated that it appears the drainage would go into the ditch along the railroad and into the wooded area. Mundt asked if the applicants would be serving meals and if there would be service vehicles coming to the site. Grimes stated that generally the meals would be catered or the applicants would be bringing in food, but that there would be no kitchen facilities on the site. e Pentel asked Grimes to address the lighting on the site. Grimes stated the Golden Valley does not have a requirement on lighting of a site and said that he thinks it would be in the applicants' best interest to provide adequate lighting. Buetow stated that the lighting is planned to be placed on the building facing south. He said there won't be any night time operations so safety and people going to their cars at night won't be an issue. Mundt said they want it to be as light as possible because they have had some problems in the past with people breaking into cars. Pentel asked if this was going to be a major remodeling. Buetow stated no, and explained that it was just going to be making the restrooms accessible and doing some ceiling work when the sprinkler system is installed. McAleese stated that since this is a Conditional Use application the Planning Commission is supposed to look at ten factors for consideration. He said he thinks this is a terrific use and that the site can handle it. He said he is concerned about the traffic circulation on the site and that there could be a lot of people coming and going at the same time. He said he would vote for the proposal because he thinks the problems can be solved. He added that he thinks the City will have to be vigilant on this one, in terms of traffic flow and congestion. Pentel said she thinks the proposed use is fine for this facility especially if Metro Mobility buses use Highway 55 as much as possible and avoid the frontage road. She said she thinks traffic could become an issue but it is nice to see these building have a new life and she would be voting in favor of the proposal as well. Pentel asked the Commissioners if they would like to put something in the motion about the lighting. Groger said he was concerned about the applicants putting the lighting on Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 5 the building and shining it out to the south. Grimes stated that the back of Breck School is to the south so he did think it would be an issue. Pentel added that the maximum number of clients should be changed to 92 in the motion. MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to approve an adult daycare facility at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway with the following conditions: 1. All sign age must meet the requirements of the City's sign code. 2. The site plan prepared by Buetow and Associates and dated 9/29/03 shall become a part of this approval. e 3. The adult day care center shall be limited to 92 clients and 18 employees. 4. The hours of operation shall be 8 am to 6 pm, Monday-Saturday. 5. Up to 8 parking spaces may be "proof of parking" and striped only when it is determined it is needed to meet parking demand. The additional space freed up by the reduction of parking shall be used to improve maneuverability within the parking area. 6. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated 9/12/03 shall become a part of this approval. 7. All improvements to the building shall meet the City's Building Code requirements. 8. The State of Minnesota Department of Human Services shall issue all necessary licenses to Health Care Plus before operating the adult day care center. Proof of licensing shall be given to the Director of Planning and Development. e 9. All other applicable local, state and federal requirements shall be met. III. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision - (SU09-05) Applicant: Paul & Rozalija Gannon Address: 508 Westwood Drive South and 4510 Strawberry Lane Purpose: To allow an existing lot to be divided into two lots for the construction of a new house. Grimes stated that the agenda should be corrected to state that the lot is not one lot being divided into two lots, it's two lots being re-subdivided into two different descriptions and eliminating the outlot so that the lot to the west could be sold for the construction of a new home. He said that he looks at this as a relatively simple minor subdivision but there are some sticking points with the way the existing house is located Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 6 on the east lot. He explained that there was a variance issued to allow the home to be within 15 feet of the north side property line but when it is scaled off it is really less than 15 feet. Also, there is a slight encroachment of the deck into the required 35-foot setback area. He asked the Planning Commission to consider granting a variance from the Subdivision Code requirements for all of the existing building variance requests. Grimes explained that the reason for this minor subdivision is to get a retaining wall on the applicants' side of the property line. He said that the City Engineer will be requiring a slope stability study. He said that the applicants could build a home on the lot now without having to subdivide it, but they want to eliminate the outlot. Shaffer asked if the property line could be moved so the playhouse shown on the preliminary plat would not have to be so close to it. Grimes stated that Public Works doesn't like jogs in property lines. e Pentel asked if the City is hoping that the new house would fit in the envelope shown on the preliminary plat. Grimes said that the envelope shown is 60 feet wide and there is no reason a house couldn't fit there. Butch Zelinsky, representing the applicant, stated that a house has been designed that will fit in Lot 1 without the need for variances. Rose Gannon, applicant, stated that the playhouse could be moved. Shaffer said that moving the playhouse three feet over would clean up the property line issue. Pentel opened the public hearing. e Nancy Whitney, 4520 Strawberry Lane, stated her concern is that they have had so much construction in their area and that the house across the street has been under construction for four years. She said there has been a landslide in her yard and after another rain storm she got another person's sod in her driveway. She said she is concerned about the new house affecting the applicant's retaining wall. Gannon stated that she has lived at her house for 32 years and that they've had an architect divert the water and have never had a drop of water in their house. June Stoll, 4511 Westwood Lane, stated that she lives directly behind the applicant and she is concerned about when there is digging and building if she is going to lose all kinds of dirt. She said she has a lot of run off from her lot into the applicant's empty lot. Pentel asked Grimes if the City has a policy about one lot draining into another. Grimes stated that the City doesn't want to make any situation worse and that the Public Works Department does require drainage and erosion control permits. He said that these steep slopes aren't easy to work with, but it is the responsibility of the builder. He added that the City Engineer is concerned and that is why he is requesting the slope stability study. Zelinsky added that the builder, Dave Allen, is just completing the fourth home in the South Tyrol area on very steep lots. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 7 Pentel closed the public hearing. Pentel noted that the slope stability study wasn't listed as a condition in Grimes staff report and asked if it should be. McAleese stated that it was listed as one of the qualifications governing approval as a minor subdivision in Grimes' memo. Keysser suggested that moving the playhouse should be added as a condition of approval. Grimes told the Planning Commission that there should be two motions made, one for the variance from the Subdivision Code and one for the minor subdivision request. e MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the requested minor subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. The preliminary plat of Gannons Addition dated September 25, 2003 and prepared by Schoell and Madson, Inc. shall become a part of this approval. 2. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is needed prior to approval of the final plat by the City Council. 3. Drainage and utility easements as required by the Subdivision Code shall be shown on the final plat. 4. A slope stability study will be done to determine the precautions that will have to be taken in building a house on this lot that has a 35 ft. to 40 ft. drop from the northeast to the southwest. e 5. The City Engineer will determine that the lot is buildable. 6. The playhouse currently located on the site will be moved so it will meet the setback requirements with the new lot line. MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve the variance for the current structure located at this address because it meets all of the conditions that are set forward by the Board of Zoning Appeals and because the existing non-conforming conditions have already been addressed and approved by the BZA. IV. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - (CU-104) Applicant: Hope for the City Address: 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue Purpose: To allow retail sales in the Light Industrial Zoning District Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 8 Grimes reminded the Planning Commission that they recently changed the Zoning Code to allow accessory retail sales in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts. He stated that the applicant would now like to request a Conditional Use Permit to do retail sales at their location. He stated that staff's primary concern is parking but after he looked at the site he doesn't have any issues with the number of parking spaces but rather another tenant's junk cars located on the site. Grimes discussed the applicants request and stated that they are only expecting a maximum of 30 clients per day and would have only two to three employees total for the retail store. He stated that donors would only drop off their deliveries by appointment only. e Eck asked about the relationship of the size of the retail space compared to the amount of space that a tenant leases. He said in this case 3,000 square feet is less than 10% of the building footprint, but it is more than 10% of the amount of space that this tenant is leasing so what could happen is that one tenant could take up the whole 10% of the building footprint that is allowed for retail sales. Grimes explained that the retail sales would have to incidental to the primary use of the tenant's business. Rasmussen asked if other tenants in the building would be offered to opportunity to use 10% of the building's footprint as well. Grimes stated that he didn't think so. Pentel asked the applicant what sorts of materials they anticipate selling. Brian Woolsey, applicant, stated that they would have everything from hardware to furniture and that most things are freely received and freely given and that some donors allow them to sell a certain percentage of the things they donate. e Pentel asked if they would receive donated automobiles. Woolsey said no. Pentel asked how they would advertise. Woolsey said they would have a sign on the building in accordance with the City's Sign Code. Eck asked the applicant to clarify how the donations are given away. Woolsey stated that everything is received as a donation and in some cases they've given out everything they possibly can so then they could sell it in their retail store and distribute the money amongst the different non-profit agencies. Grimes asked how the items are redistributed after the items are collected from the different organizations. Woolsey stated that Hope for the City distributes items to about 65 local non-profit organizations and that they pick the items up from the donors, secure them, them and distribute them to the organizations. Rasmussen asked how organizations hear about Hope for the City. Woolsey stated that it is mostly by word of mouth and that word travels fast. He said that they like the organizations to be a 501 (3)(C) non-profit and that every Tuesday there is an email sent Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 9 out telling the organizations what items will be distributed on Friday and that they are give a time slot for when they can come pick the items up. Shaffer asked Woolsey if they would be selling food products. Woolsey said they are not anticipating selling food products because that requires more licensing and they aren't really in the retail business per se, it is just a way to help shore up the bottom line. Groger referred to the applicants narrative and stated that he didn't think 25 to 30 trips per day seemed like very many. Woolsey said that there would be limited interest in the retail store. He added that they are not in the retail business and that the retail part of their operation is just for the leftover items not distributed to the non-profit organizations. e Pentel opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one Pentel closed the public hearing. McAleese stated that this use is consistent with the Zoning Code and is also consistent with the plan for the area. MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to approve the request to allow retail sales at 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue which is located in the Light Industrial Zoning District subject to the following conditions: e 1. A retail store incidental to the Hope for the City warehouse may operate in no more than 3,000 sq. ft. of the 12,000 sq. ft. leased by Hope for the City. The attached Hope for the City floor space plan indicates the location of the store. 2. If additional parking is needed, the owner of the 1200 Mendelssohn building will stripe additional parking spaces as shown on the Proof of Parking Plan. The Director of Planning and Development will determine if additional striped parking is needed. 3. The retail store hours shall be 10 am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. 4. All signage for the Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the sign code. 5. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Date October 2, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. 6. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. -- Short Recess -- e e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2003 Page 10 V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Pentel reported on the MnAPA conference she attended in Alexandria. VI. Other Business Single Family Residential Zoning Code text changes will be discussed at the November 11, 2003 Council Manger Meeting at 7 pm. Grimes stated that the Council would like as many Planning Commission members to attend the November 11 Council Manager meeting as possible to discuss the Single Family Residential Zoning Code text changes. VII. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 pm.