Loading...
10-23-06 PC Minutes . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23, 2006 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 23, 2006. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes, City Engineer Jeff Oliver, SEH Traffic Consultant Mike Kotila and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioners McCarty and Schmidgall were absent. I. Approval of minutes September 25,2006 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 25,2006 minutes as submitted. II. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan __ Colonnade Phase II - PUD No. 53-A2 Applicant: Minnesota ND Properties Inc. a corporation owned by Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of New York Address: 5500 Wayzata Blvd. Purpose: To allow for a 240,000 square foot office building with two additional levels to the existing parking ramp. Grimes explained that the applicant is proposing to amend their existing PUD. He referred to a site plan of the property and stated that the vacant part of the site at the corner of Golden Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue was originally designated for the construction of a hotel. He stated that the owners now feel that a hotel doesn't make economic sense and they would like to build a second office building instead. Grimes stated that the proposed new office building have 7 to 8 stories of parking and office space above that. He said that the main issue regarding this proposal is the additional traffic at the intersection of Golden Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue. He stated that staff wants to make sure that intersection will operate effectively and efficiently in the future. He added that staff has suggested that there should be some limitation on the number of employees which is not acceptable to the applicant. He said that another solution may be to limit the amount of parking on the site but those numbers still need to be worked out between the City and the applicant. The applicant has said they would be comfortable limiting the number of parking spaces which will reduce the peak hour trips to an acceptable level. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23, 2006 Page 2 . He said he thinks the number of parking spaces will between 1,600 and 2,200. He added that there are some significant public improvements that are going to be required with the project and that the developer has committed to doing these improvements. Grimes stated that the applicant is using the same architect used for the first building so the proposed new office building will be consistent with the existing building. Eck referred to Grimes' staff report and noted that in it, it states that the number of parking spaces would be limited to 1,600. Grimes explained that was the number proposed by staff but the applicant isn't comfortable with that number so staff will be working with the applicant to come up with a number of parking spaces that will work. Waldhauser stated that the 1-394 Corridor Study looked at the potential traffic impacts of future developments in that area and asked if the Colonnade's traffic analysis builds on the Corridor Study. Grimes stated that it does and stated that the city's traffic consultant, Mike Kotila looked at both the Corridor Study and the Colonnade's traffic analysis. Dave Sellegren, Attorney representing the property owner, stated that the Golden Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue intersection is as studied an intersection as any in the metro area. He referred to an area map and explained that the proposal is to add two levels to the existing parking ramp and a new office building that will have seven levels of parking and 240,000 square feet of office space above that. He discussed the entrances and exits on the site and showed several perspective drawings of the proposed new building. . Sellegren showed the Commissioners a graph that illustrated the projected amount of PM peak hour trips from all the developments in the area, the projected amount of peak hour trips for a 200,000 square foot office building and the projected amount of peak hour trips for a 240,000 square foot office building. He said that the difference between a 200,000 square foot office building and a 240,000 square foot office building is 38 trips. Ed Farr, Edward Farr Architects, Architect for the project, stated that the building design for this phase two project was derived from continuing the same design and materials as the phase one building. He stated that the proposed new building will be approximately 200 feet in height and will be shorter than the existing Colonnade building. It will have 8 stories of office space over 7 levels of parking. He stated that they are only requiring two new curb cuts that will be along Golden Hills Drive and will be used for delivery trucks only. He said that cars will continue to use the existing entrances to access the parking structure for both buildings. Farr showed the Commissioners a shadow study. The study looked at the summer and winter solstice and showed the proposal with the previously proposed hotel and the newly proposed office building. He said that the hotel and proposed office building would have pretty much the same impact to the neighborhood. . Cera asked about the height difference between the previously proposed hotel and the newly proposed office building. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23,2006 Page 3 . Farr said that the hotel was proposed to be 150 to 170 feet high and the office building is proposed to be 200 feet in height. Grimes added that the height of the hotel was never really determined and that the plans were conceptual. Eck referred to the driveway plan and asked if the new truck access would be able to accommodate trailers as mentioned as a concern in the staff reports. Farr explained that there is a loading berth that can hold two semi-truck trailer lengths as well as a trash berth recessed under the parking deck that will service the phase two building. Keysser asked if there will be a sign on Golden Hills Drive that says that entrance is for trucks only. Farr said yes. He added that there will be no access to the parking ramp on that side of the building and it will be for delivery trucks only. Keysser asked if there is a plan for any type of retail use. Farr said no and explained that the phase two building is connected to the phase one building which has a full service cafeteria, the capacity for a restaurant and some small retail space. Keysser asked if there are any plans for public art. Farr stated that there is a sculpture and a pond that set the stage in the phase one development and will service phase two as well. Keysser asked if there are plans for bicycle racks. Farr stated that there were also bicycle racks installed in the phase one development that will be enlarged for phase two. Grimes added that bicycle racks will also be in the Traffic Management Plan. . Cera asked if the existing sidewalks would still be available. Farr said that existing sidewalks will stay or be continued if needed and the site will have full pedestrian access. Waldhauser asked the applicants if they made any attempts to try to accommodate aflY of the 1-394 Corridor Study goals such as stricter height limits and mixed use. She said it sounds like there is no intent to have any retail other than what will serve the office workers during business hours. She asked the applicants if they are aware of the City's intentions for that area. Farr stated that he didn't think the owners would object to a restaurant for public use. He said they are using the land judiciously and adding density in the corridor where it can be absorbed instead of putting it further away from the main traffic Corridor. They are building up, not out and they are in scale and context with the existing buildings in the Corridor. Waldhauser stated that the direction in the 1-394 Corridor is to go with lower heights. Grimes explained that this property is in the Golden Hills Redevelopment area and the City has said it wants higher buildings at this intersection. He added that the 1-394 Corridor study area is really looked at as starting west of Colorado Avenue. Waldhauser said the shadow study was helpful but the site lines will be affected as well. . Sellegren stated that Golden Valley has been working on the Golden Hills Redevelopment area for a long time and that this is the area where the community wanted the mass, the image and the jobs. He said in regard to traffic there are Allianz, United Properties, the Miner Site as well as the Colonnade and the Colonnade Phase two. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23, 2006 Page 4 . He said they acknowledge that they are a contributor to the traffic and explained that as suggested in their Traffic Management Plan they intend to install a gate mechanism in their parking ramp such as Allianz has in order to help manage the traffic. Sellegren said that the last thing they are prepared to do is place limitations on the parking. He said he thinks the traffic numbers will work if they don't add on the proposed two levels to the existing parking ramp, but then they wouldn't meet the City's parking ratio requirements. He stated that the City also has an 1-394 Overlay Ordinance that they have their tenants follow. He stated that he thinks using the Traffic Management Plan, the gate control and the limited amount of parking will work. Keysser asked for clarification regarding the gate in the parking ramp and asked how they would avoid cars parking all over the neighborhood streets. Oliver explained that the gate in the parking ramp would be tied into the signal control cabinet at the intersection. He stated that the details would be worked out in the public improvement plans. Keysser asked how long people would have to wait in the ramp to get out. Oliver referred to the Allianz parking ramp which is similar and said that so far the number of trips have not come close to the threshold and the gates haven't been used. He added that there will be an emphasis placed on flexible work schedules and other forms of transitthat will help as a whole. . Keysser asked if there has been any discussion with Metro Transit about adding buses to the schedule in this area. Grimes stated that he has met with Metro Transit and told them about the added development in the area. Grimes asked about the current occupancy number. Kim Ihle, CB Richard Ellis, applicant, stated that their occupancy rate is currently in the mid 70% range. Keysser asked if their occupancy rate was at 100% if parking would be a problem. Ihle said they are never at 100% occupancy and if they were 95% full they would still be ok regarding parking. Grimes suggested adding language to the PUD Permit that will require the developer to put in "no parking" signs in the surrounding neighborhood if required by the City. Cera asked if they could possibly build less than the proposed 240,000 square feet of office space. Sellegren said they've analyzed that but their economics indicate that they need to build 240,000 square feet. Waldhauser noted that currently the Colonnade has low density offices and asked if the proposed new building will have similar density. Sellegren said the density and tenants will be similar in the new building. He said that they may get the critical mass necessary to have public retail facilities again, but when they tried previously it just didn't work. Waldhauser said she thinks street level access to any public facilities would help. Keysser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. . Kluchka said he is disappointed that a development of this size doesn't utilize mixed use and let the public use this building. He said the parking and traffic issues have been addressed but the development concerns him. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23,2006 Page 5 Grimes explained that this property is a big part of the Golden Hills Redevelopment area which doesn't say anything about mixed use. He said he knows they have talked a lot about mixed use in the corridor area but the Louisiana Avenue area is where the City wants to emphasis mixed use. The Colonnade area has always been seen as a higher density area. He explained that the first phase of the Colonnade was a mixed use development and had a restaurant and a proposed hotel. Waldhauser noted that the City is requiring mixed use right across the corner at the proposed Miner Site. Grimes explained that the Miner site is adjacent to a residential area and the Colonnade site is right on 1-394. The City wanted the development to step down from higher level buildings toward the residential area in the case of the Miner site development. Kluchka stated there are also restaurants right on 1-394 so he doesn't think that is a valid argument for the Colonnade not to have mixed use. He added that the proposed new building isn't addressing the community. Grimes stated that the City didn't require mixed use at the Allianz site and that a mixed use won't work on every site. He explained that the City can't force people to build things when the market is not there. He added that this is a very difficult corner and the City doesn't really want to emphasize this corner for retail because of the traffic and pedestrian circulation issues. Waldhauser said it's interesting that other hotels can do fine along 1-394 but the Colonnade applicants say a hotel won't work. Keysser said he agrees with the applicant that a hotel would not work well in this case because there is no restaurant close by. He said he agrees with the market analysis and agrees with the developer that a hotel is not the highest and best use for this property. Waldhauser said the direction the City wants to take with the 1-394 Corridor may not be in-synch with what the developers would prefer, but we also have to be practical about what Golden Valley can attract. Grimes suggested language be added as a condition of approval that a number of parking spaces will be determined prior to final City Council approval. Keysser suggested eliminating condition number two in Grimes' memo and replace it with language that says the City and the Developer will come to an agreement on a maximum number of parking spaces allowed on the site prior to going forward to the City Council. Cera referred to the light around the top of the existing Colonnade building and asked if it has to be left on. Farr stated that the red light on top of the building is required to be on, but there is no requiring the white light to be on. Kluchka stated the proposed lighting plan looks great and asked if there is going to be significant lighting on the building. Farr said the lighting on the site is derived by three concepts. The first concept is the pedestrian lighting, such as bollards. The second concept is the over-story street lighting and the third concept is the building illumination. He stated that the look and feel of the building and lighting will be the same as in the phase one building. Kluchka asked if the proposed lighting fits within the City's proposed new lighting ordinance. Grimes said their lighting plan would be subject to the proposed new lighting ordinance because it should be adopted by the time the building is constructed. Farr said they would design the lighting plan accordingly. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 23, 2006 Page 6 Keysser asked the applicant about the construction timetable. Sellegren explained that they need government approvals first and they need to have 60% of the space pre-leased before they begin construction. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried 3 to 2 to approve the amendment to PUD No. 53 with the following conditions. Commissioners Kluchka and Waldhauser voted no. 1. The Colonnade Phase II Plans prepared by Edward Farr Architects, Inc. and dated 10/21/06 shall become a part of this approval. 2. The City and the Developer will come to an agreement on a maximum number of parking spaces allowed on the site prior to going forward to the City Council. 3. The Traffic Management Plan prepared for ND Properties and the City of Golden Valley covering the Colonnade Phase I and II and dated September 2006 shall become a part of this approval. 4. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, dated October 18, 2006, shall become a part of this approval. Recommended changes shall be reflected in the final plans for the PUD. 5. The memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, dated October 17, 2006 shall become a part of this approval. Recommendations found in his memo shall be addressed by the applicant and made a part of the final plan for the PUD. Attached to his memo is a memo from the City's consulting traffic engineer, Mike Kotila, PE. His recommendations shall be reflected in changes to the final plan and to the final draft of the Traffic Management Plan for Colonnade I and II. 6. As required by the 1-394 Overlay Zoning District, a Traffic Management Fee shall be paid for both Phase I and II as outlined in the ordinance III. Reports on meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other meetings No reports were given. IV. Other business Discussion regarding Infill Housing Keysser referred to the St. Louis Park report regarding infill developments and suggested the Planning Commission study it and have a more lengthy discussion regarding infill development at their next meeting. V. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm.