Loading...
Planning Commission_ Meeting Minutes - 06-24-2024 (SIGNED) CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 24, 2024 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 1. CALL TO ORDER • Vice-Chair Cohen called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. & read the Land Acknowledgement • Regular Members Present: Barnstorff, Brookins, Cohen, Segelbaum, Sicotte, Van Oss (arrived 6:31) • Regular Members Absent: Ruby • Student Member, Status: VACANT • Staff Members Present: Darren Groth, Assistant Community Development Director Kendra Lindahl, Contract Planner Michael Ryan, City Engineer • Council Member Present: CM Sophia Ginis 2. CONSENT AGENDA: Brookins motioned to approve the consent agenda, as presented. Van Oss seconded. Commission voted 6-0 to approve. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Informal Public Hearing – Minor subdivision at 227 Paisley Lane and 200 Edgewood Avenue North • At 6:34 p.m., Vice-Chair Cohen introduced this item and asked Planning Consultant Lindahl to present the staff report. • At 6:37 p.m., Vice-Chair Cohen asked Lindahl to explain why this item was back in front of the commission. Lindahl mentioned the City’s Neighborhood Notification Policy and since the applicant was not asked to send a notice of the first Planning Commission meeting, the required duplicate notice was not sent. When the project got before City Council, they remanded the application back to the commission and reset the process to ensure that both the City’s notice and the identical applicant’s notice were mailed to the same people. After Lindahl’s reply, Vice-Chair Cohen asked if other commissioners had any questions. Commissioner Segelbaum asked Lindahl to show the approval conditions for a minor subdivision. Lindahl explained the criteria. Commissioner Segelbaum mentioned that those criteria seemed cut and dry but asked Lindahl to define what buildable means. Lindahl explained the review process and identified that buildable means the proposed lot meets the size, setback, and frontage criteria. Commissioner Segelbaum asked if there was a code required test for those criteria or if the Commission could determine those criteria on a case- by-case basis. Lindahl responded that there is code that describes the criteria and that the City Engineer and the entire development review team checks each application for compliance with applicable City codes. • At 6:45 p.m., the applicant, Brian Walvatne was invited to speak. Brian Walvatne told the commission that he owned both properties and wanted to build a new home for him and his wife on the new Lot 2. He mentioned that access was proposed from Paisley Lane and would CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 24, 2024 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 not come from Edgewood. He sent the required mailer, volunteered to hold a neighborhood meeting, went door to door to talk with neighbors, and plans to live in the neighborhood so he wants to build responsibly. Commissioner Segelbaum asked about the applicant’s plans for Lots 1 and 3. Walvatne replied that his mother-in-law lives on Lot 1 and is planning to stay and that the home on Lot 3 is also planned to remain. Vice-Chair Cohen asked if Walvatne had any current plans for the Lot 2 home. Walvatne responded he did not and that he anticipated it would take about 2-5 years before they could move into this new home because he needed to plat, hire an architect, and then start the building process. • At 6:49 p.m., Vice-Chair Cohen opened the public hearing. Jake Hartman was the first to speak. He mentioned that he thought the subdivision ordinance was flawed. He stated that it does not give weight or consideration to public opinion. He rhetorically asked what it takes to change an ordinance and that the City should take that action to allow more public input. Hartman thanked the applicants for holding the neighborhood meeting and claimed that the most impacted neighbors do not want this project. • At 6:53 p.m., Roberta Patten spoke about owning the house with the big garden. She mentioned reading the handout and asked if the property was surveyed properly because satellite surveys are not always accurate. She claimed that she needed data to verify staff’s review because the City Engineer also makes errors. She asked the commission to deny the request because she needed more details. She informed the commission that the most prevalent answer to any question during the neighborhood meeting was I don’t know. She accused the applicant of not being aware of what it means to cut down trees and proceeded to read a white paper from the USGS about trees. She also read a Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) paper she shared with commissioners. She concluded by stating that the applicant doesn’t have any building plans and that he must submit to citizens detailed plans and descriptions of how he intends to meet code. • At 7:01 p.m., Marcia Anderson mentioned submitting a written statement to the commission and wanted to share additional thoughts. She mentioned that this has been an intense short course on subdivisions and that she learned a lot during this process. She admitted to learning that a strict reading of the code matters, even though neighbor concerns are not recognized. She stated that the code only points to technical requirements. She mentioned that she was not able to see all the items submitted for this application and shared that she did not think it was a complete application. She also asked about the definition of buildable and why the plat did not show a building location. She mentioned seeing a Glenwood plat in 2023 that showed the building details. She mentioned meeting with the applicant on the site and stated that they shared their plans and value trees and the environment and that they would share additional information as they know it. She mentioned that platting is a complex process, but the code does not address the complexity of applications. She rhetorically asked what about the rights and interests of other property owners. She stated that this seems out of balance and unjust and is not what she wants to see in city government. She urged the planning commission to bring code improvements through the legislative process. She volunteered to participate in the process if the city were to start. She closed by saying that the code is complex and not easy to read and should be improved. • At 7:09 p.m., Peter McCalister stated that he owned the adjoining property, and he did not want to reiterate some of the concerns already shared, but he mentioned that he has noticed CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 24, 2024 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 additional water on his lot since the new home was built behind his property. He stated that his tractor already sinks in the grass on his lot when it is wet, and this request will make it wetter. He claimed that the city did not do enough due diligence to ensure others are not harmed. He admitted Walvatne spoke with him, but that he got a false sense of the sentiment because he just popped in and most people won’t be contentious during a surprise visit from their neighbor. • At 7:13 p.m., Vice-Chair Cohen closed the public hearing and asked if there were any commissioner questions. Commissioner Segelbaum mentioned that he was keeping track of questions raised during the public hearing and asked if staff could answer them. First, he asked if the provided survey was prepared by a licensed surveyor. Groth responded yes. Commissioner Segelbaum then asked if the commission typically gets to see the City Engineer’s report. Lindahl explained that the review process is performed by the professional staff hired by the City and each discipline reviews in conjunction with the others, but most do not prepare a formal report. Next, Commissioner Segelbaum asked if this development proposal followed the BCWMC’s guidelines. Lindahl mentioned that his site is not within their jurisdiction, but all development must follow their stormwater permit. Commissioner Segelbaum then asked if applicants are required to show their building plans during the platting process to which Lindahl replied, no. Commissioner Segelbaum asked if tree mitigation is required when someone cuts down a tree. Lindahl mentioned yes, the city requires a tree and landscape permit for plats. Commissioner Segelbaum then asked how the city requires applicants to address runoff during construction. Lindahl indicated that water currently flowing off a piece of land is allowed to continue flowing in that same direction and volume after construction. Commissioner Van Oss asked if the city reviewed ground water levels in a building report. Lindahl answered yes, through a stormwater permit that is required prior to construction. Commissioner Van Oss then asked how the city addresses the issue of lots being identified as buildable on a plat, but later identified differently under the stormwater permit. Lindahl mentioned that plats go through a preliminary stormwater review to identify if a holding pond or other water retention measures are needed, but the stormwater permit handles the specifics per lot. Vice-Chair Cohen asked about the next steps for the applicant. Lindahl listed all the additional permits and reviews that are needed prior to construction and the inspections performed during the construction. Vice-Chair Cohen asked if all those permits are required in this instance. Lindahl replied yes. Commissioner Segelbaum mentioned that Golden Valley recently had a moratorium on subdivisions, which allowed the city to study the platting process and then the city made the suggested revisions around 2014 or 2016. Commissioner Segelbaum indicated that the topic of platting comes up a lot at the Planning Commission and notes that many of the standards are cut and dry and that while there may be an opportunity to approve the code in the future, the Planning Commission cannot legislate a code change on one application. Commissioner Brookins echoed Commissioner Segelbaum’s sentiments. Commissioner Van Oss stated that he also agreed, and that the applicant is only asking for what they are currently legally allowed to do under the measurable standards in place, which reduces the subjectivity. Vice-Chair Cohen stated that he was in that same boat in that the city has rules and the Planning Commission’s job is to identify if the applicant meets those rules; and if so, they must approve. Vice-Chair Cohen mentioned that further discussion may be warranted regarding the code and whether they like the rules or not, they are what must guide the decision tonight. Commissioner Van Oss mentioned that he could sympathize with the comment that the code was complex and should be simplified. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 24, 2024 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 • At 7:31 p.m., Vice-Chair Cohen asked for a motion. Commissioner Brookins moved to recommend approval based on the findings and conditions of the staff report presented by Lindahl. Commissioner Van Oss seconded. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve. 4. NEW BUSINESS: NONE 5. COUNCIL LIASION REPORT: At 7:32 p.m., Councilmember Ginis briefed the commission on the progress of the search for a new City Manager. She mentioned making the three finalist’s names public last Thursday with a public meet-and-greet that evening and City Council deliberated on the candidates both on Saturday and this evening. All three candidates will be invited to present a specific scenario on July 1, 2024, and the City Council is anticipated to make their decision that day. Ginis also provided an update on the last City Council meeting where they recognized Juneteenth and concurred with the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the CUP at Culver’s. She concluded by sharing details regarding the Market in the Valley and Ice Cream Social. Vice-Chair Cohen asked if she had any sense whether City Council would be interested in clarifying the City’s subdivision regulations. Councilmember Ginis replied that is not a topic they’ve broached, so she cannot speak on behalf of the entire council. She agreed that clarifications in code are good city business, but the City currently has a lot of priorities, and some issues may just need to be a part of future years. Vice- Chair Cohen gave her and City Council some kudos on the process to hire the new City Manager. 6. COMMISSIONER TRAINING: NONE 7. STAFF COMMENT: At 7:39 p.m., Groth introduced City Engineer Ryan and briefed the commission on various staffing updates by sharing that a new Associate Planner is scheduled to start on July 1 and the Senior Planner position was offered and accepted by the top candidate and will also start in July. In addition, Groth mentioned that Director Flores resigned, and the City is beginning the process of hiring her replacement. 8. COMMISSIONER COMMENT: NONE 9. ADJOURNMENT: Vice-Chair Cohen adjourned the meeting at 7:41 p.m. Approved by: Atest By: Commission Secretary Darren Groth, AICP, CPM Community Development Asst. Director 2024.07.19