Loading...
02-14-11 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 14, 2011 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, February 14, 2011. Chair Waldhauser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall, Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Eck was absent. 1. Approval of Minutes January 10, 2011 Regular Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Cera, seconded by Segelbaum and motion carried to approve the January 10, 2011 minutes as submitted. McCarty abstained from voting. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Property Rezonings — 5075 Wayzata Blvd and 1400, 1500 Highway 100 South from Commercial to Business and Professional Offices Applicant: City of Golden Valley Addresses: 5075 Wayzata Blvd and 1400, 1500 Highway 100 South Purpose: To bring the properties into conformance with the recently updated Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Grimes explained that these properties are proposed to be rezoned in order to bring them into conformance with the General Land Use Plan Map that was adopted by the City Council as a part of the Comprehensive Plan Update in 2008. Grimes reminded the Commission that this hearing was tabled at their January 10, 2011 meeting because Duke Realty had some concerns about rezoning the properties. Since the January 10 Planning Commission meeting, staff has reviewed Duke's concerns about the future use of the properties with the City Attorney and is still recommending that the properties be rezoned to Business and Professional Offices. He explained that when the General Land Use Plan Map was adopted, the City was aware of Duke's plans for the area and that Duke currently has Preliminary PUD approval to construct a parking structure connected to office buildings (The office buildings are located on an adjacent parcel located in St. Louis Park) on these properties. He stated that the Planning Commissioners responsibility is to bring the Zoning Map into conformance with the General Land Use Plan Map. It is clear that the General Land Use Plan Map calls for this area to be designated for office use and the only zoning district consistent with that is the Business and Professional Offices zoning district. He stated that Duke's concerns would be best addressed by the City Council because they have given direction through the Comprehensive Plan as to Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 14, 2011 Page 2 what they see is the best use for this property and what Duke is proposing is consistent with the Business and Professional Offices zoning district. Segelbaum asked if the impact to Duke's plans was contemplated when these properties were designated Business and Professional Offices in the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 2008. Grimes explained that office space is a permitted use in the Commercial zoning district so Duke's PUD plans were allowed to go forward. He noted that these properties and several other properties in the area have historically been used as office building space. He added that rezoning the properties to Business and Professional Offices is consistent with previous uses on the site and is still consistent with Duke's current proposed use for the properties. McCarty said even though designating the General Land Use Plan Map for office use was consistent at the time the Comprehensive Plan was adopted it seems like the City is limiting itself if the property is rezoned to Business and Professional Offices. Grimes said he agrees that the Business and Professional Offices zoning district is more restrictive. However, the direction of the Council was to guide these properties for office use due in part to the traffic concerns in the area and how retail versus office space would affect the properties. Schmidgall said it is his understanding that rezoning these properties to Business and Professional Offices would be unbeneficial to Duke because that zoning district won't allow a free-standing parking ramp but the Commercial zoning district will. Grimes agreed that is one of Duke's concerns. Cera asked if an office building with a restaurant or café would be allowed in the Business and Professional Offices zoning district. Grimes said yes and added that as part of a PUD they could also build restaurants or shops. Kluchka asked Grimes to address the uses allowed without a PUD. Grimes explained that the Business and Professional Offices zoning district allows limited retail services in a professional office building with a Conditional Use Permit. He added that these properties would be very difficult to develop without a PUD. Schmidgall said rezoning these properties to Business and Professional Offices feels restrictive. Waldhauser stated that there was a reason behind guiding these properties for office use when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2008. She said she thinks the reasons are the concern about traffic issues and wanting to somewhat constrain retail use. She reiterated that the Planning Commission's job at this point is to bring the zoning into conformance with the Land Use plan, not to go back and revisit the Land Use Plan because the Comprehensive Plan has already been adopted. McCarty noted that the office market economy has changed since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted and he still feels like the City is restricting itself by rezoning these properties to Business and Professional Offices. Cera asked if these properties were rezoned to Business and Professional Offices if another developer could put a parking ramp there if Duke's PUD plans happen to fall through. Grimes said the only way a parking ramp could be built in the Business and Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 14, 2011 Page 3 Professional Offices zoning district without a PUD is if it is accessory to a building on the same lot. Segelbaum questioned if by rezoning these properties the City will create a disadvantage for Duke. Pat Mascia, Senior Vice President of Minneapolis/St. Paul Operations for Duke, said in general they are not opposed to rezoning the properties and it is consistent with what they have proposed. He said in terms of potential future uses there is concern about the limited uses allowed in the Business and Professional Offices zoning district. He noted that in their preliminary entitlements there was a specific allowance for parking structures on these properties because the properties are zoned Commercial. He said he understands that procedurally he needs to discuss his concerns about the proposed rezoning with the City Council but he feels that in 2008 their plans were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He questioned if the Commercial zoning district is still consistent with their plans or if the Business and Professional Offices zoning district is more consistent. He added that they would like as much flexibility as possible, but at the same time he doesn't disagree that the Business and Professional Offices zoning district will be much more restrictive or have a negative impact on the their existing Preliminary PUD plan for the site. Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Waldhauser closed the public hearing. Segelbaum said it is curious to him that the City is addressing this rezoning and a PUD approval at the same time. He suggested letting the PUD process play out then readdress the rezoning. Waldhauser said she doesn't think they have the option to wait. She added that she would not be in favor of waiting because leaving the property designated Commercial opens up the potential for several options that maybe weren't anticipated for this site. Cera said he is bothered by rezoning these properties because the City has a willing developer ready to build something here. He referred to the City Attorney's memo and asked if amending the Comprehensive Plan instead of rezoning the properties could be an option. Kluchka stated that the Council would have to direct the Planning Commission to review the Comprehensive Plan. He reiterated that it is the Planning Commission's responsibility to change the Zoning Map to match the Comprehensive Plan. McCarty agreed that the Planning Commission's role is not to vote on what the properties should be zoned, it is to make the Zoning Map compatible with the General Land Use Plan Map. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by McCarty and vote split three to three to recommend approval of rezoning the properties at 5075 Wayzata Blvd and 1400, 1500 Highway 100 South from Commercial to Business and Professional Offices Commissioners Kluchka, McCarty and Waldhauser voted yes. Commissioners Cera, Schmidgall and Segelbaum voted no. --Short Recess- Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 14, 2011 Page 4 3. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Grimes reminded the Planning Commission that the City Attorney will be attending the March 14, 2011 Planning Commission meeting to discuss various planning items. 4. Other Business No other business was discussed. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:34 pm. �...-1 Lester Eck, Secretary