02-09-87 PC Agenda i=� � ;
. �
;
I Golden Valley Planning Co�nission `�
Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road ��
� FEBRUARY 9, 1987
,
i 7:00 P.M. i
';I
� AGENDA �I
�
I i
j _ I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 12. 1986
�
II. REVIEW OF REVISID PRELIMINARY DFSIGN PLAN OF PUD 54 I
i
' APPLICANT: Russell Sovde
i
I
� LOCATION: 285-2$7 Yosemite �,venue
� ;
RDQUEST: Review of Revised Prelimina.r� Desigh Plan of PUD #54 ,i
to Allow Zero Lot Line Division of a Double Bungalow
� �:I
�
I II. R,EVIE4J OF CAPITAL II+�ROVII�iEfVT PR,OGRAM (CIP 1 1987-1991 ;
I
� IV. APA CANFERENCE REGISTRATION '
i
i
I � V. RF,PORT ON CITY CAUNCIL. BZA AND HRA ME�.CINGS �
I
i �
I VI. PROCESS TO R�VOIiE CONDITIONAL USE PF,RMITS AND SUGGESTID AMENDMENT i
i
i
i VII. LAND USE STUDY - DULU7.�i/DOUGLAS SITE
I
i
� VIII. HIRING OF FACILITATOR FOR 2010 PLAN/COMPREHINSIVE PLAN UPDATE �
:I
�
� IX. TOWN MF:�PING FOLIAW-UP %'
:i
i
' ;
i
I
i
i
;
I I
� ;
� �(I
�
i
� i
� . ,
� .
MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
� January 12, 1987
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers
of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Chairman Prazak called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
�'hose present were Commissioners Kapsner, Lewis, McAleese, McCracken-Hunt,
Prazak and Russell . Commissioner Leppik was absent at the start of the
meeting. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development,
Alda Wilkinson, City Planner, and Gloria Anderson, Secretary.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 8, 1986
It was moved by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Lewis and
carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the December 8, 1986 meeting.
II. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
ISSUED T0: William 0. Friede dba Midway Rent-All
LOCATION: 9010 Olson Memorial Highway
APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE: Outdoor Rental Business in a Commercial
Zoning District �
� Chairman Prazak introduced this agenda item and asked staff for a brief �
summary.
Commissioner Leppik arrived at the meeting.
� Director Grimes reviewed the history of this Conditional Use Permit and stated
that although the City had cooperated with the proponent, the conditions of the
permit had never been completed and the business had since moved from the
property.
� -
After a brief discussion by the Commissioners it was moved by Commissioner
Russell , seconded by Commissioner Kapsner and carried unanimously to recommend
that the City Council revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 85-22 issued to William
0. Friede dba Midway Rent-All to operate a rental business at 9010 Olson
Memorial Highway for noncompliance with the conditions of the Conditional Use
Permit.
It was suggested by Commissioner McAleese that the City Attorney be contacted
regarding simplifying the process for revoking conditional use permits.
III. REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - 1985 AND 1986
Commissioners and staff reviewed some of the actions of the Planning Commission
over the past two years. Staff indicated that in the future this would be done
. each year.
Golden Valley Planning Commission Minutes
January 12, 1986
Page 2
�
IV. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL, BZA AND HRA MEETINGS
Commissioners and staff reviewed the City Council meetings of December 9 and
15, 1986 and January 6, 1987, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
meeting of December 9, 1986, and the December 9, 1986 meeting of the Board of
Zoning Appeals (BZA).
U. MISCELLANEOUS
Director Grimes gave an update ,on the status of the Town Meeting follow up and
of the progress in selecting a strategic planning facilitator.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 P.M.
Gary Prazak, Chairman Linda McCracken-Hunt, Secretary
�
�
FebruarY 4, 198�
�
TO: Golden Valley Planning Commission
F1�OM: Alc1a Wilkinson, City Planner
SUBJECT: Review of Revised Preliminary Design Plan - PUD #54, Sovde Addition
The Golden Valley Planning Comm.ission on September 8, 1986 unanimousl,y recom-
mended City Cfl�cil approval of the Prelimina.ry Design Plan for PUD #54, Sovde
Addition, which proposes zero lot line division of an existin�g double bungalow
located at 285-287 Yosemite Avenue North, subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat name shall include "PUD #54".
2. The final plat shall include drainage and utility ea.sements along property
lines as required by the City Subdivision Regulations.
3. An appropriate gaxage and driveway ea.sement over Lot 2 sha.11 be provided to
Lot 1 by separate instrument.
4. Easements for access to water and sanita.ry sewer connection lines on Lot 1
shall be provided to Lot 2 by separate instrument.
� 5. Separate water meters sha.11 be installed for the two individual ownership
units.
6. Fire separation wall between the two units shall extend to the roof.
7. The maintena.nce agreement submitted with the PUD General Plan of Development
shall include provisions for payment of utility bills and for maintenance
of shared utility connection lines and shall meet the approval of the Citv
Attorney and approval of the City En�ineer.
8. The proponent shall submit docim►enta.tion required for title examination by
the Cit,y Attorney with the PUD General Plan of Development and shall pay
the cost of the title examination by the Citv Attornev as required in the
City Subdivision Regulations.
Ba.sed on the Planning Conanission recommenda,tion, the Golden Valley City Council
on October 7, 1986, approved the Preliminary Design Plan for PUD #54, Sovde
Addition, subject to the above recommenda.tions.
Mr. and Mrs. Sovde are in the process of completing the PUD General Plan of
Development application. As part of this process, the proponents completed
construction of the fire separation wall required in the sixth condition of
approval above. The City Inspection Department has inspected and approved the
completed fire wall.
At the same time, the proponents approached the City Inspection Department
� concerning construction of an addition to the northerly unit of the double
b�alow pro�sed for zero lat line division. A revised site plan for PUD #54,
Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 4, 1987
� Page 2
showing the proposed addition, is enclosed. The revised site plan is referred
back to the Planning Commission for consideration of the altered building
footprint prior to City Cfluncil action on the General Plan of Develop�ent and
completion of the PUD process. The proposed addition meets all requirements of
the City Zoning Code, and sta.ff suggests that the Plannin� Cammission recommend
approval of the P'UD Preliminary Design Plan with the revised site plan.
The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Sovde, have indica,ted to Plannin� staff that the,y
ma.y wish to construct an addition to the southerl3 unit or a detached garage on
one of the two lots in the future. In order to avoid the lengthy PUD amendment
procedure for approval of possible future additions meeting Zoning Code
requirements, staff suggests inclusion in the PUD approval of provision for
future construction of additions or accessory buildings. Staff suggests that
the Planning Cormnission revise recommended conditions of approval for the
Preliminary Design Plan of PUD #54, Sovde Addition, as follows:
1. The pla.t name shall include "PUD #54".
2. The final plat shall include drainage and utility easements along propertv
lines as required by the City Subdivision Regulations. .
3. An appropriate �arage and driveway easement over Lot 2 shall be provided to
� Lot 1 b,y separate instrument.
4. Easements for access to water and sanitary sewer connection lines on Lot 1
shall be provided to Lot 2 by separate instrument.
5. Separate water meters shall be insta,lled for the two individual ownership
units.
6. The maintenance agreement submitted with the PUD General Plan of Development
shall include provisions for payment of utilitv bills and for maintenance
of shared utility connection lines and sha.11 meet the approval of the Gitv
Attorney and approval of the City Engineer.
7. The proponent shall sul�mit documenta,tion required for title exa�ina.tion by
the City Attorney with the PUD General Plan of Development and shall pa`
the cost of the title examina.tion by the City Attorney as required in the
City Subdivision Regulations.
8. Future buildi.ng additions or accessory structures sha.11 be permitted
provided construction meets all requirements of Cha.pter 3B: 'I�ao-Family
(R-2) Residential Zoning District of the City Zoning Code and all other
applicable City regulations, including, but not limited to, the Uniform
Building Code.
The revised Planning Commission reco�nendation would be forwarded to the City
Council at the time of City Council consideration of the PUD General Plan of
� Development applica.tion.
Attachment: Revised Site Plan (Full sized plan sheet enclosed separately)
February 4, 1987
�
Z�O: Golden Vallev Planning Co�ni.ssion
Ff�OM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
SUBJECT: Capita.l Improvement Program 1987-1991
Finance Director pon Taylor will be at the February 9, 1987 Planning
Commission meeting to review the 1987-1991 Ca.pita,l Improvement Program. This
program outlines all proposed expenditures for major items such as streets,
sewers, storm sewers, buildings, police cars and trucks. It also covers anv
major repairs to ca.pita,l items that will extend the life of those items. For
instance, a new roof for an existing building would be a part of the CIP.
The GIP is both a planning and budgetin� tool. In the case of Golden Va11ey
where the City is 95% developed, its use as a way to caxry out land use plans
is limited. However, it is considered an invaluable budgeting tool.
After review of the CIP with Mr. Taylor, a motion bv the Planning Commission
giving approval of the CIP would be appropriate.
�
�
� February 3, 1987
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
SUBJECT: Process to Revoke Conditional Use Permits and Suggested Amendment
At the last Planning Commission meeting, the Commission discussed the revoca-
tion of conditional use permits and how the process could be streamlined as
compared to the revocation of the Midway Rent-All permit. I have spoken to
City Attorney Bob Skare about this issue and I have again reviewed the Code.
I am attaching a copy of Chapter 20 for your review. As I discussed with Mr.
Skare, the revocation of a conditional use permit could happen relatively
quickly. Section 20.03(0) specifically states that the City Council has the
right to revoke or suspend any conditional use permit whenever the terms or
conditions of the permit are not met. The action by the City Council would
take four votes. No public hearing is required to revoke the permit.
However, Mr. Skare believes that if there is an opportunity for input from the
Planning Commission or a public hearing, it would be wise. Additional input
would help to lessen any argument by the holder of the conditional use permit
that the City did not give due process. I believe that we should take each
� conditional use permit on a case to case basis. If possible, a hearing should
be held and input from the Planning Commission received.
I am suggesting that the City add a section to Chapter 20 that states that if
the business the conditional use permit allows starts and then ceases operation
for six months, the conditional use permit would be null and void unless the
� City Council would grant an extension. I believe that this is necessary
because otherwise the conditional use permit remains indefinitely valid. For
instance, a business that received a conditional use permit could operate for
several months, go out of business for a few years and then begin operation
again at the same location. I believe that the Planning Commission and City
Council should have the right to reevaluate the conditional use permit due to
conditions that may have changed.
I have attached suggested language for an amendment. If the idea is agreeable
to the Planning Commission, I will further review it with the City Attorney and
have it brought to the City Council for action.
Attachment: .
1. Chapter 20 of the Zoning Code
� 2. Suggested Amendment
z
�
Section 20.03 Add the following: -
P. If the operation of a use that requires a conditional use
permit has begun and the operation ceases for a period of six
(6) months, the conditional use permit shall be deemed null
and void. The City Council may grant an extension of the six
(6) month period of no operation.
�
s �
5 , •
CHAPTER 20: CONDITIONAL USES
� SECTION 20.01. Short Title. This ordinance shall be known, cited and referred
to as the City of Golden Valley Conditional Use Ordinance.
SECTION 20.02. Purpose & Intent. It is the purpose and intent of the Condi-
tional Use Ordinance to provide the City of Golden Valley with a reasonable
degree of discretion to determine the suitability of certain uses with charac-
teristics which may be appropriate within a given zoning district but which
might have an unusual impact upon surrounding properties or which might
-otherwise adversely affect the future development of the City of Golden Valley
or the general public health, welfare, or safety of the property or residents
therein. A conditional use permit shall be required for those occupations,
vocations, skills, businesses, or other uses specifically designated in each
Zoning Use District as requiring such a permit.
SECTION 20.03. Procedure.
A. An application for a conditional use permit may be made by any
governmental body, department, board, or commission, or by any
person or persons, individual or corporate, having a legal
interest in the property described in the application. All
applications shall be filed with the Director of Planning and
Zoning in triplicate.
B. A fee of One Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($150.00) shall be re-
quired for the filing of each application.
� C. Each property site shall require its own application. Single
applications may not be made for noncontiguous or scattered
sites.
D. Each application shall be considered on its own merits.
E. The Director of Planning and Zoning shall refer the applica-
tion to the Planning Commission. An informal public hearing
shall be held on each application within thirty (30) days
after submittal of the application to the Planning Commission.
F. The applicant and all property owners within 500 feet of the
subject site shall be notified of the informal public hearing
by the U.S. mail , not less than ten (10) days prior to the
date of this informal public hearing. Such notice shall
include the date, time, and place of the hearing and shall
reasonably identify the subject site.
�
Section 20.03 cont
� G. The Planning Commission shall make findings and recommenda-
tions �� the City Council based upon any or all of the
following factors (which need not be weighed equally):
1. Demonstrated need for the proposed use. '
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
3. Effect upon property values in the neighboring area.
4. Effect of any anticipated traffic generation upon
the current traffic flow and congestion in the area.
5. Effect of any increases in population and density
upon surrounding land uses.
6. Increase in noise levels to be caused by the pro-
posed use.
7. Any odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibration to be
caused by the proposed use.
8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals or
vermin in the area to be caused by the proposed use.
9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure or use.
� 10. Any other effect upon the eneral ubli
9 p c health,
safety, and welfare of the City and its residents.
H. The Planning Commission shall present its findings and recom-
mendations in writing to the City Council within thirty (30)
days following the date of the informal public hearing.
I. Upon receiving the findings and recommendations of the
Planning Commission, the City Council shall call and conduct
an official public hearing to consider the application.
J. Notice of the official public hearing shall be published in
the official newspaper of the City not less than ten (10)
days prior to the date of the hearing. Such notice shall
include the date, time, and place of the hearing and shall
reasonably identify the subject site. In addition, copies of
the written notice in the form thus published shall be mail-
ed to the applicant and to all property owners within 500
feet of the subject site not less than ten (10) days prior to
the date of such official public hearing.
�
. .
. •�:
Section 20.03 cont
K. The City Council shall make findings and shall grant or deny
� a permit based upon any or all of the factors found at
Section 20.03(G) . The Council may make its approval of the
permit contingent upon such conditions as it determines
necessary to prevent or minimize injurious effects upon the
neighborhood. The Council may also require that sufficient
performance bonding by an acceptable surety be supplied by
the property owner to insure satisfactory compliance with the
conditions imposed by the conditional use permit.
L. The City Council shall set forth in writing its decision, and
the specific reasons for such decisions, within sixty (60)
days following the official public hearing. The applicant
shall be notified in writing of the Council 's decision. If
the application is denied in whole or in part or conditions
are imposed, the reasons for such denial or for the imposi-
tion of conditions, shall accompany this notification.
M. No application which has been denied wholly or in part shall
be resubmitted for a period of six (fi) months from the date
of said denial , except on the grounds of new evidence or upon
proof of changes of conditions. Each resubmission shall con-
stitute a new filing and a new filing fee of twenty-five
($25.00) dollars shall be required.
N. Construction and all other pertinent implementation relating
� to an approved conditional use permit must begin within
twelve (12) months of the date that the conditional use
permit is approved or the conditional use permit shall be
deemed null and void.
0. The City Council shall have the right to revoke or suspend
any Conditional Use Permit whenever the terms or conditions
- of such permit have been violated or broken. All such action
by the City Council to revoke or suspend a Conditional Use
Permit shall be by means of a two-thirds affirmative vote.
�
: •
2 �
� _
City of Golden Valley
January 29 , 1987
Mr. Robert Skare
Best and Flanagan
35UU IDS Center
Minneapolis , MN 55�102
Dear Bob:
I have drafted tHO short additions to Section 20 of the
Zoning Code relating to Conditional Use Permits . The
� addition of' 20 .03iP) states that at'ter 180 daS°s of disuse ,
the conditional use permit is null and �•oid unless the Cit�-
Council has extended ttie 180 dav period .
The additiqn to 20 . 03101 would clarifp that a public hearin�
would ha��e to be held bef'a=•e the Citv Council in order to
revoke or suspend a conditional use permit.
Please feel free to make anV changes or su�gestions . If �-ou
have any questions , please give me a call . I would like to
get this before the Ylanning Commission f'or initial re�-iec: on
February 23 .
Sincerelv ,
!� , `� /.
,�L . ,
����.� LL�, .
�
Mark W. Grimes
Director of Planning and De�elopment
M�'G:g a
Enclosure: Draft of Additions to Chapter 20
�
Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Rd., Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, (612� 593-8000
� Section 20.03
O. Add the following sentence:
The action to revoke or suspend a conditional use permit
shall be made only after an official public hearing is held
as outlined in Section 20.U3(J) abave.
P. If after the use that is permitted by the condi�ional
use permit begins to operate and then ceases to operate for
180 days, the conditional use permit shall become null and
void. If requested by the owner/applicant, the period of
disuse may be eatended beyond 180 days by the City Council
after receivin� a recommendation from the Planning Commission.
The request for extension shall �be ma.de before the 18U da��s
of disuse is completed.
� .
�
• `:
Februar,y 4, 1987
� TO: Golden Valley Plannir� Co�►ission
FROM: Maxk W. Gri.mes, Director of Plannir� and Development
SUBJEGT: Land Use Study for Seven-Acre Site at Duluth and Douglas
At -the Januar,v 24, 1987 Gity Council Retreat, the proposed Brad Staxk housing
development at Duluth and Douglas was discussed. As you may reca.11, Brad Stark
has proposed a 117-unit senior housing development at the northeast corner of
Duluth and Douglas. The develop�[ient would require the use of tax increment
financing to help purchase the ten properties that make up the seven-acre site.
The sta.ff has worked with Mr. Stark over the past yeax to develop a proposal
tha,t is both financiallv feasible and accepta.ble from a land use standpoint.
However, Mr. Stark has run into some financial problems and i� aTnears that the
pro ject is now "dea.d".
The City Council and sta.ff believe that there will probably be future proposals
on this site. There are several propert,y owners in the area. that would like to
sell out and make a handsome profit. The City Council would like the Plannin�
Commission to study the use of this site and make a recommenda.tion to the Cit�•
Council regarding its use. If the Planning Cormaission would recoimnend a higher
use than currentiv exists at that loca.tion, the City Council would act on the
Planning Comonission recommendation before hearing specific proposals. This
would �ive the neighborhood an opportunitv to be heard on the land use charige
� before a specific proposal is made on the site.
I would sug�est that the Planning Commission consider this as an amendment to
the Land Use Plan. An informal public hearing should be held in front of the
Planning Commission before a recommendation is made to the Citv Council on a
land use change. First, the Planning Co�nission will have to study the issue
and ha.ve a proposed land use change to recommend that would �o to ttie public
hearing. If the Planning Commission sees it appropriate to continue the
existing land use (single family and institutiona,l) , a public hea,ring would not
be necessa.ry.
There may also be a larger issue to consider when considering any land use
change for higher densitv housing. There may be other loca.tions in Golden
Valle,y tha.t should also be considered for higher densit,y housing. Perha.ps when
a number of potential locations for higher densitv housin� is considered, the
Duluth/Douglas Site may come out better or warse in comparison. This is
proba.bly an issue tha.t should be examined as part of the comprehensive plannin�
process.
The Planning Commission should get ba,ck to the City Council on the length of
ti.me it would take to evaluate the Duluth/Dou�las site. I would suggest this
be discussed at the February 9 meeting.
�
p ��:
� February 4, 1987
T0: Golden Valley Planning Co�ission
FI�C�i: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
SUBJF�T: Hiring of Facilitator for 2010 Plan/Comprehensive Pla.n Update
Kevin, Alda and I have met over the pa.st couple weeks with three facilitators
who would help the Planning Commission organize and focus their thoughts at the
beginning of the 2010 Plan/Camprehensive Plan update. We have not yet received
all the proposals back from the three facilitators. At the February 9 meeting,
Kevin, Alda and I can discuss the three facilitators with you and, hopefully,
�et some direction. There appears to be two distinct choices between the
three.
�
�
February �, 1487
�
T0: Flanning Commission and Staff
FROM: Kevin McAleese
SUBJECT: Use of consultants in planning process
My impression from recent meetings with consulting candidates is
that, given the size of our budget, the Rlanning Commission has
some homewor� to do before we can make efficient use of a
consultant's services. Specifically, we need to get a better
focus on what it is we are trying to accomplish. For example,
what end product do we envision and when do we expect to make it
available^ What role should the consultant play?
I have some suggestions as to what we might da to prepare for the
consulting session (s) . I will present them next Monday. Please
bring your 2�10 material and calendars to the meeting. tIn
addition to setting up our own planning calendar, we need to
determine possible dates f or working with the consultant. )
�
�
r +•.
February 4, 1987
�
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning a.nd Development
SUBJEGT: Town Meeting Follow-up - Plannin� Commission Assignment
On Januaxy 24, 1987, the City Council had a day lon� retrea.t to discuss various
issues. One of the major issues that was discussed was the results of the Town
Meeting and how the City Council will respond to the issues identifie�i at the
Town Meetin�.'
I am enclosing a memo written by Jeanne Andre da.ted December 31, 1986. This
memo states the way the City Council ha.s chosen to follow up on the issues
ra.ised at the Town Meeting. This method of handling these issues was approved
by the Citv Council at the Januarv 24 retreat. As you can see, the issues were
divided into three ca.tegories - Level I, Level II and Level III. Level I
issues are considered ma.jor issues. Jeanne Andre and others reviewed the "raw"
issues and concerns from the Town Meeting. These issues were naxrowed into a
more managea,ble size. Many of the issues mentioned at the Meeting were combined
with other si.milar issues. The issues were then divided into the three �rot�ps.
� Ea.ch of the issues.at everv level are noH to be given to a Commission or sta.ff
member for follow up. At the City Council Retreat, it was decided that the
sta.ff should write up an explanation of all issues and take those issues to the
appropriate Comm�issions in Februaxy for their initial review and co�aent. The
City Council would like to ha.ve a report back from the Commissions and staff b�
March 17 either addressing the issue or giving a sta.tus report.
The City Council gave special emphasis to several issues at their Januar�T 24
meeting. These axe as follows:
1. The Valley Squaxe Redevelopment Area was one of the major axea.s of concern
at the Town Meeting. Traffic along Winnetka seemed to be one of the most
frequently mentioned problems. In order to address this problem, the Cit3
Council has decided to create a, Civic Center Task Force that will address
the development in the Civic Center block. The purpose of the committee
would he to make recommendations regaxding the followin�:
a) Traffic, particularl,y on Winnetka
b) Pedestrian circulation through and around the Civic Center
c) Post Office/McDona.ld traffic problem
d) A plan for the entire Civic Center block based on Cit,y plans
far expanded uses and the possible relocation of the Post Office
The City Council is now planning the Committee structure. It will proba,blv
hati�e 5 - 10 members. I would �uess that there will be at least two members
� of the Planning Commission on this Task Force along with City Council
persons, Open Space and Recreation Coam►ission members and possibly property
owners.
Golden Valley Planning Counaission
� February 4, 1986
Page 2
2. Golden Valley Lut,heran College Site. At the present time, the City Council
instructed the sta.ff to continue reviewing all proposals that are presented
to the sta,ff. So far, all proposals have involved some type of City subsidy
_usir� ta.x increment financin�. However, the City Council is now in the
process of investigating the possibility of promoting housing on the site
rather than other uses. The City Council use taa increment fina,ncing and
other financin� forms to assist a developer(s) in providing housing tha.t is
needed for the community. This mav include maxket rate units and low/moderate
income units.
I will keep �the Planning Commission informed of the Cit,y Council ideas on
this matter and try to get the Plannir�g Commission as involved as possible.
This may include a tour of other housir� developments.
3. The City Council would like to develop a redevelopment philosophv. The CitS?
Council and sta,ff will be workin� on this in upcoming months. Of pe.rticular
concern is the use of condemnation for new developments.
4. Other Issues. For the Februaxy 23 meetir�g, Alda and I will develop a written
response to all the Level I, II and III initiatives that have been directed
to the Planning Commission. The Plannir�; Couunission will then have an
� opportunitv to comment on the sta.ff's written response and make additions
or corrections. These responses would then be sent to the City Council by
March 17.
If there axe coimnents on any of the issues at the February 9 meeting, please
raise them beca.use it will help Alda. and me in makin� our written response.
�
DATE: December 31, 1986
� T0: William S. Joynes, City Manager
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Administrative Assistant
RE: Follow-up of Centennial Town P4eeting
-Introduction
Mayor Anderson and I met to review the issues raised at the Centennial Town
Meeting and possible follow-up on the more significant issues raised. Attached
is a listing of those points which we believe warrant a response. The following
memo outlines a possible approach for responding to the significant issues and
is designed to start discussion at the Council 's January 24th retreat.
Background
Almost all items which came up at the Centennial Town P4eeting have had City
action in the past, and many are ongoing City projects. Therefore, the follovr-
up is generally a question of education -- or informing the public what has
occurred or will occur in the future related to a specific issue raised. The
purpose of the Mayor's review meeting was to recommend to Council and staff
which items should be followed up and to what extent. tJot all items which came
u� at the Centennial Town Meeting are included in the list because many were of
a general or hunorous nature and it would be difficult to provide a response.
� The remaining items were divided into three categories: two which would involve
staff response at different levels of detail , and a third which would be noted�
as major City initiatives for the next year. Council and staff should comment
on the type of response that is warranted for e var ous i ems is e .
Ma3or (Level I) Initiatives
Items selected as major initiatives were mentioned at the Centennial Town
(Meeting by numerous groups and received high point values. Often a number of
issues have been grouped together under an umbrella topic. The rationale behind
the ma3or initiative category is that the Council is or should be spending a
significant amount of time, money and/or effort in addressing these issues and
information on Council actions should be provided to the public. The issues
recommended as major initiatives include: 1) Valley Square Redevelopment; 2)
Construction of a new pool and recreation center; 3) Reuse of the Golden Valley
Lutheran College site; 4) Redevelopment Philosophy; and, 5) Recycling. More
detail on these topics is included on the attached list.
Follow-up to major initiatives would include:
a. Review by staff/Council at the retreat with some determination as to
future actions and the timetable for those actions;
b. Review of those proposed actions (as well as the proposed reaction to
Level II and III initiatives) by the appropriate committee/commission;
c. Detailed staff write-up of activities to date, planned activities as
suggested by Council , staff or various cor�missions;
d. Council review of all issues prior to mailing a written response to all
�. Town Meeting participants.
-2-
� The attached list provides the major topic, sub-items from the meeting, and
identifies possible staff and commission involvement for recommended major ini-
tiatives.
Level II Initiatives
Items included as Level II initiatives would be referred to staff to provide an
overview of past and future actions and possible additional action by Council .
Staff response could range from one paragraph to a page in length, and would be
reviewed by appropriate commissions and the Council .
Level III Initiatives
Level III initiatives would have brief (one sentence to one paragraph) resronses
regarding the status of the issue, to be prepared by staff. Council and
appropriate cor�missions would review staff responses on Level II and III ini-
tiatives prior to sending a report to Centennial Town Meeting participants.
Timetable
The goal would be to send a report on Level II and III initiatives to Town
Meeting participants by the end of March. This report could also outline the
background and proposed action on major initiatives. Action on major initiati-
ves could continue over the next year.
�
JA:pb
Attachments
�
CENTENNIAL TOWN PIEETING
� FOLLOW-UP
Major (Level I) Initiatives
Issue Input
1. Valley Square Redevelopment Grimes/Odland
- Traffic Create Civic Center Task Force,
- Post Office Parking and Access include:
- Beautification of Shopping Area HRA - 2
- Diversification of Retail Opportunities Planning Commission - 2
- Pedestrian Access Open Space & Rec. Comm. - 1
- Civic Center Plan Area 8usiness People - 2
- Clean up of Highway 55 (West of Valley Square)
2. Pool and Recreation Center Jacobson/Taylor
- Indoor or outdoor pool Pool Committee
- Youth recreation center Open Space Commission
- Citizens vote on pool
- Reasonable price on pool
�3. Golden Valley Lutheran College Site Grimes/Joynes
- Reuse (institutional , day care) Planning Commission
- Zoning HRA
- Public Financial Involvement
4. Redevelopment Philosophy Joynes/Grimes
- Rights of Property Owners HRA
- Use of Tax Increment Financing
- Publicity on Redevelopment Projects
- Condemnation
- Indentify priority redevelopment districts
5. Recycli ng Becker/Odland
- Recycl i ng center
- Garbage collection
- Leaf recycling
- C1 ean-un day
�
f .
Level II Initiatives
�
Issue Input
1. Traffic Duluth/Highway 100 Odland/Planning Commission
2. Coordinated Traffic Lights Odland
3. Street Light Policy Odland
4. Snowplowing in driveways Odland/Klatt
5. Ongoing park �nd recreation programs Jacobson/Open Space Commission
6. Housing opportunities Wilkinson/HRA
7. Golden Hills Redevelopment: Grimes/HRA
Ruperts, new retail opportunities, Bury/Carlson
8. Transit Odland/Andre
9. Taxes (i ncreases, syster,�) Tayl or
10. Promoting Golden Valley (Golden Valley Days) Jim Murphy
�
�
�� �' .
Level III Initiatives
Issue Input
1. Winnetka traffic from Highway 12 to Highway 55 Odland/Planning Commission
2. I394 traffice problems during construction Odland/Planning Commission
3. Stop light at Plymouth and Mendelssohn Odland
4. Reduce salt on residential streets Odland/Klatt
5. Improve sealcoating Odland/Klatt
6. Improve J ersey Avenue/Turners Crossroad Odland
7. More sidewalks, better pedestrian access, bike
trails, better sidewalk maintenance Odland/Grimes
8. Underground wiring Odland
9. Trails J acobson/Open Space Commission
10. New recreation facilities (see list) Jacobson/Open Space Cammission
11. More fine arts activities Jacobson/Open Space Commission
12. Citizen input/study of Brookview area Jacobson/Open Space Commission
�3. Maintain residential land use Grimes/Planning Commission
14. Small grocery shop south of Highway 55 Grimes/Planning Commission
15. Accept auxilliary apartments Grimes/Wilkinson/NRA/Plan. Camm.
16. Pramote housing rehabilitation Wilkinson/NRA
17. Encourage good maintenance of business/
commercial property Grimes/Becke r/Planning Comm.
18. Enforce developer commitments Grimes/Becker/Planning Comm.
19. Increase police patrol before and after school Olson
20. Increase Neighborhood Watch Program Olson/Miller
21. Address day care needs Grimes/Human Rigl�ts Commission
22. Provide easier access to local newspaper Andre
23. Provide special news supplement Andre
24. Promote volunteer groups for community benefit Andre
�25. Develop citizen work program Andre/Odland