12-11-00 PC Minutes
.
.
.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
December 11, 2000
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,
Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on
Monday, December 11,2000. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm.
Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, Hoffman,
McAleese, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and
Development Mark Grimes and City Planner Dan Olson
I. Approval of Minutes for November 13, 2000
Commissioner Eck stated the third sentence on page 9, in the third paragraph, was not
correct. The word "only" should be struck and the word economical should read
economic. Also, The word "to" was used incorrectly throughout and should be
changed.
MOVED by Hoffman, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to
approve the November 13, 2000 minutes as amended.
II. Discussion on Environmental Assessment Worksheet - Bassett Creek
Nature Preserve
Chair Pentel stated that the proposed nature preserve on the General Mill property is a
bit of a misnomer and asked how others felt about it, and whether the Commission
should make a statement. Grimes stated that it was the first day of the comment period.
Shaffer asked about the direction of this discussion and whether the commission was
trying to come up with comments or just trying to discuss it. Pentel stated that it's open
for discussion. Grimes stated that the Planning Commission could make a comment as
a group or they can individually make comments.
McAleese asked if the comments of the group are limited to the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet or whether it makes sense under the Comprehensive Plan.
Pentel stated that because the Commission is the keeper of the Comprehensive Plan,
we have every right to talk about it as a land use matter.
McAleese stated that it would come before the Commission because it has to be
rezoned to institutional in order to be used as a nature center. It is currently zoned
business/professional office. Grimes stated that the comments on the EAW have to be
directed at the EAW itself. McAleese stated that if as a commission we thought that
rezoning that land would be inappropriate, the time to address that would be at the later
meeting when the City has an application for rezoning.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
December 11, 2000
Page 2
Pentel stated there is some confusion about the size of the nature preserve presented
in the EAW. The EAW states that it is 27 acres. Pentel stated that the EAW indicated
there are 14 acres of nature preserve and 10 acres of upland area that could be used
for a ball field.
There was a general discussion about the appropriateness of General Mills continuing
to use ground water for the cooling of their buildings when the State has said such use
of ground water should be phased out. There was also discussion about the long-run
cost to the City for the operation of a nature preserve and recreation facility on property
given to the City (or non-profit) by General Mills to compensate for the use of
groundwater. The Commission went through the law that allows for the continuation of
using groundwater for once-through cooling by General Mills.
.
Groger stated he felt that the donation of the property to the City or other non-profit is a
benefit to the City because it will leave permanent green space. He said he believes
that this green space donation is a good trade-off for the continuation of once-through
cooling by General Mills. Shaffer agreed that the donation of land for a nature area is a
good deal for the City.
Pentel questioned the usefulness of the proposed nature area due to its location near
housing and its small size. She is concerned that the area may not provide good wildlife
habitat and wonders what the public will be able to see at a nature center in this area.
She said the creek now is not fit for most aquatic life because it is too warm due to the
once-through cooling water that is run-off to the creek. She also said it is a difficult area
to get to due to the existing road configuration.
.
Grimes said that only about 5-7 acres of the property is high enough for development.
Perhaps an office building of 200,000-300,000 sq. ft. could be built on this property.
However, there are access issues. Shaffer noted that a nature area or park is better
suited at this location than an office building with poor access.
Pentel is concerned about the cost of operating a nature preserve in the long term. She
would like to know the cost of the Westwood Lake Nature Preserve in St. Louis Park.
There was discussion about the effect of restoring the creek to its original route on
flooding upstream. Would this increase flooding on property owners to the east or
west?
.
Eck said that there would be continued concern by the state about using groundwater
for once-through cooling, even after General Mills is approved by the state to continue
the practice. The state could ban such a use in upcoming years if the aquifer is going
down too fast. If this is the case, the state would end the use of groundwater for once-
through cooling and the City would get to keep the nature area. This is a benefit to the
City.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
December 11, 2000
Page 3
Pentel stated that she felt it was important for the City to not allow this continuation of
once-through cooling and that there will be public pressure for General Mills to not use
groundwater for such a use.
Shaffer said that he believes that in the long run, General Mills will convert all their
buildings to an air conditioning system that does not use groundwater, because it will be
more cost effective.
After some further discussion, McAleese stated that it did not appear that there was a
specific position of the Planning Commission regarding once-through cooling that could
be forwarded to the City Council. There may be individual comments.
There was discussion about the use of the General Mills wells for City use in case of an
emergency. Also, the Commission talked about how much such a nature preserve
would be used. Generally speaking, the Commission felt it would not be heavily used
due to its size, location, and content. It was agreed that the green space would be a
benefit to the City.
-- Short Recess --
III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council,
Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Pentel stated she was at the Council meeting the night they looked at Meadowbrook
and Honeywell and all of those things passed. Honeywell did not want to put sidewalks
in, but the council held firm and there will be sidewalks all the way to the little league
field. Groger asked what happened with Golden Meadows. Pentel stated the Mayor
started off by saying she realized there needs to be a discussion about how we treat
this sort of infill development in light of what the housing plan says and they realized
that with the Planning Commission unanimously saying no and staff saying yes, they
didn't want to be the ones to go one way or the other. There was a public hearing but
the decision was made to see if they could get the proponent to ask for a 60 day
extension so they could have this discussion with us and come up with criteria that
could be applied more uniformly when we see these sorts of developments.
Shaffer asked if there was a leaning on the council regarding Golden Meadows. Pentel
stated she couldn't ascertain whether there was a leaning. Groger stated it was the
Mayor picking out all the pieces of the housing plan that are in favor of the development
and not the ones in favor of protecting existing neighborhoods, he certainly detected
some leaning. Rasmussen stated that there really is a tension in this discussion
between our tendency to want affordable housing and higher density and then we come
up against a neighborhood situation like this. Grimes stated that it comes up every time.
McAleese stated that a lot of plans get approved and this was just a lousy plan. Shaffer
stated it started out worse and got a little better. McAleese stated that it really wasn't
even a coordinated design you've got homes on Winnetka and they're not doing
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
December 11, 2000
Page 4
anything to those. Shaffer stated at the last meeting they used the house that they built
on their property as a hardship against their own property. Rasmussen asked if there
was any threatened legal action. Chair Pentel stated no and that the Council will do
what they want at the January meeting. Hoffman questioned what will happen if the
Council doesn't vote on it.
Rasmussen stated the Sheriffs site group is coming to a consensus. They want
between 9-12 units. Olson stated the meeting in early February is going to be a
neighborhood meeting and before that, an architect is going to draw up some plans.
Pentel asked if there was any talk about Habitat. Olson stated there is some talk of
Habitat and that 2 people are coming to their meeting in January to talk about it.
Rasmussen stated the trees will be preserved and that the facilitator is doing a very
nice job. Olson stated the consensus is that they will preserve the north woods and a
buffer of trees saved on the East Side and trails that would connect with all the trails in
the area.
IV. Other Business
Olson stated the National APA Conference in New Orleans is being held from March 10
through the 14. Grimes stated that there is $2,000 in the budget for someone to go.
Olson stated that staff would need the early registration form by January 5.
V. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 pm