07-09-12 PC Minutes Regular Meeting af the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
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,
July 9, 2012. Chair Waldhauser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners, Cera, Kisch, Kluchka, McCarty,
Schmidgall, Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present were Director of Planning and
Development Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
June 25, 2012 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Kluchka abstained.
2. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 6601 and 6621 Medicine Lake
Road — Savanah Estates — SU14-14
Applicant: Paul Whiteman — RJT Investments
Addresses: 6601 and 6621 Medicine Lake Road
Purpose: Ta allow the applicant to divide two single family residential lots into
three single family residential lats
Grimes referred to a location map of the subject properties. He explained the applicant's
request to subdivide the properties into three new lots. He explained that each !ot will be
approximately 28,000 square feet in size which exceeds the minimum lot size
requirements. He added that the existing homes and accessory structures currently
Iocated on the properties will be removed. He stated that staff is recommending approval
of the subdivision request as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and it meets all
the Zoning Code requirements.
Kluchka asked if any variances are being requested or if there is the potential for variance
requests in the future. Grimes said no variances are being requested and the lots are
more than large enaugh to build houses on without requiring variances.
Segelbaum asked if these are the same parcels that the Planning Commission
considered several months ago for higher density housing. Grimes said yes. Segelbaum
asked if there are any requirements not being met. Grimes said no, all requirements
regarding subdivisions are being met in this praposaL
Waldhauser asked if the homes could be built anywhere within the setback area. Grimes
said yes and added that the driveways will probably have a turnaround area so people
wouldn't have to back out onto Medicine Lake Road.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 2
Paul Whiteman, RJT Investments, Applicant, explained that he originally wanted ta do a
six-lot development on these two praperties but it became tao cost prohibitive so now he
is proposing this three-lot development instead. He exptained that the placement of the
homes will be decided by the purehaser based the location of trees, etc.
Waldhauser asked if the tree preservation and grading of the properties will be
considered for each lot individually. Whiteman said yes.
Cera asked Whiteman if he is building a model home. Whiteman said yes and showed an
architectural drawing of a proposed home. He added that the approximate cost of the
hames will be $350,000 and will be approximately 2,500 square feet in size.
Waldhauser opened the public hearing.
Logan Ericksen, 6725 Medieine Lake Road, asked if the properties will be single family
homes. Waldhauser said yes and noted that the zoning classification is not changing.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment. Waldhauser closed the public
hearing.
Kisch stated that because all of the City's qualifications have been met he is in support of
this proposal. Segelbaum agreed.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the proposal to subdivide the properties located at 6601 and 6621 Medicine
Lake Road into three lots subject to the following conditians:
1. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the
final plat.
2. A park dedication fee of$1,65Q shall be paid before final plat approval.
3. The Public Works Department memorandum, dated July 3, 2012 shall become part
of this approval.
4. A Subdivision Agreement will be drafted for review and approval by the City Council
that will include issues found in the Public Works Department memorandum.
4. All applicable development associated fees, including the park dedication fee, shall
be paid in full prior to approval of the Final Plat.
5. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 3
3. Informal Public Hearing — Genera! Land Use Plan Map Amendment—
7345 Country Club Drive — CPAM-51
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Address: 7345 Country Club Drive (Schuller's)
Purpose: To change the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from
Low Density Residential to Commercial-Retail
Grimes stated that this is a General Land Use Plan Map Amendment brought forth by the
Gity Council. He explained that the City is the applicant and only the City Council can
amend it since it is the City's plan. He stated that at the June 12, 2012 Council/Manager
meeting Schuller's Restaurant asked the City Council ta consider changing the General
Land Use Plan Map designation from Low Density Residential to Commercial-Retail in
order to allow them to construct an outdoor patio. Grimes explained that staff and the City
Attorney believe that the addition of a patio would be considered an expansion of an
existing non-conforming use which is not allowed per City Code. He stated that he
researched the history of this property in order to try to figure out how long this property
has been designated Low Density Residential. The first Gomprehensive Plan (1959) had
the property designated Low Density Residential and it has been zoned Single Family
Residential since at least the early 1970s. He added that there are a number of steps
involved before expanding the restaurant would even be possible. The General Land Use
Plan Map would have to be amended, the property would then have to be rezoned, a
Conditional Use Permit to allow for a restaurant would have to be obtained and variances
would be required because the building is non-conforming with setback requirements.
Waldhauser asked abaut uses that would be allowed if the property were rezoned.
Grimes stated that one of the concerns he has is regarding the uses that would be
allowed if the property were zoned Commercial. He said offices, retail uses, restaurants,
auto-related uses with a Conditional Use Permit and anything else allowed in the
Commercial zoning district would be allowed at this property if it were rezoned. He added
that the building could also be torn down and a different one built. He explained that
another concern is the impact of the land use changes on the residential and institutional
properties adjacent to the property. Staff believes the General Land Use Plan Map should
not be changed.
Waldhauser asked if Schuller's would be allowed to reconfigure the building. Grimes said
they are allowed to maintain, repair and replaee the existing building, but they cannot
expand it.
Schmidgall referred to the potential new Light Commercial zaning district and asked what
types of uses would be allowed if the property was rezoned Light Commercial. Grimes
stated that many of the same uses as the Commercial zoning district, with the exception
of auto-related uses, could potentially be allowed in the Light Commercial zoning district.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Gommission
July 9, 2012
Page 4
Schmidgall asked if there is any other way a patio could be added to this property. Grimes
reiterated that as long as the patio is going to be used by their customers it would be
considered an expansion and in order to expand, the property would need to be rezoned.
Segelbaum asked if the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning re-designations could
go through the amendment process simultaneously since the two plans ultimately have to
match. Grimes stated that there is a period of time allowed after the General Land Use
Plan Map is amended to change the Zoning designation,
Kluchka referred to the General Land Use Plan Map and asked what the "semi-public
facilities" category means. Grimes stated that is the designation for nursing homes,
hospitals, etc.
Kisch questioned if Schuller's would need a Conditional Use Permit if the Zaning of the
property were to change. Grimes said yes and explained that if the property were to be
rezoned it opens all sorts of issues with the Building Code, Zoning Code and other
requirements.
Kluchka asked how the building got built in the first place. Grimes explained that it was
built in 1929 before the City had a Zoning Gode. He added that at that time Country Club
Drive was more of a crossroad than it is currently.
Segelbaum asked if the request gets to the Conditional Use Permit phase if conditions
could be placed on it regarding noise, hours, etc. Grimes said yes and stated that
because this property is in a unique area, next to residential properties, there may be
more conditions than usual such as sound mitigation, screening, and lighting. Segelbaum
stated that the opportunity to address some of the concerns could arise during the
potential Conditional Use Permit pracess.
Schmidgall said he would enjoy Schuller's having a patio but he is nervous to think about
what else could potentially be located at this property if it were to be rezoned. He asked if
the City could pass an ordinance to allow the patio addition. Grimes said no, the City
could not pass an ordinance approving a patio. Schmidgall asked if covenants could be
put in place or if a Conditional Use Permit or Rezoning could be revoked if Schuller's ever
left this location. Grimes said he thinks there would be praperty rights issues involved with
that kind of action. He reiterated that if the City wants to allow Schuller's to expand than
the process that has been discussed is the way it has to be dane.
Segelbaum asked if the Single Family Residential zoning district could be amended to
add a bar use. McCarty asked if the occupancy could be limited. Grimes stated that
Schuller's adding more seats to their restaurant equals an expansion which means the
General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning for the property would need to change.
Kluchka asked Grimes to summarize the recommendation in the staff report. Grimes
stated that staff is recommending denial of the amendment to the General Land Use Plan
Map finding that the praperty has been guided Low Density Residential since 1959
implying to the surrounding homeowners that the property cannot be expanded as a
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 5
commercial venue, there have been significant concerns from the neighborhood
regarding the negative impacts this could have and establishing the property as
Commercial-Retail would allow other commercial uses on this property.
Waldhauser stated that most of the commercial uses that could potentially operate at this
property would be similar in use to the current use such as a small restaurant or small
office building. She added that the only objectionable use would be the auto related uses.
Ktuchka asked about the City Council's discussion of this proposal. Grimes stated that
Schuller's brought their idea of constructing a patio to the City Council and that the
majority of the Council thought this proposal was something they would like to cansider so
the direction by the Council was to start the process by having the Planning Commission
consider amending the General Land Use Map designation. He added that on the surface
this propasal doesn't seem to be a big deal, but there are some legitimate concerns by
the neighbors regarding noise, etc. and the City has to be realistic about being able to
enforce any conditions that could be placed on the praperty.
Steve Sands, 1400 Sumter Avenue North, representing Schuller's, gave the Planning
Commissioner's a drawing of the proposed patio and landscape design. He also
submitted a petition from bar patrons who support the proposed patio addition. He stated
that Schuller's has had offers from people to purchase the property, but they have turned
them down. He referred to a rumor circulating that Schuller's paid people for their
signatures on the petition he submitted and explained that signatures were not bought,
but Schuller's did give some gift cards to people as a way of saying thank you.
Ray Jacob, Schuller's owner, stated that he has been in the restaurant business since
1961. He said he owns three restaurants and two of them have patios under construetion.
He reiterated that he has had many offers to sell Schuller's but he is not interested in
selling because his plan is to pass the restaurant on to his children. He said his business
is down and they've had to reduce staff. As a result he is trying to improve business by
adding a patio. He stated that Schuller's supports many activities, groups and events in
Golden Valley such as softball, volleyball, tennis, church events and school events. He
added that he has had some of his employees since 1968 and that he his good to his
employees and his customers.
Mark Jacob, representing Schuller's said the restaurant has always been a place that is
close to his heart and he could never sell it, they just want ta update it.
Waldhauser asked Ray Jacob when he purchased the property. Jacob said he bought the
property in 1989.
McCarty asked when they started reducing staff. Mark Jacob said they started reducing
staff approximately two years ago.
Segelbaum asked Ray and Mark Jacob if they could address the concerns they've heard
from the neighbors.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 6
Mark Jacob showed the illustration of the patio design and explained that there will be
trees added as a buffer and screening. Waldhauser asked if they are planning any other
modifications to the building. Ray Jacob said he would like to install more windows on the
west to better view and monitor the proposed patio. Mark Jacob added he is also
concerned that he cannot re-build the structure if it were to burn down. Grimes clarified
that legally non-conforming uses may be continued, including repair, replacement,
restoration, maintenance or impravement, but not including expansion.
Cera asked the Jacabs if they've had a neighborhood meeting. Ray Jacob said they have
not. Kisch reminded the Commission that this item was brought forward by the City and
that Schuller's is not the applicant at this point in the proposal.
Waldhauser opened the public hearing.
Peter Pluwak, 510 Kelly Drive, said knows the owners say that Schulfer's is a family
restaurant but he has seen cars leave Schuller's parking lot and hit mailboxes. He said
there are two group homes on Kelly Drive and a nursing home on Glenwood and that
wheelchair-bound people go up and down Kelly Drive where there are no sidewalks so he
concerned about more traffic in the area and accidents happening.
Cate Zottola, 7421 Glenwood Avenue, said she purchased her property in a residential
neighborhood not a commercial area. She said that property values in her neighborhood
have gone down and any change to the zoning of the Schuller's property will have
unintended consequences. She said she talked to the City when she purchased her home
and was assured that the Schuller's property was zoned residential and that it had been
for many, many years and she purchased her home knowing that it would be a challenge
to change the zoning on the Schuller's property. She said she understands Schuller's
desire to expand however she believes that would come at a high price especially if the
use were to change to an undesirable business. She said Schuller's is requesting this
because they feel they are not campetitive without an outdoor patio space but they knew
their limitations when the purchased the property. She referred to the City's variance
regulations and stated that economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship.
She stated that an expansion of Schuller's wauld bring incremental noise, outdoor alcohol
consumption, traffic and disruption into this generally quiet part of the City. She said the
bar patrons can come and go, but this is her neighborhood and she can't go anywhere
else and is stuck listening to the noise. She encouraged the Planning Commission to
deny this request.
John Hiebert, 7421 Glenwood Avenue, said the Mayor referred to Schuller`s as an icon
and he cannot find anywhere in the City Code where it lists Schuller's as an icon. He said
Schuller's knew when they bought this property that they couldn't expand. He said he's
taken a lot of time trying to educate himself on how this process works. He stated that the
Schuller's property has been designated Low Density Residential on the General Land
Use Plan map since 1959 and there is a reason why it's been that way. This property has
been zoned Single Family Residential since the 1970s, therefore it is a non-conforming
land use that is allowed to remain in its current location, but it is not allowed to expand.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 7
He said the zoning is the way it is in order to protect the residential neighborhood and he
respectfully suggests that the proposal be denied.
Ed Vizard, 7101 Glenwood Avenue, said he would like to see the patio constructed
because it would be a good thing for the business and it shauld not be a big deal to put in
a patio. However, changing the zoning to Commercial is a big deal. He said the concern
is what will happen if Schuller's is no longer there. He said the Gity is dealing with a
business that has been at this location for 80 years so he doesn't understand why the City
can't find a way to allow a patio. He said it sounds to him like the Council is trying to open
a "commercial wedge" in what is a neighborhood enclave. That is what should be
considered, not the merits of a patio, but what the rezoning will do the neighborhood.
Karen Reeves, 605 Pennsylvania Avenue, said she has to shut her windows and can't
hear her TV because of the noise from Schuller's. She has heard people at 2 am when
they get in their cars and go home. She can't leave; she has to live here with the noise.
She said she respects the local business and Schuller's does a good business as is. She
said the property will be worth a lot more if it is rezoned to Commercial and she is
concerned about what other type of use could go in if it were rezoned. She asked that the
City not allow the patio.
John Gentrup, 7101 Glenwood Avenue, said he thinks the patio will go a long way in
beautifying the peninsula and he thinks a patio would be a good idea. He said he thinks
businesses in general face a lot of onerous difficulties when they try to make changes so
he would be in favor of this proposal.
Steve Sands, 1400 Sumter Avenue North, noted that some of the residents have said that
Ray Jacob knew the property was zoned residentia! when he bought it, which is true, but
the residents also knew that Schuller's was there when they bought their properties. He
said he is not convinced that staff's and the City Attorney's opinion regarding the process
to allow a patio is correct. He said there are a lot of bars in Northeast Minneapolis that
have been around since the 1930s, they have patios and are within 20 feet of a
residential property so they seem to have a way to deal with this type of situation in
Minneapolis and they he can't figure it out in Golden Valley. He stated that Mr. Jacob is
not asking for the world with this request. He said they would stop serving by 8 pm and
have people off the patio by 9 pm and noted that the noise ordinance regulations don't
apply until 10 pm. He said he understands the neighbor's concerns about a different use
in the future however the property really has na commercial value because it is not visible
from any major road and any future uses would have to be approved by the City. He said
there has been some talk about installing the patio on the narth side of the property but
that would also require variances. Also, a patio on the north side would be a liability
because of golf balls from the country club and the servers would have to ga up and down
steps on that side of the building. He reiterated that Schuller's is a community gathering
place and has been an asset to the community.
Waldhauser stated the she understands the difficult position Schuller's is in but the
Planning Commission can't change the laws, or the process.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page $
Cate Zottola, 7421 Glenwood Avenue, stated that as a resident who lives across the
street, she has observed things that Schuller's isn't policing now including people
smoking and parking where they are not allowed. She said that an expansion to
Schullsr's would make her quality of life suffer.
Kluchka asked Zottola about the traffic on Kelly Drive. Zottola said Kelly Drive has fairly
heavy traffic that increases at happy hour and with motorcycles on Saturdays.
Ray Jacob, stated that he has told people not to park where they are not supposed to and
the only other people that park there are the police who come at lunchtime. He said he
does the best he can to monitor his customers.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to speak. Waldhauser closed the public hearing.
McCarty said this is a difficult proposal because while it is nice to be able ta sit outside, he
has a hard time considering rezoning this property because of what it could become in the
future. He added that if there was another way to consider allowing a patio he would.
Kisch said he is also concerned about rezoning the property. However, due to the site
configuration it probably couldn't handle a significantly different use. He agreed that it
would be nice to allow people to sit outside and that there are ways to mitigate noise and
other issues, he just doesn't feel there is a current zoning district that he would be
comfortable recammending at this point, but he feels this opens up the discussion to
explore a new or different zoning district.
Grimes suggested that if the City Council considers different zoning language they should
do sa before they amend the General Land Use Plan Map.
Kluchka asked if there has been a demand or queries from other developers for this type
of neighborhood bar concept. Grimes said no. He noted that the Applebee's restaurant
didn't make it and that there are other locations in the City where a bar with a patio would
be allowed. The Schuller's property is just very unique.
Segelbaum said it seems like Schuller's has made some effart to talk to the neighbors. He
said he thinks re-designating the land use and rezoning the property opens it up to for too
many other possible uses so it doesn't make sense to him to amend the General Land
Use Plan Map.
Cera stated that Golden Valley is not Minneapolis the two cities developed and grew
completely differently. He said he doesn't feel any commercial use would work at this
property because of the distance to residential property. He said there are reasons the
Zoning Map and the GeneraC Land Use Plan Map are the way they are.
Waldhauser said she thinks it would be good for Schuller's to invest in their property and
that a patio would be an amenity to the neighborhood as long as the noise issues are
resolved, but there isn't any way to construct the patio without rezoning which opens up a
Pandora's Box of other issues. She agreed that this is a unique property but it would be
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 9
stretching the purpose of the General Land Use Plan and the zoning designatian to allow
this, so she would not be in favor of recommending approval at this point.
Schmidgall noted that the City will be considering a new Light Commercial zoning district
and that this might be an appropriate location to consider that new zoning district. He said
he would like to move this discussion forward by recommending approval of this proposed
land use amendment. Grimes explained that the Light Commercial zoning district is being
considered for the Dauglas Drive/Highway 55 area and he isn't sure that the uses being
proposed for the Light Commercial zaning district would satisfy the neighbor's concerns.
He stated that the Planning Commission could tell the Council that the only way the
Commission is comfortable moving forward with this request is if any proposed new
zoning language would be acceptable. He added that the City Council will be reviewing
the proposed new Light Commercial zoning district language again before it comes back
to the Planning Cammission for review.
McCarty said he doesn't feel that this one property is enough to justify months of
discussion of a new type of zoning district that could be still be different from what is
considered in other areas as well. Kluchka said he would like to better understand the
implications of a new zoning district. Segelbaum said he would lik� to see the Planning
Commission recommendation include that there be a different type of zoning aption
available.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by Schmidgall to recommend appraval of changing the
designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from Low Density Residential to
Commercial-Retail for the property located at 7345 Gountry Club Drive (Schuller's) with
the caveat that as it moves forward the Planning Commission wauld like to further explore
additional zoning opportunities.
Grimes said it seems like there is a real concern about the property being zoned
Commercial as per the City Code today. So perhaps the message to the City Council is
that under the status quo the Planning Commission doesn't want to see the General Land
Use Plan Map changed but if the Council gives direction to study the zoning maybe the
Commission could come up with different zoning language. He added that he doesn't
know if recommending approval of the General Land Use Plan Map is sending the right
message.
McCarty added that he thinks the Planning Commission can still have a conversation
regarding new zoning language at the direction of the City Council without approving this
proposed amendment. He said approving this proposal is not to generate a discussion of
different zoning districts it is to generate the possibility of a patio for Schuller's and a
rezaning of the property.
Kisch withdrew his motion, Schmidgall withdrew his second of the motion.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Schmidgall and motion carried 5 to 2 to recommend
denial of changing the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from Low Density
Residential to Commercial-Retail for the property located at 7345 Country Club Drive
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 9, 2012
Page 10
(Schuller's) with the strong recommendation that the City Council directs the Planning
Commission to further explore the creation of different types of zoning categories that
might permit this type of request. Commissioners Cera and McCarty voted no.
Cera explained that he is in favor of recommending denial of this request, but he voted
against it because he is against the Planning Commission looking for ways to solve
SchuUer's attempt at getting an outdoor patio. McCarty said he agrees with Cera and
thought the minutes will reflect the Planning Commissions thoughts af the issue without
having to ask the Council for direction on exploring new zoning categories. Schmidgall
said he doesn't want the property to be rezoned, but he feels Segelbaum's motion is key
to driving further discussion. Waldhauser said she is not optimistic that any new zoning
category that will solve this property's problems.
--Short Recess--
5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopmen# Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Na reports were given.
6. Other Business
Planning Commission Bylaws Amendment
MOVED by Cera, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously ta amend the
Planning Commission Bylaws to make them consistent with the existing City Code.
7. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:11 pm.
(�L� l/(i-
David A. Cera, Secretary