10-13-14 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 13, 2014
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,
October 13, 2014. Chair Kluchka called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners, Blum, Cera, Johnson, Kluchka,
Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman,
Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa
Wittman. Commissioner Baker was absent.
1. Approval of Minutes
September 22, 2014, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Waldhauser referred to the second paragraph on page 9 and said she would like to
make a clarification after the fact that the homes referred to on Rhode Island Avenue
sold for $400,000 to $45Q,000, not $350,000 to $400,000 as discussed.
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve
the September 22, 2014, minutes with the above nated clarification.
2. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 108 Brunswick Ave N —
Brunswick Estates — SU12-17
Applicant: Wooddale Edina LLC
Address: 108 Brunswick Avenue North
Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single family residential lot into two new
single family residential lots.
Zimmerman explained the applicant's request to subdivide the lot at 108 Brunswick
Avenue North into two new lots in order to construct two new single family homes. He
referred to a site plan and stated that Lot 1 will be 19,100 square feet in size with
113.62 feet of width at the front setback line, and Lot 2 will be 19,510 square feet with
126.75 feet of width at the front setback line. He stated that the proposed subdivision
meets all of the requirements outlined in the City Code, therefore staff is recommending
approval of the proposal.
Cera asked how many subdivisions have occurred in this neighborhood. Zimmerman
said there have been four or five subdivisions in this area over the past few years
because the lots are large enough to divide. Cera asked how many of those
subdivisions have torn down the existing house versus keeping it. Zimmerman said that
is something that can be reviewed as part of the moratorium study. He stated that
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 13, 2014
Page 2
existing houses are typically torn down because they are located centrally on the lot and
added that in this case the existing house was in need of significant remadeling.
Segelbaum referred to an existing shed located on the property and asked if it is in
compliance with the Zaning Code requirements. Zimmerman said he would verity that it
is located 5 feet from the side and rear yard property lines.
Waldhauser referred to item six in the City Engineer's memo which reads in part that the
developer must ensure that existing drainage patterns are maintained or improved and
that stormwater runoff is accommodated within the property to the extent practicable.
She said to her "drainage patterns" means the direction of flow wouldn't change, but if
more impervious surface is added, the amount of water will change. She said it doesn't
protect the neighbors at all if the patterns or direction can stay the same, but the amount
of water can increase. She added that her concern does not apply in this case, but in
the overall subdivision process. Zimmerman said that a number of grading and
stormwater techniques are used to accommodate stormwater runoff within the property.
Kluchka suggested the language be made clearer. Cera suggested that language
regarding stormwater be added to the conditions of approval listed in the Subdivision
Code because he has seen the problems runoff can cause. Kluchka said it is alarming if
there are significant drainage impacts that aren't being accounted for.
Johnson referred to the applicant's plans and noted that they were received after the
moratorium effective date. Zimmerman stated that the initial submission occurred prior
to the moratorium effective date, but the applicant submitted some additional
information later.
Kluchka asked about the time line of the project. Steven Schwieters, Wooddale Edina,
LLG, Applicant, said he hopes to start the project in December, with completion in June
or July. He added that he is very familiar with this street and said that the homes will be
approximately 4,500 to 5,500 square feet in size.
Cera asked about the price of the proposed homes. Schwieters said they will cost
approximately $1,150,000 to $1,350,000.
Kluchka opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to speak,
Kluchka closed the public hearing.
Blum said it is refreshing to see lots that aren't the minimum size and he thinks this
proposal will fit in with the neighborhood. Cera agreed and said the proposed lots meet
all of the City Code requirements. He said the City generally strives to see more
moderately priced homes, but he understands the prices in this situation. Segelbaum
said he agrees that the homes will fit with the neighborhood even after the subdivision.
Kluchka said all the findings are met and that this is a pretty straightforward proposal.
MOVED by Cera, seconded by Blum and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the Brunswick Estates Minor Subdivision subject to the following findings
and conditions:
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 13, 2014
Page 3
Findinqs:
1. Both of the lots of the proposed subdivision meet the requirements of the R-1 Single
Family Zoning District.
2. The City Engineer finds that the lots are buildable.
3. The addition of the new lots will not place an undue strain on City utility systems.
Conditions:
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$3,080 shall be paid before Final Plat approval.
3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this
approval.
4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots.
3. Discussion Regarding Recycling Centers
Goellner explained that a moratorium was adopted by the City Council on July 1, 2014, to
prohibit the establishment of any new recycling centers for six months to allow staff time
to research the possible need to update both the definition of Recycling Centers in the
Zoning Code, and the reconsideration of the appropriateness of Recycling Centers as
permitted uses within the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts.
Goellner discussed staff's recommendations including: creating two definitions, one for
major recycling facilities and one for minor recycling facilities, removing metal shredding
and car crushing fram the current definition, adding definitions for compostable waste and
yard waste, requiring a Conditional Use Permit for minor recycling facilities in the Light
Industrial zoning district, allowing minor recycling facilities as a permitted use and major
recycling facilities as a conditional use in the Industrial zoning district, and prohibiting
outdoor storage. She added that staff is also recommending that the existing distance
requirements for recycling centers remain.
Kluchka asked about noise issues considered in staff's research. Goellner stated that
truck traffic, and the picking up and dropping off of materials, among others were
considered. Kluchka asked what "indoors" means and if the City would allow recycling in
a covered space or with windows open, both of which may cause noise issues.
Segelbaum questioned if collection, sorting, and disposing should also be restricted along
with outdoor storage, He questioned if the proposed ordinance captures what these
facilities do. Cera questioned what is trying to be accomplished.
Cera said he has dealt with recycling in his job for many years. He discussed various
types of recycling facilities, scrap metal facilities, drop-off facilities and hazardous waste
facilities. He stated that Golden Valley does not need a drop-off facility because of how
the recycling is picked up. He said that Golden Valley also doesn't want to have a
hazardous waste facility or a typical recycling facility. He stated that permits may need to
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 13, 2014
Page 4
be obtained and that any ordinance the City adopts should be consistent with the state
statutes.
Kluchka asked about the size of a typical recycling facility. Cera said they are usually in a
warehouse.
Segelbaum questioned if it would make sense to refer to the state requirements regarding
the definitions. Cera suggested not having major and minor categories and just calling
them recycling centers. Kluchka suggested offering specific language in the conditional
use and permitted sections in the ordinance. Cera agreed that would make it simpler. He
suggested eliminating the language pertaining to household hazardous waste, car
crushing and appliances.
Segelbaum said he would like ta have the major and minor levels in the Light Industrial
and Industrial zoning districts, but he is not sure how to distinguish between the two.
Kluchka suggested issues such as size, hours and truck access areas be considered.
Cera stated that volume and quantity should also be addressed. He reiterated that he is in
favor of one facility that could go in the Light Industrial zoning district and the Industrial
zoning district. Segelbaum said he is concerned about inconsistencies. Waldhauser said
she likes the idea of having major and minor categories because there is already a logical
relationship with the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts.
Cera said the City is going to want to look forward on this issue because the whole
system is evolving. He added that he thinks the language should be kept to collectian,
storage, transferring, and sorting because the City won't want to have incinerators or
chemical plants.
Johnson said he thinks consistency is important and said the terms should be better
defined so there isn't a danger of excluding something. He added that the Commission
should decide what they want, ar don't want, to see happen.
Blum said he is concerned about the words "short-term storage" because they are
ambiguous. Cera suggested short-term storage be defined as 90 days or less.
Blum suggested that the word in the title not be used in the definition. He also questioned
if "garden waste" and "yard waste" are duplicative and asked about recycling dirt.
Segelbaum questioned if yard waste was being excluded. Cera suggested the ordinance
use the words "as defined in state statute."
Segelbaum asked if staff did research on pollution. Goellner said no, and added that
some cities define recycling centers based on the volume of recycling, and the number of
trucks per day at a facility.
Kluchka questioned if any type of recycling should be allowed in the Light Industrial
zoning district. Waldhauser said it makes sense to allow consumer household items like
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 13, 2014
Page 5
electronics or small appliances in the Light Industrial zoning district. Cera suggested
allowing collection and disassembly in the Light Industrial zoning district and more
processing types of uses in the Industrial zoning district.
Segelbaum said excluding yard waste makes sense. Cera suggested excluding
household hazardous as well. Goellner suggested listing conditions in the ordinance
regarding traffic volume and material volume.
Zimmerman said staff would work on revising the proposed ordinance and bring it back to
the Planning Commission for further review.
--Short Recess--
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Kluchka reported on the most recent Community Center Task Force meeting. He stated
that the agenda was more about costs and not the final designs.
Waldhauser gave an update on the last Bottineau Station Area Planning Committee
meeting. She stated that it was their first opportunity to respond to specific details about
the stations and what could happen at each station.
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
Council Member Schmidgall gave an update on the recently adopted subdivision
moratorium. He stated that Council is going discuss, at their next regular meeting,
including proposals that are already in the review process. Kluchka questioned if the
Council has been educated at all on the research done by the Planning Commission in
the last five years. Zimmerman said that will be one component of the moratorium
review, along with reviewing existing codes and listening sessions.
Cera asked if the Council is going to be discussing organized hauling. Schmidgall said
yes, he believes that item will be discussed at the November Council/Manager meeting.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:44 pm.
, ,
__ � � � �
ir U�
Charles D. Segelbaum, Secretary Lis Wittman, Administrative Assistant