02-22-16 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Gotden Valley City Hall,
Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday,
February 22, 2016. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and
Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate
Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
Commissioners Cera and Johnson were absent.
1. Approval of Minutes
February 8, 2016, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to
approve the February 8, 2016, minutes as submitted.
2. Informal Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit— 8812 7th Avenue North —
Empty the Nest— CU-145
Applicant: Empty the Nest (Sharon Fischman)
Address: 8812 7th Avenue North
Purpose: To allow for accessory retail sales incidental to permitted uses in a
Light Industrial zoning district
Zimmerman explained the applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
accessory retail sales incidental to a permitted warehouse use at 8812 7th Avenue. He
stated that up to 10% of the building footprint can be used for accessory retail sales and
that there is one other approved accessory retail use in the building at approximately
2.9% of the building footprint. If approved this proposal would add another 4.6% for a total
of 7.5% of the building footprint.
Zimmerman stated that the Applicant currently operates in an industrial park in Burnsville
and is planning on relocating to Golden Valley. He explained that people hire Empty the
Nest to help empty a home of all belongings and prepare them for donation, recycling,
sales, etc. He added that in addition to sorting and processing goods at the warehouse
location, thrift sales would take place three days a week. In order to alleviate parking
concerns, thrift sales are proposed for Saturday, Sunday, and Monday.
Zimmerman referred to the parking requirements and stated that the applicant has been
assigned eight parking spaces in front of their suite. The applicant has stated that their
current sales typically draw no more than 10 customers per hour. He added that the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 2
Zoning Code allows the required parking to be cut by 50% for businesses that operate
during off-peak hours.
Zimmerman explained that the applicant's proposed square footage for the various uses
have changed slightly since the application was submitted and the staff report was
written. Therefore, the revised number of required parking spaces would be 6.75 spaces
on Saturdays and Sundays and 13.5 parking spaces on Mondays.
Zimmerman stated that staff is recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit
with the conditions listed in the staff report and with language added to the first condition
regarding the revised plans dated February 22, 2016.
Baker asked why the sale days would be on Mondays instead of Fridays. Zimmerman
stated that the first day of the sales would be the busiest and having the sales start on
Fridays could cause a parking issue.
Baker asked if the City knows if the applicant would be able to lease additional parking
spaces if needed. Zimmerman said he doesn't know for sure, but the building owner
mentioned the ability to swap parking spaces if necessary during the recently approved
Conditional Use Permit for Calvin Christian School (Thriftique).
Kluchka asked if there are bicycle racks on the property. Zimmerman said he didn't know.
Waldhauser asked about the number of employees. Zimmerman said the applicant could
address that.
Segelbaum asked what having eight designated parking spots means if there aren't
designated signs in place. Zimmerman stated that there are a certain number of parking
spaces for each suite and if there is a problem with parking the City could ask the
property owner to designate the parking spaces with signage. Segelbaum asked if staff
visited the site during the week. Zimmerman said yes and each time he was there the
parking lot was approximately half full. Segelbaum asked if on-street parking is available.
Zimmerman said no, there are parking restrictions on the streets around this property, but
there is an area behind the building that employees could use if needed.
Baker asked how this proposal would translate to the proposed new Zoning Code
language regarding allowing accessory retail sales based on the square footage of a
building rather than a building's footprint. Zimmerman said in this case the square footage
would be larger and there would be potential to add more retail space which would then
require mare parking spaces.
Baker asked if the amount of accessory retail space in a building is first come, first
served. Zimmerman said yes.
Sharon Fischman, Empty the Nest, Applicant, said she started this business in 2010
when she had to empty her parents' house. She explained how her company operates
and how they work with several non-profit organizations to make sure everything gets to
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 3
the right place. She stated that the homeowner gets receipts for their donations and the
things they sell in their store help reduce the homeowners' cost of clean out.
Blum asked how many jobs this business will bring to Golden Valley. Fischman said she
is currently in the process of hiring people and that she is thinking that she will have five
part-time employees. She added that the core of her business is cleaning out the homes
and that the sales just help offset those costs.
Baker asked if the sales are on consignment. Fischman stated that she meets with
families and they decide what to donate and what to sell in the store. Baker asked
Fischman if she helps people move and get set up at a new residence. Fischman said no,
she signed a non-compete agreement and that many companies come to Empty the Nest
because they know she is not going to compete with them and she gets a lot of referrals.
Segelbaum asked Fischman if she has the ability to have employees park elsewhere if
needed. Fischman said yes. Segelbaum noted that there are designated parking spaces,
but those spaces do not have signage and questioned how that will work. Fischman said
she thinks boundaries are a good thing and signage would be good.
Segelbaum asked if employees will be at the site on non-sale days. Fischman said yes,
because they will be setting up for the sales.
Segelbaum asked if there are loading bays. Fischman said yes.
Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Segelbaum closed the public hearing.
Kluchka said he would like to know if there are bicycle racks. Goellner said she didn't see
any when she visited the site. Segelbaum suggested that the property owner attend the
City Council meeting. Zimmerman said he would be hesitant to add bicycle racks as a
condition of approval since the applicant is only looking to lease space and is not the
property owner.
Waldhauser said she doesn't see any issues with this proposal and it is a nice service
that sounds like a great addition to Golden Valley. Blum agreed that the proposed use will
be facilitating charitable donations, bringing jobs to Golden Valley, promoting recycling,
and helping families in transition.
MOVED by Blum, seconded by Baker and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of Conditional Use Permit#145 subject to the following findings and conditions:
Findinqs:
1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use: Empty the Nest is an existing
business that has shown a demand exists for the services they provide. Based on
their past experiences, they are able to accurately predict the expected amount of
retail demand there will be for their operations.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 4
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: A warehouse use with a retail
component is consistent with the Light Industrial designation of this property on the
General Land Use Plan Map.
3. Effect on Property Values: Staff anticipates the new use would have no impact on
the surrounding property values.
4. Effect on Traffic: The number of trips associated with the proposed use is minimal
and largely concentrated on weekends. Staff does not expect any negative traffic
impacts to the surrounding areas.
5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: The proposed use may generate a
minor increase in the number of employees at the location three days a week.
6. Increase in Noise Levels: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause an
increase in noise levels.
7. Impact of Dust, Odor, or Vibration: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause
an increase in dust, odor, or vibrations.
8. Impact of Pests: The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests.
9. Visual Impact: Because the proposed use would involve only interior modifications,
staff does not anticipate a change in the visual quality of the property.
10.Other Impacts to the City and Residents: Staff does not anticipate any other
negative effects of the proposed use. The location is a multi-tenant light industrial
property with adequate parking to serve the individual uses.
Conditions:
1. The plans by submitted by the applicant on January 21, 2016, and revised on
February 12, 2016, and February 22, 2016, shall become a part of this approval.
2. Retail sales shall be limited to Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays.
3. In the event complaints to the City regarding parking are deemed by the City
Manager or his/her designee to be significant, the City reserves the right to require
signage be installed to highlight the existing eight parking spaoes in the front
parking lot and to reserve them for customer use. Other modifications to the days
or hours of operation may be required to adequately address parking concerns.
4. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20).
5. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances,
regulations, or laws with authority over this development.
--Short Recess--
3. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Discussion — Housing, and the Bicycle and
Pedestrian System
Goellner reviewed the Planning Commission's discussion from their January 25, 2016,
meeting which included: Community Planning, Community Background, and Land Use.
She explained that tonight's discussion includes the Housing Chapter and the Bicycle &
Pedestrian section of the Transportation Chapter. She stated that she would like the
Commissioners to provide feedback on how/why the City should revisit the Housing
goals, objectives, and policies, what they foresee as Housing issues and challenges
from 2016 to 2040, if they would like to see more content on bicycles and pedestrians,
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 5
what other data or trends would be good to understand, and what other demographic
data would be useful.
Baker asked if staff has looked into the assumptions behind the demographic
information provided by the Metropolitan Council. Zimmerman suggested having a
Metropolitan Council representative or a demographer come in and speak to the
Planning Commission. Kluchka added that the Metropolitan Council is good at providing
estimates, but he is not sure they are accurate at the end of the day.
Goellner reviewed the current Housing Chapter and noted that it includes housing
condition and age, a housing inventory, property maintenance and standards, housing
costs, median home values, and median rents. She stated that some of the challenges
the City has for housing include the high costs of land and blight conditions on some of
the older homes.
Waldhauser said she is pleased with most of the goals and objectives, but that the City
has lost sight of some of them and doesn't do enough to promote them. She referred to
page 5-23 and said she doesn't like the objective regarding striving for variety in
housing styles. She said she would rather it say that the City will strive for a variety in
housing types and costs instead of styles. Segelbaum agreed that housing types and
costs are a higher priority to him than style. Baker stated that Golden Valley is an
upscale community and doesn't do very good as a city on cheaper housing. He stated
that "inclusionary zoning" has never been mentioned. Zimmerman stated that is
something a city would really have to be committed to doing.
Waldhauser asked if the programs used to address housing needs referred to on page
5-20 are still available. Goellner stated that several of them are still available.
Zimmerman added that many of them require cities to match the funding. Waldhauser
stated that the City hasn't required developers to provide affordable units. Kluchka
stated that it would be good to look back over the past 10 years to see if the City met its
goals, or milestones, and what could be done differently. Blum expressed concern
about concentrating affordable housing to one particular building or area. Baker said he
is not sure if the City can get away from concentrating affordable housing in specific
areas because if people can't afford free-standing homes they may be more inclined to
live in a multi-unit building which concentrates affordable housing naturally. Kluchka
suggested including affordable units in all projects so the City doesn't get a
concentration of them. Goellner stated that a mixed-income building is difficult to
finance.
Baker said he agrees with Kluchka that there should be a section in the Comprehensive
Plan about what the City has learned in the past, what has worked, what hasn't worked,
and what has been ignored.
Kluchka referred to page 5-2 and questioned why there were only two areas mentioned
where increasing the housing density would be appropriate. Waldhauser said she thinks
the City has identified more areas for redevelopment than are listed in the Plan.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 6
Zimmerman stated that in order to be more forward looking there will have to be more
estimates and assumptions made.
Zimmerman stated that one of the next steps in the process is looking at the Plan goal
by goal. Baker added that the goals should be prioritized. Segelbaum agreed that
prioritizing the goals would be a good idea.
Baker referred the property maintenance code and questioned if it is a good use of
money since only 7% of the properties were given notices. Waldhauser noted that 75%
of housing needed maintenance. Baker suggested the effort be shifted to rental
properties. Waldhauser noted that the effort has shifted and that rental properties are
now licensed and inspected.
Kluchka referred to mother-in-law apartments and asked if they are considered rental
properties. Waldhauser stated that mother-in-law apartments have been specifically
precluded in the past. Blum noted that Minneapolis has alleys and properties that have
existing detached structures that can be converted to apartment units and asked if
Golden Valley is really set up for that type of detached accessory dwellings. Goellner
stated it is a topic that should be discussed.
Kluchka stated that the City should also be discussing historic preservation. Waldhauser
stated that topic has come up in the past but she questions if there are enough historic
homes to make an entire district, or if the homes are scattered throughout the City. She
stated that the City can't prevent people from tearing down their homes. Baker said he
doesn't want to discourage people from updating their homes.
Waldhauser referred to the table on page 5-4 and questioned if the information
regarding mobile homes, boats, etc. is correct. Baker asked if all the tables will be
updated, or if some will be abandoned. Goellner stated that most of the tables will be
kept and updated and more will be added such as: vacancy rates, home prices, net cost
of living, group homes, and other types of data that will be helpful in setting priorities.
Waldhauser said she would be interested in knowing if homes could be identified by
school district and where kids actually go to school because many communities rally
around their schools. Kluchka said he sees the community center as a hub for
community pride.
Goellner referred to the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and
discussed the bicycle and pedestrian system including the existing and proposed trails
and sidewalks. She asked the Planning Commission if they would like to see more
content regarding bicycles and pedestrians during this update and what other
demographic data would be useful such as the number of vehicles people own, and
how much time people spend commuting.
Baker said he would like to know the types of vehicles people own and said the City
should encourage the presence of charging stations. Kluchka said he would also like to
encourage phone charging stations.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 22, 2016
Page 7
Baker stated that the City has missed some opportunities for bike lanes and needs to
pay more attention to pedestrians and bicycles as part of the Pavement Management
Program.
Waldhauser said she would like trails on side streets to go through and not just end.
Zimmerman stated that there will be a pedestrian and bicycle study done by Humphrey
students.
Kluchka suggested there be a specific health section in the Plan. He also suggested
that wayfinding and educational signage such as the number of steps to a landmark or
major milestones be installed as a way to incorporate health into the Transportation
plan.
Waldhauser referred to Goal 6 in the Comprehensive Plan regarding visually integrating
the transit system and noted that there have been past discussions about encouraging
public art and gateway signs at key Iocations. She said she would also like to have
landscaping along major roadways. Kluchka agreed and said he would really like to see
welcome signs be a part of the transportation system.
Baker stated that there will also need to be a section in the Plan regarding Light Rail.
The Commissioners agreed.
Segelbaum reminded the Commissioners that there will be a joint meeting with the
Environmental and Open Space and Recreation Commission to discuss the
Comprehensive Plan Update process on February 29, 2016.
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Zimmerman stated that the City Council unanimously granted Municipal Consent for the
METRO Blue Line proposal at their last Council meeting. He stated that the Council will
be discussing the Golden Valley Road park and ride station/intersection design at the
March 8 Council/Manager meeting.
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
No report was given.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was ' urned at 8:53 pm.
�- � ��
John Klu ka, Secretary Lis Wittman, Administrative Assistant