Loading...
10-24-16 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 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 24, 2016. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blenker, Blum, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present were Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes October 10, 2016, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Waldhauser referred to the last sentence in the first paragraph on page five and asked Johnson to clarify what he meant. Johnson said his recollection was a discussion about land use, ordinances, and zoning and was meant as a general response. Segelbaum suggested striking the last two sentences. Johnson agreed. Baker referred to the fourth paragraph on page three and said he did not ask the question about requiring existing properties to conform to new requirements. Blenker said she asked that question. Waldhauser referred to the last sentence in the second paragraph on page five regarding development around the light rail station area and asked Zimmerman to clarify what "once certain thresholds are reached" means. Zimmerman explained that the City can have tools in place to plan for density once certain thresholds of redevelopment have already occurred. MOVED by Baker, seconded by Blenker and motion carried unanimously to approve the October 10, 2016, minutes with the above noted clarifications. 2. Presentation of Capital Improvement Program 2017-2021 — Sue Virnig, City Finance Director Virnig stated that because of its relationship with the Comprehensive Plan the Planning Commission reviews the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) every year to ensure it meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. She noted that the City Council has reviewed it twice and will consider adoption of the plan at their December 6 meeting. Virnig noted that the sections in the CIP include vehicles and equipment, parks, Brookview Golf Course, buildings, storm sewer, water and sanitary sewer, streets, Douglas Drive, and the appendix. Virnig highlighted some of the projects from each section of the CIP including: a new fire pumper, lighting at Isaacson Park with funding from a Hennepin County Youth Sports Grant, community gardens in 2019, a new grill and pro shop along with other amenities at Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 2 Brookview Community Center, a City Hall boiler replacement, window replacements, roof replacements, building security, and carpet replacement, the rehabilitation project of a culvert located at 10t" Avenue done jointly with the Union Pacific Railroad, sanitary sewer replacement and maintenance coinciding with the Pavement Management Program, and the reconstruction of Douglas Drive. Kluchka stated that he didn't notice anything in the CIP regarding dog parks. Virnig stated that this year was a trial period for dog parks and that the Open Space and Recreation Commission and the City Council will discuss the issue and decide on plans regarding future potential dog parks. Baker asked how much money is received in park dedication fees. Virnig stated that the City received $140,000 this year and that the money goes to the park improvements fund. Waldhauser asked for an overview of what the City is doing in the CIP regarding flood mitigation. Virnig stated that flood mitigation projects are listed in the CIP but many of them depend on obtaining grants and on redevelopment projects. Segelbaum referred to tax increment bonds and asked if the City tracks the payment of those debts. Virnig said yes and explained that the City has to report yearly to the State Auditor on each TIF district. Segelbaum asked if there is any indication that the City isn't overwhelming the use of that tool. Virnig stated that Golden Valley has never had a levy for any TIF district and is conservative in its financial needs. Johnson questioned if the CIP addresses any increased traffic specifically in the South Tyrol area. Zimmerman explained that there is a traffic overlay district that requires fees for traffic improvements when development occurs in that area. Waldhauser asked about the improvements to the pedestrian bridge over Highway 100 and the pedestrian crossing at the south end of Brookview Park. Zimmerman stated that the existing sidewalk at the south end of Brookview stops and that this project will bridge that gap. Virnig stated that the pedestrian bridge over Highway 100 would be improved in partnership with the City of Crystal. Johnson referred to the outdoor basketball and hoop replacement item in the plan and asked if there are any plans to create half-courts. Virnig stated the money in the CIP is for basketball hoops and that there has been no discussion about half-courts. Baker noted that the Brookview Community Center is the largest expenditure, followed by streets and then storm sewer. He questioned if the storm sewer section is typically this large. Virnig stated that is due in part to the culvert replacement on 10t" Avenue along with improvements elsewhere. She added that the City Council also wants to have an infrastructure report done. Segelbaum stated that there is a large amount of money listed for infrastructure improvements for pouglas Drive and asked if they will see a lot of improvements in 2017. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 3 Virnig said there will be major improvements in 2017. She added that the City is paying approximately 8 to 9 million dollars of the entire 25 million dollar project. Blenker referred to the Xenia Avenue reconstruction item and asked for further explanation of the costs. Virnig stated that improvements, including sidewalks and traffic improvements, need to be done because of new developments in that area. Blum questioned if any thought has been given to narrowing streets given that the PMP and storm sewer expenditures are so large. Zimmerman said that certain streets and cul- de-sacs have been made smaller or narrower when they are able to do so during the PMP projects. Waldhauser asked if bonds have been sold for the Liberty Crossing project. Virnig said yes, they were sold on September 20. Segelbaum asked the Commissioners if they think the proposed CIP is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or if they agree, disagree, or have anything to add to the recommendations in the staff report. Waldhauser said she thinks the CIP is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and that environmental concerns, green space, parks, infrastructure and the community center have all been goals in the Comprehensive Plan. Johnson referred to the Douglas Drive study and asked if there are any other similar studies in progress. Zimmerman said there are none currently, but there may be an LRT Station small area plan or study done in the future. Blenker referred to the sidewalk and trail improvements which they've heard is a priority and questioned if the $100,000 listed in the CIP is enough. Virnig stated that $100,000 doesn't go very far, but it does help with improvements in certain areas. She added that many of the sidewalk and trail improvements are done in partnership with other agencies, the PMP projects, and with new developments. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the 2017-2019 Capital Improvement Program as it is consistent with the goals and policies of Golden Valley's Comprehensive Plan. --Short Recess-- 3. Discussion — Outdoor Storage —Auto Dealership Inventory Zimmerman reminded the Commission that this is a continuation of previous conversations regarding outdoor storage regulations in order to help address resident complaints. He stated that the focus of this discussion is auto dealership inventory regulations with the goal of improving negative impacts on surrounding properties. Zimmerman stated that staff researched the requirements in several other cities and the trends from these cities include: fencing or screening regulations with stricter regulations near residentially zoned property, site plan reviews with staff, and specific districts for auto-oriented businesses. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 4 Zimmerman discussed staff's proposed recommendations regarding location and screening which include: allowing dealership inventory storage on surface lots in non- residential districts if storage is the principal use or accessory to the principal use, allowing dealership inventory storage in unoccupied parking ramp spaces, not allowing storage in a front yard or landscaped area, requiring perimeter landscaping except on lots that abut another parking area, requiring stricter fencing and screening next to institutional or residential zoning districts, not allowing storage in customer parking areas, and requiring an administrative site plan review. Zimmerman showed the Commission some photos and discussed the locations where dealer inventory has been stored and the sites that some residents have complained about and need to be addressed. Segelbaum questioned if the City could require a Conditional Use Permit or a permit to allow inventory storage as a revenue source. Waldhauser said the City needs to carefully consider how much it allows dealership storage to creep because if the lot owners can generate money it extends their life and redevelopment might not occur where the City wants it to. Segelbaum referred to the recommendation that would allow inventory storage in parking ramps and asked if staff feels that is ok because the ramp provides some screening for the cars. Zimmerman stated yes and added that the City hasn't heard any concerns about inventory being parked in ramps. He stated that generally, the only concern staff has about storage in ramps is if there becomes a problem with not having enough customer or employee parking available. Baker asked if the City has been approached by dealerships wanting to move into the I- 394 corridor area. Zimmerman said yes, but existing dealership expansion is more common. Zimmerman discussed the recommendations regarding fencing and screening. Waldhauser noted that one community used as an example in the staff report requires a 3-foot tall fence around dealerships. She stated that something less 6 feet tall is appealing to her. Blenker asked if existing dealership inventory storage would be grandfathered-in. Zimmerman said it could be argued that storing inventory on surFace lots other than their own is not allowed so it would not be considered grandfathered-in. Blum asked if the City has considered having a maximum amount of allowed parking for dealerships. Zimmerman said no and added that it would be difficult to establish an accurate count because of fluctuating inventory. Baker said he is inclined to assume that dealerships are forced to take the inventory and it is not a hardship for them to store their vehicles further away from their dealerships. Zimmerman noted that other cities are having similar discussions about how much land should be dedicated to storing cars. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 5 Johnson asked if there has been any input from the dealerships. Zimmerman said they haven't seen the most recent recommendations, but staff did meet with them earlier this year so they know the City is working on potential changes and they have been cooperative. Segelbaum asked if the City is ok with the security in parking ramps. Zimmerman said he didn't know but that he would check with the Police Department to see if they have the same concerns as they do with surFace parking lots. Blum said he would like to talk about maximum parking allowances because he thinks it cuts closer to the issues and the residents' goals of what they want to see in the Comprehensive Plan as far as green, clean, safe, alternative transportation and large outdoor paved lots with unused cars in them do not fit those goals. Segelbaum questioned what that would entail and how it would be evaluated. Blum said there are auto dealerships in highly urban areas that have almost no outdoor storage. He said he thinks Golden Valley dealerships have more than enough space to conduct their business and there are options to store their inventory elsewhere that is much more suitable. Zimmerman asked Blum if he is looking for a quantifiable number of cars allowed and questioned how that would be enforced. Blum suggested limiting the amount of square footage allowed for storage. Baker suggested limiting storage to the land the dealerships own because inventory storage isn't a use the City wants to encourage. They want to encourage empty parking lots to redevelop into a better use. Kluchka said he can see a loophole by businesses saying part of their business is renting out their parking lot. Segelbaum stated that dealerships ultimately could buy the land for their inventory storage use. Zimmerman said it would have to be zoned properly to allow for inventory storage. Kluchka said he would rather see a parking ramp built for storage than a surface lot. He added that he agrees that the dealers should own the properties they use for storage. Johnson said this is a slippery slope. He said they were discussing aesthetics and now they are assuming they know how car dealerships work. Baker said they are not talking about aesthetics, they are talking about the best use of the land in a built-out city. Johnson said to him it is aesthetics because most of the issues raised have been geared toward people who have expressed concern about not liking the look of dealership cars parked in parking lots. Segelbaum referred to the suggestion of limiting storage to land that dealerships own and said he doesn't see an advantage of ownership versus leasing and is not sure that is what they should be focusing on. Waldhauser stated that the City can control through zoning how properties are used. She said she thinks inventory storage should not be allowed as a standalone use in the Commercial zoning district but it may be ok in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts. She added that temporary storage would not bother her as much as permanent storage. Segelbaum said he wants to encourage dealerships to stay in Golden Valley and to put them in spots where it's appropriate and if the City decides certain parcels need to be redeveloped then they can focus on that. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 6 Zimmerman asked the Commissioners if they are opposed to allowing standalone lots to be used for storage at all or if that would be ok in certain areas. Baker said his inclination would be to make the code stricter or to limit storage to Light Industrial or Industrial properties. Kluchka and Blum agreed that the code should be stricter. Johnson said it is all about screening, not about what can be stored where. Blenker stated that she thinks it is ok when the inventory storage occurs adjacent to a dealership and that when the market is right redevelopment will happen. She questioned if an empty parking lot is better than one being used for inventory storage. Segelbaum asked if there should be limits on where storage is allowed. Blenker said she thinks storage should be limited somehow and that it seems to be a reasonable use in the Industrial zoning district. Waldhauser said she thinks inventory storage would be ok in Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts because typically those properties are not near residential properties. She agreed that the revenue property owners get from dealer inventory storage probably won't weigh-in on whether they stay in Golden Valley or not. Kluchka said his view is that a parking lot has to be owned by a dealer and be adjacent to a dealership rather than just propping up other landowners' parking lots and so that similar uses are grouped together. Baker agreed. Segelbaum asked the Commissioners how they feel about the recommendations regarding screening. Waldhauser said she doesn't see a need for perimeter landscaping on Industrial properties that are adjacent to other Industrial properties, but there should be stricter screening rules when storage occurs adjacent to Institutional, Residential, Commercial, and Business and Professional Offices zoning districts. Baker said he thinks requiring perimeter landscaping without any definition of height or opacity is gutless and questioned what they are trying to accomplish. Zimmerman said the question is whether the City wants to require that the storage be hidden or just look contained, or a combination of both. Waldhauser said if storage is facing residential property she'd want to require more screening. If it faces offices or commercial properties she would be ok with shorter fences or less screening. Zimmerman said he would have a conversation with the Police Chief to see if he is comfortable with the proposed fencing recommendations. Blum agreed that if dealership storage abuts residential property the screening should be more substantial. He suggested a minimum of 6-foot tall fencing and 90% opacity or evergreens. He said he would also be in favor of keeping this use further away from residential properties. Segelbaum asked the Commissioners how they feel about the recommendations regarding the location of dealership inventory storage and that it wouldn't be allowed unless it is the principal use or accessory to the principal use of the property. Johnson said to him the question is whether people want to see the storage or not, and that if cars are going to be parked on surface lots they should be screened. The question is not whether the City thinks this is a valid way for them run their business. Zimmerman asked the Commissioners how they feel about allowing inventory storage in parking ramps. Baker and Kluchka said they think storage should not be allowed if it is unrelated to the principal use. Johnson said he doesn't think it makes sense to say cars can't park in parking ramps. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 24, 2016 Page 7 Waldhauser said there are three options. The first is the most lenient one where the City allows dealership inventory storage wherever they can find space and then require it to be screened. The second is an intermediate option where the City allows inventory storage in parking ramps and in Light Industrial and Industrial areas with screening if it faces Residential, Commercial, or Office uses, and the third option is the strictest where inventory storage is allowed only if it is related to the principal use. She said she would prefer the intermediate option. Johnson, Blenker, and Segelbaum agreed with the intermediate option. Blum said he would prefer the stricter option in regard to location because he doesn't want to see off-site locations used just for vehicle inventory storage. Kluchka agreed with the stricter option. 4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Zimmerman stated that the Council/Manager meeting in December will include an update on the Comprehensive Plan and that there will be joint meetings with the City Council and other Commissions in the future. Johnson asked about the process for the Planning Commission to review the different inputs and if the Planning Commission gets involved with different groups and their parts of the plan. Zimmerman said the Planning Commission will be working with the other commissions and that there aren't other sub- groups other than the bicycle and pedestrian task force. Segelbaum said he is concerned that the Comprehensive Plan Update will get too far down the path without collaboration from other groups. Zimmerman stated that there are several reviews of the plan throughout the process. Kluchka asked if there are any updates regarding the Central Park West Art Task Force. Zimmerman said nothing has been set yet. Waldhauser stated that she attended the last Board of Zoning Appeals meeting and that the regulations regarding detached accessory structures should be reviewed. 5. Other Business • Council Liaison Report No report was given. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:29 pm. � :�._ �..��.,. � �� John Kluch , Secretary Li Wittman, Administrative Assistant