Loading...
03-13-17 PC Minutes - Comp Plan Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 A Special meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, March 13, 2017. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 6:35 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blenker, Blum, Johnson, Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present were Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Kluchka was absent. 1. 6-6:30 pm: Open House (Land Use) 2. 6:30-7:30 pm: Presentation and Discussion (Land Use) Zimmerman explained that the purpose of this meeting is to provide a check-in on the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Ptan) Update process and to review the 2030 Comp Plan goals, discuss the proposed 2040 goals, and discuss future land use maps. He stated that there will be a "Comp Plan Conversation" open house and presentation/discussion from March through August on the second Monday of the month to discuss each section of the Comp Plan. Zimmerman discussed some of the themes in the Comp Plan including: supporting a dynamic town center, showcasing Golden Valley as a "green" community, emphasizing all aspects of a multi-modal transportation system, striving to be inclusive with population and housing, and making important investments in infrastructure. Zimmerman referred to the land use goals in the 2030 Comp Plan and explained that instead of nine goals, the 2040 Comp Plan has six goals which are: create a complete community, minimize conflicts and impacts of change, promote high quality development, prepare for targeted redevelopment, protect the environment, and support improved health through active living. Zimmerman reviewed the 2030 land use goals, including the objectives and policies for each goal and if they have been successful. He then discussed each of the 2040 land use goals and objectives proposed for this Comp Plan update and asked the Commission to think about any missing goals, and how the City is doing on meeting the goals moving forward. Segelbaum noted that the number of goals has been reduced from the 2030 Comp Plan to the 2040 Comp Plan and asked about the ones that have been removed or scaled back significantly. Zimmerman stated that two of the goals from the 2030 plan have been combined in the 2040 Plan update, one was moved to another chapter, and one goal regarding accommodation of regional needs has been removed because Golden Valley has already contributed more than what is needed to accommodate the population Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 Page 2 estimates set by the Metropolitan Council. Waldhauser said she thinks consolidating some of the goals makes sense. Segelbaum asked about the ability for the public to make comments. Zimmerman said residents can comment at these Comp Plan Conversation meetings, they can fill out comment cards, they can submit comments through the Comp Plan page on the City's website, or they can e-mail, call, or stop by City Hall and talk to staff. He added that the goals and objectives they've discussed will be refined as the update process moves forward. Segelbaum asked how the land use maps and the goals are tied together. Zimmerman stated that some goals are meant to be used city-wide like the active living goals and others are more specifically related to where the City thinks change will happen or where there is an opportunity to implement a specific goal. Johnson stated that one way to meet the goals is to use words like "encourage" and "consider" and another way is to require certain objectives to meet the goals and maybe justify a waiver if the objectives can't be met. Zimmerman said both will be used once implementation of the goals is started. He added that other things such as bonuses can be built in to encourage various things as well. Baker said he is struck by the amount being retained. He said a lot has changed over the last 10 years and there needs to be more that is new and different in the Comp Plan with fresh policies to reach the goals. Zimmerman explained that the policies and implementation piece haven't been written yet. He added that when the Comp Plan was updated 10 years ago there was a lot of work and visioning done at that time and that this revision is meant to be an update to that and a chance to revisit the goals and policies. Baker said it would be good to review the Envision Golden Valley document that was produced during the last Comp Plan update. Zimmerman agreed. Segelbaum opened the meeting to public comments. Wendy Rubinyi, 1325 Maryland Avenue North, said she appreciates the pared-down goals but she wants to talk about the goal regarding preparing for targeted redevelopment. She said she knows the Metropolitan Council has said that the City needs to plan for seniors and that Golden Valley is an older community, but she thinks the future is in attracting new and younger populations and families and not just senior housing. She said the area of Douglas Drive and Highway 55 where there is an empty office building would be wonderFul for artist studios and artist shops with a brewery or distillery and it is right by a bike path. She said when talking about targeted redevelopment we should be broader in our thinking. Helene Johnson, 240 Kentucky Avenue North, said there are some areas in the themes that are really important but are not reflected in the goals or conversations. She said one example is diversity and inclusiveness because she thinks there is about 9% of the population in Golden Valley who were born in another country but she doesn't know Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 Page 3 where diversity and inclusiveness fits within the goals. She said she is delighted that it is in the overall theme, but it is not prominent enough in the information she has seen. Randy Anderson, 5625 Lindsay Street, said the City needs more entertainment options and family restaurants because he and his wife often travel outside of Golden Valley to spend money and he would like to spend money in Golden Valley. He said there are a lot of old buildings in the City and he would like to see some new uses incorporated as well. Segelbaum stated that the Planning Commission has discussed this issue in the past and noted that restaurants have to be in the right location and not in the midst of a single family neighborhood where it would be disruptive. Waldhauser asked Anderson if he was referring to restaurants that are somewhere between fast food and more upscale. Anderson said he likes family-type restaurants like Jake's, Applebee's, or Chili's for example. Marti Micks, 90 Louisiana Avenue South, said there are several restaurants in Golden Valley like Doolittles, New Bohemia, D'Amicos, Pancheros, Benihana, among others. She asked if any developers have come to the City with ideas for life-cycle housing. She said she would like to downsize but not to an apartment. She would like a smaller house with first floor bedrooms. Segelbaum stated that part of this process is to zone areas properly to encourage that sort of development. Micks suggested the southeast corner of Winnetka and Highway 55. Zimmerman stated that staff has talked to developers and has been trying to push them to consider more senior housing options. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public comment period. Goellner discussed the proposed 2040 land use categories which include: Residential Low Intensity, Residential Moderate Intensity, Residential Medium Intensity, Residential High Intensity, Office, Commercial, Light industrial, Industrial, Open Space, and Institutional. She added that staff is also considering two types of Commercial districts. One would be Regional Commercial where people would come from all over the metro area like an auto dealership or a big-box retail store. The other type of Commercial district would be Local Commercial that would fit into a smaller property and people could walk to them. She stated that staff would like feedback regarding the two types of Commercial districts and whether or not there should be Mixed Use districts in other parts of the City including Mixed Use Residential and Mixed Use Non-Residential districts. Zimmerman referred to the 2030 Land Use Map and pointed out areas that are likely to change or have an opportunity for some change. These areas include: the Douglas Drive/Duluth Street District, the Golden Valley Road Light Rail Station Area, the I-394 Corridor District, and the Downtown West District. Zimmerman discussed the existing I-394 Corridor and Douglas Drive District principles which include: improve connectivity and functionality for all transportation modes, enable the corridor to maintain a diverse mix of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial activities, maximize integration rather than separation of land uses where Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 Page 4 appropriate, maintain the corridor as an employment center, improve the visual coherence and attractiveness of the corridor, foster neighborhood-serving retail and services, and encourage and facilitate sustainable development and work to establish a balance between urban and natural systems. He referred to a map of the I-394 Corridor District and explained that many of the parcels in that area are not likely to redevelop. He said staff would like feedback on what uses the Commissioners would like to encourage and what uses they might like to prohibit in these areas. Waldhauser stated that the areas highlighted as likely to change are not surprising except for the properties north of Laurel Avenue. She asked if the City has an inkling that change might come sooner than later. Zimmerman stated that Speak the Word Church has said they have land in Plymouth, and the City won't know about the fire station property until after the outcome of the fire study. Blenker asked about the status of the Industrial properties in the I-394 Corridor District and whether some are not being used, or are underutilized. Zimmerman said there is a full range of Industrial properties, some have been there a long time and others have not so the City needs to be clear about what it wants and doesn't want to see in this area. Baker said the City was hopeful when the I-394 Corridor study was done, but he thinks it would be wise to put the efforts where there is a larger opportunity and to back away from this area and focus elsewhere. Segelbaum agreed that this area seems less important than others. Waldhauser said she thinks there are some opportunities on the west end of the I-394 Corridor, south of Laurel Avenue for mixed uses with a heavy residential component. She stated that the City doesn't have a lot of intergenerational housing areas and local services, restaurants, coffee shops, etc. could be included. Zimmerman noted that there could be mixed used blocks or sub-districts in the I-394 Corridor, but there probably won't be as tightly mixed use buildings as once envisioned. Goellner referred to the proposed Douglas Drive/Duluth Street District and stated that the north half of Douglas Drive could be a good area for townhomes or life-cycle housing with more intensity where Douglas Drive crosses Duluth Street. The south half of Douglas Drive could be good for higher intensity residential and the south end of the corridor where the former Optum building is located might be a good opportunity for a mixture of uses which could include residential, but would more likely be employment uses because of its proximity to Highway 55. Segelbaum noted that the 2030 Comp Plan had a Douglas Drive District and asked how the proposed 2040 Douglas Drive District has changed from that one. Goellner said the proposed 2040 map has slight changes. Some duplexes on Duluth Street were included, the Optum site was included, and the Edgewood area west of Douglas Drive was removed from the map. Zimmerman added that many of the properties in the north half of Douglas Drive have access on Douglas Drive, whereas many in the south half have access on side streets which have less incentive to change. Segelbaum asked if homeowners in the north half should be concerned. Zimmerman said the City would not Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 Page 5 buy properties, but may consider rezoning some properties in order to provide more opportunities over time. He added that if that is the direction the City takes homeowners would be engaged in the process. Waldhauser referred to the Douglas Drive Study and said one feature of that study was an area bounded by Duluth Street, Golden Valley Road, Douglas Drive and Highway 100 that called for development of a pedestrian greenway through the area as opportunities arose, so pedestrians didn't have to go all the way up Golden Valley Road to the Highway 100 frontage, or all the way up Douglas Drive and down Golden Valley Road to get to the retail area at Duluth Street and Highway 100. She said she hopes that greenway proposal can stay in the plans because it would help that area seem less cut off from the rest of the City. Baker asked if there is any indication of the MnDOT site being vacated. Zimmerman said there has been no indication of vacating, but they could maybe consolidate. He said he could reach out to MnDOT and discuss their long term needs. Segelbaum opened the meeting to public comments. Ric Lager, 6306 Golden Valley Road, referred to the vacant parcel he owns on Douglas Drive and asked staff what they think the best use is for that property. Goellner said she thinks residential use would be the best. Zimmerman said that property could be used as a buffer for the house to the west and is currently zoned Single-Family Residential. Lager stated that an easement took 1,400 square feet of this vacant parcel and it is still a buildable lot. He referred to a similar-sized lot across the street on Phoenix Street and asked if the City has ever considered allowing tiny houses or something similar that will increase density. Segelbaum asked if this vacant lot is within the boundaries of the proposed Douglas Drive/Duluth Street District. Zimmerman stated that it is outside of the boundary but that doesn't mean it can't be redeveloped, it is just not a property staff is concentrating on. Segelbaum asked Lager if he thinks the boundary should be moved further to the west. Lager said there are two pieces of property on Douglas and Phoenix that are, according to the proposed map, undeveloped and he wants to know what the professionals think about it. Marti Micks, 90 Louisiana Avenue South, said she wants the City to require buffers and green space. She stated that there is a big buffer with ponds near her house and she doesn't even realize that she is near industrial property because of these buffers. She added that she wants to maintain the beauty of the green space and not just have an asphalt jungle. Segelbaum agreed that buffers and green space need to be a high priority. Johnson stated that language in the plan "requiring" versus "considering" can help drive that goal. Wendy Rubinyi, 1325 Maryland Avenue North, said she wants to point out that the City is looking at an aging housing stock. Inevitably, houses will be demolished and mini- mansions will be built. She said she wants to make sure that during this planning the City is considering how it is zoning the housing and the policies in the residential areas. She suggested allowing lot splits with smaller, not huge, houses and to consider how we're Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission March 13, 2017 Page 6 moving forward with the housing stock. Segelbaum agreed that is something the Planning Commission feels is important. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public comment period. Zimmerman stated that at the next Planning Commission meeting on March 27 they will discuss the remaining land use maps which include the Downtown West map, the Golden Valley Road Light Rail Station Area map, and various "clean up" areas. They will also revisit the 2040 Goals and Land Use categories. Waldhauser said she would like to have an opportunity to talk about the goals and the details at a more micro-level soon. 3. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 pm. ..�' � �i. John Kluc a, Secretary 'sa Wittman, Administrative Assistant