08-07-17 PC Agenda AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, August 7, 2017
7:30 pm
1. Approval of Minutes
July 10, 2017, Special Planning Commission Meeting
July 10, 2017, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
2. Discussion Item — Tennant Company Concept Plan
3. Discussion Item — Golden Valley Arts
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
6. Adjournment
r This docun7ent is availabfe in alternate formats up�n a 72-h�ur request. Pl�ase call
763-593-800b{TTY: 7�3-59343968)to make�r�€��iest. Exai�nples ofi altern�te formats
may include large print,electronic,Brai6le,�udioc�ssette,'etc.
Special Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 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,
July 10, 2017. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and
Waldhauser. Also present were Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate
Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, Community Development Int�rn Kayla Grover, and
SEH Traffic Consultant Mike Kotila. Commissioners Blenker and Johnson were absent.
1. 6-6:30 pm: Open House (Transportation)
2. 6:30-8 pm: Presentation and Discussion (Transportafion)
Goellner stated that this Comp Plan discussion will focus c�n the transportation chapter of
the Comprehensive Plan. She referred to the Comprehensiue Plan word cloud that staff
created from residents' comments and stat�d that staff has incorporated the comments
into the language in the transportation plan. She added that'some of the themes in the
transportation chapter include: supporting a dynamic town c2nter, showcasing Golden
Valley as a "green" community, emphasizing all aspects of a multi-modal transportation
system, ensuring policies, procedures, and decisions are inclusive, and making important
investments in infrastructure.
Goellner stated that there are six goals in the transportation chapter. Goal 1 is to preserve
and enhance the transporta#ic�n system, goal 2 is to improve the functionality and safety of
the roadway network; goal 3 is to expand the bicycle and pedestrian network in order to
provide a balanced systern of trar�sportation alternatives, goal 4 is to maximize safety,
comfort, and convenienc� for bicyclists and pedestrians, goal 5 is to support and promote
increased transit usage, and goal 6 is to integrate community values and character into
the transporkation system.
Mike Kotila, SEH Traffic Engineer, reviewed the elements of the transportation chapter
whieh include: the travel demand forecast based on Met Council models, a roadway
capacity assessment, a functional classification evaluation, transit, bicycle and pedestrian
systems, airp4rts, freight and heavy commercial vehicles, right of way preservation,
access management, and implementation. Baker asked about the timing of the travel
demand forecast. Kotila said he thinks it will be late summer/early fall before he gets
information from the Met Council.
Kotila showed the Commission a traffic volume map that showed growth amounts on
certain roads. He next discussed a map that analyzes safety issues and shows crash
locations. Blum asked if the severity of crashes is tracked. Kotila said yes, the severity of
crashes is tracked along with the rate and frequency of crashes. Baker asked if there are
examples of where changes have been made. Kotila discussed changes made to
Medicine Lake Road and Douglas Drive and several other intersections and
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 2
configurations where improvements have been made. Baker asked why only four years of
data is being shown. Kotila said the data loses relevance over time and after
improvements have been made.
Goellner stated that the City Council appointed an 11-member task force to help with the
bicycle and pedestrian planning. She explained that the task force's recommended plan
includes: goals, objectives, and policies, a map of improvements, guidance for types of
bicycle facilities, and guidance for intersection improvements. The recommended goals
for the Comp Plan include: expanding the bike and pedestrian network to provide a
balanced system of modes/alternatives and to maximize safety, comfort, and
convenience for all ages and abilities. She stated that some of the recommended
objectives and policies include: better north-south routes, connections to destinatic�ns
such as Brookview, light rail, and schools, removing barriers and gaps; Highway �5
crossings, adding bike racks, safety and comfort in general, compatibility between modes,
consistent facility design, and wayfinding signage. She showed a rr�ap from the City's web
site that allowed people to add comments/concerns abc�ut the bike and pedestrian
system.
Goellner referred to a map of the bicycle and pedestrian network which shows existing
and proposed bikeways and sidewalks and explained the task force recommendations for
facility routes and types included: community�eedb�ck, safety concerns on existing
roads, right of way width available, traffic speeds and valumes, owner/operator of
roadways, reconstruction or repaving project s�hedules, and the cost of facility
construction and maintenance. Segelbaum asked if staff and the task force looked at
other cities to see how it compared to their bicycle and pedestrian networks. Goellner said
yes, they looked at several other cities' plans and that Staff and the task force also looked
at the age of Golden Valle�r's infrastruct�ure. She added that the number of routes
proposed is similar to other communities.
Ktuchka asked if this network supports the downtown west circulation concept. Goellner
referred to the network map �nd stated that there are some existing sidewalks in that
area, but the pra��sed network map adds some connections to the Luce Line trail. She
added that t#�is.plan will hopefully create more human activity and less vehicle traffic in
this area,
Waldhauser asked if the regional multi-use trail shown as a purple dashed line on the
map is an actiue railway. Goellner said yes, and added that it could look like the
Kenilworth corridor in southwest Minneapolis where there is active rail with a trail next to
it. Baker asked about the owner of that railway. Goellner said she thinks CP Rail owns it.
Baker asked if the City talked to CP about this proposed trail. Zimmerman said he doesn't
think so, but staff wanted to identify it on the network map as a potential north/south trail.
Baker said he doesn't want to only go after the "low hanging fruit" with this Comp Plan
update and he would hate to overlook something just because it might be hard to
address.
Blum referred to the signed bike routes and asked if there will be any changes with the
pavement or anything else besides signs. Goellner said there has been discussion about
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 3
stenciling the pavement but those costs can get high and they aren't visible in the winter
so the recommendation is to stick with signs for now. Baker said he hopes stenciling is
reconsidered in the future. Kluchka agreed and said stencils make bikers feel safer so the
City might want to reconsider stenciling the street over installing signs. Waldhauser said it
also helps drivers be more aware of where bikers might be. Blum noted that bicycle
signage is recommended on every block and suggested that they might not be necessary
on every block on the lower volume routes. Kotila said the value of signed bike routes
would be greatest when the other more permanent facilities are in place and become
connections between other established routes. Kluchka said he feels the �ammissioners'
comments were negated. He said the comments were to make sure there are more
markings on the street and not signs in order to make bicyclists and drivers more
comfortable and to have less visual impact on the neighborhoods they are in. He s�id he
doesn't want to hear a justification for signage, he wants the Commissio:ners comments to
be validated.
Blum asked how the City coordinates with the County on the proposed ch�nges or ideas
the City has and at what point the City lets residents know, and how residents stay a part
of the process. Kotila said the County works with City s'taff to irnplement projects they do
in the City.
Kluchka asked if there is something in the transportation plan that discusses the type of
traffic such as truck traffic, etc. He asked what I�vel of drone flight delivery system
management the City needs to be cc�nsidering. Kotila said drone flight delivery is evolving
quickly and there is nothing defined in the plan at this point to manage drone flight. He
added that freight movement is st�mething that is considered in the Comp Plan.
Segelbaum referred to the bike and pedestrian network map asked how changes to the
sidewalk plan came about versus#he changes to the bike routes. Goellner stated that
there are a lot of existing sid�walks on busier roads so the focus was on adding sidewalks
where necessary to ather roads that don't currently have them.
Waldhauser ask�d if there was any consideration given to public accesses through
commercial districts and parking lots and how pedestrians navigate through those sites.
Goellner said stafF focuses on that more with new developments.
Kluchka referred tt�,goal two, objective four and noted that it says "identify system
deficiencies" and asked how system deficiencies is defined. Kotila explained that a
system deficiency might be the capacity of the roadway being deficient, or a safety
deficiency where corrective action is necessary.
Kluchka said he noted that several people at the open house talked about speeding being
an issue in their neighborhood and asked if there has been any thought to offering an
incentive to people who report speeding. Kotila said he is not aware of a tool that would
allow citizens to accurately report speeding. Blum said Commissioner Kluchka's idea is a
good way to help with code enforcement in general.
Baker opened the meeting to public comments.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 4
Dawn Hill, 2000 Kelly Drive, asked about the "un-use" of stop signs and said that 10 or 15
years ago there was discussion about taking some stop signs out along Olympia so cars
don't stack up. She said she thinks it is a good idea to consider where it is appropriate to
have stop signs and where it isn't so that they are more meaningful.
Wendy Rubinyi, 1325 Maryland Avenue North, said the Comprehensive Plan means
something the City wants to have that is ideal and a vision to improve the community as a
whole. She said the details are important but the bigger vision is missing from the Comp
Plan. She questioned how to get people to the City's commercial areas an�! asked where
the crossings are on Highway 55 which is a huge blockade. She suggested gre�nways
across Highway 55 in order to make Golden Valley a destination rather than a pass-
through. She said Golden Valley needs to be seen as destination and a cr�mmunity to
stay in, do business in, and live in.
Billy Binder, 2700 Major Avenue North, said Hennepin County chanc�ed Winnetka Avenue
from a four lane road to a three lane road which will cut accidents by 5Q°lo according to
the County. Also, the three lane road made room for bike lanes. He said Winnetka would
be even safer if signs were put up. He said the City turned down free bike lane street
signs from Hennepin County because of maintenance and aesthetic reasons which
doesn't make sense to him. He said the Harrison community has voted to eliminate
parking on the north side of Glenwood from Xer�ces to Aldrich to enable the County to put
in bike lanes. He agreed that the City can do better witFr`its bike plan and we should be a
leader not a follower. He added that h� would fike �he bike plan to have a visionary
narrative, he would like it to be a free st�ndin�document, and he would like an active,
motivated citizen group to implement it.
lan Black, 924 Adeline Lane North, referred to the discussion about bike signs and said in
his experience signs are usually ignored by cars so the situation is dangerous for bikers.
He stated that if the City really wants to improve bike paths there needs to be increased
spacing or a divider between bi[ces and cars.
Shelley Maasch, �011 Circle Down, said she would like an educational program
implemented abouf who has the right of way when a person is walking on a sidewalk.
Seeing and he�ring no one else wishing to comment, Baker closed the public comment
period.
Baker asked Kotila to address the question about modifying the use of stop signs. Kotila
explained that the current practice is to review complaints and traffic control issues in a
uniform way at the City's traffic committee meetings.
Kluchka asked how to increase the priority of north/south trail connections in the Comp
Plan. Kotila said there is an implementation tool exercise that will be a work task for staff.
Kluchka asked about improving access in commercial areas in the bike and pedestrian
plan. Kotila said staff is addressing that in a small area plan approach as development
occurs.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 5
Baker said Golden Valley is a big bicycling city and that the City should really be doing
more regarding the construction of dedicated bike lanes.
Waldhauser referred to the comments in the agenda materials about the interest in giving
all residents different ways of navigating the City with emphasis on the growing senior
population, disabled individuals, and children. She stated that she does not like sidewalks
that go right up to the curb and that is predominately what Golden Valley has. She said
she would like to see more emphasis on what the City can do to make sidewalks more
convenient and pleasant to use. She added that she would also like to s�e more done
with transit or shuttles to help people who need it make short trips, etc. Kotila said the
transit section of the transportation section of the Comp Plan addresses those types of
issues.
Blum asked what justifies separating the sidewalks from the �dge of curb with trees or
landscaping. He said added trees would help mitigate the amaunt c�f impervious surface
and questioned if there could be a goal that would help make tree lined streets a
possibility.
Baker said there is a potential connection between the transportation chapter of the Comp
Plan and the chapter that includes waste management and #he way the City allows trash
haulers to use the streets. He said it is a transpc�rtation issu� as much as it is a waste
management issue so he would like to see organized hauling in the transportation
chapter.
Baker referred to the periodic updating af'traffic signal phasing and timing and asked how
periodically that updating occurs. Kcrtila stated that sometimes it takes a major change in
land use or traffic patterns before change occurs. He said there is regular maintenance
that occurs on the signal system �nd sug�ested that timing and phasing be part of that
regular review. Kluchka asked the rules regarding traffic signals could be made public.
Kotila said yes.
The meeting adjaurned �t 7:54 pm.
John Kluchka,`Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
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,
July10, 2017. Chair Baker called the meeting to order at 8 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Kluchka Segelbaum, and
Waldhauser. Also present were Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate
Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner and Community Development Intern Kayla Grover.
Commissioners Blenker and Johnson were absent.
1. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 210 Cutacross Road — SU12-21
Applicant: GreenWood Design Build, LLC
Address: 210 Cutacross Road
Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single famify residential lot into two new
single family residential'iots. `
Zimmerman referred to location map and explained the applicant's proposal to subdivide
the existing lot into two lots. The existing sin�le family home would be demolished and
two new single family homes would be constructed. He explained that the existing lot is
31,330 square feet in size and each of the two new lots would be slightly larger than the
15,000 square feet required. He stated that a tree inventory was submitted by the
applicant so when construction happens staff can review how many trees will be removed
and if mitigation is needed. H� stated that staff feels that this subdivision proposal meets
all of the City Code requiremen#s and is recommending approval of this request.
Segelbaum asked for c{arification regarding the eighth qualification governing approval of
a subdivision listed in the staff report. Zimmerman said there has been some question in
the past with how much leeway the City has in approving or denying subdivision
proposals. He explained that the City Code is clear that the eight criteria listed in the staff
report are the only issues that can be evaluated when considering subdivisions.
Scott Loehrer, GreenWood Design Build, Applicant, said they recently did a subdivision
on Paisley Lane so he is aware of the process and the issues involved.
Blum asked why the plans submitted did not include a utility plan. Loehrer stated that one
lot already has a sewer connection and that permits will be required at the time of
construction for all utilities.
Segelbaum asked Loehrer if he learned anything from his Paisley Lane project that he
would implement here. Loehrer said he didn't think so because each project is different
and they are all custom homes. Segelbaum asked if there have been issues with silt
fencing, construction hours, disturbing surrounding property owners, grading, water run-
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 2
off, etc. Loehrer said street sweeping has been an issue after big rain events and that the
City checks the grading at the end of the project. He added that run-off was more of an
issue with the project on Paisley Lane than it will be with this proposal.
Baker opened the public hearing.
Kathy Watkins, 112 Paisley Lane, said the problems with grading of the Paisley Lane
project have not been corrected. She said the builder made a basin in the backyards and
when it rained it was a lake so they made a swale which directed mud to the street
several times. She welcomed the Planning Commission to look at the erosion pattern and
the dirt that is coming into her yard. She said the builder built the grade so high th�t the
water can't make it all the way to the street and she has the lowest spot so of course that
is where the water goes. She referred to the trees and said the builder put two or three
feet of soil on top of the tree roots so she will probably lose the tree in the front`of her
yard. She said the builder has done the grading in a hasty way and they haven't shown
concern for the neighboring properties. She questioned if#ree removers should be
licensed, bonded, and insured because she doesn't think they were for the Paisley Lane
project. She said they were the tackiest outfit she's ever seen and they made noise on a
Sunday night for three hours. A more professional company could have done the work
faster without as much disturbance to the neighborhood.
Jon Segner, 125 Paisley Lane, said he has similar concerns as the last speaker, in
particular the amount of construction in their neighborhood. He said the drainage and
water table in the neighborhood has changed permanently and that he has had water in
his basement where he's never had it before due to the number of new homes in the
neighborhood. He said it doesn't seem like the City is doing much for existing residents
and that new residents are treated better. He showed the Planning Commission some
photos of the new homes on Paisley Lane' and the mud in the street which occurs every
time it rains so their silt fences are obviously not doing their job. Segelbaum asked when
the photos were taken. Segner said one photo was taken two weeks ago and the other
was taken six weeks ago. He said`he has called GreenWood several times and they've
been unresponsive. He referred to another photo showing damage to his yard due to the
construction of the new homes on Paisley and said he spoke with Mr. Zimmerman who
suggested he talked ta the developer. Instead, he fixed his yard himself and sent a bill to
Mr. Loehrer. He referred to the tree removal contractors and said they had their chipper
pointed toward the street and wood chips pelted his car. He said he realizes the City is
fairly Iimited in the ability to reject a development, but he thinks the City could reject a
develop�;r. He added that GreenWood hasn't been addressing the neighbors' concerns
and he will be filing a claim in conciliation court.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Baker closed the public hearing.
Baker asked what options the neighbors have with their complaints such as grading
problems that weren't corrected, permanent changes to the grading, and damage to
trees. Zimmerman said the as built survey done at the end of a project is compared to the
proposed survey submitted at the beginning in order to check the grading. He explained
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 3
that one of the issues staff reviews is the amount of water going onto a neighboring
property which isn't allowed to increase. Another issue is the rate of water flow so that
erosion doesn't occur.
Kluchka said a lot of the issues occur while houses are being built before turf is installed
and suggested there be an inspection of the grading and drainage during construction in
addition to before and after construction. Zimmerman said the City's building inspectors
visit a construction site several times during a project and that there could be an
opportunity to have the water resource staff visit the site during construction to watch for
water and drainage issues.
Segelbaum asked what the City does if the grading plan deviates from the approved
plans. Zimmerman said if what was built is not what was approved, th� City hras the
authority to require the grading/drainage be corrected to match what was approved.
Baker asked at what point in the process the City says the,grading/drainage needs to be
corrected. Zimmerman said there is a construction management document that
contractors have to sign that says they will follow all of t'he City Code requirements so the
City can refer to that document to get issues corrected at any point in the process.
Segelbaum asked if an escrow account is required in case tMere is damage to
surrounding properties or to City property. Zimmerman said he doesn't think there is any
money deposited up front, but the City can require contractors to repair City property.
Segelbaum said the Planning Commission hears the same complaints with every
subdivision so it would be good to be able to address some of these issues up front.
Baker told the applicant he is on notice, and the City doesn't want to see the issues that
occurred on Paisley Lane happen with' this property. He said he thinks the City should
consider requiring escrow accoun#s or penalties when things are done the way they
weren't supposed to be done. Blum agreed. Waldhauser questioned if escrow accounts
could be done on a case by cas�: basis or if it would have to apply to all construction. She
said as a City service, they should be helping residents solve these types of issues and
make sure construetion g;oes smoothly. Baker agreed something needs to change to
provide better service.
MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Segelbaum and motion carried unanimously to approve
the proposed minor subdivision of 210 Cutacross Road subject to the following 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 $5,550 shall be paid before release of the Final Plat.
3. A deferred special assessment of$4,900 shall be paid before release of the Final Plat.
4. Modifications to the Survey and Preliminary Plat, as outlined by the Engineering Division
in the memo dated July 1, 2017, shall be made and resubmitted to the City before
approval of the Final Plat.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 10, 2017
Page 4
--Short Recess--
2. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
No reports were given.
3. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
No report was given.
4. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:39 pm.
John Kluchka, Secretary Kayla Grover, Community Development Intern