Loading...
03-25-19 PC Minutes 7800 Golden Valley Road�Goiden Valley,MN 55427 t'1�,v UJ 763-593-3992�TTY 763-593-3968�763-593-8109(fax)�www.goidenvalleymn.gov ��r'���Q� y I`� V�� � �'V Planning Commission Mar 25,2019—7 pm Council Chambers REGULAR MEETING MINUTES GoldenValleyCityHall 7800 Golden Valley Road Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Chair Baker. Roll Call Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Chuck Segelbaum Commissioners absent: None Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman Council Liaison present: None Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum to approve the agenda of March 25, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried. Approval of Minutes March 11, 2019, Regular Planning Commission Meeting MOTION made by Brookins, seconded by Blum to approve the March 11, 2019, minutes as submitted and the motion carried. Discussion—Architectural and Material Standards Zimmerman reminded the Commission that they have reviewed architectural and material standards at several recent meetings. He stated that he would now like to discuss possible Zoning Code language that addresses both areas. Zimmerman explained that the proposed new section of Code will have a purpose statement that includes the following guidelines: development and redevelopment within the City will be held to a high standard with respect to visual quality, structural and ornamental elements are utilized to maximize variety and architectural interest, building facades facing the public realm are active and engaging, and the built environment is maintained in good condition. Blum questioned if one of the Planning Commission's goals was to facilitate the transition between different zoning districts. Segelbaum said he thinks it was part of their past discussions. This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call 763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-5933968}to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may inclutle large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette,etc. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 2 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm Zimmerman stated that following the purpose statement, general architectural standards would be listed that would apply to all structures regardless of zoning district. The proposed architectural standards would include: varied massing to incorporate staggered building components, recessed doorways, and other elements that provide visual interest; interesting roof lines that include pitched roofs, dormers, gable or hip roof accents, parapets, cornices, and other interesting profiles; consistent architectural treatment on all facades; and focal features that add interest or distinction to a building. Johnson asked if vertical and horizontal articulation is what "staggered building components" is referring to. Zimmerman said it refers to blocks of massing and breaking up the overall massing of a building to create visual interest. Zimmerman stated that the general standards will also include exterior materials that are divided into Class I, Class II, and Class III categories with the Class I materials being the highest quality. He stated that past conversations have included changing this to allow four classes of materials but upon further research staff has concerns that breaking the material standards into four classes gets overly complicated. Baker asked what led the Planning Commission toward having four classes. Segelbaum said they thought that some of the Class I materials were very high end and could be separated out from the list, and that there was a distinction among the Class I materials such as masonry/textured cement stucco compared to glass, copper, or natural stone. Zimmerman said it was also a way to try and fine tune different zoning districts and that the more categories there are,the more they can require certain percentages of the different classes of materials. Zimmerman showed the Commission several pictures of various types and classes of materials. Segelbaum asked what class of materials Brookview used and if it would be within the scope of what is being proposed. Zimmerman said he didn't do the calculations, but a large portion of the building is pre- finished metal and concrete block (Class II materials) so it may not meet the proposed percentage standards. Zimmerman discussed several recent construction projects in the City including the Arcata and Hello apartments and noted that much of the materials used in those projects are Class II materials with the exception of glass and brick which are Class I materials. Segelbaum asked if the majority of the recent projects used mostly Class II materials. Zimmerman said yes, he believes most of them would be a mix of Class I and Class II materials. Baker stated that those projects are zoned R-4 and the proposed Code language would require them to be composed of at least 60% Class I materials. Zimmerman agreed and added that the proposed language is upping the standard and is also what St. Louis Park and other nearby cities use. Zimmerman referred to the proposed Zoning Code language and stated that after the purpose and standards sections it addresses the individual zoning districts. He referred to the R-2 Zoning District and stated that duplexes are currently the only attached units allowed and that they function very much like a single family home, so staff is suggesting that they wait to write the architectural and materials City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 3 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm standards for this district until townhomes or row houses are included as permitted uses because they would be a better target for limited architectural and/or material standards. Zimmerman asked the Commissioners about having some architectural and material standards in the R-2 Zoning District that would encourage row homes, or attached homes, etc. He showed several photos as examples of traditional duplexes and of some town home and row homes. Baker asked how the City could encourage the R-2 Zoning District to move is that direction. Zimmerman said staff will be considering language later this year for the R-2 District that could allow town homes and row homes, and not just single family homes and duplexes. The Commissioners discussed various areas in the City that have higher densities and where this type of housing might work. Baker suggested that staff bring the Commission some suggested changes for the R-2 Zoning District. Zimmerman discussed the proposed standards in the R-3 and R-4 Zoning Districts. He stated that a lot of the proposed standards in these districts come from the existing language in the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District. Zimmerman next discussed the proposed standards in the Commercial, Office, Institutional, Light Industrial, and Industrial Zoning Districts. He stated that staff is proposing to wait on architectural and material standards language in the new Mixed Use Zoning District until the rest of the code language is written for that district. Zimmerman discussed the proposed language regarding additions and expansions to buildings and stated that it is fairly universal to require that additions comply with new architectural standards. In regard to materials the proposed language stated that all facades of an addition or expansion shall be composed of at least 90% Class I materials until the appropriate minimum Class I percentage standards for the building are met. Baker said he is satisfied having three classes of materials rather than four. Zimmerman noted that the standards can always be evaluated and added to, or changed over time. Segelbaum said he thinks having architectural standards makes good sense and is appropriate and that the materials and percentage of materials required is worth a full discussion. He stated that developers have said that in order to make a development economically viable there has to be ways to make cuts so if that is true the upping of the materials standards would up the expense and he wonders if the City would have the recent development it's had and if it will continue with these new standards. He said he doesn't want the City to price itself out of development and is glad to know that the same standards are used in other cities. City of Golden Valley F�lanning Commission Regular Meeting 4 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm Baker said there has been a flood of new housing so maybe now is the time to take action that causes that to subside a little, but the City will be attractive again. Pockl asked Zimmerman if other cities said that once they implemented these types of standards they found that it was too cost prohibitive for developers. Zimmerman said some cities stated that they received some push back, but most of the staff he talked to said their standards are reasonable and developers have been able to meet them. Baker asked if it is possible that Golden Valley got all of its recent development because there aren't these standards in place. Zimmerman said he doesn't know if it was that or if it was just the demand for housing in the Twin Cities. Blum said the City got a lot of architecturally interesting and nice looking buildings regardless of the standards. He said they shouldn't be chasing development for development sake. He said he wants development that is right for Golden Valley which is a higher standard and that is reflected in the proposed new architectural and material standards. Segelbaum asked the Commission what they thought about requiring 50% Class I materials in the Light Industrial district. Blum said he was surprised to see such a high standard in the industrial districts. Baker said he wants the industrial districts to be attractive too. Zimmerman noted that Brooklyn Park requires 65%Class I in industrial areas and many other cities require 50%. Brookins said he thinks the proposed new standards are a big jump in comparison to what the City currently has. He said he doesn't find a ton of value in it and that a lot of the industrial areas that the City has serve a good purpose and he doesn't think the City will get a better purpose in those areas by putting more brick on the front or back of a building. He said the industrial areas can be treated as such and can use industrial materials. Blum asked the Commission if they feel differently about industrial areas that border on zoning districts that have higher standards. He added that the City has been granting more CUPs in industrial areas so some of those might start to look more like commercial or office properties. Zimmerman noted that there are codes that require different standards for facades that face residential or institutional properties. Baker suggested that the standards be dropped a little bit if an industrial property isn't facing residential properties, but he questioned what the standards should be if the property is highly visible. Zimmerman said the City doesn't have very many light industrial or industrial properties that directly abut a different zoning district, most of them are across a public street from another property zoned differently. He suggested keeping the standards high when a light industrial or industrial property is across the street from a different zoning district. Johnson said the City hasn't had architectural or material standards up until now so he is struggling with the character of Golden Valley because he doesn't really know how what is being proposed fits in with what's already been built and how to apply the proposed code in the real world. Baker asked if it would City of Golden Valiey Planning Commission Regular Meeting 5 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm help to have some analysis of what's been built. Segelbaum said that would give them a quantifiable look at what's been done. Baker stated that they've looked at what neighboring communities have done and he thinks Golden Valley would want to be similar. Zimmerman stated that there isn't really a good way to determine the materials standards with buildings already built, but that he would try to provide an estimate. Johnson said they would look silly if none of the recently constructed buildings come close to what is being proposed. Baker said he is interested in what Golden Valley aspires to be in the future. Segelbaum said he agrees with Johnson and said he worries that maybe the proposed new language goes too far. He questioned if maybe it should be less strict in order to attract development. Blum questioned if maybe the percentages should be lowered or if the type of materials should be changed. Segelbaum said he is very much in favor of setting architectural and material standards he just thinks the proposed standards should be relaxed by either reducing the percentages or by having four classes of materials and requiring a smaller percentage of Class I materials and allowing a larger percentage of Class II materials. Brookins referred to the proposed language requiring 60%of Class I materials be used for R-3 properties and questioned if that will work with the City's affordability expectation. Zimmerman said the proposed language is modeled on other cities who have the same affordability standards, but he agrees that in some ways there may be competing goals. Baker said code language is adaptive and suggested trying the proposed new standards which set a pretty high bar and then change it if needed in the future. He said he's heard compelling arguments from the Commission about lowering the percentages in the Light Industrial and Industrial Zoning Districts but he likes the percentages as they have been presented in all the other districts. Blum noted that PUDs allow for flexibility and asked about the minimum acreage required for a PUD. Zimmerman said two acres is the minimum requirement and agreed that they allow more flexibility for things like the materials used. He added that hopefully the City will also get more redevelopment on the newer mixed use sites. Blum stated that if stucco and EIFs each drop down a class level he would feel more flexible about lowering the percentages required. Baker suggested moving masonry/textured cement stucco to Class II and changing the 60%to 50%as well. Pockl said what she likes about having three classes of materials is that it offers more opportunity for Class I materials which could lessen the load on cost prohibitive issues if there is more to choose from. Baker said he would feel comfortable dropping the requirement of 60% Class I materials down to 50% Class I materials in the R-3, R-4, and Office Zoning Districts if masonry/textured cement stucco is moved City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 6 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm to the Class II category. Zimmerman asked for clarification regarding moving EFIS down to the Class III category. Baker said he thinks EFIS should be left in the Class II category. Johnson stated that they should either address this issue by finding out what is already in the City or make a statement that it doesn't matter. He reiterated that he would like to have an idea on how some of the more recent buildings in the City would or wouldn't meet these proposed new requirements. He reminded the Commission that they can also request special studies as well. Baker said he wouldn't mind seeing a limited analysis that would include just the most recently constructed buildings such as: Talo, Arcata, The Xenia, Hello, and Liberty Crossing. Zimmerman said he won't be able to provide exact percentages but staff can provide some analysis of how those projects would fit with the proposed new language. Blum said he thinks it is ok for them to be forward thinking and to at least match our neighboring communities' standards. He stated that a lot of the recent projects mentioned would have had options through the PUD process to have some flexibility. Zimmerman noted that there is also the clause in the materials list that states "other materials not listed elsewhere as approved by the City Manager or his/her designee or as recommended by the Planning Commission" which also provides some flexibility. --Short Recess-- Discussion— Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report Zimmerman gave highlights from the Annual Report and stated that Chair Baker will be presenting it to the City Council at their Council/Manager meeting in April. Segelbaum referred to the 2019 proposed work plan section of the report and said he thinks the community would like to see small retail in the City. Blum stated that the Commission has previously discussed gateway improvements and said that would be a great way to distinguish Golden Valley and neighborhoods within Golden Valley. Baker asked that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan information be moved up on the staff led discussions/presentations list because the Commission spent a lot of time on that. He suggested that strengthening large tree retention and small lot development be added to the 2019 work plan section. Discussion— Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report Zimmerman referred to the Board of Zoning Appeals annual report and stated that there were 11 variances considered, nine of them were in the R-1 Zoning District. He stated that staff has continued to work with applicants up front to help decrease the amount of variance requests. Baker asked why there are so many variances in South Tyrol. Zimmerman said there were some new homes built in that area on corner lots with two front yards. City of Golden Valley planning Cammission Regular Meeting 7 Mar 25, 2019—7 pm Segelbaum asked if there is a way to compare how strict or lax Golden Valley is compared to other cities. Blum said his impression is that the BZA is very likely to grant variances and he is concerned about the exception to the rule becoming the standard. Zimmerman said he thinks the BZA tries to help homeowners and that they sometimes modify variance requests in order to not approve such large variances. He stated that some clarity from the City Council may be needed on whether it is the BZA's role to try and help homeowner's solve their problems, or if they should uphold the standards that are in place and only grant variances for things that rise to a certain level. Johnson added that many of the side yard variances are granted in order to allow people a second garage stall which really is the norm. Council Liaison Report No report was given. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings No reports were given. Other Business Baker reported on a neighborhood meeting he attended regarding a new house that was built on a 40- foot wide lot. He stated that the Council may be reviewing the regulations for these narrow lots. Zimmerman stated that the Commission may be reviewing massing and height for these types of lots. Adjourn MOTION by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:41 pm. a� .,�'`'��� ,�' ���,,., ,�� ,�` .' � +.:: �� � Ron Blum, Secretary Li Wittman, Administrative Assistant