05-13-19 PC Minutes 7800 Golden Vailey Road�Golden Valley,MN 55427 � l tv C)/
763-593-3992�TTY 763-593-3968�763-593-8109(fax)�www.goldenvalleymn.gov ������D�
�
Planning Commission z�,
�� V� � � �V
May 13,2019—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, Ryan
Sadeghi, Chuck Segelbaum
Commissioners absent: None
Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Senior Planner/Grant Writer Emily
Goellner, Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman
Council Liaison present: None
Baker introduced and welcomed new Commissioner, Ryan Sadeghi.
Approval of Agenda
MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum to approve the agenda of May 13, 2019, as submitted
and the motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Minutes
April 22, 2019, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Johnson asked that the following sentence be added to page six of the April 22 minutes:Johnson
questioned if a combination of no parking and wide sidewalks would encourage cars to speed, which
would not create a pedestrian friendly environment.
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Blum to approve the April 22, 2019, minutes with the above
noted amendment and the motion carried unanimously.
Discussion— Mixed Use Zoning District
Zimmerman gave a brief summary of the Planning Commission's last discussion regarding the Mixed
Use Zoning District and discussed the changes made to the proposed code language since then.
These changes include the addition of descriptions of the three subdistricts, removal of the minimum
fa�ade buildout requirement, removal of fa�ade types, a change from live-work units to home
occupations, and the revision of setbacks in front, side, and rear yards and for parking and storage.
Zimmerman stated that at this meeting he would like to discuss the impervious surface, building/lot
coverage, and open space requirements and would also like input about what the Commission thinks
about the definition of the three subdistricts.
This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call
763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc.
City of Gt�lder� Valiey Planning Commission Regular Meeting 2
May 13, 2019—7 pm
Zimmerman explained that Subdistrict A is a neighborhood, smaller scale subdistrict which allows
residential uses, institutional uses, restricted office uses, and many commercial uses. However,
gasoline sales, automotive repair, self-storage, and outdoor storage would not be permitted.
Subdistricts B and C are community scale subdistricts along larger transit corridors and would allow
high density residential (in Subdistrict B), hotels, and larger scale commercial, office, and institutional
uses. Subdistrict C is similar to Subdistrict B but would not allow residential uses and is focused on
employment.
Blum referred to the draft code language and said that when he read the descriptions of the
subdistricts he wasn't sure if he was reading hard rules of the subdistricts or a description of what's
to come. He questioned if these districts would always be tied to one neighborhood and if they will
always have businesses that exclusively serve that neighborhood. He suggested the language in the
description of Subdistrict A be changed to say "...surrounding neighborhoods which are typically a
small, moderate, or medium scale."
Baker referred to the definition of Subdistrict A and said he doesn't find the words "small" or
"moderate" or "medium" meaningful. He questioned where the subdistrict definition language came
from and if it is a reflection of reality or taken from other places. Zimmerman explained that the
language came from many of the Planning Commission discussions over the past several years and
wanting the ability to create neighborhood nodes with a mix of uses that weren't allowed in the
current zoning—things like restaurants and commercial services next to homes which is very
different than the current I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District.
Segelbaum said that a lot of the motivation was to have neighborhood businesses such as a small
restaurant or dry cleaners and questioned if there is anything in the proposed language to stop a
whole area from being townhomes. Zimmerman stated that the Comprehensive Plan provides
guidance and target points of what the City wants in these areas. Segelbaum questioned uses that
would be allowed by a matter of right. Blum suggested putting a hard cap of different types of uses
to prevent having one hundred percent of the same use in an area. Segelbaum said it would be hard
to dictate the uses and he is worried about being too proscriptive. He added that the language in
Subdistrict B does a nice job describing what's allowed and said that might be a good way to handle
Subdistricts A and C as well.
Baker referred to the staff report and noted that is specifically called out auto repair and gasoline
sales as being allowed in Subdistrict B. He suggested that transit oriented uses be included as well.
Johnson noted that Subdistrict A allows buildings that are four stories which take a lot more money
and lot more time but are advantageous and what they are envisioning, but the risk is that someone
will build a one story building because it is cheaper and he questions who would build a four story
building next to a one story building.
Zimmerman said another issue that has been discussed and staff is testing is setbacks. He showed
the Commission examples of setbacks with smaller setbacks in Subdistrict A and larger setbacks in
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 3
May 13, 2019—7 pm
Subdistricts B and C. Segelbaum asked if there should be larger setbacks in Subdistrict B than there
are in Subdistrict A because Subdistrict B would have larger developments that could be close to
residential. Zimmerman said staff will continue to test different setbacks in different areas.
Goellner referred to the current and proposed impervious surface requirements and stated that the
TOD consultants are recommending allowing 90% maximum in Subdistrict A, 90% maximum in
Subdistrict B, and 80% maximum in Subdistrict C. She explained that there needs to be some limits so
that 100%of a lot isn't paved, but the requirement can't be so low that the City won't get the kind of
buildings it wants to see.
Baker noted that the current limit is 65% and with a PUD it is 90%. He asked what the downside
would be of keeping the 65% requirement and allowing 80%with a PUD. Zimmerman said it
encourages more use of PUDs and staff is trying to get away from that and allow more things by
right. Also, PUDs require two acres so small lots would be excluded. He added that some of the
recent projects done in the City have been in the 75%to 80% impervious surface range.
Segelbaum said Subdistrict A is looking for small businesses and there are small lots in that
subdistrict, so he is okay with the proposed higher impervious surface requirements in that
subdistrict, but he feels differently about Subdistricts B and C.
Blum said it makes a big difference to him whether the impervious surface is a parking lot or a
building. He said he thinks not having a lot of parking space and having more building space will help
reach the goal of walkability.
Goellner referred to the open space requirements and said the current requirement is for lots over
one acre, there has to be 15% minimum open space. She said she thinks it would be appropriate to
have a minimum requirement for all lots and she thinks there needs be discussion about how open
space is defined. She said the goal of open space for this district is to bring people to it and not have
it just be turf or lawn without anywhere to sit or anything to do and is not really serving a purpose.
She said the TOD consultants recommend that there be a choice of one of three open space types on
a property: a square, plaza, or pocket park. She said she thinks what they are really looking for is a
space with defined edges that feels like a person could go into it and use, landscaping, and walkways
or connections to buildings or streets. She noted that the City of St. Louis Park's code states that a
percentage of the lot has to be "designed outdoor space."
Baker said he would rather require paved walkways, landscaping, seating, etc. that are open to the
public and not say that there has to be either a square, plaza, or pocket park. Zimmerman said it is
hard to require private property owners to dedicate space for public use.
Segelbaum suggested adding language stating that open space plans are subject to staff approval.
Zimmerman stated that there could be a site plan review process with the Planning Commission.
Blum suggested adding "and any other plan approved by the approval body" to deal with things like
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 4
May 13, 2019—7 pm
swimming pools and tot lots which may not contribute to the flow and character of the districts as
they are trying to design them.
Baker questioned how to encourage synergy to get owners to do something with neighboring
property owners. Zimmerman said that comes with the principles put into the code and in guiding
and encouraging developers. Segelbaum said it seems difficult to legislate these types of things
because developments rarely occurs simultaneously. Zimmerman said the districts could have a plan
with pedestrian connections and other things laid out so as development occurs there are approved
plans that developers have to adhere to.
Brookins referred to the side yard setback requirement of 50 feet and said he thinks in order to
maximize the facades at the street front that should be reduced because parking would have a 15
foot setback so it is not unreasonable to have a building at a similar setback. He said in regard to the
impervious surface requirements he doesn't see a lot of value in proscribing the amount that could
be building. He said he would like to consider putting the front fa�ade percentage requirement
language back in the code to maximize walkability and the percentage of frontage at the street. He
added that he would encourage using the designed outdoor space language and said if a majority of
that space is private he is fine with that and does not expect developers to include a space for him to
use, but he would like to require a walkable street area for people to walk by. Baker said he loves the
idea of these districts having spaces for the public to linger. Zimmerman said there may be
opportunities for developments to provide public spaces.
Pockl referred to the designed outdoor space language in the staff report and asked how a minimum
of 12%was chosen. Goellner said she did not know. Zimmerman added that St. Louis Park staff said it
works well. Pockl asked if there was a recommended percentage for a square, plaza, or pocket park.
Goellner said no.
Blum said he is thinking of pedestrian passage and asked if there is a way to achieve enhanced
sidewalks.
Johnson said he doesn't want to make this too complicated. He said they don't know if the 65%
maximum impervious surface allowed in the current Mixed Use Zoning district works and yet now
they are discussing 80%. He said maybe if they just kept it at 65%then by definition there will be
open space. He referred to the screening requirement and said he wants to make sure it's relatable
to other parts of the City and to not forget what they are trying to accomplish as opposed to working
really hard to refine the numbers.
Baker said if they overly constrain each lot then there will be problems and no one will be attracted
to that and if they only define the entire district the City won't get what it wants mixed around. He
said he really likes the idea of a plan within each district and encouraged going in that direction.
Segelbaum agreed and said they shouldn't overcomplicate things. He said they can't achieve all of
the goals in one set of parameters and they have to encourage the things that are most important.
City of Golcien Valley Pfannin� Commission ReguPar Meeting 5
May 13, 2019—7 pm
Zimmerman referred to current uses permitted by right and uses allowed with a Conditional Use
Permit in the current 1-394 Mixed Use Zoning District and in the proposed new Mixed Use Zoning
District language. He noted that the proposed new language also includes restricted and prohibited
uses.
Blum noted that some neighboring cities are looking to minimize drive-thrus and gas stations and
asked staff how they feel about those uses being a good fit in the Mixed Use Zoning District they are
trying to design. Zimmerman said he would not want gas stations in the neighborhood districts, and
would be comfortable not allowing them in Subdistrict B, but he doesn't see a problem with allowing
them in Subdistrict C. Blum stated that when gas stations go out of business they can become a
brown site and be undevelopable. He said in regard to drive-thrus he thinks they have a substantial
negative effect on the kind of vehicle traffic they want to see in a pedestrian focused area and it goes
against the feel they've been talking about wanting for these districts. Zimmerman said he has a
different opinion about drive-thrus. He said he thinks allowing them is key for restaurants, and other
drive-thrus such as Starbucks, Walgreens and banks so he is cautious about not allowing any drive-
thrus. He added that they need to be designed well, not be in front of the building, and have the
queuing away from pedestrians. He added that he would be comfortable removing gasoline and
automotive uses from Subdistrict B, but keeping drive-thrus as a conditional use.
Zimmerman stated that the next step is to bring this item to the City Council for some feedback at a
Council/Manager and then back to the Planning Commission for further discussion.
--Short Recess--
Annual Commission Orientation
Zimmerman gave the Commission the annual orientation presentation. He discussed, the City's
organizational chart, board and commission structure,the City's current boards and commissions,
roles and responsibilities, expectations, guiding principles, and core values.
Pockl asked about the mission statement the boards and commissions created. Zimmerman said he
would talk to the HR Director about that and let the Commission know how it is being used.
Election of Officers
Johnson nominated Blum for Chair. Blum accepted the nomination. Segelbaum nominated Johnson
for Chair. Johnson accepted. Segelbaum said he thought both Commissioners would make an
excellent Chair, he just likes the idea of commissioners rotating from Secretary to Vice Chair to Chair.
Blum said he would focus on creating a good legal record for someone to be able to look back on and
see that the Commission is doing the right thing. He said he sees the Chair as being a deferential one
and that everyone else's comments would come before his. He said being a facilitator would be his
focus as Chair.
Segelbaum called for a vote for Chair.
City of Golden Valley Pfanning Commissian Regular Me�ting 6
May 13, 2019—7 pm
Blum, Pockl, and Sadeghi and Johnson voted for Blum. Brookins, Baker, and Segelbaum voted for
Johnson.
Blum nominated Johnson as Vice Chair.Johnson accepted.
Segelbaum nominated Brookins as Secretary. Brookins accepted. Blum nominated Pockl as Secretary.
Pockl accepted.
Johnson, Pockl, Sadeghi, Segelbaum, and Baker voted for Brookins. Blum and Brookins voted for
Pockl.
The new slate of officers is Blum-Chair,Johnson-Vice Chair, Brookins-Secretary.
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
No other business was discussed.
Adjournment
MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the
meeting at 8:45 pm.
lf,P�
,�� �1� _
�
� �, Secretary
}
Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
�, ,�v���r��K��-}