pc-minutes-may-11-20
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by
the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. In accordance with that declaration, beginning on March 16,
2020, all Planning Commission meetings held during the emergency were conducted
electronically. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public were
able to monitor the meetings by watching it on Comcast cable channel 16, by streaming it on
CCXmedia.org, or by dialing in to the public call‐in line. The public was able to participate in this
meeting during public comment sections, by dialing the public call‐in line.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 by Chair Blum.
Roll Call
Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Ryan
Sadeghi, Chuck Segelbaum,
Commissioners absent: Ari Prohofsky
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager
Council Liaison present: Gillian Rosenquist
2. Approval of Agenda
Chair Blum, asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
MOTION made by Commissioner Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Segelbaum to approve the
agenda of May 11, 2020, as submitted. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chair Blum made a correction to the minutes from the April 27, 2020 meeting and assuming those
corrections were made, asked for a motion to approve the minutes from April 27, 2020.
MOTION made by Commissioner Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Johnson to approve the
meeting minutes, after the correction was made, from April 27, 2020. Staff called a roll call vote
and the motion carried unanimously.
4. Informal Public Hearing – Amendment to Future Land Use Map
Applicant: Paul Jacob
Address: 7345 Country Club Drive
Purpose: To modify the guided land use from Low Density Residential to Retail/Service
[ITEM 4 & 5 ARE PRESENTED TOGETHER]
May 11, 2020 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
April 27, 2020 – 7 pm
2
5. Informal Public Hearing – Amendment to Zoning Map
Applicant: Paul Jacob
Address: 7345 Country Club Drive
Purpose: To modify the zoning designation from Single‐Family Residential (R‐1)
to Commercial
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, started by explaining the proposal by the applicant to amend
the Future Land Use Map which would be a modification of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This
amendment changes the land‐use designation from Low Density Residential to Retail/Service. The
applicant’s second proposal was to amend the Zoning Map in order to rezone Schuller’s. This
amendment would change the zoning from Single‐Family Residential to Commercial. The elements of
the proposal have an end goal of creating an outdoor patio for customers. Adding the patio qualifies
as an expansion and in order to do so, zoning and land use designations must be changed as the
current non‐conforming statute allows use to continue but not expansion.
By way of background, Zimmerman explained Schuller’s is a bar/restaurant, operating at its current
location for decades and is considered non‐conforming. The guided land use has been designated as
a Single‐Family or Low Density Residential since at least 1977. A zoning map from the first part of
1956 shows the property zoned as commercial, but later that year it was rezoned to a Single‐Family
Residential (R‐1).
Zimmerman reminded the Commissioners that Schuller’s made a similar request in 2012, the
Planning Commission recommended denial and City Council tabled the item and did not vote. In 2013
the City Council discussed the change and did not support it. In 2014 the Council supported moving
forward but there was not an application submitted.
Moving on to the steps in the process, Zimmerman stated that if the land use change was approved
by the City, it must follow these next steps:
1. Be approved by the Metropolitan Council as a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
2. Once Met. Council grants approval, the zoning change may occur.
3. Then a CUP is needed which may then set additional regulations on setbacks, hours,
noise, etc
4. Variances would be needed for existing setbacks as well as for the new patio.
Zimmerman informed the group on the neighbor notification process for this proposal and typically
that includes a neighborhood meeting. Current Covid‐19 restrictions discouraged this and a
neighborhood mailing was sent instead with an extended comment period. Planning staff received
three emails and two phone calls.
Zimmerman expanded on the zoning and land use definitions as well as the idea of “spot‐zoning”.
Regarding Land Use changes, there aren’t specific standards outlined in the City Code but the City
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
April 27, 2020 – 7 pm
3
Attorney urges the Planning Commission to consider land‐use descriptions that are contained in the
comprehensive plan. When looking at the zoning changes, the City Attorney urges the Commissioners
to consider the purpose of the Zoning Chapter to regulate land use … for the purpose of promoting the
health, safety, order, convenience, and general welfare of all citizens of the City.
Staff has two primary concerns regarding this proposal:
1. The construction of an outdoor patio in a primarily single‐family neighborhood increases the
likelihood of complaints related to noise, lights, traffic, etc.
2. Potential changes would not be limited to Schuller’s, but would include any other future
Permitted or Conditional Use in the Commercial Zoning District
Aside from that, changing the land use does not appear to be consistent with the following Comp. Plan
goals and objectives:
Minimizing Conflicts and Impacts of Change (Land Use Chapter, Goal 2)
Protecting Existing Residential Neighborhoods (Objective 1)
Supporting Non‐residential Growth Opportunities while Respecting Adjacent Properties
(Objective 2)
Being that the request to change the land use designation of the property from Low Density Residential
to Retail/Service would be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan,
staff recommends denial.
Being that the request to rezone the property from Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) to Commercial
would likely introduce significant impacts to surrounding properties, staff recommends denial.
Commissioner Baker asked staff how often Land Use and Zoning Changes were approved and what
the conditions were. Zimmerman responded that there have been about six or so approved and it was
generally to accommodate a use for the area that wasn’t considered before. Those that were denied,
were generally because an applicant wanted to create something new and change a use all together.
Commissioner Johnson asked what the maximum height is for a structure in the rezoning proposal.
Zimmerman responded that it’s about 2‐3 stories, not much taller than the single‐family zoning allows.
Paul Jacob, Applicant, is the son of the previous owner of 30 years. Jacob stated that Schuller’s loses
about 30% of their business in the summer and it seems to be due to lack of outside patio seating.
Recently renovations have taken place to help upgrade the building and the owners would like to
continue business at the current location. Jacob said they’re willing to make accommodations to
reduce noise in order to obtain a patio. Given the current social distancing requirements, the owners
feel that once customers are allowed to go to restaurants again, folks will feel the most comfortable
with outdoor seating. Being that they can’t offer that at all, the owners are concerned for the future
of Schuller’s.
Commissioner Segelbaum asked the applicants if they had comments regarding staff concern over re‐
zoning and opening the door for another restaurant to open in the future. The applicants responded
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
April 27, 2020 – 7 pm
4
that their goal was not to rezone but it was part of the process they needed to follow in order to expand
and build a patio. They also restated their desire to keep Schuller’s.
Chair Blum opened the informal public hearing at 7:32pm.
Caller 1: Peter Pluvak, 510 Kelley Drive
Would like the Commission to recommend denial of the proposal and is concerned about the
increased traffic to the restaurant and the danger that will lead to residents.
Caller 2: John Ebber 7421 Glenwood Ave
Stated that the neighborhood is low density residential and is in the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan as such. Caller is concerned this is spot zoning and is inconsistent with the land use and
zoning maps. Economic considerations are enough to constitute a rezoning, as he said was
stated by the BZA. Resident encouraged the Commission to recommend denial to the City
Council.
Caller 3: Ben Harkins 7028 Schuller Circle
Caller doesn’t feel the plan serves the neighborhood and appears to have negative impact.
He also stated that he doesn’t understand how a blocked off or sheltered patio will be
desirable to patrons. Caller is also concerned with the increased traffic, noise and is very
concerned about the business being sold and another, larger establishment takes root.
Chair Blum closed the public hearing at 7:42pm.
Chair Blum asked staff about the applicants offer to create conditions tied to their patio proposal.
Zimmerman responded that conditions can’t be tied to a land use or a rezoning request but rather to
a CUP once the former is approved.
Commissioner Pockl asked the applicants if there have been changes since the 2012 denial that
promotes the request a second time. The applicant responded that it’s part of their improvement
process. By doing other work and investing in to the building, they were hoping to show the City that
they’re committed to staying in the building and to keep Schuller’s running. Pockl asked if there were
more upgrades planned. Applicant responded that they already made a few upgrades: new ceiling,
new booths, new windows, made the entrance handicap accessible. Pockl asked if they’ve experienced
people parking outside of the parking lot when busy. The applicant responded that it has happened
but it’s really rare and the few added seats that the patio will provide, wouldn’t make a noticeable
traffic impact. Commissioner Brookins asked if there was another zoning type that would be a better
fit. Zimmerman stated Commercial was the best for a bar restaurant, mixed‐use is possible but it opens
the door to even more possible future uses.
Chair Blum stated that after reviewing the items and regulations, he’s in favor of recommending denial
as the location is in a clearly defined residential area. Commissioner Segelbaum stated that while he’s
sensitive to the applicant as a business owner, the area is clearly residential and not an appropriate
location for a commercial/retail district. Commissioner Johnson sited staff’s presentation and stated
that he feels rezoning this location is inconsistent with the surrounding area. Commissioner Baker
echoed these comments. Pockl stated that this will be spot zoning and doing so is not reasonably
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
April 27, 2020 – 7 pm
5
related to public health, safety, morals, and welfare, therefore she is in support of recommending
denial.
MOTION made by Commissioner Segelbaum to recommend denial to both items:
1. Amendment to Future Land Use Map ‐ To modify the guided land use from Low Density
Residential to Retail/Service
2. Amendment to Zoning Map ‐ To modify the zoning designation from Single‐Family Residential
(R‐1) to Commercial
Commissioner Baker made a second on the motion
Staff called a roll call vote for each motion and the both passed unanimously.
6. Narrow Lots – Discussion
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, reviewed the narrow lot discussion thus far and informed the
Commissioners on the City’s strategic plan moving forward. Considering the possibility of the formal
public hearing being via Webex, the Communications team will be creating online resources for
residents to gather information, pose questions to staff, and make public comment. This added
resource will help alleviate public comment congestion on the call in line when the meeting takes place.
Zimmerman started his presentation by giving a review of past meetings, recommendations, and the
nine proposed changes made at the March 9th meeting.
“Menu” of Proposed Changes
1. Minimum side yard setback of 5 feet
2. Allow one‐car garages for lots 50 feet in width or less; limit garage width to 65% of façade
3. Set vertical:horizontal slope of “tent” portion of building envelope to 2:1
4. Lower wall height at side setback line to 13 feet
5. Allow second story dormers to extend outside building envelope
6. Prohibit side wall articulation from extending into side yard setback; no principal structures
within 5 feet of property line
7. Reduce secondary front yard setback to 15 feet for lots 65 feet in width or less; maintain 22
feet of building envelope width
8. Reduce lot coverage allowance to 30% for lots under 6,000 square feet
9. Impervious Surfaces – No Changes
Commissioners and staff had a discussion on each item listed. After each item held its conversation,
the Chair confirmed consensus on each one until the list concluded. Zimmerman reiterated that a
webpage with this information will soon be up for public review and comment.
Televised portion of the meeting concluded at 9:32 pm
REGULARMEETINGMINUTES
ThismeetingwasheldviaWebexinaccordancewiththelocalemergencydeclarationmadeby
theCityunderMinn.Stat.§12.37.Inaccordancewiththatdeclaration,beginningonMarch16,
2020,allPlanningCommissionmeetingsheldduringtheemergencywereconducted
electronically.TheCityusedWebextoconductthismeetingandmembersofthepublicwere
abletomonitorthemeetingsbywatchingitonComcastcablechannel16,bystreamingiton
CCXmedia.org,orbydialingintothepubliccallͲinline.Thepublicwasabletoparticipateinthis
meetingduringpubliccommentsections,bydialingthepubliccallͲinline.
1. CalltoOrder
Themeetingwascalledtoorderat7:05byChairBlum.
RollCall
Commissionerspresent:RichBaker,RonBlum,AdamBrookins,AndyJohnson,LaurenPockl,Ryan
Sadeghi,ChuckSegelbaum,
Commissionersabsent:AriProhofsky
Staffpresent: JasonZimmerman–PlanningManager
CouncilLiaisonpresent:GillianRosenquist
2. ApprovalofAgenda
ChairBlum,askedforamotiontoapprovetheagenda.
MOTIONmadebyCommissionerBrookins,secondedbyCommissionerSegelbaumtoapprovethe
agendaofMay11,2020,assubmitted.Staffcalledarollcallvoteandthemotioncarriedunanimously.
3. ApprovalofMinutes
ChairBlummadeacorrectiontotheminutesfromtheApril27,2020meetingandassumingthose
correctionsweremade,askedforamotiontoapprovetheminutesfromApril27,2020.
MOTIONmadebyCommissionerBrookins,secondedbyCommissionerJohnsontoapprovethe
meetingminutes,afterthecorrectionwasmade,fromApril27,2020.Staffcalledarollcallvote
andthemotioncarriedunanimously.
4. InformalPublicHearing–AmendmenttoFutureLandUseMap
Applicant:PaulJacob
Address:7345CountryClubDrive
Purpose:TomodifytheguidedlandusefromLowDensityResidentialtoRetail/Service
[ITEM4&5AREPRESENTEDTOGETHER]
May11,2020–7pm
CityofGoldenValley PlanningCommissionRegularMeeting
April27,2020–7pm
2
5. InformalPublicHearing–AmendmenttoZoningMap
Applicant:PaulJacob
Address:7345CountryClubDrive
Purpose:TomodifythezoningdesignationfromSingleͲFamilyResidential(RͲ1)
toCommercial
JasonZimmerman,PlanningManager,startedbyexplainingtheproposalbytheapplicanttoamend
theFutureLandUseMapwhichwouldbeamodificationofthe2040ComprehensivePlan.This
amendmentchangesthelandͲusedesignationfromLowDensityResidentialtoRetail/Service.The
applicant’ssecondproposalwastoamendtheZoningMapinordertorezoneSchuller’s.This
amendmentwouldchangethezoningfromSingleͲFamilyResidentialtoCommercial.Theelementsof
theproposalhaveanendgoalofcreatinganoutdoorpatioforcustomers.Addingthepatioqualifies
asanexpansionandinordertodoso,zoningandlandusedesignationsmustbechangedasthe
currentnonͲconformingstatuteallowsusetocontinuebutnotexpansion.
Bywayofbackground,ZimmermanexplainedSchuller’sisabar/restaurant,operatingatitscurrent
locationfordecadesandisconsiderednonͲconforming.Theguidedlandusehasbeendesignatedas
aSingleͲFamilyorLowDensityResidentialsinceatleast1977.Azoningmapfromthefirstpartof
1956showsthepropertyzonedascommercial,butlaterthatyearitwasrezonedtoaSingleͲFamily
Residential(RͲ1).
ZimmermanremindedtheCommissionersthatSchuller’smadeasimilarrequestin2012,the
PlanningCommissionrecommendeddenialandCityCounciltabledtheitemanddidnotvote.In2013
theCityCouncildiscussedthechangeanddidnotsupportit.In2014theCouncilsupportedmoving
forwardbuttherewasnotanapplicationsubmitted.
Movingontothestepsintheprocess,Zimmermanstatedthatifthelandusechangewasapproved
bytheCity,itmustfollowthesenextsteps:
1. BeapprovedbytheMetropolitanCouncilasaComprehensivePlanamendment.
2. OnceMet.Councilgrantsapproval,thezoningchangemayoccur.
3. ThenaCUPisneededwhichmaythensetadditionalregulationsonsetbacks,hours,
noise,etc
4. Varianceswouldbeneededforexistingsetbacksaswellasforthenewpatio.
Zimmermaninformedthegroupontheneighbornotificationprocessforthisproposalandtypically
thatincludesaneighborhoodmeeting.CurrentCovidͲ19restrictionsdiscouragedthisanda
neighborhoodmailingwassentinsteadwithanextendedcommentperiod.Planningstaffreceived
threeemailsandtwophonecalls.
Zimmermanexpandedonthezoningandlandusedefinitionsaswellastheideaof“spotͲzoning”.
RegardingLandUsechanges,therearen’tspecificstandardsoutlinedintheCityCodebuttheCity
CityofGoldenValley PlanningCommissionRegularMeeting
April27,2020–7pm
3
AttorneyurgesthePlanningCommissiontoconsiderlandͲusedescriptionsthatarecontainedinthe
comprehensiveplan.Whenlookingatthezoningchanges,theCityAttorneyurgestheCommissioners
toconsiderthepurposeoftheZoningChaptertoregulatelanduse…forthepurposeofpromotingthe
health,safety,order,convenience,andgeneralwelfareofallcitizensoftheCity.
Staffhastwoprimaryconcernsregardingthisproposal:
1. TheconstructionofanoutdoorpatioinaprimarilysingleͲfamilyneighborhoodincreasesthe
likelihoodofcomplaintsrelatedtonoise,lights,traffic,etc.
2. PotentialchangeswouldnotbelimitedtoSchuller’s,butwouldincludeanyotherfuture
PermittedorConditionalUseintheCommercialZoningDistrict
Asidefromthat,changingthelandusedoesnotappeartobeconsistentwiththefollowingComp.Plan
goalsandobjectives:
x MinimizingConflictsandImpactsofChange(LandUseChapter,Goal2)
x ProtectingExistingResidentialNeighborhoods(Objective1)
x SupportingNonͲresidentialGrowthOpportunitieswhileRespectingAdjacentProperties
(Objective2)
BeingthattherequesttochangethelandusedesignationofthepropertyfromLowDensityResidential
toRetail/Servicewouldbeinconsistentwiththegoalsandobjectivesofthe2040ComprehensivePlan,
staffrecommendsdenial.
BeingthattherequesttorezonethepropertyfromSingleͲFamilyResidential(RͲ1)toCommercial
wouldlikelyintroducesignificantimpactstosurroundingproperties,staffrecommendsdenial.
CommissionerBakeraskedstaffhowoftenLandUseandZoningChangeswereapprovedandwhat
theconditionswere.Zimmermanrespondedthattherehavebeenaboutsixorsoapprovedanditwas
generallytoaccommodateausefortheareathatwasn’tconsideredbefore.Thosethatweredenied,
weregenerallybecauseanapplicantwantedtocreatesomethingnewandchangeausealltogether.
CommissionerJohnsonaskedwhatthemaximumheightisforastructureintherezoningproposal.
Zimmermanrespondedthatit’sabout2Ͳ3stories,notmuchtallerthanthesingleͲfamilyzoningallows.
PaulJacob,Applicant,isthesonofthepreviousownerof30years.JacobstatedthatSchuller’sloses
about30%oftheirbusinessinthesummeranditseemstobeduetolackofoutsidepatioseating.
Recentlyrenovationshavetakenplacetohelpupgradethebuildingandtheownerswouldliketo
continuebusinessatthecurrentlocation.Jacobsaidthey’rewillingtomakeaccommodationsto
reducenoiseinordertoobtainapatio.Giventhecurrentsocialdistancingrequirements,theowners
feelthatoncecustomersareallowedtogotorestaurantsagain,folkswillfeelthemostcomfortable
withoutdoorseating.Beingthattheycan’tofferthatatall,theownersareconcernedforthefuture
ofSchuller’s.
CommissionerSegelbaumaskedtheapplicantsiftheyhadcommentsregardingstaffconcernoverreͲ
zoningandopeningthedoorforanotherrestauranttoopeninthefuture.Theapplicantsresponded
CityofGoldenValley PlanningCommissionRegularMeeting
April27,2020–7pm
4
thattheirgoalwasnottorezonebutitwaspartoftheprocesstheyneededtofollowinordertoexpand
andbuildapatio.TheyalsorestatedtheirdesiretokeepSchuller’s.
ChairBlumopenedtheinformalpublichearingat7:32pm.
Caller1:PeterPluvak,510KelleyDrive
WouldliketheCommissiontorecommenddenialoftheproposalandisconcernedaboutthe
increasedtraffictotherestaurantandthedangerthatwillleadtoresidents.
Caller2:JohnEbber7421GlenwoodAve
Statedthattheneighborhoodislowdensityresidentialandisinthe2040Comprehensive
Planassuch.Callerisconcernedthisisspotzoningandisinconsistentwiththelanduseand
zoningmaps.Economicconsiderationsareenoughtoconstitutearezoning,ashesaidwas
statedbytheBZA.ResidentencouragedtheCommissiontorecommenddenialtotheCity
Council.
Caller3:BenHarkins7028SchullerCircle
Callerdoesn’tfeeltheplanservestheneighborhoodandappearstohavenegativeimpact.
Healsostatedthathedoesn’tunderstandhowablockedofforshelteredpatiowillbe
desirabletopatrons.Callerisalsoconcernedwiththeincreasedtraffic,noiseandisvery
concernedaboutthebusinessbeingsoldandanother,largerestablishmenttakesroot.
ChairBlumclosedthepublichearingat7:42pm.
ChairBlumaskedstaffabouttheapplicantsoffertocreateconditionstiedtotheirpatioproposal.
Zimmermanrespondedthatconditionscan’tbetiedtoalanduseorarezoningrequestbutratherto
aCUPoncetheformerisapproved.
CommissionerPocklaskedtheapplicantsiftherehavebeenchangessincethe2012denialthat
promotestherequestasecondtime.Theapplicantrespondedthatit’spartoftheirimprovement
process.Bydoingotherworkandinvestingintothebuilding,theywerehopingtoshowtheCitythat
they’recommittedtostayinginthebuildingandtokeepSchuller’srunning.Pocklaskediftherewere
moreupgradesplanned.Applicantrespondedthattheyalreadymadeafewupgrades:newceiling,
newbooths,newwindows,madetheentrancehandicapaccessible.Pocklaskedifthey’veexperienced
peopleparkingoutsideoftheparkinglotwhenbusy.Theapplicantrespondedthatithashappened
butit’sreallyrareandthefewaddedseatsthatthepatiowillprovide,wouldn’tmakeanoticeable
trafficimpact.CommissionerBrookinsaskediftherewasanotherzoningtypethatwouldbeabetter
fit.ZimmermanstatedCommercialwasthebestforabarrestaurant,mixedͲuseispossiblebutitopens
thedoortoevenmorepossiblefutureuses.
ChairBlumstatedthatafterreviewingtheitemsandregulations,he’sinfavorofrecommendingdenial
asthelocationisinaclearlydefinedresidentialarea.CommissionerSegelbaumstatedthatwhilehe’s
sensitivetotheapplicantasabusinessowner,theareaisclearlyresidentialandnotanappropriate
locationforacommercial/retaildistrict.CommissionerJohnsonsitedstaff’spresentationandstated
thathefeelsrezoningthislocationisinconsistentwiththesurroundingarea.CommissionerBaker
echoedthesecomments.Pocklstatedthatthiswillbespotzoninganddoingsoisnotreasonably
CityofGoldenValley PlanningCommissionRegularMeeting
April27,2020–7pm
5
relatedtopublichealth,safety,morals,andwelfare,thereforesheisinsupportofrecommending
denial.
MOTIONmadebyCommissionerSegelbaumtorecommenddenialtobothitems:
1. AmendmenttoFutureLandUseMapͲTomodifytheguidedlandusefromLowDensity
ResidentialtoRetail/Service
2. AmendmenttoZoningMapͲTomodifythezoningdesignationfromSingleͲFamilyResidential
(RͲ1)toCommercial
CommissionerBakermadeasecondonthemotion
Staffcalledarollcallvoteforeachmotionandthebothpassedunanimously.
6. NarrowLots–Discussion
JasonZimmerman,PlanningManager,reviewedthenarrowlotdiscussionthusfarandinformedthe
CommissionersontheCity’sstrategicplanmovingforward.Consideringthepossibilityoftheformal
publichearingbeingviaWebex,theCommunicationsteamwillbecreatingonlineresourcesfor
residentstogatherinformation,posequestionstostaff,andmakepubliccomment.Thisadded
resourcewillhelpalleviatepubliccommentcongestiononthecallinlinewhenthemeetingtakesplace.
Zimmermanstartedhispresentationbygivingareviewofpastmeetings,recommendations,andthe
nineproposedchangesmadeattheMarch9thmeeting.
“Menu”ofProposedChanges
1. Minimumsideyardsetbackof5feet
2. AllowoneͲcargaragesforlots50feetinwidthorless;limitgaragewidthto65%offaçade
3. Setvertical:horizontalslopeof“tent”portionofbuildingenvelopeto2:1
4. Lowerwallheightatsidesetbacklineto13feet
5. Allowsecondstorydormerstoextendoutsidebuildingenvelope
6. Prohibitsidewallarticulationfromextendingintosideyardsetback;noprincipalstructures
within5feetofpropertyline
7. Reducesecondaryfrontyardsetbackto15feetforlots65feetinwidthorless;maintain22
feetofbuildingenvelopewidth
8. Reducelotcoverageallowanceto30%forlotsunder6,000squarefeet
9. ImperviousSurfaces–NoChanges
Commissionersandstaffhadadiscussiononeachitemlisted.Aftereachitemhelditsconversation,
theChairconfirmedconsensusoneachoneuntilthelistconcluded.Zimmermanreiteratedthata
webpagewiththisinformationwillsoonbeupforpublicreviewandcomment.
Televisedportionofthemeetingconcludedat9:32pm
CityofGoldenValley PlanningCommissionRegularMeeting
April27,2020–7pm
6
7. CouncilLiaisonReport
CouncilMemberRosenquistupdatedtheCommissiononthebondingbillattheLegislature,which
includemoneyfortheDeColaPondsE&FprojectaswellastheDouglasDriveandHwy55intersection
improvement.ShesharedtheemergencyallocationsthatwereapprovedbytheHumanServices
CommissionandindicatedthatmanynonͲprofitsreceivedfunds.RosenquistreportedthattheRhode
IslandAvesubdivisionwasapprovedbytheCouncilandthattheCouncilalsoratifiedanumberof
EmergencyActionsthattheCityhadbeentakinginresponsetotheCOVIDͲ19pandemic.
8. ReportsonMeetingsoftheHousingandRedevelopmentAuthority,CityCouncil,BoardofZoning
Appeals,andothermeetings
PlanningManagerZimmermanstatedthataMayBoardofZoningAppealsmeetingwouldbeheld.He
saidhewouldinvestigatewhichPlanningCommissionerwasscheduledtoattendthemeeting.
9. OtherBusiness
PlanningManagerZimmermanopennominationsforChair,ViceChair,andSecretaryfor2020.
CommissionerJohnsonnominatedChairBlumforasecondterm.CommissionerBakersecondedand
themotionwasapprovedunanimously.CommissionerSegelbaumnominatedCommissionerBrookins
forViceChair.CommissionerBrookinsdeclinedthenomination.SegelbaumnominatedCommission
PocklforViceChair.ChairBlumsecondedandthemotionwasapprovedunanimously.Brookins
nominatedhimselfforasecondtermasSecretary.Bakersecondedandthemotionwasapproved
unanimously.
10. Adjournment
MOTIONmadebyCommissionerSegelbaum,secondedbyCommissionerSadeghiandthemotion
carriedunanimouslytoadjournthemeetingat9:55PM.
________________________________
AdamBrookins,Secretary
________________________________
AmieKolesar,PlanningAssistant