pc-minutes-jun-28-21
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.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 by Chair Pockl.
Roll Call
Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Chuck
Segelbaum
Commissioners absent: Noah Orloff, Ryan Sadeghi
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner
Council Liaison present: Gillian Rosenquist
2. Approval of Agenda
Chair Pockl asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
Commissioner Johnson asked when the Comp Plan alignment would conclude and reviewed a few
areas in particular that were discussed. He asked when that will be completed. Staff responded there
are updates and can discuss at the end of the meeting.
MOTION made by Commissioner Baker, seconded by Commissioner Blum, to approve the agenda of
June 28, 2021. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chair Pockl asked for a motion to approve the minutes from June 14, 2021.
MOTION made by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Baker, to approve minutes.
Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
4. Public Hearing – Major Amendment to PUD 90
Applicant: ISD #270 ‐ Hopkins School District
Address: 5430 and 5300 Glenwood Ave, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Chair Pockl stated the hearing was postponed to today’s meeting but the applicant has
requested an extension to the July 12th meeting and it appears staff supports this request.
July 28, 2021 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 28, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
2
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, informed Commissioners that as staff reviewed plans
that the applicant asked for more time to provide further details. Following state statute, staff
is comfortable recommending tabling the hearing to July 12.
MOTION made by Commissioner Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Blum, to table the item to
the July 12th, 2021 meeting, as requested by the applicant. Staff called a roll call vote and the
motion carried unanimously.
5. Discussion – Temporary Outdoor Service Uses
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, reminded Commissioners that interim uses were discussed
at both the March 8th and May 24th meetings. He reviewed the catalyst for this topic and reviewed
a little history.
Interim Use
Covered in State statute
“Temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or
until zoning regulations no longer permit it”
Must conform to the zoning regulations
Conditions of use may be attached
Four main questions were raised by commissioners at a previous meeting, staff reviewed each and
provided a response.
Are Outdoor Service Areas an option for businesses currently?
Existing outdoor seating all on private property and does not impact parking. Staff review and
approval involves checking ADA compliance, parking counts, SAC charges, and stormwater impacts.
Liquor licensing might also need to be adjusted.
No outdoor retail sales to staff’s knowledge – would likely require a similar type of review.
Would a public hearing be required?
Almost all other cities researched require public hearings before approving an interim use. The
process is typically similar to a conditional use permit review, but limits the use to a fixed amount
of time. Other temporary uses in Golden Valley are allowed through administrative approval
(mobile food vending, seasonal farm produce sales, etc.).
What sorts of potential impacts should be mitigated?
Specific impacts raised by proposals would be reviewed and mitigated on a case by case basis,
similar to a conditional use permit. Typical areas of evaluation might include parking, hours of
operation, lighting, noise, visual screening, and more.
Conditions of approval for the Outdoor Service Area could be part of the approval and attached to
the permit.
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 28, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
3
What zoning district might be involved?
It seems logical to incorporate all Residential zoning districts, as well as the Commercial and Mixed‐
Use zoning districts. Restaurants and other retails businesses would then be able to take advantage
of the option.
Staff Conclusion
Given the existing ability for most businesses to install outdoor seating or to conduct outdoor sales,
staff believes it is unlikely the temporary Outdoor Service Area would be pursued outside of
Schuller’s.
This solution would address their long‐standing efforts to install a patio for outdoor seating, but the
zoning text change would be considered for the benefit of one location only. Generally, this does
not constitute good planning practice.
Commissioner Baker asked for clarification on if City Council directly requested Planning
Commission look into this. Zimmerman clarified that staff looked into other cities and their interim
use process but there wasn’t direct input from Council or Schuller’s. Commissioner Segelbaum
asked about the realities of other businesses or even homeowners wanting to set up a sale, utilizing
this use. Zimmerman added that an outdoor service area would not include a home occupation;
this would only be allowed for a retail or restaurant in R‐1 or R‐2. Commissioner Johnson asked
about a waiver from not being allowed to expand at Schuller’s. Zimmerman responded that
Schuller’s is interested in a patio space and the current building doesn’t meet current zoning. If
there were an expansion considered, the owners would need 3‐4 variances approved by BZA
before going that route. Expanding the use goes back to state statute, a variance can’t be granted
for a specific use but a permitted temporary use in a specific district would be allowed.
Staff expanded on interim use intent, term length, and renewal process. The discussion moved on
to discuss a defined space and how that applies to Schuller’s.
The conversation continued on to logistics of renewals and potential conditions.
Commissioner Blum thanked staff for their transparency while working through this process. Blum
added that small cities are more likely to create functional policy that will only impact one or two
small businesses‐merely by the function of size. However, is this policy something the City wants to
see repeated with another potential non‐conforming use in the future. Guiding his own thoughts,
Blum finds it’s reasonable to air on the side of people instead of the business, when there’s an
issue of compatibility with folks living in the area. Commissioner Baker stated that he will oppose it
as it feels like this is creating a loophole for one business. Commissioner Brookins echoed
Commissioner Baker’s statements. Chair Pockl stated that if this interim use was approved, there
would continue to be hurdles to reach approval. She added that this doesn’t seem to be consistent
with the intent of state statute and the zoning code. Commissioner Segelbaum echoed these
statements and added he recalls the neighbors didn’t want to change the land use to Commercial.
Creating this use doesn’t seem consistent with what other municipalities have done.
Commissioner Johnson asked about neighborhood support and that lead to a discussion with staff
about direct neighbors versus close neighbors that would use the space. Johnson followed up with
examples of other situations where it felt the Planning Commission was put in a position to
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 28, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
4
mediate. He added that he wants businesses to be successful but feels that the group should focus
on the current regulations, and stated his opposition.
Zimmerman stated that he’ll bring the discussion to City Council and let the Planning Commission
know what the direction and next steps are.
6.Discussion – Accessory Dwelling Units
Item was tabled to next meeting so Val Quarels, Planning Intern, could be in attendance.
Televised portion of the meeting concluded at 8:06 pm
7.Council Liaison Report
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, reported for Council Member Rosenquist and updated the
Commissioners on new legislation that fixed the language around the funding for the Highway
55/Douglas Drive underpass project. Commissioner Johnson gave an update on a tour taken by the
members of the Facility Study Task Force of new facilities in Fridley.
8.Other Business
The Commissioners discussed the outstanding rezoning proposal for the Highway 55/Winnetka
Ave/Harold Ave corner and debated if the proposal should wait for a future traffic study and BRT study
to be concluded before reevaluating the change.
9.Adjournment
MOTION by Commissioner Blum to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Brookins, and approved
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:22 pm.
________________________________
Andy Johnson, Secretary
________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant