pc-agenda-feb-13-23
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Planning Commission meetings are being conducted in a hybrid format with in -person and remote
options for attending, participating, and commenting. The public can make statements in this meeting
during the planned public comment sections. Some members of the Commission may attend virtually.
Members of the public may attend virtually by following instructions below.
Remote Attendance/Comment Options: Members of the public may attend this meeting by watching
on cable channel 16, streaming on CCXmedia.org, streaming via Webex, or by calling 1-415-655-0001
and entering access code 2469 139 1513.
1. Call to Order & Land Acknowledgement
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
January 9, 2023, Regular Meeting
4. Informal Public Hearing – Zoning Map Amendments for Properties at Harold Ave / Winnetka Ave N /
Highway 55
– End of Televised Portion of Meeting –
To listen to this portion, please call 1-415-655-0001 and enter meeting access code 2469 139 1513
5. Discussion – TPT Video: Jim Crow of the North
6. Council Liaison Report
7. Other Business
a. Reports on Board of Zoning Appeals and Other Meetings
8. Adjournment
February 13, 2023 – 6:30 pm
Council Chambers
Hybrid Meeting
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was conducted in a hybrid format with in‐person and remote options for attending,
participating, and commenting. 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 6:30 pm by Chair Pockl.
Roll Call
Commissioners present: A. Brookins, S. Ginis, L. Pockl, M. Ruby, C. Segelbaum
Commissioners absent: E. Brenna
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner
Council Liaison: Denise La Mere‐Anderson
2. Land Acknowledgement
3. Approval of Agenda
MOTION made by Commissioner Segelbaum, seconded by Commissioner Ginis, to approve the
agenda of January 9, 2023.
Motion carried.
4. Approval of Minutes
MOTION made by Commissioner Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Ginis, to approve the meeting
minutes of December 12, 2022.
Motion carried
5. Discussion – Off‐Street Parking Regulations
Myles Campbell, Planner, started with a summary of the discussion points thus far: parking setbacks,
electric vehicle requirements, off street parking minimums, and land use description consistency. He
noted this discussion will revolve around commercial land uses.
Campbell started by reviewing the items covered in the presentation, comparisons to other
communities as well as common takeaways and overlap.
Golden Valley has non‐specified uses in the code, staff suggests moving this statement into the
parking minimums table to increase visibility, as well as add more specific reference material. Staff
made a few recommendations for parking specifics that are called out and suggested categorizing
them as non‐specified moving forward.
January 9, 2023 – 6:30 pm
Council Chambers
Hybrid
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
January 9, 2023 – 6:30 pm
2
Staff noted the City of Plymouth has maximum parking capacities listed in their City Code. Campbell
quoted the code and noted that staff would like to add a section on maximum parking for practical
limits. Staff recommends considering a similar cap on parking and expanding that for more general
applications.
Campbell noted a number of categories to be consolidated for off‐street parking regulations:
B&B/lodging/hotels/motels
Health clubs and skating rinks
Indoor Entertainment and Amusement
Warehousing and Self‐Storage
Campbell discussed an initial review on reducing parking requirements for service stations, bakeries,
Class II Restaurants, gyms, office parking, and to tier the requirement for shopping centers.
Planning staff would like to research trends on some parking categories related to drive‐thru
restaurants and parking maximums. Staff would like to examine items in the summary use table that
are not reflected in the parking tables and to discuss EVs with the Environmental Resources staff.
Commissioner Ruby mentioned restaurants and curb side pickup, he asked if a few parking spots
allotted for that purpose take away or add to the maximum capacities. Staff responded the code
seems to imply the parking spots are for the business and they can designate how spots are used.
Ruby followed by saying parking caps are good as it decreases impervious service but this has the
potential to increase on‐street parking. He followed by asking if the City then incurs the cost of
maintaining on‐street parking. Staff discussed this with the Assistant City Engineer and while a hard
number is difficult to produce, he said the impact to the life of the street would be about the same as
if the road was only exposed to moving cars.
Commissioner Segelbaum asked if it seemed correct that most businesses meet minimum parking
requirements and not much beyond that. Staff responded that what seems more common, is existing
businesses seek expansions/improvements and to do so would require a CUP or variance as they’re
below the minimum parking. New developments, specifically housing, minimum parking is met but
then the developer needs to determine if they’ll utilize surface parking (fewer costs passed on to the
tenant/more impervious surface) or a structured parking system (higher cost to tenants/less
impervious area/ideal for seasonal changes). Even though the City wants to regulate parking, private
developers are doing the same. Segelbaum added the minimum was in place so businesses aren’t
overwhelmed and if they weren’t present, other lots will be inundated with traffic for other areas.
Commissioner Brookins asked if there was a history of parking complaints. Staff responded the
complaints are often related to multi‐family housing units. Primarily due to tenants being charged
additional fees for internal parking spaces, therefore folks are looking for other areas to park and
may end up parking on the street or elsewhere.
The discussion continued to discuss businesses with lots, current code requirements, CUPs, fast food
restaurants, and temporary outdoor seating that utilizes parking lot sections. The group then
discussed other cities and the transition to shared parking with malls or other businesses and what
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
January 9, 2023 – 6:30 pm
3
that would look like at the GV Shopping Center if there were redevelopment. If a unit is
multipurpose, code requires each unit have parking meet the individual uses in the code.
The discussion moved on to redevelopment packages, adding stormwater considerations, EV
charging centers, permeable pavers, how public transportation goals and access directly impact
environmental goals, structured parking for commercial uses, and what class of restaurants require
what level of parking.
The discussion wrapped up with Commissioners mentioning language edits for clarification.
6. Council Liaison Report
Council Member LaMere‐Anderson was not present.
7. Elect New Planning Commission Secretary
Commissioner Sophia Ginis was elected and accepted the position.
8. Other Business
9. Adjournment
MOTION by Commissioner Segelbaum to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Brookins and
approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:09pm.
________________________________
________________________________ Secretary
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant
1
Date: February 13, 2023
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Subject: Informal Public Hearing – Rezone Properties at Harold Ave / Winnetka Ave N /
Highway 55 to Achieve Conformance with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Summary
Staff is revisiting the proposed rezoning for ten properties in order to bring them into
conformance with the Future Land Use Map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. These were first
considered by the Planning Commission in 2020.
Background
State statute requires that all zoning designations be updated to be consistent with the land uses
identified in the Comprehensive Plan. At its regular meeting on July 13, 2020, the Planning
Commission discussed the proposed rezoning of this area and eventually tabled the item to allow
for additional analysis, including the pending changes associated with a revised R-3 zoning
district. On September 14, 2020, following the adoption of the R-3 changes, the zoning map
amendment was once again considered by the Planning Commission and a recommendation of
denial was forwarded to the City Council. The Council held a public hearing and then voted to
send the zoning map amendment back to the Planning Commission for another look once
additional pieces of information were available, including results of a new traffic study and any
information from a pending Highway 55 BRT analysis. The rezoning is now being revisited.
Analysis
The ten properties under consideration demonstrate a fulfillment of a previous land use change
by the City that was not followed by a zoning change. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan put forward
this land use designation again as part of the Future Land Use Map.
No development proposals are pending with the City at this location.
2
Address Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
This group of residential properties in the southeast corner of Winnetka Ave and Hwy 55 was
guided for higher density use in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (adopted in 2010), but ultimately
was not rezoned. As part of the land use analysis leading up to the adoption of the 2040 Comp
Plan, the Planning Commission felt strongly that guiding these properties for medium density
use would provide opportunities for the development of housing that would complement the
efforts to strengthen the city’s downtown.
7831 Olson Memorial Highway R-1 R-3
440 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
424 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
400 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
7840 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7830 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7732 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7724 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7710 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
411 Rhode Island Ave N R-1 R-3
3
This corner (bounded by Highway 55, Winnetka Ave N, and Harold Ave) was the subject of a
rezoning proposal in 2011 from R-1 to R-3. This would have aligned the zoning map with the land
use designation included in the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. At a Planning Comm ission
meeting in August of 2008, residents expressed concerns regarding building height, traffic
congestion at the Winnetka/Hwy 55 intersection, cut through and speeding traffic on Harold Ave,
and pedestrian safety.
In anticipation of the rezoning, SEH conducted a traffic study based on the proposed land uses. It
found that a senior development, as opposed to a typical multifamily project, would generate
fewer trips in the AM and PM peak hours, even with a greater number of units. Potential
improvements to Winnetka Ave south of Hwy 55 (additional turn lanes to clear the intersection
more quickly) were recommended as a way to mitigate congestion. These changes were
implemented in 2015, even without any new development occurring in the area.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission recorded a split vote (3-3)
regarding the rezoning. The City Council, however, denied the rezoning with the findings that
traffic would not be supported by local streets and that the potentia l development would not be
in keeping with the character of the community. Subsequently, the land use map in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan was amended and the area once more guided for Low Density Residential
development.
In July of 2018, the Planning Commission examined the area while preparing the draft Future
Land Use map for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. At that time, staff recommended guiding the
properties for Medium Density Residential, but the Commissioners debated guiding it for an even
greater intensity (High Density Residential) due to the location adjacent to the downtown and the
likely future development of mass transit on Hwy 55. The approved Future Land Use Map
ultimately assigned the area a Medium Density Residential designation.
At the Planning Commission meeting in September of 2020 to consider the necessary rezoning,
eight residents called in to provide testimony and one sent an email to staff. The majority of
those commenting opposed the rezoning and expressed concerns over the potential fo r
increased traffic, cut through traffic on local streets, the height of a new building, and pedestrian
safety. Based on these comments, the Planning Commission found that while increased density
through redevelopment was favorable, concerns about traffic congestion and infrastructure
should be addressed first in order to preemptively study and identify a potential solution. The
Commissioners then voted to recommend denial of the rezoning (5-1).
Staff subsequently received three additional emails – one in support of the rezoning and two
others opposed. The City Council met to discuss the rezoning on October 7, 2020, and three
residents spoke in opposition, citing concerns similar to those expressed above. Based on
outstanding questions regarding traffic congestion and pedestrian safety, the Council was
reluctant to move forward and approve the zoning map amendments. Instead, they tabled the
item and asked staff to continue to investigate the concerns and return to the Planning
Commission when more information became available.
4
Staff continues to recommend that the properties be rezoned to R -3 in order to conform to the
guided land use approved by the City and the Met Council. The proximity to the downtown and
Brookview would encourage greater bicycle and pedestrian activity, especially if a new bridge
over Hwy 55 and Winnetka Ave were to be constructed in the future. Recent changes to the R-3
zoning district encourage sustainable amenities such as energy efficient buildings, renewable
energy sources, support for electric vehicles, and innovative above-ground stormwater
management facilities, in exchange for a density bonus.
A traffic study of the downtown was conducted in 2022 to evaluate potential future congestion
and necessary infrastructure improvements associated with the build out anticipated in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. Special attention was paid to the southeast quadrant of the Winnetka Ave
and Highway 55 intersection in order to address concerns raised by the planned rezoning. Any
significant redevelopment of this area would likely result in the removal of direct access to
Winnetka Ave and the use of a shared access point onto Harold Ave to the south.
The study evaluated a range of housing types (townhomes, apartments, senior townhomes,
senior apartments) and calculated the resulting trip generations using standard models from the
ITE Trip Generation Manual. The results showed that the greatest number of trips would be
generated by townhome development (900) while the fewest would be generated by apa rtment
development (568). The trips associated with the worst case (townhome) development were
distributed across the Harold/Winnetka and Winnetka/Hwy 55 intersections to evaluate any
impacts on congestion. The findings show that any potential impacts were negligible. This
resulted in about one additional trip in each direction (northbound Winnetka and westbound
Harold) every two minutes during peak hours which had no impact on Level of Service (LOS) and
only one additional second of increase of delay per vehicle at the Harold/Winnetka intersection.
Full details of this analysis are attached.
The City has also upgraded pedestrian safety at the Winnetka /Harold intersection by installing
enhanced pedestrian crossings. A Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) signal was installed
last fall and will be put into service early in 2023. The signal system also includes an ADA
compliant pedestrian median that provides refuge to pedestrians crossing Winnetka.
As of early 2023, the timing of the anticipated BRT study for Hwy 55 remains unclear.
MetroTransit is attempting to coordinate with MnDOT, but is appears the feasibility study
remains months away, if not longer. Rather than continue to delay the consideration of the
rezoning, staff is moving ahead while providing information about the densities typical sought
after by MetroTransit in the areas adjacent to BRT stations.
The table below is from the Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Policy Plan and shows the
minimum and target densities for various Community Designations (Golden Valley has an Urban
designation):
5
Density for Transit
Corridors Relative
to Community
Designation
Urban Center Urban Suburban Suburban Edge of
Emerging
Suburban Edge
Density
expectations for
highway BRT
transitway station
area (area within
10-minute walk or
½ mile)
Minimum: 25
units per acre
Target: 40-75+
units per acre
Minimum: 12
units per acre
Target: 25-50+
units per acre
Minimum: 10
units per acre
Target: 20-40+
units per acre
Minimum: 8 units
per acre
Target: 20-40+
units per acre
Density
expectations for
arterial BRT
transitway station
area (area within
5-minute walk or
¼ mile)
Minimum: 15
units per acre
Target: 20-60+
units per acre
Minimum: 15
units per acre
Target: 20-60+
units per acre
Minimum: 15
units per acre
Target: 20-60+
units per acre
Minimum: 15
units per acre
Target: 20-60+
units per acre
Staff analysis of the existing land use designations within a ½ mile of the Winnetka/Harold/Hwy
55 intersection (attached) show that there are currently 899 units spread over 125 acres for an
average residential density of 7.22 units per acre – well below the minimum as well as the target
density numbers. If other residential-zoned properties in and around the downtown were to
redevelop at their maximum allowed densities, the units per acre figure would increase to 10.60.
Finally, the rezoning and subsequent redevelopment of the ten properties in question could
increase the average residential density to 11.81 units per acre – just under but closer to the
minimum threshold required. It should be noted that a pending consideration of an increase in
the density of two properties in the downtown would be enough to surpass the 12 units per acre
threshold, while still remaining well below the target number of 25 to 50+ units per acre.
In summary, staff sees the rezoning as an important step in supporting future BRT along Hwy 55.
While some of the questions around traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, and BRT have been
answered, the fact remains that the change in zoning would allow for an increase in allowed
building height compared to the regulations in place today. R-3 zoning allows for buildings up to
four stories, or five stories for a senior building if a Conditional Use Permit is approved. In
contrast, the Valle d’Or townhomes across Harold Avenue to the south are two and a half stories
tall. The Valley Square Corporate Center building to the northwest across Highway 55 is three
stories. The closest existing structures of this height are the professional buildings in the Valley
Creek Office Park a short distance to the west, which are four stories tall and on a hill, making the
height relative to Hwy 55 more similar to five stories. The Calvary Apartments to the east of the
Civic Campus are between 10 and 11 stories, and a proposed multifamily building along the west
edge of the downtown would be six stories. When viewed in the larger context, the potential
height of a structure in the area proposed to be rezoned would not be out of scale.
6
Zoning Requirements
The key aspects of the R-3 zoning designation being considered are listed below:
Medium Density Residential (R-3) Zoning District
Permitted Uses • Duplexes
• Townhouses
• Multifamily buildings
• Senior and physical disability housing
Conditional Uses • Retail sales, restaurants, and professional offices on a ground floor with
direct access to the street
Density Range • 12 units per acre or 17 units per acre with a CUP (up to three additional
units per acre available through density bonuses)
• Senior/physical disability housing – 20 units per acre or 25 units per acre
with a CUP (up to five additional units per acre available through density
bonuses)
Height • Four stories or 48 feet
• Five stories or 60 feet for senior/physical disability housing with a CUP
Future redevelopment under R-3 zoning could happen via wholescale change with the
construction or one or two larger buildings, or incrementally on one or two lots at a time as
ownership of existing single-family properties changes hands.
Should the City choose not to rezone these properties, an amendment to the Future Land Use
Map would then be required with the Met Council – modifying the 2040 Comprehensive Plan – in
order to maintain consistency between guided land use and zoning.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the Zoning Map to rezone the ten properties in
question from Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Medium Density Residential (R-3).
Attachments
Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of September 14, 2020 (6 pages)
List of Affected Properties (1 page)
Map of Future Land Use and Existing Zoning Designations (1 page)
Selection from Downtown Redevelopment Traffic Study dated November 11, 2022 (3 pages)
Downtown Residential Density Analysis (1 page)
List of Affected Properties
Address Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
7831 Olson Memorial Highway R-1 R-3
440 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
424 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
400 Winnetka Ave N R-1 R-3
7840 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7830 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7732 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7724 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
7710 Harold Ave R-1 R-3
411 Rhode Island Ave N R-1 R-3
Future Land Use Current Zoning
GOLDEN VALLEY DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY GOLDV 166095
Page 34
5.4 Area 5 Sensitivity Analysis
A supplemental traffic sensitivity analysis was performed for Area 5, located on the SE quadrant
of TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue, north of Harold Avenue. In addition to the 2042 full build
volumes from the downtown redevelopment analysis, extra traffic volumes were distributed to all
study intersections based on expected future trip generation in Area 5.
Area 5 is approximately 6.2 acres and currently zoned as R-1(Single Family Residential). The
area, however, is being proposed for R-3 zoning (Medium Density Residential). Based on the
City Code, Section 113-90, the following maximum land use densities1 are allowed for areas
zoned R-3:
• 20 multi-family dwelling units per acre (125 total)
• 30 senior housing units per acre (187 total)
Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Table 14 summarizes the daily and peak
hour trip generation estimates based on the 20 multi-family dwelling units of 30 senior housing
units for different residential land use types.
Table 14 – Area 5 Trip Generation Scenarios
Land Use Type
(ITE Code) Units/Acre Total
Units
Daily
Trips
AM Peak
Hour Trips
PM Peak
Hour Trips
Apartments (221) 20 125 568 46 49
Senior Apartments
(252) 30 187 606 37 47
Townhomes (215) 20 125 900 60 71
Senior Townhomes
(251) 30 187 806 45 56
1 Maximum densities include the by-right densities for each category, 5 additional units/acre for each category, and
density bonuses of 3 units/acre for general residential and 5 units/acre for senior housing pursuant to the City’s
Residential Density Bonus Policy.
Area 5
(6.2
Harold Ave
Sensitivity analysis performed for the potential
residential development in Area 5, located on
the SE quadrant of TH 55 and Winnetka Ave.
GOLDEN VALLEY DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY GOLDV 166095
Page 35
Based on the trip generation of each R-3 development scenario for Area 5, the 125 townhomes
are estimated to generate the greatest daily and peak hour traffic. Figure 12 depicts the 2042
build traffic from the downtown redevelopment areas, the Area 5 trips using the peak hour trips
generated by 125 townhomes, and the total build traffic at the TH 55 at Winnetka Ave and
Winnetka Ave at Harold Ave intersections. The distribution assumes that all residential
development access points will be on Harold Avenue and none on Winnetka Avenue. A relatively
low number of new peak hour trips are added to the two intersections, with a maximum of 27
vehicles added to Winnetka Avenue in the northbound direction and 31 vehicles added to Harold
Avenue in the westbound direction. This equates to about one additional trip in each direction
every two minutes, or 3-4 additional trips per direction during each TH 55/Winnetka Avenue
signal cycle.
Figure 12 – 2042 Area 5 Sensitivity Analysis Traffic Volumes
An operations analysis was completed using the 2042 Build + Area 5 Trips for the TH 55 at
Winnetka Avenue and Winnetka Ave at Harold Avenue intersections. The results were compared
to the 2042 Full Build operations, which are summarized in Table 15.
The new trips generated by Area 5 are expected to have minimal impact to the Harold Avenue
and TH 55 intersections on Winnetka Avenue. At the TH 55 at Winnetka Avenue intersection, the
increase in delay is less than 2 seconds per vehicle during the AM peak hour and less than 1
second per vehicle during the PM peak hour. At the Winnetka Avenue at Harold Avenue
intersection, there is no change in the delay during the AM peak hour and a less than 1 second
per vehicle increase in delay during the PM peak hour. Additionally, the AM and PM northbound
maximum queue lengths at the TH 55 at Winnetka Avenue signal increases by approximately 1-2
vehicles and are expected to clear the intersection in a single cycle.
GOLDEN VALLEY DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY GOLDV 166095
Page 36
The significant delays experienced on the side streets are comparable to the 2022 existing
conditions and are primarily attributed to the longer cycle lengths set by MnDOT along TH 55,
which prioritize vehicle throughput on the mainline. As development occurs in Area 5, it is
recommended that the accesses on Winnetka Avenue be removed, and all accesses be located
on Harold Avenue to minimize conflict and offer additional northbound storage room for queues.
Table 15 – 2042 Build Traffic Operations – Area 5 Sensitivity Analysis (SimTraffic)
Peak
Hour Intersections: Approach
2042 Full Build 2042 Full Build - Area 5
Sensitivity Analysis
Approach
(sec/LOS)
Intersection
(sec/LOS)
Approach
(sec/LOS)
Intersection
(sec/LOS) AM Peak Hour TH 55 at
Winnetka Ave
(Traffic Signal)
EB 16.6 / B
26.6 / C
16.5 / B
27.8 / C WB 12.0 / B 12.2 / B
NB 85.7 / F 94.6 / F
SB 66.6 / E 67.5 / E
Winnetka Ave at
Harold Ave
(Traffic Signal)
EB 7.0 / A
2.6 / A
5.7 / A
2.6 / A WB 4.7 / A 5.1 / A
NB 0.2 / A 0.2 / A
SB 3.8 / A 3.5 / A PM Peak Hour TH 55 at
Winnetka Ave
(Traffic Signal)
EB 17.2 / B
33.3 / C
16.2 / B
33.9 / C WB 18.3 / B 18.8 / B
NB 88.5 / F 92.9 / F
SB 80.6 / F 79.1 / E
Winnetka Ave at
Harold Ave
(Traffic Signal)
EB 8.2 / A
1.1 / A
10.6 / B
1.4 / A WB 5.1 / A 5.1 / A
NB 0.2 / A 0.3 / A
SB 3.1 / A 3.7 / A
5.5 Golden Valley Road at Wisconsin Avenue Intersection Analysis
5.5.1 Single Lane Roundabout
Although the intersection of Golden Valley Road at Wisconsin Avenue does not indicate existing
safety concerns or future operational issues with the redevelopment traffic demand, the City
requested a review of the operations of a roundabout at the intersection. The intersection
currently operates as an all-way stop controlled intersection. The roundabout-controlled
intersection could be implemented as a traffic calming strategy for the corridor, be a gateway
feature into the City’s downtown area, or alleviate any future safety or operational concerns.
The roundabout analysis was performed using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS7), which
implements the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) calculations. The all-way stop analysis was
also performed using HCS7 for a direct comparison between the control options. Table 16
summarizes the operations for the intersection under the existing all-way stop control and the
roundabout control. The two control types show similar operations during the AM peak period,
showing LOS A for the intersection and for all approaches with minimal queueing. During the PM
Downtown Residential Density Analysis
Quarter Mile Half Mile
Total
Units
Residential
Acreage
Avg. Residential
Density
Total
Units
Residential
Acreage
Avg. Residential
Density
Existing
Residential 215 30.76 6.99 899 124.52 7.22
2040 Land
Use w/o
Harold 380 36.27 10.49 1550 146.22 10.60
2040 Land
Use - Full
Projection 558 36.27 15.37 1727 146.22 11.81
Date: February 13, 2023
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Subject: TPT Video: Jim Crow of the North
Summary
Following up on previous viewings of the TPT documentary “Jim Crow of the North” which
focuses on the use of racially restrictive covenants and real estate practices in the Twin Cities,
staff will provide time for discussion among Commissioners.