12-08-08 PC Agenda (2)
AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, December8,2008
7pm
1. Approval of Minutes
a. November 24, 2008 Reguiar Planning Commission Meeting
2. Informal Public Hearing - Property Lot Consolidation -1425 Rhode
Island Avenue North - SU15-04
a. Applicant: Peter Ralph
b. Address: 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North
c. Purpose: To allow three existing lots to be consolidated into one new lot
3. Consideration of Resolution No. 08-01 Finding that the Redevelopment
Plan for the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area Conforms to the
City's Comprehensive Plan
4. Short Recess
5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
6. Other Business
7. Adjournment
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 24, 2008
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City
Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on
Monday, November 24,2008. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, McCarty,
Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Finance Director Sue Virnig, Director
of Public Works Jeannine Clancy, Director of Planning and Develo t Mark
Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assist . tman.
Commissioner Kluchka was absent.
1. Approval of Minutes
a. November 10, 2008 Regular Planning
Eck referred to the last sentence in paragra
should be changed to the word "in".
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded
approve the November 10 minut
carried unanimously to
ove..noted correction.
2.
Presentation of Ca
City Finance Dir
t Program 2009-2013 - Sue Virnig,
Virnig reviewed th
proposed new fire
continues unf 0
apita Improvement Program. She discussed a
, the PaVement Management Program which
improvement fund to pay for park equipment.
erformance area improvements and asked if city bonds
she was not aware of city bonds being issued for the
about the City's bond rating. Virnig said the City's rating is AA 1.
Eck aske a out the recycling fund. Virnig discussed a one~time repair scheduled
for the Srookview parking lot.
Waldhauser questioned the proposed reconstruction of the sidewalks along
Winnetka Avenue near City hall. Clancy explained that the sidewalks being re-
done are in excess of 10 years old and were made with pavers that are susceptible
to salt and are deteriorating.
Waldhauser referred to proposed work on the frontage road south of 1-394 and
asked if there is any way to share those costs with St. Louis Park. Clancy stated
that the portions of the frontage road located in Golden Valley are Golden Valley's
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 10, 2008
Page 2
responsibility but that part of the funding will come from state aid money.
Waldhauser asked if there is a list available of state aid streets. Clancy said she
could provide the Planning Commission with a map showing state aid streets.
Waldhauser asked if the City keeps track of the total cost of the III program, City
versus residential. Virnig said yes and added thatCity receives matching funds
from the Metropolitan Council. Clancy explained that the City is not taking any
portion of the matching funds for the private work being done.
Keysser asked if the market value for properties is going down. Virnig said
residential values are down 1.2% and commercial values are up 1
5.
to
Grimes explained that the Capital Improvement Programs is
Comprehensive plan and that it is the Planning Commissi
decide if it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. .
MOVED by Cera, seconded by McCarty and moti.
recommend approval of the 2009-2013 Capital I
consistentwith the Comprehensive Plan.
4.
Reports on Meetings of th
City Council, Board of
edevelopment Authority,
d other Meetings
No reports were given.
McCarty asked fo
that United Pr
asked that Ci
the Applewood Pointe proposal. Grimes stated
itted their Final Plan PUD application but they
on hold at this point.
te on the status of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated
f the plan has been sent to surrounding cities and jurisdictions
added that the first public hearing should take place
bruary 2009.
Waldhauser asked about connecting the trails near Bassett Creek and
Briarwood. Grimes talked about the County's trail plan.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:40
Lester Eck, Secretary
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-81 09 (fax)
Date:
December 4, 2008
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Minor Subdivision to Consolidate Three Lots into
One Lot-1425 Rhode Island Ave. N.-Peter Ralph, Applicant
. Peter Ralph is the owner of the house and property at 1425 Rhode Island Ave. N. The property
consists of two full lots that are each 60 ft. wide and two-thirds or 40 ft. of one 60 ft. wide lot. In
total, the property owned by Mr. Ralph is 160 ft. along Rhode Island Ave. and about 142 ft.
deep. The total area of his property is 22,700 sq. ft. or .52 acres. Mr. Ralph is proposing to
create one large lot in order that the new home he is constructing is not built over any property
line.
At the present time, there is a house and detached garage built on the far west edge of the
property. Mr. Ralph is now in the process of constructing a new house on the property that
would conform with all building setback requirements once the lots are consolidated. He and
his family will remain living in the existing house during construction. After the new house is
constructed and before occupancy of the new house is permitted, the old house will have to be
demolished.
The existing garage on the property was constructed in 2002 and will remain as the garage for
the new house. When the garage was built, the zoning code required a variance because it
was not built behind the house. At the time this garage was built, all detached garages had to
be built behind the main dwelling. (In this case, the only location for a detached garage would
have been either in front of or next to the existing house because the existing house is located
about 6 ft. from the west or rear property line.) After the lot consolidation and removal of the
existing house, the existing garage meets all setback requirements for a detached garage.
These setback requirements are 5 ft. from the side or rear property lines.
At this time, Mr. Ralph is proposing to consolidate this property only into one lot. However, he
is placing the home on the property in a manner that another lot could be created north of the
home that is being constructed. The future second lot would meet or exceed the minimum size
requirement for a lot. (Lots must be at least 80 ft. wide at the front setback line and be at least
10,000 sq. ft. in area.) If a future lot is platted, the existing garage would go with the new lot.
The house under construction has a one car garage that can be expanded to a two car garage
1
in the future. (The existing garage on the property is about 800 sq. ft. in area. No one dwelling
may have more than a 1000 sq. ft. total of accessory structure space. Therefore, the attached
garage in the new house can be no larger than about 200 sq. ft. The plans for the new house
indicate that the garage area in the new house can be expanded to a two stall garage in the
future.)
City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, has reviewed this consolidation request and has written a memo
to me dated November 25, 2008 (attached). In this memo he outlines the concerns of the
Public Works Department. Because the right-of-way for Rhode Island Ave. N. is only 40 ft. in
width in this neighborhood, the City will be requiring a 10ft. wide drainage, utility and roadway
easement. This easement could be used for future roadway improvements or sidewalks. In
addition, a second 10ft. drainage and utility easement will be taken directly to the west of the
roadway easement. Therefore, the City will have 20 ft. of easement along Rhode Island Ave. In
addition, a 6 ft. wide drainage and utility easement will have to be provided along the side
property lines and a 5 ft. drainage and utility easement along the rear or west property line.
(The rear or west easement would normally be 6 ft. but due to the location of the garage to
within 5 ft. of the property line, the City will accept a 5 ft. utility easement.) The applicant has
agreed to dedicate all easements recommended by the City Engineer. The new house is
setback 35 ft. from the existing Rhode Island Ave. in order that the setback is consistent with
other homes along the street. Rhode Island Ave. was reconstructed within the past 10 years.
The proposed lot consolidation meets the requirements of the Subdivision Code for a minor
subdivision or consolidation. The proper information has been submitted to City staff for
review.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends approval of the proposed lot consolidation to create one lot from three
existing lots at 1425 Rhode Island Ave. N. The new lot will exceed requirements for lots within
the Residential (R-1) zoning district. The result of the consolidation will be the creation of a lot
for a conforming new house and garage. At this time, the existing house is nonconforming
because it does not meet rear setback requirements and required a variance to construct a
garage to the side of the existing house. At this time, the applicant does not want to create a
second lot but the location of the new home would permit consideration of a second lot on the
property. The following conditions of approval are:
1. The final plat of the consolidation must be consistent with the preliminary sketch plan
submitted with this application.
2. All requirements including easement dedication and compliance with the Inflow and
Infiltration Ordinance as outlined in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to Mark
Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated November 25, 2008 shall become a
part of this recommendation.
3. The new house under construction on the property shall not receive a certificate of
occupancy until the existing home is removed.
Attachments
Location Map (1 page)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated November 25,2008 (2 pages)
Sketch of proposed lot consolidation (1 page)
Photos of property (4 pages)
2
- .
OLYMPIA ST _.~, .....
152:5
i !
18115 ; 7159 nol : 1548 1GOl ! 1551 1501
1845 : y
151'!1 . i i i .
1541 ! 1540 , . 1540 1541
y 1541 1540 1541 !
1513 Z IS36 i Z:
rt.! 1533 1532: 1532
rt.! 1533
c Ci
-< 1511 1525
l! 1516 U<
152!l . ~I
1501 I 152:0 1516 . 1516
i . 1517
1517
1509 . 1508 1515
1900 1508 1509 1508 1509
z: y
I~ rt.! 1M
z: 7100 -< 1SOll 1501
1840 1llOll ! 7140 Q 1SOll
lit
I~ ~
mw -. .. ,.~,< = WINSDALE ST N Wh'
~ ~ J_
:E T J,1
1901 1440 :l 7159 !il 1446
I'll 1441 = lMO 7501
1441 ~l I
1434 , Subject Property -
1439 1440 --
~1432 ... ....... 1433
143tl 1431 ";. 1435
1425 1424 1425
142:0 1425 1424 1425
142:0
1416 1411 ,
1413 y .
1 14lllI 1409 :
1401 141111 14119 ! 14llO 1524 7514
1401 I 1AOO :
1400 7800 , 1400 1401 ,
:
1325 KNOLL ST N ....
1501
1319
132:0 7821 7813 1325 712:9 7121 7113 :1705 iU1 1629 7613 :t331 1336 1529 1521
1301
1313
1301
,
, 1624 1612
1300 7820 7812 1301 i 1300 1128 112:0 7112 7104 iU2 1325 1300 1S2l1 152:0 1512
(1)
PLYMOUTHAVEN ,~" -.
M"l'''''''''''"'''''''_S' C~iC'tOOlSGlS~ I : I I I I ...~ . ?;lC>fI'
I
alley
em randu
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
Date: November 25, 2008
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Enginee~
Subject: 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North, Lot Consolidation
Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed lot consolidation for 1425 Rhode Island
Avenue North. This proposal consists of combining all or portions of three lots into a
single parcel. The existing home on this parcel will be demolished following the
construction of a new home.
The City's subdivision ordinance requires that street right-of-ways for local roadways be
60 feet wide. The existing street right-of-way for Rhode Island Avenue adjacent to this
site is 40 feet wide. The requirement for an additional 10 feet of right-of-way across the
subject property can be accomplished by the dedication of a 1 O-foot wide drainage,
utility and roadway easement.
The subdivision ordinance also outlines the need for drainage and utility easements on
all lot lines. Based upon the code, a 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement is
needed on the front lot line, with 6-foot wide easements on all other lot lines. However,
the existing garage in the northwest corner of this property was constructed with a
5-foot setback from the north and west lines of the parcel. Therefore, the dedication of
5-foot side and back yard easements is acceptable in this situation.
Based upon the above discussion, the easement dedications on the Rhode Island
Avenue frontage for this subdivision must include a 10-foot wide drainage, utility and
roadway easement on the eastern 10 feet of the property. In addition, a 10-foot wide
drainage and utility easement is required immediately west of the first easement, or
across the western 10 feet of the eastern 20 feet of the lot. The applicant must provide
legal descriptions for these easements to Public Works staff for easement document
preparation. The easements must be signed and ready for recording prior to approval of
the lot consolidation.
The owner of the subject property recently installed new sanitary sewer and water
services for the proposed home on this site. The existing sanitary sewer and water
G:\Developments - Private\1425 Rhode Island\Review 112508.doc
services will be left in place and be utilized if, and when the property is subdivided into
two lots.
The existing home on this property is currently utilizing one of the two in-place sanitary
sewer services. When the existing home is demolished, the property owner will be
required to bring both existing services into compliance with the City's Inflow and
Infiltration Ordinance.
Public Works staff recommends approval of this subdivision subject to the dedication of
easements as discussed in this review, and subject to compliance with the Inflow and
Infiltration Ordinance for the two existing sanitary sewer services at the time the existing
home on site is demolished. Approval is also subject to the comments of other City staff.
C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
Gary Johnson, Building Official
G;\Developments - Private\1425 Rhode Island\Review 112508.doc
---
r::,?
~
5
GARAOO,
'24.0
o
6'7J~
GRAVEL
"
en
<(
W
~
co
0>
to
if)
<(
w
:::E
<0
,,;
III
1-S
WD-FRAME
'?
~.
oj..
FF=100.0
ASSUMED DATUM
..-
3:
::
to
..-
..
0>
P
-0
o
en
~
"
"'.
~
",.. -'\
6.1:!: . ~. c3>'
AERIAL UllLlTY
PRESUMED EASEMENT
BY USER
.5
I.t\
CH LNK
LINE ESTABLISHED BETWEEN
NW COR L 1 (IRON MON)
& SW COR LOT 5 (IRON MON)
if)
~ C'I
:::E 0;
....
<0
oj
III
'"
~/
40.8
SW COR LOT 5
o
('II
~
~"?
~
PAVER
BLOCK'
WD DECK
....
oj
...
--.-
1
I
----l
1
-j-
N~8-42'20ttw 143.9 CALC
'I-'
,,0 54.2
_ FE:NCE
<>,
q,'"
38.3
----
L O.-I-- 2-
----
I
+- ---=
tl
~I
x
51
o
(1)1
I
I PROPERTY AREA: ' 23,OOO:i: fl
-----_-L___
GRAVEL
/
/
l;
(
--
\
~
~
<:)
!>J'
.q;
o
.
..g
c:t
~
~O T 3
"-
--
---
---
-----
GRAVEL
--
~
-
--
--
-
-
----
50.0
116.8
o
C""l
{\\
PROPOSED HOUSE
\
5.0
35.0
LOT
4
.tiQIE.;.THIS SURVEY IS FOR THE SOLE BENEFIT OF
THE INDIVIDUALS. CORPORATIONS. AND/OR PAR IES NAMED THEREON.
55.0
AND STANDARD OF WORK FOR SURVEY R BASED UPON
o "NORMAL" STANDARD OF CARE REO IRED BY LAW
..,g
!O'?
,..:.
t>.
, .
51.6
588-33tOO"E 144.1 CALC
5 . @
51.7 .
-
--
1\.5 "'?
BC '-'
U
...J
<(
U
o
ci
co
..-
W
::
o
..-
..
co
o
"y-
o
o
z
",'!>
2002 SURVEY & MAPPING SPECIALI S
REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
5,2 t>.'?
\ I I 1
~ 1\'
~I "
Ii'
.\
tl~ ::l I 1
\. ,~ I ./
,,'
~
I
'I
II
I,
I . ~.~
~ l' ~ I
I ~!\',
I ~ I'
'.
I ,~ I
\ .\'1(,
l~
.a,\ \'
~
, ,\
'" ~~
I~
~ ,- I
" ..
It
-.
l "
I, ~
0 f; ~
II , ~;
~
~
" n
I" t, " '\ ~
. ,'1 I t
IJ> f
II , , , \
.
1 ., 'I'
Il,
t. · ~ " it
.i .~
1.
I
1
-. Il '
w
'\
1:11
'.
.
'.
J,
"
\.t'
-'I
~
,
.' ,I
,
~.
"..
I
l\
"
"
~
" ~ 4'
'.
I ,)
;;' ,<,
~,
.\<,t I'
.. I.
'''r,..;~.'
r,-'J d,
.1.1 ;;.
..:/ 'I
,"';'(~
-;:"oI~:J
'..'j...i',
,'. j
I-J,"'jJ ,
II;
'\i
. "
, . ~
,~ ;
<", ":~
"
r:
.\
'. -'
i / ".r 1'4~
.; ;~' ,$
("1: 1;
.., :~f .~t .
>'~';.
";:.~(~~ i
"1'}.
~ ~
I';
"
. 1
l
'I
~.
I',:
~ 1
ff
J'll
'I
:...
:\
~
"
\
Ii l
II
o
L__
, .
.-
\ll'
. .
'\
i
t
I'
.
,. .
...
. ~ ,; ,.
, .
~."';;" - ~ .
......
~ ...
~< ~';~
.
"
alley
Me orandum
Housing & Redevelopment
Authority
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
7800 Golden Valley Rd. Golden Valley, MN 55427
763-593-8014
Date: December 2, 2008
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jeanne Andre, Assistant Director,
Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Subject: Redevelopment Plan for Douglas Drive Corridor Redevelopment Project Area
On November 10 the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority approved the
attached Redevelopment Plan and recommended its adoption to the Golden Valley City
Council. Under state law the Plan is to be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to its
consideration by the City Council. The Planning Commission is charged with determining if
the Plan is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. A resolution outlining this
determination is attached.
At this time the plan identifies a geographic area and identifies principles for the
redevelopment of this area. It establishes general goals and policies to be followed for public
improvements and redevelopment of the corridor. It does not identify specific redevelopment
projects, other than senior housing at the northeast corner of Douglas Drive and Golden
Valley Road. The Plan does not propose any other changes in land use.
Recommendations regarding other redevelopment or public infrastructure projects have been
deferred until the completion of the Douglas Drive Corridor Study.
Attachments:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-01 (1 page)
Draft Redevelopment Plan for Douglas Drive Corridor Redevelopment Project Area (8 pages)
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 08-01
RESOLUTION OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR DOUGLAS DRIVE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
(the "City) and the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the 'Authority) establish
Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area) and adopt a
Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area attached as Exhibit A, pursuant to and in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, inclusive, and
Sections 469.174 through 469.1799, inclusive; and
WHEREAS, the City and the Authority have caused to be prepared and
submitted the Plans to the City Planning Commission (the "Commissiorl) for review prior
to the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Plan to determine their
conformity with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as
described in the comprehensive plan for the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Plan
conforms with the general plans for the development of the City as a whole and,
furthermore, the redevelopment activities are compatible with the City's zoning
ordinances and other related regulations and encourage efficient use of existing
infrastructure as set forth in the City's Land Use Plan.
Adopted this _ day of December, 2008.
Chair
Attest:
Secretary
Exhibit A
Redevelopment Plan for Douglas Drive Corridor
Redevelopment Project Area
lopment Authority:
0,2008
Con
Redevelopment Plan for Douglas Drive Corridor
Redevelopment Project Area
Section 1. Introduction
As part of a goal-setting session in 2006 the City Council identified Douglas Drive
(CSAH 102) as a primary area of concern for the future of the City. As part of the 2008
update of the Comprehensive Plan, the City again identified the Douglas Drive Corridor
from Medicine lake Road (CSAH 70) to Minnesota Trunk Highway (TH) 55 as a priority
for further study. There is significant through traffic from communities to the north and
the mixture of land uses along the corridor in Golden Valley adds even more traffic. The
volume of traffic combined with limited public right-of-way available for expansion will
present challenges to improving this corridor and its public infrastructure. Traffic is
heavy along the corridor due to its designation by Hennepin County as a minor arterial
corridor. Its mixture of land uses including single-family, multi-family, offices, retail,
schools, churches and industrial uses, some of which are blighted, could through
redevelopment, become a more vibrant, integrated community.
The initial focus of redevelopment will be the east side of Douglas Drive between Duluth
Street (CR 66) and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The City desires to look at
this area in a comprehensive manner. The existing land use is a mixture of low-and-high
density ho~sing, some relatively new and some blighted, as well as office, commercial
and industrial uses.
Section 2. Statement of Need and Public Purpose, Statutory
Authorization
The Authority finds that there is a need for development within the City and the Project
Area in order to provide employment and housing opportunities, to improve the local tax
base, and to improve the general economy of the City and the State. The economic
security of the people in the City depends upon proper development of property that
meets anyone of a number of conditions, including properties whose values are too low
to pay for the public services required or rendered and properties whose lack of use or
improper use has resulted in stagnant or unproductive land that could otherwise
contribute to the public health, safety, and welfare.
The Authority finds that in many cases such property cannot be developed without
public participation and assistance in various forms including property acquisition and/or
write-down, proper planning, the financing of development costs associated with
clearance, grading and soils correction, and the making of various other public and
private improvements necessary for development. In cases where the development of
property cannot be done by private enterprise alone, the Authority believes it to be in
the public interest to consider the exercise of its powers, to advance and spend public
money, and to provide the means and impetus for such development.
The Authority finds that in certain cases property within the Project Area would or may
not be available for development without the specific financial aid to be sought, that the
Redevelopment Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the
City as a whole, for the development of the Project Area by private enterprise, and that
this Redevelopment Plan conforms to the general plan for the development of the City
as a whole.
1
It is the intention of the Governing Body, notwithstanding the enumeration of specific
goals and objectives in the Redevelopment Plan, that the Authority shall have and enjoy
with respect to the Project Area the full range of powers and duties conferred upon the
Authority pursuant to the HRA Act, the TIF Act, municipal housing and redevelopment
authority laws, and such other legal authority as the Authority may have or enjoy from
time to time.
The HRA Act authorizes the Authority to exercise all the powers relating to a housing
and redevelopment authority granted under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to
469.047, or other law.
Section 3. Background
When Douglas Drive was initially constructed, the surrounding land uses were more
rural in nature. Now a number of major employers including Honeywell, United Health
Care and Tennant Company have a significant presence in the corridor and the average
daily traffic on various sections of the corridor in Golden Valley range from 10,000 to
14,000 vehicle trips per day. The presence of numerous schools (Sandburg Middle
School, King of Grace Lutheran School and Perpich School of Performing Arts) and
recreational facilities (Sandburg fields, Honeywell Little League field, Seeman and
Hampshire Parks, and the Three Rivers Luce Line Trail) in the corridor increase the
need for improved safety for non-motorized transportation.
The Three Rivers Park District has constructed a portion of the Luce Line Trail through
Golden Valley that will connect French Park in Plymouth with Wirth Park in Minneapolis.
At the present time there are not safe north-south connections to this trail for bikers and
pedestrians. In order to improve these connections Golden Valley received funding
through the Non-Motorized Transportation Act to study this corridor and plan for future
improvements to pedestrian, bicycle and transit connections in this corridor. The
Principles for this study are outlined below.
Section 4. Principles
1. Improve connectivity and functionality for all transportation modes. Douglas
Drive, which is classified as a county state-aid highway in the Hennepin County
Transportation Plan and minor arterial road in the City's Comprehensive Plan, has
historically focused on motorized vehicles. Traffic volume has increased significantly
over the years as has the need for better, safer pedestrian and non-motorized
transportation and transit options. Intersection improvements at Highway 55 I
Douglas Drive and other key major and minor intersections within the corridor are
critical to safer and improved movement for pedestrians, non-motorized and
vehicular traffic in the corridor.
2. Enable the corridor to maintain a diverse mix of land uses, including
residential, commercial and industrial. A mix of activities, uses and densities will
help to sustain the corridor through changing economic cycles, consumer
preferences and housing trends. Clustered and mixed uses can create synergies,
increase transit use and enhance the level of pedestrian activity.
2
3. Maximize integration rather than separation of land uses, where appropriate.
Many land uses can benefit from increased integr~tion with one another, including
neighborhood-serving retail, multi-family and senior housing, offices, and low-impact
services. Non-residential corridor uses should be buffered from adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
4. Maintain the corridor as an employment center. Jobs within the corridor help
maintain Golden Valley's jobs-housing balance while sustaining commercial
enterprises. Retaining 'living wage' jobs should be a priority.
5. Improve the visual coherence and attractiveness of the corridor. Improvements
in streetscapes, landscaped areas, open spaces, building aesthetics and
parking/service areas all contribute to a more unified and visually appealing
environment, with an increased sense of identity. Buildings and other private
improvements should make positive contributions to the corridor and the broader
public realm, while public improvements should set the standard for private
investment.
6. Foster neighborhood-serving retail and services. Multimodallinks to commercial
development should be enhanced.
7. Foster sustainable development and work to establish a balance between
urban and natural systems. Encourage the application of green building and
infrastructure techniques. Examples include low-impact development that maintains
the natural functions of the land, encourages reduced stormwater runoff and fosters
resource conservation and the use of renewable systems in new construction.
Section 4. Goals and Objectives
The current hodge-podge of land uses, minimal right-of-way (63 to 100 feet), sometimes
minimal building setbacks from a high-traffic road, and the desirability of buffering
residential uses from the high volume of traffic make the corridor an ideal candidate for
broader redevelopment. Some goals of the redevelopment would be to provide for
additional right-of-way, consolidate corridor land uses and the number of access points
onto Douglas Drive. There are existing impediments in the right-of-way (electrical poles,
fire hydrants, utility boxes, railroad crossings, etc.) that complicate the infrastructure
needs for the area and impede pedestrian and bike access which could also be
addressed through redevelopment.
To achieve its mission of structured redevelopment, this Plan has identified six goals
with related objectives to encourage cohesive planning and structured redevelopment
within the corridor. It then outlines policies that will help to achieve the goals and
objectives.
Goal 1 - Improve vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian transportation.
Objectives
· Improved roadway with added pedestrian and non-motorized transportation facilities
· Complete streets that meet vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian needs
· Reduced impediments in the sidewalks
· Undergrounded utilities
· Consolidated access points onto Douglas Drive
3
Goal 2 - Redevelop obsolete properties.
Objectives
· Blighted, functionally obsolete, and/or economically unsustainable buildings
removed
· New uses compatible with existing uses
Goal 3 - Create jobs and life-cycle housing.
Objectives
· Increased high-paying jobs
· Housing stock that is maintained or improved
· Higher density housing
· Housing for seniors and young families
· Affordable housing
· Commercial uses that serve the community
Goal 4 - Require design that is sustainable and aesthetically pleasing.
Objectives
· Enhanced community identity through features which reflect Golden Valley.
· Visually attractive development that complements its surroundings.
· Buildings constructed with environmentally sustainable 'green building' practices
(Development that meets environmental criteria set forth by Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) and the United States Department of Energy).
· Active living criteria included in design
Goal 5 - Protect the environment.
Objectives
· Wetlands that are protected and enhanced
· Land free of soil and wetland contamination
· Arborous environments
· Natural features retained and native vegetation (re)established
· Co-located uses that reduce the amount of auto travel and corresponding air
pollution
· Best shoreline management practices implemented along Bassett Creek
Goal 6 - Maintain a regional framework.
Objectives
· Growth compatible with the Metropolitan Council development framework
· Public infrastructure designed in cooperation with Hennepin County, Three Rivers
Park District, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation
· Participation in grant programs available through Hennepin County, the Metropolitan
Council and other agencies
· A po~itive relationship with surrounding communities and governmental agencies
· Continued participation in cooperative traffic management strategies
· Improved transit options
4
Section 5. Policies
Land Use
The City will study planned land uses to determine the need or desirability of individual
parcel or area-wide comprehensive plan or zoning amendments to accommodate
desired land uses.
The City and HRA will assure that its review processes, zoning, and building regulations
will promote desired development projects.
The City will assure that new uses in the redevelopment area are compatible with
existing development and the City's land use plan.
The City and HRA will review existing corridor properties to consider their long term
viability and/or options for alternative uses.
Land use plans will promote mixed use developments and increased density where
appropriate, in keeping with the Metropolitan Council's regional growth strategy.
Financing
The City and HRA will identify criteria to target redevelopment funds such as tax
increment financing, tax abatements, Livable Communities, Community Development
Block Grants and other funding made available by the legislature or other agencies or
governmental units.
The City and HRA will consider providing public assistance to redevelopment projects
that serve a substantial public purpose, remove blight, or mitigate contamination.
The City and HRA will consider using land write-downs to subsidize redevelopment
projects.
Redevelopment funding will be paired with other funding options such as assessments,
based on the Golden Valley Special Assessment Policy.
The City will consider franchise fees and utility surcharges to underwrite the cost of
utility and infrastructure upgrades.
Design and Environmental Standards
The City will promote best practices to meet the highest environmental standards.
The City and HRA will identify approaches and/or incentives to promote a corridor
beautification program. This program will include both public and private components.
The City will monitor ongoing research on sustainable development initiatives to guide
redevelopment and future updates of this plan.
Transportation
The City will work with Metropolitan Transit to monitor transportation needs of area
residents and workers and identify ways to improve transportation services including
improving transit routes, and working with area businesses to develop transportation
management plans.
5
The City will work with Hennepin County, the State of Minnesota and other agencies to
design and seek funding for an improved roadway with added pedestrian and non-
motorized transportation facilities that meet city, county and state needs.
Section 6. Redevelopment Area Defined
In 2008-09 the City is studying the full length of Douglas Drive from Medicine Lake
Road on the north to Trunk Highway 55 on the south. Until that study is completed the
Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area will include the Douglas Drive street right-of-way
and parcels on the east side of the street from Duluth St. to the Union Pacific railroad
right-of-way to the south. This is an area with no pedestrian infrastructure and is
centered on a significant area of multifamily housing.
The full Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area is identified on Map A. The area is divided
into three subsections, based on land use. The complete Douglas Drive right-of-way (to
the westerly boundary) adjacent to the parcels is included in the Redevelopment Area,
divided between the three sub areas.
Area A..1
Area A-1 extends from Duluth Street south to the Canadian Pacific Railroad and is
guided Commercial and Office. It has three parcels, with the following land uses: two
gas stations and a multi-tenant office. The complete Duluth Street right-of-way (to the
northerly boundary) adjacent to the northerly parcel is included in the Redevelopment
Area.
Area A-2
Area A-2 extends from the Canadian Pacific Railroad south to Golden Valley Road. It is
guided High Density Residential and Railroad Right-of-Way. Existing land uses range
from single family, duplex, and triplex units to three- to five- story rental apartment and
condominium buildings and railroad facilities. The Metropolitan Council has identified
this rail corridor for a regional, mixed-use trail on its 2030 Regional Parks System Map.
There are currently 178 units of housing in this area. Six parcels in the area south of
Bassett Creek and north of Golden Valley Road are under option for development as
senior housing. Two four-story buildings are proposed, one with 74 units of senior
cooperative housing and a second with 95 units of senior independent and assisted
living units. If this project goes forward, the number of housing units in Area A-2 would
increase to 318. The complete Golden Valley road right-of-way at the southern edge of
Area A-2 is included in the Redevelopment Area.
Area A-3
Area A-3 extends from Golden Valley Road south to and including the adjacent Union
Pacific Railroad/Luce Line Trail and the Canadian Pacific Railroad right-of-way on the
east. CenterPoint Energy owns one parcel and uses it for a peaking plant and
maintenance center. It is guided Industrial. The Union Pacific and Canadian Pacific
Railroad rights-of-way are guided Railroad Right-of-Way.
Common features for all of the areas include no sidewalk and electrical poles and
overhead lines that would impede the development of sidewalks. There is pedestrian
access on intersecting east-west roads including sidewalks on Duluth St. and Golden
Valley Road and the new Luce Line Trail along the Union Pacific right-of-way.
6
d [ IN:/ ..,.. /i
=~.~~ '+. I' - U! 0000
, ~~o:ho: 0 ~':,~ f' or II~':,
.....PSllIRlllH. - ~. .;.;, I~ ~=.. ~ ~ .... ..... 'l~'" ... ......;
~... jJJlJ :rtttEjll.. . I :: II I 00 ; fi'I -'.' t;j....1~..f:::. ....... J -f. :~. ~~~',
I' I ttm ---~ q' : .I !=I: ;.-:
. ,. . .... I, .. \. v .;ii. .. \
.....WINSDA~STN'. .'~ \ !:z :, ~- i,
..Bml;- ~: ~ i - i ! ~! I. '~r-I= ~
-: . I: , g @fii - '_ ~ T~i
.... "- /- >...." '\L
-tn. -.1, r- -...t~ ( .l, .... ~t \
-I, ..\Y"/.... p'" 'fi\ \,'.
, - ~. '. ==! i: .' _>~~" '~....m. $, J . .......~T~J,
-~--,-' . . , I
- i-./' . Area A-3 . L : '" ______ :; ..... UNDSAY~t.I...... ..... .....".
I ~j;: / " I I" ----: ~I . \ o";;\:"\
I/~ ~!lmlll Ii . <>~\
I~__,,,,_,o_~_ I .s" \ r---~ "" r OF,
MapA
Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area
7