05-09-11 PC Agenda AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, May 9, 2011
7 pm
1. Approval of Minutes
March 28, 2011 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
2. Informal Public Hearing —Zoning Code Amendment— Adding High Density
Senior and Physical Disability Housing as a Conditional Use in the Medium
Densifiy (R-3) Residential Zoning District Section of City Code —ZO00-86
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: To allow higher density senior and physical disability housing with a
Conditional Use Permit in the Medium Density (R-3) Residential
zoning district
3. Informal Public Hearing — General Land Use Plan Map Amendment— 9110
Golden Valley Road — CPAM-45
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Address: 9110 Golden Valley Road
Purpose: To change the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from
Light Industrial to Medium High Density Residential
4. Informal Public Hearing —General Land Use Plan Map Amendment— 2040
Douglas Drive —CPAM-46
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Address: 2040 Douglas Drive
Purpose: To change the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from
Medium-Low Density Residential to Office
5. Informal Public Hearing — General Land Use Plan Map Amendment— 1100, 1170,
1200 & 1300 Douglas Drive and 6200 & 6212 Golden Valley Road — CPAM-47
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Address: 1100, 1170, 1200 & 1300 Douglas Drive and 6200 & 6212 Golden
Valley Road
Purpose: To change the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from
High Density Residential to Medium-High Density Residential
6. Informal Public Hearing — General Land Use Plan Map Amendment— 5635 & 5701
Glenwood Avenue— CPAM�8
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Address: 5635 and 5701 Glenwood Avenue
Purpose: To change the designation on the General Land Use Plan Map from
Medium-High Density Residential to Low Density Residential
--Short Recess--
7. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
8. Other Business
9. Adjournment
; This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request,Rlease call
7b3-593-8006(TIY:763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include iarge print,electronic,Braille,autliocassette,etc.
. �.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
March 28, 2011
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,
March 28, 2011. Chair Waldhauser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall,
Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and::Development
Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom, Planning Intern Carri� Noble �:nd Planning
Intern Michael Simmons.
1. Approval of Minutes
March 14, 2011 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve
the March 14, 2011 minutes. McCarty abstained from voting, as he was not present at
the March 14, 2011 meeting.
2. Informal Public Hearing — Lot Consolidation =Venture Bank— 6210 and
6224 Wayzata Blvd — SU18-08
Applicant: Venture Bank
Addresses: 6210 and 6224 Wayzata Blvd
Purpose: The Lot Consolidation would remove the property line between the two
properties located at 621� and 6224 Wayzata Blvd. in order to create one lot.
Simmons referred to a location ma:p and discussed the applicant's proposal to
consolidate the two lots. He explained that Venture Bank recently acquired both
properties and plan� to relocate its Golden Valley branch office to the existing building
on the site. Simmons referred to the applicant's intent to renovate the existing building
on the site,
Simmons discussed the seven qualfications that govern approval of a subdivision
request, and explained how this proposal satisfied the requirements in City Code.
Simmons stated that staff recommends approval of the lot consolidation request,
subject to the conditions found in City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo dated March 21,
2011 as well as a review of the titles of the properties by the City Attorney.
Waldhauser asked if Venture Bank plans on occupying the entire building on the site.
Simmons stated that Venture Bank does intend to occupy the entire site, with most of
the building space devoted to offices.
Gwen Stanley, Chief Financial Officer for Venture Bank, stated that Venture Bank
recently acquired the site, and plans to open the facility in late August. Stanley stated
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
March 28, 2011
Page 2
that Venture Bank's current Golden Valley branch, located in the Colonnade building,
has become too small. The new facility will double the size of Venture Bank's Golden
Valley branch.
Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to speak,
Waldhauser closed the public hearing.
Kluchka stated that he supports the proposal because the owner of the property, rather
than a developer, has made the request.
MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of a Lot Consolidation to remove the property line between the
finro properties located at 6210 and 6224 Wayzata Blvd. in order to create one lot.`
3. Site Plan Review—Venture Bank (6210 and 6224 Wayzata`8lvd.)
Applicant: Venture Bank
Addresses: 6210 and 6224 Wayzata Blvd
Purpose: To approve the site plan for the propased parking lot at 6210 and 6224
Wayzata Blvd.
Noble referred to a site plan showing the proposed configuration of the parking lot to be
located at 6210 and 6224 Wayzata Blvd. Noble stated that City Code requires a site
plan review to be perFormed by�he Planning Commission for existing parking lots in the
I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District ifi the parking lot is expanding by ten percent. Noble
stated that the purpose of the site`plan review is to promote development that is
compatible with nearby properties, neighborhood character and natural features, and
that is consistent with the Compr�hensive Plan.
Noble referred to the requirements found in Chapter 11.47, Subdivision 8 of City Code
(I-394 Mixed Use Zoning Districts) that pertains to parking lot design standards. Noble
explained that, because this involves the redevelopment of an existing building, only the
new parking lof plan would be reviewed.
Noble discussed parking location, parking screening, landscaping in and around the
parking;lot, sidewalks and public art. Noble explained that the City Code provides the
Planning Commission the ability to use discretion when reviewing a site plan in the I-
394 Mixed Use Zoning District.
Kluchka asked whether or not the footprint of the parking lot is increasing. Noble stated
that the footprint of the parking area is increasing slightly.
Cera asked if there is an impervious surFace coverage requirement for this property.
Grimes stated that there is an impervious surFace coverage requirement, but he
believes that the property is "grandfathered in" because of the existing building.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
March 28, 2011
Page 3
Waldhauser asked if the number of parking spaces exceeds that allowed in City Code.
Hogeboom stated that there is adequate parking on the site.
Kluchka requested more information about the standards at which the Commission
should be considering when reviewing the site plan. Grimes referred to Section 11.48 of
City Code which guides site plan review in the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District.
Segelbaum advised that the Commission should make findings in its review of the site
plan.
McCarty questioned the northeastern corner of the property and asked whether or not
there is adequate screening of the parking lot in that area. Grimes stated �hat screening
could be accomplished through vegetation or fencing. Grimes#hen stated that he will
review the landscaping/screening possibilities for this area with Environmental
Coordinator AI Lundstrom. Schmidgall stated that he felt the vegetation associated with
the planned drainage pond would be adequate screening for the location.
Waldhauser questioned if an additional tree could be added to the south edge of the
property. Corey Bergman, engineer with MFRA, stated that Venture Bank anticipates to
remove the existing pylon sign on the site and replace it with signage on the south wall
of the building. Bergman stated that an additional tree in front of the south side of the
building will impact the visibility of the building and its sign from Interstate 394. The
Commission concurred that no additional tree was necessary along the south side of
the building.
Waldhauser stated that the interior sidewalks in the property should be landscaped at
least 50% of their length, per City Code. Bergman stated that the exact location of the
internal sidewalks may be modifiecl slightly based on the interior design of the building,
but that Venture Bank will agree to landscape the sidewalks accordingly.
Waldhauser asked if the property owner would be required to maintain the public
sidewalks surrounding the property. Grimes stated that the City is responsible for the
maintenance of public sidewalks.
McCarty reeommer�d�d that Venture Bank consider some form of outdoor public art on
the property. Waldhauser explained that public art could be a wide variety of things that
would make the property more visually appealing to the public. Kluchka noted that there
is no bicycle parking noted on the site plan. Grimes suggested that, since bicycle
parking is required per the City Code, a bike rack could double as public art.
McCarty noted that the Planning Commission had voted to strike building material
requirements from the requirements of the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District. Hogeboom
and Grimes stated that they believed the City Council voted to include the building
material standards in the Code.
Eck questioned if the site has adequate room for snow storage. Schmidgall stated that if
snow storage becomes an issue for Venture Bank, it would be in Venture Bank's best
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
March 28, 2011
Page 4
interest to remove the snow from the site. Stanley stated that she believes there is
adequate room to store the snow onsite.
MOVED by Cera, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the site plan for the proposed parking lot at 6210 and 6224 Wayzata Blvd.
with the following conditions:
1. Required parking lot screening shall be shown on the site plan.
2. If the parking lot screening significantly interferes with operation of the filtration basin
in the northeastern corner of the site, then the Environmental Coordinator will work
with Venture Bank to determine the best possible screening option.
3. At least 50% of the length of the interior walkways and sidewalks must be
landscaped.
4. Bicycle parking must be installed on the site, per City Code.
--Short Recess--
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redeveloprnen#Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Me�tings
Grimes stated that the Neptune Society Conditional Use Permit request will be going
before the City Council on April 5 for approval.
Hogeboom stated that the City Council will discuss the Livable Communities Act
Housing Action Plan, the rezonin�;of several residential properties and the Douglas
Drive Moratorium Area Study at the April 12 Council/Manager meeting.
5. Other Business
Waldhauser reminded the Commission that the City will reimburse Planning
Commissioners who attend certain planning-related conferences and workshops.
Waldhauser reminded the Commission of the annual MnAPA Conference, to be held in
September.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm.
Lester Eck, Secretary
��. ��. �
� � ,�t�� t�.������ e Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date: April 15, 2011
To: Planning Commission
From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Subject: High Density Senior and Physical Disability Housing as a Conditional Use in the
Medium Density (R-3) Residential Zoning District
Background
The City Council has directed staff to amend Chapter 11.23 (Medium Density Residential
Zoning District (R-3)) of City Code to allow high density senior and physical disability
housing with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The R-3 Zoning District permits housing with
a density of up to 12 units per acre. Under this proposal, senior and physical disability
housing, proven to produce less traffic than non-restricted housing, would not have a
maximum density limit but rather would be limited to a maximum building height of five feet.
This is similar to how density is allowed in the High Density (R-4) Zoning District.
City Code currently provides a definition for "senior and physical disability housing." The
definition, commonly accepted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, is as follows:
"A multiple dwelling building with open occupancy limited to disabled or handicapped
persons and/or persons over fifty five (55) years of age, except that no more than ten
percent(10%) of the occupants (excluding disabled or handicapped persons), may be
persons under fifty five (55) years of age (spouse of a person over�fty five (55) years of age
or caretakers, etc.)."
The City Attorney's office advises retaining this definition in City Code.
Findings
Regarding this proposed amendment, staff finds that:
• Senior and physical disability housing creates lower levels of traffic than does
intergenerational housing.
• Tra�c generated from senior and physical disability housing residents and employees
typically occurs during off-peak times.
• Dwelling units in senior and physical disability housing can be smaller, on average, than
dwelling in intergenerational housing. (As would be the case in memory care and
assisted living communities.)
• Senior, lifecycle and physical disability housing is identified in the Comprehensive Plan
as a needed housing product type in the City of Golden Valley.
• Allowing higher density senior and physical disability housing to be built in the Medium
Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) would provide more opportunities to increase
the housing type in the City.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending Section 11.23: Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3)
of City Code to allow higher density senior housing and Physical Disability Housing with a
Conditional Use Permit. In its recommendation to the City Council, staff asks that the Planning
Commission adopt findings.
Attachments:
Section 11.23: Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) (4 pages)
§ 11.23
Section 11.23: Medium Density Residential
Zoning District (R-3)
Subdivision 1. Purpose
The purpose of the Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) is to provide
for medium density, housing (up to ten (10) units per acre with potential for twelve
(12) units per acre with density bonuses) along with directly related and
complementary uses. Subject to issuance of a conditional use permit, Senior and
physical disabilitX housing is permitted to a densi� in excess of twelve 12) units
per acre, but in ank case shafl not exceed five �5) stories or sixt�(60) feet in
height, whichever if less.
�ubdivision 2. District Established
Properties shall be established within the R-3 Zoning District in the manner
provided for in Section 11.90, Subdivision 3 of this Chapter, and when thus
established shall be incorporated in this Section 11.23, Subdivision 2 by an
ordinance which makes cross-reference to this Section 11.23 and which shall
become a part hereof and of Section 11.10, Subdivision 2 thereof, as fully as if set
forth herein. In addition the R-3 Zoning Districts thus established, and/or any
subsequent changes to the same which shall be made and established in a similar
manner, shall be reflected in the official zoning map of the City as provided in
Section 11.11 of this Chapter.
Subdivision 3. Permitted Uses
The following uses and no other shall be permitted in the R-3 Zoning District:
A. Townhouses
B. Two-family dwellings
C. Multiple-family dwellings of twelve (12) units or less per acre�
D. Foster Family Homes
E. Essential Services, Class I
F. No more than one (1) kitchen area and one (1) kitchenette shall be
permitted in each dwelling unit.
Subdivision 4. Accessory Structures
The following accessory structures and no others shall be permitted in R-3 Zoning
Districts:
A. Enclosed parking structures similar in construction and materials to the
principal structure
Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 4
§ 11.23
B. Storage structures similar in construction and materials to the principal
structure not exceeding five hundred (500) square feet in area. No accessory
structure shall be erected in the R-3 Zoning District to exceed a height of one
(1) story, which is ten (10) feet from the floor to the top horizontal member
of a frame building to which the rafters are fastened, known as the top plate.
C. Accessory structures
D. Private indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, including but not limited to
swimming pools and tennis courts
E. Underground parking structures
Subdivision 5. Conditional Uses
The following conditional uses may be allowed after review by the Planning
Commission and approval by the Council following the standards and procedures
set forth in this Chapter:
A. Residential facilities serving twenty-five (25) or more personsl
B. Group Foster Homes.�
C. Principal structures in excess of four (4) stories or forty-eight (48) feet�.
D. Senior and physical disability housing to a density in excess of twelve (12)
units per acre, but in any case not to exceed five �S) stories or sixty (60) feet
in heiaht, whichever is less; or
E. Retail sales, Class I and II restaurant establishments, and professional ofFices
within principal structures containing twenty (20) or more dwelling units
when located upon any minor or major arterial street. Any such sales,
establishment or ofFice shall be located only on the ground floor and have
direct access to the street.
Subdivision 6. Buildable Lots
In the R-3 Zoning District a lot of a minimum area of fifteen thousand (15,000)
square feet shall be required for any principal structure. A minimum lot width of
one hundred (100) feet at the front setback line shall be required.
Subdivision 7. Corner Visibility
All structures in the R-3 Zoning District shall meet the requirements of the corner
visibility requirements in Chapter 7 of the City Code.
Subdivision 8. Easements
No structures in the R-3 Zoning District shall be located in dedicated public
easements.
Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 4
§ 11.23
Subdivision 9. Maximum Coverage by Building and Impervious
Surfaces
Structures, including accessory structures, shall not occupy more than forty percent
(40%) of the lot area. Total impervious surface on any Iot shall not exceed sixty
percent (60%) of the lot area.
Subdivision 10. Principal Structures
Principal structures in the R-3 Zoning District shall be governed by the following
requirements:
A. Setback Requirements. The following structure setbacks shall be required for
principal structures in the R-3 Zoning District.
1. Front Setback. The required minimum front setback shall be twenty-
five (25) feet from any front property line along a street right-of-way
line. An open front porch for each building, with no screens, may be
built on the ground level to within seventeen (17) feet of a front
property line along a street right-of-way line.
2. Side and Rear Yard Setback. When directly abutting any R-1 Zoning
District, the required side and rear yard setback shall be thirty (30)
feet. In all other instances, the required side and rear yard setback
shall be twenty (20) feet.
B. Maximum Density. Dwelling units shall not be built at a rate greater than ten
(10) units per acre, unless they meet the provisions of Subdivision 12.
C. Height. No building shall exceed four (4) stories or forty-eight (48) feet in
height, whichever is less�except subject to issuance of a canditional use
permit, Senior and physical disabilit�housing may be u� to (5) staries ar
sixty (60) feet in height, whichever is less.
Subdivision 11. Enclosed Parking Structures and other Accessory
Uses
Enclosed parking structures and accessory uses in the R-3 Zoning District shall be
governed by the following requirements:
A. Setback requirements. The following structure setbacks shall be required for
all enclosed parking structures and other accessory uses in the R-3 Zoning
District.
1. Front Setback. The required minimum front setback shall be twenty-
five (25) feet from any front property line along a street right-of-way
line.
2. Side and Rear Yard Setback. The required minimum side and rear
setback for enclosed parking structures shall be thirty (30) feet when
abutting any R-1 Zoning District and twenty (20) feet in all other
Go/den Valley City Code Page 3 of 4
§ 11.23
instances. The required minimum side and rear setback for other
accessory uses shall be fifteen (15) feet.
3. Separation Between Structures. Accessory structures shall be located
no less than ten (10) feet from any principal structure and from any
other accessory structure.
Subdivision 12. Density Bonus
Multiple Family dwellings providing sidewalks as required by the City shall be
granted one (1) of the following density bonuses.
A. Underground parking. The provision of one (1) or more underground parking
space�s,Zper dwelling unit shall increase the maximum allowable density by
two (2) units per acre.
B. Public Transit. Scheduled public transit route within one thousand (1000) feet
of the primary entrance accessed by public sidewalk shall result in an
increase in the maximum allowable density by one (1) unit per acre and
reduce required parking to one and one half (1.5) spaces per dwelling.
C. Recreation. Indoor or outdoor recreation facilities such as swimming pools,
porches, tennis courts, or other facilities requiring a substantial investment
equaling at minimum five percent (5%) of the construction cost of the
principal structure shall increase the maximum allowable density by two (2)
units per acre.
Source: Ordinance No. 372, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 07-13-07
Ga/den Valley City Code Page 4 of 4
. _. � � � � � �� �
�-' � ' �
�., d .� � � � _ � � � ��
�. #
� � ;, x b !� �i � �,, - � '
W r s+ " " �� •, '' _
�,_..-' ,�j 3 � '. �. � '� � � � � � ' � �� � �
� ,� ,
�` �� Q 4t1 � � � � rn ! u '� �� � "�1 L a :
� �--* `- �y a � $ � �� � }l ...J '� .
'; � � � �y IS � Q w � �y � l'7 1� %
��. � � t] t �' � �i a: � -,y� �
� �, y� � rn �'" �i � � F _ r� +� � � � w
�D w � � � �- � � � � �. ,� � g ,� �, ro � « �
�� � M-
. iY o a � � a, ro ya c � i.a �' u- 4. 5: ° �, a• k � ��
,...�i � � n ''� i� ^� � `�' � C .`,-� n x :�i� '.; � y a � '� ' �'�
•]�`"` •—. W � -.' _ _ i � �r_ te �� , ' .. , � �� c� Q �: � . i►
��w"./� W ����� ��, ��� � ���' �� LJ ' �4�r? :
�
,
. ,'��M,.�� ��+�-ri�,ti�-� . .;� �: � y ,y
�i � tf �t��}+=°' j"}j�+�'j � -
� - ��i . � � � M! � �' .
.��� � ( '' � ...�� � �
F' 3�� � �.,,I � � /// a'
9
� i! • •� �� � �-J
- �_,t .'. l. ��� t �y �
j 4�` � � � , � )
� � F� ,�4� i. '' i�
I ��� A T y;.'7i1'��� .F+wM . ,) � �j .1� . . .
T+�' �°��- -�, � � ,�� ` ;��# , ; �.
:,� .,,. . I'� _. � + , �.
, ,
____ �
.. �. . � ,...� .'.'+ � , �++� V� � �^' 1 � 1" . " t .� � ' r . * , �._.
_ � w,�., � '_ A � �# 4 p`• � � $ •�,
u+i ' r p
���y �A . ! ��f �.-". l �y. .•...,�� . . , .
.. � . . � �-.irN f f �� 1 * S� .bf+...ei .,` R��11lwP. �"� y ti�� f � I
�t � � � � ' � li
I _ . �� . � ,. '� ��� ` ��� , � *fYiV..,� . � � LIF� YM�.A1 * ( y ._
nri_ ,� r
"' . ...� `' � �
.. � r• `' ^ . � a` � .
� ^ . � ..«.p� ` E �� ��k.. �`�M '1,., �.._ '�w 1 A �,�� �� Y .. .. � �• t3 ..�� . �. . .
•„� �. A j� r .nf �,•F � �_-..� �.
_ ' •
� i � a 1 1
XA
.�.. ,a-.x3� t.�l['.. i�
. � � �ie>.wa ' �.�t � &�� . . �� ��..I\ . . . ) s _
. ., �,....-.. . . � �. "y+f'+. eti .atit M ?�� , y: Y . � r� . .. � � � ,
P R �. T
'�ry' � _.., a � .a� �..'�I...,�YN ry�� i. �'� , � iy�� ` ��I ��' �. E
,�� � �. ,,,��� � �' ��� � _ a
_ . �:w� � '� � M.�� �.. "'� -��;��, , ,.�!'.�� �r 'Y ��F ;
:r . .� . . �. F��.�+�,j_, a}.� �� ���t � ,zY. �� ��i- t�� -�'"�".""-1�l. � " r�
� . . ��a s�,.�,d - 1 y�" ; . . 1 �
kk 9 A'y.'!3
.( � S
���{ " � � "`�—`t/.JI�� '�, � ; � •�relr'M �7..'� � , � �'a�...r- ��
' . .,` . � iif� �~ . . i'} p .+�.., ' _� �� •`� � �
' .Rr .w^i '
^ � � 'k+ � �d ., � �„� � �� � f._ f -J
'4 � � ,�� � `..k'�;F �,r �} s�,u .
i
' . .� ��+ �i �, �! ia�.os ' � ~��
.._. . �'� . .. �t � f!: �Y � .. �'�;I
t... �.rr., ,. , ' � � ..• .
.$ , �V k
i�i �; � ; � h � . ��, ,i,.;
� � t j. .. . . � ,'y ., .. �� . . .e � .
E� .��,+� � �,� : ,.,
� �, - ...._., �..��..
,� �� ,�,
� =� �,.,�_ E � ; ppp
.. . ... �� ��,� #^�.R'I�r. � . ��' � + k.
�+T � _+,w�.w . '!��� 1��. �.'4,+,:y ;'+s,r�'� i � .
��
y� 4a x � � r �:,,� ,'" � t ���,'�,. •.
� '� � � ��{ _ {'� i�"j� � f �`
� +� � .. ... � - -�n�x�a � ....t � . �.�� .
'� .. . }� '1 .+.� ��w ( .
.. . ----�- - � ���� ._� �� ,.,,,�• >� � ��r�� r'�� ��` ; �R.,,.,�. �������
. . ,.,.
M
i � � I
l a
Q i ;'., •
� '���,�III���"+��. .,. - _ �� .� .. .:F" � a . � � �
' � ? E�. y(�1
� � � . . ` .. ' �.levp.w 1�'
� i `�*� ��`' , t , _
� � ��.A ..' � ,�,.�i� .:� L
� i. . .r 1 �m�an " .. ��V '�"�•� �,�'''..
�J `j_ ' ' �`' � � , , ••
� � , ' . +
.'��- � �»I A �k�..
� {'t_ 1 _r� � ���r� � � }� �`
s:���� F .�x,a,e•e -. � � aw•�w:., . .�.-: „�+ �. '_" �� ��^►' .. . .
�� ��� - •• s l Y �� . � i= 3t� �� � ; � ����rr
��
� ;. L
. . >
'.�.' Y.,��. ,:�a�. �y � �: `'�l•:� a: , � r. +`
�• � .� .} . r.rrn .. n ^ y . ..,�w,� � e ,..
::. � aa.�.sY + ��,_,l. �,'.'M �1vf �` ,�
� _.�,... ���� �
n�,. � �� - , � ,.� � y:, � : +� .
E f .>.�" "� "� } �� ., � ' �� ,
9d'w� � � f �r� � .� � + i�� � ,a�.,�.
. r '�`�� . .w � �....�. . � : . ^�: �f .n
. .w ..
.. _.
i
. � a �;� �� . � � � � � �,
�
� � � . � 4 R� ���' .��? (�
�.: _. _v_
, �� . � � �� _
� �,.�.� �� j�" '*i ' '1 � �� "�-�J � �
... . 4`�}�.,�.;wc�,� �. a.. � � � y.- �'�� ���� ..r...... � w l#.
� � �i'`�. ��� � � W � �s`
; . � �� a � .�i� �
. .. �/,J'��� � . . . 7 � ,� � � �
I �i -�ty'r..�' � .x`.. , .. ,_ " .. . . � �
��.`"i°�� ..,.....6 j�.,� .. � ''�
� .1 i^r i,�,,� �1� 3 , �
,i�� � 3 t � �'f , � �
�:� �. � . .. ��r�+l + i �.�,'",j " ;
4r � .. , �. . . � � �_
�a �-� _ _ � ,.�
_ . . � - ��� :1 wc'
---__._ -. ��- _- -- �^ . . --• , �"_' �'
, . � � ,�, <<.�.�
� _� .. _ `�#
�-�..�3 � ��.�� i ,
, ���d �� � � � .� 'F ' ,,A
.
0 w��-�� � � � Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date: April 15, 2011
To: Planning Commission
From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Subject: General Land Use Plan Amendment— 9110 Golden Valley Road
Background
The City Council has directed staff to amend the General Land Use Plan Map by
designating the property located at 9110 Golden Valley Road to "Medium-High Density
Residential." The property is currently designated as "Light Industrial." It is shown as area
"A" on the attached General Land Use Plan Map.
There are currently five apartment buildings Iocated on the site, with a total of 54 units. If the
property is not re-designated on the General Land Use Plan Map, then it must be rezoned to
"Light Industrial" by June 9, per Metropolitan Council requirements.
Findings
Regarding this proposed amendment, staff finds that:
• The apartment buildings at 9110 Golden Valley Road provide affordable housing
options to the community.
• The housing is located close to many jobs.
• Rezoning the property to "Light Industrial" would render the apartment buildings as non-
conforming uses.
• The City Council has identified this area as an appropriate location for long-term
housing.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending the General Land Use Plan Map by designating the property at
9110 Golden Valley Road as "Medium-High Density Residential." In its recommendation to the
City Council, staff asks that the Planning Commission adopt findings.
Afitachments:
Location Map (1 page)
General Land Use Plan Map (1 page)
Location:
9110 Golden Valley Road
��
=���� :
��_„'�'�
W
<
;�
� � a .
�� � 3r F�:x.. , .a„f �v ,�.71 ,.�t���.�''.13��.,
A Y
� Planning
o y � e
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date: April 15, 2011
To: Planning Commission
From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Subject: General Land Use Plan Amendment—2040 Douglas Drive
Background
The City Council has directed staff to amend the General Land Use Plan Map by
designating the property Iocated at 2040 Douglas Drive to "Office." The property is currently
designated as "Medium-Low Density Residential." It is shown as area "B" on the attached
General Land Use Plan Map.
There is currently a small office building located on the site. If the property is not re-
designated on the General Land Use Plan Map, then it must be rezoned to "Moderate
Density (R-2) Residential" by June 9, per Metropolitan Council requirements.
Findings
Regarding this proposed amendment, staff finds that:
• The office building located at 2040 Douglas Drive provides employment options to the
surrounding neighborhood and to the general community.
• Rezoning the property to "Moderate Density (R-2) Residential" would render the office
building as a non-conforming use.
• The City Council has identified this area as an appropriate location for long-term office
use.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending the General Land Use Plan Map by designating the property at
2040 Douglas Drive as "Office." In its recommendation to the City Council, staff asks that the
Planning Commission adopt findings.
Attachments:
Location Map (1 page)
General Land Use Plan Map (1 page)
Location:
2040 Douglas Drive
� Y,
�;
� King of
lut^
Ch
y� and_°
�x�a
ff
� �
A t��• 1
"M'.s .. 3 . �1 - s
��=�:� � Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date: April 15, 2011
To: Planning Commission
From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Subject: General Land Use Plan Amendment— 1100, 1170, 1200 and 1300 Douglas Drive
& 6200 and 6212 Golden Valley Road
Background
The City Council has directed staff to amend the General Land Use Plan Map by
designating the properties located at 1100, 1170, 1200 and 1300 Douglas Drive and 6200
and 6212 Golden Valley Road to "Medium-High Density Residential." The properties are
currently designated as "High Density Residential." They are shown as area "C" on the
attached General Land Use Plan Map.
�
The City Council feels that this site would be suitable for high density senior housing, but
may not be suitable for high density non-senior housing. If higher density senior housing is
allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in the Medium Density (R-3) Residential Zoning
District, then this site would still be able to accommodate high density senior-oriented
housing. If the property is not re-designated on the General Land Use Plan Map, then it
must be rezoned to "High Density (R-4) Residential" by June 9, per Metropolitan Council
requirements.
Findings
Regarding this proposed amendment, staff finds that:
• High density senior housing may be appropriate for this location.
• High density non-senior housing may have traffic levels that cannot be sustained at this
location.
• The City Council has identified this area as an appropriate location for long-term
medium-high density residential use.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending the General Land Use Plan Map by designating the properties
located at 1100, 1170, 1200 and 1300 Douglas Drive and 6200 and 6212 Golden Valley Road
as "Medium-High Density Residential." In its recommendation to the City Council, staff asks
that the Planning Commission adopt findings.
Attachments:
Location Map (1 page)
General Land Use Plan Map (1 page)
Location:
Northeast Corner of Douglas Drive and Golden
Valley Road
1100, 11700, 1200 and 1300 Douglas Drive;
6200 and 6212 Golden Valley Road
�
� Z --� ,�,
o � �
o � � ;
�
,
� � � � .o
' i�
�
_ � � �
- -� -�:- �
;;��.�ctt �- `�
�
�
��, --
; ' �'1{�,.�. b ;$
,�y " ���TZ--* ��:;1 .. � I ei.?I� .�'.
A$ � F Planning
o � ;�� e
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date: April 15, 2011
To: Planning Commission
From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Subject: General Land Use Plan Amendment— 5635 and 5701 Glenwood Avenue
Background
The City Council has directed staff to amend the General Land Use Plan Map by
designating the properties located at 5635 and 5701 Glenwood Avenue to "Low Density
Residential." The properties are currently designated as "Medium-High Density Residential."
They are shown as area "D" on the attached General Land Use Plan Map.
The City Council feels that the single family homes located on this site are acceptable long-
term uses. If the property is not re-designated on the General Land Use Plan Map, then it
must be rezoned to "Medium-High Density (R-3) Residential" by June 9, per Metropolitan
Council requirements.
Findings
Regarding this proposed amendment, staff finds that:
• Rezoning this area to Medium-High Density (R-3) Residential would render the homes
as non-conforming uses.
• The City Council has identified this area as an appropriate location for long-term low
density residential use.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending the General Land Use Plan Map by designating the properties
Iocated at 5635 and 5701 Glenwood Avenue as "Low Density Residential." In its
recommendation to the City Council, staff asks that the Planning Commission adopt findings.
Attachments:
Location Map (1 page)
General Land Use Plan Map (1 page)
Location:
5635 and 5701 Glenwood Avenue
�. - �- _
��.�
�,v I�I�n
�i. .`,f,����.�
Luth�r�rt
�� �h�ir�ch
_�:;�� ,' °�` �1!fr�,�g.af��n �r„
�
;;,:; P'o�,�c�