Loading...
04-26-04 PC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday,ApriI26,2004 7pm I. Approval of Minutes April 12, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting II. Informal Public Hearing - General Land Use Plan Map Amendment Applicant: City of Golden Valley Address: 4950 Olson Memorial Highway Purpose: To change the General Land Use Plan Map designation from Commercial to High Density Residential in order to allow Sunrise Development, Inc. to construct an 80-unit assisted living facility. III. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning Applicant: City of Golden Valley Address: 4950 Olson Memorial Highway Purpose: To change the Zoning Map designation from Commercial to Multiple Family Residential (M-4) in order to allow Sunrise Development, Inc. to construct an 80-unit assisted living facility. -- Short Recess -- IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings V. Other Business VI. Adjournment , .. . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 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 April 12, 2004. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at I 7pm. I I. Approval of Minutes March 22, 2004 Planning Commission Me Those present were Chair Pentel, Commissioners Eck, Groger, Rasmussen and Schmidgall. Also present were Director of PI Development, Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, . Pentel said she would like the word "contigu . referring to the sidewalk in front of the S rin Planning Commission recommended proposal I to t wbrding when ping Certer that the pproval on the Applebee's Eck referred to page ten and ording of the motion was not clear. MOVED by Keysser, se approve the March 22, mussen and motion carried unanimously to ith the above noted changes. II. - Rezoning from R-1 to R-2 - Z003-02 Lilac Drive North To allow an existing duplex to be rezoned so an addition and remodeling can be done. Grimes r ed to a location map and stated that the property is located at Scott Avenue and Lilac Drive. He stated that the applicant is requesting to rezone the property from R-1, Single-Family Residential to R-2, Two-Family Residential. Grimes explained that the house was built as a two-family home in the 1960's and that prior to the 1980's two-family homes were allowed as a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district. He added that there are a number of existing two-family . homes is this area. . Minutes of the GoldenValley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 2 ~ Grimes explained that the applicant would like to convert the existing tuck-under garages into living space and add an addition on to the back of the existing two- family home but the Zoning Code prohibits non-conforming buildings to be added to or altered. So the only way they can add on to this two-family dwelling is to make it conform by rezoning it to R-2. Grimes said the home is currently being used as a two-family home. Each unit in the two-family home is occupied by 3-4 unrelated individuals. He explained that the Zoning Code defines a family as "up to five unrelated people", 0 ybody related by blood or by marriage. . Grimes stated that the proposed addition and the existing h setback requirements and that the property is approxima square feet which is more than double the requirement district which is 12,500 square feet. He added that theG Map designates this property as low density (up t n' would only be three units per acre. Grimes said that the proposed improvement the neighborhood because it has been years and there are other two-famil location map and showed where so are located. Pentel asked Grimes if th rezoning process if the structure. Grimes said property they hav made without cha ner would have to go through the same a deck or any other addition to the tce Tasks Unlimited purchased the erous improvements to the inside that could be 'ng. roposed addition would be shared by the two units. nding is that the addition is for only one of the units. He 109 Official looks at plans there is going to have to be two the City has a number of R-2 properties located in R-1 zoning districts e clear intent in doing that was because this area was to be a single family residential district. He said that if this property is now rezoned to R-2 it would mean another duplex could be built on this property and the City would be allowing an R-2 property in the middle of an R-1 zoning district in perpetuity, which is not the intent of the R-1 zoning district. . Pentel said if the City would not allow the property to be rezoned it would be considered a taking because there is a house existing as a duplex and the City's . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 3 zoning code changing the R..1 zoning dist'rict came into effect after it was built. Grimes said the house could continue to be used as a duplex. Eck stated that if there was a fire and the house would have to be torn down it would then be able to be rebuilt as a duplex if it was rezoned to R-2. Pentel stated that the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the property is low density and that the lot is almost two times the size required. I I i Eck asked if there is something else the City could do to allow the R addition without rezoning the property. Grimes said that the Cod says that a non-conforming structure can not be added to and t the City would want to start issuing variances for non-confo Groger asked if the owners could convert the existing without requiring a rezoning. Grimes said yes because t enlarged. He added that they should consider wha a typical two-family home. He added that ther so there would be fewer trips than with a typO the existing garages conform with the setba pace Id not be o like if it was ive s at this home el. Groger asked if nts. GrirPes said yes. Groger said that in the 1980's when were some parcels in the City that be some reason why it was th Single-Family. Grimes said t he did not know how the some were not. Pentel Comprehensive Plan R-2 zoning district there .~&~ned R~2 and that there must n"to'feep this property zoned r ry few parcels zoned R-2 and that made hat some were zoned R-2 and ning on this property is R-1, but that the density which includes R-1 and R-2. nue South, Minneapolis, representing Tasks d off wanting to improve this property for their ed as several options to avoid having to rezone the hing they decided that they other plans they came up e clarified that the proposed new addition would be h unit and that each unit will be an independent unit. He said n 0 relocate the kitchen currently in the north unit to the south Pentel asked about the number of residents currently living in the home. Nielsen said there are six and that they fully expect to follow the rules about not having more than 10 people total living in the house, or five in each unit. Pentel asked if there is staff living with the residents or if these individuals are living totally independently and maintaining the house and yard. Nielsen said there are staff services available as needed, usually an average of 8 to 10 hours per week. He said that they do have a property manager that assists with the . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 4 maintenance, but that Tasks Unlimited maintains all of the major things in the home. In terms of living, they operate as any family would. Keysser asked if the residents are all men. Nielsen said in this house all the people living there are men but that they do have some co-ed homes. He added that they are trying to maintain the character of the neighborhood and that they are trying to be sensitive to the setback requirements. Pentel referred to Grimes' staff report regarding one of the tenants r bicycles. Neilsen said one tenant fixes up bicycles and sells the see this more as a hobby and not a business. He said that the to figure out another way to sell the bikes and that to the be f they have all been removed from the property. Keysser asked Nielsen to explain what Tasks Unlimited Tasks Unlimited operates 19 lodges in the Twin Git' He said that all of the tenants have jobs and t to each house. He said each house is self g administered using the same model. He add people can leave whenever they want. aid that metro area. po staff individual t hey are all is no end cycle and that Keysser asked what kinds of specia that they are people with ment tenants are a part of the stat said they there may be s but they are largely sel individuals and how th County, work trai . ants have. Nielsen explained es 0 ome kind. Pentel asked if the !,,, are receiving disability. Nielsen getting some medical assistance support, tel asked Nielsen how they find these s limited. Nielsen said through Hennepin , tenants and other family members. re court appointed. Nielsen said no, they are free r they want. Pentel asked if everyone has a certain ribute toward rent. Nielsen explained that there is a d board set by Tasks Unlimited and the tenants. he tenants get around if they are not driving. Nielsen said that ants drive and that they do have a vehicle at the location for them Groger referred to the interior of the duplex and asked if there would be any connecting doors between the two units or if they would be entirely separate. Nielsen said that there is a fire door separating the two units that remains closed. Groger asked Grimes if a door between the two units would cause a problem with the building being able to be considered a two-family unit. Grimes said that the Building Official would have to determine that, but it is his understanding that . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 5 the home is two distinct units with a common household on each side. Nielsen said that was correct. Keysser asked if the tenants socialize together in one common area. Nielsen said it is up to the individual people if they want to socialize together. I Keysser asked what is driving the need for this proposed remodeling. Nielsen said that they want to upgrade the home for their tenants, they h~ve a demand for housing, it is a very large lot and it is a practical thing to do. venue North, referred to the previous mention of the rezoned in order to build a deck addition or any other kind d how the garage built between 1992 and 1997 received zoning the property. Grimes explained that garages are a s an accessory structure and that the City allows accessory structur out having to rezone the property. Pentel added that it would only need to be rezoned if the actual principal structure was being added to. Keysser asked how long Tasks Unlimited has owned this pro~e they've owned it since 1997. Schmidgall asked if it is possible that the door connecti make the house be considered a single-family home an to be rezoned. Pentel said she thinks the door is said if the door is an issue they are prepared t . Pentel asked about the tenure of tenants. Ni at this location but that it is typically se Keysser asked Nielsen why Tasks services they offer don't fall un ~ or County. Keysser asked Nielse it. Nielsen said as far a any other duplex. s a conventional duplex when they bought a conventional duplex and that it looks like . Ward referred to the R-1 section of the zoning code and asked if the zoning for this property could be kept single-family with a conditional use permit. Grimes explained that "residential facilities" serving seven to 25 people are allowed with a conditional use permit in the single-family zoning district but that the definition of a "residential facility" is one licensed by Hennepin County and the State of 1 . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 6 Minnesota and Tasks Unlimited is not a licensed operation so they are not considered a residential facility. Ward said there are some duplexes in the area that have been turned into single- family homes. He said he doesn't think having a door between the two units qualifies it as a two-family home and that he believes that makes it a single- family dwelling. Demetria Hawes, 3385 Scott Avenue North, stated she was representing David Ruth, 3340 Lilac Drive North, because he could not attend the mee' . Ruth said he is concerned that only residents within an area of 500 feet re ice of this proposal because it affects a much larger area. He said h this dwelling is grandfathered in and asked if the proposed rem approved by the neighbors it affects most. He asked how able to reside in the duplex, if the City will collect an e is a two-family residence and what the property values surrounding single-family dwellings. He said thes and that he doesn't question who lives there, area. Hawes said it is a very large property house it is a three-story walkout. Sh 1,092 square feet and that that us their property is on a peat bog in 70 trucks of dirt to fill in th garage and said it is belo her it shouldn't have b humongous house and they have been g space without rezo questioned h cook to prepa single fa good n ks at the house from her e proposed addition is .~ of a small house. She said selflillg and that they have brought ears. She referred to the existing I and t e person who built the garage told it was. She said it is going to be a ul oversized forthe neighborhood. She said ne with this structure and they can get added erting the existing tuck under garages. She d if the people living in the home are using a he said her thoughts were that they are using it as a dded that they are nice people and that they have been Scott Avenue North, stated that he lives across the street rty and that he would like to make a complaint. He said the applican sh ends up in his yard when there are high winds and that it has happened two or three times. Carol Smith, 3355 Scott Avenue North, asked if the owners are paying real estate taxes. She asked how Tasks Unlimited approaches their financing with the large number of people living in the house. She said there are some sites such as milk cartons piled up outside which would indicate that it is a higher density residence. She said she would like to see a plan or elevations of the proposed addition and that a home of this size in this neighborhood would be valued too , . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 7 high. She added that ifsomething were to happen to this house it would then be zoned for higher density and could be turned into town homes and could increase the size of residences in the neighborhood which is an R-1 neighborhood. She said they are quiet neighbors and she hasn't seen police cars at the property or things that happen in higher density housing areas. She believes how they operate now is good considering the kinds of residents they have and that she believes the total concept is to have smaller groups of people living together functioning more like a family. I Pentel clarified that with the way the property is zoned right now up to five unrelated adults, and no more, living on each side 0 t Nielsen explained that Tasks Unlimited is a not for profit not pay real estate taxes and that the proposed additio financial impact relating to property taxes. do Kristen Sobanja, 3360 Scott Avenue North, s seems as though the duplex is being used a common eating area. She said some of the have had 8 people living there and tha and ate and lived commonly on the City inspect the house to see how it rnE1 because it welling with a the pastlhave said they ne end. of the house ested someone from the Pentel asked Nielsen if there units. Nielsen said the do they don't intend to bre. only five people living i bedrooms on the 0 sleeping. terior door connecting the two e two units goes to the garages and that arding the separation of the space having t. arified that there are currently three n each side of the duplex where people are Avenue North, said they live in a nice neighborhood o keep it that way and to know their neighbors. She over, they welcome new families and teach all of the kids yand try very hard to know each other so they can all assist lose that ability as these duplexes and other homes in the purchased for the purpose of converting them to group homes. She sai he people living in this duplex have a tendency not to associate with the neighborhood and therefore, are changing the complexity of their single- family, concise neighborhood. She said the addition the applicant is proposing is bigger than her first home and that it is not going to fit in with the neighborhood. She asked why the property has to be rezoned to R-2 when it is already an R-2 home. She said she has not seen anything that indicates what the addition is going to look like and that 1,000 square feet is a heck of a big kitchen. She said the inside of the units would have to be reconfigured and more bedrooms would have to be added to allow five residents on each side and that she does not think . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 8 that would be conducive to the type of thing that the Planning Commission has said they want for single-family homes. She said she wants to point out that there is another home on Scott Avenue and possibly one on 33rd that have been purchased and are in the process of being converted into group homes. She said there is a low-income housing unit in their area as well and that she thinks that is enough impact to an area that is supposed to be zoned single family and asked how many homes the City wants to see taken off the tax roles. She said she has an objection to this huge addition and that she hasn't seen anything saying that they have tested the soil to show that this proposed addition would n work. She said she is not convinced that people should be allowed to erty and then keep expanding it to the maximum of what the law s hat is supposed to be a single-family zoning district. She said t en they were first occupied, were family units and the City c individuals living alone, not doing much interaction with wanting to be integrated into the neighborhood a family. Pentel clarified that these units were built as d family homes and that the City rezoned that that would be grandfathered in. Grimes expl always defined a family as related indi . re never single were duplexes e zoning code has e unrelated people. Chuck Ryan, 1319 Winnetka Avenu neighborhood but that he has a house was built and added Tasks Unlimited is a profi they should be paying focusing on this partie talk on camera ab th anything about it. doesn't live in this ro m in his neighborhood where h lot of people living in it. He said ation, t is not a non-profit organization and old Ryan that the Planning Commission is t t this meeting. Ryan said he wanted to rty in his neighborhood because nobody has done roperty is zoned R-1 than it should be R-1. 76 Scott Avenue North, asked about the ramifications zoned to R-2 if in the future they want to sell this house. , perty can be used for if it is zoned R-2. Grimes explained is zoned R-2 they can use it as a two-family dwelling and that o uare feet. If it were to burn down the property could be two new duplexes could be built. Gloria Friske, 5332 33rd Avenue North, asked how the City knows how many people would occupy this dwelling and who oversees it. Grimes explained that the Mr. Nielsen has an understanding with the City regarding the number of people that would be allowed to live in the house. He said the City can go into the house and inspect it if there are neighborhood complaints, the minutes will show the discussion and that the City Code allows the City to enforce the number of people living in a house. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 9 Pentel asked what happens if the City finds out there are more than five unrelated people living in a house. Grimes said they would talk to the owner first and if that doesn't work they would have to go to court. He said he has made Mr. Nielsen very aware that there can't be more than five people living in each of the units. Carol Smith, 3355 Scott Avenue North said that there is a high demand for R-1 zoned property and that if this property is rezoned to R-2 the Citt would be setting it up for the applicant to sell the property and make a profit. . es said the owners would have to look at the financial feasibility of sellin erty. Nielsen said they are not trying to disrupt the character of t they want to be sensitive to the neighborhood, they are s. the property. He said he would be happy to do somethi property but he can't. Pentel asked Nielsen to explain what exactly i foot addition. Nielsen said that they are plan remodeling the kitchens to make them hand unit to the north would end up being la accommodate accessible rooms the their interest in this property would h he 1,000 square I reat room and .ble. Pe~tel asked if the yes, and that in order to . He said he doesn't think rhood. Keysser asked Nielsen to cia and up to five unrelated R aware of the rules and uld be two totally separate units ive in ne unit. Nielsen said he is keenly . tention of violating them. Groger said by th two units that com said that if th ild have to d wh unders dding a great room and having a door between the ys it is going to be used as one facility. Grimes es this as not being a two-family unit, they'll make it a two-family unit and that the applicant Iy be a total of 10 people in this building. Scott Avenue North, said that 10 people don't take up that o x 30 addition does and that it is the size of the addition she Id the Planning Commission not to be taken by the applicant saying t e going to put in a handicap accessible kitchen because they won't need it if the bedrooms and bathrooms aren't accessible. Demetria Hawes, 3385 Scott Avenue North, asked if caregivers stay overnight at the house and if that is included when figuring the number of people that can live in a house. She said they have gotten along fine with the property the way it is and all the changes that have been made to the property have benefited this company. She suggested they change the tuck under garages into living space and asked why the City can't keep it zoned like it is. She asked how rezoning this " . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 10 , property would benefit the neighborhood and said she thinks it would just benefit the property owners and give them license to do whatever they want. Josh Goodell, 5315 33rd Avenue North, said his biggest concern is how rezoning this property will open it up to redevelopment in the future. He added that the addition will make the house look disproportionate to the other houses in the neighborhood. He urged the Planning Commission to try to find another way to address this need and said that rezoning the property can lead to unintended consequences. . Seeing and hearing no one further wishing to speak, Pentel c10s hearing. Eck said he appreciates the value of the Tasks Unlimited work they are doing. He said he doesn't have any issu addition being built and understands the concerns of the size of the addition but that the size of the additio him the issue is that the City would be creatin an R-1 area specifically zoned R-1 by the Ci other way to get this proposal done and if th this then he can not support rezoning e oposed ut the esaid to lot in the middle of as to be some tely no other way to do Groger said he agrees with Eck an not in agreement with rezonin development which could po already has seven bedro have nine bedrooms pi, to allow the addition w rezoning this prop need for the addition and he is ec se it would open it up for future edensity on this lot. He said it onve ng the existing garages they could n living space. He said if there is someway e might consider it, but he can not support uplex on the neighborhood is fairly marginal, but to bedrooms that would allow another two people the property. He said the proposed addition is really r two people. Iso concerned about the way the duplex is being added on to plex is being made into one large institution which is not a single family zoning district. . Pentel said she thinks the Commissioners are finding the access from one unit to another objectionable and that it sets it up as operating as one house. She said she worries about tying the hands of anyone who owns this property being able to add on to it. She said she would like some advice from the City Attorney. Grimes said he has discussed this application with the City Attorney and that rezoning the property was his recommendation because there is no variance -~ . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2004 Page 11 t procedure to allow the proposed addition'and the City doesn't want to make it a PUD. He said the text of the zoning code could maybe be changed to add "group living facilities" as a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district. Rasmussen said she agrees with her fellow Commissioners and is not in favor of spot zoning. She said she thinks the people that run this program are heroes and she doesn't like to see the neighbors say negative things about their neighbors in order to keep the property zoned R-1. She said she wishes ther~ were some other way to allow the proposed addition because these types of fa ... es need to exist. She added that these are the kinds of programs that keep m being homeless and urged the City to look at allowing the additi er way. Pen Comm Commissl Grimes stated that from a size perspective, there are a' Valley that are larger than this proposed addition and th not out of proportion. Grimes said he would talk to the City Attorn is in favor of the program. ds as if everybody I . Schmidgall said he is puzzled that t property, but can't seem to make it he zoning of the them to expand. MOVED by Keysser, second the request to rezone the otion carried unanimously to deny ted a 3370 Lilac Drive North to R-2. III. hort Recess -- the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, oning Appeals and other Meetings to a brochure from GTS and suggested that the new Planning embers take the seminar called "The role of the Planning Grimes gave the Commissioners a copy of the plans for the road work being done at Highway 100 and Douglas as they requested at their last Planning Commission meeting. . v. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:52 pm. i . Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: April 19, 2004 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Amendments to the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning Map for Lot 1, Block 1 of Sunrise of Golden Valley, PUD No. 97 . At the February 17, 2004 City Council meeting, the Council approved the Preliminary Design Plan for Sunrise of Golden Valley, PUD No. 97. The Preliminary Design Plan includes the proposed 80 unit Sunrise assisted living building and the existing office building (Edina Realty building). The General Plan of Development for Sunrise is scheduled to go before the City Council on May 4, 2004. This would give final approval of the PUD and allow for building permits to be issued for the assisted living building. As part of the approval of the Preliminary Design Plan by the City Council, it was noted that the General Land Use Plan Map guides the Sunrise assisted living building lot for Commercial uses. This was consistent with the previous user that was on the site (The old White House restaurant was torn down over five years ago). This commercial guiding of the property is not consistent with the proposed Sunrise assisted living building. The Zoning of the Sunrise assisted building lot is also not consistent with the existing Commercial zoning of the site. Again the Commercial zoning was appropriate when the old White House restaurantwas located on the site. . In order for the General Plan of Development to by approved by the City Council, the uses within the PUD must be consistent with both the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning Map. Therefore, the staff is recommending that the General Land Use Plan Map be amended Commercial to High Density Residential and the Zoning Map from Commercial to Multiple Family Residential (M-4). These designations are consistent with the proposed assisted living building. (These amendments are being done at this time to coincide with the approval of the General Plan of Development by the City Council. These amendments were not done at the time of Preliminary Design Plan consideration because there is the potential that the proposed PUD could be dropped prior to General Plan approval. If it was dropped and the Plan Map and Zoning Map were changed, the City would have a site with changed Plan Map Guiding and Zoning and no project.) 1 . . . The other lot in the PUD is the location of the existing Edina Realty building. This lot will remain guided on the General Land Use Plan Map for Commercial uses and on the Zoning Map for Commercial. Office buildings are permitted uses in the Commercial zoning district Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of changing the General Land Use Plan Map from Commercial to High Density Residential and the Zoning Map from Commercial to High Density Residential (M-4). The amendment to the General Land Use Plan Map must be reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council prior to final approval by the City Council in o[der to determine that the amendment is consistent with regional systems. The City staff does not see any reason why this minor amendment would not be approved by the Metropolitan Council. Attachments Location map (1 page) 2 . LIlAC DR N ~, ~~~\\ \~\ ) / ) 1// ,I / ~ / / -<' HIGHWAY 55 HIGHWAY 55 HIGHWAY 55 ~ > ~ m z 14950 Olson Memorial Highway I J I SCHAPER RD z w ~ <( ~ 1= o HIGHWAY 55 HIGHWAY 5 HIGHW Y 55 HIGHW,4 HIGH AY 55 .~ z ~ o .,.