07-12-04 PC Agenda
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, July 12, 2004
7pm
I. Approval of Minutes
June 28, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit Amendment - CU-1 04
Applicant: Hope Discount Warehouse
Address: 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue
Purpose: To allow the applicant to expand their sales hours to include
Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 10 am to 6 pm and to allow an
additional 500 square feet of floor space for the store area.
III. Informal Public Hearing - Z011-1 0 - Rezone a portion of the Property located at
the Southeast Corner of Douglas Drive and Medicine lake Road from R-1 (Single
Family Residential) to R-2 (Two Family Residential)
Applicant: Amain Homes, Inc.
Address: Property located at the Southeast Corner of Douglas Drive and
Medicine Lake Road. (South 120 feet of the North 261 feet of the
NW % of the NW % of Section 28, TWP. 118, RGE. 21)
Purpose: To allow the applicant to rezone a portion of the property from R-1
(Single Family Residential to R-2 (Two Family Residential)
IV. Informal Public Hearing - SU 11-06 - Subdivision of the Property located at the
Southeast Corner of Douglas Drive and Medicine lake Road.
Applicant: Amain Homes, Inc.
Address: Property located at the Southeast Corner of Douglas Drive and
Medicine Lake Road. (South 120 feet of the North 261 feet of the
NW % of the NW % of Section 28, TWP. 118, RGE. 21)
Purpose: To allow a lot for the existing Single Family Home and 2 lots for
future construction of a two family home.
-- Short Recess --
1
III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
IV. Other Business
A. Discuss proposed revisions to the Multiple Dwelling Zoning District section of
the Zoning Code.
V. Adjournment
2
i
.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 28, 2004
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall
Manager's Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on
Monday, June 28, 2004. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
.
licant's home located at 15 Westwood Drive N. does not
urrent setback requirements from the real property line but with the
ing proposed it would meet all of the setback requirements. Grimes
e front yard setback for the existing home on the south lot (1 Westwood
s not meet the 35 foot front yard setback requirement and that there is
only a 25 front yard setback. Therefore, this proposal will require a variance from the
Subdivision Code because in order to qualify as a subdivision all of the requirements of
the Zoning Code must be met. He added that with the way the new Single Family
Residential section of the Code has been rewritten that this subdivision would not have to
be done in order for either property to do any additions toward their rear yards in the
future, but that the applicant is requesting this subdivision because it is a comfort issue
for the property owners to have the property line where it has always been perceived to
be.
Those present were Chair Pentel, Commissioners Eck, Hackett, Keysse
Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present were, Director of Planning
Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes
May 24, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Rasmussen a
approved the May 24, 2004 minutes as submitte
II. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdi
Applicant: Randy Roland
.
Address:
Purpose:
raw the existing property line between
Grimes stated it was rece
applicant's propert 5
Westwood Drive No
that the propo
been followed
vere at the existing property line between the
od Drive North and the property to the south, 1
ere they thought it was actually located. He explained
e "practiced" property line, or the line that has actually
s of the two properties over the years.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 28, 2004
Page 2
Pentel asked if the Board of Zoning Appeals could approve the variance from the
Subdivision Code. Grimes said no and explained that the Board of Zoning Appeals only
acts on Chapter 11 of the Zoning Code and that the Subdivision Code is located in
Chapter 12.
Pentel said this is an awkward situation because according to the Code, the Planning
Commission is supposed to deny requests for subdivisions ifthey don't meet all of the
requirements of the Zoning Code.
rive
er put
line
Randy Roland, applicant, stated that they purchased the house at
North in 1986 and although this proposal looks cosmetic the rea'
the house on the lot differently than they thought. He said tha
where it is being proposed is important to the economic val.
Keysser stated that there is an obvious visual separaf
asked if that is where the proposed new property line
properties and
oland said yes.
Pentel opened the public hearing. Seeing and h
hearing.
tel closed the public
.
Pentel suggested the Commission ma
Subdivision Code and one for the s
MOVED by Keysser, seconded <
recommend approval of the .
regarding the properties I
request is for 10 feet off
closest point to the f nt y
nd motion carried unanimously to
uest n ded from the Subdivision Code
d 15 Westwood Drive North. The variance
ir feet to a distance of 25 feet at the home's
ack along Westwood Drive North.
MOVED by R
recommend a
between
by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to
Icant's request to redraw the existing property line
d Drive North.
III.
lic earing - Complete Revision of Section 11.60 of the Zoning Code
Management Zoning Overlay District
The City of Golden Valley
Purpose:
In order to meet current Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) requirements
.
City Engineer, Jeff Oliver, stated that Golden Valley first adopted a floodplain
management code in 1981. He explained that the City has been asked by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to update the Flood Code. He stated that the
City's current floodplain ordinance was adopted in 1981 and that the Flood Code is
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 28,2004
Page 3
.
required in order for Golden Valley residents to participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program where they are offered reduced rates on their flood insurance.
Oliver stated that most of the changes to the Flood Code Ordinance are administrative.
However, there are some significant changes. For example the old Flood Code had a
single classification for floodplain zones and the new Flood Code has two classifications,
the floodway and the flood fringe with varying regulations in each of them. He explained
that the f100dway is the area that is critical for conveyance of the flood w nd that the
flood fringe is typically the area from the floodway out to the limits of r flood
elevation.
wners would be required to undergo the expense for the flood
a e t flood proofing the last 13 homes is a cooperative effort
watershed district and the homeowners and that they are in the
some funding through the ONR.
Pentel r to Subdivision 11 (0) and asked why the Commercial and Industrial
loading areas were removed and added to a different section of the Code. Oliver said
that the goal is that as those properties redevelop the new structures will be required to
comply in entirety so they can be removed from the floodplain.
Oliver stated that the major operational change is with the Re
Elevation or "RFPE". Currently the City's requirement is tha
elevated or flood-proofed to one foot above the 1 DO-year flo
ordinance would require all structures to be built two f abo
Oliver stated that the Floodplain Ordinance bein
"substantial damage" and "substantial improve
Building Code, aimed at reducing potential floo
re clearly defines
see ns of the State
added to it as well.
.
Oliver explained that when the original
approximately 70 homes in Golden
there are now only 13 homes in t
started there were
bject to frequent flooding and that
rought out of the floodplain.
Schmidgall asked if the are
less than the area that u
to hold water. Oliver stat
sists floodway and the area of flood fringe is
dplain due to the projects that have been done
nificant, but it is less.
Hackett asked Oliv
floodplain. Oliv st
that water has
e homeowners options if they are located in the
ucture can be moved, the property can be elevated or
hrough the structure without causing damage.
.
Waldhauser said that she got the impression from the proposed ordinance that
homeowners located in the floodplain would be precluded from doing maintenance or
repairs to their homes.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 28, 2004
Page 4
Oliver explained that additions or improvements that don't exceed 50% of the market
value (or aren't considered a "substantial improvement") of the structure can be done
such as new siding, anew roof or a deck.
Pentel asked Oliver to point out on a floodplain map some of the homes that are located
in the floodplain. Oliver referred to one of his floodplain maps and showed an area where
the homes are in the floodplain. He said that several of those homes are on the repeat
claim list with the National Flood Insurance Program. He explained that d is going to
be constructed in the open area of the Briarwood Nature Area, a floo vee is
going to be built off of Regent Avenue and that some of the homes ve "m . iff
stations" in their backyards.
Waldhauser asked if landscaping structures such as drivew
in the floodplain. Oliver said they would be permitted in floo
could pond and collect on those surfaces and they do t obs
rohibited
ause water
r.
Pentel opened the public hearing. Seeing and h
hearing.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Keysser a
approval to the City Council to Comple
Floodplain Management Zoning Ov
animously to recommend
1.60 of the Zoning Code -
III.
Reports on Meeti
Council, Board
sing and Redevelopment Authority, City
s and other Meetings
IV. Other
g Commission packets
ommissioners if they would prefer their agenda packets be e-mailed
issioners agreed that they do not want their agenda packetse-mailed
ould still like to have agenda packets mailed or delivered to them.
Imes gave the Planning Commission an update on various planning issues.
V. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm.
,
>'
.
.
.
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
July 6, 2004
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Amended Conditional Use Permit to Allow
Additional Floor Space and Extended Business Hours for the Accessory
Retail Space Incidental to the Hope for the City Warehouse at 1200
Mendelssohn Ave.-Hope Discount Warehouse, Applicant
At the November 5, 2003 City Council meeting, the Council approved a conditional use permit
(CUP) that allowed Hope for the City to operate a 3,000 sq. ft. retail store incidental to the
Hope for the City warehouse at 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. N. The conditional use permit also
restricted the hours of the incidental retail sales to 10 am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and
Saturday. (The City Council changed the City Code late in 2003 in order to permit incidental
retail sales in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts. The incidental retail sales
space cannot exceed more than 10% of the building footprint in which the business is located.
The incidental retail sales require a CUP.)
The Hope for the City retail store (also called Hope Discount Warehouse) opened earlier this
year. Staff visited the site early on to review the operation. It appeared to meet the
requirements of the CUP. Recently, however, it was determined by staff that the retail store
was actually open on Tuesday and Wednesday in addition to the days approved as part of the
CUP. Hope for the City was notified of the violation of the CUP and the retail sales operation
was brought back into conformance with the CUP. Hope for the City was told that they would
have to amend their CUP in order to expand the number of days that they could operate.
Therefore, they have applied for an amended CUP to allow sales Tuesday~Saturday with the
same hours as originally approved by the City Council in November 2003.
As part of the CUP, the retail store is limited to 3,000 sq. ft. total. However, the staff has
determined that the amount of space that is used for the retail store is about 3,500 sq. ft. The
total area that is leased by Hope for the City is 12,000 sq. ft. The remaining 8,500 sq. ft. is
used for the main purpose of the organization which is to warehouse donated goods forweekly
distribution to other non~profit organizations. There is also office and rest room space.
As noted in the memo from Trent Rolfzen of Hope Discount Warehouse, the number of
employees for the store will be one full time employee and three part time employees. There
are also 10 volunteers that work at the store. These employees and volunteers also work in the
warehouse.
.
.
.
2. If additional parking is needed, the owner of the 1200 Mendelssohn building will stripe
additional parking spaces as shown on the attached proof of parking plan. The Director of
Planning and Development will determine if additional striped parking is needed.
3. The retail store hours shall be 10 am to 6 pm Tuesday-Saturday.
4. All signage for the Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the sign code.
5. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning
and Development, and dated October 2,2003 shall become a part of this approval. The
retail store may not operate on Tuesday or Wednesday until these requirements found in
this memo are completed.
6. All other applicable local, state and federal regulations are met.
Attachments
. Location Map (1 page)
. Applicants Narratives (2 pages)
. Memo from Mark Grimes to the Planning Commission dated October 9,2003 (4 pages)
. Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal dated October 2,2003 (1 page)
. Exterior Site Plan/Proof of Parking Plan (1 page)
. Hope for the City floor space plan (1 page)
. 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. current site plan (1 oversized page)
. 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. floor layouts (2 pages)
. CUP No. CU-104 (1 page)
3
1200 Mendelssohn Ave.
~
.
z
w
~
w
o
z
w
c
z
w
a.
w
c
2:
PL
$
<-:,.
z
::c
o
en
en
..J
w
C
z
w
:e
NPL YMOUTH AVE N
.
::c
Q
::c
:e
~
.... ::c
$ Q
z ::c
:e
~
....
en
CD
Z
.
~"
~ "'-- ",-
'", '\,,~
'" ',',
~~~
"". "".>~
'\ ,
~" '"
''\'. '" ',-",
"-, "". "\
" ", \
", ""
::c
r=
r-
en
l:D
o
~
:!i:
m
z
PLYMOUTH AVE N
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/'
G')
~
l:D
c::
::0
G')
:!i:
m
z
.
.
.
NARRA TIVEDESCRIPTION
Hove for the city is a 5 year old 50lc3 (not for profit) organization. Developed to be the
procuring Idistribution agent of new merchandise ie, clothing , household goods, office-
school supplies. Sourced from local and national manufactures & wholesalers, freely
received these goods, are then freely given. Distributed to over 65 local community
partners (50lc3), this distribution of free goods has taken place for over 3 years.
Facilitated by one fulltime employ, and supported by up to 20 volunteers. Each Friday of
the week between 12:00 & 2:00 PM. Organizations receiving free goods attendance
varies from 15 to 25 partners per distribution contingent upon quantities on hand.
Stocking of this secured merchandise for Friday distributions takes place Monday
through Thursday between 10:00 & 3:00 on average this can represent 3 to 5 trucks
delivering goods per week.
In conjunction with our present operation we are requesting a conditional use permit,
allowing hope for the city to sell small excess inventory's of general household goods,
with proceeds going to the foundation. Sales could be accomplished In a retail space not
to exceed 10% of the existing footprint of the building. This operation could potentially
run on a Thursday Friday Saturday weekly schedule with hours of 10:00 to' 6:00 PM
which is projected to develop 20 to 35 customer trips per day.
.
.
.
To: City OF Golden Valley
From: Hope Discount Warehouse
Re: Amendment to an existing conditional use permit
To further grow and maximize our potential at this location, Hope
Discount Warehouse would like you to consider the following application.
Currently Hope Discount Warehouse is open Thursday, Friday, and
Saturdays 1 0:00am to 6:00pm. Our goal is to further fund Hope for the City
and help meet the needs of the community and to do that we feel being open
an additional two days would better meet that need.
Our desire is to open additionally Tuesday and Wednesday lO:OOam
to 6:00pm. With those additional business hours we feel that we would be
making ourselves more available to the community.
Staffmg for the discount store would consist of one full time and 3
part time employees with the assistance of 10 volunteers a week.
On an average 3-5 shipments will be arriving for the store during
normal operating hours.
'.~
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Trent Rolfzen
Director of Retail Sales
Hope Discount Warehouse
!
r-
I
!
t
I
,
i
.
lIey
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
October 9, 2003
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Conditional Use Permit to Allow Up to 3000 Sq. Ft.
of the 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. Building for Accessory Retail Sales Incidental
to the Hope for the City Warehouse-J. Brian Woolsey, Hope for the City
Executive VP, Applicant
.
Background and Description of Proposal
On September 11 , 2003, the Zoning Code change allowing accessory retail sales and/or services
in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts went into effect. This change to City Code
allows up to 10% of a building footprint for accessory retail sales and/or services as long as the
sales and/or services are incidental to a permitted use within the building. A Conditional Use
Permit would also be required. The City now has its first application to allow accessory retail
sales in the Industrial zoning district. Not surprisingly, the first applicant is Hope for the City. They
requested the change to the Zoning Code because they are leasing space at 1200 Mendelssohn
Ave. N. and would like to use it primarily for warehouse space with up to.3000 sq. ft. for an outlet
store.
Hope for the City will be leasing 12,000 sq. ft. at the 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. building. (The
building is located at the southeast corner of Mendelssohn Ave. and Plymouth Ave.) The space is
located on the south side of the building with access off Mendelssohn Ave. As part of their
application, they have submitted a narrative description of their not-for-profit organization. In
addition to the warehouse portion of the business that employs 2-3 persons, they would like to
operate a small store in order to sell excess inventories of general household good. There would
be no additional employees for the store operation. The proceeds from the sales would go to help
run Hope for the City. As indicated in the narrative, the store would operate only on Thursday,
Friday and Saturday from 10 am to 6 pm. They anticipate 20 to 35 customer per day that means
about 70 vehicle trips. Mr. Woolsey, Executive VP for Hope for the City, has indicated to me that
no more than 3,000 sq. ft. of their total 12,000 sq. ft. would be used for the store. The plan for
their space indicates the location of the retail store. The footprint of the 1200 Mendelssohn
building is approximately 40,000 sq. ft. so the amount for the retail store proposed by Hope for
. the City is less than 10% of the building footprint.
Existing Building
The applicant has submitted several plan sheets indicating the existing site plan, a plan showing
the space to be used by Hope for the City, a plan indicating the existing tenants in the building
and a plan showing maximum parking on the site. The building is a 2 story brick and block
.
.
.
office/warehouse building with approximately 51,000 sq. ft. of leaseable space on two levels. The
building was constructed in 1959 as a paint factory. There are currently 12 tenants in the building
(including Hope for the City). There are several spaces that are for lease on the second floor.
The uses in the building are a mix of warehouse space, showroom space, manufacturing and
office space. There is also the Rico Kickboxing Club on the Plymouth Ave. side that has operated
since 2000 without any issues. Welsh Companies in Bloomington is both the owner of the
building and the leasing agent.
The City has had an ongoing code compliance concern with one of the tenants in the building
regarding the storage of automobiles. Approximately 5-6 older cars have been parked at the
southwest corner of the site along the railroad tracks. An auto leasing and sales company owns
these cars. They are allowed to have 5 spaces for the parking of cars. No sales may occur on the
site. The cars must each have a current license or else they are considered junk cars and may be
towed. At this time, Welsh is dealing with this tenant and Welsh will not be renewing their lease in
February 2004. Welsh Companies has told me that they will speak to the tenant about this car
storage problem. The City will also continue to monitor this matter and use its police powers to
bring the situation into conformity. .
Parking
The parking requirement for 12,000 sq. ft. space leased by Hope for the City is 24 spaces if the
space is used solely for warehouse purposes. If 3,000 sq. ft. is used for a store and 9,000 sq. ft.
for warehouse, the parking requirement is 38. (This number is based on one space for each 150
sq. ft. of retail space and one space for each 500 sq. ft. of warehouse space.) If the other 39,000
sq. ft. of space in the building is 80% warehouse and 20% office, the parking requirement for that
portion of the building is 70 spaces. Therefore, the total parking required for the entire building is
about 108 spaces. Welsh has submitted a proof of par king plan for their property that indicates
that there is space for 134 spaces on the site. (Ignore the property line on this proof of parking
plan because it is. incorrect. Welsh does have the right to park on the spaces indicated on the
plan because they either own the land or have a permanent easement for parking and access.)
The existing site plan map actually indicates where the parking spaces are striped. Only about 75
spaces are actually striped. I have been to the site numerous times and have never seen a
parking shortage with the 75 spaces. Even with the addition of the Hope for the City operation,
parking should be adequate on the site. As part of the CUP, staff will require that there is a proof
of parking condition in the CUP. This would state that additional parking would have to be added
to the site up to the 134 spaces if the number of striped parking spaces were not adequate.
The Hope for the City portion of the building will be accessed from the west and south side of the
building. The warehouse portion will have two or three dock doors along the south side that will
allow truck access. The store will be accessed through a pedestrian door on the west side of the
building. It is hoped that store customers will use the parking spaces along the west property line
along Mendelssohn Ave. Those coming to pick up items in the warehouse come on an
appointment basis and usually come in the truck that will pick up the items. Therefore, the non-
store portion of Hope for the City requires few car parking spaces.
Setback/Code Issues.
The subject property is zoned Industrial and the General Land Use Plan designates the area for
Industrial uses. The property is bordered on the west by TH 169, on the north by a single-family
residential area, on the east by light industrial and on the south by railroad right-of-way and the
city-owned storage facility.
2
.
.
.
The existing building itself meets setback requirements. The parking lots on the north, west and
south side do not meet setback requirements, and are, therefore, considered non-conforming.
However, according to City Code Section 11.90, Subd. 2, relating to non-conforming uses, this is
not an issue since the building footprint is not proposed to be changed.
Environmental Issues
Since the building footprint is not being changed and no changes are being proposed to alter the
landscape, the applicant is not required to submit plans to the Public Works Department
regarding grading, erosion control, drainage or tree preservation. The Department of Public
Works has chosen not to comment on this CUP application because it isan existing use and the
site will not change. The Fire Marshall has written a memo and his findings will be made a part of
the CUP.
Factors for Consideration
1. Demonstrated Need for the Use: The City's standard basis for determination of
need is that an applicant has identified a market for the proposed good or service.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The General Land Use Plan identifies
the proposed site for industrial uses. Because only a small portion of the 1200
Mendelssohn Building will be used for incidental retail sales, the area will remain
industrial/office/service in nature.
3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: Approval of the CUP will not substantially
alter the extent or nature on on-site development or activity. The store is
proposed to be located on the south side of the building, away from the single-
family area to the north. Also, the number of customers that is anticipated to use
the store is expected to be small and limited to only three days a week.
4. Effect on Any Anticipated Traffic Generation Upon Current Traffic Flow and
Conqestion in the Area: The applicant has stated that the store will generate
about 35 customers on the three days per week when it is open. This translates
into about 70 total trips. The number of employees will be the same with or
without the store since the warehouse employees will operate the store. This
building is in a very accessible area due to its proximity to TH 169 and Plymouth
Ave.
5. Effect on Any Increase in Population: Staff does no believe thatthe number of
employees or customers will increase the daytime population in a manner that
would have a negative impact on the surrounding area.
6. Increase in Noise Level: The store is relatively small and would not cause any
noise issues. The store is on the south side of building that is inclose proximity to
TH 169 that creates a significant amount of background noise.
7. Any Odor. Dust. Smoke. Gas. or Vibration Caused by the Use: Because of the
nature of the business, staff does not suspect the store will cause these problems.
3
.
.
.
8. Anv Increase in Flies. Rats. or other Vermin in the Area Caused bv the Use:
These types of pests will not increase due to the store. There will be a covered
dumpster that will be used to toss any unwanted items.
9. Other Concerns ReQardinQ the Use: The applicant is not p~oposing any outside
storage or changes to the outside appearance of the building, other than signage.
All signage will have to meet the requirements of the Sign Code.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends approval of a CUP that would allow Hope for the City to operate a
retail store incidental to their permitted use. The store would take up no more than
3,000 sq. ft. within the 12,000 sq. ft. that is leased at 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. N. The
proposed store with its limited operating hours, two employees and limited number of
customers will not have a negative impact on the building or area. Also, there appears
to be more than adequate parking on the site for all the uses within the building. The
following conditions are recommended:
1. A retail store incidental to the Hope for the. City warehouse may operate in no
more than 3,000 sq. ft. of the 12,000 sq. ft. leased by Hope for the City. The
attached Hope for the City floor space plan indicates the location of the store.
2. If additional parking is needed, the owner of the 1200 Mendelssohn building will
stripe additional parking spaces as shown on the Proof of Parking Plan. The
Director of Planning and Development will determine if additional striped parking
is needed.
3. The retail store hours shall be 10 am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and Saturday.
4. All signage for the Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the
sign code.
5. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of
Planning and Date October 2, 2003 shall become a part of this approval.
6. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met.
Attachments:
. Location map
. Applicant's Narrative
. Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning
Dated October2, 2003
. Exterior Site Plan/Proof of Parking for 1200 Mendelssohn
. Hope for the City floor space plan
. 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. current site plan
. 1200 Mendelssohn Building floor layouts
4
.
.
.
Memorandum
Fire Department
763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax)
To:
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning
From:
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
Subject: Memorandum - CUP -104-Hope for the City
Date: October 2, 2003
cc: Mark Kuhnly, Fire Chief
Listed below are the fire department plan review comments for the proposed conditional use permit
104, for the proposed occupancy of Hope for the City at 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue.
1. The proposed retail and warehouse area shall be in compliance with the Minnesota State Fire
Code.
2. The storage of products in the warehouse area shall be in accordance with the Minnesota
State Fire Code, Chapter 23 - High Pile Combustible Storage.
If you have any questions, please call me at 763-593-8065.
. a a a
. a a a
. a a a
I- . a a a C
. a a a (")
'v~ "-'
J<
. a a Cr
"-'
-
-
EXTERIO R SITE PLAN + Proof et=-. ark, h)
/J. f5l) tvleN]cLsso/...,J AIjb
--...... ---
............
1
1
_.-.c;.-.-v.--'C.--U----C--.u--.'"G---.-----.--.--c.,
I I ~ I I -,:..,
\et Il. II '-...q
d~
T
I
.
a
I
".... I
'\....." .
I
I
0.1
. 1
I
. I
Oi
I
I
C, I
-j
1
Oi
1
~--.--.- .----.--:.--.--.---------.--.--.--.--.- ---.--.--.-~.--.-_.--eJ
-> 0 ~ ~
,~
~O,->~~. --
~~("~
a
:j
c
-~~-
~-
'.ro
(
~~
.
.
.
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
No. CU-104
Date of Approval:
November 5..2003 by the City Council in accordance with
Sec. 11.10. Subd. 2 and Section 11.36 of City Code
Issued To:
Hope for the City of Golden Valley
Approved Location:
1200 Mendelssohn Avenue. Golden Valley. MN
Approved Conditional
Use:
To allow 10% of the existinq buildinq footprint foraccessorv
retail sales on Thursdays. Fridays and Saturdays in the
....'ndustrial zoninq district
Conditions of Approval:
1. A retail store incidental to the Hope for the City warehouse may operate in no more
than 3,000 sq. ft. of the 12,000 sq. ft. leased by Hope for the City. The attached
Hope for the City floor space plan indicates the location of the store.
2. If additional parking is needed, the owner of the. 1200 Mendelssohn building will
stripe additional parking spaces as shown on the Proof of Parking Plan. The
Director of Planning and Development will determine if additional striped parking is
needed.
3. The retail store hours shall be 10 am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and Saturday.
4. All signage for the Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the
sign code.
5. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of
Planning and dated October 2, 2003 shall become a part of this approval.
6. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met.
7. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for
revocation of the conditional use permit.
Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other city code
provisions, regulations, and ordinances.
Issued by:
~L,
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
.
.
.
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
July 7, 2004
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR THE
SOUTH 120 FT. OF THE NORTH 261 FT. OF THE NW Y4 OF THE NW Y4 OF
SECTION 28, TWP. 118, RGE. 21 (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DOUGLAS DR.
AND MEDICINE lAKE RD.) FROM R-1 (SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL) TO
R-2 (TWO-FAMilY RESIDENTIAl)-AMAIN HOMES, INC., APPLICANT
Amain Homes, Inc., has entered into an agreement to purchase the south 120 ft. of the
property at 2548 Douglas Dr. N. The property is currently owned by Donald Rudser and
Dorothy Rudser (son and mother). The plan is to create a separate lot for the existing single
family home occupied by Donald and Dorothy Rudser. The south half of the property would
then be sold to Amain Homes for the future construction of a two-family home. There would be
two lots created for the side-by-side two-family home. (Amain Homes also has a subdivision
application on this same agenda for consideration by the Planning Commission. In order for
the subdivision to be considered, a recommendation on the zoning change is first required by
the Planning Commission.)
At the current time, the property is zoned R-1 (Single-family residential). Within that zoning
district, only single-family homes are permitted. In order for the proposed two-family home to
be constructed, the south 120 ft. of the Rudser property would have to be rezoned to R-2
(Two-family residential).
Before consideration of the change in the zoning map for this parcel, the City must first
determine if the proposed use is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The text of the
City's Housing Plan does call for a variety of housing types and opportunities for Golden
Valley. The proposed rezoning would provide for a different type of housing opportunity by
creating a side by side two-family structure. Amain Homes proposes to sell each side of the
building to two different families. It is my understanding that the each side would sell in the
$250,000 range. In terms of the General Land Use Plan Map, the Plan Map indicates that this
area is designated for Low Density (less than 5 units per acre) residential uses. In this case,
the proposed Amain development would have a total of 3 housing units on approximately
40,000 sq. ft. or 3.26 units per acre. This density is similar (or less) than some single family
zoning districts in Golden Valley. The two lots proposed for the two family home are each over
10,000 sq. ft. in area which is the minimum lot size for single family lots in the R-1 zoning
district.
.<
.
.
.
A copy of the City's existing land use map is attached that indicates that there are several two-
family homes in the area of the Medicine Lake Rd. and Douglas Dr. intersection. Each of these
two-family homes in the area are nonconforming because the properties are zoned R-1. These
two-family homes were probably built prior to 1980 when the City permitted two-family homes
in the Residential zoning district. After 1980, the City changed the zoning code to only permit
single-family homes in the Residential zoning district. The existing two-family homes are
considered nonconforming and may continue to exist. However, these existing two-family
homes cannot expand and if destroyed or damaged (over 50% of value), they would have to
come into conformance with the zoning code. In the case of the proposed Amain two-family
home location, there is an existing two-family home located immediately to the south.
One reason why there are several two-family homes in the area is that the two-family homes
tend to be constructed on busier streets such as Medicine Lake Rd. and Douglas Dr. (These
are both county roads.) Also, the lots along these county roads are generally deeper than
interior lots that are off major streets. This allows for more space for the two-family home. In
the case of the Amain proposal, the two family home lots are 183 ft. deep. This is 50-60
deeper than most standard single-family home lots.
The zoning map indicates that the entire area around the proposed development in Golden
Valley is zoned R-1. The property to the north in Crystal is zoned for a neighborhood shopping
center.
The proposed Amain two-family home is essentially creating two single-family homes with no
setback along the interior lot line. This allows for a more efficient use of the City's land supply.
If the current R-1 zoning regulations were applied to the parcel owned by Dorothy and Donald
Rudser, only two single-family lots could be created (one for the existing house and one lot to
the south). If the Rudser house was removed, the lot could be subdivided into three single-
family lots. However, Dorothy and Donald Rudser have no plans to move from this location.
The use of this site for a two-family home would not have a significant impact on traffic or
movement along Douglas Dr. The two family home would have a shared driveway on to
Douglas Dr. and create about 20 trips per day.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends approval of the zoning map amendment from R-1 (single-family) to R-2
(two- family) for the two-family home location proposed by Amain Homes. The proposed two-
family home is consistent with the policies of the City's Housing Plan and the Low Density
Residential designation on the General Land Use Plan Map. The proposed two lots for the two-
family home will be similar in size to lots that are used for single-family home. The two lots are
each over 10,000 sq. ft. in area. Also, the proposed two-family home is in an area where
several two-family homes area currently located. These existing two-family homes have
existed in this area and provided the City with affordable and diverse housing for the
community. Although it cannot be guaranteed that the Amain two-family home will be owner
occupied (although this is the plan), the plan is to sell each side of the two-family home and
that is consistent with the ownership pattern of the single-family homes in the area.
Attachments
Existing Land Use Plan Map (1 page)
2
.
.
.
.
Hey
Planning
763.593.8095/763.593.8109 (fax)
Date:
July 8, 2004
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING ON PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AMAIN
ADDITION-2548 DOUGLAS DR. N.-AMAIN HOMES, INC., APPLICANT
Amain Homes, Inc. has signed a purchase agreement with Dorothy and Donald Rudser
(mother and son) in order to purchase the south half of their property at 2548 Douglas Dr. N.
Amain Homes plans to construct a two-family home on the property. In order to purchase the
property, there has to be a subdivision to create a lot for the Rudser house and the two lots
proposed to be purchased by Amain Homes. Prior to consideration of the subdivision,
however, the property where the two-family home is proposed must be rezoned from R-1
(single-family residential) to R-2 (two-family residential). The rezoning must be considered first
because the proposed lots for the two-family home do not meet the requirements of the R-1
zoning district. If the Planning Commission recommends denying the rezoning of the south half
of the property to R-2, the Planning Commission must recommend denial of the preliminary
plat because the proposed plat would not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code for the
R-1 district. .
The property to be subdivided is 42,273 sq. ft. in area Uust short of an acre). At the current
time, the Rudser home is located on the lot. It is located at the southeast intersection of
Douglas Dr. N. and Medicine Lake Rd. The home was constructed in the 1940's. A new,
smaller lot would be created for the Rudser home and two lots would be created for the side-
by-side two-family home to be constructed south of the Rudser home.
Amain Homes has prepared a preliminary plat and submitted other information as required by
the Subdivision Code. The preliminary plat indicates that the north lot for the single-family
home exceeds zoning code requirements of the R-1 zoning district and that the two lots for the
two-family home (assuming the rezoning is approved) exceeds the requirements of the R-2
zoning district.
Factors for Consideration of Approval of Preliminary Plat
Consideration for approving or denying subdivisions is set out in the Subdivision Code. Staff
findings on the following points for consideration are as follows:
,
.
.
.
1.
Proposed lots must meet requirements of the applicable zoning district. As stated
above, all lots will meet the requirements of the R-1 zoning district for Lot 1 and the R-2
zoning district for Lots 2 and 3 where the two-family home is proposed. The minimum lot
size in the R-2 district is 12,500 sq. ft. for a two-family home. In this case, Lots 2 and 3
are about 22,000 sq. ft. together, far exceeding the minimum requirement. The
preliminary plat does indicate that there are two sheds on the property. Amain has said
that these sheds will be removed or moved to a conforming location prior to issuance of
building permits for the two-family home.
2. Subdivisions may be denied upon the City Engineer's determination that steep
slopes or excessive wetness encumbers the buidable portion of a new resulting lot.
The City Engineer addresses drainage and other engineering issues in the attached
memo to me dated July 8, 2004. His memo does indicate that consideration of the
preliminary plat should not go forward until a proper permit has been issued for the filling
of the south half of the property has been issued. It is anticipated that this will happen by
July 9, 2004.
3. Subdivision may be denied if public sewer and water connections are not directly
accessible to each proposed lot. In this case, the existing single-family home has utility
services. The two-family home would be served by existing utility lines in Douglas Dr.
Please refer to the City Engineer's memo regarding utility services.
4.
Approval of a subdivision shall be conditioned on the applicant's granting of
easements for necessary public purposes as determined by the City.The final plat
will indicate all necessary easements as required by the Subdivision Code. The
preliminary plat does indicate proposed easements.
5. When public agencies other than the City have some form of jurisdi'ction over an
area including or directly affected by a proposed subdivision, approval of that
subdivision may be conditioned on the requirements of the outside agency. In this
case, the preliminary plat has been sent to Hennepin County because it is located on a
County road. The City has yet to receive their comments and they will incorporated into
the recommendation made to the City Council.
6. If the applicant is required to submit a review of the property's title, then approval
of the subdivision shall be conditioned on the applicant's resolution of any title
issues raised by the City Attorney. Prior to final plat approval, the City Attorney will
determine if it is necessary to review title information.
7. Approval of a residential subdivision shall be conditioned on the payment of a park
dedication fee in an amount established by the City Council. The City Council has
the right to assess a park dedication fee at the time of final plat approval. Staff will make a
recommendation at that time.
8.
In the case .of subdivisions for two-family home lots, the two lots in combination for
the two-family home shall exceed the minimum lot requirements as established in
the R-2 zoning district. In this case, the two lots for the two-family home will exceed the
minimum lot size requirement of 12,500 sq. ft. for a two-family home when combined and
be capable of meeting all setback requirements when the two-family home is built on the
lots.
2
.
.
9.
The two-family lots must be able to be split into two substantially equal sections.
In this case, the two lots are almost equal in size and dimension.
10. The structure will meet building code requirements. This is a standard requirement
that will have to be met.
11. Separate utilities will be provided to each housing unit ina two-family home. This
is now a requirement of the building code as well as the zoning code and will have to be
done.
12. The owners will have to provide a "Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and
Conditions" for the two-family building that will address issues such as
maintenance, restrictive uses, and arbitration of disputes between owners. Amain
has submitted a draft of the components of such declarations that the City Attorney will
review at the cost of the applicant. The City will be made a beneficiary of the declarations
as required by the Subdivision Code. The declarations will have to be filed with the
County prior to the issuance of any building permits for the two-family home.
.
Staff Recommendation
Assuming that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the zoning map amendment
for the south half of property (Lots 2 and 3, Amain Addition); staff recommends approval of the
preliminary plat of Amain Addition. The preliminary plat creates three lots, one for the existing
home at 2548 Douglas Dr. N. and two for the proposed two-family home. The following
conditions are recommended for the approval:
1. The final plat will be consistent with the preliminary plat of Amain Addition prepared by RLK
and dated 6/25/04.
2. The comments in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to Mark Grimes, Director of
Planning and Development, dated July 8, 2004, shall become a part of this approval.
3. A park dedication fee shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat by the City council.
The amount of the park dedication fee shall be determined prior to final plat approval by the
City Council upon recommendation by staff.
4. The final form of the "Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions" shall be
developed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final plat. The cost of
review of the "Declaration" shall be paid by Amain.
Attachments:
Location Map (1 page)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE dated July 8,2004 (3 pages)
Restriction on Use of Property (components of future "Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions
and Conditions) (7 pages)
. Photos (6 pages)
Preliminary Plat of Amain Addition prepared by RLK, dated June 25, 2004 (2 oversized pages)
Preliminary Grading/Utility Plan prepared by RLK, dated June 25,2004 (1 oversized page)
3
.
I
12548 Douglas Drive NJ
! I I
~
l.-
i I
,
!
i
MEDICINE LAKE RD
I
"T'~-~-'-~---1
Zi. I
~ '
~f~--~-~
<(I I
e,/
0:::'
01 '
..J I
~.__. I
I
.~~
Z
0:::
C
~
'CJ
:J
o
C
.
\
\
\
\
\
MEDICINE LAKE RD tAEO c,,~E
.~~-~\
I
I
\
,/'
/
/
WYNNWOOD RD
I
I
WYNNWOOD RD
I I
II
I I
) L j
WY
. Memorandum
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
.
.
Date: July 8, 2004
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer ~
Subject: Preliminary Plat Review of Amain Addition
Public Works staff has reviewed the preliminary plat for the proposed Amain Addition.
This proposed development consists of subdividing an oversized existing single family
lot into three new lots. One of the proposed lots will be for the existing house, and two
lots will be for a zero lot line duplex development. The proposed development is located
in the southeast corner of Douglas Drive and Medicine Lake Road.
Public Works staff recently received a complaint from a resident in this portion of the
City that filling is occurring on the property being considered for development as the
Amain Addition. Upon investigation, it was discovered that approximately 60 truckloads
of fill have been placed on this site without a City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage
and Erosion Control Permit. Staff notified the property owner in writing that a permit was
required, but as of today, no reply has been received by the City. Based upon this
violation of City Code, staff recommends that this subdivision not be forwarded to any
advisory committees for review until the appropriate permits have been applied for and
issued.
Preliminary Plat
The preliminary plat must be modified to include 1 O-foot wide drainage and utility
easements on Douglas Drive and Medicine Lake Road.
The Hennepin County Bicycle System Plan identifies Douglas Drive as a primary
bikeway route. The Hennepin County Department of Public Works must review this
preliminary plat to determine if additional easements or right-of-way are required for the
future installation of a bike path.
Utilities
There are currently two sanitary sewer and water services to the proposed development
site. One set of sewer and water services is currently connected to the existing home,
G:\Developments.Private\Amain Addition\PrePlat Review.doc
.
.
.
and the second set is proposed to be extended to Lot 3. Services to Lot 2 will need to
be installed from the sanitary sewer and water mains within Douglas Drive. The
developer will be required to obtain permits from the Hennepin County Public Works
Department for the installation of these services.
The proposed sanitary sewer services to Lots 2 and 3 shown on the plans have multiple
bends in the service pipes. These services should be installed with a minimum number
of bends if possible. However, if bends are required, it is recommended that c1eanouts
be installed at each bend. The Building Official should review and comment on this
issue as part of the permit review for the site.
The developer will be required to obtain utility permits and a Right-of-Way permit from
the City of Golden Valley for the installation of the sewer and water services for Lot 2.
Gradina, Drainaae and Erosion Control
This proposed development is within the Mainstem subdistrict of the Bassett Creek
Watershed and must comply with the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission
(BCWMC) Water Quality Policy. Based upon this policy and the size of the
development, water quality ponding will not be required.
This proposed development will also be subject to the Golden Valley Grading, Drainage
and Erosion Control Ordinance. The developer will be required to obtain a permit under
this ordinance prior to the beginning of any work on site.
The existing storm water runoff from the proposed development site is toward the east
and into the rear yards of the adjacent homes. There is no existing storm sewer
available to extend to this site. In order to minimize the amount of additional storm water
runoff flowing to the east, and thereby minimizing the potential for future drainage
problems, the developer must minimize the arnount of runoff leaving this site that flows
to the east. This can be accomplished by maximizing the front yard area that flows to
Douglas Drive, and to route runoff from the roofs of the proposed duplex to the west and
onto Douglas Drive.
Tree Preservation
This development is also subject to the Golden Valley Tree Preservation Ordinance. A
Tree Preservation Plan and Permit application must be submitted for review and
approval prior to starting any work on site.
Recommendations
Public Works staff recommends that the Preliminary Plat for the proposed Amain
Addition be approved subject to the comments contained in this review, which are
summarized as follows:
G:\Developments-Private\Amain AcIdition\PrePlat Review.doc
.
.
.
1. The preliminary plat must be revised to include 1 Q-foot wide drainage and utility
easements on Douglas Drive and Medicine Lake Road.
2. Subject to the review and comments of the Hennepin County Public Works
Department regarding the need for additional easements for trails on Douglas
Drive.
3. The developer is required to maximize the amount of storm water runoff from the
site to Douglas Drive. This includes directing all roof drainage to Douglas Drive.
4. The developer obtains a Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit, a Tree
Preservation Permit and a Right-of-Way Permit from the City of Golden Valley,
and the applicable Hennepin County Permits prior to starting any work on site.
5. Subject to the review and comments of the Building Official, the Deputy Fire
Marshal and other City staff.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter.
C:
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator
Eric Eckman, Engineering Technician
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
Gary Johnson, Building Official
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
G:\Developments-Private\Amain Addition\PrePlat Review.doc
.
.
.
Article 7
RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF PROPERTY
All Owners and Occupants, and all secured parties, by their acceptance or assertion of an
interest in the Property, or by their occupancy of a Unit, covenant and agree that, in addition to
any other restriction~ which may be imposed by the Act or the Governing Documents, the
occupancy, use, operation, alienation and conveyance of the Property shall be subject to the
following restrictions:
7.1. General. The Property shall be owned, conveyed, encumbered, leased, used and
occupied subject to the Governing Documents and the Act, as amended from time to time. All
covenants, restrictions and obligations set forth in the Governing Documents are in furtherance
of a plan for the Property, and shall run with the Property and be a burden and benefit to all
Owners and Occupants and to any other Person acquiring or owning an interest in the Property,
their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
7.2. Subdivision Prohibited. Except as permitted by the Act and the City of
, no Unit nor any part of the Common Elements may be subdivided or partitioned without
the prior written approval of all Owners and all secured parties holding first mortgages on the
Units.
7.3. Residential Use. The Units shall be used by Owners and Occupants and their
guests exclusively as private, single family residential dwellings, and not for transient, hotel,
commercial, business or other non-residential purposes, except as provided in Section 7.4. Any
lease of a Unit (except for occupancy by guests with the consent of the Owner) for a period of
less than seven (7) days, or any occupancy which includes services customarily furnished to
13
. hotel guests, shall be presumed to be for transient purposes. The maximum number of
permanent residents in a Unit shall be two for each bedroom in the Unit. A permanent resident
for this purpose shall be a person living in a Unit for thirty (30) or more consecutive days.
7.4. Business Use Restricted. Except to the extent permitted in this Section 7.4, no
business, trade, occupation or profession of any kind, whether carried on for profit or otherwise,
shall be conducted, maintained or permitted in any Unit or the Common Elements. An Owner or
Occupant residing in a Unit may use his or her Unit for home office purposes and studio uses,
provided that such uses are: (i) incidental to the residential use of the Unit, (ii) do not involve
physical alteration of the Unit, (iii) do not involve any substantial observable business activities
such as signs, advertising displays, bulk mailings, deliveries or visitation or use of the Unit by
customers or employees, and (iv) otherwise comply with such reasonable Rules and Regulations as
the Association may enact. In addition, the Association may maintain offices on the Property for
management and related purposes, and Declarant may maintain sales facilities as provided in Article
15 or the Act.
.
7.5. Leasin2. Leasing of Units shall be allowed, subject to reasonable regulation by
the Association, and subject to the following conditions: (i) that no Unit shall be leased for
transient or hotel purposes, (ii) that no Unit may be subleased, (iii) that all leases shall be in
writing, and (iv) that all leases shall provide that they are subordinate and subject to the
provisions of the Governing Documents, the Rules and Regulations and. the Act, and that any
failure of the lessee to comply with the terms of such documents shall be a default under the
lease. The Association may impose such reasonable Rules and Regulations as may be necessary
or proper to implement procedures for the leasing of Units, consistent with this Article.
7.6. Parking. Garages and parking areas on the Property shall be used only for
parking of vehicles owned or leased by Owners and Occupants and their guests, and such other
incidental uses as may be authorized in writing by the Association. Owners and Occupants shall
not be permitted to park vehicles in parking areas that are designated for use by guests only. The
use of garages, driveways and other parking areas on the Property, and the types of vehicles and
personal property permitted thereon, shall be subject to reasonable regulation by the Association,
including without limitation the right of the Association to tow illegally parked vehicles or to
remove unauthorized personal property.
7.7. Animals. No animal may be bred, or kept or maintained for business or
commercial purposes, anywhere on the Property. However, the Board shall have the exclusive
authority to prohibit, or to allow and regulate, by Rules and Regulations, the keeping of animals
on the Property. The word "animal" shall be construed in its broadest sense and shall include all
living creatures except humans.
7.8. Ouiet Eniovment: Interference Prohibited. All Owners and Occupants and their
guests shall have a right of quiet enjoyment in their respective Units,and shall use the Property
in such a manner as will not cause a nuisance, nor unduly restrict, interfere with or impede the
use of the Property by other Owners and Occupants and their guests.
.
14
.
.
.
Subject to this Article 2 and Section 3.2 of Article 3, all spaces, walls, and other improvements
within the boundaries of a Unit are a part of the Unit.
2.3. Access Easements. Each Unit shall be the beneficiary of an appurtenant easement
for access to a public street or highway as shown on the Plat, subject to any restrictions set forth in
this Declaration. Each Unit that shares all or a portion of a driveway with an adjoining Unit shall be
the beneficiary of an appurtenant easement to use that portion of any such shared driveway located
upon the land within an adjoining Unit to the minimum extent necessary in order to have reasonable
access to the benefited Unit. All such easements shall be subject to regulation by the Board of
Directors of the Association. In the absence of an election by the Association to maintain and/or
replace such shared driveways and to treat the expense of such maintenance and/or replacement as a
Common Expense, each Owner benefited by a shared driveway shall pay the costs of maintaining
and/or replacing the portion of such driveway located upon the land within said Owner's Unit.
2.4. Use and Enioyment of Common Elements. Each Unit shall have the right to use
and enjoy the Common Elements for ingress and egress purposes, access to utility services, and
other reasonable purposes, together with the right to use and enjoy any Limited Common
Elements allocated to the Unit, all subject to any restrictions set forth in this Declaration and
subject further. to any reasonable rules and regulations adopted by the Association.
2.5. Utility and MaintenanceEasements. Each Unit shall be subject to and shall be the
beneficiary of appurtenant easements for all services and utilities servicing the Units and the
Common Elements, and for maintenance, repair and replacement as described in Section 13.
2.6. Encroachment Easements. Each Unit shall be subject to, and shall be the
beneficiary of, the appurtenant easements for encroachments as described in Article 13.
2.7. Declarant's Easements. Declarant shall have and be the beneficiary of easements
for surveying, measuring, inspection, construction, sales activities, and other purposes described
in Article 15.
2.8. Recorded Easements. The Property shall be subject to such other easements as
may be recorded against it or otherwise shown on the CIC Plat.
2.9. Easements and Rights are Appurtenant. All easements and similar. rights now or
hereafter burdening or benefiting a Unit or any other part of the Property shall be appurtenant
thereto, and shall be permanent, subject to termination only in accordance with the Act or the
terms of the easement. Any recorded easement benefiting or burdening the Property shall be
construed in a manner consistent with, and not in conflict with, the easements created by this
Declaration.
2.10. Impairment Prohibited. No person shall materially restrict or impair any
easement benefiting or burdening the Property, subject to this Declaration and the right of the
Association to impose reasonable Rules and Regulations governing the use of the Property.
5
.
.
.
Article 12
RECONSTRUCTION, CONDEMNATION AND EMINENT DOMAIN
12.1. Reconstruction. The obligations and procedures for the repair, reconstruction or
disposition of the Property following damage to or destruction thereof shall be governed by the
Act. Any repair or reconstruction shall be substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifications of the Property as initially constructed and subsequently improved upon. Notice
of substantial damage or destruction shall be given pursuant to Section 18.10.
12.2. Condemnation and Eminent Domain. In the event of a taking of any part of the
Property by condemnation or eminent domain, the provisions of the Act shall govern; provided,
that notice shall be given pursuant to Section 18.10. Eligible Mortgagees shall be entitled to
priority for condemnation awards in accordance with the priorities established by the Act and the
Governing Documents, as their interests may appear.
12.3. Notice. All Eligible Mortgagees shall be entitled to receive notice of any
condemnation proceedings or substantial destruction of the Property, and the Association shall
give written notice thereof to a Eligible Mortgagee pursuant to Section 18.10.
Article 13
EASEMENTS
13.1. Easement for Encroachments. Each Unit and the Common Elements, and the
rights of the Owners and Occupants therein, shall be subject to an exclusive easement for
encroachments in favor of the adjoining Units for fireplaces, walls, roof overhangs, air
conditioning systems, decks, balconies, patios, utility installations and other appurtenances: (i)
which are part of the original construction on the adjoining Unit or the Property; or (ii) which are
added pursuant to Article 8. If there is an encroachment by a Common Element (including a
Limited Common Element) or Unit, upon another Unit as a result of the construction,
reconstruction, repair, shifting, settlement or movement of any part of the Property, an
appurtenant easement for the encroachment, for the use and enjoyment of any encroaching
Common Element (including a Limited Common Element) Of. Unit and for the maintenance
thereof, shall exist; provided that with respect to improvements or alterations added pursuant to
Article 8, no easement shall exist unless the improvement has been approved as required by this
Declaration, and constructed materially in accordance with such approval, or as required by this
Declaration. Such easements shall continue for as long as the encroachment exists and shall not
affect the marketability of title.
13.2. Easement for Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and Reconstruction. Each Unit,
and the rights of the Owners and Occupants thereof, shall be subject to the rights of the
Association to an easement on and over the Units for the purposes of maintenance, repair,
replacement and reconstruction of the Units or Common Elements, and utilities serving the Units
or Common Elements, to the extent necessary or proper to fulfill the Association's obligations
22
. under the Governing Documents. Each Unit shall also be subject to an easement in favor of the
Association and all utilities companies providing service to the Units for the installation and
maintenance of utilities metering devices.
13.3. Easements for Utilities. The Property shall be subject to non-exclusive, appurtenant
easements for all utilities, including natural gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and similar
services, which exist from time to time, as constructed or referred to in the CIC Plat, or as otherwise
described in this Declaration or any other duly recorded instrument. Each Unit, and the rights of the
Owners and Occupants thereof, shall be subject to a non-exclusive easement in favor of the other
Units for all such services, including without limitation any sewer or water Jines servicing other
Units. Each Unit shall also be subject to an exclusive easement in favor of the Association and all
utility companies providing utility service to the Units for the installation and maintenance of utility
metering devices.
13.4 Access and Beneficial Rights. Notwithstanding anything in this Declaration to
the contrary, in no event shall an Owner or Occupant be denied reasonable access to his or her
Unit or the right to utility services thereto. The easements set forth in this Article shall
supplement and not limit any easements described elsewhere in this Declaration or recorded, and
shall include reasonable access to the easement areas through the Units and the Common
Elements for purposes of maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction.
.
13.5 Perpetual Easements. All easement rights and obligations created in this
Declaration shall be considered to be perpetual easements running with the land, inure to the
benefit of and be binding upon all persons holding any interest in the Common Interest
Community.
Article 14
COMPLIANCE AND REMEDIES
14.1. Negotiation and Arbitration of Disputes Regarding the Condition of the Property.
Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to the physical condition of a Unit or the
Common Elements, the Disclosure Statement, or the construction of any improvements within
the Property, including claims of breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, warranty and/or
negligence against Declarant, shall be settled by negotiation; provided, however, that if any party
to such negotiations concludes after attempting to resolve a dispute through negotiation that
further negotiation is not likely to lead to a successful resolution of the dispute, that party may
require that the dispute be resolved through binding arbitration in accordance with the
procedures set forth herein.
14.2. Demand for Arbitration. If a party elects to commence arbitration after
concluding that further negotiations will be fruitless, that party (the "Claimant") shall submit a
written notice to the other party (the "Respondent") by certified mail, return receipt requested
(the "Demand"), demanding binding arbitration. The Demand shall specifically describe each
element comprising the Claim.
.
23
. 14.3. Arbitrator. The dispute shall be decided by a single arbitrator unless the Claimant
in the Demand. or by the Respondent by written response to the Claimant made within five (5)
business days after receipt of the Demand, requests that a three-arbitrator panel be used in lieu of
a single arbitrator. The arbitrator(s) shall be a retired state or federal judge or an attorney who
has practiced in the areas of real estate and/or construction for at least ten (10) years. Within ten
(10) days of receipt of the Demand, the Respondent shall forward to the Claimant the names of at
least five (5) potential arbitrators. The Claimant shall select, within ten (10) days after receipt of
the list of potential arbitrators, the arbitrator or three arbitrator panel from the list provided by the
Respondent. If an arbitrator is not able to serve, the Claimant shall select, from the list provided
by the Respondent. another arbitrator within ten (10) days after any resignation, disability,
inability, or other failure of an arbitrator to serve as arbitrator.
14.4. Allocation of Fee of the Arbitrator or Panel of Arbitrators. The cost of the
arbitration, including without limitation the arbitrator or arbitrators' compensation and expenses,
shall be borne by the party whom the arbitrator determines has not prevailed in such proceeding,
or shall be borne equally by the parties if the arbitrator determines that neither party has
prevailed. The arbitrator may require the parties to advance the potential cost of the arbitration.
.
14.5. Arbitration Procedure. The arbitrator(s) shall conduct a pre-arbitration telephone
conference with the parties. No party may have direct communication with the arbitrator(s)
without the presence of the other party. The parties shall have the right to conduct and enforce
pre-hearing discovery in accordance with the current Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. Any
disputes regarding discovery shall be decided by the arbitrator(s). Each party may present
evidence, including documents or testimony by witnesses and experts. The arbitrator(s) shall
select the date for the arbitration in consultation with the parties. The arbitration hearing shall
take place at the Property, or in such other location within the county where the Property is
located as the parties may mutually agree or the arbitrator(s) shall order. Either party may be
represented by an attorney at the hearing provided that the party gives at least ten (10) days'
notice to the arbitrator(s) and to the other party.
14.6. Award. The arbitrator(s) shall have the authority to award any remedy or relief
that a Minnesota court could order including, without limitation, specific performance of any
obligation created under this Agreement~ provided, however, that under no circumstances shall
Builder be responsible for any consequential or incidental damages. Judgment on the award may
be entered in District Court for the county in which the Property.is located, or in any other court
having jurisdiction. The arbitrator(s) shall apply the laws of the State of Minnesota in resolving
the matter submitted to arbitration.
.
14.7 Entitlement to Relief. Subject to the provisions of Sections 14.1 through 14.6,
above: (i) the Association may commence legal action against any Owner to recover sums due,
for damages, for injunctive relief or to foreclose a lien owned by it, or any combination thereof,
or an action for any other relief authorized by the Governing Documents or available at law or in
equity~ and (ii) legal relief may be sought by the Association against any Owner. or by an Owner
against the Association or another Owner, to enforce compliance with the Governing
Documents, the Rules and Regulations, the Act or the decisions of the Association. No Owner
may withhold any assessments payable to the Association, or take (or omit) other action in
24
ARTICLE 10
PARTY WALLS
. 10.1 General Rules of Law to Apply. Each wall built as part of the original construction
of the Dwellings and located on the boundary line between Dwellings shall constitute a party wall,
and, to the extent not inconsistent with the provisions of this Section, the general rules of law
regarding party walls and liability for property damage due to negligent or willful acts or omissions
shall apply thereto.
.
.
10.2 Repair and Maintenance. The Owners of the Units which share the party wall shall
be responsible for the maintenance, repair and replacement of said party wall in proportion to their
use of the party wall; provided (i) that any maintenance, repair or replacement necessary due to the
acts or omissions of a certain. Owner or Occupant sharing such party wall shall be paid for by such
Owner, and Oi) that the Association may contract for and supervise the repair of damage caused by
an Owner or Occupant and assess the Owners for their respective shares of the cost to the extent not
covered by insurance.
10.3 Destruction bv Fire or Other Casualty. If a party wall is destroyed or damaged by
tire or other casualty, any Owner who has use of the wall may, with the consent of the Association,
restore it, and the other Owner(s) sharing the party wall shall promptly reimburse the Owner who
restored the wall for his or her share of the cost of restoration thereof; provided, however, that the
cost of restoration resulting from destruction or other casualty resulting from the acts.or omissions
of certain Owners shall be the financial responsibility of such Owners, and the Association may
assess the responsible Owners for their share of the costs, without prejudice to the right of aa Owner
to recover a larger contribution from the other Owner. Insurance claims shall be made promptly
following any casualty.
10.4 Weatherproofing. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, any Owner
who, by his or her negligent or willful act, causes a party wall to be exposed to the elements shall
bear the whole c.ost of the repairs necessary for protection against such elements.
10.5 Right to Contribution Runs With Land. The right of any Owner to contribution from
any other Owner under this Section shall be appurtenant to the Unit and shall pass to such Owner's
assign and successors in title.
01
.
.
.
Planning
763-593-8039/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
July 8,2004
To:
Mark Grimes, Director of Community Development
From:
Adam W. Fulton, Planning Intern
Subject:
Multiple Dwelling Zoning Code
The Multiple-Family Zoning District (presently Section 11.25) was first added to the City's Zoning
Code in 1964. In both form and content, this Zoning District has had few changes since 1967,
when height restrictions were added. Golden Valley regulates density primarily by addressing the
appropriate height of the buildings within each Multiple-Family sub-zoning district. Of 20 cities
surveyed, only Brooklyn Center and Golden Valley regulate density through height.
The City's current Zoning Code is problematic for a number of reasons. First, though many new
developments are completed through the PUD process, it is often difficult to ensure that the
underlying zoning conforms to the same density as the new development. In turn, this causes
discrepancies between the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. Next, it is difficult to
complete any new residential development projects (other than Single Family) using the
regulations in the existing code. Finally, the existing code's language is archaic. There are
several Subdivisions that require a substantial amount of detective work just to figure out what is
meant. While such language might be appropriate for legal property descriptions, it does. not
have a place in a Zoning Code meant to be used daily by citizens and staff.
A new set of ordinances have been drafted to replace the old. Section 11.25 will be repealed,
and Sections 11.23, 11.24, and 11.25 will fill the gap. Section 11.23, 'Medium Density
Residential Zoning District' will allow density of up to 12 units per acre and buildings of a height
not to exceed 3 stories or 36 feet. . In Section 11.24, 'High Density Residential Zoning District',
densities greater than 12 units per acre will be allowed. A maximum height of 8 stories or 96 feet
is established. Section 11.25, 'Senior and Physical Disability Residential District', is established
to create an appropriate zoning district for a certain demographic that has slightly different needs
than can be accommodated in Medium and High Density Residential Zoning Districts. For
example, senior citizens often have a reduced need for parking.
These proposed changes will also bring the Zoning Code into line with the Comprehensive Plan.
Since its inception in 1964, the Multiple-Family Zoning District has not come together well with the
Comprehensive Plan. These changes will eliminate any discrepancies between the two. Any
changes to the Multiple Family Zoning District will impact 44 parcels in the City. No parcel will be
zoned to a category that reduces its value.
.
11.23 R-3 Medium Density Residential Zoning District
Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the R-3 Medium Density Residential Zoning
District is to provide for medium density housing (up to 12 units per acre) along with
directly related and complimentary uses.
Subdivision 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 11.2.3 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 changesto 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. Two-family dwellings.
B. Multiple family dwellings of 12 units or less per acre.
C. One-family attached dwellings, provided there is collective maintenance of building
exteriors, driveways, landscaping and common areas.
D. Foster Family Homes.
E. Essential Services,Class I.
Subdivision 4. Accessory Uses. The following accessory uses and no others shall be
permitted in R-3 Zoning Districts:
A. Enclosed parking structures not more than 50% larger than that required by
Subdivision 6 and similar in construction and materials to the principal structure.
B. Storage structures similar in construction and material to the principal structure,
not exceeding 500 square feet or 10 feet in height.
C. Private recreational facilities, including but not limited to swimming pools and
tennis courts.
D. 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 up to 25 persons.
B. Group Foster Homes.
C. Primary structures in excess of 3 stories or 36 feet.
D. The Director of Community Development may propose a 33% reduction in setback
requirements at his/her discretion as a Conditional Use if a development or
redevelopment proposal meets the following requirements:
1. 100% of parking requirements met using underground parking.
2. 30% of all dwelling units planned as affordable units.
.
.
.
3. Lot area is equal to or greater than one (1) acre and a minimum of 33% of
said lot is dedicated as a public park.
Subdivision 6. Lot Area, Height, Parking. All property in the R-3 Zoning District shall
be subject to the following restrictions on use thereof:
A. Lot Area. The physical size of a lot shall determine the maximum number of
dwelling units that may be built thereon. Dwelling units shall not be built at a rate
greater than 12 units per acre. Lot size shall be determined by a registered survey
less than 3 years old.
B. Height. No building shall exceed 3 stories or 36 feet in height, whichever is less.
C. Parking. A minimum of 2.5 off-street parking spaces of a size not less than 180
square feet each shall be provided for each dwelling unit. A minimum of 1.5 spaces
per dwelling unit shall be fully enclosed. Any enclosed parking structure shall be of
similar construction and material to the principal structure. If the enclosed parking
space is provided underground, only 2 off-street parking spaces shall be required,
including only 1 enclosed space. In all construction occurring after January 1,
2006, any outdoor parking or accessory enclosed parking structure shall be
located to the rear of the principal structure and feature a minimum landscaped
area equal to 10% of the paved surface area.
Subdivision 7. Minimum Yard Requirements.
A. The minimum required front, rear and side setbacks for any structure in the R-3
Zoning District shall be as follows:
Front Yard
35 Feet
Side and Rear Yard
25 feet minimum;
30 feet when directly abutting an R-1 Zoning District;
35 feet along a public right-of-way.
B. The minimum required front and rear side yards for parking lots as measured from
the lot line shall be as follows:
Front Yard
25 feet landscaped yard.
Side and Rear Yard
One-half the setback required for a structure.
C. Lot Coverage. No lot or parcel in the R-3 Zoning District shall have a lot coverage
of more than 40% for a lot or parcel equal to or less than one (1) acre in area or of
more than 35% for a lot or parcel over one (1) acre in area. This requirement
excludes outdoor swimming pools, patio areas, and parking lots' or structures.
.
11.24 R-4 High Density Residential Zoning District
Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the R-4 High Density Residential Zoning
District is to provide for high density housing (over 12 units per acre) along with directly
related and complimentary uses.
Subdivision 2. District Established. Properties shall be established within the R-4
Zoning District in the manner provided for in Section 11.90, Subdivision 30f this
Chapter, and when thus established shall be incorporated in this Section 11.24,
Subdivision 2 by an ordinance which makes cross-reference to this Section 11.24 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-4 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 others shall be permitted
in the R-4 Zoning District:
A. Multiple-family dwellings.
8. Foster Family Homes.
C. Essential Services, Class I and II.
.
Subdivision 4. Accessory Uses. The following accessory uses and no others shall
be permitted in R-4 Zoning Districts:
A. Enclosed parking structures not more than 50% larger than the minimum size
required by Subdivision 6, not higher than 50% of the height of the principal
structure, and similar in construction and materials to the principal structure
8. Storage structures similar in construction and material to the principal structure,
not exceeding 500 square feet or 10 feet in height.
C. Underground parking structures.
D. Private recreational facilities, including but not limited to swimming pools and
tennis courts.
E. Retail sales, restaurant establishments, and professional offices within principal
structures containing 100 or more dwelling units. Any such establishment or
office shall be located on the ground floor, have direct access to the street, and
shall occupy no more than 5% of the total floor space in the structure.
.
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 up to 25 persons.
8. Group Foster Homes
C. Retail sales, restaurant establishments, and professional offices within principal
structures containing 50 or more dwelling units. Any such establishment or office
shall be located on the ground floor of the principal structure and shall have
direct access to the street. Any petitioner applying for such a Conditional Use
.
.
.
permit shall provide a current traffic study completed by a professional engineer
showing all potential traffic and parking impacts.
D. The Director of Community Development may propose a 25% reduction in
setback requirements at his/her discretion as a Conditional Use if a development
or redevelopment proposal meets the following requirements:
a. 100% of parking requirements met using underground parking.
b. 30% of all dwelling units planned as affordable units.
c. Lot area is equal to or greater than one (1) acre and a minimum of 33% of
said lot is dedicated as a public park.
Subdivision 6. Lot Area, Height, Parking. All property in R-4 Zoning District shall be
subject to the following restrictions on use thereof:
A. Lot Area. The physical size of a lot shall determine the maximum number of
dwelling units that may be placed thereon. Dwelling units shall not be built at a
rate greater than 32 units per acre. Lot size shall be determined by a registered
survey less than 3 years old.
B. Height. No building shall exceed 8 stories or 96 feet in height, whichever is less.
C. Parking. A minimum of 2.5 off-street parking spaces, of a size not less than 180
square feet, shall be provided for each dwelling unit. A minimum of 1.5 spaces
per dwelling unit shall be fully enclosed. If the enclosed parking space is provided
underground, only 2 off-street parking spaces shall be required, including only 1
enclosed space. Any enclosed parking structure shall be of similar construction
and material to the principal structure. In construction occurring after January 1,
2006, all parking shall be located to the rear of the principal structure and shall
be surrounded by a minimum landscaped area equal to 10% of the paved
surface area.
Subdivision 7. Minimum Yard Requirements.
A. The minimum required front, rear and side yards for any structure in the R-4
Zoning District shall be as follows:
Front Yard
35 Feet
Side and Rear Yard
25 feet from any other zoning district;
35 feet along a public right-of-way;
35 feet when directly abutting an R...1 or R-2 Zoning
District.
B. The minimum required front and rear side yards for parking lots as measured
from the lot line shall be as follows:
F ront Yard
25 feet landscaped yard
Side and Rear Yard
One-half the setback required for a structure.
.
C. Relationship of Setback to Building Height. For any structure in an R-4 Zoning
District that directly adjoins an R-1 or R-2 Zoning District, the minimum required
side or rear setback shall be one-half the height of the building as measured from
the average height of that particular side, unless such measurement is less than
the minimum setbacks in paragraph A.
D. Lot Coverage. No structures, including accessory structures, shall occupy more
than forty (40) percent of the lot area.
.
.
.
11.24R-5 Senior and Physical Disability Residential District
Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the R-5 Senior and Physical Disability
Residential Zoning District is to provide areas within the city which are particularly
suitable as to location and amenities for senior and physically disabled housing, and to
limit the development of such districts to this type of residential construction and directly
related complementary uses.
Subdivision 2. District Established. Properties shall be established within the R-5
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 11.25,
Subdivision 2 by an ordinance which makes cross-reference to this Section 11.25 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-5 Zoning District 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-5 Zoning District:
.
A. Senior housing provided that:
a. 80 percent of the dwelling units shall be occupied by at least one person
of age 55 yearsor older.
b. Elevator service shall be provided to each floor level.
c. Twenty (20) percent of the lot area shall be maintained and landscaped for
passive or active recreational use.
B. Physical disability housing provided that:
a. One unit per building may be designated for a caretaker. The caretaker
unit may be occupied by a person without a physical disability.
b. Resident requirements. All residents must meet the definition of a
physically disabled person as defined in Section 11.03 of this Code.
C. Essential Services, Class I
Add a definition for Physical disability housing; physically disabled
person.
.
Subdivision 6. Accessory Uses. The following accessory uses and no others shall
be allowed in an R-5 Zoning District:
A. Enclosed parking structures.
B. Storage structures similar in construction and material to the principal structure,
not exceeding 500 square feet or 1 o feet in height.
C. Underground parking structures.
D. Private recreational facilities, including but not limited to swimming pools and
tennis courts.
.
E. Retail sales and restaurant establishments within principal.structures containing
more than 35 dwelling units. Any such establishment shall be located on the
ground floor of the principal structure and shall have direct accessfrom both the
street and the interior of the structure. Such uses shall not exceed three (3)
percent of the structure's total floor area.
Subdivision 7. 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 up to 25 persons.
B. Group Foster Homes
C. Retail sales and restaurant establishments within principal structures containing
more than 75 dwelling units. Any such establishment shall be located on the
ground floor of the principal structure and shall have direct access to the street.
Any petitioner applying for a Conditional Use permit within this category shall
provide a current traffic study completed by a professional engineer showing all
potential traffic and parking impacts.
.
Subdivision 4. Lot Area, Height, Parking, Public Transportation. All property in the
R-5 Zoning District shall be subject to the following restrictions on use thereof:
A. Lot Area. The physical size of a lot shall determine the maximum number of
dwelling units that may be placed thereon. Dwelling units shall not be built at a
rate greater than 56 units per acre. Lot size shall be determined by a registered
survey less than 3 years old.
B. Height. No building shall exceed 8 stories or 96 feet in height, whichever is less.
D. Parking. Senior and physical disability housing presents a unique parking
situation. All primary structures in the R-5 Zoning district shall adhere to the
following:
1. All building permit applicants in an R-5 Zoning District shall present a
parking analysis completed by a professional traffic engineer containing
criteria for the maximum number of possible cars, trends in auto usage,
and parking requirements over time.
2. At his/her discretion, the Director of Community Development may require
an independent parking analysis completed by a professional traffic
engineer. All costs for such analysis shall be the responsibility of the
applicant.
3. A building permit shall not be issued for a primary dwelling that includes
fewer parking spaces than dwelling units.
E. Public Transportation. The main entrance of the principal structure shall be
served by or located within 400 feet of regular transit service. The main entrance
.
-'
t
.
shall be served by a sidewalk providing for safe movement to and from the
location of the transit service.
Subdivision 5. Minimum Yard Requirements.
A. The minimum required front, rear and side yards for any structure in the R-5
Zoning District shall be as follows:
Front Yard
35 Feet
Side and Rear Yard
25 feet from any other zoning district;
35 feet along a public right-of-way;
35 feet when directly abutting an R-1 Zoning District.
B. The minimum required front and rear side yards for parking lots as measured
from the lot line shall be as follows:
Front Yard
25 feet landscaped yard
Side and Rear Yard
One-half the setback required for a structure.
.
C. Relationship of Setback to Building Height. For any structure in an R-5 Zoning
District that directly adjoins an R-1 or R-2 Zoning District, the minimum required
setback shall be one-half the height of the building as measured from the
average height of that particular side, unless such measurement is less than the
minimum setbacks in paragraph A.
D. Lot Coverage. No structures, including accessory structures, shall occupy more
than forty (40) percent of the lot area.
.