The URL can be used to link to this page

09-09-85 PC Agenda ' " } • GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road September 9, 1985 7:00 P.M. AGENDA I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 26, 1985 II. WAIVER OF THE PLATTING ORDINANCE � APPLICANT: Mr. Peter Knaeble LOCATION: 5221 Woodstock Avenue and 455 Cloverleaf Drive REQUEST: Approval of Lot Division to allow transfer of property from 5221 Woodstock Avenue to 455 Cloverleaf Drive III . WAIVER OF THE PLATTING ORDINANCE APPLICANT: Mr. Arthur L. Ney � LOCATION: 8355 and 8365 Julianne Terrace REQUEST: Approval of Lot Division to allow transfer of property from 8355 to 8365 Julianne Terrace IV. REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN V. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 3, 1985 VI. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE STUDY COMPLETED FOR GOLDEN HILLS REDEVELOPMENT AREA • � _. .. �,. _ � 4 MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY � PLANNING COMMISSION August 26, 1985 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley Health Center, 4101 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Planning Commissioners assembled in the lobby of the Administration Building at 6:30 P.M. Those present were Commissioners Kapsner, Leppik, Lewis, McAleese, McCracken- Hunt, Prazak and Russell . Also present was Alda Peikert, City Planner. I. TOUR OF GOLDEN VALLEY HEALTH CENTER Ms. Carol Schneeweis, Director of Marketing, Golden Valley Health Center, conducted a tour of the Golden Valley Health Center buildings and grounds, explained the programs offered at Golden Valley Health Center, and answered questions from Commissioners during the tour. II. MEETING WITH HEALTH CENTRAL REPRESENTATIVES Following the tour, Planning Commissioners and staff inet in the Board Room of the Administration Building of Golden Valley Health Center with representatives of Health Central Enterprises including Ms. Barbara Cox, Vice President, � Planning and Marketing, and Ms. Dolly (Loreen) Schmidt, Manager of Market Research. Ms. Schmidt gave a presentation concerning future development of Golden Valley Health Center property. Ms. Schmidt reported that within the next year to year and a half, Health Central expects to complete plans for development of 25 to 40 acres of undeveloped Golden Valley Health Center property. The area targeted for development is Outlot B of the Golden Valley Health Center plat, which is located on the west side of the Health Center between Twin Lake and Sweeney Lake. Ms. Schmidt said that the meeting with the Planning Commission was premature in terms of presenting plans for development of the property, but that the meeting was not premature as the first in a series of ineetings anticipated for purposes of exchanging development ideas and concerns. Ms. Schmidt reported that she has met with Mr. Michael Botnan, Manager of Data Processing, Minneapolis Clinic of Psychiatry and Neurology, with Mr. Jim Beaton, Associate Director and Interim Executive Director of Courage Center, and with Ms. Sharon Landrum, Vice President of Finance, Golden Valley Health Center, to address their future needs and obtain their suggestions in an effort to coordinate future development harmonious with the programs and goals of all three facilities. Ms. Schmidt presented a list of development alternatives or options compiled in response to needs expressed and recommendations made by the three participating entities. Ms. Schmidt stated that Howard Dahlgren and Associates has been retained to assist with site planning for the anticipated development. � . � Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 26, 1985 � Page 2 Ms. Schmidt concluded with a request for suggestions, and Planning Commissioners expressed concerns and offered suggestions in relation to street access, soil conditions, access to Sweeney Lake, impact on Sweeney Lake, and impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood. Ms. Cox and Ms. Schmidt answered Planning Commissioner questions about Health Central programs and about the future planning process. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 8, 1985 It was moved by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Leppik and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 8, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as recorded. IV. REPORT ON BZA MEETINGS - JULY 9 AND AUGUST 13, 1985 Commissioner Leppik, Planning Commission member serving on the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) , provided reports on the July 9 and August 13, 1985 BZA meetings. V. � REPORT ON HRA MEETING - AUGUST 13, 1985 Commissioner Russell represented the Planning Commission at the August 13, 1985 meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and provided the � Planning Comm�ssion with a report on the meeting. VI. REPORTS ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS - JULY 16 AND AUGUST 6, 1985 Commissioner McAleese represented the Planning Commission at the �July 16, 1985 City Council meeting and provided the Planning Commission with a report on the meeting. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt represented the Planning Commission at the August 6, 1985 City Council meeting and provided the Planning Commission with a report on the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M. Respectfu1ly submitted, Gary Prazak, Chairman Linda McCracken-Hunt, Secretary � . � � September 4, 1985 T0; Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Alda Peikert, City Planner SUBJECT: Waiver of the Platting Ordinance - 5221 Woodstock Avenue and 455 Cloverleaf Drive The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Peter Knaeble and Ms. Frima Karon, request approval of a Waiver of the Platting Ordinance to allow division of the single family residential lot at 5221 Woodstock Avenue for transfer of ten feet to the adjacent single family .residential lot at 455 Cloverleaf Drive. Mr. and Mrs. Knaeble, applicants for the lot division, are recent purchasers of the residence at 455 Cloverleaf Drive. Ms. Karon is the owner of the residence and property at 5221 Woodstock Avenue proposed for division. The purpose of the requested division is to clear title of Mr. and Mrs. Knaeble and of previous owners of the property at 455 Cloverleaf Drive to � the ten feet of property originally a part of the lot at 5221 Woodstock Avenue. According to research conducted by the attorney for the sellers to Mr. and Mrs. Knaeble, title to the ten feet in question was originally deeded to buyers of 455 Cloverleaf Drive in 1964. The property at 5221 Woodstock Avenue deeded to Mr. Howard F. Karon in 1964 excluded the easterly ten feet of the originally platted lot. The division was not approved by the City of Golden Valley at that time, and Hennepin County consequently never completed the division for tax purposes. The property remaining at 5221 Woodstock Avenue after the division conforms to the City Zoning Ordinance requirements for a single family residential lot. The lot area exceeds the minimum area requirement of 10,000 square feet, and the lot width exceeds the minimum lot width requirement of 80 feet. Setback from the proposed new side lot line to the existing house at 5221 Woodstock Avenue exceeds the minimum side yard setback requirement of ° 15 feet. Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend City Coun�il approval of a Waiver of the Platting Ordinance to allow division of the property at 5221 Woodstock Avenue for transfer of the easterly ten feet of the lot to the adjacent property at 455 Cloverleaf Drive. Attachments: � 1. Site Location Map 2. Survey �IT1� . QF GOLDE N VAL LEY � • � I �� 28vG.-3 �es �� -� ��v'�.21.i55 ch- ...... ,63 9 ••--"" ..13�p(71it�... -- 844 4(��fl , . :�diA�N �!� ._ p5,�e .. -S. -- 9... ... � �a.o-- ` ti1, 4-o . o.�. �. ; 4c�+,. {S�� te'��`' � � , ,Q•�° • � Io „� ^.5.�`� 1;521� 5<^�i °20� �;7� Sin � c - , � �. ., � e��4 °1.�� E5. � lao . .. S�s too 120 ° � • �3 •Z •� oa ' 6 �5 4 • : �;° o �rs., ` qo 1,�� w � � �_ � '^ � ,^.o �� ' •0 1- , � r � � �w ,2 .•�, , ,o -. .e. VI �1�` ! � 6 0 lo0 1213 Io , � � � d' � IIS.o -'", 100 - --•�o --y ')11 l00 ' a' �� `• �^� �n M'� � � � 4 \ � D � ./jS 5�pp �'� � �sl w�'QL a� ��..� 8 �r, �^,.y�.�,.. / �, (5bo1r I � \O fj � t� m'� � � 9 �r '- � �� •3 j ��" a� 'a:�� sac %.s �� 10 �,^+~ �e. � / Q � , � • �r'�. �� o � .---•----�'---- - . _.ti � �4�9 \o.� 3 Q �i , j -�$o �� , �ro ,�k,t�, y Y /� t � o \b �.. 9 F�4F°;_' s3� �si'c �,e ' 1° � � 1 � ' ,�o° �. `'�4 ' � � , "' .DZ, �o .� i 5 �. � '40 p `ec� �,�� o .. o° �o sj��4 ��°^ `�` :� , X ; e' 9'�41 �5 .B1t�'`/�j. 0 1 52_ _ � .� � � �;,�� 5 a �� r �:ja.'I'I ,�'h• • .� s� Z .- �.°-+� , i �n yS � ,t� �' h ± y �,3 — �^� g s � :� • 4�p ^O 8�---' �,�� ,�' 4 � Z '. ��G_ oo� �, o ' � ��'•v � � �� l��' ' O �� Q h P '� ° d ! '� ;: R e!+` 'n r� V4 •'f;�s , � �- ` `:i �: I ___ 'M�..'i' � j . 2 � �� r' p .I' _ _ 9 , o.o � o\p ..- i,- _ .. �• ' - "L; -t----- =�� n� ° - �——- J �'��'� wvr_ .x >` 6 5 ... �, r-�_t5 .,,, M 2 ...' •. _ 5 F9'16 f GSd G S �p�i' Y�571 „°,� ..-.-��^ � ��1�q`� • � �O S 34 a 6 I ZO 30 �� Z S 100 i 0 1 ',C t- C � � 534i• 5°0l • \ Z..o �.a� 14 1''•.' Z ..o .n �.�0 4� o ° `^I � v` � a r �' t � 2 ` ti' ° 0 3 = o � °'N 2 ^''' � �' 9222 a o � - � z-�- T E --��E �� °mYS',�oo3P Si 46 il . w4 ee i2 .i4 i � � � � °�°:a '' , �t5 � �� R•" N s ^' ' °° - . �i � °�� '- `�d. �3 0 i � ' °�°, �N S'�'•. ' 1 J b 8 e �� S,o r�, , �J�pY' ti 4p1�^,. `� v.. �` �,11'L , 1 ,y�a � � A o ° 12.[�� r ° � � ri g �+`;��6a _p;y"�° �aP,c* �j.o1 A ' ; 61,r � ( n;�.. i: '' s • �L�' �'• �"°'d��e�,� �p , ��V � J� ap �' h� �j e�n u� '6 7 i �p o v ��.• p�12 �� . � � 1 �� ; ° • z �d 6 �� -f�o ��. �• ,1� F� :�Aofl. ,� ,. '1. A f:., �v. o ��. o � �4 ' 11 is �9 t ,' �" f 'ea g� .�o•�� ¢F a , `�u �ti� ��ti • a '� - - __ ,— ^ - \ — — .r-�, � , 'o — --t�� *�....� '�� a '...3+31 5� —10— — — � ......._, ..... �� ..�. a oo, • 1 C'jG t..q\q �fo°I �rr � � 13fl ��t� "'�+, E --�°S �i _....�,i54 �� r' g - - � `` � �ra ? 3D0 °a e, e pD W o �\'r �a°° 8 � �O g64 � �� .— � �� 50.• o a, . \ , w • J . 1 ae � \ \1 ' _N � v �.1r:"'�ti5.'• �� d • D � -- - —..s>. _�=-�:"� —•• _- � -•- `� - -�• - - - y�\\ � �`� - � - � --- � ��_ �rlt. �� 1 e ;� .�:-�` � \. �-r,;:.. �° o� _- ' DRAINAGE DiT�H� AE AL PHOTo�Se ' �! \A ,�� '�_ I •'1`��`�� \ �° � / ; �`�'. � �° � — I ,��\ �� ', vo�b. d\ �/_♦ � >, ,�Q:`�b0.'�� `� �� .•� 0 �`.,, '-(-- ��. . !:/jt,�,'� . "_ — — _-�3lno_-_ _0�°° ` `� . ) - IV w000s'roCK AvE . --80.7�'-- _ -. — — �' � � '�: - --IOD.o'--; _ -�� il� - --7a71"--�� , ` - -- Il�.o - - _i 1 � � `� OL S�A�E �.,ayo, � � I �� F � � °- �C � �'` I a_ �, �� ►&ss – _ 2Z.1` I ,LN b .d� . � i N S�` ,� s �� .� �� 3y.c' !�� s� s c Q t,; ' � � �� N ' � �°- '�' $1 Z Z� �' � � S� fn t � N N ��b _ = 1 \ • �.� i 56.�� ; ' � ,Y�,i ��e �� 4g5� � I O 20,� ,8 sq / �� i c� i i v ---IIZ.b�-- � � � s i� a` '; - - 102.D�-- _�; ;�,) i 2�3� � . �,° n --_ \ n �, a; � „ � °e � .�� S6S\� o of � ` '� � 5221 Woodstock pve. �b ��.�� \ P y,. Existing legal description: `, F' Lot 3� Block 1, Clover Leaf Terrace 2nd Addition� � Hennepin Co. � Minn. / Propose3 iegal description: Lot 3� except the easterly 10 fee� thereof, as measured alorg the north and south lines thereof, Block 1, C3.over Leaf Terrace 2nd Addition, Henn. Ca.. A:in.. 455 �loverleaf Drive E�cisting legal description= Lot 4� Block 1� C�aver Leaf TerracE 2nd Addition� Henn. Co., Minn. Proposed legal description; Lot 4 and the easterly 10 feet af lat 3� as measure3 along the north and south lines thereof� Block 1� Clover Leaf Terrace 2nd Addition, Henn. Co., �:in-►. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SURVEY,OR DRAWN SCHOG�ORG REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY , N D SU RVEYI N G DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY �-J� REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS QF CNECK I NC. T��SA_TE OF M NESOTli. %� �.-. �^ �r �t r'`y. ,.. � _ - i' '"� `ti � SURVEV $ y;;� "'� � ,BY � Paul 8.Schoborg R,.2.eox 133 DATE: �` ` REGISTRATION NO. �� r�f s72•322t DeuNO.MN 55328 rvaozs� ' � September 4, 1985 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Alda Peikert, City Planner SUBJECT: Waiver of the Platting Ordinance - 8355 and 8365 Julianne Terrace The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Arthur L. Ney and Ms. Phyllis Royce, request approval of a Waiver of the Platting Ordinance to allow division of the single family residential lot at 8355 Julianne Terrace for transfer of a three to five foot strip of property to the adjacent single family residential lot at 8365 Julianne Terrace. Mr. and Mrs. Ney, applicants for the lot division, are recent purchasers of the residence at 8365 Julianne Terrace. Ms. Royce is the owner of the residence and property at 8355 Julianne Terrace proposed for division. The purpose of the request for City approval of the division is to finalize a transfer of the property which, according to Mrs. Ney, originally occurred in � 1963. Due to the fact that the division did not receive City approval at that time, Hennepin County never completed the division for tax purposes. The oversight was revealed at the time of the recent title examination in connec- tion with sale of the property at 8365 Julianne Terrace. The proposed division provides needed added setback from the side property line to the existing house on the lot at 8365 Julianne Terrace. At the same time, the remaining lot at 8355 Julianne Terrace conforms to all Zoning Ordinance requirements. The remaining lot exceeds the 10,000 square foot area require- ment and exceeds the 80 foot width requirement. Setback from the new property line to the existing house on the lot at 8355 Julianne Terrace remains at 19.4 feet, which is over the 15 foot requirement. Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the requested Waiver of the Platting Ordinance to allow division of the property at 8355 Julianne Terrace for transfer of a strip of property to the adjacent lot at 8365 Julianne Terrace. Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Survey � � ' �b� J�� 1•° �9 .. .. - -- 2591.01�C'es..._ ...; g�-::.. _ . — ��,t . .mtEET - - e� / �353 I333 IS/5 I?03 IIl3 N/3 IIOJ Sl63 Il33 el13 ��/5 n' s d?!! B. �p{IL . �O. .01 101A N.01 101 •• . - . • � lOJ� 1l�il r p:l�•. Q iO��+i- o � � � � � � � � � ��io wi "�to • � ' � e � Z �I _ 10 � 9 _ 8 7 � 6 � S 4 s �C � � . �� 24 °�o, � � E.d 10 � S IC E. IOWL � - •� --'`�7 6�� 0 .. .. Ifll3iE / «• o � � � d tiE.� 41 e o 23• � '� o = � � � s�so; �e1:S � i �o w, �� ,�; ° _ 1 2 1 3 � 1 4 r 1�,� -�-�6 17 � . � o a e27o� 2 1 W rtd' �aso es�o � � : � � .�, . .�9 " 20 '` •2� ' s�2' S° � 22 ro� �.r�e o�4 � � �`� �� ° � r�., CJeO •� r-fr t��'s+h f ; �: �o .3z W r°. Pa Y .0 00 � d-lo�S0�07? AI00 � � �d�l�f!T �2°5!f) ��LlfO � �a�� -�� 6!-�. ' .�.o .i 2 • 3 ' o N.DY'l�E.� ��♦ it'3» _ * �a�� +' IDIl.1 � . a: �+l��tll)" ' � � • � aQ %iv � ��I�I�l%!! �d'�'J7Y1� , �Oj/1 Z ' '_.. � �_ � �:)6�i` , �° � 1�JYtl } - ' ° 4 b' ° � �.. s�OS � :M �f 97.S is/3 �4 �{�' � . � };-°. � 4, Z _ ..� ,,, 9 � 8 7• 6 � , �Ir1'liqp' y�a:j�/�•,10 y� 83�5 ,A�'��¢_ r� o�� ' .+82�� ,: �doo� � s.t4to11 �' � r��5r_ 4 � �'c�_!,% �i�►��, '��; � 11 v, b� ' �0 1�. 91 . f.lo'K%E • �3 �� eElS. . ' 1), '00 • ,� �;'' lol,K �oT �o. ' . S.tT'i3 0!E N./4�N f , o S � � � � •• 0. 10 .r° ` • .. Q o �2 � 13 � 14 � IS � 16� s w 8360' '1.2 -7� - 25 �ot.i h92��o�.��o�°, 13 •n et,eo easo es,o 1Fm� it � ' ��C.•� °'- �� J ��0 he:�' u' . = �� e ,� e3+o �`.; 3 �:' s. , ° 6 b � es�o 4. ,easo B� � �iad�yri," �,�. • - O� =' Zp� 2��' �°4;,� .f;� ..��' , Q � JULIANNE •,; �s�es ��;�;o� B.00� � :��n� '� �.t � �ar�a�' ��e.�'a�s ,�� r�.. �- ��.�� 4.fi,:. co e�� u sPS iss u3 �os euss ar��ri �0 � � � � q, �^ A��.� � T'�s�es+s �8 ��'ra�� O�p � TERRACE ' ' � k�UC/4l ,; :! � �- • 05 � 6 0 0 . hd•N!!1! :' 100 ltv iz S• b � '�p.� ,� i► d � sz� • • �,,, � +ia•i�:'n" ti� � °�• '�ti; b "''sszo, -. q r. S�' / �: _ J ` . � , �p�i. av B3:1ts .� :.�°g• � S�o � � Y.`"a rw 15� vL �� v 'O' 3 � �6 � 3 2 � I �..' S�: I e � .�1 L0 p.td �1 • �j. 6 ,!• �2 r � / � • °•'�' � •�- Ir. Z IZS �•� �` o�L �S �° Ne, w 8 �. . � 0 11 � � /b� 50 N�ff�tT 1% �5 �O � I � � - � �� ,� 't 2•jS e /°o. 'FT'' lOf �� ' N � (� , ��t�.^ ,� ,s:�, << ;s �, ,� � .,o GS � ,� e ,o�� 21 ,o z 4; ,• s � ��.: ti% .y ,�; •. �IC��C~ �oo • � y M � �, 9 81.�r ,°n C� 11 o ir c . � �9- c �o �Y 5�� oo . � 8 . � _ � � � � _ ' 380 2�'p�E a 2 •,�u,. ti � s.y , +w " �a � o v a � �� • a su !s � �g �;°� �iQ•f e� o � B,j,�C S 4.j = , � 3 n 6 � 116.65 i � 4�►i s 'ie•7 s I • � i°a �°i°ie's s' � � y �R�, ?3 So t,to B2o., 7. L 7 g•... 6 ` e�o 5 i'4� �R � ��i'b'K` t,3rye,9 S_ ��•v�� T:1� ,�L� ��p ti� ��CO � y^�n 5 �� V f�;Q'�k�� l06 �06 r4 6 � ll' ,, ^W c�L �T� i6F19 ��Oj�f 6*d2� tt S�.s � � . � � _'ii� i t , B BJPO � S3i0 � o � ° ^� �� 7 N�i� • nN si?4 /�19 � '3S �� ' .-u�__� ��k B ?5:1I 58'io` e� ; •n r!n i 4'S `• o ~ • oN�� a ��•• ?3�,� ° 2 .; 'M$ • s f��'�rj- � ` .. ,9�� ' � � 46 « 'S ��n n�1�3�� •6 �,o�,�.. W w 1 � ; '� N P!�,�'�1i'u". � I6P1 +� e o, �,s ury �'6 •�ti�� '��ti` ° , . 4 '. ; �w. s�� • �, 2 � � z' '°,q 7.l4.�i • �Sc� � o rf Z'n J� {.+�'' /09 ioS � /00.36-�b 91( � rft3 Np '0�"E � j� � � �y`�' �7 �� q ,L s.��!rj�-�T. - �1 0 = � �: � �: �^ !„ i • �c70.1��, �...- .��r�$ • � �� •' r -1 �' � �� IOS �yo � M\ � ,� ''�g • '.G� '' OUTLOT l 'q? N � Z� J o �Z9.55.J �� 8 j.t�t �� • !'�t�°2�0 �� o �.�L' ot�3�'09Eo 8 e T ? ' i05 -90 � 116.95'�' So 30 t°,29.S5 '' '" ..4 0.o N.�,9°�4_o9E.320•44_� _. _ . i _,�_ �---- � i - .�• . ..,, � . . •S�, ,�51 � � � � � A �I.�I�p w ISG �. , w a fZ.e If14 � • s�;��0� �i�n�.sr ,I�� .e 20 M �� « bo � , � �� . �.� N � 60 � � 1� 2 � �^ � . • B 2 • � : ��5.a� -� � t s - ' • _ i s � a , . � ; � : ° . � 18 • Z01 r3t • � � �� Z 'i e 2 • c �nQ � � . � o � o •� ' �17. � � 0 .��I7 -._`._ .a 7Q � l eo7 ` � :` ti434 -Z _ _ trol � - 3 : � �r�.t-•. ( $ �S • �16 S • �h m ` • 16 =� � ��n ,_�'a � 3 e o t I ' �o �24�IO� � y o 'e ��s 6 • •^- '_° ' � IS 6�a � o` 4 �f v^ ` ., ., ttf. 1 =' �' - = - - �n • 4 � ' °- �- �' 14 7�`� �� aR � ,_ � : „�I, t .r/ • ' r' � � • • o l� N � 1 6! ♦ a . o�i3 e �O1 '� � i3 �o t s�h° s ^� . 5 � g � �� . Q t48 e• _ __ � o 0 12 9 �Z� ( � ^.y� {h� ��gv Q ^' �a� 1�45 _ o�' � • V q t� • . 1 11'i�L� � �•!.� r� . � f ' , ,� • ,� � ' � �Y " ' � �; Q. . �� . � + � I " t ;J �� ' � 4� � +! � d�•�� ' � � � � � 1 t� � � ; �1► '� t- �r ' ? : : , �, � �� # � � 1 I . z•.,`, `� � � � ' ± «. ,]; �! ( � �s �. 4(1 � � c p= * � _l �� C Q � , � ^ N _ , ' � i� , u ^ � -r � � 3 .� �•� � � �, � �� '^ � _ c '� � � ' S ;� � � +� �e � , j � �� , � � "' �- 1 � � � . ,,, „ z r�z C � � Z a '_ . ' : � � � i �,� . 1z , � �, � � =; - � � ' ► A � S d� a � r r`�� ' , 1 \1 � 1 J: (. `�y li ( �_ � �� ' I •z �"1 � u, �'4� :i.4.' ��: L: � ----� __ � � , S ` ,� �a . ,/ , - � �� i _' — ` J� '3 � � �i. � ` J �: � � r _ }' : ' ' � �S 1�+c' �`` t � . �.�. � t` ^ S V �. .� ` � � ,�f � J ' . � � - ; � 4� � •t � , � i► N t 3 �, � . ` ; � � � �, , , ; a . , �. � -�,� � o . , . 1 , � r1 � � C �. �C 1 • " C � f ' C � � f j � �� 1 s��:; � � ` i , � � � � i' '. �n' ` � ` - — — _ �!s , . . ,� — .1 _ _ � , � 1r ;�\ � ,f� — — , _L_� � � � � $1 � 1 "�' i �i � �y • � i �� 3 t S � � ._ � � :, : �� 1 � � September 4, 1985 T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission FROM: Alda Peikert, City Planner SUBJECT: Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to Provide for Adoption and Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Attached is a proposed amendment to the Administrative Section of the City Zoning Code prepared by the City Attorney in response to 1985 legislation amending planning enabling legislation and the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. The proposed Ordinance amendment outlines procedure for Council adoption of a Comprehensive Plan or Plan amendment and clarifies procedure in the event of discrepancies between the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council recently deferred action on a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment recommended by the Planning Commission in conjunction with rezoning of properties on the west side of Highway 100 to allow time for adoRtion of an Ordinance clarifying procedure for adoption of Comprehensive Plan amendments. • The attached proposed Ordinance establishes procedure for City Council adoption of Comprehensive Plan amendments in accordance with 1985 legislation and provides for Plan amendment to maintain consistency between zoning and compre- hensive planning. ` Attached as background information for the interest of Planning Commissioners are a copy of a letter prepared by the City Attorney concerning the comprehen- sive plan/zoning consistency issue, materials on a Metropolitan Council forum held on the consistency issue, and a copy of the 1985 legislation. Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend City Council adoption of the attached Ordinance establishing procedure for adoption of Comprehensive Plan amendments. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2. July 24, 1985 Letter from City Attorney 3. August 1985 Minnesota Planning Association Newsletter Article 4. August 1, 1985 Memorandum from Metropolitan Council 5. 1985 Legislation � ORDINANCE NO. � An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code (Comprehensive City Plan) The City Council for the City of Golden Valley does hereby � ordain as follows : Section l . The Zoning Code for the City of Golden Valley is hereby amended by enacting and adding thereto Section 14 . 09 which shall read as follows : "SECTION 14 . 09 Comprehensive Plan. The City Council shall adopt, and may from time to time amend, a comprehensive municipal plan pursuant to the authority provided by and the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 473 . 858 and the related � sections of said Minnesota Statutes 473 . Before adopting any such plan or any amendment the City Council shall solicit the recommendations of the Plarining Commission with respect thereto and shall take no action thereon until such recommendation has been received or until 60 dars have elapsed since any such , request for a recommendation and/or a specific proposal relating to said plan was submitted to the Planning Commission. In considering any such request or proposal , and before adopting any plan or gart thereof or any proposed amendment thereof or position with respect thereto, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing thereon. Following the recei�,pt of the Planning Commission � recommendation, or the elapse of said 60 day period, the City a Council shall upon published! notice hold a public hearing with � respect to the proposed adoption of the Comprehensive Plan or any amendment thereto and any action taken at such public hearing shall become and be part of the Official Comprehensive Plan for the City of Golden Valley provided that a resolution evidencing said action was a'pproved by a two-thirds vote of all of the members of the City Cc�ur�cil . All public hearings as � required by this Section shall be held no sooner than 10 days after published notice thereqf in the official city newspaper in the same manner as applies to the adoption of ordinances relating to or amending the official Zoning Code for the City ,, , of Golden Valley. The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Golden Valley as adopted pursuant hereto, and any parts thereof or amendments thereto, shall 'serve as a guide to the City and � its public officials as respects future development and zoning actions of and within the Cit'y. In the event that said Comprehensive Plan shall be o,r come in conflict with the zoning ordinances of the City then i'n all such cases the zoning ordinances shall supersede the Comprehensive Plan; provided however with respect to all of such conflicts as may egist or arise the City Council shall within a period of no more than nine months from the time such conflict develops call for and act upon a public hearing at which such conflict shall be addressed. �, � ' -2- Passed by the City Council this day � of . 1985 . Mary E. Anderson, Mayor ATTEST: Robert M. Skare City Attorney 3500 IDS Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 � . -3- CHARLEB.S.BELLOWS Q� � CA?HY E.GORLSN � aTOBti R.CARROLL B E S T {7C F LAI`'A GAN Pe=RICS B.HE_1'ATES6Y aTAMES D.OLSOIC ' C8RISTII�E I{.SOL60 / ARCBIHALD SPENCER ATTORNEYS A'I' LAW BRIH W. IHELE ROBERt :�I.SHARE 3soo IDS CExTER ERICA C. $TREEi ROIIERT L.CROSSY DIA2CE !�S.HELLAXD LEOXARD M.Aaarxoror �r-rEAPOI.IS,MIl�'1�ESOTA b8402-2113 TAMMY L.Pcsr ROBER? R.Baxra -� � Ksr E.Pwsaos T.�1ALSER (rRAFF (612 339-7121 MARY RL'MSEY ALLEN D.BAR3�ARD DAt ID J. ZL'HHE RICBARD A.PEiERSON Txo�ea D.CaxLSOx Fxe�s �'ooL Or Corx.asaL T�LARI\VS �S.��.AI� PL'STE2�,JR. T GEORGE :�lALO2�EY JA.�tES C.DIRACLES uuly 24/ ��5 LEOSARD ti1�. SIMO?C£? ROHER? L.ASELLER,�TR. �1ARD B.LEM IS� SCOT? D. ELLER CaeRZES C.BExpuiss JertES I.BESr GEORGE O.Lt:acsE III 1908-19G6 E.�TOSEPlI LwFe�•E m GREGORY' D. SOtiLE ROHERT J.FL.t�:dc,s� 1B9B 1974 Mr. Mark Grimes City Planner City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golc7en Valley, Minnesota 55427 Dear Mark: At your request (and the suggestion of Mayor Anderson� we have examined the question of whether the Metropolitan � Land Use Pl�anning Act precludes amenc3ments to the City Zoning Code which would be inconsistent with applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan. As a result of this research I am of the opinion that the action of the most recent legislature providing that conflicts between the code and the plan shall be resolved in favor of the zoning code means that thealatter can be amended prior to and absent a contemporaneous change�in and strict conformity with the comprehensive plan. The case of State by Rochester Association of Neighborhoods v. City of Rochester (1978) also so holds although it should be noted that this case was decided under the Minnesota Municipal Planning Act and not the newer Land Use Planning Act governing the seven county metropolitan area of which Golden Valley is a part. Had the legislature intended to restrict the supremacy of the zoning code to situations where a subsequent action on a plan creates a conflict with the existing code (as some contend) it could have easil� and readily done so. In fact the whole thrust of the1985 legislative modification in this area is to move more of the decision process from the "planning agency" to the elected "governing body" which must � adopt or amend a plan based upon a hearing and the same two-thirds majority vote as is required to change the zoning code. Perhaps in obedience to M.S.A. 873.851 (3) the plan and/or the zoning code must be so amended as to eliminate . the conflict but such amendments can occur up to 9 months later -- the two need not be amended in tandem. (Although it appears that M.S.A. 873. 851 (3) is really intended to require code amendments where the plan has been changed - not vice versa. There are no cases or attorney general opinions to guide us. ) ;� BE�T cSc I�LA:�AGA:`' Mr. Mark Grimes � City Planner • City of Golden Valley Page 2 July 29, 1985 ------------------------------- Notwithstanding our opinion as aforesaid we would recommend that whenever changes occur in either the Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Plan resulting in inconsistencies between the two that as soon as feasible (contemporaneously if possible) the appropriate statutory procedures be followed, and hearings held, to address and resolve the conflict. Perhaps the legislature will further clarify this entire matter; in the meantime as minimum first step our response to the 1985 legislation should be to amend our ordinance provisions so as to specify the notice and hearing procedures pursuant to which the council shall initially adopt or later amend the Comprehensive Plan (whether that plan or amendment be one as recommended to the council by the Planning Commission � acting on its own initiative or a plan/amendment initially pro- posed by the council itself) . Our present ordinance relative to the Comprehensive Plan does not take into account that henceforth (as a result of the 1985 legislation) it is only the council that can promulgate or amend the official plan and that to flo so requires an affirmative vote of at least four members of the"council. This being the case I would suggest that our plan ordinance provisions be amendec] to require a full noticed and advertised formal public hearing relative to any action on the Comprehensive Plan. We will be happy to assist you in drafting these procedural modifications to our existing ordinance (s) , as mandated by the new 1985 legislation, should you so request. Very truly yours, Robert M. Skare RMS:rys � E TT I L E R , .� , . • � AWUST, 1985 VOL. 2 N0. 8 NlnAQA PRES=DEN'r' S N�TFtp pI:,ANNER.�S D2SCUSS � COLUL��II�T CON52 STENCY =SSUE by Lucy Thaa�pean I've received my new APA dues invoice and tnarry of you have too. The national board, In the 1985 legislative session, an a f t e r a c a r e f u 1 a n a 1 y s i s o f t h e ameru�nent to the Metrapolitan Land Planning alternatives, raised national dues . Act was a�opted which states that: "If the Minnesota Chapter dues have not beer� caroprehens3ve mun3cipal plan is in conflict chan�ed since the wh�le membership voted an with the zoning crdinance, the zoning increase fran $10 to $15 in 1983. ordinance supersedes the plan. " Previous to adoption of the new language, several The new national dues use a sliding scale Metropolitan Area conflnittees had wrestled based � incame. The sliding scale holds with ttbe issue of consistency between local down the increase for members in lower comprehensive plans and local zoning salary categories. Approxiraately half of ordinances, and municipal attorneys had all APA members earn S30,000 or less and made varying interpretations of which of will have dues increases of no more than the tw� planning devices prevailed in the $7. Fewer than 30� of inembers earn over event the two were in conflict . While $55,000. They will face the maximum nassage of the legislation clarified that rease of $30. Sliding scale dues have the zon3ng ordinance is the ultimate n successfull�y implemented by the determinant of land use, communities are rican Society of Public Administrators, still approaching the issue in different the National Managenent Association, and an ways and making different interpretations increasing number of other professional for specific cases. The Metropolitan associations. I believe a sliding scale is Council held a Planners' Forum on June 27 , fair. 1985, to discuss the new legislation and the wh�le consistency issue. Tt�e first batch of billir� with the higher dues created ccmfusion about state chapter The Planners' Forum as well attended by dues. From the national dues set by the approximately 80 metro planners, attorneys, national board, $15 is rebated to the planning consultants, local officials and member's state chapter. In add3tion, state Cauncil staff. The program consisted of a chapter boards may set their own dues ($15 presentation by a member of the Council's in Minnesota) . But the bills lumped the legal staff on implications of the new national rebate and the state-set dues legislation and braader legal implications tc�getYber as a line item "Minnesota Chapter involved in the issue', as well as Dues (Mandatory)" at $30. It is true that presentations by representatives from the Minnesota Chapter gets $30.00 from the Blaine, Bloomington, Coon Rapids, and check you send to APA, but the amount we Maunds View on their local ex�eriences with all think of as chapter dues and voted on the consistency problem. Each community here in Minnesota is still S 15 . The reprLsentative discussed the history flf the natiealal office ass�ires me th�at the billing issue, the city's position, the local format is being revised to alleviate any interpretation and possible impact of the further coa�fusiaaz ab�ut state chapter dues. new legislation, and the city's proposed future caurse of action. � real concern at the state level is to your $30 well. The MnAPA Board has The impressive feature about the forum was b�en meeting moa�thly and wurking in between the range of perspectives offered in terms to reactivate the organization. This year of each community ' s approach to the See President's Col�nnn - page 4 See Metro Plani�ers - page 4 we have kept the Business Letter coming, legislation--frora ic,�oring the mandate that held the St. Clvud ooaifere�nce, co-sponsored zcriing ordinances prevail and waiting for an evening at the Orc�ray Music Theatre, and legal challenges, to continuing with �a¢�ged a couple of bag lun�h sessions. business as usual because the zoning are currently arr�ging a .reception for ordinance had always been considered to Richard Bolan and a tour of the new prevail. T�e discussion that followed the H�pYu�ey Institute Building, a family night presentations indicated that several at Canterbuxy Do�a�.s, a seminar on personal communities are still wrestling with the camputers, more bag l�a�hes, a�d developing ��istency issu+e a�d that the legislation, a current membership roster . We are � cut and dried as it appears, does not setting up a Program Committee , a �ily simplify the is�,�e. Conferencea Conanittee, and a Membership Committee. Please help. Call me at As a follow-up to the forum , the 612/292-15??, exte�sion 325. Metro�olitan Council will be conducting a survey of all local �mits of government in -Larry Soc]erholm, President the Metro�politan Area to get a better idea of local experience with the consistency issue, hvw prevalent it is, and whether aciditional assistance is needed to help Mr�AQA RECEPTS ON FOR local planners recancile zaning ordinances. �C�� L�N If the survey results shaw that several communities are still wrestling with the WII,CON� RICHARD BOLAN. Richard Bolan tyas issue, a work group of planners may be ccme fram Bostas� Call e and is at work in created to help formulate methods or � proc�s local units of government might his r�a positioa� as professor and director follow to meet the requirements of the la�►. of the Masters in Planning program at the Humphrey Institute. Dr. Bolan's name is A packet of materials fr�n the Planners' familiar to planners as a leader in the gorum is available to planners free of �rofession, particularly because of � fran the Metrapolitan Council. The rticles which have made important packet includes two handouts (from Coon contributions in the area of social g�i� � �� View) distributed at the re�onsibility. forum, and a summary of c�mments made by The Cha ter will hold a rece tion to � ��rs� If you v�uuld like a set of P P these materials, contact Lucy Thompson, welcome Dr. Bolan on Friday, September 6 Community Assistance Planner the the fram 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. in the Terrace Room �tropolitan Council , at 291-6521 . In of the Camipus Club, Coffman Union Building, �tia�, ahe is interested in learning of at the University. Dr . Bolan has other communities' experiences with the gra+ciously agreed to spe�d a few minutes at �,sister,cy issue. the reception sharing his observations on current developments i,n the planning I�IINNESOTA PLgNNING ASSOCIATIOH NONPROFIT ORG. profession. C/0 0 M S U.S. POSTAGE 2225 White Bear Ave. p�D Chapter men►bers will have an opportunity to �plewood, MN 55109 ST. PAUL,lQJ tour the new Humphrey Institute building ; before the reception. The one-hour tour PERKIT N0. $681 will begin at 2:45 from the courtyard in front of the Schaol of Management tower located between 19th and 20th Avenues, one blocic north of Riverside. Pl�a,se call (612) 292-157T, extension 326 00970T 126 25 �:�' �- (St. Paul Plaruzing) by Ttnu-sday, August 29 �;�5 _ . }lARK �to indicate that you will attend the CITY QF 60lDEN VALLEY ption and to reserve a hard hat for the 7500 GOLt?EN YALLEY ROAD taur. 60LDEN YALLEY MN 55�27 1 '' • Qo1itar� C� O O Metropolitan Council ��' �-� ; �',� 300 Metro Square Build,r�� ••. ' � Seventh and Robe't S�fE=•,S � -`"' � "' St. Paul, ��innesota 551u1 � �� - �'�. �� Telephone (G121 291-63_� . � '�k�n� �-�`'' August 1, 1985 MEMORANDtR�! T0: Persons Attending June 27, 1985, Planners' Forum on Zoning/Comorehensive Planning Consistency Issue FROt4: Lucy Tho:.*.pson, Corununity Assistance Planner �(�,� ��1 SUBJECT: Summary of Speaker Presentations I have enclosed a set of sur.unary coruaents fro:� the five speakers who parti- cipated in the June 27, 1985, Planners' Forur.i on "The Zoning/Comprehensive Planning Cons�stency Issue: Local Experiences and Legal Perspectives." fiJhere audience comments were audible, we have sur.unarized those as well. If you have any questions, contact ei�he^ me (291-6521) or one of the speakers. Metro- • politan Council staff look forward to continuing to work with '�etro Area planne^s on this very inportar.t issue. LT:IM Enc. � An Equa v„�.:. <,�n '� Empioye� SU*�4ARY OF PLA:1?�ERS' FORL^•i Thursday, June 27, 1985 � "Tu�' '.OPJI`.'GI�02•i?�EHE?:SIV� ?L�P;tII;�G C'J'•,�ISTE:.'CY :SSJ=,': ; + .T.vCnL .'1r.r..p�:?�.�^.i:C.7�.�rC. r�"/aT� ' ��'"' ?y��' ^'t e+tl +� .+:+1JriL vP.sC..rVLJ I*TTRODUCTORY 4E;�►.ARKS • Carl �Ohrn. Director Comprehensive Plannin , t�letro�olitan Council The purpose of this forum is to learn what the issues are about consistency and implementation, and to share information on problems and methods to deal with these. The concern of the Metropolitan Couneil is the i�plementation of our �rowth nanageaent policies through comprehensive plans. If this inplmentation is being frustrate�, then our staff nust be better able to understand what is going on at a local level, the difficulties encountered, and soae possible solutions. Final].y, �ae must try to formulate plans for the future. In addition to having this forur�, the t".etropolitan Council nay conduct a local governr�eat survey to receive additional information about probleras and plans, and how the Metro Council ean be helpful with this issue. LEs1�L PERSP�CTIVjS � Karen Schaffer, Assistant Staf.° Counsel ::etro�olitan Council The t•iinnesota Land Planning Act (;�.PA) has ta�o purposes, tk�o perspectives. The first is the purely local perspective. If an ordinanee is not to be in conflict t�ith the coraprehensive plan, what does tha� tae2n for local governnent and the integrity of the plan? The secon� is the regional perspeetive; to ensure that local land use controls are not in conflict with metropolitan systems plans. As there are two issues, there are two interested constituencies: 1) the cities and local �overnments that plan for their areas, and 2) the metropolitan aoeneies that need to be able to maintain the integrity of their system plans. The i1LPA mandates that: 1 ) comprehensive plans be adopted; 2) they include an implementation program with zoning and subdivision controls; 3) the impleraen- tation program be adopted; 4) official controls and devices in conflict with the comprehensive"plan may not be adopted; and 5) any comprehensive plan amendment be assessed for inconsistency with officizl controls. The basie structure of the Land Planning Act has not been chanoed since 1976. The local goal is orderly sta�ed development. The aetropolitan �oal is consistency with the netropolitan systems plans. The act clearly anticipates � that prospeetive ordinances not be in conflict with the plan. ' -2- � . �ia�or issues that have arisen inc�ud�: 1) :�iust the 2oning ordinances that were in place when ttre local plan was � adopted be amended so they are not in conflict? The ?angua�e of the act saves pre-�xisting controls. The� retain their validity, but the intent of iize laia is c:�at they eventuali�r be a.�eaded to be consiszer.t ciith t:e pia::. Achieving this is a problem ior local officials and city manag�rs. 2) i�hen must the pre-existing ordinances and controls be amended so as not to �e in conflict? As the MLPA contains no timefrane, the law 3mplies in "a reasonable time." This can onlq be answered in particular situations. It is clear that the validity of an ordinance may be in question after passage of a reasonable tiae, so the best advice is to aaend it promptly. 3) I��at does it mean for zoning ordinances and coaprehensive plans not to be in confliet? The ans�aer is a function of the timing dimension deseribed in the comprehensive plan. It is a question of a) co�paring use in the plan and ordinances; b) co�parin� the density in both; c) co�aparing the ordinance with the general intent of the plan; and d) looking at the appropriateness of official controls in teras of the charaeter of the area. All of these are potential areas of conflict. The primary question is: do the recent amendments to the MLPA affect any of these issues? There are three portions of the new la��: 1) The authority of city councils and governing bodies to adopt amendments to . the comprehensive plari absent the affirmative recocemendation of the planning conmission is clarified. 2) A comprehensive plan amendment now requires a two-thirds ma�ority (the same as a change in zoning) , where previously only a simply aa3ority was required. Basically, this makes a plan that �aas relatively easy to adopt tough to chan�e. 3) The ma�or change in the act is a sentence inserted that reads, "If the coaprehensive municipal plan is in conflict with the zoning ordinance, the zoning ordinance supersedes the plan." It is unclear what this means. The es�ential purposes, obligations and structures of the :4LPA remain unchanged. Comprehensive plan and iaplementation programs are still required by law, and pre-existin� ordinances are still grandfathered in. :Jhat proble�n does the new language solve? � The new wording �i.ght be interpreted to extend the life span of pre-existin� ordinances by reducing the consequences of not bringing ordinances into synehronization with the plan. If the statute is interpreted as decreasing the local obligation to adopt ordinances not 3n conflict with the plan, that is a problem for �etropolitan agencies because the Council reviewed the coapre- hensive plans, but it did not review the pre-existing ordinances. If the state is ready to reduce the obligation to adopt ordinances consistent with local and regional plans, this w311 create problems for the metropolitan agencies. The potential problems for local government are �ust as great, especially if the . statute is read to reduce the extent that cities can rely on the coaprehensive plan and consistency with it to �ustify zoning and zoning decisions. - -�- i:�e ?�al of the discussion today is to identi:y local patterns and lear� about ioc3? �xperiences w=th this issue. Out of this we need to decide if sowething -u�� 'ane to tae s�atute in ter�s of local ada�nistrat�on, or if ��e Metro- � �oii- ; Counci? ras to start changiag its anproach to ^eviewin� coapre�e�sive ��ar.� � �a ?er�zos consider rsviewir.g local or�inar.ces. The Aain structure of the Land Planning Act remains in place. The neia legislation has not been helpful, but it is not clear how daaagin� it is either. �It �ust raises many questions. . LOCAL EXPFRIENCES . Lee Starr, Director of Plannin� City of Coon Rapids , The initial adoption of the Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan was in 19$1 . The • city intended at that time to proceed to iaplement that plan and provide zoning consistent �aith it. Although there was concern about the fler.ibilty of the plan, the city felt tr.at they iaere obl��ated to affirmatively �ove to rezor.e in a way that was consistent with the co�prehensive plan. Because plan-consistent rezor.ings were dealyed for various reasons, the city legal staff was asked for an opinion on the interi� status of the existing zoning. The position of the city attorney at the time was that the plan sucersedes the zoning. k'hile there was still the obligation to brin� zoning 3nto compliance, the land-use map guided developaent, not zoning. The attorney also ruled that in a given area, a use that was consistent �ith the zonin� but not with the plan would constitute a nonconforming use. This neant that the � property owner couldn't expand� rebuild or begin new construc�ion of another buiding of that type. In several recent incidents, local residents have taken great exception to this interpretation of the relationship of comprehensive planning to zoning, and have raised a nuc►ber of issues about due process, required public notice, etc. The new legislation brings Coon Rapids 180 de�rees from �here the citq started in 1981. - One thing that has created some interesting dynamics on the city couneil in the past were efforts to obtain consistency where there were not enou�h votes to amend either the zoning or the plan. An example: a piece of property had a split zoning designation (sin�le-family for the baclt, office for the front), but a single coaprehensive plan designation (hi�h-density residential or HDP,) . The owner of the property w2nted the front zoning changed to commercial so he could put in a gas station, but �,rante� the back to remain the sa�e. The planning co�.�ission said r.o, and told its staff to rezone the area according to the plan. The city council's opinion was that the back should be moderate density residential (MDR) , but the front they couldn't agree on. The council sent the proble� back to the planning coiamission, which then said PmR was okay for the back, but they still wanted the HDR for the front. It went back to the city council, and not until an election was held was consensus achieved. The case that was instrumental in chan�ing the law coneerned an older, established neighborhood with scattered eYisting sin�le-family hones. The � zoning was low-density residential, but the plan designated the area hi�h- density residential. A developer wanted to build an apartment building in the upper seetion of the area. Sinee the planning coramission was using the coT�rehensive clar. at the time, the:• ssid fir_e. TFe neiahborrood ob�ec�ea, �ut the site plan was approve� b�r the pla_^.r.in� co�.Tission, c�zllenged but sustaiaed �c *r.e cit;� ��;incil. � The neighborhood claiaed they would sue unless the city rezone�. The City of �GOri R2�1CS :ti3S '.J�:_Zi.F L� -^;rJ t0 CCL1Z'L �O S@tL�2 ��'12 I'E12L:.or.sn_;. DEt'r72°II planning a�d 2oning, but the developer wasn't and eventually pulled out. The city council then cenied the rezoning, both because there was nc lcinger the � nesd�•and because the neighborhood ob�ected. . Hocaever, the city council was reluctant to anend the plan to comply with the zoning because of the changing character of the area. There were not enough votes to do anything and inconsistency prevailed. rlow some of the residents in the lower section of the district are petitioning for an HDR designation, and the people in the upper half are getting nervous once again. This case so agitated the residents that they went to their state senator, Gene t-lerria�, �rho then introduced the legislation amending the t�;LPA. In essence, *ahat we are doing noc,r is moving more assertively than before, trying to bring zonin� into conformity, or in so�e cases amend the plans to brin� then into synch. A few issues that have arisen are: 1) In some cases, as happened here, the city council will decide to leave inconsistencies, not do anything one way or another. If they continue to hold that position and an interested developer cor�es in, the case will undoubtedly �o to court to force a decision. 2) If planning and zoning are in conflict and you want to develop according to � the zoning, will an amendment to the comprrehensive plan be required before development can proceed? 3) ?iow does all this relate to the basic requirements of the t•lL°A? Joe Grillo, Direetor of Cor.�aunity Development City of Blaine The City of Blaine stands in stark contrast to the City of Coon Rapids. Since 7964, Blaine has said that zoning is the plan. A cou�prehensive plan was adopted in 1982, but the attitude of the Blaine city council is that the reasonable length of time within which ordinances must be aaended is as long as they want, and there is no rush to inplement the plan. There have been a couple of interesting cases recently. One case was brought by a property owner and a developer contendin� that the city had failed to implenent its co�iprehensive plan, and also its sewer policy plan. Currently, the property under discussion is zoned farm residential, while the plan says that it be urban residential. The contention is that urban means something � other than far�, so the property should be zoned something different, allowing for development. The city has responded that "urban" was meant to include a variety of different residential districts, including farm residential. The opposition also claims that the city has failed to implerrent its sewer policy plan, which states the area in question is to have utilities extended to • it between 1985-89. They are requesting a rezoning and extension of utilities because the area was clearly indicated for urbanization. The city �aintains that the council alcaays has the right to say when. ' -J- Coapounding the issue, the city, after denying the rezoning and sewer exten- sions, amended the sewer policy plan to �ive the area a 1990+ designat:on. � The second case that has come up concerns a piece of p^ooerty in the orocess a: being changed fro� a light industrial designation to a res_dential desi�- nation. T'.:e owner ob�e�t�. T:�e city has �ug�este� a one-year �eveiopment moratorium for a 2000-acre area in Blaine, while thev determine Blaine's development needs and goals. There are currently a number of areas with little development but much interest. The council needs time to do sone planning. If the city proceeds with the proposed moratorium, the property o�mer will probably sue. In response to the new ta�o-thirds majority rule, it has always been difficult for the Blaine city couneil to get a two-thirds ma3ority on issues. It is boun� to be even more difficult to reach near consensus on controversial issues. Tris is �ust one more thing. Given the current local political situation, as in Coon Rapids, this fight �aill ultimately be fou�ht at the polls. Blaine has alw2ys said that zoning prevails, so the amend�ent will have very little impact, but developers feel confused and irritated. ?lanners have spent a long tiae convincing developers of the worth of the cor�prehensive plan, trying to get them to Iook at the coamunity as a Frhole rather than as 3us� individual properties. In fact, Cevelopers have moved faster than the local council in embracing the corsprehensive plan. Some now feel betrayed and confused. Developers want some fairly sir�ple rules and cannot understand why legislators are making it so difficult. They have a legiti�:ate point. Another point raised is what is a "reasonable" tir�efracie? This new amendr�ent � has 3ust provided Blaine with more reasons to say they can move even slower in implementing their plan. This has had a negative i�pact. Blaine is �aaking up for lost tine by using aoratoriums, and viewing them as a �ore acceptable tool to catch up or to aake time for planning. In general, the city eouncil needs to adopt a compre:�ensive plan that it is really comnitted to. Bob Hawba:{er, Senior Planner City of Bloomington Blooaington has had an active plannino program for 30 years. During the '70s the city's plans became thoroughly integrated with the zoning and subdivison ordinanees. Consistency re�ulations were added to the code. Already in Bloomington, before development can proceed, the plan and the zoning must agree. However, the city has not yet rezoned all of the property to be in confornance with the land-use element of the coaprehensive plan. There are large tracts of undeveloped land currently zoned sin�le-fa.�nily residential, the lowest designation, whether the cocaprehensive plan says that is appropriate or not. In the past, the planning cor.ueission and the city council have used the comprehensive plan as the guide for directing future aetion. Recent deve?op- ments affirm the importanee of the plan, because the plan is the first thin� scrutinized to cetermine the developnent policies of the city, and the zoning is based on the recommendations of the plan. � The city council has selected the comprehensive plan as the arena within which broader decisions are made. The plan is still the definitive pclicy guide. If the zoning aap were to become the conprehensive plan in Bloomir.ston, the city } ' • would lose its authority to eonpel complianee �aith its policy decisions. It is safe to say that Bloomin�ton will continue to consider zoning ordinances an i�plenentation tool for tha comnrehensive plan, and will basica�ly ignore • most of the r?ouireaents of the net.• law. As far as the ne�a ��ro-thirds aajori�y rule goes, on its face it is innocuou� because the new legislation makes the plan irrelevant. However, �t may have sone oerit for Bloomington because the city views the plan to be at �.east as important as the zonin�. : Dick �Meyers, City Attorney City of Mounds View The City of Mounds View is currently involved in the following case. A maa bought a home on fiighway 10 in an area that is zoned residential. The comprehensive plan designates the wbole area moderate-density residential, although there are several coffinnercial uses in it, all apparently previousl� zoned coruaercial. The new owner began conducting a radiator repair business . out of his garage. A building inspector said that rezoning for such a business would be a problea, but possibly a hocae occupation woul� be alloz:ed, and �ve hin some inforaation on applying for a home occupation permit. The property owner applied for a rezoning; it kas denied by the planning commission. The city found that both the use he �aas putting his property to ar.d the zoning request were inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. The ocaner claimed he had a legitiaate home occupation and continued to operate his repair business. After several unsuccessful ne�otiations, the case was ta:;en to court. � The city argued that they denied rezoning based on the conprehensive plan. The cou^t ruled� against the city. The �udge said that the city had no rational basis for denying the rezoning and conditional use perclit, and that there was no reason the owner should not conduct his business except that it was technically in violation of the zoning ordinance. Since the rezoning would have a beneficial impact on the surrounding property, and since Hi�hway 10 r,�as aore cor,unercial in character than residential., the owner's property value was diminished without a rezoning. The court further said that the city hadn't made much of an effort to implement the comprehensive plan; that the plar.'s continued viability on Highway 10 was extrenely doubtful; that the co�prehen- sive plan did not zone the property anyway; and, finally, that the city knet•r of the owner�s delicate financial condition and refused to negotiate with him. The city argued that the owner knew what he was doiag, that he �new the property was zoned residential when he bought it. r;ounds `Jieca is appeal�ng the decision, claiming that they are trying to impleaent their comprehensive plan, although perhaps they haven't done so within a "reasonable" timeframe. However, the city has in the past, and will continue to grant conditional use permits for p^operly zoned land regardless of what the comprehensive plan says. The end result was that the city passed a motion rezoning the garcel and issued a conditional use peraiit as ordered by the court. The final outcome of the appeal eould have grave implications for planning. � , -i- Co:r�ents � '.•Ie are sor�� +ut ;ae cnly :�ave �ranscri�ts o.° co�^snts of �hcse ae�bers of �::e 2udiezce w:�o oa�e up to tY�e podiu�. Blair Tre^�ere, Jirector of Co�unity �evelopme�t • City of Pl�aouth Speaking in defense of the new law, it was the City o� Plymouth that first initiated it. The city attorney, the city council, the Association of Metropoiitan Municipalities and the League of t�Iinnesota '•:unicipalities were aIl aware of the need for correetive legislation and were supportive of the bil'_ at the initial stage. At the heart of the problen was the prov�sion in the 1976 i•iLPA that tied implementation down to a nine-month period after t:�e a�aea�r�ent of a plan. In Ply�outh the :lLPA was taken very seriously, and thp ci�y counc�l undertoo�c the corplete reconciliation of the Land Use Guide Plan and the zoning r�ap. The constraints of it became apparent when a situation arose where it took a si�;ole ma�ority to araend the cor�prehensive plan, but then this �aould mandate a rezonino which required t•�ro-thirds aajority. The intiative be�ind the ori�inal anead�ent to the t�LPA was to resolve this vote issue for nonehartered cities. Ply�o�sth initiated the a�end�ent, Eden Przirie tacked on another amendcaent, and then ca�e the Coon �2pids case. That case resulted in last �iaute az�end�aent legislatioa that has raised the concerns addressed here today. It is inportant to view the law in terms of its co�ponent pa.rts so that the � initial feature of re�arding votes is not tainted 5y perceived difficulties � with the othEr parts. If ci�ies have their act together and really put soae credibility into their comprehensive plans by reconciling the Land Use Guide Plan with the zoaiag nap, then there should be no trouble t�ith the vote. Developers don't necessarily have the right to amend co�prehensive plans. The;� �ust prove thei^ need to the satisfaction of a two-thirds majority. :here is the argu�ent that the coaprehensive plan should be easier to modify since it serves as a guide. But the way the MLPA is written, especially now, if there is to be mandatory compliance and ir�plementation, why shouldn't the require�ent for modification of the cor�pre:�ensive plan be the sa�e as zonino? Gunnar Isber?, Gunnar Isberg & Associates Plorth.°ield, t•iinnesota Reae�nber that the new law affects corar�unities outside the ��tro area as a�ell. Since they aren't required to have coc��rehensive plans, r�an� norunetro communities feel that they don't have to do planning any^sore, The same attitude can be found among certain elected officials wi�hin the metro area. Often they adoot coa:prehensive plans only because tr.ey have to. Local officials are not convinced that olanning is necessary, as they think of it as a �eneral o ide that they can invoke when it is convenienct and ignore. when it is not. Tde have spent a lon� ti�e convincing local officials that �lznninQ is • necessary and no�r the law says d?f°erent. � . � .� �.i � .c i v� 3- �.� .�.,r �,_,, . ; m ��y��• NOTE �� y„� 'A� • Tn:;1s thc fin�t version Yt IAE Dill tt►3l tr•ill bQ i �S'1 f'�� '°'t`` U�nsrr��:teo to tnt �werncr's ' �� . �� A ��-,►n �»�G desk.CAeck Hou�o Inde�c De�3�itgnt .¢'�'r`� L7�'!C�Cpe"''��"�j` ��'a•••• 10�upd�ted S1aQ�i(296-66i6)/ .� 1 . 2 re'_at±aq to local rovesr.ment; providinq conditions for 3 L�e acootion or ameacsoeat of camor:aezsive �aunicipal 4 plans; providinq for r�solution of canflicts bet:+ee:� a 5 zoninq ord?nance and t'�e c�m�rehezsive municipal plrn; 6 a.�eacinq Mianesota Ststu�es 1°84, sec�ioas 452.355, � subdivision� 2 and �; 462.357, subd?v?sion 2; and 8 473.858, subcivision l. 9 • � 10 0� IT ENAC�ED SY Zf"� L-:GISLniU'ti5 OF T.:� ST�TS OF MIM�Ir.SOTA: •- - . 11 Sec:ioa 1. Minnesota SLatutes 1°84, se=:ion 462.355, ' � 12 s•.:..'�c?v� s:on 2, is a.�ne�dec to r:ac: , - • . �3 SuSc. 2. (?40C_DU�. FOR ?r.�y ��0?=-ON :SD :�r:t.^,i�I=?f:. J �::_ . 1� �la:ni::q ase:cy may, ur.less ot`se�aise �rovic-3 by c'�a:ter or 15 or�inanca c�r.sis:e:1L wi�i ��e m�aSc=�a1 c�a====. _='?= ="= ='°'= ?o :_:;,;n.a:ac to r:ze Sovera?nq boc_�-tie_scop�=or._a=c-a3e=c.�=r._ __�:� 17 :::.►e t� t=se of a c�n?re:^.e::s:•re rsunic:�aL �i51: es =�s ' -- _�. v ' �.��:_= �.7 ��..��::��:: �.1 f�r C��::�::7 ��v. ^�Z:: tiii{ v� :� �. 19 azc acoo�:_ i:: scc=ior.s, ea=a ci �:�ici re�atns ta a wajor :0 :u�je=: o: t'a3 �lan or �o a a►a?or �z�S:tc'r.?c3! ae==:-n c: :`►e 2i nur.:c��ai`:.�. '��e cove:-°_:sc ::oc.� aa_� ?raoose e-n•=-=::e= '-= =�' , ::2 co,:,�r:ae:.s:✓� muaic:rai �lir. a=c_am=acm---3--e-i - 3y . sclu'"on 23 submit:e3 to :..'�e Qlar.niz�, a�eac.�. oeF�re adootir►� t�a . 24 compraheasiva,�uaicipal plan or any section or amenc�aent ot �`�a 25 plsn, the plssuzinq aqency shall hold at Least ona publie hearinq � 26 thereon. A aotSee ot th� tiene, plac• aad p�rpos• ot th• heariaq 27 sha!1 be publiahed once in the of:icial nevspspe: of the 1 - — - --- -- � , ^ ' ' 1 municipality at least tsn d:ys before t2�e day of the �� ' 2 hear:ng. ':!:e �=�pe=�= F==': �ee±:e• e? •_�� ?==-'% �= �e.:e.�e�s I ' I . 3 :::a=? be �:a�sr_:e=e3 ts l.�e ge�e:�:�+� bee; p�:e: !� �::e 4 �G�'s:en�eez ss ktit ne�iee eE !:=a=:"4: �e�eeb�� e.:d ��e��e•r er �5_ tLe eeap==1=��:re aur__e?�ni P_=,� er •8 aesY ae��=ea t.4e:eeE �isn_� 6 be by rese?ese;sn ade�led br a aefe==•_r e? e== *_.Le tse=bess e: t::e ; 7 P=n.-s_.:q ee�=aa=es, �l es,pr e? �Le P=n� er e= aar aeetrea e: 8 naer.=�e�t !�ie:eer sdee�e3 bY tLe p?a.-_.=zq aq�r.eY a?�a's_ be 9 ee:k:ESed ts �ke qev�s�tr,g bedY e£ t4e �e�-�=_pn:j��+ . 20 Sec. 2. Minne�ata S:atutes 1°84, se=-=on 462.355, 11 s::�Civ?sion 3, ±s une�ded to read: 12 Subd. 3. (ADOPTION BY CO�RNING BODY. j A propcsed 13 cor..p:e�:ensive plan or an ameac.�ne�t to it may not be acted L�oa ---------------------------------------------------- - --- 24 by t::e yoverzinq bcdf ua:il i: has rec=?ve= t�:e re:oaL�ne^ca=:on -------------------------------------------------------------- 15 oz the planninq asency or uat?1 60 cays have elaosec ::oca t:�e ------------------------------------------------------------- 15 �ate an a.Tezc�ae�t praoosed by tae qoverz:nq body has be_a --------------------------------------------------------- 17 s•.:=ritteC to `�ise pla:ia:nq aqezcy ior its recor.�e.^.dation. Unless -------------------------------------------------------- ' 18 o:5e:.+ise provided by c:�a:ter, �tie soverainq body may by - , ' 19 resolu::on ee a se;e�5!Y by a�tao-thirds vo:a of a?1 ot its 20 ne.:.bers scopt and ame:�d the com�:��se�sive plaa or port:on > Zl t�e:eof se c:=ea-e.:ee: as �4e oz:ieial mun?cipal plan u�on suca 2= r.ot_ce ar.c �ea-'_a� ns may nn presc=:�== bY e=--aar.ce. L::•== =e . 2� G_��l�� L"f iLt qOYG�»��g SeGj� �!O ��5� ��=�� GO �C�t�"°� O �`f 24 *-�� ==ee=-,=sdn=6=r. ee •_Le i?_=:=.:s eqe-eYz 25 Se=. 3. i".i:ui�sa�a S:a�;t:es 1�8�, se::=on =62.35i, 25 =::�cir:sioa 2. is a:��r.dec �o reaC: � 27 S;:�c. 2. (G=V�Z4L ��U:i=:•!=N�= I :.� an_i ::r..e a:==: .-• � 29 acoo�ion oi a :a^c use piar► zor c:�e mLaic:=rli=.�, :ie �:a:.::::5 ! ' ' 3° Ese.^.c;i, :or tie Fur�ose o: e�=:y::sg c�= =:= oo=:=:=s ar.c �oals � 50 0: ;�a lanc use �lar., aa� :re?a=e i :===o=°-= ==.=a: cr�=aar.ce � 31 P.^.0 SL'�RiS� �� O wTld C�O�i±�1:zq bocf �ii�� i�3 �!��CA.'D!.^.C�S��0�15 :�_' �Z dCCOC10Pl. $�l7]ZC� LD :1e S�C'yL'==�ffiG:1:3 O� S:i7Gt�•I�S:011s �, : and 33 5, the governinq bocy may adoot anc� amenC a zoninq or�iaance by ( ' 34 a tvo-third� vote ot all its �+embers. It the comprehensive -------------------- �� :...;,=c:pi: plan is in eontliet vith t`ee zon�nq ordfnane�, the -------------------------•---------------------------------- ]6 :oninq ordinance suoe:aedes the olan. -----------------------------°------- ; � • � . � � H.f. No. 247 1 Sec. 4. Mirinesota Statutes 1984, section 473.858, j2 subdiv�sion 1, is t�nende.a. to r�ad: " 3 Su�civision l. Hit'�in thr�. years fol�owinq the rec_?�t of 4 t?�e metropolitan system a�at�:aeat, everl local qovera.�nea�al unit � 5 shall have prepared a camcrehensive plan in accordance Wit� Laus 6 1976, Cyapt:r 127, Sections 1 to 23 and t4e aoolicable pl�nn3nq 7 statute and shall have submi��ed the plaa to the met:opolitan 8 council for review pursuant to section 473. 175. The provisiens 9 of Laws 1976, Chapter 127, Sections 1 to 23 shall supezsede t�e I 10 �ravisiozs of t.4e applicaale plar.nins s�atutn WY:ers�er a 1? cor.=l3c� may ex:s�. If t'sie com�re*�ezsive caunic:pal �lan is i� ----------------------------------------- 12 conflict wit'� the zoniaq ordinance, the zoninq ord±nance � 13 su_ersedes_the'plan� � • 14 Se_. 5. (Ec_'c�TIVE DP.TE. j � 1� This act is effe=tivn July l, 1°85. ----------------------------------- � . � September 4, 1985 T0: Golden Va11ey Planning Commission FROM: Alda Peikert, City Planner SUBJECT: Golden Hills Redevelopment Area Land Use Study . Enclosed with the agenda is a land use study prepared by Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. for the portion of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Area to the west of the future Xenia Avenue interchange with I-394. The purpose of the study is to clarify and improve Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) plans for future development of the westerly portion of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Project. At the August 13, 1985 HRA meeting, the HRA received an oral presen- tation of the land use study and moved to have the final written report referred to the Planning Commission for review. As an update on other developments in the Golden Hills Redevelopment Project, the HRA expects at the October 8, 1985 HRA meeting to sign a development agree- ment with Turner Development Corporation and Embassy Suites for office%hotel • development of the area between Turners Crossroad and Xenia Avenue. Also scheduled for October 8, 1985 after the regular HRA meeting is an informational meeting with homeowners on Circle Down concerning potential expansion of the easterly portion of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Area to include properties on Circle Down. Tax increment projections prepared by City bond consultants reveal that new construction with a market value of $38 million is required in the East Area in order to support expansion of the Redevelopment District and acquisition of Circle Down homes. The HRA has contracted with James B. McComb and Associates to prepare a market study for the East Area to determine whether redevelopment could support the expanded project. The study is to be available by September 23, 1985. Attachment: Golden Hills Land Use Study (enclosed separately) � �