02-14-83 PC Agenda GOLDEN VALLEY PLAPJNING COMMISSION
(Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road)
February 14, 1983
� �:00 P.M.
AGENDA
I . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
II . DISCUSSIGN AND RECOMMENDATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CITY HOUSIPJG POLICY
III . REPORT ON REDEVELOPMENT POTEtJTIAL FOR T.H. 55 � GALDEN VALLEY ROAD
AREA 41EST OF BOONE AVENUE
IV. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 1 , 1983
V. REPORT ON BZA MEETING - FEBRUARY 8, 1983
VI . REPORT ON HRA t9EETING - FEBRUARY 8, 1983
� VII . REPORT ON VALLEY SQUARE DEVELOPER SOLICITATION
VIII . ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR YEAR IX CDBG PROGRAN
�
���
• MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
J anuary 24, 1983
� A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers of
the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chairman
Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
Those present were Commissioners Leppik, Polachek, Singer, Thompson and Tubman.
Commissioner Prazak was not present at the beginning of the meeting. Commissioner
Forster was absent.
Also present were Mike Miller, Planning and Redevelopment Coordinator, and Judy
Nally, Deputy City Clerk.
T. Approval of Minutes - January 10, 1983
It was moved by Commissioner Tubman, seconded by Commissioner Polachek and
carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the January 10, 1983 Planning
Commission meeting as recorded.
Commissioner Prazak arrived at the meeting.
II. Informal Public Hearing - P.U.D. #39 West Metro Surgical Center:
APPLICANT: American Medical International , Inc.
LOCATION: 6681 Country Club Drive
� REQUEST: Approval of Preliminary Design Plan for P.U.D. #39,
including medical offices and a "same day" surgical
center
Chairman Thompson introduced this agenda item and recognized John May, Executive
Director, of the proposed West Metro Surgical Center. He is presently the Director
for a surgical center in St. Paul and will also be the Director for the facility
a in Golden Valley. He reviewed for the Commission what types of patient services
are provided in a typical day. He also answered questions relative to the types
of surgery, number of patients, number of employees, and projected traffic.
Brian Cluts; Waters, Cluts & 0'Brien, Inc.; Architect answered questions regarding
the lay out of the parking lot.
Dr. Stephan Brzica, Jr., Proponent, reviewed who is responsible for the management
of the PUD.
Jim Benshoof; Jim Benshoof and Associates; answered questions regarding the
traffic analysis for the PUD.
Chairman Thompson opened the informal public hearing for public input.
Dennis Jackson - 6745 Country Club Drive - He had concerns over the distance
between the parking lot and residential property. He would like to see a 50
foot setback. He also stated that he has no traffic complaints or ma3or
objection to the surgical center.
i�
� ' Planning Commission Minutes - January 24, 1983 Page 2
II. Informal Public Hearing - P.U.D. #39 West Metro Surgical Center - Continued:
� There was no one else present who wished to speak to this agenda item, and
Chairman Thompson closed the informal public hearing.
Chairman Thompson reviewed the five conditions of approval recommended in the
staff report.
It was moved by Commissioner Polachek, seconded by Commissioner Singer and
carried unanimouisly to recommend City Council approval of the Preliminary
Design Plan for PUD #39, Golden Valley Surgical Center, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The portion of sanitary sewer line to be constructed in the street shall be
installed by the developer at developer expense but shall be City owned ,and �
maintained, shall be an 8 inch line, and shall include a manhole at the point
in the street where the private 4 inch line to the site begins at an angle
toward the south.
2. The developer shall submit with the General Plan of Development detailed
engineering plans satisfactory to the City Engineer and City Building
Inspector for the retaining walls proposed between the parking area and
landscaped area along the west side of the site.
3. The surgical center building shall be completely sprinklered with the
provision that if water could be hazardous to hospital equipment, smoke
detectors will be accepted in unsprinklered areas.
� 4. Fire Department connection for the surgical center building sprinkler system
shall be located on the north side of the building.
5. Sprinkler and smoke alarms shall be transmitted to the Golden Valley Police
and Fire Dispatch Center.
III. Report on BZA Meeting - January 11, 1983: .
Commissioner Polacheck provided the Planning Commission with a report on the
January 11, 1983 Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) meeting.
IV. Report on City Council Meeting - January 18, 1983:
Commissioner Leppik provided the Planning Commission with a report on the
January 18, 1983 City Council meeting.
V. Valley Square Redevelopment Land Use Recommendations
Mike Miller asked that any extra copies of the Valley Square Redevelopment, Land
Use Recommendations Report, prepared by the Galpin-Poppleton Corporation be
returned to the City Manager's Office.
VI. APA National Conference
Mike Miller informed the Commission that the APA National Conference will be held
,.• April 16-20, 1983 in Seattle and he will distribute information regarding the
conference when it becomes available.
. � Pla����g Commission Minutes - January 24, 1983 . Page 3
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
�
David Thompson, Chairman Margaret Leppik, Secretary
�
:� .
� T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEB. 9, 1983
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION OF CITY HOUSING POLICY
At the request of the Golden Valley City Council , the Planning Gommission
has been asked to suggest methods to implement the City Housing Policy,
recommended by the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council
in January of 1g81 . (See attached memo and capy of Housing Policy.)
The City Councit would like the Planning Commission to consider this matter
and report back to the Council before the end of May, 1983. In con-
junction with the implementation of the City Housing Policy, the City
Council has also requested that the Planninq Commission consider recent
state legislation affecting the placement of mobile and/or "manufactured"
homes in municipalities. ,
Attached you will find a memo which backgrounds the matter of mobile homes
in cities. You will also find a memo suggesting some methods for imple-
mentation of the City Housing Policy.
J .
• MHM:kjm
•
• T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1983
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY HOUSING POLICY
Now that the City Council has adopted a rather comprehensive Housing Policy for
Golden Valley, the task of providing for implementation of this policy is confronting
us. With the knowledge that existing State and Federal assistance programs for low
and moderate income families have an uncertain future, it would be very difficult
to rely very heavily on such programs to carry the major burden of implementation
at this time. However, it is safe to anticipate that there will be new Federally
funded housing assistancQ programs to replace those that will be dropped or phased
out.
Although it may be phased out soon, one Federal assistance program that has had
little play in Golden Valley, but could be quite useful in implementing the housing
policy, is the Section 8 Existing Rental Assistance Program. The City does not
become directly involved in administering this program as it is a voluntary program
on the part of the landlord to apply for qualification, and for qualified tenants to
then apply for Section 8 assistance through Hennepin County. Our role in this matter
could be to develop more information on how landlords qualify and apply, and how
• qualified tenants can benefit. Perhaps by providing such information to potentially
interested parties, more landlords might utili:�e this program.
Basically, the only .way that the City can expect to Mave an on-going availability
of low and moderate income housing is for the City to be a participant from a
financial standpoint. Only through programs such as used to finance the "scattered
site" housing proje�t can we anticipate that there will be a continuing supply of
, affordable rental housing for qualified families in Golden Valley. Perhaps the
best way that the City could become a "financial" participant in providing law
and moderate income housing is to provide subsidies and other financiat incentives
to qualified developers who would provide this type of housing.
It is neither feasible, or practical , to attempt to force developers to provide
a certain number of housing units within a new development for low and moderate
income families. This type of purchase arrangement is a "one-shot" situation with
the resale of the dwelling unit going at the current appreciated market rate which
would preclude low and moderate income families from being able to purchase such
homes. Subsidizing home ownership is extremely difficult in today's market situation.
Perhaps the best prospects in this area lie in City acquisition of deteriorating
or blighted dwelling units, rehabilitating them, and selling them to qualified
low and moderate income buyers on purchase terms .that they can afford. Another
alternative would be to the purchaser to rehabilitate the dwelling unit and give
him credit for "seat equity". The number of dwelling units available in Golden
Valley that might fall into this category would be relatively few. The best
prospect for either of these two alternatives would probably be for the HRA to
acquire a dilapidated, or declining, apartment building, rehabilitate it, condo-
O I
Golden Valley Planning Commission -2- February 9, 1983
.
minimize it, and sell the units to low and moderate income families.
I believe that the issue of economic mix is very important with respect to imple-
menting the Housing Policy. Frankly, I view economic mix on a neighborhood scale
rather than on a parcel by parcel basis. First of all , any partially subsidized
development must be planned and.designed as an integral part of a total neighborhood
scheme. Subsidized housing should never be allowed to become a transitional
zone between high intensity uses and lower intensity uses. In addition, caution
should be exercised in locating subsidized housing on the periphery of a neigh-
borhood. In either case, there exists the danqer of creating a possible "ghetto-
like" sub-neighborhood. This in turn would have the effect of placing an ever-
lasting stigma on that develooment and the people who would reside there.
With regard to interesting and encouraging developers to consider partially subsidized
housing development, I feel that available sites should be investigated by staff
and reports made available to prospective developers after HRA approval . These
sites would include neighborhood developments, scattered sites, as a�etl as existing
structures that are deteriorating and rehabilitable.
Another possible means of implementation relating more to existing housing stock
involves ordinance modifications that would allow the zero lot line subdivision
of qualified existing double bungalows which could be sold independently as single-
family dwellings. Inasmuch as land and development costs would be less than that
. for a single-family detached dwelling, the cost of purchasing such an attached �
single-family dwelling, even at market rate, should be lower and more available
to the middle income buyer than a standard dwelling. Because of less lot area
and lower building costs, this type of home should remain less costly than a
standard single-family home. •
MHM:kjm
�
T0: Planning Commission
FROM: Rosemary Thorsen, Mayor
• DATE: January 26, 1981
RE: Housing Policy
The Golden Valley City Council has adopted the attached housing policy.
The Council thanks the commission for its participation in developing the
policy. We now need a recommendation for implementation. We have referred
the policy to staff with a request that they present suggestions and recom-
mendations back to the Council .
�
•
•
HOUSING POLICY IN GOLDEN VALLEY
Golden Valley is a first ring suburb directly adjacent to the west
boundary of Minneapolis. The preliminary census count by the Bureau of
Census states that Golden Valley has a 19$0 population of 21 ,913. Tnis
figure represents a 9� decrease in population from the 1970 census f�gure
of 24,246. It seems that Golden Valley, like many other fully develoaei
communities, is experienCing a gradual decline in their population.
According to the Metropolitan Council 's Guidelines, Golden Valley is
considered fully developed.
Although the poputation has declined over the last ten years , the
total number of households has increased by 165. Golden Valley's housinc
vacancy rate is relatively low. According to the preliminary 196o Census
figures there are 7,683 households in Golden Valley. Approximately li of
these units are vacant . This implies that the demand for housing in Golder,
� Valley is high. Single family owner occupied units dominate the housinc
market . Eighty four percent of all the dwelling units in Golden Valley
are owner occupied and the remaining 16% of the units are rented.
The overall housing stock in Gotden Valley is sound. More than half
� of the housing units were built between 1940 and 1960. Less than 5i of
the existing homes were built prior to 1940. Housing conditions in Gelde�
Valley do not appear to exhibit a substantial problem at the moment . Ho.��-
ever, it is important to establish a housing policy that will maintain the
quality of housing that Golden Va11ey has thus far enjoyed.
HOUSING GOALS
Golden Valley has made a number of attempts at addressing housine goals
and objectives. Golden Valley's Comprehensive Plan enumerates certain goa}s
and objectives in a form adopted by the City as the official policy. The
Housing section of the Comprehensive Plan addressed the general housinc
concerns in Golden Valley. This Housing Policy is being established so
• that future housing developments will have certain guidelines that shall
be followed. The primary function of this Housing Policy is to set goals
and objectives that are more specific. These goals and objectives are
-z-
� based on those in the Housing Eiement of the Comprehensive Plan. Hov:-
ever, criteria for developing subsidized housing units are further
defined.
The overriding housing goal in Golden Valley is as follows :
Provide housing opportunities for citizens of ali ages and
income levels, without discrimination, while maintaining a
d.iversity of high quality living environments through
imaginative and sound planning principles.
Based on this general goal , the following factors were examined in
the Comprehensive Plan:
1 . Economics: P�ovide a variety of housing units at costs
affordable to a wide range of famity incomes.
One program that will help achieve this goal
. , is H.U.D. 's Section 8 Rental Assistance Housinc
Program. There is a definite need for afford-
able rental units in Golden Valley. The City,
through its HRA, should attempt to integrate
subsidized housing projects with market rate
� housing. Projects that are more than 75%
federally subsidized sfiould be discouraged. A
good housing mix would be market rate units
- ' developed with Section 8 units that are
subsidized from 51r to 60°r, by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development . This type
of mix would help keep subsidized housing
� developments more in character with the
surrounding neighborhoods. All federally
subsidi2ed housing projects 5hould be carefully
analyzed by the Planning Cammission, the Human
Rights Commission, the HRA, the City Council ,
• and any other appropriate City comnission or
subcommittee. This analysis is usually
-3-
• accomplished through the City's P.U.D.
, (Planned Unit Development) Ordinance.
2. Type of Unit :
A. St�l�e: A dwelling unit is characterized by two
traditional styles : detached single unit
and a multiple dwelling unit . Within these
two basic styles lie variations of design.
The City's P.U.D. ordinance is written so
that the developer has a good deal of flexi -
bitity in the designing process.
B. Ownership: The ownership of a dwelling unit is another
�
distinction by which to identify types of
units.
There exist two basic approaches to residency.
• . One is referred to as awner occupied. This
may include detached single family units,
townhouses, multiple units (condominiurr,$) ,
duplexes , and fourplexes. The second basic
° approach is renter occupied units. A rente�
housing unit can be of any style from an
apartment in a multiple unit complex to a
detached single family unit.
Ownership becomes particularly important in
any P.U.D. housing project. The P.U.D. `s
incorporating asststed housi�g will have to
prepare and adhere to a viable management
plan as part of any P.U.D. (Planned Unit
Development) contract. Any management plan
will have to be reviewed and approved by both
the Human 'Rights Commission and by the Housing
• and Redevelopment Authority where the HRA is
involved.
-4-
• 3. Density: Another recognized factor affecting a diversity
of housing is density. In Gotden Valiey there
can be found three basic densities for housing:
a. Low Density: 1-4 units per acre
b. Mid Density: 5-12 units per acre
c. High Density: Greater than 12 units
per acre.
These classifications are simply guidelines :
Density is a retative variable and must ,
therefore , be analyzed on an individual project
basis. Additional consideration must be given
to the number of occupants , size of the units,
_ parking area, play area for children, open
space and other factors that directly relate
to density. The City of Golden Valley must
recognize the fact that current housing demands ,
• economic and energy conditions, may dictate
increased housing densities.
4. Designs: Innovative design can directly affect the
• impact of other factors, such as the densit�
and energy efficiency. A poor design can
cause density to have a more detrimental impact
than, for example, a good design with the same
density. Rising fuel costs have necessitated
designing with energy efficiency being a high .
priority.
Design is also an tmportant factor when consid-
ering safe fire p�otection. The height of the
building and access to the building by fire trucks
is extremely important from an external design
standpoint. Other design factors, such as the
i' installation of sprinkler systems and the
location of smoke detectors must also be taken
tnto consideration from an internal design
-5-
� standpoint. The Building Board of Revievr
examines the design of all structures and is
responsibie for meking safety demands on the
buitder,
The City of Golden Valley is keenly aware of the continually rising
cost of quality housing and limited amount of land available for residential
development in the future. Therefore, future housing in the City must be
a result of carefu1 planning and cooperation between elected officials ,
appointed commissions and committees, City staff, and developers.
There are numerous justifications for providing the opportunity to �
have a diversity of housing in a first ring suburban municipality such as
Golden Valley. They include:
1 . Hete rogeneity: The batkbone of a mature and socially
healthy community is its intrinsic socio-
ieconomic mixture. This mix includes, but is
• not limited to, a diversity of races , life-
styles, income levels and age groups. If a
community is to retain this ethnic and
° socio-economic mix a diversity of housino
opportunities should be encouraged by City
officials. A diversity of housing should
provide families residing in the City with
� the option to �emain in the City as the farily
, members mature. As a family matures, its
members require different housing needs.
For instance, the cfiildren of parents owning
a home in Golden Valley should heve the
opportunity to reside in an affordable home
in the City once they have reached a decision
to buy or rent. Also, as parents reach an
elderly age, they may cfioose to sell their
� home and move into an apartment or senior
housing complex. The City shoulcl advocate
that housing be provided to serve those special
-6-
• needs of a maturing family or household
in order that a mixed and stable populatio�
remains in Golden Valley.
For these reasons, it is important that
federally subsidized housing projects such
as Section 202 Rental Housing for the
elderly and handicapped and other Section 8
housing projects be integrated tooether with
market rate housing.
2. Stability: A diversity of housing can also create a
stable population in a cor�nunity by:
a. Maintaining the number of lona-terr
residents in the City. This factor
hinges on the availability of quality
� housing to families of various incone
levels.
b. Generating healthy commercial dis:ricts
in the City to serve the local populace.
. c. Providing housing for families and
individuals with close proximity to
ma,jor employment centers located in
the community.
3. Adaptability: A variety of housing types, design and density
is necessary if the City is to adjust to the
changing development patterns expected in the
near future.
4. Interdependence: The City of Golden Valley, as a part of the
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, can no longer
be thought of as an isolated urban community.
� Therefore, the City's future housing stock
(reside�tial development patterns) should
reflect a metropolitan responsibility to -
-7-
. providing opportunities for a variety of
housing types and densities.
5. Flexibility: The changing lifestyles and demographics of
a suburban community must be accompanied by
a diversity of housing.
The solution to providing single people,
young families and the elderly with quality
housing involves allocating the construction
of various housing types, designs and der,sities
in order that selecting a home and its
location remain a respected right of personal
choice.
HDUSING PROGRAMS
An overview of the housing program elements used by Golden Valley in
• conjunction with the objectives each supports is displayed in Figure 1 .
The City has adopted several policies that are direetty related to
- each objective. These policies have attempted to integrate the housing
, goals and �bjectives together with the avaitable housing programs. The
following discussion provi�des a description of how the City's Housing
Policies have been used to attain the four Housing Objectives outlined in
the Comprehensive Plan.
OBJECTIVE 1 : PROMOTE THE PRESERVATION AND UPGRADING OF THE EXISTING
RE5IDENTIAL HOUSING STOCK IN THE CITY.
Poticies:
A. The City shall make use of all available
federal , state and local funding sources
to promote the rehabilitation and/or
� redevelopment of identified and designated
substandard residential units or areas.
• _8_ .
B. For residents in Golden Valley participating
� in federally or state funded housing prograr^s,
the City shall adopt the Section 8 Housinc
Qual�ity Standards used by HUD to determine a
residential unit 's habitable acceptability in
order that the City has a means of detectinc
whether or not a house is in need of improve-
, ments or beyond repair.
C. The City shalt promote the utilization of
federally allocated Community Development
, Block Grant Funds for the purpose of revital-
izing the residential neighborhoods targeted
for substantial rehabilitation.
� D. The City H.R.A. may use its legal authority
under "eminent domain" to condemn and remove
substandard housing which has been determined
• economically unfeasible to rehabilitate.
OBJECTIVE 2: ENCOURAGE A SUFFICIENT VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND
DESIGNS TO ALLOW ALL PEOPLE A HOUSING CHOICE.
Policies:
- A. The City shall encourage design and planning
innovatiorts in housing construction and
residential land use development. This
type of City-Developer �elationship is
encouraged through the City's P.U.D. ordinance.
B. The City wi11 promote a diversity of newly
constructed housing.
Various housing projects differ with the housing
� programs handling the finanting. Therefore,
the subsidized percentage range could vary
with ihe project. However, Housing Projects
that would be 100$ subsidized should be discouraged.
' -9-
Subsidized housing shoutd be attempted to be
• integrated with market rate housing. As
stated earlier, a good mix would be in the
51% io 60i federally subsidized range.
C. Residential development shall be built in
accordance with performance standards that
respect the hydrologic and natural landform
features. (Proposed developments on wetlands ,
floodways , flood plains, and severe slopes
shall be carefully reviewed in order that
the impact on the natural balance of the
environment is minimized.)
D. The City will continue to offer as an alterna-
tive for land utilization the development of
Planned Unit Developments (P.U.D. 's) which
allow the City to be more flexible in site
• design and density requirements.
E. The City will promote the development of
multi-family dwellings, provided the density
does not pose an overuse of the site and
the surrounding environment. Density is
relative to each project and shall be viewed
accordingly.
� OBJECTIVE 3:, THE CITY SHALL PROMOTE THE USE OF AVAILABLE PROGRAMS,
FUNDS AND PLANNING APPROACHES IN ORDER TO PROVIDE
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AT A COST INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES
CAN AFFORD WITHOUT COMPROMISING ESSENTIAL NEEDS. SPECIAL
FOCUS ON HOUSING NEEDS OF THE ELDERLY, MINORITIES,
HANDICAPPED AND BOTH DOUBLE AND SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES
WITH YOUNG CHILDREN.
. Policies:
A. The City shall attempt to obtain, when
-to-
• available, all applicable state and federal
housing subsidies designed to maximize the
opportunity of providing a variety of housing
types, costs, and densities.
B. The City shall encourage the use of the horr�
ownership and rental subsidy programs .
C. The City shall recognize the housing goals ,
established by the Metropolitan Council .
D. The City will provide, when available, increased
opportunity for low and moderate income persons
� to �eside in the community through the provision
of state and federal sub.sidized housing and
rental assistance programs. Ideaily, these
• types of projects should be integrated with
market rate housing.
' E. The Lity shall encourage that �ewly constructed
subsidized housing be developed in locations
offering residents easy access to�local and
regional urban service centers.
F. The City shalt encourage the use of townhouses ,
duplexes, garden and patio apartments and
scattered site single family units for modest
cost housing.
G. The City shall promote the implementation of
federal housing subsidies to ecqui�e land for
scattered site modest-cost housing in order
that land, as an element. of housing costs , is
� minimized.
H. The City shall review and revise its present
land use regulations to enhante the opportunity
' -il-
for modest cost housing in the future.
.
I . The City shall continue to promote the
market-rate housing at a cost similar to
the existing market-rate housing stock in
the City.
J. The City shall promote the development of
townhouses , condominiums , and detached sinole
family homes as viable types of market-rate
housing.
K. The City shall promote energy efficient design
standards whenever possible.
OBJECTIVE 4: THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN THE AREA
OF HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTING.
�
A. The City shall promote a diversity of housing
. for all peopte, regardless of ethnic background,
age, income level , sex, and religion.
•
., ' i
fIGURE 1 : GOLDEN VALIEY INVENTORY ELEMENTS BY OBJECTIVES
.
ObJective Inventory Elements
MHFA Home Improvement Grants
1. Prorrrote the preservation
and upgrading of the MHFA Hame Improvement Loans
existing residential
housing stock in the City. Community Development Rehabili-
tation (CDBG Funds)
Zoning Ordinance
2. Encourage a sufficient
variety of housing Planned Unit Development Ordinance
' 3• The City shall promote the
use of available programs , Section 8 Housing Assistance -
funds, and planning Existing Housing
� approaches in order to
provide housing opportunities Section 8 Housing Assistance -
� at a cost individuals and New Construction
families can afford without
compromising essential needs. Scattered Site Program (Local HR�,
Special focus on housing needs taxing and tax increment financing�
af the elderly, minorities,
handicapped and both double Section 202 Housing for Elderly
and single parent families and Handicapped.
• with young children.
4. The City will encourage equal
, opportunity and discourage the Section 8 - Existing and Ne►��
. practice of discrimination Construction
in the area of home ownership
and renting. Community Development Block Grants
I
.
�??
°¢T � r � ,� ��:. =�.
�.�
� `� ��`t _�
�
4
.�.�
f tlx�..:._
y;'-' �
City of Golden Valley
February 7, 1983
T0: Planning Commissioners
FROM: David Th�pson, Chairman�
SUBJECT: Housing Policy
Two years ago, the City Council adapted our current Housing
Policy, which calls for making affordable housing available
to those persons and families of law and moderate incom.es.
The City has part3cipated in several pro3ects making such
affordable housing available, both prior to and since the
adoption of this policy. These pro�ects include Dover Hill,
Calva.ry Center Apartments, Medley Park Tawnhomes and the
• scattered site project. The City has utilized CBDG funds
and tax increment financing for land purchase and resale.
All of thia ha.s been done without a formal implementation
policy. The Council wants the P].anning Commission to recommend
such an implementation policy.
" As a matter of practicality, the City must continue to be a
financial participant to implement the Housing P olicy. The
aptions open to the City, however, are now more limited, given
the lack of a.vailable land for another Medley Park. The
remain3.ng viable options appear to be scattered site housing
and�or the purchase, rehab3ng and resale to qua lified buyers
of .existing, blighted housing. Scattered site housing will
remain viable as long as there are availa.ble lots. Scattered
site housing currently includes two duplexes and one four plex.
To properly consider further use of the scattered site concept,
we should be aware of where each building is and how each fits
into its neigYiborhood. Mike has included the addresses of these
units in the agenda packet. Please dxive by each of the sites
prior to our Feb. 14 meeting.
• .
Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 ��-,�
- �,�rG:� � � .���'�� .rl��
;� �,. 7�. �� �',�'�� •� ���,
rl� �y�� ',`� �r`'�:�,�' � ..�r
jI �� ;�`s ��� �j� �. ,�.' � -
���� a5 ��� .�-� ;�,
_ `�.'.��..���.�a�,-��;-�:xw�� �' '�� ,� ,�'�k'�`�`i�'
� ,i.f.'"�.r..+"�3�''�,�.�a�� �3'��'. '}'�.y ��� - " . . _
•� 3�::�c � .r�d...' , _, .r x c.s
� t �� ��� -'� '��
^�� � �k:� � ��
�. i .
� �f��,R� a� ��� ��'����`.. �' '�, .��� �� 'i
—��`= : .� � �ti�' � tx _
�.'r'��f
�s r. -r '" ,F � - , �..�X- f�'1�% ' �r_J� l
_ '�C � .:,r� � r � , _
. - .. =W�- - , � ���.,.�� l��.rr. � _
- t���w..� , � �` � �,� '`� �'�T`., �� ,� -_
I � �� ���
- �� r�.�_ �� �,.,� .,�.= - -_ .„�\ ., � •'• _
w - �� �- / �
:��r� .� �y� -��..� �_ � i� ( _
� ��-: �_ •� `f—' — �� �� �r\ -�,��r � '
�� =�� a� �_ -�� ����� lr� `
. —.
__ ----- - �
��l_ — °'; .�•�� � . :..
` � �'='�%_ , �` -r ��i - ��
�i��°� :�;�:... �
�'�'����� '�,_ - �L f. -i�" �i` :
- -
. . -�.� .���.�1� � � ��� -
..�_,,;,,, _�
�� _ �
±� � � ���� ;- ������
; � �t �\ _. �����°, r�
, - � ;� , - -
/ ���:_ �� �� � ;l,� -' � _ u: ,
= , ; ,���� �� , ,� �'"'�,;,� - -
'�' ,�!( ; �i. - :� �-�;s.�z��
' ' - ��' _ _�, -_���:�`r
�_ � -� - ��_ � -=��- �
�- _ .�:,� � _
''���"' __'�.�"-�I�`� 3 ��'
;.__.� =i.. _.:�. i,
��i� _�-:: ;��■•_. _ - _
� Il��i�i�'t;� �� �� lt._r1E
�
— ,..ii �� �"�� � � � ��. 1 � �y,�
�, � � �I � r� - .�
�'�+' �"�,� .���,�`F'� ��F �.��'f'. s��.� I,.
:i.� �.. � ..,r�. `�`�C,,, �`
;r''�"��. _ - ����`�- �� ��� ��,�-�
-�= �`4 -��.��
� .� �
�"J rr�r.�, i iJ �,�� ���x� .������.:
�s.. ���.:x,�,;'N.�,:�;� .-�,.n..,.,.r,;-
_�� C- L - �. ��� -�� -�
_- -�!�� � � �.
:;�
- -:�r��r�� - 1
�� r�1'� -
� � :��- �''" ' � �
�:�- �r-r�` "1 .
��� t-`' - ;,�'�_���•!L� � -
�`�I' r� �,;� �ti;�' _�
� T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMP1ISSION DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1983
FROM: ALDA PIEKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE TA ACCOMMODATE NEW
LEGISLATION ON MANUFACTURED/MOBILE HOMES
The State Legislature in .1982 passed legislation prohibiting the use of Zoning
to exclude manufactured/mobile homes. The City of Golden Valley Zoning Ordinance
does not make provision for, and therefore does not allow, mobile homes as
defined in the Definitions Section of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance
does not differentiate other types .of manufactured housing from conventionally
built houses, and factory built modular homes have been erected in Golden Valley
and could be installed under the existing Zonina Ordinance provided all require-
ments of the State Uniform Building Code (UBC) are met.
The new State law, which became effective August 1 , 1g82, adds language to the
Zoning enabling legislation stating that Zoning regulations may not prohibit
; manufactured homes built in conformance with the Manufactured Homes Building Code,
originally established by 1980 legislation as the Mobile Homes Building Code.
The Manufactured Homes Building Code, Minnesota Statute 327•31 through 327.35,
defines a manufactured home as "a structure, transportable in one or more sections,
. which in the traveling mode is eight body feet or more in width or 40 body feet
or more in length or, when erected on• site, is 320 or more square feet, and which
. is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or
without a permanent foundation . . . ."` This means that City and County Zoning
Ordinances may not exctude, or in other words must make provision for, manufact�red/
mobile homes which meet this definition of manufactured housing. At the same time,
the list of items which may be regulated by Zoning is expanded to include '�idth"
and "type of foundation", along with height, size, lot coverage, density and use
' as previously provided for in Zoning enabling legislation. A copy of the first
section of the City Zoning enabling legislation with the amendment underlined is
attached.
The likelihood of receiving a proposal for installation of a mobile home in Golden
Valley is reduced by lack of available land and by the relativety high cost of
residential lots in Golden Valley. However, the use of manufactured/mobile homes
on sma.11 individuat lots of record is a possibility. The City Zoning Ordinance
requires amendment in compliance with the taw to make provision for manufactured
housing which conforms to the Manufactured Homes Building Code, and it would be
in the best interests of the City at the same time to provide for regulation of
manufactured housing to ensure compatibility with established Golden Valley residential
neighborhoods.
Guidelines for dealing with the ne�v legislation published by both the League of
Minnesota Cities and by Metropolitan Council suggest that cities may, without violating
the law, establish any of the following: �
�
Golden Valley Planning Commission -2- February 9, 1983
•
1 . Design standards for dwellings in residential districts specifying minimun
width, minimum square footage, siding materials, roof lines and foundation'
requirements.
Z. Residential districts in which only dwellings meeting the State Uniform Building
Code (UBC) are permitted.
3. Mixed residential districts in which both homes conforming to the UBC and
homes in compliance with the Manufactured Homes Buildi.ng Code are permitted.
4. Manufactured home park districts in which only manufactured homes meeting
the Manufactured Homes Building Code are permitted.
T�e City is required to make provision in the Zoning Ordinance for manufactured
housing which complies with the Manufactured Homes Building Code but apparently has
two options for regulating use of manufactured/mobile homes:
1 . Relegation of manufactured/mobile homes to specific residential districts.
2. Limitation by means of zoning requirements such as minimum size, width,
exterior materials or roof pitch. Design standards of this type must be
applied uniformly to all dwelling units within a zoning district including
conventionally built homes as well as manufactured/mobile homes.
• The limitation of manufactured/mobile homes to specific residential zoning districts
is not a workable option in Gotden Valley. There is only one zoning district for
single family homes, the Residential Zoning District, and creation of a new residen-
tial zoning category for manufactured/mobile homes in not feasible. There is no
. available vacant land for a manufactured/mobile home district, and selection of
existing Golden Valley neighborhoods as more suitable than ot�ers for the inclusion
' of mobile home development is not practicable. The only viable alternative is
to adopt design standards which would limit the type of manufactured/�obile homes
allowable in the current Residential Zoning District.
Residential Zoning District design standards wh.ich may be adopted as deterrents
to incompat.ible manufactured/mobite home development include the following:
1 . Minimum Dwelling Unit Size
The City of Golden Valley in 1981 eliminated from the City Code all minimum
square footage requirements for residential dwelling units. Elimination of
minimum square footage requirements in noted in the recently adopted
Comprehensive Plan Housing element as facilitating new construction of
affordable housing. Elimination of residential dwelling unit minimum square
footage requirements improves Golden Valley's rating under Metropotitan
Council 's Policy 39 housing evaluation for housing subsidy funds. Staff feels
that reinstitution of minimum square footage requirements is not necessary
in order to adequately regulate manufactured/mobile home development in Golden
� Valley Residential Zoning District and advises against use of this tool .
Golden Valley Planning Commission -3- February 9, 1983
• 2. Minimum Width
The amendment in the zoning enabling legislation allows addition of minimum
dwelling unit width as a design standard applicable to all dwelling units
within a residential zoning category. Review of ordinance amendments passed
by other Metropolitan Area communities reveals that a width of 22 feet is used
as a standard in residential neighborhoods as opposed to mobile home parks.
One example requires a minimum width of 22 feet at the narrowest point, and
another requires a minimum width of 22 feet for a minimum of 70 percent
of the length of the dwelling unit. A Metropolitan Council publication suggests
the use of a 20 foot minimum width requirement to allow only double wide man-
ufactured homes. Staff suggests that a minimum dwelling width of 22 feet would
be reasonable for all new construction in the Residential Zoning District
and that it would serve to promote manufactured/mobile home installation com-
patible with conventional single family residential neighborhoods.
It is suggested that the Planning Commission consider provision for homes narrower
than 22 feet as a conditional use. This would allow for a width less than
22 feet, whether manufactured or conventionally built, in the case of unusual
lot configuration, but would provide for a determination of compatibility with
the surrounding neighborhood. The conditional use provision would eliminate
the possibility of court challenge based on lack of provision in any part of
the City for single wide mobile homes.
. 3. Garage Requirement
Section 3A. 10 Paragraph 3 of the Residential Zoning District Section of the City
Zoning Ordinance requires demonstrated space for a garage prior to issuance of
a building permit for a single family dwelling. It has been suggested that a
garage requirement would increase the investment required in a single family
dwelling and therefore, discourage installation of less expensive manufactured/
• mobile homes. Lack of a garage requirement, the same as lack of square footage
requirements, is a factor noted by Metropolitan Council as promoting affordable
housing. Staff nevertheless suggests consideration of adding a garage require-
ment in the Residential Zoning District. The Golden Valley Zoning Ordinance
already includes garage requirements for the Two Family (R-2) Residential and
Multiple Dwelling Zoning Districts.
4. Permanent Foundation
The second item added to zoninn enabling legislation is type of foundation.
The Ma�ufactured Homes Building Code provides for temporary tie down of mobile
homes rather than installation on permanent foundations. Other communities
have distinguished between installation on permanent foundations in conformance
with the State Uniform Building Code (UBC) in residential districts and use
of temporary tie down systems in conformance with the Manufactured Homes
' Building Code in manufactured/mobile home park districts. Staff suggests
addition of a requirement for permanent foundations in conformance �vith Chapter
2g of the UBC, which requires masonry frost footings to a depth of 42 inches
� and foundation extending 6 inches above grade.
Golden Valley Planning Commission -4- February 9, 1983
� 5• Roof Design
In order to achieve roof lines compatible with conventionally built housing,
o-ther communities have adopted design standards requiring a minimum roof
pitch of 3/12. A Metropolitan Council publication cautions that roof pitch
on most manufactured homes is slightly under 3/12 to allow transport under
interstate highway bridges and that the 3/12 requirement could be challenged
as excluding all manufactured housing. Staff suggests instead a requirement
that roof design conform to Section 3203 (d) of the Uniform Building Code which
specifies roof design for areas susceptible to ice buildup.
In conclusion, it is suggested that the Planning Commission request that staff
prepare draft amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance providing for the following:
1 . A definition of manufactured/mobile homes which conforms to the new zoning
enabling legislation.
2. Manufactured housing in conformance with the Manufactured Homes Building Code
as permitted and conditional uses in the Residential Zoning District.
3. Residential Zoning District design standards requiring minimum dwelling unit
width, garages, permanent foundations and roof design in conformance with the
UBC.
� .
AP:kjm
Attachments:
1 . P1N Statutes Section 462.357 Subdivision 1 .
•
(
� -
Seca 2. Minnesota Statutes 1980, Section 462.357, Subdivision 1, is amended to
• read: �
Subdivision 1. (AUTHORITY FOR ZONING.) For the purpose of promoting the public
health, safety, morals and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate
the location, height, width, bulk, t�r e of foundation, number of stories, size of
buildings and other structures, the percentage o� ot which may be occupied, the size
of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses
of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public
activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence,
recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation,
conservation of shorelands, as defined in section 105.485, access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02, flood control or other
purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. No
regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construct�on as defined in section 116H.02,
subdivision 3, or manufactured homes �bu9lt in�conformance with sections 327.31 to
327035 that se�� es _c_o�mp � w a o er zoning or inances promu ga e pursuan to
th s section. The regulat�ons may divide the municipality into districts or zones
of suitable numbers, shape and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class
or kind of buildings, structures or land and for each class or kind of use throughout
su�h district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other
districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be known as the zoning
ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the
application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within
two miles af its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has
adopted zoning regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipali-
ties have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the
• zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous muni-
��palities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations.
Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as
if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town
board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
/rmm
�4/15/82
• T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSIAN DATE: FEB. 9, 1983
FROM: MIKE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPP1ENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT - T.H. #55 � GOLDEN
VALLEY ROAD WEST OF BOONE AVENUE
Attached you will find a copy of a report on the above referenced area
which outlines the potential for redevelopment in that area. As can be
gathered from the report, that while this area is deteriorating, the priority
for immediate action is not the highest. However, the matter is being
brought to the Planning Commission for further study which ultimately
should result in Planning Commission input and recommendation to the
City Council and HRA.
MHM:kjm
�
�
.-�—_....
� s����`4 sr�ee C ity of
s .
�` � � •
. �r��� �rr�
� . �
o� � ,
• �g � DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC W R
— O KS
� j ,
� � MEMO
inspection
O A T E: FEBRUARY 2, 1983
T O: JEFF SWEET, CITY MANAGER
F A O M: MIKE MILLER, PLANNtNG � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
S U B J E C T: POTENTIAL FOR REDEUELOPMENT - T.H. 55 AWD GOLDEN
VALLEY ROAD AREA
Pursuant to a request from the HRA, 1 have made a -reconnaissance survey of the
above referenced area analyzing the potential for redevelopment. The area surveyed
includes both the north and south sides of Golden Valley Road from the point where
• Golden Valley Road takes off from T.H. 55 west of Boone Avenue to a point where
Golden Valley Road becomes Mendelssohn Avenue (the service road for County Road 18) .
The zoning for the entire south side of Golden Valley Road in this area is Commercial .
Most land uses along the south side of Golden Vailey Road in this area are
commercially oriented services except for a veternary clinic and a single-
family dwelling. Both of these latter uses are non-conforming uses under the present
. zoning, and should be seriously considered for removal and/or relocation. Other
° land uses along this side of Golden Valley Road include a self-service gas station,
camera shop, insurance offices and a bowling alley. The general appearance af this
side of the street indicates blight and/or deteriorating'conditions combined with
clutter and non-conforming setbacks for parking and structures. Inasmuch as this
side of Golden Valley Road fronts on T.H. 55, the physical image presented is one
of a deteriorating strip development.
That part of the area along the north side of Golden Valley Road presents a far
less negative image than the south side does. However, that does not preclude the
potential for redevelopment, rehabilitation and/or development of vacant land.
There are three zoning classifications along the north side of Golde�n Valley Road,
Commercial , Muitfple Dwelling, and Business and Professional Offfce (B � PO) .
Land uses include a restau�ant (Red Lobster) , approximately 3.7 acres of commercially
zoned undeveloped land, apartment condominiums, a small office structure, a single-
family dwelling (non-conf.orming use) . and another office structure. Both the
restaurant and apartment condominiums are well developed and maintained. Both land
uses should remat� intact. The approximate 3.7 acre commerctal site is being proposed
for possible 1984 development for commercial-retail service with possibly some
� office intended for such uses that might be relocated from the Valley Square Redevel-
opment Project. The single-family dwelling and small office structure are situations
indicating improper land use and under utili2ation of land in that area. Both
i�l
Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Vatley Minnesota,55427,(612) 545-3781 ��:,�
Jeff Sweet
• Februa ry 2, 1983 �
Page 2
sites, either singularly or combined could be rtbre intensely developed as a Business
and Professional Office location. Properly redeveloped, this site could be much
more harmonious with adjacent uses which are the Westview Business Center and a
trade union office structure. The trade union office structure lies to the west of
the single family dwelling where Golden Valley Road runs into Mendelssohn Avenue.
Along the south side of Golden Valley the self-service gas station should be either
removed or relocated. The veternary clinic should be removed (non-conforming use)
providing room for development of a new camera store and/or other retail services
to compliment proposed development across the street. The insurance office should
remain as is, since it was recently rebuilt, and r.ieets all minimum zoning requirements.
The bowling alley, if it stays, should be rehabilitated with the parking lot brought
into conformance with the City Zoning Ordinance. To the west, the single-family
dwelling should be removed and the site utilized for office development or commercial
uses such as the Hennepin County Seed Exchange, or possibly the self-service gas
station in conjunction with other retail uses.
�olden Yalley Road ltself could use curb and gutter to regulate indiscriminate
ingress and� egress from land uses along that street. The intersection of Golden
Valley Road with T.H. 55 could be modified. However, the best improvement probably
would be the elimination of gas station which is located so close to the intersection.
� This area wili always be a strip development, and as such, care should be taken to
upgrade the area presenting a more positive image as well as a more economically
viable neighborhood abutting Valley Square.
MHM:kjm
�
� �i i � � � e -
V � ' ' �� = �
u � � =
� .
facr - ,
�, _
� � � � 0! .01 • . '.�
on ,� ow f` os• � �b'• e `°9 °." 1
!'elil- •S `� - --- ----——- -— --
-�iaTn- , r .'3J1r� 3NOU8� .ar�:. ` `;• a,- Y, y�.ot.e�=�y
fi2if LQ'SG2 fY12 li� OB : io)� �•eM+ �'L�� �` .►,
i te�-�o� :�� °r �
• - • `� • e ��P ;,� � • ' � 1, �^ •
. o ^Q _ e
_ w o N e � a 1 �s �
N O ZC LOf ' '�, 1 e .i
z 41� � �' �
M.iI.CO.ON o �
�,IL�OM 1i'90f e � • p J �a N `�� �t
�• • m � 0 ; Q � •�.r�. ^I � �
;
___ ►9 Of___ � Mf � ' wi �� �� �
N " w'� � � � 7� r � , � � ., �
� ^ . a � � .e
� sti � o q/��Li ' � / ° � I o ...
� -�y� �;.wr �� � � r •�, r �� � /O �
Mf ;- Y�2 V/ I ' �K YC� 4�
' ,�, g �^�• I F f y�.k , g •• as � ?n� �n an oo�
� ' ' � e M � • •u ctr `
y� p ..._.. .
I • � a � �� '� � 1 �......_. . �
/ . : ,� Z ; .;• ;--s �• s,:s 3nv antv�aa:�,.;'.
_ . r �: -----�
CvI-oto 71t�OS[ �st-Oi[ � r - . 1'--..... ♦rt � � o� •
iSi[S ff /i HYIZ 0! ii6�i . 1 uy m � n► o tn �
Y/��M " 6S'6¢2 •' OC- {.^ , , . (lfU. _
'ON -• 3Ad LIt11V�3a , '3nv anlv�3a��� �. e^ ! ! 5 4" >
Gf6
. ♦ � O'0♦ !tC[L 1 � �.. r°, .. ' C�e.°. Q
iPI iOf i"� � � .`el -04�� '
� �I. W $ � .c„ .' a --�q �
• N • � � O �; i o�+�.� r1 �f)i p •`1hi,e�
� �
� N � � v M' I
� � W *� °� � ��'a.
� -_SiFL7--- ar s<--�-�=�~ � �'. 'J �
_j.__
.�o� � '�o y —�� d e <<'<<�� J
� �Pa,�. �„„ R _ N3 , • e ;
� . ,
'" • _ .. �c •° > . ; ... 's o �s :
V � �
� N �N ro.,�. _"""'�"'... �en� � o� u�cy.
� ��I.OI�ON - �
,N. ��� �� 3'i':�v y ,'s s'3A1/ N91SN3�
�r� Z :N�"i % ser. _��wi• .
� l9Lf! �ll.i! '- .*. '_. t o5. Y S.
y�iory Q .�J�aM ` o i!I•_ .J►_�:If L�(
� �T _i 1^ •4 ~, � � d � �
_ m y�.,�
� J , .
� �. .� s �;
��". N .Y �YI'. H �Y
� O� O t0 �• M� .rr : rr e.
V �
� m°� W o � .y i 7 o�Z e� ,
z- � w t . �i,,'�a° 7ne;.
.6�l�C i�iG♦ M..OS.O/�JN �O�Of �5 Sac v a•.ar *+ . �::T:j_ �. ' •�et;� H 1. s.
f62 0,i'a.•n� •. m 1I fel I I�isi y S ^ °-�`
-N..6»,eS �J!� � o •`o, '�'.
�o --f.'- _ ;�� o� •
� � , •
±i w
_A � I
1 vO a � ` , o ya -
r� : ��1� � P �
N � ; I� � � 5 '� , •
� � N � •
.
. W - - ' •,
. ° � �: `�,
OZ ; N _ , : a � _ ,.,_ - _
�/� . '^ _ ' --- - C5 y� � �
� 0 7 � � .. _ •, �j� �
� � �I � � A �.t!
�� I�/ � e�: y i .�i� •1�!
b 1� Q ;:' d C• � �/.Q`.
T.o •'' � �
a � � • __ +rsss . _ °�_ : -_
� O�
M~ � ~� '
� I ' Z�j,� .:�:.. � �� _
¢ i i 1 - �S1:E. �-- w ''�e .
V - ej 1
1- M \
ou • .� 01�►r .,f �: c .i`+y��: ` ,
� a. .
� � �e':i. � '� �3g �
�� - .:YC � ' ���� � � -' �'
�/ � ,' ^ ' »� _ , . .
o � a �
�/ � — ` _('�f4 : ^.� • .
{{�_//���• y9
�w � i � ^�)'oS ._'_'_ �~. �Il 11
V� O y � S• O
dj °a'° � � � ° . ` .n =�8„ '
y o�r—�r— ' .
` � > yY o �� i
�' « �r s .a. � !
� � ti �, .
°�' � g c�l'�aei� � �� c'�� _ �t +9� �
�;.ti., � � �; �ti� -^�' `� �:.
s c a� � � z' .o•� e6 ��y1. 0 :-y 'g.'- . '
,1�_ �/ .:4� o� G( II � � IbIP I q� '. C
,; o' st•�-.tiri "'°" o«n� �: ,:;� • '�s'�"'?h"•i:n�: I �<''w �_ � .4 e: � s
} �°"�Z ' �6 , �:�-r a � '1 .p �7`.. NLf10NAld !O All'J �_
- t0u4 :� I .''�
� _
��
� T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEB. 9, 1983
FROM: �11KE MILLER, PLANNING � REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: VALLEY SQUARE DEVELOPER SOLICIATION
As of January 31 , 1983, the Prospectus soliciting developer proposals
for the first phase of implementation of the Valley Square Redevelopment
Plan was made available to the public. A mailing list of over 100 developers
has been compited by City Staff and the prospectus has been mailed out
to those firms. In addition, a news release announcing the project and
calling for developer proposals has been circulated to various newsletters
and periodicals such as "Dodge Reports" and the "Construction Bulletin".
Advertising space was also purchased in the Real Estate section of the
"Wall Street Journal " which appeared in that paper Friday, February 4, 1983•
Response to the soliciation appears to be quite favorable.
MHM:kjm
s
�►
i
T0: GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMP1ISSION DATE: FEB. 7, 1983
FROM: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) YEAR IX PROGRAM
It is requested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation
to the City Council on expenditure of the City's Year IX Community Devel-
opment Block Grant (CDBG) allocation. The Planning Staff recommendation
for use of the Year IX grant amount of $115,109 is outlined in the attached
memorandum to the City Manager.
As background for consideration of the Year IX budget, examples of previously
funded CDBG projects include the foltowing:
Medley Park Section 8 Rental Townhouse Project $ 440,000
(Atlocations in Years VII and VIII and funds
reprogrammed from earlier years)
Ewald Project 65,000
(Allocation in Year VII )
� Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program 62,000
(Allocations in Years V, VI and VIII )
Scattered Site Section 8 Rental Housing Project 51 ,000
(Allocation in Year V)
Calvary Subsidized Senior Citizen Rental Housing 123,000
° (Allocation in Year IV)
Senior Citizen/Community Center Study 28,000
(Allocation in Year III and reprogrammed
additional amounts)
Comprehensive Plan 12,000 �
(Allocations in Years 111 and IV)
The City of Golden Valley is one of forty-two participants in Urban
Hennepin County which each year submits a joint application to HUD for
renewed CDBG funding. Individuat community proposed CDBG budgets are
revie�ved by Planning Area Citizen Advisory Committees prior to inclusion
in the Urban Hennepin County CDBG application. Golden Valley is within
Planning Area One, which also inc.ludes Brook}yn Center, Crystal , Edina,
New Hope, Robbinsdale, Richfield, St. Anthony and St. Louis Park. Plann,ing
Commissioner Gary Prazak serves as Golden Valley's representative to the
. Planning Area One Citizen Advisory Committee.
Attachment: February 3, 1983 Memorandum to Jeff Sweet, City Manager
`�����`� s��eef City of .
Q � ��a f
• � �a����t �I�r�
, �
�, � ;
�,
• ' e � DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
� �
.. ..
o , MEMO
Inspection
>
O A T E: FEBRUARY 3, 1983
T p; JEFF SWEET, CITY MANAGER
F A O M: ALDA PEIKERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
8 U B J E C T: COMMU�JITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) YEAR IX PROGRAP1
Hennepin County has distributed materials for Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Year IX which covers the period from August 19s3
through July 1984. The allocation to Golden Valley in Year IX is $115, 109,
� tivhich is approximately $11 ,000 less than the City's Year VIII allocation of
$126,088. The formula used for distribution of the Urban Hennepin County allocation
in Year IX is based on population, percentage of Hennepin County pov�rty and
percentage of Hennepin County overcrowded housing in each community.
The CDBG Year IX application schedule calls for hotding of the public hearing
required at the local community level by March 15, 1983• Proposed Year IX budgets
are then referred to the Planning Area Citizen Advisory Committee (PACAC) for review
° prior to inclusion in the Urban Hennepin County application to HUD.
Staff suggests that reprogramming of remaining Year VI funds be addressed along with
allocation of Year IX funds at the same hearing. The County has notified com-
munities that Year VI funds not expended by June 15, 1983 will be placed in a
Planning Area contingency .fund for reallocation to other Planning Area communities
able to make immediate use of the funds. Remaining Year VI funds in the City of
Golden Valley CDBG Program include the foltowing:
1 . Comprehensive Plan $ 5,305
Printing of the adopted Comprehensive Plan, funded from this
CDBG Program, is complete. Remaining funds were intended for
a housing in�ventory in preparation for future comprehensive housing
planning. The housing inventory cannot reasonably be accomplished
prior to the June 15, 1983 deadline considering the current Planning
Department work program.
• .
Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 ���„,
Jeff Sweet -2- February 3, 1983
.
2. Senior Center Study $ 1 ,833
The Senior Center Study contemplated construction of a new
community center facility. Planning staff understands that new
construction is no tonger under consideration and that the study
has been discontinued.
3. Administration $ 1 ,876
A change in CDBG regulations requires that administrative expenses
associated with a specific CDBG project must be charged to that
project budget, which leaves little use for a separate budget
for Administration.
Planning staff considered three potential uses of Year IX and reprogrammed Year
VI funds: 1 ) Application to the Valley Square Redevelopment Project, 2)
continuation of the Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program, and 3) subsidy of elderly
housing. Hennepin County tast year placed top priority on housing programs, including
both new construction and rehabilitation of housing for low and rr�derate income
persons. In Year IX Hennepin County proposes to revise its Statement of Objectives
to give equal weight to the other two objectives of the national program, which are:
1) Elimination and prevention of slums and blight, and 2) economic development
and employment opportunity.
. Valley Square
Following adoption of a redevelopment plan, the Valley Square Project is eligible
for CDBG under elimination and prevention of slums and blight. There is no longer
a limitation on the percentage of CDBG allocation which may be used for slum and
blight removal as there was at the time the Ewald Project was funded. Within the
. Valley Square Project, CDBG funds may be used for any of the following four eligible
activities: 1 ) Acquisition, 2) public facilities, including public utilities and
street improvements, 3) clearance and 4) relocation. Nennepin County advises use
for acquisition for two reasons: 1 ) The �acquisition procedure, although cumbersome,
is specific, and 2) acquisition would probably result in the earliest use of CDBG
funds. Use of_CDBG for public� fa�ilities or clearance involves regulation of con�
tracting and bidding, submission of payroll reports and interviews of workers on the
job site, all of which staff has been through on the Medley Park Project. Hennepin
County recommends the use of Von Klug and Asso.ciates for guidance with either
acquisition or relocation. The one possible point of difficulty in use for acquisition
is that under CDBG the price paid for property must match the appraised value.
This has not posed a problem in the case of CDBG acquisitions for Medley Park and
Ewald.
Housing Rehabilitation Grants
Hennepin County reports tfiat they presently have three eligible CDBG Housing rehab- �
ilitation grant applicants wa�iting for funding of the grant program in Golden
• Valley. Of the three, two are self-employed persons with reported annual
. Jeff Sweet -3- February 3, 1983
incomes of $6,000 and $8,000 on the lower end of the eligibility scale, and one
is at the high end of the Section 8 limits used for the grant program. Hennepin
County estimates that another three to four eligibte persons woutd make application
during the Year IX funding period. The current limit on a single grant amount
is $8,250. The program could make use of up to $50,000 for the funding of six
home improvement grants.
Senior Citizen Housing
There is a need for additional elderly housing in Golden Valley, as evidenced by
the long waiting lists for elderly housing at Calvary and at Dover Hill . The
problem at present is lack of a complementary rental subsidy program. The
Section 202 Program used for the Calvary project is still existent, but Golden
Valley would not be considered for another project after funding of the
Calvary building. Staff has requested from MHFA an information packet on a new
MHFA moderate income elderly housing program for nonprofit groups. Staff recommends
pursuing an elderly housing project but not allocating CDBG funds until specific
sponsors and funding sources are identified. HUD, Hennepin County and the PACAC 's
are pushing strict enforcement of the two year limitation on use of CDBG funds,
and the deadline on use of Year IX funds will be July 1985.
Funding of an Urban Hennepin County Year X is uncertain. Hennepin County reports
� that the CDBG Program definitely will receive continued funding, but funds may be
distributed through the State rather than through Hennepin County, in which case it
may become necessary to compete with other communities for grant altocations. If
funding through Urban Hennepin County continues, communities should receive similar
amounts next year.
Planning staff recommends allocation of the Year IX allotment of $115,109 to the
, Valley Square Program to ensure timely expenditure on an eligible activity. At
the same time, staff recommends reprogramming of the $9,014 remaining Year VI
funds to the Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program. Staff anticipates that there
may be remaining funds and program income in the Ewald Project on completion and
suggests that those funds also be reprogrammed to the Housing Rehabilitation Grant
Program if they become available.
Staff suggests that the City Council on February 15, 1983 set a hearing date of
March 15, 1983 for consideration of use of Year IX CDBG funds and reprogramming
of Year VI CDBG funds. Staff recommends the following CDBG budget allocations:
Year IX Acquisition for Blight Removal $115,109
Year VIII Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program 9,014
•