09-28-15 PC Agenda AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, September 28, 2015
7 pm
1. Approval of Minutes
August 24, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
2. Informal Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit (CUP #140) — Peaceful
Valley Montessori Academy — 6500 Olson Memorial Highway
Applicant: Peaceful Valley Montessori Academy
Addresses: 6500 Olson Memorial Highway
Purpose: To allow for a childcare/preschool facility in the Business and
Professional Offices Zoning District.
3. Informal Public Hearing —Zoning Code Text Amendment— Amending PUD
Requirements — ZO00-102
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: To consider modifications to PUD requirements when considering
major, minor, or administrative amendments
--Short Recess--
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
6. Adjournment
' This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request.Please calJ
763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593�3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print,electronic,Brailte,audiocassette,etc.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
August 24, 2015
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,
Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday,
August 24, 2015. Vice Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Cera, Johrtson, Kluchka,
Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present was Physical Development°Qirector Marc
Nevinski, Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate Planner/Grant iNriter Emily
Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
July 27, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meefing
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Kluchka ar�d motion carried unanimously to
approve the July 27, 2015, minutes as submitted. Commissibner Cera abstained from
voting.
2. Consideration of Resolution No. 15-0'1 Finding that the Redevelopment Plan
for the Winnetka and Me�licine Lak�,�oad Redevelopment Area and Tax
Increment Financing (Re�evelopment�.:District (Liberty Crossing Project)
Conform to the Cit�/'�� �eneral Plan of Development
Nevinski explained that th� �City's HRA h�s established a redevelopment area and a Tax
Increment Finance (TIF) distri�t that includes the properties involved in the recently
approved Liberty Crossing PUD 1�cated near Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue.
He referred to a map ofi the redevelopment area and the TIF district and stated that the
properties in the TIF District have been reguided and rezoned for High Density
Residential. He explained that part of the statutory process requires the Planning
Commission to consider the plans and determine if they are compatible with the City's
Comprehensive: Plan and regulations, and if they encourage efficient use of infrastructure.
Kluchka asked'for specifics on what the TIF money will be paying for. Nevinski stated that
the TIF Plan outlines a number of issues and that the money will largely be used for
infrastructui�e development including some land purchases to help with flood control.
Kluchka asked if the duration of the TIF district is 25 years. Nevinski said the
redevelopment district can run for up to 25 years. He added that if the City negotiates an
agreement with the developer, or if bonds are paid off earlier, the district can be
decertified sooner. Kluchka asked if the TIF amount will be 19 million dollars. Nevinski
said the amount is projected to be approximately 6.5 million dollars.
Kluchka asked how much money is being contributed by neighboring cities for flood
mitigation. Nevinski said that has not yet been determined and will likely be determined
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 2
after the study of DeCola ponds is completed. Kluchka said there are no guarantees the
City will get any other funding and asked about the cost of flood mitigation as it currently
stands. Nevinski said there have been some estimates in the 25 million dollar range. He
explained that there is no one solution for dealing with the flood issues in the area. There
are many smaller projects that will require partnerships and the various cities working
together.
Segelbaum questioned if adopting this TIF district would compromise the City's ability to
negotiate with other cities. Nevinski said he doesn't think so, he said he thinks the
development project gives the City opportunities to help fund some of the�flood;mitigation
projects. Segelbaum asked if other cities don't help with the costs if th�f�nds ca�,be
focused on helping Golden Valley flood mitigation. Nevinski said t�is plan�°is largely
focused on benefitting Golden Valley and will have positive impacts on the`flt�ading that
occurs at the Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue intersection_'He added that the
partner cities have contributed to the funding of the study and he thinks they understand
the problems.
Waldhauser asked if in light of what flood mitigation"may cost, the City has ever
considered putting the whole area back as flood storage rather than maintaining it, or
redeveloping it. Nevinski explained that much of�he area in the proposed redevelopment
is on high ground and is not filling in the existing flood storage areas. There will be some
flood storage area used by the proposed develppment, buf the developer will have to
mitigate what they are filling, so the flood storage ar�a is not shrinking and using tax
increment will help expand it.
Cera asked if blight had to be pr�V�r� c�n the properties in the TIF district. Nevinski said
tax increment statutes requ�re that,specific findings be made regarding blight conditions.
He said it is well documenfied th�t'all of the properties in the TIF district are substandard.
Segelbaum asked if the Planm,�€�g Commission has to find that the properties are blighted.
Nevinski said no, the Pianning Cqmmission is considering its conformance to the
Comprehensiv�Plan �nd th� �ity�s desire for high density housing in this area.
Kluchka ref�rred to the rn�ap of the redevelopment area and questioned why the lines look
so gerrymandered. H� said he is curious about the properties abutting the ponds and
what kinds of'opportunities will be available to them. Nevinski said the map was put
together based on the shape of the parcels. He explained that the redevelopment area
was established how it was because there is expected to be future work in the
Pennsylvania Woods area to help with flood conveyance and rate control. Kluchka said
he is not confident that much thought was put into the boundaries of the map. He said he
is very concerned about the properties surrounding the ponds and the connection to the
study. He asked if any of the TIF money will be used to acquire some of these properties
as a part of flood mitigation measures. Nevinski stated that the TIF project is focused on
activities improving infrastructure related to the proposed development. He said the
properties adjacent to the ponds are outside of the redevelopment area and project area
and tax increment money will not be spent outside of the redevelopment area. Kluchka
asked why the area wasn't drawn larger. Nevinski said there is a limited amount of dollars
available from tax increment so the focus is on infrastructure in the redevelopment area to
Minutes of the Golden Valiey Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 3
expand the flood storage and rate control opportunities at the northern end of the area.
Waldhauser asked Kluchka if his concern is that some of the properties adjacent to the
ponds have regular flooding. Kluchka said he is concerned that a lot of the property
owners have received communication indicating that their properties are in a flood plain
that they weren't in before and they are on high alert that their properties may be bought
out. Waldhauser asked if these properties have experienced flooding. Kluchka said yes.
Segelbaum asked if the study will consider any of the properties outside of the project
area to determine if they are prone to flooding. Nevinski said yes and added that in some
cases the mitigation will be to remove a home if the homeowner wants to sell, but the City '
isn't going to insist that acquisitions occur.
Segelbaum asked if TIF funds could be used to redirect the flood v�rater orpbtain
additional flood storage. Nevinski said yes, by adding more fload'stora�e, �x��rading the
DeCola ponds, working with Dover Hill Apartments and the cities of;Crystal an�i' New
Hope, more flood water will be held and the impacts will be reduced. Kluchl�a asked if
funding for the acquisition of homes would come from the TIF funds.'Nevinski said no, not
as part of this proposal. Segelbaum asked if TIF funds could be used for acquiring
easements. Nevinski said yes, the City will be working with the Liberty Crossing
developer on obtaining easements on the VFW property. Baker asked who would own
and maintain the flood storage beneath the Liberty Crossing:project. Nevinski said it
would be owned and maintained by the Gity. C�ra asked if the developer is responsible
for their portion of the flood mitigation on their parcels. Nevinski said yes.
Johnson noted that the Redevelopment;Plan�states that development patterns have
resulted in flooding in the area and that the are� used to be a lowland and a wetland
when nothing has really changed in th�''last 50 years. He noted that one of the goals
listed in the Redevelopment''Plarr is to iminimize the impact of flooding on private property
and structures and said he is confused because the plan also states that 25% of the TIF
proceeds can be used for inf�astructure. He asked if infrastructure means flooding.
Nevinski said there is sorne abili#y for the City to spend 25% of the increment outside of
the TIF district, but within th� p�oject area, and that the City would like to put that toward
infrastructure improvem�r�ts. Johnson asked how the flood mitigation is measured or
quantified and what "flood�ng will be minimized" really means and if that is the Planning
Commission's charge tp consider. Nevinski explained that the Redevelopment Plan has
broad goals and that the more specific information will be in the mitigation study. He
added that the Planning Commission's purview, by statute, is to consider the proposed
land use and determine if it meets the goals that the City has established regarding land
use. Baker said he thinks the goal regarding minimizing the impact of flooding might be
considered part of what the Planning Commission is asked to review. Kluchka stated that
the Planning Commission hears complaints about flooding during public hearings and this
is a great opportunity for the Commission to say something about it. He said he thinks the
word accountability should be added to the language in their recommendation because
there should be accountability around the things the City says it will do. He said when
things do not go according to plan residents don't have any recourse and that is simply
not good enough. Segelbaum said he thinks the mitigation study will be reviewed before it
is adopted. Nevinski said the Councils of the three cities will review the study.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 4
Kluchka asked when the developer determined that the only way they would be able to do
their development is with TIF money, because he thought the developer had said during
the PUD process that they wouldn't need to use TIF for their proposal. Nevinski stated
that as they've worked through the plans with the developer they've found there is a need
to acquire some land and to make some infrastructure improvements in order to provide a
greater public benefit. Segelbaum said he thought the developer was responsible for
making their site flood neutral. Nevinski said the developer will need some compensation
to help offset the costs for the public use of their property for flood storage in the area.
Segelbaum asked if the "but for" analysis is important in justifying a TlF d'istrict.'`Nevinski
explained that having the "but for TIF, the project wouldn't go forward �rtalysis" is,�t the
heart of Minnesota TIF law. Kluchka said he understands something might have cc�me up
after the PUD public hearing, but he doesn't want the City to get in trouble beG���e the
developer has said on record they don't need TIF financing. Nevinski elarified �fiat the TIF
documents and this public hearing process are helping to show the need fQr TIF. He
added that it is not uncommon for projects to go through several iteratiQrts before it is
realized that TIF financing will help with the project and with obtaining some public
improvements as welL
Segelbaum asked if an amount the developer will receive has been determined. Nevinski
said that wilt be determined by the HRA. Blum said it seems as if the development may
be feasible for the developer, but not neGessarily with all of the flood mitigation that the
City wants them to do. Nevinski agr�ed �n�,said the cost of redeveloping the site is too
much without the use of tax increr�ent fo help,offset the requirements and would not be
able to be redeveloped without th� assistance rtf,TIF. Waldhauser asked if the developer
didn't have that information earlier i� th� process. Nevinski said that is correct and there
have been ongoing discuss'rons about�the options in the area. Baker said he doesn't want
to rewrite history, and that #he a�Curate story is that the developer came to the City with
one story, and now��ey are'hearing quite a different story. The developer said they could
do their project without TIF and r1�w the Planning Commission is hearing that the City is
subsidizing the benefit;of the PUD'rather than the developer providing that benefit.
Kluchka said he'hopes there is record of what happened after the Planning Commission's
approval af the PUD. Segelbaum said he thinks the minutes are the record and reflect the
fact that therE was not'a request for TIF earlier. Cera said it sounds like the City will be
paying for part of the developers cost of flood mitigation and anything more is yet to be
determined. Bake�said it sounds like the developer is not doing what they offered to do.
Nevinski said the developer has an approved plan and part of the conditions of that
approved plan is that they will have to deal with the flood mitigation. He said staff has
thought a1'("along that this is a good project because it starts to create opportunities for
dealing with flood storage issues. As the project has moved forward the developer is
realizing the costs of this redevelopment. Baker agreed that the PUD plans were
approved in concept, and if the developer decided they needed more help, that is fine and
is a part of the process.
Baker questioned who initiates TIF and how TIF districts come about because he can
think of many other projects that might have benefited from using TIF. Nevinski said the
City looks at its goals and objectives and what it would take to accomplish them. He
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission "
July 27, 2015
Page 5
explained that staff has somewhat driven the process in this case because of the
opportunity for public improvements that will benefit the City as a whole. Segelbaum
asked if the HRA is involved in the development of TIF financing. Nevinski said yes, the
HRA approves the contracts and agreements and has certain powers that the City
Council does not.
Johnson referred to the last paragraph on page three of the Redevelopment Plan where it
states that the study will document the cause of the flooding and identify specific
measures to reduce the flooding in the area by creating more flood stora��. He said that
the solution seems pre-ordained and he would expect that the study wquld fincf Aut what
is going on and then propose solutions. He questioned what happens ifi the flood storage
isn't enough and there continue to be insurance claims and complaints ab�ut flooc�ing in
the area. He asked if the study is geared to flood storage and not abatemerit because it
seems stilted. Nevinski said the current flood mitigation study is the second part of a high
level study started in 2010 that was initially done to help understand the is�ta'es and where
there might be opportunities to help solve those issues, The second ph�se of the study
will be more detailed and will analyze the options, hqw to go about solving the issues, and
what it will cost. Johnson asked if the solution to afl'��'of the issues is,more flood storage.
Nevinski said flood storage is a broad term for m�ny different solutions, including ponds,
reducing impervious surface, studying existing storm systerns, etc. Johnson said the
issue really is how to keep water out of a swamp/w8tland area and he questions if the
City should really being doing this. Nevinski said it isn't really a matter of keeping water
out, it is more about how to manage the water going in. Kluchka said he thinks it is true
that there are a lot of ways to mit�gate the water and many of them are being addressed
in the proposed development. H� questi4ned if FEMA money could be used to help with
flood mitigation.
Kluchka asked if there are any affordabl� units required in this TIF district proposal.
Nevinski said this is not a housing district, its purpose is redeveloping the properties and
the project meets the statutory r�guirements for a redevelopment district. Kluchka noted
that goal number five in the Redevelopment Plan states that there should be a plan for
growth compatible with the Metropolitan Council development framework and the City is
always being told to�provide enough affordable housing units. Nevinski said this project
will provide differer�t types of housing within the community.
Johnson referred to the last statement of objectives listed on page five of the
Redevelopment Plan that refers to constructing or acquiring facilities deemed desirable
for the development of the Project Area and asked what that means. Nevinski said the "
language in the Redevelopment Plan comes out of HRA statutes and that the HRA is the
implementer of plans and in some cities the HRA provides certain types of housing and
can step in to get a property ready for development if needed. Johnson asked if this
objective is applicable to this proposal. Waldhauser noted that redevelopment projects
are required to meet one or more of the objectives, not all of them.
Blum referred to page eight of the Redevelopment Plan and noted that the definition of
"Project Area" says Highway 55 West Redevelopment Project Area instead of Winnetka &
Medicine Lake Road Redevelopment Project Area. He referred to the definition of"TIF
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 6
Act" and noted that the statute numbers quoted there are different than the statute
numb�rs referred to in the TIF Plan. He referred to section a. in the TIF plan where it
states the City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the site will increase
without the use of tax increment financing is anywhere from $0 (except for a small amount
for annual appreciation of land value) and questioned if something is missing before the
parenthesis.
Blum asked if there are bus routes on Winnetka Avenue and Medicine Lake Road.
Nevinski said yes. Blum said in looking at how the TIF and Redevelopmer�t Plans conform
to the Comprehensive Plan that could be considered an efficient use of infrastr�cture.
Nevinski agreed. Blum said on the east side of the proposed developm�nt there'�as been
discussion of changing part of Rhode Island Avenue to a grassy area. Nevinski s�id yes,
and explained that part of the overall project includes reducing the amaunt of-irnpervious
surface. Blum said he understands there will also be some bike/pedestrian traifs that will
go through that area as well which is also efficient use of infra�tructure and`�nrill provide
some needed connectivity. Nevinski agreed. Blum said-#he Cornpreh�n�lv� Plan also has
a goal of providing a variety of housing and noted that the praposed development will
have different types of housing including townhornes ar�d apartrrt��ts. Nevinski said yes,
there are a variety of housing types proposed, however they are all market rate rental
units. Blum said he also understands that right now flood waters aren't managed very well
in this area and asked if that is correct. Nevinski said that is eorrect and that the VFW
parcel has documented flood issues. Blum said other t1�an fhe proposed development
there are no other plans for this area,to take c�re ofi the existing problems. Nevinski
agreed. Blum asked if there are pUblic safety �oncerns with the flooding in this area if the
flooding is significant enough. Nevinski s�id th�r� is a concern that public safety vehicles
would not be able to get through that infiersection during a flood event.
Segelbaum asked if the Pl�nning Comrrrission just needs to adopt the proposed
resolution or if they need to r��ke additional findings. Nevinski said that by adopting the
resolution the Plannir�g �omrr�ission is making the findings that the Redevelopment Plan
and the TIF plan confq�m toth� Comprehensive Plan, are compatible with the City's
regulations, and encour�ge the efficient use of infrastructure.
MOVED by Kluchk�,,,�t�d seconded by Baker to adopt Resolution No. 15-01 finding that
the Redev�lopm�nt Pl�ii`for the Winnetka and Medicine Lake Road Redevelopment Area
and Tax Incre,menf Financing (Redevelopment) District (Liberty Crossing Project) conform
to the City's General Plan of Development.
Kluchka s�'�d he thinks it will be valuable for the HRA and City Council to review the
minutes regarding this item and the Liberty Crossing PUD proposal.
Johnson said he intends to vote no on the resolution because there is nothing
measurable in the plans and he doesn't understand what the outcome is supposed to be.
Segelbaum realized that the public hearing was not held for this item as required.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 7
Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Segelbaum closed the public hearing.
Segelbaum asked for the motion to be restated.
MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Baker, and motion carried 6 to 1 to adopt Resolution
No. 15-01 finding that the Redevelopment Plan for the Winnetka and Medicine Lake Road
Redevelopment Area and Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District (Liberty
Crossing Project) conform to the City's General Plan of Development. Commi$sioner
Johnson voted no.
3. Consideration of Resolution No. 15-02 Finding that the Tax Increment
Financing (Housing) District (Cornerstone Creek Pcoject) Cvnforrns�to the
City's General Plan of Development
Nevinski stated that Cornerstone Creek is a proposed project within the City's existing
Highway 55 West Redevelopment Area consisting of affordable housing for adults with
developmental disabilities. He explained that a TIF`housing district is proposed to be
established for this project and that the Planning Commission needs to review the plans
to consider if the TIF District conforms to the City'� Comprehensive Plan. He referred to a
map of the Project Area and the proposec� TIF District and �oted that the existing uses on
the properties to be redeveloped includ� a single famify home and an office building. He
added that both parcels have been r�zonEd and reguided to High Density Residential to
allow the proposed redevelopment to oceur.
Segelbaum asked if this propQ��d'TIF district would overlap the other TIF district in the
area. Nevinski said no, thEy are tSnro d�fifierent TIF districts in the same project area.
Segelbaum asked if the TtF funds'can be pooled. Nevinski said no, they have to be
operated independen�ly of one another.
Baker asked if any other TIF'distrF�ts are anticipated in this project area. Nevinski said
there could be in the future, but'currently there are no others TIF districts planned.
Waldhauser asked if the other TIF district in the area will be used to fund sidewalks and
other public improvements. Nevinski said yes, and explained that because of the
additional housing proposed in this area, providing sidewalks, pedestrian scale lighting,
and safety improvements of the existing Highway 55 slip ramp are all part of the public
improverpentS that will be funded in part by TIF dollars from the Golden Villas (hello.)
proposal. Waldhauser asked how the tax benefit will be used in the Cornerstone Creek
project. Nevinski said the benefit will go to the developer and that the public purpose is
the creation of affordable housing.
Segelbaum asked if it would make sense to change the project area to have them
coincide with the TIF district. Nevinski stated that typically the project area tends to be
broader so various things can be done within the project area.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 8
Waldhauser asked about the five-year rule and tax increment pooling. Nevinski said the
five-year rule and pooling reference relate to the timing that activities need to commence
within a tax increment district.
Blum said the way he understands TIF financing is that the City is making a finding that
without TIF financing a reasonable development would not occur so the City is not
pledging tax money that is here today or tomorrow, but it is tax money that would not be
there except for if this project goes forward. Nevinski said it is an investment in the future
and at some point the City will see catalytic development around the TIF.����,. After the
TIF district expires the City will then have those new taxes that it wouldn't have �ut for the
TIF district. He added that with tax increment the tax level currently, be�ng paid wiJl
continue to be paid, so taxes aren't being reduced there just isn't ��n immediate g��n in the
increase in taxes. Blum said there are also other benefits to th� City as wel'I i�cluding the
development of this highly visible gateway area. Nevinski agreed.
Blum referred to the goals in the City's Comprehensive Plan and stated that one of the
goals is to strive for at least 10% of the city's housing supply to be designed for seniors
and asked if this development will provide for seniors. Neyinski said this development is
not exclusively for seniors. Segelbaum stated that the propqsed community area could
benefit seniors. Blum said another goal is to high[ight commercial corridors and asked if
this proposal would be in line with that goal. N'evinski said yes.
Kluchka asked if the potential budget is 1.5_million over 25 years. Nevinski said that is
correct. Kluchka asked if the dev�lr�per`�as sa.id how much money they will need for their
development. Nevinski said Corrr�rstone Creek is also benefitting from a variety of
County and State funds.
Kluchka asked why notification w�s ser�t to the Hopkins School District. Nevinski stated
that the City is statutorily required to send notice to the County and the School District to
get comments and f��db�ck be�use they benefit from taxes and could see an impact in
their tax capaci�y. �
Johnson stated that when:the Planning Commission reviewed the Cornerstone Creek
PUD proposal the applicant stated that they were thinking about renting out their
community center space. He said it seems odd to him that they could charge for access
when there are tax dollars being used to fund it. Nevinski clarified that the community
center space will be a separate parcel and will not be a part of the TIF district.
Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Segelbaum closed the public hearing.
MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to adopt
Resolution No. 15-02 finding that the Tax Increment Financing (Housing) District
(Cornerstone Creek Project) conforms to the City's General Plan of Development with the
comment that the community center portion of the Cornerstone Creek project is excluded
from the TIF district.
--Short Recess--
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 9
4. Discuss proposed amendments to the PUD Section of the Zoning Code.
Goellner stated that staff is looking for feedback from the Planning Commission on some
proposed changes to the PUD Section of the Zoning Code. She discussed several past
PUD proposals and the challenges with the current PUD process including: a
cumbersome timeframe, difficulties in coordinating multiple plan submissions, and a
decreased focus on a public purpose when approving a PUD. She stated that the goals
for the proposed changes are to simplify the process and clarify the requirements
because creating a new PUD and approving a major amendment to an exi�ting PUD can
take six months. She explained that with the proposed new process it�ould still take up to
six months to create a new PUD, but it would reduce the time it takes for;a major
amendment to three months. A minor amendment would take approxima�ly two r�onths,
and administrative amendments would be allowed.
Goellner referred to the current PUD amendment requirements and stated#hat the
proposed new requirements would be more specific and more generous with the projects
that quaiify as a minor amendment. She stated that staff is Rroposing that a major
amendment be required when the proposed amendment significantly affects the original
design and intention, and requires more public review. Minor amendments would be
required when there are less significant changes and the use meets the underlying zoning
requirements and administrative amendments would be allowed when the proposed
amendment is in regard to items already reviewed adrriinistratively if the property is not in
a PUD such as: utilities, interior building remodels, grading and erosion control, outdoor
lighting, landscaping, and architectural �levations. She added that if the original design
intent is proposed to be altered, staff can deem the amendment a minor amendment and
the applicant would go throuc�h the minor amendment process instead.
Kluchka said he likes the idea of streaml'�ning the process, but he wants to make sure the
City is getting something better out of it. Waldhauser said one of the things the City would
get out of it is the streamlining of the process for staff as well, and that PUD plans would
be submitted at the beginning of�e process with much more detail. Segelbaum agreed
with streamlining the process and said that many times there isn't much difference
between the preliminary plans and the final plans.
Kluchka said if the City streamlines the process he wants to improve the quality of the
process at the same time. He said he would like the Planning Commission to have more
specific direction or powers in order to remove some of the vague issues that they've
been told aren't in their purview, or have felt pushed to approve in the past. Segelbaum
said he worries about a proposal similar to the Menard's PUD where it was considered a
major amendment, even though the entire site was demolished and rebuilt. He said that
type of situation is different than a proposal to just add a new wing on a building like the
recent Struthers PUD amendment. Baker asked if there might be a way to reduce the
definition of a PUD amendment and when necessary, require the creation of a new PUD.
Cera said he is bothered by how close a major PUD amendment is to a creating a new
PUD. He asked if the City can consider some major PUD amendment proposals as new
PUD proposals instead.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 10
Johnson asked how this will change customer behavior so the PUD plans submitted are
what is expected up front. Goellner said the proposed PUD changes will give staff the
ability to get applicants to provide better detail at the beginning of the process.
Segelbaum said it would be asking the developer to invest a lot up front without hearing
from any City officials. Goellner stated that developers enjoy the certainty and they expect
having to submit detailed plans.
The Commission discussed various proposed uses that could be considered a major PUD
amendments versus a minor PUD amendment such as the change in use,.the
introduction of a new use, changes in massing, changes in impervious��urface; �nd traffic
issues..
Kluchka said the key issue to him is who is defining what a significant change in building
elevation is and how "original design intent" is defined. Goellner exp4ained that the Code
current!y has language regarding "good design" but there is no definition of'design or any
design guidelines. Kluchka said he always has to remind the Commiss�an that they need
to look at design and he would love the PUD requirements to have "more teeth" when it
comes to reviewing design. Goellner stated that creating design guidelines were not part
of the direction given by City Council. Baker said the Comrnission should push back at the
City Council when it comes to design stand��ds. �/llaldhauser questioned if construction
standards could be imposed on all PUDs.sirriilar to the standards in the I-394 Mixed Use
Zoning District. Kluchka stated that the City doesn't need fo have design standards to
have good architecture. Goellner said�she thinks the term "good design" is too subjective
and would be hard to enforce withpuf haye s�me specific standards. Cera stated that it
might be easier to say what materials the City daesn't want to see used.
Waldhauser referred to the proposal to„�Ilow an amendment to be considered a minor
amendment if it is a use that is permittetl in the underlying zoning district. She said that
concerns her becau�e a PUQ �ould be approved for one use and the applicant could
switch to another us�that.might r�ot have been approved in the first place. She added
that she would also like the Flann'�ng Commission to see amendments that include
changes in landscaping and changes that bring the amount of impervious surface up to
the maximum amount allowed.
Kluchka said he would like to require that applicants have a neighborhood
communications plan in place before, during and after a project is built, and he would also
like to require'that HVAC systems be screened, and that a snow removal plan is
submitted at the time of application. Zimmerman stated those items might be better as a
conditions of approval on a case-by-case basis rather than a requirement at the time a
PUD amendment application is submitted. He explained that the feedback staff is looking
for at this point is what would trigger a minor PUD amendment versus a major PUD
amendment. Kluchka noted that the word "encouraged" is used in the PUD language and
he would like that changed to "required." He said he would also like to add language
about "architectural significance" as well as requiring color and sample boards to be
submitted.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 11
Segelbaum asked the Commission how they felt about the public amenities list that was
in the agenda packet. Waldhauser asked how the point system works. Goellner explained
that some cities give public amenities a point value and require developers to have a
certain number of points. Segelbaum noted that applicants could contribute to a.fund for
public amenities instead. Baker said he found the list very compelling. Kluchka
questioned if language regarding architectural significance could be added to a public
amenity list. Cera said he is not sure a point system is the way to go. Segelbaum agreed
and said the list they were shown goes too far. Waldhauser asked if the City could just
enforce the public benefit requirement it currently has. Baker said he thinks �he City
should be asking for more public benefits and set the bar higher. Segefbaum e�tpressed
concern about the public amenities requirement squelching development and said he is
worried developers will just go etsewhere.
;;
Johnson questioned the problem they are trying to fix. Baker said the City isn't getting any
public benefit when approving PUDs. Johnson questioned if the City really uvants the
things listed on the example in the agenda packet. Baker said he thinks Golden Valley
would be a better community if it had gotten some of the things on that fist and that they
haven't c�one a good job in getting something back from PUDs. ae�elbaum noted that the
City gets property developed that it wants developed. Bakef said he'd like to hold out for
better. Cera suggested the list focus on outd�or public amenities rather than indoor
amenities. Kluchka suggested the public amenities'include things like open space,
community gardens, affordable housing, public art, inforrnational displays, preservation,
LEED certification, and bicycle/pedestrian connections. Blum said he would like
bicycle/pedestrian connections tq be requir�d, not optional. Kluchka said he would also
like to find ways to encourage h��lthy living such as stairs instead of elevators.
Goellner said she would work on inc�rp;orating the items discussed into proposed new
Zoning Code language and brin��it back to the Planning Commission to review.
5. Reports on Meetir�gs of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, 6oard of Zor�ing�=Appeals and other Meetings
Zimmerman stated ti�at the City Council has been engaged in the light rail station area
planning; and the rnunicipa� consent processes and will be scheduling a workshop and
another open house in the future.
Waldhauser asked if the City is behind in starting work on the upcoming Comprehensive
Plan Amendm�nt process. Zimmerman explained that work will start on the
Comprehensive Plan Update when Metropolitan Council Systems Statements have been
received.
6. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
No report was given.
Minutes of the Golden Valiey Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 12
7. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 10:29 pm.
John Kluchka, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administr�tive Assi�tant
�i�y �f ,
old�n � � oRA �v t�
�
�C`�, �,,'� Physical Development Department
763 593 8095/763 593 8109(fax)
Date: September 28, 2015
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Melissa Sonnek, Planning Intern
Subject: Informal Public Hearing, Conditional Use Permit 140—Allowing for a Child Care
Facility in a Business and Professional Offices Zoning District—6500 Olson Memorial
Highway— Peaceful Valley Montessori, Applicant
Summary
Peaceful Valley Montessori has applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) allowing a child
care/preschool facility to locate at 6500 Olson Memorial Highway. This property is zoned for
Business and Professional Offices. Child care facilities require a Conditional Use Permit in this
District. The building at 6500 Olson Memorial Highway was previously occupied by Trustone
Financial Federal Credit Union.
The subject property is bounded by Olson Memorial Highway to the south with access to Country
Club Drive to the north. There is Light Industrial use to the north, Institutional use to the west,
and Single Family Residential to the south. The site can be accessed from Country Club Drive
through three driveways facing to the north of the site.
The applicant has operated a child care facility at a different property (5530 Golden Valley Road)
since 2010, where a previous CUP was approved. As child care demands continue to grow,
Peaceful Valley would like to be able to serve more families. The Department of Human Services
has issued a license that allows the applicant to provide care to 30 children in the current facility.
Within the new facility, the applicant plans to have two infant rooms, two toddler rooms, and
three preschool rooms. A fenced-in outdoor recreational area and an additional sidewalk are
planned for the south side of the building. The new facility will be built to a capacity of 160
children, with 65 children expected in January 2016 when the facility is planned to open. Upon
inspection of the new facility, the Minnesota Department of Health will update Peaceful Valley
Montessori's license to serve a maximum capacity of 160 children.
The applicant plans to utilize the parking spaces built by the previous owner of the building.
According to the City Zoning Code, the use of child care requires 1 parking space for each 6
participants. The building is being designed for a capacity of up to 160 children, which requires 27
parking stalls. The applicant has surpassed this requirement by providing 89 parking stalls.
As part of the reconstruction of Douglas Drive in 2016 and 2017, access to and from Country Club
Drive will be removed and Country Club Drive will terminate in a cul-de-sac at its eastern end.
The current right-in access to Country Club Drive from Olson Memorial Highway will be
augmented with right-out access. These changes are not anticipated to significantly affect access
to the site.
A neighborhood meeting was held at proposed child care facility on the evening of Monday,
September 14. There were no neighbors in attendance.
Evaluation
The findings and recommendations for a Conditional Use Permit are based upon any or all of the
following factors:
1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use:As the Peaceful Valley Montessori transitions
into their new building, they need this facility to continue educating their established and
potential future student base.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: A child care use is allowed as a conditional use
within the Business and Professional Offices Zoning District.
3. Effect on Property Values: Staff anticipates the introduction of this use would have no
impact on the surrounding property values.
4. Effect on Traffic: Staff does not anticipate any negative traffic impacts to the surrounding
areas based on the trips generated by this proposed use.
5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density:The proposed use will employ nine full-time
and ten part-time employees on site.
6. Increase in Noise Levels: The proposed use may result in a slight increase in noise as a
result of more children using the outdoor play area, but any increase is anticipated to have
minimal impact.
7. Impact of Dust, Odor, or Vibration:The proposed use is not anticipated to cause an
increase in dust, odor, or vibrations.
8. Impact of Pests:The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests.
9. Visual Impact: Due to the fact that the applicant does not intend on redesigning the
footprint of the building, but rather the interior design and layout, staff does not anticipate
any negative impacts on the visual quality of the property.
10. Other Impacts to the City and Residents: Staff does not anticipate any other negative
effects caused by the proposed use.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 140 allowing for a child care facility in a
Business and Professional Offices Zoning District at 6500 Olson Memorial Highway. The approval
of a Conditional Use Permit is subject to the following conditions:
1. The site plan prepared by Paul Meyer Architects and received on September 17, 2015,
shall become a part of this approval.
2. The Montessori school/childcare facility shall be limited to 160 clients, or the amount
specified by the Minnesota Department of Health.
3. All necessary licenses shall be obtained by the Minnesota Department of Health and/or
the Minnesota Department of Education before schooling and childcare operations may
commence. Proof of such licensing shall be presented to the Planning Manager.
4. If any future changes to the site are made on the north side of the building, the owner will
be required to remove any driveway entrances it does not intend to use for vehicle access
and replace them with curb and gutter to match into the existing curb line. The owner will
also be required to extend the sidewalk from the building to the north in order to connect
to the City sidewalk on Country Club Drive.
5. The hours of normal operation shall be Monday through Friday from 7 am to 6 pm with
occasional events on evenings and weekends.
6. All improvements to the building shall meet the City's Building and Fire Code
requirements.
7. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20).
8. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or
laws with authority over this development.
9. Failure to comply with any of the terms of this permit shall be grounds for revocation.
Attachments
Location Map (1 page)
Applicant's Narrative (1 page)
Site Plan and Survey dated September 17, 2015 (2 pages)
�� .
%"�r�c;.��c. i.�f.c<.�-
M v a�e i�,.6 .t
Conditional Use Permit: Pec►ceful Valley Montessori AcademY
Part D: Narrative description:
Peaceful Valley Montessori Academy intends to use the property at 6500 Olson Memorial Hwy
for a childcare/preschool facility with the capacity of 160 students. In the space, there will be
two infant rooms, two toddler rooms, and three preschool rooms, as well as a large motor area.
Each classroom will meet or exceed the minimum 35 sq. ft per child (which is required by
Department of Human Services) and will also include the standard requirement of sinks and
toilets.
Administrative offices, a staff lounge and prep kitchen will also be included in the facility.
There will be two outdoor environments, one for the toddlers and one for the preschoolers. The
outdoor space on the South side of the building will be designated for use by the infants and
toddlers, while the outdoor space on the North side of the building will be used by the
preschool children. We intend to plant a garden and fruit orchard in the South side play area.
Each outdoor space will be fenced for the safety of the children.
Hours of operation will be Monday-Friday, 7:00 am-6:OOpm. On occasion, the space may be used
on nights and weekends for parent education classes or conferences.
Peaceful Valley Montessori Academy will have nine full time and ten part time employees. The
parking lot on the East side of the building will be designated for employee parking. The West
parking lot will remQin available for parents and will have at least 27 parking spots available and
meets ADA requirements for pnrking.
It is our understanding that the City of Golden Valley intends to re-route the traffic pattern
on/near the property at 6500 Olson Memorial Hwy. This will be a benefit to our clients, as
there will be direct access to/from the highway. The time of day that traffic will be heaviest is
8:15-9:OOam and 3;15-4:OOpm. With a large parking lot to accommodate this, it should not
impact local traffic patterns.
Peaceful Valley Montessori Academy has been in business in Golden Valley for 6 years. The
families at our school consider PVMA a community school and we are proud to be serving the
families of Golden Valley. We have an extensive wait list and are excited to be able to serve
more children and families in the community. With our extensive Montessori experience, both
with our current facility and working at other Montessori schools, we find that the business
model that we are proposing is strong and viable. By creating a larger Montessori school, PVMA
will add to the charm and tight knit community that Golden Valley provides.
G300
Subject Property
6823I5gpg 6745 .
`' FiG S 1
� 6701 �� G500 � J -
Q � • - 602
540 ��",�«...� •
572 510 �_"..... _ - ^�r'^ -�` .
530 � - ,�.r^'""J�..!�
ttwYNOS'_ �^,SS�r„""_ y , -- 6401
...--^'^..-- _ �`��S`��,.�i�YNO �, -" ���:,
�,�..,...-�„-.... _- _-- .-..S;���'� 6400
�,�,�,�` .r"� '- 6445
_.-�'� -J^" r` � _- 6198 �1 6501 6407
_- -- " _ �s� sa�z
6677 6495
" 6697 649i 6415
- - �� � b124
6800 6589
6820 �10 � 6321
440 6481 6190 6432 61
� 6484 6438 6427
435 6475
6827 6817 6807 �� 6A78 6444 420
425 6450
840 q20 6473
6466 6458
68�0 6443 41.� _
6820 415 � �'��.
410 6,�9 6547 '; I r.
e�.
6810 ' 6461 6453 t ....
zz-.�.5.� �`'A.. .�w�..pr 350 4� 1l ,r
I
i�f�_
e t j�*�
;ji:
c
fK51#1J3�OUd ' - : ' �7
�� W - VI -p ' '^ , Q-'
LZb55 NW '�(a��en uap�o� � , ; �,,, ��F��c = o �'� r�y 1 0
i C a��rrv nu n�d , :. ��"'og K - � � 'ti�
anua qnl�iG;uno�OOS9 ` g e���� � � � � Q Q �
�� �� „�3, � ���4��:�,>.
RIOSS3INOW Jl3��b�n�f1�3�b�3d � N i[�'s i � a i i H � a � `o���3 � W � Q J Q
:ao�uoi;e�a�l`d Pasodo�d .Ic�L1aJ/�L ln�Cl�J m s°G�p o s �N_ � a
=k�o��� N oo � �r'� u�
� ' '� ��
I � �
N o �
Y II, � z Z 1
U I =_ � ``'
Q /i�/ \��� J �
m I F ,'� �� � 0 1
W www o " li� _ �
N LL LL LL. Z �\ I- 1
��� I �O � \\I1 J � �
Z N a � \1 � W H
V 1\ � _ � U
Q n u u I aQ (n z
�� w
J � �o , \n a C� � � cn
z� a� �� z �
�w� I O ____ ___==� ,`-_ -,_� -__-_______, \, w Y J z � Z
m LL��, _ �„
,----- _,_ �; ii J �
I �_____ ___-'" J�, Q Z o � Q o o r- o
Z a m o � a � a Q w U
� U J �
� �n ____—___- m U U 1- Q � w � p v7 z
� � I _.-��__='_ '-\�� � � _ � � � U a p � � a � a
u . ii =_____— 1 � U U U 0 � S � � z � O z
vi �n vi�i vi N I -��� � \ � Q w w Q Q C� Q � � C� Q w Z
^ ��� �� o ��„ 1 � ww � = � � � � � � o =
�, �m� �� ,;%' o o �,�, J �I) yy�,, ,y4�
W � �M N � I /� N O \\\ � � � O W'J �( O OO rO Y � O OO
y �/ � \\
� / N \\\
Z \\
\\
� O Z Y ^ � 1 �-+
� ma 3 �_ �� � --'__
V u� c�c� o -- 1 1 1 __ _
W Q �z �, J —-____- � _�_�
Hw �n v~i 3 3 I � �soo° " �' i�
f/� rn w w z "-`"--__ � � ___-1'-� � z
__ � �
I `-- `_ � 1� _-----"_' 1 �
� � �° __________ ' ' � �,
----_____ � ���� � �
� I j>�__,_ W
� -----��__ � --_��_____- 1 �
� -___
� ____�; z`_ `;-� � 1 0
I �--_-__-. ; _ ---__ �� � � �
U �
� �� 1 O
I _ / �LL -,,,,_' �_
�� ,
I � � w z---____ � � �
� � Z� � Z
W 1
� ---- -- � �
I w � �� --__-_-_- �� _� �
�,Z 1
� � i ---__- _ � =LL
�0 1
� � ; z�
� ' � �
� � � �.. ��
� �- � ��� ;�� � �
� � o
� ���` � �
oLL Q�
i �o }�
� oe _ i �� ��
_ , ��
� °��:� � � � a �� �
oe �
� � � 1
� �
<� ' " 1
I ° � `z'
I "
� _ o LL 7..
- osr � oo ' �
/ � � o � d� o0 1 �
I � � p� Y 1 �
.� I Q
OLL �
N 1 �
I � I p� woLL �
/ W� ` ��
� � a Qo za O 1 �
I �� � �.-� g m � � �.
� �
� �o . �
�. N� _ o
� _ � 4 _ , ,
— _ � � � 1
. ; , , .
, - ,
, , ,---�-,--� �� , �
i I F LL
�LL
I Z�; f Z� 8
� o .
LL� Q \,.
/
Z_ �
1 ' � _ � _�_ � J__�— 1
I -�I __
I � 1 35 0 '
� �
' 3 I ""_"" � � � . ._, F�\`-``i W 111� � � `Y 11 ,- "
p I , Z C7 U _�-�
� � N � ��- __ Z� �� � _ _.
i-�__- �W X Y __c_ ..
� `�__ W m `_—_-�
�
I ___-___ 1r_„_..- a�o
' -____ , '11' ' �Uo
- � � kFo k..-
U
�S C
�
m g rv
N
O �� p
� �3
�Z ^
Z Z �� �o E
w
� W '^. � "rn`m z o$
LL a � w¢ �4E
z
o �
� � ��moNd
W w � z G -TM
O W � ¢�N2��
S
� a uw
0 o Q a N � !^ z
z cn =
� �
= w � w = � = Zp�
� 2 O � Q S F F" O O �x
o a m o � a w Q � '., '^ " v� � ��
M Z m c� U w ¢ a w � Z � w a /�/ g a
� V � � � v�i z x z � � z � � Z ��i�1 W � °aU
� � Q w w �J
QW U W W U 2 � � N �U VI li � 2 ••• L p g
o � J O��O� °°000 1� o � � � G.
Z �H
QW ��
� � ��
� W�
�
�o� ��
k��
�$�
325.70 ��" '.
._ �o �,� �= — —�— — � — — — — — — ��- � T —
` o pL �._
° �� 1
=e �- 1 1
""a v'o- km ,��
uN �QO� mTm '",�� � 1
O LN ���- iUd g�n
° un cE�" tm =r3
�m �°am a�� �E:
u.. '-`oo« o E o `
9 fn u p�? o w��
_ �� y�-~`o
m �m a o �Y a
� no �at �mu 1
». 0 9 �.- 0 1
t o 11
O �'W 9 O O �� _ �
u� �'- -
t jA O
m 0 r M '- 4 H 0 I �s 1
w ,6 MU ca�r 009
v"�i 'o = . a`�a, I
u �� rn y�m a°i I 1
� w 9 UN u O« opu�i r
� o '
0 O O� 'pZ ��Of%1 �y I a 1 1
0 0 - c ,a,00 �;� '� � 1
c o x E �°°� �°
c�i a. �v c �0�c i � � /
o '= o d ao<< m°'$ in € 1
o N a� . .
U � y Q N�L N O 9 U 4 4� � �
« oY ay�« ao < � I 1
�m d E._ d `v'; m v
� v � a� °�xu "tm ����
° �o m� pt r°.� c� II �� II I � 1
'" t«ro °a'Jy Z� I � �
`L' a t . ��'� �°°v� � 1
�n .. u ,«Eoo . ..�y ��rcv� �
O � y 6 '_p m I \
ro °° � am °�� �Et
o ,_ o ..c =°'oo,� No� ¢� 1
D % o �� ~«=.'mq °'�o I� �
•"� N ° aEi- aoj'O� � •_• I 1
E c �� ` �;o nyy� � ---
^' � 'o a -+- I ' ' 10
� f o rn�m�o j-`v o '_" s
P �- 'L' s.2� ..m'co c o a'v
uN �mGo= v u p .o I�
c m ° . uo o�rou° 0�01 I o
0 0' Ea E �«9 1
a o " $ 1m
n d Du �E� otEov `oNmc I � ov+
- o �E _o or r w I 1W
t '3" -�o w o a 10
' a �� �°v mT«o« uc"� � � �. 1�
0 oc v. v ._ 01Eco I ` m - �
Ysm �� o «oo �`.... ---- 11 __ _ -'
4 Y° �x �'v�+o � u I - _ 1 1 1 � - -
o `o 0 0'u m a o d r ' `�+���_��-
" 3� rnc � a rnd«� _ < I 1 �y
° d m c c N o 0 0 o m c y o o m a --._ I 1
6 ° '-'m `oa �5�«C 90�« I _ ... ' \ �.,....,w x
� � z°pm ac° �.°.>;u a�o°u � � �' 3----_.. � �� f<, - 1 1
� �'--.._.. � � �
� ni Ni v vi �ri I � � - � ' 1
N �...._.�.._ 1
O I " -.. ' m `�\\��_ q W
Z � u �-__'__ I F �'-.+. I � 'm
` � 1 , 1
� T _.,_�'54�-8.50 i" � Z 2
I O
_'_. � _'_---__T 11 O 1
I � � � -�_�� � 1 � 1
� a � - -- - � ,, iD
� Z � '1 � �
� � �n i �� ,_ -- � �a
w
1 � ' - - - � �<� �� 1
� a -- � 1
a � I �, � � � � � �
o� �, � � � z
a a -D � m � �. � � � i �
N o �o o 'a-9° ° o ' W � j 11 `o ' 1
9p T �o: o o•w � N B Fi.i 1
oc0 oc� oc � �Z° ' p � 11 ":c
v�i.•" v�i«o �4� ° °� v - I � 1
�,�iw �,tl1ro q°� c mu I nro I < I
3;0 3;`� Yo O p ` YJ � 4' � I
o�,t w rn�w a�i W'`^ � � �O I a� � � /
_,�u> s �n o p � � _ �n
"�r' "o^' woo t W � I 0 1 1 1" u� 1
�T� 3L C tv
�r O H�o "c N q � I ` +� � 1 1 �
oo� o�� "a� ; � � _ � s m � ,:
�" a � � v �a i m � � �?,
i�� 5 u� aL � D
d� d� z \� �r
_'�'• °c'^o o°V'u m I � � I� o �' II : x
��c =?� d9u o � d 1� � 9 1 ' 1� �
s, rn s. ?m ' � I� W � � �
ix tx "°°' C' � � 1 d 1 E�-.
opy d�y oom IA , 1
oZ� oZ` q9v �_ �_ � ._.
a+ � d q`' �..,_ �m 1�
c°'� c 01�' o
c � ._ - � �
0
'-v`o c�o � o ._..._._/r
�� g� d � ^ 1
�;a c �:a"c '"to _ �. . — — — — — —�— —
o�' � �
_ _ «o° 1 � 1
� t°��t t°�N`u z :uo 1 / � `
p L p �'_0 / i�,
y c`o^�o �o" F
` a � �mc ' a uct � 1 �i ` 1
f �-d� ��d5 � v'o�- I � "
�a� ' a
�: _'�.t.a. =D«a. F 1 1
w t°1� 1 1
=' wcL c m I �*+M _as " '
> nj't"._r Ni C« U _+�._ ' ' JN�� ;
� r�" 1
M�<< Mg_o _ ! l � I i ,�d ,
Qa O ne O n9 I , S - , ' � I � .�Lt�\�� , � �,� 1 - � 1
� Z�o o Z t o•- m �--_"_ �
z�o'" z"o'" ' ;� �W 1
U . O�.�P OC�.T +� ` SIIONIFlI11B t.-..' F 1
Z 3 >C�o � Sc�� N / L� $ "- 1��-- � 1
Q °� m n-� m m n� m �` d '
Z _ i 1 .
V=1��� N NO�m N ' a I i � "t"�.
� ° u�E�^� in E t� ` -__-- i, � � i 'i I � �.__.- g 1
'� o��E E o�m E E I� i ; ..1
� � £ , - � � � }_-= i
...
W � S�'o.. z' o�a,. z' +
Z N a`m 9 « a j°m� v m earo� r i j i i � � o T-.._- 1
� �- ! i, � , :,
O tV'�'q � N��'� F I I � �'� �' i 1-.-`� 1
F" po o�oo o Jcoo `o I ��� � ' . i , . 1 �
_ ,� = m = o +� �" z 1
N Z �Oq� � yTNC � ' � 6�ONIX�IIB � o
� W O ��.y N � O �N � I O I 1 � � I I I 35 � � 1 `\ 1 N 1
¢ a aa,Es ci amEi i� � ' , �� � � 'i ��,�
¢ o v o m � om - � � L-- -r--i-t-r.��_.;--,�y'-�n�,�oNai�� + i � ~��� � 1
� a Q �io� a r°u�« a ' u � ' � � ' I � � y 1
r � I � � � R �
a �
� o � I � zzr oN wswaers smiionr z.o�w axn.s3v.---'" ' 1
v�i a -�'i
NO'32'OS"W 268.29 1
� 1
1 1
.,., .. ,,,_.�..,.....�aar.,....
' __ ,,,. ..,.�_ Oyl.,� __.,,., 1
1 �
�
city of
DIG���'l E 1V� t�► � A lil
� .
�TG�,. �,,,.'� Physical Development Department
763-593-8095/7b3 593 8109(fax)
Date: September 28, 2015
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Subject: Informal Public Hearing—Zoning Code Text Amendment—Planned Unit
Developments
Background
During the previous discussion on August 24, staff received initial feedback regarding the direction
and content of proposed amendments to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) section of the
Zoning Code. Staff has prepared a set of recommended amendments for review by the Planning
Commission.
PUD Amendments
Staff is recommending modifications to the list of projects that qualify as major, minor, or
administrative amendments. Staff sees major amendments as changes that are not permitted in
the underlying zoning district in which the PUD is located. These changes are significant and require
a more extensive review process with Planning Commission and City Council. Staff sees minor
amendments as changes that are permitted in the underlying zoning district and require only City
Council review. Administrative amendments are seen as changes that are currently reviewed
administratively on properties that are not within a PUD. They are most often reviewed by licensed
engineers and building inspectors.
Staff is proposing a modification to the requirements so that major PUD amendments no longer
require a preliminary and final phase; rather, a major amendment would be reviewed by Planning
Commission and City Council once each. It is estimated that this process would take three months
rather than six months. Please see attached materials comparing the current process to the
proposed process for PUD amendments.
It is proposed that the minor PUD amendment process remain the same, but allow more changes
to PUDs be considered minor rather than major. The approval process for minor amendments
typically takes six weeks or less depending on the proposal.
Current Code Language regarding Amendments
An application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that required for
an initial PUD; however, a minor amendment may be made through review and approval by a
simple majority vote of the City Council with or without referral to the Planning Commission. To
qualify for this review, the minor amendment shall not:
A. Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of sensitive site
features.
B. Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning, design, landscaping
or building materials.
C. Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
D. Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more than five percent
(5%).
E. Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than three percent
(3%) or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by more than five percent
(5%).
F. Increase the number of stories of any building.
G. Decrease the amount of open space by more than three percent (3%) or alter it in such a
way as to change its original design or intended function or use.
H. Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the Final
PUD Plan.
Proposed Major Amendments include:
• Eliminate, diminish, or disrupt the preservation and protection of sensitive site features
• Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas, roads, site access, or open space
• Increase in the number of residential dwelling units by 10% or more
• Introduction of new uses
• Demolition or addition of a principle structure
• Change to front yard, side yard, or rear yard setback that does not meet minimum
requirements set forth in the underlying Zoning District
• Change in the number of parking spaces that does not meet the minimum off-street
parking requirements set forth in this Chapter
• Increase in impervious surfaces above the maximum amount allowable in the underlying
Zoning District
• Change in building coverage above the maximum amount allowable in the underlying
Zoning District
• Change in gross floor area in any individual building by 10% or more
• Increase the number of stories of any building or a significant alteration in the overall
height of the building
• Decrease the amount of open space by more than 3% or alter it in such a way as to change
the original design or intended function or use
• Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the Final
PUD Plan
• Any other change determined by Physical Development staff to have a significant impact
Proposed Minor Amendments include:
• Change in the land use to a use that is permitted in the underlying Zoning District
• Increase in the number of residential units by less than 10%
• Demolition or addition of an accessory structure
• Change to a front yard, side yard, or rear yard setbacks that meets minimum requirements
set forth in the underlying Zoning District
• Change in the number of parking spaces that meets the minimum off-street parking
requirements set forth in this Chapter
• Change in parking lot configuration or design with no change in number of parking spaces
• Increase in impervious surfaces up to the maximum amount allowable in the underlying
Zoning District
• Change in building coverage up to the maximum amount allowable in the underlying
Zoning District
• Change in gross floor area in any individual building by less than 10%
• A significant change in architectural elevation plans that alters the intended function of
the development.
• A significant change in landscape plans that alters the intended function of the
development.
Review of Architecture and Landscaping
At the discussion on August 24, several Planning Commissioners expressed that the preference that
changes to architectural elevation plans and landscape plans be considered major amendments
rather than minor or administrative amendments. Staff understands that high quality design is a
key purpose of Planned Unit Developments, but there are no standards set forth in City Code to
guide the implementation of high quality design. As a result, feedback is often subjective and
unpredictable. In order to fulfill the City Council's strategic priority of revising the entitlement
process in order to promote targeted development and redevelopment, staff recommends that
changes to architectural elevations and landscape plans be primarily minor and administrative
amendments. Changes to these plans that the City Manager or his/her designee considers to be a
significant alteration to the intended function of the development will be deemed minor
amendments. It is unlikely that an applicant would propose a significant change to building
materials or landscaping without also proposing a significant change to the site plan or to the
square footage of the buildings on site (which would most often be categorized as major
amendments).
Proposed Administrative Amendments include the following changes if approved by the City
Manager or his/her designee:
• Change in utility plans
• Change in landscaping plans
• Change to interior building plans
• Change to outdoor lighting plans
• Change to grading/erosion control plans
• Change to architectural elevation plans
The City Manager or his/her designee may categorize the proposed amendment as a major
or minor amendment based on its impact to the original design.
Application Requirements
Staff recommends that a meeting with the applicant be required prior to submission of the final
PUD application in order to verify that all outstanding issues raised during the preliminary approval
process have been addressed. In addition,the final PUD application should require a narrative
specifically addressing these issues. If these items are not addressed, staff may deem the
application incomplete.
PUD Points System
Based on feedback from City Council and Planning Commission, staff is recommending the
adoption of a points system to track the public amenities provided within each new PUD. This point
system would not be applicable to amendments in the immediate future. Staff would like to time to
analyze how the points system is working with the creation of new PUDs before implementing the
system for PUD amendments.
Each amenity is awarded between one and five points. All new PUDs will require a minimum of five
points in order to receive approval. In order to produce the best outcomes, staff will need a certain
level of discretion in negotiating the points with the applicant. For example, if the applicant can
only fulfill a portion of an amenity for a unique reason, staff could award the applicant a portion of
the points allocated. However, staff will strive for simplicity, transparency, and efficiency in this
negotiation process.
Recommended Public Amenity Options
Green Roof Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Community Garden Preservation of Unique/Historical Architecture
Affordable Housing Units Enhanced Stormwater Management
Public Open Space Water Feature Usable to Public
Rooftop Solar Panels Shared Bicycle and Vehicle Facilities
LEED Gold or Platinum Certification Decorative Fencing
Public Recreation Area Enhanced Exterior Lighting
Public Plaza Informational/Interpretive Displays
Public Art Enhanced Landscaping
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
5 Green Roof Installation of an extensive, intensive, or semi-intensive,
modular or integrated green roof system that covers a
minimum of fifty (50) percent of the total roof area
proposed for the development.
5 Community Garden Permanent and viable growing space and/or facilities such
as a greenhouse or a garden, which provides fencing,
watering systems, soil, secured storage spaces for tools,
solar access, and pedestrian access as applicable. The
facility shall be designed to be architecturally compatible
with the development to minimize the visibility of
mechanical equipment. The food produced shall be
provided to those living or working in Golden Valley.
5 Affordable Housing Units Three options of affordability include:
• At least ten (10) percent of units within development
are rented or sold at 30% of Area Median Income or
less.
• At least twenty (20) percent of units within
development are rented or sold at 50%of Area
Median Income or less.
• At least thirty (30) percent of units within
development are rented or sold at 80%of Area
Median Income or less.
4 Public Open Space Contiguous ground level outdoor open space that is
provided beyond the amount of open space required in
the underlying Zoning District requirements.
4 Rooftop Solar Panels Installation of an extensive, intensive, or semi-intensive,
modular or integrated solar roof system that covers a
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
minimum of fifty (50) percent of the total roof area
proposed for the development.
3 Leadership in Energy and The proposed development shall achieve LEED Gold or
Environmental Design Platinum certification approved by a LEED Accredited
(LEED) Gold or Platinum Professional (LEED-AP) by a date determined in the
Certification Development Agreement. During the PUD approval
process, the developer must submit a LEED checklist and
documentation to the City that shows the project will
comply with LEED Gold or Platinum requirements.
3 Public Recreation Area An active, safe, and secure outdoor recreation area open
and visible to the public that includes play equipment or
natural features suitable for recreational use by children
and families.
3 Public Plaza Plazas shall be open to the public during daylight hours
and provide opportunities for the public to interact with
the space using outdoor furniture, art, or other
mechanisms.
3 Public Art The art shall be maintained in good order for the life of
the principle structure. The art shall be located where it is
highly visible to the public. If located indoors, such space
shall be clearly visible and easily accessible from adjacent
sidewalks or streets.
2 Enhanced Bicycle and Eligible facilities may include a combination of the
Pedestrian Facilities following: heated transit shelter, bicycle repair tools, rest
area, wayfinding signs, and other amenities that increase
the convenience and encourage the use of public
walkways and bikeways.
2 Preservation of Preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration of designed
Unique/Historic historic landmarks or unique architectural features as a
Architecture part of the development.
2 Enhanced Stormwater The design must provide capacity for infiltrating
Management stormwater beyond what is required by the City and
Watershed District and the design must serve as a visual
amenity to the property.
1 Water Feature Usabte to A water feature, including but not limited to a reflecting
Public pond, a children's play feature, or a fountain shall be
located where it is highly visible and useable by the public.
1 Shared Bicycle and Vehicle Accommodation for shared vehicles or shared bicycles on
Facilities site. The shared service provider must be committed in
writing to the use of the space in order to be eligible.
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
1 Decorative Fencing Installation of high quality metal fencing where visible
from the public street, public sidewalk or public pathway.
1 Enhanced Exterior Lighting A lighting plan that highlights significant areas of the site
or architectural features of the building(s).
1 Informational/Interpretive Permanent signs that inform the public of unique aspects
Displays or history of the property.
1 Enhanced Landscaping A landscaping plan prepared by a licensed landscape
architect that provides exceptional design with a variety of
native trees, shrubs, and plant types that provide seasonal
interest and that exceed minimum City standards.
Miscellaneous Code Revisions
Staff is also recommending the following set of changes to this section of City Code:
• Update all job titles to City Manager or his/her designee
• Restructure and reorder content in the section in order to increase the readability and
usability
• Remove sign plan from list of items required in an application. The sign plan will be
reviewed by City staff in a separate approval process.
• Remove size requirement for wetland and pond riparian buffers. Engineering staff relies
on other sections of City Code as well as State of Minnesota standards instead.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to Section 11.55 of the Zoning Code
regarding Planned Unit Developments.
Attachments
Memo to Planning Commission, dated August 24, 2015 (5 pages)
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 24, 2015 (3 pages)
PUD Amendment Process Comparison (4 pages)
Proposed City Code Section 11.55: Planned Unit Development (18 pages)
Existing City Code Section 11.55: Planned Unit Development (16 pages)
���� ��
����� U �
� .
�� �� Phys�cal Developrnent Department
763-593-8Q95/7b3-S93�81�9(fax�
Date: August 24, 2015
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Emily Goeltner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Subject: Discussion - Zoning Code Text Amendment— Planned Unit Developments
Summary
Staff is seeking feedback from the Planning Commission regarding the direction and content of
proposed amendments to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) section of the Zoning Code. The
proposed changes address a strategic priority identified by City Council, which is to review and
simplify the entitlement process in order to promote targeted development and redevelopment.
The following changes received positive feedback from all members of City Council on August 10,
2015.
Background
There are 75 active PUDs in the City. While staff finds PUDs to be a helpful tool, there are some
positive changes that can be made to the process to address the City Council's strategic priority. In
researching the topic, staff referred to a helpful publication from the Environmental Protection
Agency (see attached, "Rein In and Reform the Use of Planned Unit Development").
In reflecting on the PUD process, staff identified three key challenges:
1. Cumbersome timeframe required for approval of PUD amendments
2. Developers making multiple final plan submissions
3. The focus on the public purpose of the PUD plan has decreased over time
Staff has identified two key goals for the proposed changes:
1. Simplification of the process
2. Clarification of the requirements
PUD Amendments
Particularly with recent PUD amendment applications, staff has acknowledged that there is a
cumbersome timeframe required for approval. By modifying the current requirements, the City can
simplify and streamline the process without losing the ability to review and approve changes.
The creation of a new PUD typically takes six months. Most amendment applications are
considered "major" under the current regulations and require a six month entitlement process as
well. The application is reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council in both a preliminary
phase and a final phase. Staff would like to modify the requirements so that major PUD
amendments no longer require a preliminary and final phase; rather, a major amendment would be
reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council once. It is estimated that this process would
take three months rather than six months. Please see attached materials comparing the current
process to the proposed process for PUD amendments.
Minor amendments require a two month process in which the application is reviewed by City
Council. The City Council has the discretion to decide whether minor amendments are reviewed by
Planning Commission as well. Staff finds this process to be appropriate, but would like the City
Code to be more specific and more generous with the projects that qualify as minor amendments.
Current Code Language regarding Amendments
An application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that required for
an initiat PUD; however, a minor amendment may be made through review and approval by a
simple majority vote of the City Council with or without referral to the Planning Commission. To
qualify for this review, the minor amendment shall not:
A. Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of sensitive site
features.
B. Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning, design, landscaping
or building materials.
C. Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
D. Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more than five percent
(5%).
E. Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than three percent
(3%) or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by more than five percent
(5%).
F. Increase the number of stories of any building.
G. Decrease the amount of open space by more than three percent (3%) or alter it in such a
way as to change its original design or intended function or use.
H. Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the Final
PUD Plan.
Amendments to a PUD cannot currently be reviewed administratively, but staff is interested in
allowing changes to outdoor lighting, utility, and grading/erosion control plans to be approved by
City staff. Also, changes to landscaping and architectural elevation plans that do not alter the
original design intent of the development could be reviewed administratively. These kinds of
changes are currently reviewed administratively on properties that are not within a PUD.
Proposed Major Amendments include:
• Decrease in the amount of open space by more than 3%
• Change in gross floor area in any one structure by more than 10%
• Change to front yard, side yard, or rear yard setbacks that does not meet minimum
requirements set forth in the underlying Zoning District
• Change in the building area coverage by more than 10%
• Change in the number of parking spaces that does not meet the minimum off-street
parking requirements set forth in this Chapter
• Introduction of new uses
• Demolition of a principle structure
• Eliminate, diminish, or disrupt the preservation and protection of sensitive site features
• Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas, roads, site access, or open
space
• Increase or decrease in the number of residential dwelling units by more than 10%
• Increase the number of stories of any building or a significant alteration in the overall
height of the building
• Alter the original design or intended function of the development
• Any other change determined by Physical Development staff to have a significant impact
Proposed Minor Amendments include:
• Increase in impervious surfaces up to the maximum amount allowable in the underlying
Zoning District
• Change in parking lot configuration or design (not the number of parking spaces)
• Change in number of parking spaces that meets the minimum off-street parking
requirements set forth in this Chapter
• Change in gross floor area in any one structure by less than 10%
• Change in the land use to a use that is permitted in the underlying Zoning District
• Change in building coverage by the project up to the maximum amount allowable in the
underlying Zoning District
• Change in the number of residential units by less than 10%
• Demolition of an accessory structure
� Change to architectural elevation plans or landscape plans that alters the original design
intent of the development
Proposed Administrative Amendments include the following changes if approved by the City
Manager or his/her designee:
• Change in utility plan
• Change in landscaping plan
• Change to interior building plans
• Change to outdoor lighting plan
• Change to grading/erosion control plan
• Change to architectural elevation plans
Application Requirements
Due to the length of time required, developers commonly submit final PUD plans only days after
receiving preliminary approval. Developers feel rushed to submit an application without every item
addressed so that the sixty-day clock can begin and final approval can be received as soon as
possible. This is problematic for staff for several reasons. First, it causes staff to request extra plan
submittals prior to Planning Commission. Multiple site plans can become confused with one
another. Also, this demands additional staff time to communicate and coordinate with the
applicant. Staff suggests that a meeting with the applicant be required prior to submission of the
final PUD application in order to verify that all outstanding issues raised during the preliminary
approval process have been addressed. In addition,the final PUD application should require a
narrative specifically addressing these issues. If these items are not addressed, staff may deem the
application incomplete.
Public Purpose Requirement
Staff recognizes that some developers have applied for a PUD in order to circumvent zoning
regulations. PUDs require more time intensive review by staff, Planning Commission, City Council,
and the landowner and/or applicant. PUDs are a good planning tool for the City. While the
developer receives the benefit of flexibility in uses, density, and setbacks, the community receives
unique benefits from the PUD in return.
In order to insure that the community receives unique benefits, staff recommends that the Zoning
Code explicitly require that all PUDs provide a unique public amenity within the proposal. The
following examples are typically more costly to the developer, so they are not often provided in
development plans when they are merely suggested and encouraged rather than explicitly
required.
PUD Points System
At the Council/Manager meeting on August 10, 2015, City Council Members questioned how staff
will determine which amenity meets the requirement. It is possible that developers will choose the
most affordable option, which could result in an uneven amount of certain amenities. In response
to that question, staff would like to discuss the option of a points system for public amenities,
which is used by the City of Minneapolis (see City of Minneapolis PUD Amenity Summary attached).
Public Amenity Options
Affordable Housing (10%of units at 60% or Shared Bicycle and Vehicle Facilities
below Area Median Income) Library Open to Public
Public Open Space Fitness Studio Open to Public
Public Recreation Space Electric Car Charging Ports for Public
Community Room Bike Repair Tools or Shop Open to Public
Community Garden Preservation of Unique/Historical Architecture
Public Restrooms Bike and Pedestrian Trail Connections
Public Art Innovative Stormwater Storage or Infiltration
Public Plaza Sports Field Open to Public
Game Room Open to Public Outdoor or Indoor Theater Open to Public
Computer Lab Open to Public On-Site Renewable Energy
Informational/Interpretive Displays LEED Silver Certification or Equivalent
Discussion
Staff is interested in gaining feedback from the Planning Commission regarding the proposed
amendments to Section 11.55 of the Zoning Code regarding Planned Unit Developments.
Attachments
City Code Section 11.55: Planned Unit Development (16 pages)
"Rein In and Reform the Use of Planned Unit Development" Essential Smart Growth Fixes for
Urban and Suburban Zoning Codes, published by Environmental Protection Agency, November
2009 (4 pages)
PUD Amendment Process Comparison (4 pages)
Public Amenity Requirements for City of Minneapolis Planned Unit Developments (6 pages)
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 9
4. Discuss proposed amendments to the PUD Section of the Zoning Code.
Goellner stated that staff is looking for feedback from the Planning Commission on some
proposed changes to the PUD Section of the Zoning Code. She discussed several past
PUD proposals and the challenges with the current PUD process including: a
cumbersome timeframe, difficulties in coordinating multiple plan submissions, and a
decreased focus on a public purpose when approving a PUD. She stated that the goals
for the proposed changes are to simplify the process and clarify the requirements
because creating a new PUD and approving a major amendment to an exis�ing PUD can
take six months. She explained that with the proposed new process it �s�uld still take up to
six months to create a new PUD, but it would reduce the time it takes fa�.a major
amendment to three months. A minor amendment would take approximately two months,
and administrative amendments would be allowed.
Goellner referred to the current PUD amendment requirements and �tated fihat the
proposed new requirements would be more specific and more generous with the projects
that qualify as a minor amendment. She stated that staff is proposing that a major
amendment be required when the proposed amendme�n# signific�t�ttly affects the original
design and intention, and requires more public review. Minor amendments would be
required when there are less significant chan�es �nd the use meets the underlying zoning
requirements and administrative amendmenf�would�l�e al�o�nred when the proposed
amendment is in regard to items already reviewed adrriinistratively if the property is not in
a PUD such as: utilities, interior building remodefs, g�ading and erosion control, outdoor
lighting, landscaping, and architectural elevations. She added that if the original design
intent is proposed to be altered, ���ff car� deem the amendment a minor amendment and
the applicant would go through the mit�or amendment process instead.
Kluchka said he likes the idea of streamlining the process, but he wants to make sure the
City is getting something better out of it. Waldhauser said one of the things the City would
get out of it is the stream�ining of the process for staff as well, and that PUD plans would
be submitted at the beginning Qf the process with much more detail. Segelbaum agreed
with streamlining the process and said that many times there isn't much difference
between the prelimi�ary plans and the final plans.
Kluchka said if tt�e City streamlines the process he wants to improve the quality of the
process at the sam,e time. He said he would like the Planning Commission to have more
speeific directian or powers in order to remove some of the vague issues that they've
been tald aren't in their purview, or have felt pushed to approve in the past. Segelbaum
said he warries about a proposal similar to the Menard's PUD where it was considered a
major amendment, even though the entire site was demolished and rebuilt. He said that
type of situation is different than a proposal to just add a new wing on a building like the
recent Struthers PUD amendment. Baker asked if there might be a way to reduce the
definition of a PUD amendment and when necessary, require the creation of a new PUD.
Cera said he is bothered by how close a major PUD amendment is to a creating a new
PUD. He asked if the City can consider some major PUD amendment proposals as new
PUD proposals instead.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 10
Johnson asked how this will change customer behavior so the PUD plans submitted are
what is expected up front. Goellner said the proposed PUD changes will give staff the
ability to get applicants to provide better detail at the beginning of the process.
Segelbaum said it would be asking the developer to invest a lot up front without hearing
from any City officials. Goellner stated that developers enjoy the certainty and they expect
having to submit detailed ptans.
The Commission discussed various proposed uses that could be considered a major PUD
amendments versus a minor PUD amendment such as the change in use, #he
introduction of a new use, changes in massing, changes in impervious surfac�, and traffic
issues.
Kluchka said the key issue to him is who is defining what a significant change in building
elevation is and how `briginal design intent" is defined. Goellner explained that the Code
currently has language regarding "good design" but there is no definition of design or any
design guidelines. Kluchka said he always has to remind the Commission that they need
to look at design and he would love the PUD requirements #o have "more teeth" when it
comes to reviewing design. Goellner stated that cre�ting design guidelines were not part
of the direction given by City Council. Baker said #he Comr�ission should push back at the
City Council when it comes to design standards. Waldhaus�:r questioned if construction
standards could be imposed on all PUDs similar to the sta�d"�ards in the I-394 Mixed Use
Zoning District. Kluchka stated that the Gity do�sn't need to have design standards to
have good architecture. Goellner said she thinks tFie.term "good design" is too subjective
and would be hard to enforce withnut have some specific standards. Cera stated that it
might be easier to say what materials the City doesn't want to see used.
Waldhauser referred to the proposal fc�;allow an amendment to be considered a minor
amendment if it is a use th�t is p�;rmitted;in the underlying zoning district. She said that
concerns her because a PUD �ould be approved for one use and the applicant could
switch to another use that might not have been approved in the first place. She added
that she would also like the Planning Commission to see amendments that include
changes in landscaping and changes that bring the amount of impervious surface up to
the maximum amount allowed.
Kluchka said he would fike to require that applicants have a neighborhood
communications plan in place before, during and after a project is built, and he would also
like to require that HVAC systems be screened, and that a snow removal plan is
submitt�d at th� time of application. Zimmerman stated those items might be better as a
conditions of�pproval on a case-by-case basis rather than a requirement at the time a
PUD amendment application is submitted. He explained that the feedback staff is looking
for at this point is what would trigger a minor PUD amendment versus a major PUD
amendment. Kluchka noted that the word "encouraged" is used in the PUD language and
he would like that changed to "required." He said he would also like to add language
about "architectural significance" as well as requiring color and sample boards to be
submitted.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Page 11
Segelbaum asked the Commission how they felt about the public amenities list that was
in the agenda packet. Waldhauser asked how the point system works. Goellner explained
that some cities give public amenities a point value and require developers to have a
certain number of points. Segelbaum noted that applicants could contribute to a fund for
public amenities instead. Baker said he found the list very compelling. Kluchka
questioned if language regarding architectural significance could be added to a public
amenity list. Cera said he is not sure a point system is the way to go. Segelbaum agreed
and said the list they were shown goes too far. Waldhauser asked if the City could just
enforce the public benefit requirement it currently has. Baker said he thinks the City
should be asking for more public benefits and set the bar higher. Segelbaum expressed
concern about the public amenities requirement squelching developmen# and sa��f: he is
worried developers will just go elsewhere.
Johnson questioned the problem they are trying to fix. Baker said the City isn't getting any
public benefit when approving PUDs. Johnson questioned if the City really wants the
things listed on the example in the agenda packet. Baker said hre think� Golden Valley
would be a better community if it had gotten some of the things on that list and that they
haven't done a good job in getting something backfrom PUDs. Segelbaum noted that the
City gets property developed that it wants developed. Baker said he'd like to hold out for
better. Cera suggested the list focus on outdoor public amenities rather than indoor
amenities. Kluchka suggested the public amerrities include things like open space,
community gardens, affordable housing,public art, informational displays, preservation,
LEED certification, and bicycle/pedestrian connections. Blum said he would like
bicycle/pedestrian connections to be required, not optional. Kluchka said he would also
like to find ways to encourage healthy living such as stairs instead of elevators.
Goellner said she would wark on incor�orating the items discussed into proposed new
Zoning Code language arrd.bring`it back to the Planning Commission to review.
Reports on Meet��gs o the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Z+��i g Appeals and other Meetings
Zimmer stated that t�e Ci Council has been engaged in the light rail station area
planning an he munieipal co sent processes and will be scheduling a workshop and
another open se in the fut re.
Waldhauser asked i e City behind in s g work on the upcoming Comprehensive
Plan Amendment proc . Zi merm xplained that work will start on the
Comprehensive Plan Up etropolitan Council Systems Statements have been
received.
6. Other B ess
Council Liaison eport
o report was given.
Current
Major PUD Amendment Process
Estimated Time 6 Months (10 steps)
• Applicant meets with City staff to discuss PUD amendment
-. -
• Submit application and preliminary plans
-.
• Applicant holds a neighborhood meeting
_� • All property owners within 500 ft of development are notified
• Application is reviewed by Physical Development and Fire Departments
_� � • Staff reports are prepared
• Planning Commission reviews preliminary plans at an informal public
_� _ hearing
• City Council reviews preliminary plans at public hearing
• Applicant meets with City staff to review submission of final plans
_, . _ • Submit application and final plans
• Planning Commission reviews final plans at an informal public hearing
• City Council reviews final plans at a public hearing
• City Council approves Final Plat, PUD Permit, and Development Agreement
Proposed
Major PUD Amendment Process
Estimated Timeline 3 Months (7 steps)
. � • Applicant meets with City staff to discuss PUD amendment
•
. � • Submit application and final plans
• Applicant holds a neighborhood meeting
"• • All property owners within 500 ft of development are notified
• Application is reviewed by Physical Development and Fire Departments
�' • Staff reports are prepared
.� • Planning Commission reviews final plan at an informal public hearing
• City Council reviews final plans at a public hearing
• City Council approves Final Plat, PUD Permit, and Development Agreement if
" • applicable
Current and Proposed
Minor PUD Amendment Process
Estimated Timeline 2 Months (5 steps)
. � • Applicant meets with City staff to discuss PUD amendment
•
.� • Submit application and final plans
• Applicant holds a neighborhood meeting
' ' • All property owners within 500 ft of development are notified
• Application is reviewed by Physical Development and Fire Departments
" • • Staff reports are prepared
.� • City Council reviews final plans
Proposed
Administrative PUD Amendment Process
Estimated Timeline 3 Weeks (3 steps)
• Applicant meets with City staff to discuss PUD amendment
� •
• Submit application and final plans
- . .
• Staff reviews plans and updates PUD Permit
ro s�ed C�ol�.-
P°
Section 11.55: Planned Unit Development
Subdivision 1. Intent and Purpose
It is the intent of this Section to provide an optional method of regulating land use
which permits flexibility from the other provisions of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City
Code, including flexibility in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements,
number of buildings on a lot and similar regulations.
A. The purpose of this Section is to:
1. Encourage, preserve and improve the health, safety and general welfare
of the people of the City by encouraging the use of contemporary land
planning principles.
2. Achieve a high quality of site planning, design, landscaping, and building
materials which are compatible with the existing and planned land uses.
3. Encourage preservation and protection of desirable site characteristics
and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features
including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, waterways, wetlands and
lakes.
4. Encourage construction of affordable housing and a variety of housing
types.
5. Encourage creativity and flexibility in land development.
6. Encourage efficient and effective use of land, open space, streets, utilities
and other public facilities.
7. Allow mixing land uses and assembly and development of land to form
larger parcels.
8. Encourage development in transitional areas which achieve compatibility
with all adjacent and nearby land uses.
9. Achieve development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
10. Achieve development consistent with the City's redevelopment plans and
goals.
11. Encourage development that is sustainable and has a high degree of
energy efficiency.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 1 of 18
B. This Section applies to all Planned Unit Developments existing in the City on
the date of its enactment and all subsequently enacted Planned Unit
Developments.
Subdivision 2. Applicability
A. Optional Land Use Control. Planned Unit Development provisions provide an
optional method of regulating land use which permits flexibility in the uses
allowed and other regulating provisions including setbacks, height, parking
requirements number of buildings on a lot and similar regulations provided
the following requirements are met and the PUD plan complies with the other
provisions of this and other Planned Unit Development sections. Approval of
a Planned Unit Development and granting of a PUD agreement does not alter
the existing zoning district classification of a parcel in any manner; however,
once a PUD has been granted and is in effect for a parcel, no building permit
shall be issued for that parcel which is not in conformance with the approved
PUD Plan, the Building Code, and with all other applicable City Code
provisions.
B. Uses. Once a Final PUD Plan is approved, the use or uses are limited to those
approved by the specific approved PUD ordinance for the site and by the
conditions, if any, imposed by the City in the approval process.
C. Maintenance Preservation. All features and aspects of the Final PUD Plan and
related documents including but not limited to buildings, setbacks, open
space, preserved areas, landscaping, wetlands, buffers, grading, drainage,
streets and parking, hard cover, signs and similar features shall be used,
preserved and maintained as required in said PUD plans and documents.
Subdivision 3. Standards and Guidelines
A. Intent and Purposes. A PUD shall meet and be consistent with the intent and
purpose provisions and all other provisions of this section.
B. Findings. Approval of a Preliminary or Final PUD Plan, or a PUD Amendment,
requires the following findings be made by the City.
1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific
characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning
and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the
ordinance.
2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable
portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive
environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks,
wetlands and open waters.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 2 of 18
3. Efficient - EfFective. The PUD plan includes efficient and efFective use
(which includes preservation) of the land.
4. Consistency. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with
adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
redevelopment plans and goals.
5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving
the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City.
6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose
provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions.
C. Size. Each residential PUD must have a minimum area of two (2) acres,
excluding areas within a public right-of-way, designated wetland, or
floodplain overlay district, unless the applicant can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee the existence of one (1)
or more of the following:
1. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding
neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or
topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community.
2. The property is directly adjacent to or across a right-of-way from property
which has been developed previously as a PUD and will be perceived as
and will function as an extension of that previously approved
development.
3. The property is located in a transitional area between different land use
categories.
D. Frontage. Frontage on a public street shall be at least one hundred (100) feet
or adequate to serve the development.
E. Setbacks.
1. The City may allow some flexibility in setbacks if it benefits all parties and
the environment. Requiring greater or allowing lesser setbacks may be
based on uses on and off the site, natural amenities and preservation,
topography, density, building heights, building materials, landscaping,
lighting and other plan features. The rationale and justification for these
setbacks shall be described in the narrative.
2. Principal Building. No principal building shall be closer than its height to
the rear or side property line when such line abuts on a single-family
zoning district.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 3 of 18
3. All Buildings. No building shall be located less than fifteen (15) feet from
the back of the curb line along those roadways which are a part of the
internal road system. Some minor deviations may be allowed provided
adequate separation is provided through additional landscaping, berming
or similar means.
F. Private Service Facilities or Common Areas. In the event certain land areas or
structures are proposed within the planned unit development for shared
recreational use or as service facilities, the owner of such land and buildings
shall enter into an agreement with the City to assure the continued operation
and maintenance to a pre-determined reasonable standard. These common
areas may be placed under the ownership of one of the following as
determined by the Council:
1. Dedicated to public where community-wide use is anticipated.
2. Landlord.
3. Landowners or Homeowners Association, provided appropriate conditions
and protections satisfactory to the City are met such as formation of the
association, mandatory membership, permanent use restrictions, liability
insurance, local taxes, maintenance, and assessment provisions.
G. Private Streets. Private streets shall not be approved, nor shall public
improvements be approved for any private right-of-way, unless a waiver is
granted by the City based on the following and other relevant factors:
1. Extension of a public street is not physically feasible as determined by the
city;
2. Severe grades make it infeasible according to the city to construct a
public street to minimum city standards;
3. The city determines that a public road extension would adversely impact
natural amenities; or
4. There is no feasible present or future means of extending right-of-way
from other directions.
5. If the City determines that there is need for a public street extension, this
provision shall not apply, and the right-of-way for a public street shall be
provided by dedication in the plat.
6. If a waiver is granted for the installation of private streets, the following
design standards shall apply:
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 4 of 18
a. The street must have adequate width consistent with the
Transportation Plan and must be located and approximately centered
within an easement at least four (4) feet wider than the street.
b. The private street shall be designed to minimize impacts upon
adjoining parcels.
c. The design and construction standards must result in a functionally
sound street in balance with its intended use and setting.
d. The number of lots to share a common private access drive must be
reasonable.
e. Covenants which assign driveway installation and future maintenance
responsibility in a manner acceptable to the City must be submitted
and recorded with the titles or the parcels which are benefited.
f. Common sections of the private street serving three (3) or more
dwellings must be built to a seven-ton design, paved to a width of
twenty (20) feet, utilize a minimum grade, and have a maximum
grade which does not exceed ten percent (10%).
g. The private street must be provided with suitable drainage.
h. Covenants concerning maintenance and use shall be filed against all
benefiting properties.
i. Street addresses or City-approved street name signs, if required, must
be posted at the point where the private street intersects the public
right-of-way.
H. Hard Surfaces. Hard surface coverage is expected not to exceed the following
standards.
Uses Maximum Hard Cover Percent
Single Family 38%
Townhouses 40%
Apartments-Condominiums 42%
Institutional Uses 45%
Industrial Uses 70%
Business Uses 80%
Commercial-Retail 90%
Mixed Uses of Housing with Retail, Office or Business 90%
I. Public Space. Properties within PUDs are subject to the dedication of parks,
playgrounds, trails, open spaces, storm water holding areas and ponds as
outlined in the Subdivision Code, the Comprehensive Plan, redevelopment
plans or other City plans.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 5 of 18
J. Public Amenities. Atl PUDs created after November 1, 2015 shall provide at
least one amenity or combination of amenities that total at least five (5)
points from the Public Amenity Option table. Where an amenity does not
meet all of the standards required, a portion of points may be allotted if
approved by the City Manager of his/her designee. An applicant may petition
for credit for an amenity not included in the Public Amenity Option table;
however, if the petition is granted, the amenity may only be allotted up to
two (2) points.
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
5 Green Roof Installation of an extensive, intensive, or
semi-intensive, modular or integrated
green roof system that covers a minimum
of fifty (50) percent of the total roof area
ro osed for the develo ment.
5 Community Garden Permanent and viable growing space
and/or facilities such as a greenhouse or a
garden, which provides fencing, watering
systems, soil, secured storage spaces for
tools, solar access, and pedestrian access
as applicable. The facility shall be designed
to be architecturally compatible with the
development to minimize the visibility of
mechanical equipment. The food produced
shall be provided to those living or working
in Golden Valle .
5 AfFordable Housing Units Three options of affordability include:
• At least ten percent (10%) of units
within development are rented or sold at
thirty percent (30%) of Area Median
Income or less.
• At least twenty percent (20%) of units
within development are rented or sold at
fifty percent (50%) of Area Median
Income or less.
� At least thirty percent (30%) of units
within development are rented or sold at
eighty percent (80%) of Area Median
Income or less.
4 Public Open Space Contiguous ground level outdoor open
space that is provided beyond the amount
of open space required in the underlying
Zonin District re uirements.
4 Rooftop Solar Panels Installation of an extensive, intensive, or
semi-intensive, modular or inte rated solar
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 6 of 1 S
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
roof system that covers a minimum of fifty
(50) percent of the total roof area
ro osed for the develo ment.
3 Leadership in Energy and The proposed development shall achieve
Environmental Design LEED Gold or Platinum certification
(LEED) Gold or Platinum approved by a LEED Accredited
Certification Professional (LEED-AP) by a date
determined in the Development
Agreement. During the PUD approval
process, the developer must submit a
LEED checklist and documentation to the
City that shows the project will comply
with LEED Gold or Platinum re uirements.
3 Public Recreation Area An active, safe, and secure outdoor
recreation area open and visible to the
public that includes play equipment or
natural features suitable for recreational
use b children and families.
3 Public Plaza Plazas shall be open to the public during
daylight hours and provide opportunities
for the public to interact with the space
using outdoor furniture, art, or other
mechanisms.
3 Public Art The art shall be maintained in good order
for the life of the principle structure. The
art shall be located where it is highly
visible to the public. If located indoors,
such space shall be clearly visible and
easily accessible from adjacent sidewalks
or streets.
2 Enhanced Bicycle and Eligible facilities may include a combination
Pedestrian Facilities of the following: heated transit shelter,
bicycle repair tools, rest area, wayfinding
signs, and other amenities that increase
the convenience and encourage the use of
ublic walkwa s and bikewa s.
2 Preservation of Preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration
Unique/Historic of designed historic landmarks or unique
Architecture architectural features as a part of the
develo ment.
2 Enhanced Stormwater The design must provide capacity for
Management infiltrating stormwater beyond what is
required by the City and Watershed
District and the desi n must serve as a
Go/den Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 7 of 18
PUD Amenity Options
Points Amenity Standards
visual amenit to the ro ert .
1 Water Feature Usable to A water feature, including but not limited
Public to a reflecting pond, a children's play
feature, or a fountain shall be located
where it is highly visible and useable by
the ublic.
1 Shared Bicycle and Vehicle Accommodation for shared vehicles or
Facilities shared bicycles on site. The shared service
provider must be committed in writing to
the use of the s ace in order to be eli ible.
1 Decorative Fencing Installation of high quality metal fencing
where visible from the public street, public
sidewalk or ublic athwa .
1 Enhanced Exterior Lighting A lighting plan that highlights significant
areas of the site or architectural features
of the buildin s .
1 Informational/Interpretive Permanent signs that inform the public of
Dis la s uni ue as ects or histor of the ro ert .
1 Enhanced Landscaping A landscaping plan prepared by a licensed
landscape architect that provides
exceptional design with a variety of native
trees, shrubs, and plant types that provide
seasonal interest and that exceed
minimum Cit standards.
Subdivision 4. Procedures
A. Qualifications. Application for a PUD may be made only by: 1) the owner of
the land involved in the PUD application, or by a duly authorized
representative, or 2) an option or contract holder, provided the application is
accompanied by fully executed agreements or documents from the owner
stating that such owner has no objections to the proposed application and is
in fact joining in the same as such owner's interest may appear. The City
may act as a petitioner on its own behalf or on the behalf of an affiliated
governmental body.
B. Preliminary PUD Conference. Prior to filing a PUD application and prior to
conducting a neighborhood meeting, the applicant shall meet with City staff
for a pre-application conference. The primary purpose of the conference is to
allow the applicant and staff to discuss land use controls, appropriate use of
the site, design standards, how the plan will achieve higher quality and meet
the PUD purpose and design requirements, the application process, and the
general merits of the applicant's proposal.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 8 of 18
C. Neighborhood Meeting. At an appropriate point during development of a
Preliminary PUD Plan, the applicant shall hold a neighborhood meeting. All
property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD, or a larger area
as determined by the City, shall be given notice of the meeting. The purpose
of the meeting is to inform the neighborhood of the proposed PUD, discuss
the concepts and basis for the plan being developed and to obtain
information and suggestions from the neighborhood.
D. Preliminary PUD Review.
1. Planning Division. Upon submission of a completed Preliminary PUD Plan
application, the Planning Division shall:
a. Refer. Refer the application to other City departments for their written
evaluations regarding those aspects of the proposal which affect public
safety and the delivery of service.
b. Notify. Notify by mail property owners within five hundred (500) feet
of the PUD, or a larger area to be determined by the City, of the public
information meeting. However, failure of any property owner to
receive notification shall not invalidate the proceedings.
c. Report. Prepare a report and refer it to the Planning Commission for
review at the informal public hearing.
2. Planning Commission.
a. Informational Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold an
informal public hearing and consider the application for consistency
with the Intent and Purpose provisions and other PUD requirements
and principles and standards adhered to in the City. The Planning
Commission's report to the Council shall include recommended
changes, conditions, or modifications.
b. Petitioner. The petitioner, or the petitioner's representative, shall
appear at the public information meeting in order to answer questions
concerning the proposed PUD.
c. Findings. The findings and action of the Planning Commission shall be
forwarded to the Council.
3. City Council.
a. Public Hearing. The Council shall hold a public hearing and take action
on the application. All property owners within five hundred (500) feet
of the PUD, or a larger area as determined by the City, shall be given
notice of the meeting. The public hearing shall be called and notice
thereof given in the manner required by statute.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 9 of 18
b. Findings. The findings and action of the Council may include a request
for plan amendments, approval, denial, or other action deemed
appropriate by the Council such as referral back to the Planning
Commission.
E. Final PUD Conference. Following approval by the City Council of the
Preliminary PUD Plan and prior to the submission of the Final PUD Plan for
review, the applicant shall meet with City staff to demonstrate that all
conditions or required modifications to the Preliminary PUD Plan have been
addressed. Failure to hold this meeting prior to submission of the Final PUD
Plan shall be grounds to deem the application incomplete.
F. Final PUD Review.
1. Planning Division. Upon submission of a completed Preliminary PUD Plan
application, the Planning Division shall:
a. Refer. Refer the application to other City departments for their written
evaluations regarding those aspects of the proposal which affect public
safety and the delivery of service.
b. Notify. Notify by mail property owners within five hundred (500) feet
of the PUD, or a larger area to be determined by the City, of the public
information meeting. However, failure of any property owner to
receive notification shall not invalidate the proceedings.
c. Report. Prepare a report and refer it to the Planning Commission for
review at the informal public hearing.
2. Planning Commission.
a. Informational Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold an
informal public hearing. All property owners within five hundred (500)
feet of the PUD or a larger area as determined by the City, shall be
given notice of the meeting.
b. Consistency. The Commission shall review the Final PUD Plan for
consistency with the Preliminary PUD Plan as approved by the Council,
and the conditions, if any imposed by the Council, the Intent and
Purpose provisions, all other provisions of the PUD ordinance, and
principles and standards adhered to in the City.
c. Findings. The findings, actions and report of the Commission to the
Council may include recommended conditions and modifications to the
Final PUD Plan.
3. City Council.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 10 of 18
a. Public Hearing. The City Council shall hold a public hearing. All
property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD, or a larger
area as determined by the City, shall be given notice of the meeting.
The public hearing shall be called and notice thereof given in the
manner required by statute.
b. Action. The action of the Council may include plan amendments,
approval, denial, or other action based on findings and deemed
appropriate by the City Council.
4. Approval. Approval of a Planned Unit Development shall be by ordinance
requiring an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council.
Subdivision 5. Application - Preliminary PUD Plan
A. Application. The applicant shall complete and sign the application and submit
a Preliminary PUD Plan. All application requirements must be completed and
submitted for the application to be processed. If it is proposed to develop a
project during a period which will exceed two (2) years, the applicant may
request approval of a Preliminary PUD Plan for the entire project and
permission to submit a Final PUD Plan only for the first stage of the project.
Separate public hearings and a Final PUD Plan shall nevertheless be required
respecting such successive stage of the project as the same is reached.
Except to the extent the City Manager or his/her designee requires more or
less information, the application shall include, but not be limited to, the
following information:
1. Narrative. A narrative statement explaining how the proposed PUD will
meet the purpose and other provisions of the PUD Ordinance.
2. Preliminary Site/Development Plan. A plan of the proposed development
illustrating the nature and type of proposed development shall identify all
land uses and proposed square footages, the locations of buildings,
existing and proposed roadways and accesses, pedestrian ways and
sidewalks, proposed parking areas, areas to be preserved, public and
common areas, and the amenities to be provided. Setback measurements
from buildings, roads, parking and high use outdoor activity areas to the
nearest lot lines shall be shown on the Site Plan.
3. Preliminary Preservation Plan. A Preservation Plan showing the areas to
be preserved and spaces to be left open shall be provided. Preference
shall be given to protecting sensitive environmental features including
steep slopes, trees, scenic views, waterways, wetlands and lakes.
4. Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan. Preliminary plans for grading,
drainage and erosion control which meet the City's standards shall be
submitted. The plan shall show hard surface calculations by areas -
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 11 of 18
buildings, private streets, driveways, parking lots, plazas, walks, trails,
and all other impervious surfaces.
5. Preliminary Utilities Plan. The applicant shall provide a plan showing how
the site will be served by utilities.
6. Preliminary Building Code Analysis.
7. Preliminary Plat. All data required for a preliminary plat by the
requirements of the Subdivision Regulations Chapter of the City Code.
8. Preliminary Building Elevations, including height and materials.
9. Future Requirements. The applicant is advised to consider the additional
requirements for a Final PUD Plan when preparing the Preliminary PUD
Plan.
10. Other. An applicant may submit any additional information which may
explain the proposed PUD.
Subdivision 6. Application — Final PUD Plan
A. Application and Final PUD Plan Requirements. Unless the applicant has
obtained City Council permission under Subd. 5(A) hereof to develop a
project over more than two (2) years, the applicant shall submit a complete
Final PUD Plan within one hundred eighty (180) days of Preliminary PUD Plan
approval. Such one hundred eighty (180) day period may be extended for
additional one hundred eighty (180) day periods by the City Council in the
exercise of its sole discretion subject to such additional conditions as it
deems appropriate. The Final PUD Plan shall be consistent with the
Preliminary PUD Plan approved by the City Council, as well as the PUD Intent
and Purpose provisions hereof. Except to the extent the City Manager or
his/her designee requires more or less information, the application shall
include, but not be limited to, the following:
1. Narrative. The applicant shall submit a description of the development
especially as it relates to use of PUD provisions and explaining how it
meets the purpose and other PUD provisions. The narrative must
demonstrate that all conditions or required modifications to the
Preliminary PUD Plan have been addressed.
2. Final Site/Development Plan. A plan of the proposed development
illustrating the nature and type of proposed development shall identify all
land uses and proposed square footages, the locations of buildings,
existing and proposed roadways and accesses, pedestrian ways and
sidewalks, proposed parking areas, areas to be preserved, public and
common areas, and the amenities to be provided. Setback measurements
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 12 of 1 S
from buildings, roads, parking and high use outdoor activity areas to the
nearest lot lines shall be shown on the Site Plan.
3. Final Preservation Plan. A Preservation Plan showing the areas to be
preserved and spaces to be left open shall be provided. The plan shall
include new plantings, fixtures, equipment and methods of preservation.
Said plan and information may be included on the Landscape Plan.
a. Wetlands and Ponds. Wetlands and ponds shall have a riparian buffer
strip composed of natural vegetation but not an improved and/or
fertilized lawn.
b. Buffers. Provisions for buffering the PUD site from adjacent uses shall
be included. Natural amenities shall be used to the extent possible and
be supplemented by additional landscaping, berms or other features as
may be appropriate. Buffers shall be based on the type of uses on and
adjacent to the site, views, elevations and activities. BufFers may be
included on the Landscape Plan.
c. Tree Preservation Plan. A complete tree preservation plan consistent
with the PUD requirements and the Preliminary PUD Plan as approved
by the City.
d. Landscape Plans. Complete landscaping plans showing vegetation to
be removed, vegetation to be retained and proposed vegetation. Plans
shall include species, quantities, planting methods and sizes. Within
any specific PUD, the landscaping may be required to exceed the City's
policy on minimum landscape standards.
4. Final Stormwater Management Plan. Complete plans for grading, drainage
and erosion control which meet the City's standards shall be submitted.
The plan shall show hard surface calculations by areas - buildings, private
streets, driveways, parking lots, plazas, walks, trails, and all other
impervious surfaces.
5. Final Utility Plan.
6. Final Building Code Analysis.
7. Final Plat. Unless waived by the City, the applicant shall submit a final plat,
as required by the Subdivision Code. The title of the plat must include the
following `�P.U.D. No. " (The number to insert will be provided by the
City.)
8. Other items, if determined to be applicable:
a. Transportation and Parking Plan. A complete plan shall be submitted
which includes:
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 13 of 18
1. Proposed sidewalks and trails to provide access to the building,
parking, recreation and service areas within the proposed
development and connection to the City's system of walks and
trails
2. Internal roads, if any
3. Driveways
4. Parking, including layout dimensions of spaces and aisles, total
parking by use, and a notation about striping/painting the spaces
5. Off-street loading for business uses
6. A plan for snow storage and removal
7. A plan for maintenance of the facilities
8. A calculation of trafFic projections by use with assignments to the
roads, drives and accesses serving the PUD, including existing
traffic volumes for adjacent streets using the most recent counts
and/or based on the uses and trip generation estimates
9. A description of the alternatives and locations considered for access
to the site and the rationale used in selecting the proposed
location, width and design of streets, driveways and accesses.
b. Architectural Plans. The applicant shall submit architectural plans
showing the floor plan and elevations of all sides of the proposed
buildings including exterior wall finishes proposed for all principal and
accessory buildings. Cross sections may be required.
c. Lighting Plan. Subject to the requirements in Section 11.73, Outdoor
Lighting.
d. Refuse and Garbage Plan. The applicant shall provide a refuse disposal
plan including provisions for storage and removal on a regular basis.
f. Dwelling Information. The applicant shall submit complete data as to
dwelling unit number, density net and gross, sizes, types, etc.
g. Life-Cycle and Affordable Housing. If the PUD includes "life-cycle" or
affordable housing, the applicant shall provide a narrative describing
the housing, and the guarantees such as covenants to be used to
secure such housing and maintain long term affordability.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 14 of 18
h. Population. The applicant shall submit a population component which
shall contain a descriptive statement of the e�stimated population and
population characteristics.
i. Employees. If office, commercial, business, service firms or
institutional uses are included in the PUD, the estimated number of
employees shall be included.
j. Schedule. The applicant shall submit a schedule and proposed staging,
if any, of the development.
Subdivision 7. PUD Permit and Development Agreement
Following Council approval of a Final PUD Plan, City staff shall prepare both a PUD
Permit and a Development Agreement which reference all the approved plans and
specify permitted uses, allowable densities, development phasing, required
improvements, completion dates for improvements, Letters of Credit and other
sureties, and additional requirements for each PUD, in accordance with the
conditions established in the City Council approval of the Final PUD Plan and PUD
ordinance. The PUD Permit and Development Agreement shall be signed by the
petitioner within thirty (30) days of the City Council's approval of the permit and
agreement.
Subdivision 8. Building Permit
Following approval of a Final PUD Plan and execution of the PUD Permit and
Development Agreement, the City may grant building permits for proposed
structures within the approved PUD area provided the requested permit conforms to
the Final PUD Plan, all provisions of the PUD ordinance, the PUD Permit, the
Development Agreement and all other applicable City Codes.
Subdivision 9. Multiple Parcels
A PUD may be regulated by a single agreement which may include attachments.
One (1) or more of the attachments may cover an individual lot. An applicant
amending an approved PUD must show that the proposed change does not
adversely affect any other property owner, if any, in the PUD, the terms of the Final
PUD Plan, PUD Permit, Development Agreement, and the Intent and Purpose and
other provisions of the PUD ordinance. A proposed amendment which does not
meet this requirement may be rejected by the City without review as would
otherwise be required by the ordinance.
Subdivision 10. Amendments
An application to amend a PUD shall be reviewed by the City Manager or his/her
designee to determine whether the amendment qualifies as a major amendment,
minor amendment, or an administrative amendment.
A. Major Amendments. A major amendment shall be reviewed by Planning
Commission and approved by a simple majority vote of the City Council. To
qualify for this review, the proposed amendment shall:
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 15 of 18
1. Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of
sensitive site features.
2. Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning,
design, landscaping, or building materials.
3. Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
4. Increase the number of residential dwelling units by ten percent (10%) or
more.
5. Introduce new uses.
6. Demolish or add a principle structure.
7. Change a front yard, side yard, or rear yard setback that does not meet
minimum requirements set forth in the underlying Zoning District.
8. Change the number of parking spaces that does not meet the minimum
off-street parking requirements set forth in this Chapter.
9. Increase impervious surfaces above the maximum amount allowable in
the underlying Zoning District.
10. Change building coverage above the maximum amount allowable in the
underlying Zoning District.
11. Increase the gross floor area of any individual building by ten percent
(10%) or more.
12. Increase the number of stories of any building or a significant alteration in
the overall height of the building.
13. Decrease the amount of open space by more than three percent (3%) or
alter it in such a way as to change its original design or intended function
or use.
14. Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval
of the Final PUD Plan.
15. Any other change determined by Physical Development staff to have a
significant impact.
B. Minor Amendments. A minor amendment shall be approved by a simple
majority vote of the City Council with or without referral to the Planning
Commission. To qualify for this review, the proposed amendment shall:
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 16 of 18
1. Change land use to a use that is permitted in the underlying Zoning
District.
2. Increase the number of residential dwelling units by less than ten percent
(10%).
3. Demolish or add an accessory structure.
4. Change a front yard, side yard, or rear yard setback that meets the
minimum requirements set forth in the underlying Zoning District.
5. Change the number of parking spaces that meets the minimum off-street
parking requirements set forth in this Chapter.
6. Change parking lot configuration or design with no change in number of
parking spaces.
7. Increase impervious surfaces up to the maximum amount allowable in the
underlying Zoning District.
8. Change building coverage up to the maximum amount allowable in the
underlying Zoning District.
9. Change gross floor area in any individual building by less than ten percent
(io�io).
10. Significantly change architectural elevation plans that alter the intended
function of the development.
11. Significantly change landscape plans that alter the intended function of
the development.
C. Administrative Amendments. Administrative amendments are reviewed and
approved by City staff. Administrative amendments include:
1. Change in Utility Plan
2. Change in Landscaping Plan
3. Change to Interior Building Plans
4. Change to Outdoor Lighting Plans
5. Change to Grading/Erosion Control Plans
6. Change to Architectural Elevations
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 17 of 18
Subdivision 11. Cancellation
A PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an
ordinance rescinding the ordinance approving the PUD.
Subdivision 12. Administration
A. Deposit. The City may require the applicant to make funds available to cover
legal fees generated by the establishment or modification of the PUD.
B. Records. The Physical Development Department shall maintain a record of all
Planned Unit Developments approved by the City Council including
information on the use, location, conditions imposed, time limits, review
dates, and such other information as may be appropriate. Each approved
PUD shall be clearly noted on the Zoning Map.
C. Certification of Plans. The City may require that PUD plans be certified at the
time of submittal and/or upon completion of construction.
D. Time Limits. No application which was denied shall be re-submitted for a
period of six (6) months from the date of said denial.
E. Letter of Credit. To assure conformance to the Final PUD Plan, PUD Permit,
and Development Agreement the City may require the applicant to post a
Letter of Credit in a form approved by the City, guaranteeing the faithful
performance of certain work or matters covered in the agreement and in a
s�m equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) the total cost of all such
items as determined by the Physical Development Department. The Letter of
Credit or other surety may be reduced when specific parts or items are
completed and upon recommendation of the Physical Development
Department.
F. Effect on Conveyed Property. In the event any real property in the approved
PUD Agreement is conveyed in total, or in part, the buyers thereof shall be
bound by the provisions of the approved Final PUD Plan constituting a part
thereof; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed to create
non-conforming lots, building sites, buildings or uses by virtue of any such
conveyance of a lot, building site, building or part of the development
created pursuant to and in conformance with the approved PUD.
Golden Valley City Code (Proposed) Page 18 of 18
� � p� § 11.55
�����
S
Section 11.55: Planned Unit Development
Subdivision 1. Intent and Purpose
It is the intent of this Section to provide an optional method of regulating land use
which permits flexibility from the other provisions of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City
Code, including flexibility in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements,
number of buildings on a lot and similar regulations.
A. The purpose of this section is to:
1. Encourage, preserve and improve the health, safety and general welfare
of the people of the City by encouraging the use of contemporary land
planning principles.
2. Achieve a high quality of site planning, design, landscaping, and building
materials which are compatible with the existing and planned land uses.
3. Encourage preservation and protection of desirable site characteristics
and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features
including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, waterways, wetlands and
lakes.
4. Encourage construction of affordable housing and a variety of housing
types.
5. Encourage creativity and flexibility in land development.
6. Encourage efficient and effective use of land, open space, streets, utilities
and other public facilities.
7. Allow mixing land uses and assembly and development of land to form
larger parcels.
8. Encourage development in transitional areas which achieve compatibility
with all adjacent and nearby land uses.
9. Achieve development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
10. Achieve development consistent with the City's redevelopment plans and
goals.
11. Encourage development that is sustainable and has a high degree of
energy efficiency.
Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 16
§ 11.55
B. This Section applies to all Planned Unit Developments existing in the City on
the date of its enactment and all subsequently enacted Planned Unit
Developments.
Subdivision 2. Applicability
A. Optional Land Use Control. Planned Unit Development provisions provide an
optional method of regulating land use which permits flexibility in the uses
allowed and other regulating provisions including setbacks, height, parking
requirements number of buildings on a lot and similar regulations provided
the following requirements are met and the PUD plan complies with the other
provisions of this and other Planned Unit Development sections. Approval of
a Planned Unit Development and granting of a PUD agreement does not alter
the existing zoning district classification of a parcel in any manner; however,
once a PUD has been granted and is in effect for a parcel, no building permit
shall be issued for that parcel which is not in conformance with the approved
PUD Plan, the Building Code, and with all other applicable City Code
provisions.
B. Uses. Once a Final PUD Plan is approved, the use or uses are limited to those
approved by the specific approved PUD ordinance for the site and by the
conditions, if any, imposed by the City in the approval process.
C. Maintenance Preservation. All features and aspects of the Final PUD Plan and
related documents including but not limited to buildings, setbacks, open
space, preserved areas, landscaping, wetlands, buffers, grading, drainage,
streets and parking, hard cover, signs and similar features shall be used,
preserved and maintained as required in said PUD plans and documents.
Source: Ordinance No. 318, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-31-04
Subdivision 3. Standards and Guidelines
A. Size. Each residential PUD must have a minimum area of two (2) acres,
excluding areas within a public right-of-way, designated wetland, or
floodplain overlay district, unless the applicant can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee the existence of one (1)
or more of the following:
1. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding
neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or
topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community.
2. The property is directly adjacent to or across a right-of-way from property
which has been developed previously as a PUD and will be perceived as
and will function as an extension of that previously approved
development.
Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 16
§ 11.55
3. The property is located in a transitional area between different land use
categories.
Source: Ordinance No. 547, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 3-26-IS
B. Frontage. Frontage on a public street shall be at least one hundred (100) feet
or adequate to serve the development.
C. Setbacks.
l. Principal Building. No principal building shall be closer than its height to
the rear or side property line when such line abuts on a single-family
zoning district.
2. All Buildings. No building shall be located less than fifteen (15) feet from
the back of the curb line along those roadways which are a part of the
internal road system. Some minor deviations may be allowed provided
adequate separation is provided through additional landscaping, berming
or similar means.
D. Private Service Facilities or Common Areas. In the event certain land areas or
structures are proposed within the planned unit development for shared
recreational use or as service facilities, the owner of such land and buildings
shall enter into an agreement with the City to assure the continued operation
and maintenance to a pre-determined reasonable standard. These common
areas may be placed under the ownership of one of the following as
determined by the Council:
1. Dedicated to public where community-wide use is anticipated.
2. Landlord
3. Landowners or Homeowners Association, provided appropriate conditions
and protections satisfactory to the City are met such as formation of the
association, mandatory membership, permanent use restrictions, liability
insurance, local taxes, maintenance, and assessment provisions.
E. Intent and Purposes. A PUD shall meet and be consistent with the intent and
purpose provisions and all other provisions of this section.
Subdivision 4. Pre-Application
A. Qualifications. Application for a PUD may be made only by: 1) the owner of
the land involved in the PUD application, or by a duly authorized
representative, or 2) an option or contract holder, provided the application is
accompanied by fully executed agreements or documents from the owner
stating that such owner has no objections to the proposed application and is
in fact joining in the same as such owner's interest may appear. The City
Golden Valley City Code Page 3 of 16
§ 11.55
may act as a petitioner on its own behalf or on the behalf of an affiliated
governmental body.
B. Pre-Application Conference. Prior to filing a PUD application and prior to
conducting a neighborhood meeting, the applicant shall meet with the city
staff for a pre-application conference. The primary purpose of the conference
is to allow the applicant and staff to discuss land use controls, appropriate
use of the site, design standards, how the plan will achieve higher quality
and meet the PUD purpose and design requirements, the application process,
and the general merits of the applicant's proposal.
C. Neighborhood Meeting. At an appropriate point during development of a
preliminary PUD plan, the applicant shall hold a neighborhood meeting. All
property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD, or a larger area
as determined by the City, shall be given notice of the meeting. The purpose
of the meeting is to inform the neighborhood of the proposed PUD, discuss
the concepts and basis for the plan being developed and to obtain
information and suggestions from the neighborhood.
Subdivision 5. Application Procedure - Preliminary PUD Plan
A. Application. The applicant shall complete and sign the application and submit
a Preliminary PUD Plan. All application requirements must be completed and
submitted for the application to be processed. If it is proposed to develop a
project during a period which will exceed two (2) years, the applicant may
request approval of a Preliminary PUD Plan for the entire project and
permission to submit a Final PUD Plan only for the first stage of the project.
Separate public hearings and a Final PUD Plan shall nevertheless be required
respecting such successive stage of the project as the same is reached.
Except to the extent the City Manager or his/her designee requires more or
less information, the application shall include, but not be limited to, the
following information:
Source: Ordinance No. 318, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-31-04
1. Preliminary PUD Plan. A Preliminary PUD Plan of the proposed
development illustrating the nature and type of proposed development,
shall identify all land uses and proposed square footage, the location of
buildings, existing and proposed roadways and accesses, pedestrian ways
and sidewalks, proposed parking areas, preliminary traffic volume
projections, areas to be preserved, public and common areas, preliminary
building elevations including height and materials, preliminary utilities
plan, the location of the parcel's boundaries, the net and gross density of
the development, the total area occupied by the development, lot
coverage, a lighting plan (subject to the requirements in Section 11.73,
Outdoor Lighting) and the amenities to be provided and a development
schedule.
Source: Ordinance No. 365, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 3-23-07
Golden Valley City Code Page 4 of 16
§ 11.55
a. Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan
b. Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan
c. Preliminary Building Code Analysis
2. Preliminary Plat. All data required for a preliminary plat by the
requirements of the Subdivision Regulations Chapter of the City Code.
This requirement may be waived if the PUD is an amendment to an
approved PUD.
3. Narrative. A narrative statement explaining how the proposed PUD will
meet the purpose and other provisions of the PUD Ordinance including
how it will:
a. Encourage, preserve and improve the health, safety and general
welfare of the people of the City by encouraging the use of
contemporary land planning principles.
b. Achieve a high quality of site planning, design, landscaping, and
building materials which are compatible with the existing and planned
land uses.
c. Encourage preservation and protection of desirable site characteristics
and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features
including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, water ways, wetlands and
lakes.
d. Encourage construction of affordable housing and a variety of housing
types.
e. Encourage creativity and flexibility in land development.
f. Encourage efficient and effective use of land, open space, streets,
utilities and other public facilities.
g. Allow mixing land uses and assembly and development of land to form
larger parcels.
h. Encourage development in transitional areas which achieve
compatibility with all adjacent and nearby land uses.
i. Achieve development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
j. Achieve development consistent with the City's redevelopment plans
and goals.
Golden Valley City Code Page 5 of 16
§ 11.55
k. Encourage development that is sustainable and has a high degree of
energy efficiency.
4. Future Requirements. The applicant is advised to consider the
requirement for a Final PUD Plan when preparing the Preliminary PUD
Plan.
5. Other. An applicant may submit any additional information which may
explain the proposed PUD.
B. Planning Department. Upon submission of a completed application, the
Planning Department shall:
1. Refer. Refer the application to the Physical Development Department for
their written evaluations regarding those aspects of the proposal which
affect the particular department's area of interest.
2. Notify. Notify by mail property owners within five hundred (500) feet of
the PUD, or a larger area to be determined by the City, of the public
information meeting. However, failure of any property owner to receive
notification shall not invalidate the proceedings.
3. Report. Prepare a report and refer it to the Planning Commission for
review at the informal public hearing.
C. Planning Commission.
1. Informational Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold an
informal public hearing and consider the application for consistency with
the Intent and Purpose provisions and other PUD requirements and
principles and standards adhered to in the City. The Planning
Commission's report to the Council shall include recommended changes,
conditions, or modifications.
2. Petitioner. The petitioner, or the petitioner's representative, shall appear
at the public information meeting in order to answer questions concerning
the proposed PUD.
3. Findings. The findings and action of the Planning Commission shall be
forwarded to the Council.
D. City Council.
1. The Council shall hold a public hearing, and take action on the application.
All property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD, or a larger
area as determined by the City, shall be given notice of the meeting. The
public hearing shall be called and notice thereof given in the manner
required by statute.
Golden Valley City Code Page 6 of 16
§ 11.55
2. Findings. The findings and action of the Council may include a request for
plan amendments, approval, denial, or other action deemed appropriate
by the Council such as referral back to the Planning Commission.
E. Findings. Approval of a Preliminary PUD Plan requires the following findings
be made by the City.
1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific
characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning
and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the
ordinance.
2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable
portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive
environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks,
wetlands and open waters.
3. Efficient - Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use
(which includes preservation) of the land.
4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with
adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
redevelopment plans and goals.
5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving
the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City.
6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose
provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions.
Source: Ordinance No. 318, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-31-04
Subdivision 6. Application Procedure — Final PUD Plan
A. Application and Final PUD Plan Requirements. Unless the applicant has
obtained City Council permission under Subd. 5(A) hereof to develop a
project over more than two (2) years, the applicant shall submit a complete
Final PUD Plan within one hundred eighty (180) days of Preliminary PUD Plan
approval. Such one hundred eighty (180) day period may be extended for
additional one hundred eighty (180) day periods by the City Council in the
exercise of its sole discretion subject to such additional conditions as it
deems appropriate. The Final PUD Plan shall be consistent with the
Preliminary PUD Plan approved by the City Council, as well as the PUD Intent
and Purpose provisions hereof. The standards and other provisions of this
section shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
Source: Ordinance No. 419, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 05-29-09
Golden Valley City Code Page 7 of 16
§ 11.55
1. Site Plan/Development Plan. Plans of the proposed PUD development
which identify all land uses and proposed square footage, the location of
buildings, existing and proposed roadways and accesses, pedestrian ways
and sidewalks, proposed parking areas, traffic volume projections, areas
to be preserved, public and common areas, building elevations including
height and materials, preliminary utilities plan, the location of the parcel's
boundaries, the net and gross density of the development, the total area
occupied by the development, the amenities to be provided and the
development schedule.
2. Setbacks. Setback measurements from buildings, roads, parking and high
use outdoor activity areas to the nearest lot lines shall be shown on the
Site Plan. A narrative shall describe these setbacks and provide the
rationale and justification. The City may allow some flexibility in setbacks
if it benefits all parties and the environment. Requiring greater or allowing
lesser setbacks may be based on uses on and off the site, natural
amenities and preservation, topography, density, building heights,
building materials, landscaping, lighting and other plan features.
3. Preservation Plan. A Preservation and Open Space Plan showing the areas
to be preserved and spaces to be left open shall be provided. Preference
shall be given to protecting sensitive environmental features including
steep slopes, trees, scenic views, waterways, wetlands and lakes. The
plan shall include new plantings, fixtures, equipment and methods of
preservation. Said plan and information may be included on the
Landscape Plan.
a. Wetlands and Ponds Guidelines. Wetlands and ponds shall have a
riparian buffer strip at least twenty-five (25) feet wide composed of
natural vegetation but not an improved and/or fertilized lawn.
b. Buffers. Provisions for buffering the PUD site from adjacent uses shall
be included. Natural amenities shall be used to the extent possible and
be supplemented by additional landscaping, berms or other features as
may be appropriate. Buffers shall be based on the type of uses on and
adjacent to the site, views, elevations and activities. Buffers may be
included on the Landscape Plan.
c. Tree Preservation Plan. A complete tree preservation plan consistent
with the PUD requirements and the Preliminary PUD Plan as approved
by the City.
d. Landscape Plans. Complete landscaping plans showing vegetation to
be removed, vegetation to be retained and proposed vegetation. Plans
shall include species, quantities, planting methods and sizes. Within
any specific PUD, the landscaping may be required to exceed the City's
policy on minimum landscape standards.
Golden Valley City Code Page 8 of 16
§ 11.55
4. Public Space. Properties within PUDs are subject to the dedication of
parks, playgrounds, trails, open spaces, storm water holding areas and
ponds as outlined in Section 12.30, subdivision 1 of the Subdivision Code,
the Comprehensive Plan, redevelopment plans or other City plans.
5. Transportation and Parking Plan. A complete plan shall be submitted
which includes:
a. Proposed sidewalks and trails to provide access to the building,
parking, recreation and service areas within the proposed development
and connection to the City's system of walks and trails
b. Internal roads, if any
c. Driveways
d. Parking, including layout dimensions of spaces and aisles, total parking
by use, and a notation about striping/painting the spaces
e. Off-street loading for business uses
f. A plan for snow storage and removal
g. A plan for maintenance of the facilities
h. A calculation of traffic projections by use with assignments to the
roads, drives and accesses serving the PUD, including existing traffic
volumes for adjacent streets using the most recent counts and/or
based on the uses and trip generation estimates
i. A description of the alternatives and locations considered for access to
the site and the rationale used in selecting the proposed location,
width and design of streets, driveways and accesses.
6. Private Streets. Private streets shall not be approved, nor shall public
improvements be approved for any private right-of-way, unless a waiver
is granted by the City based on the following and other relevant factors:
a. Extension of a public street is not physically feasible as determined by
the city;
b. Severe grades make it infeasible according to the city to construct a
public street to minimum city standards;
c. The city determines that a public road extension would adversely
impact natural amenities; or
Golden Valley City Code Page 9 of 16
§ 11.55
d. There is no feasible present or future means of extending right-of-way
from other directions.
e. If the City determines that there is need for a public street extension,
this provision shall not apply, and the right-of-way for a public street
shall be provided by dedication in the plat.
7. Private Street Design Standards.
a. The street must have adequate width consistent with the
Transportation Plan and must be located and approximately centered
within an easement at least four (4) feet wider than the street.
b. The private street shall be designed to minimize impacts upon
adjoining parcels.
c. The design and construction standards must result in a functionally
sound street in balance with its intended use and setting.
d. The number of lots to share a common private access drive must be
reasonable.
e. Covenants which assign driveway installation and future maintenance
responsibility in a manner acceptable to the City must be submitted
and recorded with the titles or the parcels which are benefited.
f. Common sections of the private street serving three (3) or more
dwellings must be built to a seven-ton design, paved to a width of
twenty (20) feet, utilize a minimum grade, and have a maximum
grade which does not exceed ten percent (10%).
g. The private street must be provided with suitable drainage.
h. Covenants concerning maintenance and use shall be filed against all
benefiting properties.
i. Street addresses or City-approved street name signs, if required, must
be posted at the point where the private street intersects the public
right-of-way.
B. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans. Complete plans for grading,
drainage and erosion control which meet the City's standards shall be
submitted. The plan shall show hard surface calculations by areas - buildings,
private streets, driveways, parking lots, plazas, walks, trails, and all other
impervious surfaces. Hard surface coverage is expected not to exceed the
following standards.
Golden Valley City Code Page 10 of 16
§ 11.55
Uses Maximum Hard Cover Percent
Single Family 38%
Townhouses 40%
Apartments-Condominiums 42%
Institutional Uses 45%
Industrial Uses 70%
Business Uses 80%
Commercial-Retail 90%
Mixed Uses of Housing with Retail, Office or Business 90%
C. Utilities and Service Facilities. The applicant shall provide a plan showing how
the site will be served by utilities.
D. The applicant shall submit a Final Building Code Analysis.
E. Refuse and Garbage. The applicant shall provide a refuse disposal Plan
including provisions for storage and removal on a regular basis. (In
residential developments, all waste/refuse shall be stored inside a principal
structure or a garage until the day of pick-up. In commercial, business and
institutional developments refuse may be stored in a principal building or in
an enclosed screened in area designed of materials to match the principal
building.)
F. Architectural plans. The applicant shall submit architectural plans showing
the floor plan and elevations of all sides of the proposed buildings including
exterior wall finishes proposed for all principal and accessory buildings. Cross
sections may be required.
G. Sign Plan. The applicant shall submit a Sign Plan including the location of
proposed signs, size, materials, color, and lighting. In those instances where
not all signs are known, a sign policy shall be presented to the City for the
City's review consistent with PUD requirements. Sign design, policies, style,
colors, locations, size, height, materials and accompanying landscaping must
be consistent with achieving a high quality development meeting the PUD
intent and purpose provisions.
H. Dwelling Information. The applicant shall submit complete data as to dwelling
unit number, density net and gross, sizes, types, etc.
I. Life-Cycle and Affordable Housing. If the PUD includes "life-cycle" or
affordable housing, the applicant shall provide a narrative describing the
housing, and the guarantees such as covenants to be used to secure such
housing and maintain long term affordability.
J. Population. The applicant shall submit a population component which shall
contain a descriptive statement of the estimated population and population
characteristics.
Golden Valley City Code Page 11 of 16
§ 11.55
K. Employees. If office, commercial, business, service firms or institutional uses
are included in the PUD, the estimated number of employees shall be
included.
L. Final Plat. Unless waived by the City, the applicant shall submit a final plat,
as required by Chapter 12 (Subdivision Regulations) of the City Code. The
title of the plat must include the following ��P.U.D. No. " (The number to
insert will be provided by the City.)
M. Schedule. The applicant shall submit a schedule and proposed staging, if any,
of the development.
N. Narrative. The applicant shall submit a description of the development
especially as it relates to use of PUD provisions and explaining how it meets
the purpose and other PUD provisions including how it will:
1. Encourage, preserve and improve the health, safety and general welfare
of the people of the City by encouraging the use of contemporary land
planning principles.
2. Achieve a high quality of site planning, design, landscaping, and building
materials which are compatible with the existing and planned land uses.
3. Encourage preservation and protection of desirable site characteristics
and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features
including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, water ways, wetlands and
lakes.
4. Encourage construction of affordable housing and a variety of housing
types.
5. Encourage creativity and flexibility in land development.
6. Encourage efficient and effective use of land, open space, streets, utilities
and other public facilities.
7. Allow mixing land uses and assembly and development of land to form
larger parcels.
8. Encourage development in transitional areas which achieve compatibility
with all adjacent and nearby land uses.
9. Achieve development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
10. Achieve development consistent with the City's redevelopment plans and
goals.
Golden Valley City Code Page 12 of 16
§ 11.55
11. Other. The applicant may submit any additional information which may
explain the proposed PUD.
12. City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager or his/her designee
may require more or less information than that listed above.
O. Planning Commission.
1. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold an informal public
hearing. All property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD or
a larger area as determined by the City, shall be given notice of the
meeting.
2. Consistency. The Commission shall review the Final PUD plan for
consistency with the Preliminary PUD Plan as approved by the Council,
and the conditions, if any imposed by the Council, the Intent and Purpose
provisions, all other provisions of the PUD ordinance, and principles and
standards adhered to in the City.
3. Findings. The findings, actions and report of the commission to the
Council may include recommended conditions and modifications to the
Final PUD Plan.
P. City Council.
1. Public Hearing. The City Council shall hold a public hearing. All property
owners within five hundred (500) feet of the PUD or a larger area as
determined by the City, shall be given notice of the meeting.
2. Action. The action of the Council may include plan amendments, approval,
denial, or other action based on findings and deemed appropriate by the
City Council.
Q. Findings. Approval of a Final PUD Plan requires the following findings be
made by the City:
1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific
characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning
and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the
ordinance.
2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable
portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive
environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks,
wetlands and open waters.
3. Efficient. Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use
(which includes preservation) of the land.
Golden Valley City Code Page 13 of 16
§ 11.55
4. Consistency. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with
adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
redevelopment plans and goals.
5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving
the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City.
6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose
provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions.
R. Approval. Approval of a Planned Unit Development shall be by ordinance
requiring an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council.
Subdivision 7. PUD Agreement
Following Council approval of a Final PUD Plan, City staff shall prepare a PUD
agreement which references all the approved plans, specifies permitted uses,
allowable densities, development phasing, required improvements, completion
dates for improvements, the required Letter of Credit and additional requirements
for each PUD, in accordance with the conditions established in the City Council
approval of the Final PUD Plan and PUD ordinance. The PUD agreement shall be
signed by the petitioner within thirty (30) days of the City Council's approval of the
agreement.
Subdivision 8. Building Permit
Following approval of a Final PUD Plan and execution of the PUD agreement, the
City may grant building permits for proposed structures within the approved PUD
area provided the requested permit conforms to the Final PUD Plan, all provisions of
the PUD ordinance, the PUD agreement and all other applicable City Codes.
Subdivision 9. Multiple Parcels
A PUD may be regulated by a single agreement which may include attachments.
One (1) or more of the attachments may cover an individual lot. An applicant
amending an approved PUD must show that the proposed change does not
adversely affect any other property owner, if any, in the PUD, the terms of the PUD
Plan and PUD Agreement, and the Intent and Purpose and other provisions of the
PUD Ordinance. A proposed amendment which does not meet this requirement may
be rejected by the City without review as would otherwise be required by the
ordinance.
Subdivision 10. Amendments
An application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that
required for an initial PUD; however, a minor amendment may be made through
review and approval by a simple majority vote of the City Council with or without
referral to the Planning Commission. To qualify for this review, the minor
amendment shall not:
A. Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of
sensitive site features.
Golden Valley City Code Page 14 of 16
§ 11.55
B. Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning, design,
landscaping or building materials.
C. Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
D. Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more than
five percent (5%).
E. Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than three
percent (3%) or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by
more than five percent (5%).
F. Increase the number of stories of any building.
G. Decrease the amount of open space by more than three percent (3%) or
alter it in such a way as to change its original design or intended function or
use.
H. Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of
the Final PUD Plan.
Subdivision li. Cancellation
A PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an
ordinance rescinding the ordinance approving the PUD.
Subdivision 12. Administration
A. Records. The Planning Department shall maintain a record of all Planned Unit
Developments approved by the City Council including information on the use,
location, conditions imposed, time limits, review dates, and such other
information as may be appropriate. Each approved PUD shall be clearly noted
on the Zoning Map.
B. Certification of Plans. The City may require that PUD plans be certified at the
time of submittal and/or upon completion of construction.
C. Time Limits. No application which was denied shall be re-submitted for a
period of six (6) months from the date of said denial.
D. Letter of Credit. To Assure Conformance to the Final PUD Plan and
Agreement the City may require the applicant to post a Letter of Credit in a
form approved by the City, guaranteeing the faithful performance of certain
work or matters covered in the agreement and in a sum equal to one
hundred fifty percent (150%) the total cost of all such items as determined
by the Physical Development Department. The Letter of Credit or other
surety may be reduced when specific parts or items are completed and upon
recommendation of the Physical Development Department.
Golden Valley City Code Page 15 of 16
§ 11.55
E. Effect on Conveyed Property. In the event any real property in the approved
PUD Agreement is conveyed in total, or in part, the buyers thereof shall be
bound by the provisions of the approved Final PUD Plan constituting a part
thereof; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed to create
non-conforming lots, building sites, buildings or uses by virtue of any such
conveyance of a lot, building site, building or part of the development
created pursuant to and in conformance with the approved PUD.
Source: Ordinance No. 318, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 12-31-04
Golden Valley City Code Page 16 of 16