The URL can be used to link to this page

08-25-2015 AUGUST SEPTEMBER MEMBERS S M T W T F S S M T W T F S �lCNEIL �-IUNKE 1 1 2 3 4 5 �/NEWHOUSE �Jf'AIT � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 f ARDEN ,�W LLACE-JACKSON 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 {�KERSSEN �DERSON 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 30 31 AGENDA ZONING & PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, August 25, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS ----------------------------------------------------- ITEM: Approve and sign minutes of the July 28, 2015, regular meeting. ^ COMMISSION ACTION: / / / / CASE NO. ZN15-7 REZONE FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY TO SINGLE AND TWO-FAMILY Public Public hearing to consider rezoning from R-2 and R-3, 600 to 645 10th Avenue Hearing South to R-1-A COMMISSION ACTION: / / / / CASE NO. ZN15-8 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Public Public hearing to consider a comprehensive plan amendment from Medium Hearing Density Residential to Low Density Residential COMMISSION ACTION: / / / / ^ ADJOURNMENT ��-�� csf la „._<z —� ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 28, 2015 A regular meeting of the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 28, 2015, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Hopkins City Hall. Present were Commission Members Brian Hunke, Gary Newhouse, Scott Kerssen, Mike Tait, Emily Wallace-Jackson, Matt McNeil and James Warden. Also present was staff inember Nancy Anderson. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Kerssen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Tait moved and Mr. Hunke seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the June 30, 2015, regular meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. ITEM: BLAKE ROAD LISC REPORT � Meg Beekman updated the Commission on the changes to the Blake Station since the report was completed. Gretchen Nichols of LISC appeared before the Commission. Ms. Nichols reviewed the process of the study. Barbara Raye, the facilitator of the workshops, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Raye discussed the process and the evaluation responses from participants. Ann Beuch from the Blake Road Corridor Collaborative (BRCC) appeared before the Commission. Ms. Beuch talked about the engagement process to encourage attendance at the workshops and some of the key points that the community discussed during the process. ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT—FAST FOOD Ms. Anderson reviewed the proposed new Taco Bell restaurant. Barb Schneider, representing Taco Bell, and Dean Madson, the architect, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Schneider and Mr. Madson reviewed the proposed Taco Bell restaurant with the Commission. The public hearing was opened at 7:40 p.m. No one appeared at the public hearing. Mr. Warden moved and Mr. Newhouse seconded a motion to close the public hearing. The motion was approved unanimously. The public hearing was closed at 7:41 p.m. Mr. McNeil moved and Mr. Hunke seconded a motion to adopt Resolution RZ15-14, recommending a conditional use permit for a fast food restaurant at 919 Cambridge Street. The motion was approved unanimously. �� .�, ��;�, � � , MINUTES OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING MEETING, July 28, 2015 Page 2 ITEM: SITE PLAN APPROVAL—TACO BELL � Ms. Anderson reviewed the proposed new Taco Bell restaurant. Barb Schneider, representing Taco Bell, and Dean Madson, the architect, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Schneider reviewed the site plan with the Commission. Ms. Schneider stated that they modeled the flow of the site from the Golden Valley restaurant, and at that location they get small service vehicles and they expect these vehicles at this location. Mr. Madson reviewed the proposed Taco Bell restaurant exteriors with the Commission. The public hearing was opened at 7:42 p.m. No one appeared at the public hearing. Mr. Tait moved and Mr. McNeil seconded a motion to close the public hearing. The motion was approved unanimously. The public hearing was closed at 7:43 p.m. Mr. Tait moved and Mr. McNeil seconded a motion to adopt Resolution RZ15-15, recommending approval of a site plan to construct a new Taco Bell at 919 Cambridge Street. The motion was approved unanimously. ADJOURN Mr. McNeil moved and Mr. Tait seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. MEMBERS � ATTEST: Scott Kerssen, Chair � --� August 17, 2015 _ Planning Report ZN15-7 REZONING— lOT'' AVENUE SOUTH Proposed Action Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution RZ15-16, recommending approval of Ordinance 15-1098, rezoning lOth Avenue South from R-2 Low Density Multiple Family, and R-3, Medium Densitv Multiple Familv to R-1-A Single and Two- Family Hi Densit� Overview Several years ago the staff surveyed the City and identified sites and areas that were zoned multiple family, but had other uses on the sites and areas. The Planning Commission reviewed the various sites and areas and chose to rezone many sites and areas to reflect the current uses on the sites and areas. The subject area was not identified, but should have been. The area on 10`h Avenue South between Sixth and Seventh Streets is currently zoned R-2 and R-3, but consists of single and two-family homes. The proposed rezoning will make the � existing homes conforming uses. R-2 zoning allows two-family dwellings, two to four family dwellings and townhouses. The R-3 zoning permits two to four family dwellings, townhouses, and multiple dwellings. Primary Issues to Consider • What is the Comprehensive Plan designation? • What does the R-1-A district zoning allow? • Should the site be rezoned from R-2 and R-3 to R-1-A? Suqnortin�Documents • Analysis of Issues � Resolution RZ15-16 • Ordinance 15-1098 .n ;•� � �. � �i t �.��i Nancy; . Anderson, AICP City Pl er Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N Source: � Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: ZN 15-7 Page 2 -� Primarv Issues to Consider • What is the Comprehensive Plan designation? The Comprehensive Plan has designated the site as Medium Density Residential. With this rezoning the Comprehensive Plan will have to be amended to Low Density Residential. • What does the R-1-A district zoning allow? R-I-A zoning allows single and two-family homes. Single and two-family homes are currently on the lots. With the rezoning the homes in this area will become conforming uses. • Should the site be rezoned from R-2 and R-3 to R-1-A? Several years ago we changed many sites that had a multiple family zoning to reflect the actual uses on the sites and also to reduce the scattered multiple family sites within the City. This site was apparently missed. The R-2 and R-3 zoning also deters residents from making improvements to their homes because if a resident in this area wanted to add an addition, they would have to comply with the larger setbacks required for multiple family zoning. The resident would probably have to ask for a variance. � Alternatives 1. Recommend approval of the rezoning. By recommending approval of the rezoning, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval. 2. Recommend denial of the rezoning. By recommending denial of the rezoning, the City Council will consider a recommendation of denial. If the Planning Commission considers this alternative, findings will have to be identified that support this alternative. 3. Continue for further information. If the Planning Commission indicates that further information is needed, the item should be continued. --� � � City of Hopkins Zoning Map T�—:-----; _. I �.' T,-�_ ' ' ..� ` ' I � V R-1-D '�-�` \ - ; J �� ' 1��.- ' L ' _ . :__ -- � N �` ��_-' �- , � � R-1-D I�R�. [1� � , - R R.4 � _ ,�� ,�'i �� R l i�-- �p777�� '�J�S---- 7 �� R-2; R-4�� NS i --- 1 � S'Ifli i'i(��Jl��'� ��o � — �� „ 11 ��' R� . �� F� � R_,A �'� I-Z ' � � �� '� " t . �� R Pu� i-2 BP�; �� BP 7, ,,��;nr �!IILTJ �� l� � ___ ./ _�,�� -� ��1 , ,'�'''"'�'�'�� t� INS �� ilf_ R�5 �� 1��I� , � 1-2 '"�� __- �� _� � i'�' �- � B f ��f L w � j�.��.1=—� ZONING DISTRICTS , �BP J�� a►� I��II`� R-1-A Sin le and Two Famil Hi he Densit ��!Y�L17� , 0 9 Y 9 Y � � � — j-, �� --i � R-1-B Single Family High Densiry � � R-1-C Single Family Medium Density Closed Landfill R stricte • '[-1 �R-1-D Single Family Low Density � �R-1-E Single Family Low Density -- '— O R-2 Low Density Multiple Family R� �R-3 Medium Density Multiple Family (///�� 'I - � R-4 Medium High Density Mulliple Family �� r�.avUD I�� --- � '�+�,� R.IPUD I � � -� � - �� --��- �R-5 High Density MWtiple Family �R-6 Medium Density Multiple Family �B-1 Limited Buisness -B-2 Central Business -B-3 General Business - B-4 Neigborhood Business �Business Park �Institutional � I-1 Industrial - I-2 General Industrial `� �Mixed Use � Closed Landfill Restricted(CLR) � � = ■■ � �� _ ■ � �� C� Ci� �� ty,. . i� �� 11111. .� �� _ __ � - � � � �� _ � ' ' � � �� ■ � - { i �� C �� - ; ; � �� ■ _ .� ; � �� _�..r C �� , ::: -. � �� . � �� . CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota � RESOLUTION NO: RZ15-16 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REZONING FROM R-2 and R-3 to R-1-A WHEREAS, an application for Zoning Amendment ZN15-7 has been initiated by the City of Hopkins; WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for zoning amendment was initiated by the City of Hopkins; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission published notice, held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on August 25, 2015: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; 4. A legal description of the property is as follows: Lots 1-12 Block 58 West Minneapolis �� Lots 13-24 Block 59 West Minneapolis NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Zoning Amendment ZN15-7 is hereby recommended for approval based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. That with this rezoning the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning will be consistent. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Zoning Amendment ZN15-7 is hereby recommended for approval based on the following conditions: 1. That the Metropolitan Council approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Adopted this 25th day of August 2015. ATTEST: Scott Kerssen, Chair � CITY OF HOPKINS ^ Hennepin County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 15-1098 AN ORDINANCE REZONING lOT'-' AVENUE SOUTH FROM R-2, LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY, AND R-3, MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY, TO R-1-A, SINGLE AND TWO-FAMILY HIGH DENSITY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: That the present zoning classification of R-2, Low Density Multiple Family, and R-3, Medium Density Multiple Family, upon the following described premises is hereby repealed, and in lieu thereof, the said premises are hereby zoned as R-1-A Single and Two Family High Density. The legal description of the property to be rezoned is as follows: Lots 1-12 Block 58 West Minneapolis Lots 13-24 Block 59 West Minneapolis � First Reading: September l, 2015 Second Reading: September 15, 2015 Date of Publication: September 24, 2015 Date Ordinance Takes Effect: September 24, 2015 Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: Amy Domeier, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Signature Date --� � �� N � ' �r ♦ � August 17, 2015 Planning Report ZN 15-8 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT— lOT'' AVENUE SOUTH Proposed Action Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution RZ15-17, recommending approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment from Medium Densitv Residential to Low Density Residential. Overview Several years ago the staff went through the City and identified sites and areas that were zoned multiple family and possibly guided multiple family residential,but have other uses on the sites and areas. The Planning Commission reviewed the various sites and areas and chose to rezone many sites and areas to reflect the uses on the sites and areas. The subject area was not identified, but should have been. The area on 10`�' Avenue South between Sixth and Seventh Streets is currently zoned R-2 and R-3, but consists of single and two-family homes. � The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment will reflect what exists in the area. Primarv Issues to Consider • How has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? • What is the difference between the Medium Density and Low Density Residential designation? SuAporting Documents • Analysis of Issues • Comprehensive Plan • Resolution RZ15-17 � ' � ° ��+ �- �.� Nancy S: Anderson, AICP City Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N Source: ^ Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: ZN 15-8 Page 2 Primary Issues to Consider. `� • How has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? The Comprehensive Plan has designated the area as Medium Density Residential. With the proposed zoning change, the zoning and the Comprehensive Plan designation will be consistent. • What is the difference between the Medium Density and Low Density Residential designation? Medium Density residential has a density of 8-16 units per acre. An example would be townhomes. Low density residential has a density of 1-7 units per acre, which is a single and two-family density. Alternatives. 1. Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. By recommending approval, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval. 2. Recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. By recommending denial, the City Council will consider a recommendation of denial. If the zoning is �"'' changed and the Comprehensive Plan amendment is not approved, the zoning and Comprehensive Plan will not be consistent. 3. Continue for further information. If the Planning Commission indicates that further information is needed, the item should be continued. � f � CITY OF HOPHINS Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO: RZ15-17 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSNE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR l OTH AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, an application for Zoning Amendment ZN15-8 has been initiated by the City of Hopkins; WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment was initiated by the City of Hopkins; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed and published notice, held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on August 25, 2015: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; � 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and 4. A legal description of the subject property is as follows: Lots 1-12 Block 58 West Minneapolis Lots 13-24 Block 59 West Minneapolis NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment ZN 15-8 is hereby recommended for approval based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. That the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan will make the zoning and the land use plan consistent. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment ZN15-8 is hereby recommended for approval based on the following conditions: 1. That the Metropolitan Council approves the proposed amendment. 2. That the subject properties are rezoned. Adopted this 25th day of August 2015 --� Scott Kerssen, chair ti City of Hopkins Comp�ehensive Plan --� � �-___ - - � a_.�.. I� N kl:-- � � � -- _.� ;��'<IL= i F=�:1�� _:��1i ��L11J� �i.� v,i..r o�ep.a. � -� R r 6 ,I� ! � � r � t _ � ' ' �� _ � �i - y■ °�� +4 � ,/y 11011 f ;,,� �,: �[1 �..� 1. L-{�� "- I � '�� '/ T � � J � // -� I , '� ._I_��_ �� . �� - ��u , _�,: - _ �� ;�� r � � �� , � ,�, � � �� q�� , -�, � . _ ��,; �� l�� BP t,�� r_i BP � yl .� �j Q �� I .. � /a 91ITN - . . ;�'��@:��i�il rti'��,P�,��,�� (i��r�- �� (.h�� ,��_<< �� `� _ ��` �.�..w �� { � �.�. , �� ' � . �� - . � . �� ., � ! �� , ,� � -� _-- . _ - - � �- , � � I av i I ��(�i� � �� %' , e._,:�,-.�..�. _ Land Use Catagories 1 / � � � �� €�2�� I L--� LDR � - - � MDR \ l� ,r = .._, !�j�� } 1-1 5�� HDR �._ ��I ---� � - COMMERICAL ,��.�, � � - -'` f ��1 �_J MIXED USE _�� I � ' ��I iaua + - INDUSTRIAL _ "__ � ;- --I i`��J / r ; i ' I I BUSINESS PARK ��- -- �� _ _- - � ' � � - INSTITUTIONAL �' OPEN SPACE ; PRIVATE OPEN SPACE ._ ____ - PARK �.�. CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED • n�n�� , .��::_�..� �: .,: : . . . � � � � . 6.: . ,��.��:'.....a�:.,, . ..- " ,"��"' ` . Y yv�7:'�`�,,('-+N . " ' .. . 'F''.'1l3.�11'�Sl.i��t� .. � I ■ 1 .' ' ","� / - "'�„ • . �• - �� ... "' �• . .I .""�"" u � u I�"'."'■ '"�:. f�� — _—_ • �- �'. �t"t„" -.- -- - -- ��` rr �/r rr rr .J� J��` C� C C � •i�� :�� ' ...r 7... ...r *... . d�'-'S" � .i�:.r �"'�' �� •� , �'1 �.: ,. �� _� ��' �� •�1�� _' �� .�� . . - %��t ��' �� 14,' J��L CC � . a��r ��.- �� 111E� EIII� *•� '. _ - -- ; �� : .� �� - - - --- ---- -- - : :��i � = J� 1� � = ...�%: r� =� ,'-.�� r... � . � .; ., �, - _ _ _ 3i C"� ;IIIL , � ... �� . . �