CR 91-22 Review Multiple Family Zoned Parcels` \ T Y °
G T
~.,,
h °i
January 28, 1991 °p K~`' Council Report 91-22
REVIEW OF MULTIPLE FAMILY ZONED/DESIGNATED PARCELS
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends approval of the following motion: Move that the
Zonin and Plannin Commission stud various residential sites
desi noted for develo ment or redevelo ment to multi 1e famil and to
provide recommendations to the Cit Council.
overview.
Two recent proposals for multiple family housing in Hopkins, one
development on the Pines and a second on Hiawatha, has renewed the
discussion of the amount of multiple family dwellings in Hopkins. The
Housing Study that was completed last spring recommended the
following: "in light of the findings of the Housing Study, the City
Council should review the policies established in the Comprehensive
Plan to determine whether the data presented in the Housing Study
supports the previous policies which were established."
The staff is recommending that the Planning Commission and the City
Council become proactive in reviewing the appropriateness of the
multiple family sites designated on the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance. This is being recommended so that in the future when there
is a proposal for development on sites that have been designated in
the land use plan or zoned as multiple family residential, the
Planning Commission and City Council will have had an opportunity to
review and affirm the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance or make
changes as deemed appropriate.
Primar Issues to Consider.
o What are the vacant sites left for development of multiple
housing?
o What are proposed sites for redevelopment to multiple housing?
o What are the sites designated for multiple family housing in
the land use plan that are currently zoned and used for
another use?
Supporting Documents.
o Land Use Plan
o Map of Sites
o Alternatives
j~,l ~ ;, ~ ~I ~`'`'
Nyancy An erson
Plann r
. CR: 91-22
Page 2
o What are the vacant sites left for development to multiple housing?
There are three vacant large parcels of land that are in the land use
plan and zoned as multiple family. The three sites are as follows:
- Steiner Property 62
- Minneapolis Floral site 280
- Property north of St. Therese 245
Total units 587
•
o What are the proposed sites for redevelopment to multiple family?
There are three sites that are currently zoned multiple family that
have the potential to be redeveloped to multiple family. The
following are the three sites:
units removed
possible units
100
46
32
Pines
South of Mainstreet
North of Mainstreet
Total redevelopment
178
176
238
450
864
o What are the sites designated for multiple family in the land use
plan that are currently zoned and used for another use?
There are two parcels in the Comprehensive Plan that are designated
for multiple family but currently used as industrial. The two sites
are the following:
- The site that is currently used by Christian
Salvesen. This site is currently zoned I-2,
General Industrial.
- The south part of the Hennepin County site. This
site is currently zoned I-1, Industrial.
•
The site that Christian Salvesen is located on is designated as high
density multiple family. Based upon this designation approximately
400-600 units could be constructed on this site.
The Hennepin County site is designated as medium density multiple
family. Approximately 140-190 units could be constructed on this
site.
possible
units added
CR: 91-22
Page 3
A total of 2,301 additional multiple family units could be constructed
in the City. This number is only an approximate figure. The range
given with the Christian Salvesen and the County site will depend on
many factors such as zoning, the developer, PUD development etc. The
numbers given for the other six sites are approximately the maximum
number that could be constructed on the site.
The fact is that over 2000 additional multiple family units could be
constructed in the City in the future under the present zoning and
land use plan. Is this the direction that Hopkins should be going?
The staff is recommending that the aforementioned sites be reviewed in
light of the findings of the Housing Study such that the City may
confirm the policies established in the Comprehensive Plan or to
change them.
Alternatives.
1. Direct the Zoning and Planning Commission to study the
multiple family sites as outlined in the report above, and
make recommendations to the City Council.
2. Do nothing. By not doing anything the land use plan and
zoning will not by reviewed in light of the Housing Study's
recommendation.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council
indicates that further information is needed, the item should
be continued.
T
.4 `_ l
~--
0
FIGURE 3
• l~
t
1
I
J I~~~ II ~J_c
~~~
li'
OAK RIDGE
GOLF COURSE L w o ~ ~
L~ , ~ ~ HDR 1 ,
c I ~ ~ _ r___ -° r •9 . / ~ HDR I ,~
_~~~ -~----5 H~^JLJ _.~~3,~\' ~ ~ {`MDR -~ ~ \ ~J
- n I 'aII II~' ~\._~~r ~~~p '~~ _P_J ~`J, HDR\~~ `.
n ~ ~ R 1 C ~. ~
nn k'~'
`1 ~~~J ~~ ~ F ~.• f ~ ~ Jai .~ ~ ~
I P I ~ I 6 I~ ~ HDRII I ~~ ,_ I
J~ r~ I~ D' ~ i ~! i C ~s~a~-~e-
IY
c M ~ ~ c: 1 `~~„ i~ ~y ., ~ ` ~~.~-or-~~ g~ MEADOWI ~
MDR] ~ ~ \i~ c..,~-~'! ~ ~NI @~;~OLuJ~~ ~a
c ~ ~ P - c ~ ~/ , - ~ ~ y I ~I ~ LDR BROOK ~~ N
r ~v :y.~ lI I ~~~~~~i GOLF
S ,I S ~ ; J~~_L_Jl„~~ ~ COURSE L'
--~~ .~Ir~ _~ f / STATION ~,~ =-'r~l~= =~ _~_~ti-,-~r,sr J~~'J__ f'~~~~jN
RcErsra~-ao ~. ~-~~ ~ -
-~` ~ I MDR1 j IZ LLDRJ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
~ ~ , _ ~ >~ ~ l3: ~MDRJ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
I - `~'~l~ / gp i1C ~ B~1 ~ rHDR~ HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
- l., P Jl.~..~ ~ ~ I ;~ r C ~ COMMERCIAL
~f~~~~l ~ I` DR f ~ ~ ~~ ~ L_.J
~ ~ I~` r,~ T 6 a, ,~ d~ ~ `BP J BUSINESS PARK
~~~„~' ~~~1 s` r~-l ~_I ~' ` I J INDUSTRIAL
P II ~i~~•~,.~, I \ - - ~ e c 1 ~ ` P J PARK
'-J`" ~ . ~ ~ P I`~11H~` i I LOSJ OPEN SPACE
~"~~ ~~ oN r-1
{{~, oa \~II ~ (' z `, S J SCHOOL
iDR~---~ MDF~"~~ ~~~~_~~I'p ~Ch J CHURCH
III I ~,, I~ ~?~ ; PuBLIc
(( MINNETONKA ~j N
0 600' 1200' 2400'
Citq Of
HOPKINS
~omprehensi~e
plan
~~~~~~~~ LAND USE PLAN
Zs
:~
THE CITY OF
"'""E`°"KA HOPKINS ,MINNESOTA
)J B M R R
/'
~~ °'\•`~•' j _ NENNEPIN COUNTY
~~. I SCALE
I • ~ • B00' 0 B00 1800
~ ' r--~_ \
I I ~9~~c.eR< 1~ s
S I ~~1
~~~
I
1
I ~ ,
' ~ I_
f I r
n MINNETONKA ~ ~ L
4 RL"- LL~~
I U .,...E ~
;, o
• n0 y • ,~ I _ CN.Wi S
-7 M ~II~ YI .~~ 7 (e yw~~yll ^ ` i~
~~~~. Boa ~e~ t• ~~'~ ~~~~-~~
~ \~~ ~ ~' ~+ o yrul.. I
1 + c
--J ~ I .7~~ ~a ~ ~ ~ m a I N
~ ~n~--~ nn nnn~ n {~ .16) F y~ J I ~I
:.~- ~I LII ~I...~I~I III ,1 III II II ,~~~I ~~I$ ~ ~ '.=~I _.~~ a S~. ~,~. r L ~-,nn-~~~~///
~~ // ULJ 8 ` tl
,` n II el._JU~UL.J ~ Y InpLJUL-JUC- `~ ~.,' ~ _~ -nV~ ~ ,J~ a
• t ~ ~~ m
,1 ~ ~ _~ ~= 0 ~ooo~~oaag I
4 ~ ~ ~ '~
~ _ _ _ c.yl. v... '•'e z.• ~I .c ~ ~ s la ~' .a~ ~~~ ~ s~~~~~1 I
~~ ~ ~~~ ~ r
~.~~"~, , . -~~ ~r,„~r-~n~' 11 Win-,-- .,, ...
I
l~T ~'~~
~ ;:{ct i i
I f
I ~ R R
~ B ~e
. ~~ s 1 STEINER PROPERTY
~~~'• C 2 MINNEPOLIS FLORAL
" ~ P1 ~1 Q~~~~a~ ~ a~ 3 NORTH OF ST. THERESE
~ L~1~LJ 4 PINES
f ,r
' R .,~,., , `~\; ~~-`~ 5 NORTH OF MAINSTRE.ET
.~ ~ 6 SOUTH OF MAINSTREET
~,~ 7 CHRISTAN SALVENSON
~ R,~ "'' 8 HENNEPIN COUNTY SITE
»~' ~ _
I _ W
NINlIET°NKA •~~.
... lLL . :,...
~~^~ I \
. ~, I
.~ A B C D