HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-03 PC Packet. .,, %
h
MOUNDS VIEW
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
August 3, 2022 — 6:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Special Order of Business
A. (none)
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues
Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and
address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. Long Lake Cove (discussion)
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Yard Homes (discussion)
B. Multi -Family Residential Zoning (discussion)
7. Approval of Minutes: April 20, 2022
8. Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity
B. Staff Updates
C. Council Updates
D. Planning Commissioner Reports
9. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, August 17, 2022
B. Wednesday, September 7, 2022
10. Adjournment
MouNis lViEv
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To:
From:
Item Title/Subject:
Item No:
Meeting Date:
Type of Business
Planning Case
Planning Commission
Jon Sevald, Community Development Director
Long Lake Cove (update & discussion)
05A
August 3, 2022
Planning Case
M U 2022-002
Introduction:
A plat application has been submitted for Long Lake Cove; 7700 Long Lake Road (NW corner of
Long Lake Road & County Road I), to include eight townhome units (two 2-unit buildings, and
one 4-unit building). A Sketch Plan (7 units) was reviewed by the City Council at its March 7,
2022 Work Session. The Council's consensus was to proceed with the development
application, and to amend the City Code as necessary to maximize the number of units that
could fit on the lot.
The plans are not ready for action by the Planning Commission. However, since the
Commission is meeting anyway, this is an opportunity to provide preliminary
comments/recommendations for the Developer's benefit.
Discussion:
The project will require:
1. Zoning Map amendment, from R-1 Single Family Residential, to PUD Planned Unit
Development.'
2. Comprehensive Plan amendment; (1) (Figure 2-2 Future Land Use), from Single -Family
Detached, to Single -Family Attached; and, (2) amendment to change the density of Single
Family Attached from 1-5 units per acre, to 1- units per acre. 2 3 4
Question:
If Single -Family Detached is guided for 1-5 units p/acre, and Multi -Family
is guided for 15-50 units p/acre, then should Single -Family Attached be
guided for 1-15 units p/acre (instead of 1-5 units p/acre)? Examples
of Single -Family Attached include twin -homes and attached townhomes.
3. City Code amendment, reducing the minimum Residential PUD project size from 3-acres,'
to -acres (project is 1-acre).
Question: At the time PUD's were allowed (1980's), the intent was that they be large
projects. As the City became more built -out, smaller PUD's have been
1 Mounds View City Code §158.020(B)2; "No subdivision shall be approved unless, and until the property has been
rezoned in accordance with the proposed use thereof."
2 Mounds View City Code §160.004 (Relation to Comprehensive Municipal Plan)
3 Mounds View City Code §158.040 (Conformance with Comprehensive Plan).
4 Mounds View City Code §160.316(B) (General Requirements and Standards; Comprehensive Plan consistency)
5 Mounds View City Code §160.317(A)(2) (Minimum project size)
i rie IVIODUUS view vision
A Thriving Desirable Community
Item 05A
Page 2 of 2
proposed. Should the minimum Residential PUD Project size be
reduced from 3-acres to 1-acre, or 0-acres?
4. Planned Unit Development, and Development Review
Question:
The application does not include any architectural or landscaping plans
(required for Development Review). Are there any design
expectations?
5. Preliminary/Final Plat, and Stormwater Management permit
Question:
The Developer's intent is to maximize the number of units that will fit on
the property (8). This limits the amount of land left over for usable yard
area. Much of the yard will be used as stormwater infiltration basins. Is
this supported (above ground), or should stormwater be
underground (chambers)?
Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal:
Continue BR&E program, maximize utilization of development space and current list of available
sites, encourage land owners to maintain their properties, & consider residential redevelopment.
Financial Impact:
N/A
Recommendation:
No formal action is required. The Planning Commission should discuss "questions" above, and
provide comments.
Respectfully,
4.Natv
Jon Sevald, AICP
Community Development Director
ATTACHED:
Aerial Photo
Survey, April 10, 2022
Preliminary Plat, June 30, 2022
Paving and Dimension Plan, June 16, 2022
Grading & Erosion Control Plan, June 16, 2022
The Mounds View Vision
A Thriving Desirable Community
7700 Long Lake Road
7/29/2022, 9:56:07 AM
Override 1
Streets
Interstate
US or State Highway
Connector (Ramp)
County Road
Local Road
Privately Maintained Public Access Road
Alleyway
Personal Property
Tax Parcels
L.._a Cities
4. County Offices
NWI Wetlands
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Riverine
0
1:1,200
75 150
300 ft
1
0 20 40
80 m
Ramsey County
Ramsey County MN
Tag Species Status Cond
1 Oak, red High Value Fair
2 Spruce, blue High Value Good
3 Oak, red Specimen Good
4 Oak, red Specimen Fair
5 Oak, red Specimen Fair
6 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
7 Oak, red Poor
8 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
9 Oak, red Specimen Fair
10 Oak, red Poor
11 Elm, siberian Specimen Fair
12 Elm, siberian Fair
13 Elm, siberian Fair
14 Ash, green Fair
15 Ash, green Fair
16 Elm, siberian Fair
17 Elm, Siberian Poor
18 Elm, Siberian Poor
19 Elm, Siberian Poor
20 Elm, siberian Fair
21 Elm, siberian Fair
22 Elm, siberian Fair
23 Elm, siberian Fair
24 Elm, siberian Fair
25 Elm, siberian Fair
26 Elm, siberian Specimen Fair
27 Elm, siberian Fair
28 Elm, siberian Fair
29 Elm, siberian Fair
30 Elm, siberian Fair
31 Elm, siberian Fair
32 Elm, siberian Fair
33 Oak, red Specimen Poor
34 Elm, siberian Fair
35 Elm, siberian Fair
36 Oak, bur High Value Fair
37 Elm, siberian Fair
38 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
39 Oak, red Specimen Fair
40 Elm, siberian Fair
41 Oak, red Specimen Fair
42 Oak, red Specimen Fair
43 Oak, red Specimen Fair
44 Oak, red Specimen Fair
45 Oak, bur High Value Fair
46 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
47 Oak, bur High Value Fair
48 Oak, red Specimen Fair
49 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
50 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
51 Oak, red Specimen Fair
52 Oak, bur High Value Fair
53 Oak, red High Value Fair
54 Oak, red Specimen Fair
55 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
56 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
57 Ash, green Fair
58 Oak, red Specimen Fair
59 Oak, red High Value Fair
60 Oak, red Specimen Fair
61 Oak, red High Value Good
62 Oak, red High Value Fair
63 Elm, siberian Fair
64 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
65 Oak, red Specimen Fair
66 Oak, red Specimen Good
67 Oak, red Specimen Good
68 Elm, siberian Fair
69 Pine, white High Value Fair
70 Pine, red High Value Fair
71 Pine, red High Value Fair
72 Walnut, black Specimen Fair
73 Pine, red High Value Fair
74 Crabapple High Value Fair
75 Oak, red Specimen Good
76 Oak, red Specimen Fair
77 Oak, red Specimen Fair
78 Oak, red Poor
79 Oak, red Specimen Fair
80 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
81 Oak, bur Specimen Fair
82 Oak, red Specimen Fair
DBH Notes
16
8
20
46 2x 23 23
20
20
50 hazard
41 3x 2014 7
17
27
38
12
18 2x99
10 leans toward house
8 leans toward house
8
19
22
20
20
19
12
8
10
10
36
11
13
10
9
10
10
26 extensive root decay
21
18
14
14
15 untagged
20
12
62 3x 26 2016
26
21
17
14
9
8
20
20
19 2x 127
19
8
16
55 2x 29 26
22
19
8
28
15
40 2x 20 20
16
15
12
19 2x 127
19
22
22
8
9
12
13
23
10
9
24
27
35 2x 18 17
48 2x 28 20, half dead
23
33 2x 21 12
62 6x171211886
21
ostly dead, severe lea
half dead
half dead
Moundsview Tree Preservation Ordinance
160.416 DEFINITIONS.
SIGNIFICANT TREE. Any live healthy high value tree
measuring eight inches in diameter or greater, measured at four and
one-half feet above the ground.
SPECIMEN TREE. Any high value tree over 16 inches in diameter, or any
other species over 30 inches in diameter.
HIGH VALUE TREES. Any tree from the list below:
(1) Birches (River and Paper), Black Walnut, Catalpa, Cherry, All Firs,
Flowering Crabapples and Hawthorns, Hackberry, Hybrid American
Elm, Ironwood, Japanese Tree Lilac, All Lindens, All Maples, All Oaks, Ohio
Buckeye, Pines (except Jack), All Spruce.
A 2X in the notes column denotes a tree with 2-stems with respective
diameters
#11 severe decay, leans towards home, wires
- ou
0
FOUND 1/2 -
INCH IRON
PIPE MARKED
RLS 4741
g04.8
905.1
0108.2
908.7
908.0 -
908.
FOUND 1/2
INCH IRON ;(3)
PIPE MARKED
RLS 4741 Q.
0
O
9109.8-
Xg10.7
FOUND 1/2 X910.2
INCH IPONI
q�00'
X,g08.4
Xg08.3
PIPE Xg10.4
X 910.8
w
O
0
0
•
° d- ' ' Q• 1
c*)
ou
• • , 1a
11
z I - Q•
•
905.
Xg05
X908.3
Xg091.7
X goq.3
X g0q.6
gog.7
X9110.1
0u
• • •60" 'WAT551A N .' : I . .
d . d' . Q
° • Q '•N88°19'S6"E d ..
d • d.26 .53 d• • • ,. • d
•
°° • d • � d � ed y d••
905.5
#24
ou
Xg10.5
X 911.2
X 905.1
X g0q.
ou
X906.4
5' DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT PER PLAT
X 906.3
Xgos.2
X 909.2
Xg08.8
X g0q.5
Xg08.6
xg08.8
#31
g0q.0
#37
9i, 0 0 ¢�
909
v/ / / `i- 9/(irly
---
KENNEL.S
FLOOR=g13.1-�
Xg11.2
60" WATERMAIN
911.2X
X 911.2
#6
#33
X gOq.3
9p96k
It
X g07.1
q01
X"07.9
XF107.2 008---- (232.26 PLAT) o�
N88°13'50' E
232.28 #47
9087)
#
#34
0'
#82
1
-gOg.ITW
X g0q.
#45
GARAGE
FLOOR=q 13.9 -I
X 911.2
9111.1
9%1
R00F=g31.0
EXISTING BUILDING
L/0=911. I
#46
X 909.7
#48
q10-
#44
Xgll.e
Xgll.7
EXISTING BUILDING
" - ROOF=g27.2
X 911.4
X q 11.1
#80
Xgll.l
, J g11.4
dll.4,-p gll5-� d. 9
q10.8 a u 1 -910'9 a, d ds • d • 4. d • A,• e'''A ''*!: A 'RD° I
g0q.q X
X 912.5
Gn Xg12.1
X q 11.q
X 911.1
d» •
A.
•• • • 8, N 8.1.9'•5 �a'E• . ' .. d. ..a . . •' ' d• • •a • . • , • •eQ . d • , • . .. \ • d n
•
d >'d d d >. SAN f1H : .
•
• NVT8�7. , d ' . • •
•d
Akiw
Rehder Forestry Consulting
9/o.
910.4
X91091.2
. •
>44
•d• • d
♦ d
J •• .1 •
ou
ou
0
0u
A..
•
•
•
d •
20
ou
ou
40
0u
, •
0u
NORTH
0u
(BUDE)°
•
ou
ou
ou
X g0q.8
Xgll.3
Xg12.1
XF108.6
Xg09.3
Xgll.q
#74
#77
X 911.3
qll.
q12.0
•Q , A. ^ 0 A.
»a.
ou
90
909.gT W -
908.gBW--
X g0q.q
o0 .
gOq.q
F108.9
g11.6X
quu./gx9�
1 'o
9/2.6T1y
73" 9/i6k
SET P.K.
NAIL
P
EXISTING IMPROVEMENT AREAS:
HOUSE = 1 545
KENNEL = 671
SHED = 84
GAZEBO = 245
CONCRETE = 500
GRAVEL DRIVEWAY =1002
WALLS = 41
-908.8
-g0q.0
X'g0q.2
•
0�
SAN MH
RIM=S 10.0
INV=6S0.G1
-909.6
- 910.0
-910.1
-910.4
v
N00
v
33
LON
AN MH
M=g11.1
=8801.8
'AV a .
' d P •
a-g• 11'34 d• I A' •
Q •��. WATERa"IQW ,
.
•
=911 • jI•
Q•• ' •• •
"RCP•° • '° • •
••>,
•
•
d
a
•
• Y • • • _
> d • • >
ou
(IN SQUARE FEET)
TOTAL IMPROVEMENTS = 4088 SQ.FT.
= 9.2% (% OF PARCEL AREA)
912
L •• d i Al ° .
• , d
•
•
•
Aff
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Title Services as agent for Alliant National Title Services
Company Title Commitment No. 100352.22 dated February
3rd, 2022)
Lot 7, Block 1, BAYPORT ACRES, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
TORRENS PROPERTY
EASEMENT NOTES:
The following easements or encumbrances are as shown on
the Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Report of Title
Order No. 2657217 issued on January 24, 2018.
1. Drainage and Utility Easement as shown on the Record
2. Easement for public use, such as setting of poles,
stringing wires, trimming and removal of trees if
necessary for line clearance and lying underground
conduits. Covers the west 5 feet of the subject
property.
AREA:
TOTAL AREA AS SHOWN = 44,513 SQ.FT.
SURVEY NOTES:
. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE RAMSEY COUNTY
DIFFERENT THAN SHOWN ON THE RECORDED PLAT.
2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER ONE
LOCATES AND AS-BUILTS PLANS PROVIDED BY THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
3. THERE MAY SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS,
ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR LOCATED.
4. DATE OF FIELD SURVEY 3-31-22
111
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED
FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING
DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH
UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED.
THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT
LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT
THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM
THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT
PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKET NUMBER(S)
22 0880 91 9. SOME MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER
UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND TO THE LOCATE REQUEST.
ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY
EXIST.
CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!
Gopher State One Call
TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002
TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166
BENCHMARKS
ELEVATIONS BASED ON GPS DERIVED VALUES FOR NAVD 88.
LEGEND:
• FOUND MONUMENT
MARKED RLS NO. 25718
CABLE TV PEDESTAL
AIR CONDITIONER
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
ELECTRIC METER
ELECTRIC PEDESTAL
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
0 LIGHT POLE
GUY WIRE
-0- POWER POLE
• GAS MANHOLE
GAS METER
▪ TELEPHONE MANHOLE
E TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
• SANITARY CLEANOUT
O SANITARY MANHOLE
or 0 CATCH BASIN
or E STORM DRAIN
FLARED END SECTION
• STORM MANHOLE
AC
IEPI
LIE
UTV
UF
UT
OU
UC
FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION
HYDRANT
CURB STOP
WATER WELL
WATER MANHOLE
WATER METER
POST INDICATOR VALVE
WATER VALVE
BOLLARD
FLAG POLE
MAIL BOX
TRAFFIC SIGN
UNKNOWN MANHOLE
SOIL BORING
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
CONIFEROUS TREE
DECIDUOUS TREE
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UNDERGROUND CABLE TV
UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
OVERHEAD UTILITY
UNDERGROUND GAS
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
WATERMAIN
FENCE
CURB [TYPICAL]
CONCRETE SURFACE
BITUMINOUS SURFACE
CONTACT:
Carson Schifsky
651-260-3248
www.schifskycompanies.com
COUNTY/CITY:
DATE REVISION
4-1 0-22 PRELIMINARY ISSUE
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me, or under my direct supervision, and that I am
a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of
the state of Minnesota.
PROJECT LOCATION:
Co Co
LONG LAKE ROAD
PID#063023440059
Suite #200
1 9 70 Northwestern Ave.
Stillwater, MN 55082
dan@cssurvey
.net
CORNERSTONE
LAND SURVEYING, INC.
FILE NAME
PROJECT NO.
TREES SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY WERE LOCATED BY RHEDER FORESTRY
CERTIFICATE OF
SURVEY
SURVEY NOTES:
1 . BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE RAMSEY COUNTY
COORDINATE SYSTEM NAD 1983. BEARING ARE
DIFFERENT THAN SHOWN ON THE RECORDED PLAT.
2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER ONE
LOCATES AND AS-BUILTS PLANS PROVIDED BY THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
3. THERE MAY SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS,
ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR LOCATED.
4. DATE OF FIELD SURVEY 3-31-22
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED
FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING
DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH
UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED.
THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT
LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT
THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM
THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT
PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKET NUMBER(S)
220880919. SOME MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER
UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND TO THE LOCATE REQUEST.
ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY
EXIST.
CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!
Gopher State One CaII
TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002
TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL AS SHOWN = 44,513 SQ.FT.
PROPOSED LOTS = 8
LOT 1, BLOCK 1 = 2,100 SQ.FT.
LOT 2, BLOCK 1 = 2,100 SQ.FT.
LOT 1, BLOCK 2 = 2,100 SQ.FT.
LOT 2, BLOCK 2 = 2,100 SQ.FT.
LOT 1, BLOCK 3 = 2,008 SQ.FT.
LOT 2, BLOCK 3 = 1,708 SQ.FT.
LOT 3, BLOCK 3 = 1,708 SQ.FT.
LOT 4, BLOCK 3 = 2,008 SQ.FT.
PROPOSED OUTLOT A = 28,681 SQ.FT.
PROPOSED EASEMENT VACATIONS
THE FOLLOWING REQUEST TO VACATE ALL EXISTING PUBLIC
EASEMENT WITH THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION TO CLEAN UP
FUTURE REFERENCES OF THE EASEMENTS ON TITLE
PURPOSES. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO VACATE THE
EASEMENT IS AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THOSE PARTICULAR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS
OVER LOT 7, BLOCK 1, AS DEDICATED ON THE PLAT OF
BAYPORT ACRES, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA ALONG
WITH ANY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER THE WEST 5.00
FEET THEREOF AS RECITED IN LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR
SAID LOT 7.
0
5' DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT PER PLAT
ZONED R-1
(/ 232.26 PLAT)
N88°13'50"E
232.28
- -ROOF=q3 Lo
EXISTING BUILDING
j�
FOUND 1/2 -- /
INCH IRON 1 Vr
PIPE MARKED 1
RLS 4741 �h 0>
ry ov•
^\ I:.
ZONED R-1
/ -s__,
/ /
og
FOUND 1/2 p
INCH IRON Co
PIPE MARKED CY)
RLS 4741 R o
O
,2
I VACATE EXISTING
I DRAINAGE AND
'UTILITY EASEMENTS J
INC BUILDING
ZONED R-2
OU
O
LO
FOUND I/2
INCH IRONI
PIPE
0
4
0
0
OU
O
O
60.00
S89°14'59"
-==--DRAINAGE AND
-2.50
UTILITY EASEMENT
1
60.00
0
0
Lci
N)
S89°14'59"W
O
2
N89°14'59"
60.00
0
0
Iri
0 0
O OU
°V-G
i!
OU
w
o
O
O
0
6d00
OU
S89 59'
0
x
60
S80°
cs
K
KENNEL./
FLOOR=g13.1--
ao\ 2
x
DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENT
N89°14 59"E
60.00
x
x
0
N)
0
x
x
x
ou
\
\\\\ -I j VACATE EXISTING
�1= DRAINAGE AND
j UTILITY EASEMENTS J
OUTLOT A
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND
ACROSS ALL OF OUTLOT A
/ SHED
�
A
GARAGE
FLOOR=q 13.q' I
' FLOOR=q 12.0 j///
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT OVER, UNDER ANp
ACROSS ALL OF OUTLOT Al
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND
ACROS A
N
CS)
\X
61.00
589°14'59"W
1
61.00
S89°14'59"W
2
61.00
S89°14'59"W
Y�3
STING BUILDING 89°14'59"W
ROOF=g27.2
0
1 0
1 1
60" WATERMAIN
2640.44
N88°19'56"E
>
-4- - SOUTH 1/4 CORN I R OF .TION
6, T30, 223, FOUND RAMSEY
COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT
o I
I 1
OU ou
60" WATERM1\IN
15"RCP
232.46
S88° 9'56"W
N89 °14'59 "E
61.00
SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4
OF SECTION 6, T30, R23- -
- ou
>
>
>
COUNTY RD. I
1 1 1
0 20
ou
ou
40
ou
N88°19'56"E
265.53
- »
SAN MH
RIM=c111.8
INV=887.7
(SLUDGE)
1
»
N
O
N
N
O
K
N
N
N
I PROPOSED �---�\ � �
I TRAIL EASEMENT
L NAIL-
ou
ZONED B-4
NORTH
Ou
OU
ou
- ou
EXISTING IMPROVEMENT AREAS:
HOUSE = 1 545
KENNEL = 671
SHED = 84
GAZEBO = 245
CONCRETE = 500
GRAVEL DRIVEWAY =1002
WALLS = 41
ou
(IN SQUARE FEET)
TOTAL IMPROVEMENTS = 4088 SQ.FT.
= 9.2% (% OF PARCEL AREA)
33
v
SAN MH
RIM=0110.0
INV=8010.01
»
v
v
v
N00°45'01 "W
cE
W
V
z
0
J
33
AN MH
IM='R 11.1
I =88018
v
15"RCP >
STS MH
RIM =0112.6
INV=005.55
»
1 1
60" WATEPMAIN
»
0
z
O
fV
-CB
I RIM=0111.8
\ INV=0106.6
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
(The following legal description is as shown on the Pillar
Title Services as agent for Alliant National Title Services
Company Title Commitment No. 100352.22 dated February
3rd, 2022)
Lot 7, Block 1, BAYPORT ACRES, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
TORRENS PROPERTY
EASEMENT NOTES:
The following easements or encumbrances are as shown on
the Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Report of Title
Order No. 2657217 issued on January 24, 2018.
1. Drainage and Utility Easement as shown on the Record
Plat.
2. Easement for public use, such as setting of poles,
stringing wires, trimming and removal of trees if
necessary for line clearance and lying underground
conduits. Covers the west 5 feet of the subject
property.
TYPICAL LOT/BUILDING LAYOUT
REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR SPECIFIC LOT
DETAILS AS LOT DIMENSIONS MAY VARY
5.0'-
o
0
w
z
J
O
J
5.0'
0
-- BUILDING LINE
S89°14'59'W / l
60.00 LOT LINE /
o
i
50.00
�- ' LOT NUMBER -7
/
�- BLOCK NUMBER //
( '
o f
o \\ PROPOSED BUILDING
m \
\
S89°14'59"W
60.00 LOT LINE
-/-Ili
o
o
_
o
Lii
o
CD.
N)
_
U
o 0
oM M
►�1
- ,
I 50.00
IL,0 LOT LINE SETBACK
�
PROPOSED BUILDING
so.0o
o
6
--1.7
0
O
in
1
T
0
BUILDING LINE --
60" WATERMAIN
V 76
SE CORNER OF SECTION
\ /- T30, R23, FOUND RAMSEY
`1 COUNTY MONUMENT
SAN MH
RIM =912.3
INV=889.3 N
INV=? E- W
15"RCP
» -
>
12"CIP
1
or CD
or
!AC
IEPI
60.00
N89°14'59"E
LOT LI
BENCHMARKS
- 5.0' >-
0
- 5.0'
PRIVATE DRIVE
ELEVATIONS BASED ON GPS DERIVED VALUES FOR NAVD 88.
LEGEND:
• FOUND MONUMENT
0 SET 1/2" IRON PIPE
MARKED RLS NO. 25718
ry CABLE TV PEDESTAL
AIR CONDITIONER
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
ELECTRIC METER
ELECTRIC PEDESTAL
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
LIGHT POLE
GUY WIRE
POWER POLE
GAS MANHOLE
GAS METER
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
W TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
co SANITARY CLEANOUT
0 SANITARY MANHOLE
CATCH BASIN
STORM DRAIN
® FLARED END SECTION
O STORM MANHOLE
UE
uiv
OF
UT
ou
Uc
x
0
O
WM
tw
a
O
FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION
HYDRANT
CURB STOP
WATER WELL
WATER MANHOLE
WATER METER
POST INDICATOR VALVE
WATER VALVE
BOLLARD
FLAG POLE
MAIL BOX
TRAFFIC SIGN
UNKNOWN MANHOLE
SOIL BORING
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
CONIFEROUS TREE
DECIDUOUS TREE
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UNDERGROUND CABLE TV
UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
OVERHEAD UTILITY
UNDERGROUND GAS
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
WATERMAIN
FENCE
CURB [TYPICAL]
CONCRETE SURFACE
BITUMINOUS SURFACE
Suite #200
1 970 Northwestern Ave.
Stillwater, MN 55082
Phone 651.275.8969
dan@cssurvey
.net
LONG
LAKE
GROVE
CONTACT:
Carson Schifsky
651-260-3248
www.schifskycompanies.com
COUNTY/CITY:
RA M S EY
CO U NTY
MOUNES N/1EW
REVISIONS:
DATE
4-10-22
6-30-22
REVISION
PRELIMINARY ISSUE
PRELIMINARY PLAT
CERTIFICATION:
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared b
me, or under my direct supervision
a duly Licensed Land Surveyor u
the state of Minnesota.
urmes Registration
Date: 4-10-22
lam
of
mber: 25718
PROJECT LOCATION:
z crn
LONG LAKE ROAD
PID#063023440059
1
CORNERSTONE
LAND SURVEYING, INC.
FILE NAME
PROJECT NO.
ZZSCH22001
PRELIMINARY
PLAT
EXISTING BUILDING
x
0
X
>0
ILJJ
W
O
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING
COUNTY RD.
—»
w
P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C200.dwg
—»
GM
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
V
v
0
LONG LAKE
»
SYMBOL LEGEND
■
O
'a
A
V A
4
d 4
4
4
a
NEW BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT SECTION
SEE DETAIL 1/C500
NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
LONG LAKE ROAD
(MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT)
NEW LIGHT -DUTY
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
SEE DETAIL 2/C500
NEW HEAVY-DUTY
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
SEE DETAIL 3/C500
NEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT
LONG LAKE ROAD
(MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT)
NOTE: THE CONCRETE JOINTS ARE SHOWN ONLY FOR
GENERAL REFERENCE TO SIGNIFY LIGHT -DUTY
CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ACTUAL JOINTS SHALL BE
CONSTRUCTED PER PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.
GENERAL
KEY NOTES
PROPERTY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER WITH CONCRETE APRON,
SEE DETAIL 4/C500
B612 CURB AND GUTTER,
SEE DETAIL 5/C500
SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER,
SEE DETAIL 6/C500
NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
LONG LAKE ROAD
(MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT)
NEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT
LONG LAKE ROAD
(MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT)
0
NORTH
0 10 20
40
z
0
0
L.L
V J
z
0
U
L.L
0
0
z
>-
L.L
z
J
w
0
10922 STONEBRIDGE TRAIL N.
STILLWATER, MN 55082
Q Zci
0 I= 2
Z LJ
I-1-1O�
J o
C7) W �
Z W
O�
�0
J
ai
U
0
0
I hereby certify that this plan,
specifications or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws
of the state of Minnesota.
Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E.
Date:
Lic. No.:
Rev. Date Description
Project #: 12226046
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: TJH
Issue Date: 06.16.22
Sheet Title:
PAVING AND
DIMENSION PLAN
Sheet:
KEY NOTES
GRADING NOTES
SYMBOL LEGEND
EXISTING BUILDING
>
>
12"CIP
>
><
#14
\
1<LLO
w
0
O
O
O
0
0
i
i
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE,
SEE DETAIL 4/C501
SILT FENCE,
SEE DETAIL 5/C501
RIP RAP WIER OVERFLOW,
SEE DETAIL 6/C501
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET,
SEE DETAIL 7/C501
INLET PROTECTION,
SEE DETAIL 8/C501
908.50 910.84 G
PRO'OSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
��GFE=910.84
9�-
2.69%
910.02 TC
909.69 GL
PROPOSED/ BUILDING
FFE-_/
911.67 0
GFE = 910.84 4.45,o/
-7)
908.50 G
6\908.50G 910.84G
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
GFE = 910.84 03`^
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE'-= 911.67
GFE = 910.84
908.50 G
60" WATERMAIN
w
OE
OE
/
909.83 TC
909.50 GL
910.37 TC
910.77 TC
15"RCP
>
OE
P:\Projects\Projects - 2022\12226046 - Mounds View Residential\C. Design\Drawing Files\12226046 C300.dwg
OE
4.59%
3.62%
7
919.44 GL
3 CURB CUT
909. 5 G
EXISTING BUILDING
�910.i7TC
909.84 GL
910.34 B
910.15 B-
� 3.38%
2.95%
910.35 B
911.00 G
1T h.84 G
1. Tree protection consisting of snow fence or safety fence installed at the
drip line shall be in place prior to beginning any grading or demolition
work at the site.
2. All elevations with an asterisk (*) shall be field verified. If elevations
vary significantly, notify the Engineer for further instructions.
3. Grades shown in paved areas represent finish elevation.
4. Restore all disturbed areas with X" of good quality topsoil and seed.
5. All construction shall be performed in accordance with state and local
standard specifications for construction.
910.48 TC/
910.15 GL
911.17 G
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
GFE = 910.84
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
GFE = 910.84
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
GFE = 910.84
PROPOSED BUILDING
FFE = 911.67
3FE = 910.84
910.84 G/
911.00 G
COUNTY RD. I�
OE
SAN MH
RIM=911.8
INV=887.7
(SLUDGE)
OE
>
910.17 TC
OE
>
911.17 G
909.44 B
100-YR HWL = 908.
CB
RIM=910.8
INV=907.1
>�
i
7
�1x
/
/
/
/
909.50 C
909.00 G L*
909.40 C
909.71 C
EOF
909.25 GL*
909.61 C
>
-912-
v
SAN MH
RIM=910.0
INV=890.9
v
v
15"RCP
\
60" WATERMAIN
i
60" WATERMAIN
SAN MH
RIM=912.3
INV=889.3 N
INV=? E-Wi
/
1-1
-O\
CB
RIM=911.8
INV=906.6
-0
STS MH
RIM=912.6
INV=905.55
OE
950 EXISTING CONTOURS
950 PROPOSED CONTOURS - MAJOR INTERVAL
949 PROPOSED CONTOURS - MINOR INTERVAL
GRADE BREAK LINE
GRADE SLOPE
SILT FENCE
RIP -RAP / ROCK CONST. ENTRANCE
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
INLET PROTECTION
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
950.00 TC
949.50 GL
SPOT ABBREVIATIONS:
TC - TOP OF CURB
GL - GUTTER LINE
B - BITUMINOUS
C - CONCRETE
G - GROUND
EOF - EMERGENCY OVERFLOW
LP - LOW POINT
HP - HIGH POINT
(*) - EXISTING TO BE VERIFIED
1. Owner and Contractor shall obtain MPCA-NPDES permit. Contractor shall be responsible for all fees pertaining to this permit. The SWPPP
shall be kept onsite at all times.
2. Install temporary erosion control measures (inlet protection, silt fence, and rock construction entrances) prior to beginning any excavation or
demolition work at the site.
3. Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan are the absolute minimum. The contractor shall install temporary earth dikes,
sediment traps or basins, additional siltation fencing, and/or disk the soil parallel to the contours as deemed necessary to further control
erosion. All changes shall be recorded in the SWPPP.
4. All construction site entrances shall be surfaced with crushed rock across the entire width of the entrance and from the entrance to a point 50'
into the construction zone.
5. The toe of the silt fence shall be trenched in a minimum of 6". The trench backfill shall be compacted with a vibratory plate compactor.
6. All grading operations shall be conducted in a manner to minimize the potential for site erosion. Sediment control practices must be
established on all down gradient perimeters before any up gradient land disturbing activities begin.
7. All exposed soil areas must be stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion but in no case later than 14 days after the construction
activity in that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased. Temporary stockpiles without significant silt, clay or organic
components (e.g., clean aggregate stockpiles, demolition concrete stockpiles, sand stockpiles) and the constructed base components of roads,
parking lots and similar surfaces are exempt from this requirement.
8. The normal wetted perimeter of any temporary or permanent drainage ditch or swale that drains water from any portion of the construction site,
or diverts water around the site, must be stabilized within 200 lineal feet from the property edge, or from the point of discharge into any surface
water. Stabilization of the last 200 lineal feet must be completed within 24 hours after connecting to a surface water. Stabilization of the
remaining portions of any temporary or permanent ditches or swales must be complete within 14 days after connecting to a surface water and
construction in that portion of the ditch has temporarily or permanently ceased.
9. Pipe outlets must be provided with energy dissipation within 24 hours of connection to surface water.
Z
10. All riprap shall be installed with a filter material or soil separation fabric and comply with the Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard 0
0
0
Specifications.
11. All storm sewers discharging into wetlands or water bodies shall outlet at or below the normal water level of the respective wetland or water
body at an elevation where the downstream slope is 1 percent or flatter. The normal water level shall be the invert elevation of the outlet of the
wetland or water body.
12. All storm sewer catch basins not needed for site drainage during construction shall be covered to prevent runoff from entering the storm sewer
system. Catch basins necessary for site drainage during construction shall be provided with inlet protection.
13. In areas where concentrated flows occur (such as swales and areas in front of storm catch basins and intakes) the erosion control facilities
shall be backed by stabilization structure to protect those facilities from the concentrated flows.
0
Z
14. Inspect the construction site once every seven days during active construction and within 24 hours after a rainfall event greater than 0.5 inches
15. All silt fences must be repaired, replaced, or supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the sediment reaches 1/3 of the height of the
fence. These repairs must be made within 24 hours of discovery, or as soon as field conditions allow access. All repairs shall be recorded in Z
the SWPPP.
16. If sediment escapes the construction site, off -site accumulations of sediment must be removed in a manner and at a frequency sufficient to
minimize off -site impacts.
17. All soils tracked onto pavement shall be removed daily.
18. All infiltration areas must be inspected to ensure that no sediment from ongoing construction activity is reaching the infiltration area and these
areas are protected from compaction due to construction equipment driving across the infiltration area.
in 24 hours. All inspections shall be recorded in the SWPPP.
19. Temporary soil stockpiles must have silt fence or other effective sediment controls, and cannot be placed in surface waters, including
stormwater conveyances such as curb and gutter systems, or conduits and ditches unless there is a bypass in place for the stormwater.
20. Collected sediment, asphalt and concrete millings, floating debris, paper, plastic, fabric, construction and demolition debris and other wastes
must be disposed of properly and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements.
21. Oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary containment, to prevent spills, leaks or other
discharge. Restricted access to storage areas must be provided to prevent vandalism. Storage and disposal of hazardous waste must be in
compliance with MPCA regulations.
22. External washing of trucks and other construction vehicles must be limited to a defined area of the site. Runoff must be contained and waste
properly disposed of. No engine degreasing is allowed onsite.
23. All liquid and solid wastes generated by concrete washout operations must be contained in a leak -proof containment facility or impermeable
liner. A compacted clay liner that does not allow washout liquids to enter ground water is considered an impermeable liner. The liquid and
solid wastes must not contact the ground, and there must not be runoff from the concrete washout operations or areas. Liquid and solid
wastes must be disposed of properly and in compliance with MPCA regulations. A sign must be installed adjacent to each washout facility to
inform concrete equipment operators to utilize the proper facilities.
24. Upon completion of the project and stabilization of all graded areas, all temporary erosion control facilities (silt fences, hay bales, etc.) shall be
removed from the site.
25. All permanent sedimentation basins must be restored to their design condition immediately following
stabilization of the site.
26. Contractor shall submit Notice of Termination for MPCA-NPDES permit within 30 days after
Final Stabilization.
rti
NORTH
0 10 20
40
w
L.L
0
th
0 .%
L
V♦ w
c .g)
J w
0
a)
0
CO
J
N
LP)
0
0
a)
c
0
0
cn
m
0)
c
c
c
Q)
c
0)
c
w
c
0
5)
J
0
0
10922 STONEBRIDGE TRAIL N.
N
0
STILLWATER, MN 55082
gi
U
a)
0
0
I hereby certify that this plan,
specifications or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws
of the state of Minnesota.
Thomas J. Herkenhoff, P.E.
Date:
Lic. No.:
Rev. Date Description
Project #: 12226046
Drawn By: KBK
Checked By: TJH
Issue Date: 06.16.22
Sheet Title:
GRADING AND
EROSION CONTROL
PLAN
Sheet:
Item No: 06A
MouNis lViEv
City of Mounds View Staff Report
Meeting Date: Aug 3, 2022
Type of Business Other
Planning Case N/A
To: Planning Commission
From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: YardHomes (discussion)
Introduction:
YardHomes is a manufacturer of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU), based in New Brighton.
YardHomes requested to provide a presentation to the City Council, who redirected them to the
Planning Commission with the intent of a joint -discussion. The City Council will be attending.
Discussion:
Based on Staff's review of YardHomes' website and its product's relation to the City Code, there
are three applicable types of uses:
Temporary Healthcare Dwelling
In 2016, Minnesota Statutes were amended to allow Temporary Family Healthcare
Dwellings as a permitted use in all cities, unless the city adopted an "opt out" ordinance,
which Mounds View did.1 Temporary dwellings (6-12 months) were to be restricted to a
maximum of 300 sq ft, must be attached to a permanent foundation, must have sewer &
water, and must be occupied by one resident (maximum) who is physically or mentally
impaired. Because of the statutorily 12-month limit, examples of such needs include;
physical rehabilitation and hospice care.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)
The City Code was amended in 2016 to allow ADU's in the R-1 district as a permitted
use if internal to the home,2 and as a conditional use (CUP) if a home addition.3
Detached ADU's are not permitted. The intent was to not look like there are two homes
on one property. The home or the ADU must be owner occupied. The Code
amendment was at the request of a former Planning Commissioner who wished to build
an ADU above a garage (was not built due to expense).
Ai+u-M1M A�rcan FD•wrdrrn!JrxT ilr.�.fi ...4..FV m .
541.0
•
Graphics curtesy of the City of Minneapolis
i Ordinance 921; An Ordinance Opting -out of the Requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.3593 Relating
to Temporary Health Care Dwellings.
2 City Code §160.087(I) (Accessory dwelling unit (internal).
3 City Code §160.088(H) (Accessory dwelling unit (addition).
i rie rviuunus view vision
A Thriving Desirable Communit' •
Item 06A
Page 2 of 3
Tiny House (one house on one lot)
Detached Tiny Homes are an option for affordable housing (similar to manufactured
homes). There are a number of vacant landlocked lots, publicly and privately owned,
which could be developed if the density justified the cost of building streets, sewer, and
water.
Within the R-5 (Mobile Home) district, a new development (plat) may be approved by the
City Council. Each home must be a minimum 320 sq ft in size.4 Each lot must be a
minimum of 45' X 110', with street frontage; 30' front yard setback; 10' setback in-
between homes, and one off-street parking stall.5 A new Manufactured Home Park
requires a minimum of two homes. Although the R-5 district is intended for "mobile"
homes, it is applicable to YardHomes as well.
Affordable Housing:
The Metropolitan Council assigns each community an Allocation of Need for Affordable Housing
to be included in the Comprehensive Plan. After The Villas of Mounds View, 4889 Old Highway
8, is completed (fall 2023), there will still be a need for affordable housing primarily at the <30%
AMI level (AMI = Area Median Income). Generally, these are household incomes of $22,000 -
$36,000. Minimum wage ($10.33 p/hr) income is about $21,000 for a 40 hour/week job). The
median gross rent in Mounds View is $928.6 The Villas planned rent will vary between $590 (1-
bedroom) and $1,636 (3-bedrooms).
Villas of Mounds View
Additional units
required in Mounds
View by 20407
Additional units
required by 2040, after
Villas of Mounds View
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
-
-
< 30% of AMI
3
-
-
27
24
31 % - 50% of AMI
65
43
-
11
0
51%-80%of AMI
-
1
8
21
12
TOTAL
68
44
8
59
36
120
If YardHomes is an affordable option, then a development of tiny homes could be an alternative
to building additional affordable apartments, or an expansion of an existing manufactured home
park, and could satisfy the 2040 Comprehensive Plan housing goals.8
Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal:
Continue BR&E program, maximize utilization of development space and current list of available
sites, encourage land owners to maintain their properties, & consider residential redevelopment.
Financial Impact:
N/A
4 City Code §151.002 (Definitions; Manufactured Home)
5 City Code §160.149 (Mobile Home and Manufactured Home Park Development)
6 US Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey
Mounds View Comprehensive Plan, Table 3-7 (Housing Allocation by Income). In 2019 (after calculations were
made), Boulevard Apartments was completed, including 4 units < 30% AMI, and 56 units < 60% AMI.
$ Mounds View 2040 Comprehensive Plan; Housing Policies; Goal 3: "Support a mix of housing types reflective of
the needs and desires of the community"
i rie IVIODUUS view vision
A Thriving Desirable Community
Item 06A
Page 3 of 3
Recommendation:
Staff requests that the Planning Commission and City Council listen to YardHomes'
presentation, ask questions, and provide Staff direction if any additional research, ordinance
amendments, or outreach (marketing to developers) is necessary. In reference to the
Comprehensive Plan; does this product (YardHomes) satisfy "the needs and desires of the
community'?
Respectfully,
C)re•-iaA9
Jon Sevald, AICP
Community Development Director
ATTACHED
• YardHomes presentation
• Metropolitan Council Requirements for Affordable Housing Handout
The Mounds View Vision
A Thriving Desirable Community
¶rdHomes
320 sf (16'x20') or
384 sf (16'x24')
Structurally -Insulated Panel
walls, floors: modular wall
system allows flexible
placement of windows & doors
Tiny House code allows
optional sleeping loft
Slab foundation ideal
672 sf (24'x28') ADU over 2-car
garage with interior stair
1 or 2 bedroom layouts
Contemporary or traditional
exterior style options available
Features, materials and specifications subject to change.
See www.YardHomesMN.corn for details.
2022 Models
500 — 590 sf
ADA accessible bathroom
Side or end entrance;
optional deck/porches
¶ardHomes
1
rI
s.
Tall ceiling, spacious feel
Optional floorplans: a) 1st
floor bedroom with wall
kitchen / living area or b)
sleeping loft only plus large
galley kitchen, open living
area (shown)
Great cabin model
34'-0
Cottage Series
Generous garage area with lots of
storage
1 and 2 bedroom convertible office
/ guestroom options
Open kitchen / living area plan
stackd-UP
2022 Models
500 sf base model with
ADA accessible bathroom
+2' bedroom, +4' living
area extension options
Spacious vaulted ceiling
Features, materials and specifications subject to change. See www.YardHomesMN.com for details.
Metropolitan Council requirements for Affordable Housing
The Metropolitan Council assigns each community an Allocation of Need for Affordable Housing to be
included I the Comprehensive Plan. After the Villas of Mounds View are constructed, there will still be a
need for affordable housing by 2040.
< 30% of AMI = 24 units
31%-50% of AMI = 0 units
51%-8-% = 12 units
For a total of 36 units.
Minimum wage comes to about $21,000 p/year.
Income
Limits per
Household
Size
1
2
3
4
5
6
30% AMI
$22,050
$25,200
$28,350
$31,470
$33,990
$36,510
50% AMI
$36,750
$42,000
$42,000
$52,450
$56,650
$60,850
60% AMI
$44,100
$50,400
$56,700
$62,940
$67,980
$73,020
A two bedroom apartment at the 31%-50% of AMI is about $1,181 p/month rent or about $14,172 p/year.
A two bedroom apartment at the 51%-60% of AMI is about $1,417 p/month rent or about $17,004 p/year.
If it is recommended that only 30% of a household's gross income be used for housing and a household
of 2 is making $25,200 p/yr then they should only be paying $7,560 p/yr or $630 p/month.
This story is part of CNBC Make It's One -Minute Money Hacks series, which provides easy,
straightforward tips and tricks to help you understand your finances and take control of your
money.
There's been a lot of discussion about affordable housing recently, especially as home prices and
rents hit record levels. Is your current home affordable? Here's how to tell.
The most common rule of thumb to determine how much you can afford to spend on housing is
that it should be no more than 30% of your gross monthly income, which is your total income
before taxes or other deductions are taken out.
For renters, that 30% includes rent and utility costs like heat, water and electricity. If you own your
home, you should include interest, homeowners insurance, property taxes and utilities, in addition
to your mortgage.
That means if you earn $75,000 a year before taxes, you should spend no more than $1,875 a
month on your housing.
The 30% rule is based on how much a family can reasonably spend on housing and still have
enough money left over to afford everyday expenses like food and transportation.
If you're looking to buy a home, some financial experts also recommend using the 28/36 rule to
determine what you can afford. The 28/36 rule stipulates that in order for a home to be considered
within your budget, your housing expenses (such as mortgage payments, taxes and insurance
payments) shouldn't exceed 28% of your gross monthly income. Your total debt (including credit
cards, student loans and car loan payments) shouldn't exceed 36% of your gross monthly
income.
If you're married or have a partner, keep in mind that this calculation includes the entire
household, so you'll need to include their salary and debts in the equation as well.
So, is your current home affordable? If it's not, it might be time to consider a cheaper place to rent
or think about refinancing if you can.
MouNis lViEv
Item No: 06B
Meeting Date: August 3, 2022
Type of Business Other
Planning Case N/A
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Planning Commission
From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Multi -Family Residential Zoning (discussion)
Introduction:
Should Twin Homes and/or Townhomes be permitted (encouraged) in Single Family
neighborhoods? If yes, options are to rezone from R-1 to R-2 (standard practice), or allow two-
family or multi -family dwellings in the R-1 district as a permitted use (e.g. Minneapolis permits
three -unit homes anywhere single-family homes are permitted).
Discussion:
There are a number of lots in the R-1 district that are vacant, or double lots, or large but not
large enough to subdivide. Periodically, Staff receive inquiries if these lots can have a twin -
home (duplex) or townhome, or apartment (no). However, there are several examples where
lots are zoned for two-family homes fronting streets in single-family neighborhoods.
The general intent of Zoning is to separate non -compatible land uses. This separation of zones
serves "to protect the public health, safety, and welfare", but arguably segregates different types
of families and households.
Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal:
Continue BR&E program, maximize utilization of development space and current list of available
sites, encourage land owners to maintain their properties, & consider residential redevelopment.
Financial Impact:
N/A
Recommendation:
Staff requests direction if vacant and underutilized R-1 lots should be encouraged for
development for 2, 3, 4, or more unit residential.
Respectfully,
Jon Sevald, AICP
Community Development Director
ATTACHED
• Examples: Two-family unit housing fronting streets in single family neighborhoods.
• Mounds View Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 3: Housing
• Webster, Mary Jo, Michael Corey; How Twin Cities housing rules keep the metro
segregated, StarTribune. August 7. 2021
(This article includes multi -media graphics, and is more readable, if viewed online)
The Mounus view vuwn
A Thriving Desirable Community
Item 06B
Page 2 of 2
Examples: Two-family unit housing fronting streets in single family neighborhoods
8484, 8486 Long Lake Road (built 1984)
Mounds View Boulevard & Pleasant View Drive/Pleasant View Court (built 1979, 1981, 1982, 1983)
5000 Block or Sunnyside Road (built 1956, 1959, 1960)
7315/7317, 7325/7373 Knollwood Drive (built 1995)
The Mounds View Vision
A Thriving Desirable Community
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 3: Housing
INTRODUCTION
Mounds View is a suburb in the northern Twin Cities metropolitan area. A
variety of forces affect housing including demographic, regional, and local
trends, the economic climate, the availability of land, government controls and
the real estate market. A key factor in the City's ability to provide a livable
community has been the development and maintenance of strong
neighborhoods, which consist of a variety of housing styles and types,
ownership and rental options, and range of costs.
The housing element of the Plan reviews the current housing situation and
establishes a plan to meet the city's future housing needs. In addition, this
element reports on four areas that the Metropolitan Council requires study
including housing goals and policies, analysis of housing supply, anticipating
future housing needs, and outlining programs that the City plans or currently
utilizes to achieve housing goals.
HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
The City has developed goals and policies related to housing in order to grow
and adapt to changing conditions. The goals and policies of this chapter are
critical to guide housing that supports the community as it evolves and to
support projected growth. The following are the housing goals and policies for
Mounds View:
Goal 1: Support development and redevelopment which accomplishes 2040
forecasted population growth and the supportive land use designations
identified in this plan.
Goal 2: Maintain the residential character of Mounds View.
• Preserve single-family neighborhoods.
• Reinvest in multi -family properties.
• Redevelop the Mounds View Boulevard corridor.
Goal 3: Support a mix of housing types reflective of the needs and desires of
the community.
• Preserve affordable housing while encouraging redevelopment of
multi -family properties, including manufactured home parks, such
that if publicly subsidized redevelopment occurs, there is no net -loss
of affordable housing units.
• Support Home Improvement programs and encourage their use by
residential property owners.
MouNDs VIEW
Opinion Survey
It is clear that there is public
opposition to affordable housing,
and apartments.
Many of the concerns may be
attributed to the age of
apartments, many of which were
built in the 1960's and 1970's,
have been minimally improved,
and lack modern amenities.
The Comprehensive Plan seeks a
mix of housing types, supporting
existing single-family
neighborhoods, stabilizing the
County Road I corridor, and
manufactured home communities,
as well as redevelopment of the
Mounds View Boulevard Corridor.
Chapter 3: Housing 3-1
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
• Coordinate with manufactured home communities on ways to
improve their neighborhoods and longevity of private infrastructure.
Implementation of Housing goals and policies will focus on enforcement of
property maintenance codes, crime reduction, preservation of urban forests,
coordination with Ramsey County and service providers to help residents
with financial and health concerns, and encourage rehabilitation and
preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing, including reducing
stormwater inflow & infiltration at manufactured home parks. Affordable
Housing goals are most likely to be accomplished through redevelopment
along the Boulevard, with inclusion of affordable and market -rate units. This
is dependent upon the flexibility afforded by the Mixed Use zoning district,
allowing increased density standards. The City will adopt a Fair Housing
Policy and/or plan. Currently, the City informally implements practices
without a coordinated plan.
EXISTING STOCK
Mounds View was predominantly developed in the 1950's through 1970's.
One -level homes, split-levels, and rambler homes are typical in this city as they
are in the surrounding cities. Manufactured homes provide a significant
percentage of housing units in the city and are located in three manufactured
home parks. There are also a number of senior housing and multi -family units
built from the late 1960's through the 2000's. The farmhouses that were built
prior to 1930 and that are still standing are scattered throughout town. Figure
3-1 shows the time period in which each house in the city was built.
Figure 3-2 shows the values of owner -occupied housing units. The same data
is not available for renter occupied units so this map excludes the values of
apartments and homes in manufactured home parks.
There were 5,332 occupied housing units in Mounds View in 2016. Most
of those units, 3,102 or 58%were single-family homes. Multi -family homes (i.e.
apartments or townhomes) made up 31 % of the housing stock. A significant
11 % of housing units in Mounds View are manufactured homes.
Approximately two-thirds of the total housing units were owner occupied. One-
third were renter occupied. A break -down of housing units by type are
calculated in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: housing unit types NUMBER OF UNITS
Owner occupied
Renter occupied
3,600 68%
1,732 32%
Single-family
Multi -family
Manufactured homes
3,102 58%
1,669
561
31%
11%
Mounds View Schools
Mounds View ISD 621 serves
northwestern Ramsey County. Mounds
View residents are within the attendance
area of each school listed below:
Irondale High School - All students
have a personal learning plan, guiding
their choice in classes according to their
goals and progress. The District's
Pathways to Possibilities allows students
to pursue trades and earn college credit,
including an Associates degree while at
Irondale, along with internships with
about 30 partnering businesses and
organizations.
Edgewood Middle School - The middle
school has a STEAM curriculum. 60% of
students participate in music programs,
and 40% in extracurricular activities.
47% of students are non-White. The
most popular non-English, non-native
languages are Spanish, Hmong, and
Arabic. 47% of students are eligible for
free or reduced -price lunch.
Pinewood Elementary School - Family
Night is held each Thursday. Students in
grades 4 and 5 can take band, choir, or
orchestra, and Spanish. 49% of students
are non -white. 52% of students are
eligible for free or reduced -price lunch.
Sunnyside Elementary School - 43% of
students are non -white. The most
popular non-English, non-native
languages are Spanish, Tibetan, and
Somali. 45% of students are eligible for
free or reduced -price lunch.
Pike Lake Education Center - This
school serves 519 all -day
kindergarteners, and are provided with
free breakfast. 47% of students are non-
white, 47% are eligible for free or
reduced -price lunch.
Chapter 3: Housing 13-2
IL
rakwood- G,
A W ■ .
'Bronson Die
w
1
1110111,u
1:11101
I MR oodaIe-Dr-—
� + I
ImPateara
I m
69th-Ave.N�— - -
WoodcrestDr
Built before 1940
Built between 1940 and 1960
1=1 Built between 1960 and 1980
▪ Built between 1980 and 2000
▪ Built after 2000
— — Mounds View City Boundary
Open Water
NWI Wetland
ArdanAve
Louisa -A" 2
e
earvie
v
Woo :ale -Dr
i• i-
m.
no Elm nom �-
• __ mil am
11ps-Am cm ma
Figure 3-1: Housing Age
City of Mounds View
0 1,500 3,000 Feet
N
Oakwood -Dr
� I
Willview_ Rd
Bronson Dr
1
t_amberl Avel
11 .
• /fN///,.I /..
IC
/IU:t, /#, 1? / II .. / /A.
"Woodale Dr
Mustang -Dr
Ap-il 1
V.119381active11938041741GI S1Projects1Housing Age.mxd
J
IMP
J_—o
Arden Ave
Arden:*ie
- — - '851hAve NE
-- •uI �
Laport Dr pa MN� C La Dr
711
ti...,:',_. -I_ � T, oar I
p .11lll•� -
VIM m v rn
1 4Y mw, — =m. _ t4Oo LosDr r
i.4 :I,
IL uj W 1 _ 1. 0A L1 -
..-
7 1 �Illview Rd
• = _ I{I Oak v iD1 1 tt 11 mo1t1 1 111 i; 1111
w Mo Wp •- .. :::..
>i11 �I 1 akwood Dr
Oaxwodd !. —m" 1 1j O; 11 hie 11 11 leinlI _�� mPinewaodCir�IIti►1 11 111 i111111
�' Ir _ . ■ j 11 tl i_ -Hill 11� r_
R I'■ - Pinewood -Dr_=.
�= L 1
I -r. �W . , I vim
o Z i ,i d croeera-st
D - C
m.
3 ,� , _ O
mli. BrdRson=Dr n owg ,0
• , m�Ir e 8
1 Y N▪ � m mG
C7
-I Bronson Dr
■
1 11 z BronsoriDr
LP
1 v' =p • \
ErMil .1
o Palk View -Dr,
3 _
Mal
m --
a
— 69111 Ave+NE• •
- ■•
OCR5
Louisa Ave
o on1 R
ClearviewAve a mGlearvi; `Ave r1 =
O 1
• -0 Ridge Le - 11 [7 a Ci
Woodale br -' cc m a O m
v 3 Woodlale�r m 1 1 1� - O
0 8
c E m
al m a tp f▪ rc w
mocv I
Woodcres1YDr
r
Mounds View City Boundary
Open Water
NWI Wetland
2017 Total Estimated Market Value:
- Up to $85,000
$85,000 to $151,500
I $151,500 to $185,000
$185,000 to $236,000
$236,000 and above
111,r-I,\II,.I
Figure 3-2: Owner Occupied Housing Values
City of Mounds View
aQ
1,500 3,000 Feet
Belle La
r Bronson Dr
CO+='inir� i
1! o`
lambert Aye
I I i %is
Mustang:
• - - • a - • •
January 1
MOUNDS IVIEW
V:119313 acIive119313037551GIS4Pro]edsSCom Plan 20113 pwner Occupied Housing Values.mxd
City of Mounds View 1 2040 Comprehensive Plan
AFFORDABILITY
Residents across the Twin Cities region experience challenges affording the
costs of housing. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
defines housing as `affordable' if its residents pay no more than 30% of their
gross income on housing and related costs. Housing costs include rent or
mortgage payments, utility bills, HOA fees or other fees associated with living
in a home. There are over twelve hundred (24%) cost burdened households
in Mounds View who do not meet that threshold.
Households are considered Cost Burdened if their housing costs account
for a high percentage of their income. Cost burdened households are classified
by household size and income as a percent of the area median income (AMI).
Qualifications for affordable housing are dependent on income and household
size, broken down in Table 3-2. The maximum rent by income and household
size is broken down in Table 3-3. The number of cost -burdened households
by income brackets below area median income (AMI) are calculated in Table
3-4.
Table 3-2: Income limits by household size in order to qualify for
affordable housing'
1
2 3 4 5
30% AMI $13,220 $15,100 $16,980 $18,860 $20,380
50% AMI $33,050 $22,650 $25,470 $28,290 $30,570
60% AMI $39,660 $45,300 $50,940 $56,580 $61,140
80% AMI $52,880 $60,400 $67,920 $75,440 $81,520
Table 3-3: Maximum gross rents by bedroom size for affordable
housing (post 1989)
1 2 3 4
30% AMI $531 $636 $735 $735
50%AMI $885 $1,061 $1,226 $1,367
60%AMI $1,062 $1,273 $1,471 $1,641
80%AMI $1,416 $1,698 $1,962 $2,188
1 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, "Income Limits And Maximum Rents; Table K:
Projects Placed in Service on or after 4/1/2018". Jan 2, 2019.
MouNDs VIEW
Hillview Avenue
Chapter 3: Housing 3-5
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
Table 3-4: Cost -Burdened by Income
at or below 30% of AMI
31% to 50% of AMI
51% to 80% of AMI
Households
532 10%
593 11%
144 3%
The median home value in Mounds View was $219,100 in 2018 compared
to $208,000 in 2010. Most of the housing units in the City were affordable for
households earning 51% to 80% AMI. A much smaller number were affordable
to those earning a smaller percent AMI. The number of affordable units for
each income bracket below AMI are calculated in Table 3-5.
Table 3-5: Affordable Units by Income
at or below 30% AMI
31% to 50% AMI
51% to 80% AMI
Housing Units
704 13%
1,467 28%
2,612 49%
Some housing units in Mounds View are publicly subsidized. A certain
number of those units are supplied specifically for seniors. The number of
publicly subsidized homes is calculated with sub -categories in Table 3-6.
Table 3-6: Subsidized Housing Number of Units
Publicly Subsidized
... specifically for Seniors
... specifically for People with Disabilities
HOUSING PROJECTIONS AND NEEDS
181
40 1%
22 <1.%
3%
Although Mounds View is largely built -out, it will need to continue to grow
as local and regional demographics evolve. The city will need to accommodate
a rising population including residents of all socioeconomic backgrounds. The
Metropolitan Council requires Mounds View to supply 27 new affordable units
by 2040. The allocation of needed units by income brackets below AMI are
calculated in Table 3-7.
Table 3-7: Housing Allocation by Income Required Units
at or below 30% of AMI
31% to 50% of AMI
51% to 80% of AMI
Total Units
AMI = Area Median Income
27
11
212
59
2 "Boulevard" Apartments, constructed in 2019, includes 4-units at or below 30% AMI, and 56-
units at or below 60% AMI.
MOuNDs VIEW
275000
250000
225000
200000
175000
150000
125000
100000
75000
50000
25000
0
�O�o�O���O�coO��iO,y�O,y�O,y4)
Mounds View Median Home
Value
Suburban Ramsey County Median
Home Value
Reinvestment
Many apartment buildings in Mounds
View were built in the 1960's and 1970's
without indoor parking, elevators, or
other modern amenities, and are
naturally occurring affordable housing,
with rents $0.90 - $1.10 per sq ft for a
two -bedroom unit ($900 - $1,300 per
month), as of 2018.
In 2018, BBH Management purchased
the 48-unit Ridgewood Apartments. As
leases expire, BBH has remodeled each
unit, floor to ceiling, investing about
$10,000 per unit, with a goal of rents of
about $1 per square foot (garage extra).
Reinvestment in multi -family housing is
critical to maintain these older buildings
and stabilize neighborhoods.
Chapter 3: Housing 13-6
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
The Metropolitan Council estimates that there will be an increase of 220 new
households in Mounds View between 2020 and 2040. In order to
accommodate the growth, new homes both single-family and multi -family are
likely needed. New multi -family development is likely to occur along the
Mounds View Boulevard corridor on property currently used as single-family
residential and commercial uses.
HOUSING ACTION PLAN
Mounds View intends to work with partners to develop an Action Plan that
focuses on:
1. Homeowner Assistance
2. Preservation of Affordable Housing
3. Development/Redevelopment of New Affordable Housing
Currently (2019), such efforts operate independently, rather than as a
conjoined effort. A conjoined effort will be developed as part of the City's
Strategic Plan that more clearly explains cause & effect of the City's actions.
HOMEOWNER ASSISTANCE
Many of the resources are through Ramsey County, and include loans for
moderate -income to low-income households, and weatherization programs
specific to suburban communities. A list of available resources can be found
on the City of Mounds View website. As of 2019, this list includes programs
facilitated by the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), including;
• Suburban Ramsey County Energy Conservation Differed Loan
• Mounds View Emergency Repair Deferred Loan
• Mounds View General Home Repair Revolving Loan
• Mounds View Mobile Home Loan
• Preservation of Affordable Housing
Fairchild Avenue
MouNDs VIEW
Red Oak Drive
Chapter 3: Housing 13-7
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
Mounds View includes some small homes on large lots built prior to World War
II. As homeowners move or pass away, developers have purchased,
demolished, and subdivided the properties for new construction, typically
priced between $325,000 and $425,000. The City will continue to encourage
such redevelopment, which is necessary to provide options, and to remain
competitive with surrounding communities within the School District.
Mounds View is home to three manufactured home parks consisting of 561
homes on a combined 80 acres. These properties are particularly desirable for
redevelopment due to their size, proximity to freeways, service, manufacturing
and high-tech jobs, and are walkable distances to parks and schools. These
manufactured home parks are privately owned and maintained. The City
intends to work with the owners and the Metropolitan Council to monitor private
infrastructure for structural stability including water inflow and infiltration.
Should one or more of these parks be redeveloped, the City supports
preserving the same number of affordable housing units in its place, or within
the same school attendance boundary.
DEVELOPMENT OF NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The City has preference for new market -rate housing in order to provide a
range of housing options. When warranted, the City will support new affordable
housing projects on a case -by -case basis, preferably mixed with market rate
housing. It has been the City's experience that mixed affordable/market-rate
developments are difficult to attract to Mounds View because of smaller land
parcels available for redevelopment, meaning smaller projects are more likely
to be developed as all affordable, or all market -rate units with no mixture.
The City will continue to work with its partners to better understand the City's
place in supporting affordable housing within the larger metro area. Mounds
View is an attractive location because of the school district, proximity to
freeways, and jobs. Redevelopment is likely to occur along the Mounds View
Boulevard corridor. Many of those parcels are guided for mixed use and higher
density housing, to better support a mix of housing, including affordable units.
See Chapter 1: Land Use.
The city's location is hindered by the availability and cost of land3, limited mass
transit access, and public opposition to affordable housing due to the large
amount that already exists in the City. Part of this is public perception of "what
kind of people" live in affordable housing. The City will continue its efforts of
making Mounds View an inclusive and welcoming community.
3
The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) provides competitive tax credits to
qualifying affordable housing projects based on a Qualified Allocation Plan, taking into
account proximity to jobs, transit, high performing school districts, economic and racial
integration. More points tend to be awarded to those areas of higher incomes and less
integration, presenting a challenge for Mounds View which is stable and affordable, not
attracting regional attention for reinvestment, and supporting vacancy along Mounds View
Boulevard.
MouNDs VIEW
Boulevard
Affordable Housing costs about the same
to construct as market -rate housing.
New affordable housing is affordable
because of subsidies provided to the
developer/owner, allowing them to
reduce rent. For example, the Boulevard
Apartments (2019) costs $232,000 per
unit to build, and will charge rents within
60% of the Average Monthly Income
(AMI) within Ramsey County. Four ADA
accessible units will have rents within
30% AMI.
The project received funding from
multiple sources, including; the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (IRS
Tax Credits), Metropolitan Council
(Livable Communities Grant), Ramsey
County (discounted land sale), and the
City of Mounds View (Tax Increment
Financing). It is these subsidies that
made the project financially feasible, and
would not have been built but for this
assistance.
Chapter 3: Housing 13-8
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
HOUSING TOOLS
There are a number of widely used tools available to the City of Mounds View
to address housing needs within the community. Such tools include, but are
not limited to:
Local sources of funding:
• Creation/use of a local Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA),
Community Development Agency (CDA), or Economic Development
Authority (EDA): State law permits cities to cooperatively plan,
undertake, construct, or operate projects that contribute to the
economic welfare and public benefit of the community, including
housing projects and developments, redevelopment projects, interest
rate reduction programs, or any combination of these (Source:
Metropolitan Council).
• Housing Bonds.
• Tax Abatement: Tax abatement is a financing tool that reduces taxes
or tax increases for owners of specific properties. Local governments
offer the tax reduction to provide a financial incentive for a public
benefit, such as creation of housing affordable to low and moderate -
income households (Source: Metropolitan Council).
• Tax Increment Financing: A primary tool in economic development
and redevelopment, tax increment financing, also known as TIF, is a
legislatively authorized tool available to cities and special entities such
as housing and redevelopment authorities. Used to finance real estate
development costs, municipalities create TIF districts to encourage
development and to pay for related public improvements and
infrastructure needs such as streets, sidewalks, or sewer (Source:
Metropolitan Council).
Local policies and strategies:
• Effective referrals, most commonly occurring as a result of Rental or
Zoning inspections of housing conditions beyond the owner's or
renter's ability to correct and maintain.
• Fair Housing Policy, required in conjunction with Metropolitan Council
Livable Community Account grants.
• First time homebuyer, down payment assistance, and foreclosure
prevention programs, including the New Brighton -Mounds View
Rental Property Managers Coalition.
• Participation in housing -related organizations, partnerships, and
initiatives.
• Site Assembly, most commonly conducted in cooperation with private
owners of land adjacent to EDA land, who share a common vision for
redevelopment, and a cooperative timeline.
• Zoning and subdivision ordinances with flexible use of PUD's to
increase density where tree and open space preservation is not
necessary.
MouNDs VIEW
Federal and regional sources
of funding:
• Consolidated Request for
Proposals
• Land Bank Twin Cities
• Livable Communities
Demonstration Account
(LCDA)
• Livable Communities
Demonstration Account —
Transit Oriented
Development (TOD)
• Community Development
Block Grant Funds (CDBG)
• HOME Investment
Partnerships Program
(HOME)
Preservation strategies:
• Project Based Rental
Assistance
• Low Income Housing Tax
Credit Properties
• Public Housing
• Housing Improvement
Areas (HIAs)
• Community Land trusts
• Low -interest rehab
programs
• Manufactured Home Parks
• Private unsubsidized
affordable housing
Chapter 3: Housing 13-9
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
• Rental license and inspections programs, in conjunction with a Crime
Free Multi -Family Housing program.
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Housing Need
Homeowner Assistance
Preservation of Affordable
Housing
Available Tool
Home Improvement Loans, Energy
Conservation Deferred Loan
Habitat for Humanity' A Brush with
Kindness and Hearts & Hammers home
repair programs
Homestead to reduce property taxes
FirstHOME Buyer Assistance Program
Rental license and inspections programs
CDBG and HOME
Housing Bonds, Local EDA powers,
Community Land Trust
Housing Improvement Area (HIA)
Manufactured Home Park
Preservation Tools
MouNDs VIEW
Circumstance and
Sequence of Use
The City has links on their website
to these resources and will provide
referrals to residents as needed.
The City has links on their website
to these resources and will provide
referrals to residents as needed.
The City has a link on their website
to this resource and will provide
referrals to residents as needed.
The City has a link on their website
to this resource and will provide
referrals to residents as needed.
The City administers a rental
dwelling license and inspection
program, with a Crime Free Multi -
Family Housing component.
The City will consider sponsoring
an application to Ramsey County
HOME or CDBS to assist with
maintenance and rehabilitation of
housing for low -and -moderate
income households.
The City will consider strategic use
of these tools to preserve
threatened affordable housing, and
coordinate with others to preserve
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit
recipient properties as affordable
housing.
An HIA may be established to
improve common elements to
CIC's or manufactured home
parks, paid in whole or in part from
fees imposed within the area.
The City will consider extending
homeownership resources to
Manufactured home parks and will
consider supporting a local notice
of first sale or first look provisions
to provide residents time to
consider cooperative ownership
if/when the community becomes
available for sale.
Potential Partners
Center for Energy and
Environment (CEE)
Habitat for Humanity and
Hearts & Hammers
Ramsey County
Ramsey County
N/A
Ramsey County
Ramsey County,
Metropolitan Council,
MHFA
Ramsey County
Metropolitan Council,
Ramsey County
Chapter 3: Housing 13-10
City of Mounds View 12040 Comprehensive Plan
Development/Redevelopment Tax Abatement, TIF
of New Affordable Housing
Consolidated RFP, LCDA, Site
Assembly
MouNDs VIEW
The City would consider these
local tools at the request of a
qualified developer providing
affordable housing with units
available of at least 80% AMI.
The City would consider these
regional tools at the request of a
qualified developer providing
affordable housing with units
available of at least 80% AMI.
Affordable Housing
Developer, MHFA,
Metropolitan Council
Affordable Housing
Developer, MHFA,
Metropolitan Council,
Ramsey County
Chapter 3: Housing 13-1 1
StarTribune
How Twin Cities
housing rules keep the
metro segregated
4.
AN(http://www.startrihi lne,rnm)
UNMUTE SKIP 1 REPLAY
iet
(https:(htt r/fI itt!£
u=httpsP1t-%
twin- twin-
cities-cities-
housirtg+using-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
k
IMP
- StarTribune
Drone video by IV 4a EIIIP9 J) Michael Corey.
(https:(11trisvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities-cities-
housirigausing-
By MaryJo Webster and Michael Corey • Star Tribune • Aug. 7, 2021 rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segregaigiatWiler
iz Stroder has dreamed of owning a home since she was a teenager.
Definitely a garden. Maybe some chickens.
More than anything, the St. Louis Park apartment dweller wants to
give her 14-year-old son the stability that comes with
homeownership. But Stroder has realized that's out of her reach, with a
median home price in the Twin Cities now topping $350,000 and her income
as an insurance underwriting assistant holding stagnant. Those "rose-colored
glasses were lifted," she says.
All of this was on the 42-year-old's mind when she approached the microphone
during a contentious public meeting in St. Louis Park early last year. The
crowd had spent the first hour opposing a developer's plan to build a 4-story,
80-unit apartment building, saying it would threaten their property values and
bring crime into the Elmwood neighborhood.
"There's a monster being built in front of our cottages!" one woman exclaimed.
"I will not risk my children for this kind of stuff," said another.
Despite hecklers and a lot of "hatefulness" in the room, Stroder said she felt
compelled to speak up for people like herself who cannot afford the American
dream of a single-family home.
"I'm used to not being heard because of the fact that I'm a renter, and I'm a
Black woman, and I do not make a lot of money, not enough to afford a
$400,000 house in St. Louis Park," Stroder told the mostly white crowd. "Do I
not deserve to be here because of that?"
tst ib ne.raStitivi ition to multifamily ato the people who need to
live There — that SLroder witnessed that night sterns in part. from decades qfittps:(YittrisivatteitiE
local government land -use rules that prioritize single-family housing @ u=httpsc t o9
.twin- twin -
Today, however, these rules are increasingly viewed as a major reason thatcities-cities-
housirtousing-
Black and Latino families are essentially shut out of the vast majority of Hiles- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:
segre
Twin Cities.
.r StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
Single-fam
zoning
At least 73% of residential land in
the Twin Cities is governed by local
zoning ordinances that only allow
single-family detached homes,
according to a Star Tribune analysis
of 2019 land use regulations from
102 metro communities.
(https:(htirsvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
.r StarTribune
Additionglt 0A6ligibungd8F s the
size of LI IG IVl VI LI IG 1 IU11 I{JGI VI
garage stalls — drive up the cost of
those homes and are common
throughout the metro. More than
65% of the land where only single-
family homes can be built requires a
minimum lot size of one -quarter
acre or more, at least twice the size
of a typical one in Minneapolis or St.
Paul.
Source: Zoning data compiled by the Star Tribune
from 102 metro communities that are within the
regional sewer system. Maps don't reflect areas
under Planned Unit Development agreements, a
process commonly used for new subdivisions that
often overrides existing zoning.
(https:(Yitt v/fticilk
u=httpst%
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
Middle 7(lnln¢
About 10% of residential land in the
Twin Cities allows for more modest -
cost housing such as duplexes,
triplexes, townhomes or mobile
homes. This is often referred to as
"middle housing."
(https:(htirsvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
- StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
M1iltifamily znnino
Only 7% of residential land allows
for apartment buildings with four
units or more.
A few small cities do not have any
land zoned for apartment buildings,
and about 20% of the cities the Star
Tribune studied — including Mounds
View, Hugo and Woodbury — require
developers to apply for special
permission to build those projects.
(https:(htirsvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
.r StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
Rl a rk nnni 11 ati nn
------ f -r------_- __
The metro's Black population is
concentrated in these areas zoned
for multifamily housing.
Less than 1% of block group is Black
1% to 4.9%
5% to 9.9%
10% to 14.9%
15% to 29.9%
30% to 49.9%
More than 50% of block group is Black
Source: American Community Survey 2015-2019
(https:(Yitt r/ftteilk
u=https t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segregaigiatIWIEN
StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
(https:(htirsvatacilk
u=httpisct3(o
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
"Zoning is being used to regulate who can live in what communities," said
Nelima Sitati Munene, co-chair of the equity advisory committee of the
Metropolitan Council, a regional planning agency that promotes and helps
finance higher density housing. "We could argue about what the intentions
were until kingdom come, but it doesn't matter. What has this meant for the
people who have been excluded all this time? And what has been the impact
for the people who have benefited?"
twin-
ities-
using-
ules-
eep-
the-
metro-metro{https:,
segre
Nelima Sitati Munene, a member of the Metropolitan Council Equity Advisory Committee and
executive director of African Career, Education and Resource, attended a picnic with residents of
a Brooklyn Center community to discuss tenant issues. Photo by Shari Gross.
None of these zoning @ J ordinances mention race, but they perpetuate
segregation that took root decades ago in an era of more racially explicit
housing discrimination. Today, they are seen as a major reason the Twin Cities
has some of the nation's worst disparities
(https://www.startribune.com/x/600072649/) in income, wealth and
homeownership between white residents and people of color.
In Minnesota and across the country, a growing number of lawmakers, city
planners and advocates for racial equity and housing affordability are pushing
cities to drop rules that restrict areas to only single-family housing. They say
allowing a mix of housing types ®, — such as duplexes, triplexes or row
houses — when properties are redeveloped would make those single-family
neighborhoods accessible to a more diverse population and improve
affordability for everyone.
Stakipitaiglis drew national atiai&Ffn,6D1161958ing the first city in the
nation (https:/ / w w W .s artribune.com/ x/ J6VL/t1702/) to loosen sin le iaiiiii(j� p (htt
g tt s: lftiezilk
zoning rules it said were rooted in racist planning decisions of the past. T-
hhttp�s
in- twin-
in -
state of Oregon (https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-single-family- cities-cities-
housirtausing-
zoning-law-effect-developers/) and cities such as Berkeley, Sacramento ankles- rules-
he -
Charlotte have since adopted similar measures, and officials in Connecticiep- keep-
the-
(https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/realestate/connecticut-zoning-
segre
reform.html) , California, Atlanta, and Seattle have also debated zoning
reforms. President Biden is proposing a $5 billion competitive grant program
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/blog/2021/06/17/exclusionary-zoning-its-
effect-on-racial-discrimination-in-the-housing-market/) to encourage cities to
eliminate exclusionary zoning practices.
metro-metro-(https:
At the Minnesota Capitol, two lawmakers — a Republican and a Democrat —
have introduced measures that would either encourage or require cities to
allow higher density development.
Even the most ardent advocates admit that zoning reform will not eliminate
racial segregation or improve affordability on its own, especially not soon
enough to help the current generation.
"I don't think it's a panacea," says Gary Cunningham, a former Metropolitan
Council member and longtime leading voice for racial equity in the Twin
Cities. "It's a step in the right direction, but it's not sufficient."
Minneapolis shows that change will be slow. Only 23 building permits have
been issued for new duplexes or triplexes in places they would not have
previously been allowed.
Some of the fully developed first -ring suburbs are starting to follow
Minneapolis' lead, but most suburban leaders believe that they can meet the
needs of anyone who wants to live in their communities by zoning land for
townhouses and apartment complexes, especially along highways, transit
corridors and in commercial areas.
KstMitribbil-4,nge of the metro ara,ViiffileffiVAlgesfiirriand for development and
• g1 r..,.111 y ..:. g typically makes ..p 90 fth., residential I tia 111 ytps:QYLtt ev/ft ittl
sill 1G-1 Qlllll G 1. 11.Q11 111d1�GJ U l V %U or more of 1.11G 1 GJ1UGlllldl ldll
city leaders are reluctant to change the character of the cherished single -fa r'�!
twi - twin -
neighborhoods. cities-cities-
housirt ausing-
rules- rules -
"People have come out here and expected a certain way of life regarding hep- keep-
the- the -
much density we have and what it looks like," said Denny Walsh, mayor ofn�etroi„etro{https:,
Orono. segregaiptIWIEN
Unfounded fears abound that the kind of reform approved by Minneapolis
would lead to bulldozing of single-family neighborhoods. Michael Lens, an
urban planning associate professor at University of California, Los Angeles
from St. Paul, points out that upzoning does not require the addition of
duplexes and triplexes but merely removes a long-standing prohibition
(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01944363.2019.1651216) and
gives landowners more flexibility.
"Ending single-family zoning doesn't end single-family housing. And there's no
real reason why we prioritize single-family housing in such a way," Lens said.
"You can't have true integration of race and income without a variety of
housing types."
simmi
(http://www.startribune.com
ps:QYittr/fi3itta
t1p4311402E%
'finivin-
hS-®hies-
housi g use' n-
rules- rules-
the- the
metro metro-(htt
segre
•
ps:.
�u5
Liz Stroder tended plants in the patio garden she built behind her apartment in St. Louis Park. Stroder said the
garden has allowed her to build a community with her neighbors, despite the uncertainty that comes with leasing.
Photos by Mark Vancleave.
, StarTribuRd007, Stroder and heilliaManiBesffrinoved from Cleveland to the Twin
11-IG . 1LG1 �. best friend a r persuaded a a her + + . + ��lttps:QYLt1�99N/f� tE
V1L1GJ 0.11,G1 he est friend from college Gl suaded o start a ne
chapter in her life. u=httpsctoWo
twin- twin-
cities- cities -
Her friend introduced her to pickled herring and took her out on a housirigausing-
rules- rules -
frozen lake for the first time. She fell in love with Minnesota. keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:
She has made a home for herself in a 1960s-era apartment complex in St. Lswiegatyiwiffla
Park, where she has made friends with her neighbors and tends to the
community garden, as well as the flowers, produce and herbs planted in
containers on her patio. Her rent has gone up at least 40% in the past decade,
though, making it even harder to save for a down payment on a home.
Over the years, Stroder would get excited when she saw a "For Sale" sign on a
house in St. Louis Park, thinking maybe that would be her dream home.
Then she looked at the price.
"People who live in rental housing here, they love the city too," Stroder said in
an interview earlier this year. "If they want that dream to own a home and
plant more permanent roots here, why isn't it something you're trying to make
possible for them?"
This is a question that St. Louis Park officials are wrestling with as well. They
realized that the 19% of the city's residents who are people of color are
concentrated in the few areas that have apartments.
"BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color) folks have been segregated
from more affluent neighborhoods because they haven't been able to have
more housing options in those neighborhoods," said Karen Barton, St. Louis
Park's community development director. "That affects education, health,
future incomes, everything."
The Twin Cities metro has become more racially diverse during the past two
decades, but people of color, especially Black and Latino, disproportionately
live in the relatively small areas zoned for multifamily housing, according to a
Star Tribune analysis. Nearly 25% of Black people live in these areas, compared
to 15% of Latino and 8% of white people.
stAktimmership data also shOlanil '6rf e8T6P e having a harder time
getting 111V Jllgle -fa .:y neighborhoods. Just 25 U of Black and nJnof Lat gps:L9svatiedtE
uhouseholds own their home, compared to about 74% of white households, twin- �sPY 9
twin- twin -
according to U.S. census data for the seven -county metro. cities-cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep -
Twin Cities has wide racial disparities in homeownershipthe- the -
Twin met o-metro{https:,
segregaigdWiiir
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS IN EACH GROUP WHO OWN THEIR OWN HOME
50%
White ;an Indian
Includes the 102 cities in the Star Tribune zoning pattern analysis.
Source: American Community Survey 2015-2019
The gap between Black and white homeownership in Ramsey and Hennepin
counties is the largest among metro areas in the nation and has widened in the
past 20 years, according to an Urban Institute report
(https://www.urban. org/research/publication/who-owns-twin-
cities/view/full_report) released in June.
Single-family neighborhoods are viewed as "high opportunity" areas due to the
relative lack of poverty, which has been repeatedly shown in research studies
to shape the trajectory of children in important ways. At the same time, the
homes generate wealth that can be passed to future generations, feeding a cycle
of prosperity that does not exist in neighborhoods with high concentrations of
rental property, said Cunningham, who serves as CEO of Prosperity Now,
(https://prosperitynow.org/) a nonprofit focused on closing the racial wealth
divide.
x Stallo fi ybody can live whernRM�'a1 ' ? e;°1 unningham said. "They are
re1G�0.LGU LV certain areas because that's -where G the affordable housing is. (https:(ritt vlfheittE
u=httpsctoWo
twin- twin -
The United States is one of the only countries in the world that uses zoning�ijs-cities-
separate single-family homes from other housing types, and race was on thiFusiripusing-
rules- rules -
minds of its designers, said Jonathan Rothwell, a senior research fellow at pep- keep-
the- the -
Brookings Institution. metro-metro-(https:,
segregaigitatIWIEN
In the early 1900s, city planners — supported by federal housing authorities —
wanted to protect all -white neighborhoods that had been created by racially
explicit zoning after the Supreme Court ruled those laws unconstitutional.
They realized that they could achieve the same goal by barring multifamily
housing from those areas since most Black people at the time could not afford
to buy a home.
"The problem is that from the very beginning, zoning has treated multifamily
housing as akin to a pollutant," Rothwell said. "It was taken for granted that if
you were a well-off or a white family, your children were at risk if they were
near a multifamily housing complex."
Black and Latino residents more likely to live in areas zoned for multifamily
Though there are exceptions, in many Twin Cities suburbs, the areas with concentrations of
Black and Latino residents often overlap with areas near highways or where a developer
doesn't have to get special permission to build an apartment building.
Multifamily zone City boundary Highway
Percentage of city's Black population
0 1% 5% 10% 20% 30% 100%
Percentage of Black residents
Percentage of Latino residents Black and Latino combined
MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL
(http://www.startribune.com)
X StarTribune 1 9 % Black population, 26% 16% Black population, 19%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
BLOOMINGTON
9% Black population, 2%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
PLYMOUTH
6% Black population, 5%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
BROOKLYN PARK
28% Black population,17%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
MAPLE GROVE
6% Black population, Less than
1% residential land zoned for
multifamily.
(https:(httrsvaticilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities-cities-
housirt�using-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
(http:/(�✓ww.startrib�ane.com)
ds k ''' A
*StarTribune Q{)
`V
WOODBURY
6% Black population, 0%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
EDEN PRAIRIE
8% Black population, 21%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
LAKEVILLE
EAGAN
10% Black population, 5%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
BLAINE
6% Black population, 3%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
COON RAPIDS
2% Black population,12% 8% Black population,17%
residential land zoned for residential land zoned for
(https:(Yiti r/ftteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtusing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
multifamily.
StarTribune
BURNSVILLE
(http://www.startrittilingerni-134
14% Black population, 4%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
APPLE VALLEY
9% Black population, 8%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
MINNETONKA
5% Black population, 2%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
EDINA
3% Black population, 2%
residential land zoned for
multifamily.
(https:Ntrisvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities-cities-
housirtgausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
- StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
ST. LOUIS PARK SHAKOPEE
7% Black population, Less than 8% Black population, 13%
1% residential land zoned for residential land zoned for
multifamily. multifamily.
Sources: City governments, U.S. Census Bureau, OpenStreetMap contributors
(https:r(Yitt r/ftteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segre
he homes that Stroder has been pining for in St. Louis Park tell the
story of how this kind of zoning shaped the Twin Cities' suburbs.
The small, entry-level homes were built to solve a massive housing
shortage and provide homes for returning World War II servicemen
and their families. Financing was available through the GI Bill, but Black
veterans had difficulty getting approved. (https://www.history.com/news/gi-
bill-black-wwii-veterans-benefits)
Thousands of these new homes built in the first -ring suburbs in the 1940s were
also protected by (racial covenants @ , , snippets of text that developers
included in property deeds prohibiting people of color from buying or
occupying those properties.
stAilf ififtia6ial covenants, startiilgth4/e sit au ecCe lsfully divided Minneapolis
and Paul distinct Black and white neighborhoods that remain e_.:dcgtps:QYLti r//milk
St. 1" dUl into distinct ll, 1, 11G1 111J V111V VUJ Llldl. G V lU
today, according to data collected by the Mapping Prejudice Project u=httpsctoWo
twin- twin-
(https://mappingprejudice.umn.edu/) at the University of Minnesota. cities-cities-
housirt ausing-
rules- rules -
As farmland turned to subdivisions, covenants effectively created an invisikep- keep-
the- the -
wall in the suburbs along Minneapolis' borders. There were at least 2,400 metroi„etro{https:,
covenanted homes in St. Louis Park, a city of just 22,000 people by the timegre
racial covenants were deemed unenforceable in 1948.
These covenants worked hand -in -hand with real estate steering, white
intimidation and "redlining" — a government -backed effort that designated
minority neighborhoods as being high -risk for mortgage lending — to maintain
all -white neighborhoods and keep people of color out of homeownership.
In 1952, a Black family that wanted "to live in the more open atmosphere of
the country" was met with bribes and threats when they bought a home in
what was then Minnetonka Township. Neighbors attempted to halt the
purchase and gathered a protest meeting.
A Minneapolis Star editorial about the neighbors' concerns said, "It wasn't
claimed, for example, that these people are irresponsible, shiftless, ill-behaved,
etc. Actually the man is a mail carrier, a veteran of the last war, and a good
enough credit risk to satisfy a major city bank. But he's a Negro."
(http://www.startribune.com)
Xstaitittee Prejudice Blooms in Our Suburbs, Too
1N ar semi - rural Minneapolis suburban
..g people of the immediate neighbor-
hood and some list ant!• around. 11 drew
"leading citizens" in the Area.
No solid I•haiges were made against
the Negro hcrnil► whir•h wants to live in
the more oIrfin stenos niece of th,• r r'urr-
tr It wasn't claimed. for r•:u rnple. t hat
these people art, irre -,p,i rsihle, shirtless,
i1l.b havr�rt. It Aettially the man is a
mail carrier, ti vr•trrrrn of the last war,
and R good enough eredil risk to satisfy
a major Oh lank. But he's a Novo
(https:Qfvttrisev/ftacittE
This man s fiance neighbors have tt-Ir►hs#tt6F` %
to bribe hire not 1.o complete +h- twin- twin -
cities -cities -
It watt si1gg $ten Mao these. •aic ,i,, housirt ausing-
should look beyond the present rase, r toi- rules -
a resolution was proposed whereby 1 keep -keep -
present would promise each other iietilier the-
n sell their property to a Negro, in Alqtfo-metro{https:,
lion 1,1 ;declging a is rtatn amoIInt of i �� ie
to finance the rrrrront action.
This rnf.etieg, mind You, WAS not in 11rr
benighted deep south. li wis ii meeting
of tipper-middle-clasm, upper -educational -
level people of Minnetonka township. It
NI-atr A rlishARrtening thing to S F.
The editorial in the Minneapolis Star, which ran on Jan. 30,1952
In addition to racial covenants, some of these subdivisions had other
requirements that are common in modern zoning codes. For example, Golden
Valley's West Tyrol Hills neighborhood, when approved in 1938, mandated
only single-family homes, with a garage, costing at least $7,500, according to
city planning commission meeting minutes.
As the other more racially explicit forms of housing discrimination were
outlawed, single-family zoning came into widespread use by the 1950s.
"Class prejudice and racial prejudice were so intertwined that when suburbs
adopted such ordinances, it was impossible to disentangle their motives and to
prove that zoning rules violated constitutional prohibitions on race
discrimination," Minneapolis -based public historian Denise Pike, who
researches racial housing discrimination, said in a League of Minnesota Cities
webinar (https://www.lmc.org/learning-events/previous-events/recorded-
webinars/facing-forward-series-part-one-systemic-racism-in-housing/) last
year on systemic racism in housing. "The basis of single-family zoning is so
tied to racial exclusion and today still excludes people of color."
Sti'IPitiiimbs along Minneapol{M//958,.comhdina, St. Louis Park,
r�..t,t,:...,., ale ,....a Golden � all y — artifacts ..fL...___ single-family r...... i y .......:...4https:QYLti�9�v/f� t�
i\V UU111JU0.1G 0.11U 13V1UG11 V Q11Gare cLL LLic Lt V1 11V VV J111 1G-1Q11111 G
-11
perpetuated the segregation created by racial covenants. Those cities now u=httpisctoWo
twin- twin -
average 18% people of color, well below the 34% average for other first-ringities-cities-
housirt using -
cities, according to a Star Tribune analysis of census data. rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the -
All four have 80% or more of their residential land zoned for single-familymetroi„etro{https:,
well above the 60% average for other first -ring suburbs. segregaiptIWIEN
"So much of why things happened the way it happened, especially in the first -
ring suburbs, goes back to these racial implications with redlining and racial
covenants. Single-family zoning replaced that as a tool to maintain the status
quo," said Jason Zimmerman, Golden Valley's planning manager.
- StarTribune
(http://www.startribune.com)
(https:(htirsvatteilk
u=httpis t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtausing-
rules- rules -
Left At least 73% of residential land in the Twin Cities metro area is governed by local zoning ordinanlily
allow single-family detached homes, like this Prior Lake neighborhood. the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
Right Only 7% of residential land in the metro allows apartments to be built without special permissregaigittlIORM
Advocates for allowing multifamily homes in more areas of the metro say it could reduce the need for large
complexes such as this one in New Brighton. Photos by Mark Vancleave.
E
ven today, proposals for denser development in or near single-
family neighborhoods almost always face fierce opposition from
nearby homeowners.
The owner of an Apple Valley golf course pitched a plan in 2019 to
convert the property to a mix of apartments, townhouses and single-family
homes. After several heated public meetings and opposition from planning
commission members for that much density, the city ultimately opted in
December to rezone the land for what would be considered low to medium
density, with no more than 8 units per acre. The city is considering a new
proposal for that land calling for about half that density, with 49 townhouses
and 27 villas, which are small, single -level homes.
In Prior Lake last year, neighbors objected to a proposal to build 67
townhouses and 27 single-family homes. The townhouses were expected to be
priced around $360,000, similar to an adjacent development. Nearby residents
said it would bring too much traffic, more car break-ins and unacceptable
density.
"If they do build townhomes, what's that going to do to our property value and
our neighborhood? Because it is a beautiful family neighborhood," one
resident of that adjacent development asked at a March 2020 planning
•�StsplykAon meeting. "I was tdIM ll`g.iini nfe-tmily neighborhood."
(https:QhprevlftwittE
The city's planning commission rejected the plan because the proposed dern p6Fr t 9
twin- twin -
of 4.2 units per acre exceeded the 4 units per acre allocated in the city's lanes-
cities -
use plan. The land owner scrapped the proposal. housirigausing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep -
Prior Lake Mayor Kirt Briggs said his city wants the "diversity and vibranc'°e- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
that growth brings, but the city needs to balance that with its ability to proasmigilegatapwiffla
infrastructure like streets, utilities and parks, and that there's only so much the
city can do to provide housing that everyone can afford. "What we can't
legislate is what the sales price is going to be," Briggs said.
Doug Anderson, center, has served as Lakeville's mayor since 2017. "I think the dream of
homeownership is alive and well," he said. "Single-family homes are the motivation for a lot of
people." Photo by Renee Jones Schneider.
Some leaders of suburbs that prioritize single-family homes say that character
is the heart of their community, and something that people strive for and want
to protect. Lakeville Mayor Doug Anderson said older homes in the city
St ni• fordable options fox(�i-%M` g' i6Wrrs° id have helped diversify the
l,1L y J pup UIQ L13.J11, VV 1111.111J dUIJ U L 1/ 7U 1.1WIJIG VI l.V1V1.
"I think the dream of homeownership is alive and well," Anderson said.
"Single-family homes clearly are the motivation for a lot of people."
(https:(h w/ftteilk
u=https t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities-
housirtusing-
rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
segregaigiatIWIEN
Liz Stroder has found a community renting in St. Louis Park, but dreams of a permanent home for her and her son.
Video by Mark Vancleave.
s housing prices soar, pressure is growing to loosen zoning's grip on land use,
and it's coming from both sides of the partisan divide.
With its recent chAtte pan hireel sg s Osseo and Spring Park as
X StarTrAune
thet only cities :._ L1 metro that a t i a-v-e any e gti.ti,orhoo tps:QYvti vlf� t�
Vlll 1.11.1GJ 111 I.11G 111G 1.1 V l.11dl. UV not 11dVG 11G1 11VV111VV
restricted solely to single-family detached homes. Bloomingtorit-httpsto%
win- twin -
also allows duplexes in the majority of its city. St. Louis Park isities-cities-
housirtausing-
revising its zoning code to allow duplexes in what are now single-family rules- rules -
neighborhoods. keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:
While they have multiple reasons for doing so, city leaders say they are tale
a small step to reverse the effects of decades of intentional segregation.
These changes, though, will not alter neighborhoods overnight.
"It's taken generations to get where we are, and it will take generations to make
the changes we're talking about," said Golden Valley City Attorney Maria
Cisneros.
Cisneros and Golden Valley's diversity, equity and inclusion manager, Kiarra
Zackery, are leading the city's effort to educate residents about the racial
inequities under which their city was created.
Zackery said people living in an upper -middle-class suburb that seems
affordable to them and where all their "desirable life outcomes are easily
accessible" may have a hard time understanding that the reverse is the reality
for other people.
Sen. Rich Draheim, R-Madison Lake, introduced an unsuccessful bill this year
that would have encouraged cities to allow duplexes, triplexes or even
fourplexes in single-family neighborhoods.
Rep. Steve Elkins, D-Bloomington, wants the House to consider a similar bill
requiring cities to allow duplexes in any residential area. Other parts of their
bills are aimed at reducing the regulatory approval processes that a builders
coalition claims is making it impossible for them to build entry -level -priced
homes.
"What have we done to help people? We've shoved them in an apartment and
not done anything to help them get on a path to homeownership," Draheim
said. "I truly believe this is the best thing we can do to help people get out of
stiaiviblynall the money in the �ernsta fib` 'elFsus helping them build
equity- L11 a home."
Some other inner -ring suburbs are also taking a hard look at their zoning
(https:(hit v/fticilk
u=https t Wo
twin- twin-
cities- cities -
codes. Three years ago, Crystal loosened its lot -size requirements to enablchT8tOusing-
rules- rules -
to be split during redevelopment. New Brighton launched a steering commie keep-
the- the -
to evaluate its zoning code, which has not been updated since the 1970s. M4y9Emetro{https:,
Kari Niedfeldt-Thomas said she expects that the committee will discuss theegre
inequities and other criticisms of single-family zoning.
Shoreview Mayor Sandy Martin said her city has worked hard over the years
to ensure that there is a mixture of housing types and affordability levels. But,
like most other suburbs, multifamily housing is kept separate from single-
family units, and Martin is seeing how that has shaped the city.
"Shoreview has a very low percentage of people of color, but it can be up to 20
to 30% in some parts of the city," Martin said." The prevalence of multifamily
housing is where those populations are."
In St. Louis Park, the opposition of neighbors did not scuttle the project
planned (https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments-
divisions/community-development/development-projects/union-
congregational-church) for land owned by Union Congregational United
Church of Christ. But, in response to the complaints at that March meeting,
the developer reduced the proposal to three stories and 60 units. It was
approved by the council in June 2020.
The church's pastor, the Rev. Barb Martin, was disturbed by what she heard at
that meeting. She fears it has caused a rift in the neighborhood. The heated
complaints were "based on massive assumptions about who is going to live in
that apartment building," Martin later said in an interview. "And it's all
racial."
Stroder had gone to the meeting as part of her volunteer work with the St.
Louis Park Community Housing Team (https://m.facebook.com/login.php?
next=https%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com%2FSLP.CHT%2F&refsrc=deprecated& rdr)
xstaptiittfieft in tears, feeling tattP" "ett a'ah't want people who look
line iiie here." (https:(htt v/fticilk
u=httpsctoWo
twin- twin -
"Just because people don't have the same money and access to privilege, how
itthat they are a threat to you?" Stroder said, reflecting on the meeting mol sirs 3using-
rules- rules -
than a year later. keep- keep-
the- the-
metro-metro-(https:,
Stroder, who continues working with the affordable housing group, is pleasegiegatfflawate
that the apartment building got approved, but she is quick to point out that it's
not enough to solve the city's affordability and segregation problems.
The bigger work that needs to be done, she says, is one of the key things she
told the crowd at that meeting: "If the city is going to follow the tenet of being
concerned with racial equity and inclusivity, equality ... this is something that
all of us have to look into our hearts to find a way to work together to support
that."
Staff writers Eric Roper, Jim Buchta and Jeff Hargarten contributed to this report.
METHODOLOGY
To examine residential zoning patterns in the Twin Cities, the Star Tribune requested zoning maps
from more than 100 communities that are designated by the Metropolitan Council as urban or
suburban and are served by the regional sewer system.
Reporters reviewed zoning ordinances from each city and used information collected from a
survey of city planning officials to standardize the residential zoning districts. Each district was
assigned to a category based on the most dense form of housing allowed without a conditional
use permit or other form of special permission.
The categories were: single-family detached, multifamily housing of more than four units, and
districts that allow townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes or mobile homes (this is often
called "middle housing"). We also identified mixed -use areas that allow both residential and
nonresidential use. Areas zoned as a Planned Unit Development were categorized separately
since these areas are governed by agreements between a city and a developer, often overriding
existing zoning regulations.
This
rwork was conducted in late 2019i1141A/�@dItl ii t 11� the midst of approving their
ZU4�"Comb prehensive Plans. Those plans, which are done every 10 years, can result in zonin
ttps:(Yitt r/ftteilk
changes. The Star Tribune adjusted Minneapolis' data in its analysis to reflect the city's decibigmt pguo
to allow duplexes or triplexes in zoning districts that previously allowed only single-family ho Y1 . twin -
This analysis doesn't reflect any changes that might have occurred in other cities since ther�ities-cities-
ousirilusing-
rules- rules -
Read more about our process and download our data on Github. (https://striblab.github.io/mil--keep-
zoning-project/data.html) the- the-
metro-metro{https:,
segregaigdWIEN
INTRODUCTION VIDEO VOICES
Kiarra Zackery, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Manager, Golden Valley
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, Golden Valley
Charles Cadenhead, Mayor, Lake Elmo
Nelima Sitati Munene, Executive Director, African Career Education & Resource, Inc.
PeggySue lmihy, Management Analyst in Hopkins
Gary Cunningham, President and CEO, Prosperity Now
CREDITS
Reporting MaryJo Webster, Michael Corey, Eric Roper, Jim Buchta, Jeff Hargarten
Photography Mark Vancleave, Renee Jones Schneider, Shari Gross
Videography Mark Vancleave
Editing James Eli Shiffer, Eric Wieffering, Katie Moritz, Ginny Greene, Cheryl Diaz Meyer
Graphics Thomas Oide, Michael Corey, C.J. Sinner, Jim Foster
Design Anna Boone, Thomas Oide, Michael Corey
Development Michael Corey, Thomas Oide, Anna Boone, Jamie Hutt
Audience Engagement Tom Horgen, Anna Ta, Ashley Miller
MaryJo Webster is the data editor for the Star Tribune. She teams up with reporters to analyze
data for stories across a wide range of topics and beats.
,cStarTribmagWebster@startribune.com (ht 045m rtribur ebster
(https:(hitrsivaticittE
Michael Corey is a news developer for the Star Tribune. He specializes in data journalism, and twin--p�tw j 3��
twin -
his reporting has focused on mapping, science, remote sensing, history, data on the radio, policecities-cities-
housirt ausing-
use of force, the U.S.-Mexico border wall and sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. rules- rules-
keep- keep-
the- the-
michael.corey@startribune.com mikejcorey metro- metro-(https:,
segre
DRAFT
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
April 20, 2022
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Ca11 to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Rundle at 6:30 p.m. for April 20, 2022.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Curtis, Farmer, French, Munson, Nelson, Rundle, and
Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present: Community Development Director Jon Sevald and Council Member Gary
Meehlhause.
Index to Minutes Page
Resolution 1150-22; Conditional Use Permit and Development
Review for Expansion of a Multi -Family Dwelling at H2 Flats;
2662 Scotland Court
2
Approval of Minutes 5
3. Special Order of Business
None.
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
April 20, 2022
Page 2
5. Planning Cases
A. Resolution 1150-22; Conditional Use Permit and Development Review for
Expansion of a Multi -Family Dwelling at H2 Flats; 2662 Scotland Court
Community Development Director Sevald stated H2 Flats was built in 1972, and includes 11
buildings, totaling 385 units. In 1978, the owner proposed to build indoor and outdoor
recreational facilities. The outdoor sport courts were built. The recreational building was not.
The current plan is to remove the outdoor sport courts (unmaintained), to be replaced with sod
and a garden; and build a "club house" to include administrative offices, co -working space, and a
recreational room. The building will be in the same location as proposed in 1978 (open area
along County Road H2). Additionally, dumpster enclosures will be rebuilt. A Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) is required for the expansion of a Multi -Family facility (e.g. Club House).
Community Development Director Sevald explained a Development Review is required for a
new principal building (e.g. Club House). The two reviews are duplicative. This application is
specific to the Club House, although the entirety of the property may be included in the
Commission's discussions. The property is zoned R-4 High Density Residential, and guided
Multi -Family Residential in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The complex is boarded by Silver
View Park (north & west), wetland (east), and townhomes (south). Additionally, the owner
intends to make interior improvements to units, as they become vacant. Staff commented further
on the request and recommended the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit
and Development Review per staff's recommendation.
Paul Humestin, Paul Mayer Architects, thanked staff for the thorough report. He discussed the
design of the new building noting it would house three management offices, a package room, a
co-working/meeting space and a fitness center.
Commissioner Nelson requested further information regarding the parking requirements for the
building. Community Development Director Sevald commented on how parking requirements
had changed since the apartment building was constructed in 1972. He stated in 1972 the
number of garages that were built was appropriate and this legal non -conformity could continue.
Commissioner Nelson asked if now was the time to bring the property into conformance with
current parking standards. Community Development Director Sevald explained this was not a
requirement. He noted the general intent of the CUP was to focus on the new use.
Commissioner Nelson stated it seemed like there was a huge gap for parking on this site based
on the new parking numbers.
Commissioner Munson reported she lived in this apartment building 15 years ago and she
recalled parking onsite was difficult.
Commissioner Nelson commented he understood there was a need for a clubhouse, but he argued
that there was also a need for additional parking. Mr. Humestin stated from the owners
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
April 20, 2022
Page 3
perspective having appropriate onsite management facilities and other amenities for the residents
was outweighing the parking.
Commissioner Nelson indicated this was the City's chance to fix or address the parking situation.
He noted there were 385 units on this property and the site was vastly under parked.
Further discussion ensued regarding the cost for additional garages and stormwater management
on the property.
Community Development Director Sevald reported the City Council discussed this project at
their April worksession meeting and it was determined if another garage was added, costly
stormwater management would have to be put into the property.
Commissioner Nelson explained he did not believe he would be doing his job as a Planning
Commissioner if he didn't bring up his concerns about parking on this property.
Commissioner Curtis stated short of the garden area the only other option for parking would be
to construct a parking ramp, but he anticipated this would be cost prohibitive. Mr. Humestin
reported this was the case.
Commissioner Farmer reported the site currently has 719 parking stalls and 89 were covered. He
asked what the parking requirements were for apartment buildings at this time. Community
Development Director Sevald stated one garage stall and one and a half surface spaces is
required per apartment unit. He was of the opinion the City's requirements were a bit higher
than was needed. He explained some cities set their parking requirements based on the number
of bedrooms in each unit versus per unit.
Commissioner Curtis questioned how wide the drive aisle was that cut east/west through the
development. He asked if parking would fit on one side of the driveway. Mr. Humestin
estimated the drive lane was 24 feet wide. He did not believe additional parking would fit
against the curb.
Chair Rundle stated he was surprised this complex did not have a standalone management office.
He commented given the size of this apartment complex, the site needed a management office.
Commissioner Nelson encouraged the applicant to take another look at the plan to see if there
was any way to add more parking. Community Development Director Sevald stated plan does
show proof of parking for 18 additional stalls.
Commissioner Stevenson questioned how many additional parking stalls would be gained when
the parking lot was re -striped. Mr. Humestin commented on the number of parking stalls that
would be gained through the new parking plan.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
April 20, 2022
Page 4
Commissioner Nelson asked if the site had any handicap parking stalls. Mr. Humestin reported
one handicap parking stall would be added in front of the new clubhouse which met ADA
requirements. Mr. Humestin noted that there are no ADA units in the complex.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Munson/Commissioner Stevenson. To approve Resolution
1150-22, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development
Review for expansion of a Multi -Family Dwelling at H2 Flats at 2662 Scotland Court.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0 Motion carried.
6. Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity
Community Development Director Sevald discussed upcoming planning cases with the
Commission. He noted the Commission would meet on Wednesday, May 4 to discuss a variance
request.
B. Staff Updates
Community Development Director Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff
and reported Caribou Cabin would be opening soon.
C. Council Updates
Council Member Meehlhause provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City
Council. He commented on the items the Council reviewed at their April meeting, which
included the 2025 strategic plan and the 2023 budget. He indicated the EDA sold a lot on
Groveland for a new development. He noted the Council updated the electronic sign ordinance
and the vending kiosk ordinance. He reported the 2022-2023 street projects were approved,
which included a trailway expansion along Mounds View Boulevard. He explained the Council
approved the purchase of two pavilions that would be placed near the splash pad.
D. Planning Commissioner Reports
Commissioner Curtis reported the County had grant funding available to assist multi -family
housing units with constructing dumpster enclosures.
7. Other Planning Activity
None.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
April 20, 2022
Page 5
8. Approval of Minutes
March 2, 2022.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Nelson/Commissioner Farmer. To approve the Minutes of
the March 2, 2022 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0 Motion carried.
9. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. Wednesday, May 4, 2022
B. Wednesday, May 18, 2022
10. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Rundle adjourned the
meeting at 7:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Sevald
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
Minute Maker Secretarial