PL PACKET 03152022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 15, 2022 Page 3 1 After a series of back-and-forth negotiations with Met Council Staff, the Met Council 2 formally approved the Comprehensive Plan in April of 2020 – although the formal 3 submissions were occurring during the previous 12 months. Also during this period, the 4 property owner began redevelopment of the property as a manufactured home park. The City 5 considered the manufactured home park a continuing “grandfathered” use since there had 6 been some buildings retained during the period that the park appeared to be mostly closed. 7 The only formal land use application made during this period was for the subdivision 8 removing the westerly 4+ acres from the bulk of the property, which is currently under 9 development of a senior housing project. 10 11 Chair Socha asked Mr. Grittman to explain what the Met Council is expecting from St. 12 Anthony as far as goals. Mr. Grittman stated St. Anthony is considered an urban community. 13 Met Council requires new development average at least 10 units per acre. The further you 14 move out the lower the density. The 2040 growth goal was in the 500’s over the unit count. 15 Mr. Grittman does not have the specific numbers at this time. The affordability is also part of 16 these goals. There are targets that must be met. 17 18 The applicant is seeking a revision to the Land Use Plan, redesignating the land from High to 19 Low-Density Residential. To pursue this amendment, the City will need to revise more than 20 the map, since the map is directly tied to many of the numbers used elsewhere in the plan for 21 sewer, traffic, and most notably housing. Because the Comprehensive Plan was approved with 22 a fixed requirement for new housing units, and a component of affordable units, the land use 23 guidance for this site afforded the opportunity to assign several of those unit applications. The 24 Met Council Staff’s approval memorandum for the City’s 2040 Plan required the City to 25 adopt an affordable unit allocation for 2020 – 2030 of 153 affordable housing units. 26 27 Re-guiding the subject property to Low Density Residential would remove a significant 28 portion of those affordable units from the 2020-2030 and 2030-2040 Plan inventory, and they 29 would likely have to be reallocated to other sites. It is not clear how this might occur, and 30 would require some presumably extensive discussions with the City for suitable locations, as 31 well as with Met Council Staff. In that regard, it is possible that some or all of the replaced 32 manufactured homes may qualify for a portion of that allocation, but because there is no 33 specific development approval for the site, the mechanism for ensuring that is not clear at this 34 point. 35 36 Chair Socha asked if the mobile home park was legal non-conforming because it is zoned 37 single-family and they are putting in a higher density than the zoning allows. Mr. Grittman 38 stated because they retained some of that activity the City has taken the position it can be re- 39 established. 40 41 Before Staff undertakes the extensive research and Met Council discussions required to 42 pursue and ascertain the extent of other changes necessary to accomplish the applicant’s 43 request, a determination as to whether the City considers that effort to be in the interest of the 44 City’s 2040 Plan overall and its land use goals and objectives. While the property owner is 45 concerned that the Hennepin County Assessor is incented to raise property value (and