The URL can be used to link to this page

9-16-08 - agenda packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber September 16, 2008 6:30 p.m. The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call PAGES 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting - August 6, 2008 and Council/Manager Meeting - September 10, 2008 B. Approval of Check Register C. Licenses: 1. General Business Licenses 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Community of Recovering People dba The Retreat D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Human Rights Commission - June 12, 2008 2. Joint Water Commission - July 2, 2008 3. Human Services Foundation - August 11, 2008 4. Bassett Creek Water Management Commission - July 17, 2008 E. Letters and/or Petitions: 1. Petition Regarding Enforcement of Residential Property Maintenance Code at 2430 Quail Avenue North 2. Memorandum's Regarding 2008 League of Minnesota Cities Legislators of Distinction - Senators Ron Latz and Ann Rest 3. Letter from City of New Hope Regarding New Hope Ice Arena F. Approval of Deadline Extension for Final PUD - PUD #105 - Xenia Ridge G. Approval of Extension for Filing of Plat - 1017 Ravine Trail H. Call for Public Hearing - Special Assessments - Pavement Management Program - 10/21/08 I. Authorization to Sign Agreement with MnDOT for Safe Routes to School Program 08-39 J. Appointment to Human Rights Commission K. Call for Administrative Hearing - Appeal of Administrative Citation - 2560 Brookridge Avenue North - 1017/08 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM A. Public Hearing - Ordinance #409 - Rezoning to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) - 1100 Douglas Drive North, 1170 Douglas Drive North, 1200 Douglas Drive North, 1300 Douglas Drive North, 6200 Golden Valley Road and 6212 Golden Valley Road B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan Review - PUD #106 - Applewood Point - Northeast Corner of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road C. Public Item - Appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals Decision - 6925 Medicine Lake Road 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Continued Item - Authorization to Sign Amended PUD Permit - Calvary Lutheran Church - PUD No. 46 - Amendment NO.6 - 7520 Golden Valley Road 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Announcements of Meetings B. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT alley rn n urn Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. B. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments Loose in agenda packet. Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. alley M n u Inspections 763-593-8090 I 763-593-3997 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. General Business Licenses Prepared By Kathryn Pepin, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, some businesses are required to be licensed by the City. Listed below are the License Number, Applicant, License Type and Fee of those who have submitted an application for approval. #2851 Vintage Waste Systems P.O. Box 477, Mound Refuse Hauler - 2 Vehicles$100.00 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff. alley Memo ndum City Administration/Council 763-593-8006 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Community of Recovering People - The Retreat Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary The Retreat mission is to improve the quality of life for individuals, families and communities affected by alcohol and drug dependency by providing supportive, educational residential services grounded in the Twelve Step principles of Alcoholics Anonymous. As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit an application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or denied by the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the 30-day waiting period. Attachments Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages) Letter from Community of Recovering People - The Retreat requesting waiver of 30 day waiting period (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for the Community of Recovering People - The Retreat. Minnesota Lawfu! Gambling LG220 Application for Exem t Permit An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: · conduc1s lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and · awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. Fee is $50 for each event Page 1 of 2 6108 For Board Use Only Check # $ ORGANIZATION INFORMATION dbtt ---r4 ~~ R I Type of nonpr organization. Check ) one. D Fraternal D Religious D Veterans Mailing address \ ? -z.. \. 'Ut--\-tl (b l vb . E-. Name of chief executive officer (CEO) JO~f'. tv ,+1 SS Previous gambling permit number 'I. "34.'5'3"3 txj Other nonprofit organization State/Zi p Code (YlN SS3Ql Daytime phone number q?a -ltl~-O'5fo(P ATTACH A COPY OF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING FOR PROOF OF NONPROFIT'STATUS 1-tt * Do not attach a sales tax exempt status or federal 10 employer numbers as they are not proof of nonprofit status. _ Non profit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 180 State Office Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-296-2803 _ Internal Revenue Service -IRS income tax exemption [501 (c)) letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact the IRS at 877-829-5500. . _Internal Revenue Service -Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization (charter) If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of QQtt!. of the following: a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501 (c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. i.lntemal Revenue Service - proof previously submitted to Gambling Control Board If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the I ntema I Revenue Service, no attachment is required. GAMBI..INGP.REMISESINFORMATION Name of premises where gambling activity will be conducted (for raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place) 1'Y\e..-Tr-o 0 \", ~t:t \\.r-OO fY) Address (do not use PO box) City Got6en\lel.ne~ / Zip Code S41 ~ W "Z.a:+~ ib \ If J. . ,,\, 5 S 41 ~ Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date of the drawing} 00 '-\ 2CO g Check the box or boxes that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will conduct: D *Bingo itl Raffles D "Paddlewheels D "Pull-Tabs 0 *Tipboards * Gambling equipment ror pull-tabs, bingo paper, tipboards, and paddlewheels must be obtained trom a disbibutor licensed by the Gambling COntrol Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed trom another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on List of Licensed Distributors, or call 651-639-4076. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit LOCAL UNITOFG.OVERNMENTACKNOVVLEDGMENT Page 2 of 2 6/08 If the gambling premises is within city limits, the city must sign this application. Check (..J) the action that the city is taking on ~pplication. 0he application is acknowledged with no waiting period. _The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days (60 days for a 1st class city). _The application is denied. Print city name (P.o/de()Vctll~ On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this application. Signatu of c' personnel receiving application Title Date~.-LJ O~ CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE If the gambling premises is located in a township, both the county and township must sign this application. Check (..J) the action that the county is taking on this application. _The application is acknowledged with nO waiting period. _The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days. _The application is denied. Print county name On behalf of the county, I acknowledge this application. Signature of county personnel receiving application Title Date TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny an application [Minnesota Statute 349.213, subd. 2)] Print township name Signature of township official acknowledging application Title Date I The information provided in this application is com lete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and retu CI 0 the Board within 0 days of the date of our gambling activity. Chief executive officer's signature Complete an application for each ga . one day of gambling activity . two or more consecutive days . each day a raffle drawing is held Send application with: . a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and . $50 application fee for each event. Make check payable to "State of Minnesota." To: Gambling Control Board 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South Roseville, MN 55113 Date '1> ,/4 ,og Financial report and recordkeeping required A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your permit. Within 30 days of the activity date, complete and retum the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. Questions? Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at 651-639-4076. Da1a privacy. This form will be made avaUable in altemative format (i.e. large print, Braille) upon request. The information requested on this form (and any attachments) will be used by the Gambling Control Board (Board) to determine your qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to supply the information requested; however, if you refuse to supply this information, the Board may not be able to determine your qualifications and, as a consequence, may refuse to issue you a permit. If you supply the information requested, the Board will be able to process your application. Your name and and your organization's name and address wUl be public information when received by the Board. All the other information you provide will be private data until the Board issues your permit. When the Board issues your permit, all of the information provided to the Board will become public. If the Board does not issue a permit, all information provided remains private, with the exception of your name and your organizatiOn's name and address which will remain public. Private data are avaUable to: Board members. Board staff whose work requires access to the information; Minnesota's Department of Public Safety; Attorney General; Commissioners of Administration, Finance, and Revenue; legislative Auditor, national and intemational gambling regulatory agencies; anyone pursuant to court order; other individualS and agencies that are specifically authorized by state or federal law to have access to the information; individualS and agencies for which law or legal order authorizes a new use or sharing of information after this Notice was given; and anyone with your consent Directors George Mann, MD, Chairman John Curtiss, President Terry Tray, Vice Chairman Robert Harvey, Secretary Gale Sharpe, Treasurer Robert Bisanz, Life Member Greg Amer, MD Nancy Anderson John Beal John Brown, Jr. Kevin Hart Larry Hendrickson Larry Koll Todd Miller, MD Patrick O'Neill Bud Premer, MD Joanne Sift Molly McGlynn Varley Peter Vogt, MD Staff John Curtiss President Bruce Binger v.P. Development Diane Poole Program Director John Leonard Dir. of Marketing/Outreach Services Debbie Johnson Business Manager Ellie Hyatt Dir. Family & Spiritual Recavery Dick Rice Dir. of Spiritual Development Mike Jamison Men's Program Coordinator Andrea Bruner Women's Program Coordinator Lisa Maddalena Adm. Coordinator/Supervisor Russell Holm Admissions Coordinator Michelle Stangl Admissions Coordinator Mike Humphrey Retreat Assistant Sharry Weidner Retreat Assistant Peter Farley Facilities Manager Pierre Faillettaz Security Duane Jackson Spiritual Director August 25, 2008 Judy Nally City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Dear Judy: The Community of Recovering People (dba The Retreat) will host our annual IMAGINE fundraising event at the Metropolitan Ballroom and Clubroom on Saturday, October 4,2008. We are requesting permission to hold a raIDe at this event and respectfully request that the City Council waive the customary 30-day waiting period for the exemption for lawful gambling permit required for this type of event. I have attached a completed LG220 for your review and signature. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ~f~ Debbie L. Johnson Business Manager ~~- ~~.~ ,~ ~ ~~p....~..... ~k-F'~~ _ .~ www.theretreat.org . 952.476.0566 . 1.877.446.9283 . 1221 Wayzata Blvd. East . Wayzata, MN . 55391 GOLDEN VALLEY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MEETING Minutes from the Meeting of June 12, 2008 Members Present: Marion Helland, Anne Dykstra and Jay Sandvik. Members Absent: Ron Brandon. Staff Present: Chief Stacy Altonen and Council Member DeDe Scanlon. The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Dykstra at 7:04 pm. OPEN FORUM There was no one present requesting to address the Commission. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Helland moved to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2008 meeting; Seconded by Commissioner Sandvik. The minutes were unanimously approved. BREMER GRANT/CAPACITY BUILDING Hilary Hauser from the Crystal Human Rights Commission discussed their application in 2007 for the Bremer Grant to build a library of reference/training materials. Approximately $1400 was approved for books, DVDs and other materials, which are available for checkout to members of neighboring Human Rights Commissions. For 2008 the Crystal Human Rights Commission is considering a one or two-day strategic planning/capacity building session through Neighborhood House in St. Paul. Crystal would like to partner with New Hope and Golden Valley to apply for grant money for this training. Julie Ralston Aoki from the Robbinsdale Human Rights Commission was present and also expressed interest in partnering with surrounding cities for training/planning sessions. Commissioner Helland moved to approve partnering with New Hope, Crystal and Robbinsdale to apply for Bremer Grant funds for capacity building/planning. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE REPORTS SCHOOL EDUCATION The Quotable Quotes booklet was distributed to commissioners, highlighting quotes from the top 25 essays received for the essay contest. The Desegregation/Integration Plan and 2007-2008 free/reduced meal counts for Robbinsdale Schools were distributed and discussed. Regular Meeting of the Human Rights Commission June 12, 2008 Page 2 SCHOOL EDUCATION - CONTINUED Commissioner Dykstra will be giving a presentation on genocide at the Guthrie Theater for a teachers' workshop on June 21st. Commissioner Dykstra spoke about the Cambodian genocide to the junior and senior classes at Eagan High School last week and was impressed at how prepared the students were and how thoughtful their questions were. HOUSING There was nothing to report. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONS Commissioner Helland distributed the agenda and registration forms for the annual conference, which will be held October 4th in Rochester. Commissioner Dysktra reported Ellen Kennedy from the Genocide Intervention Network gave a presentation to the League regarding genocide and she would be willing to present to the mayor and council members to discuss divesture in Darfur. SHARE THE DREAM There was nothing to report. DISCRIMINATION Chief Altonen advised there was graffiti displayed on a garage door for unknown reasons. The case is still active, but there are no suspects. PROCLAMATIONS The proclamation for Juneteenth will be forwarded to the City Council for approval. OLD BUSINESS RECRUITMENT STRATEGIES Commissioner Dykstra advised she conducted a survey of minority businesses in Golden Valley and surrounding cities and devised a short list of businesses where members could be recruited from. Commissioner Jorgenson was intending to work on recruitment strategies with churches, but resigned before work was completed. Commissioner Helland offered to create a brochure to outline what the Golden Valley HRC does for human rights. Commissioner Helland stated it may be beneficial to send an invitation to churches and schools in Golden Valley to solicit membership from staff members. DIVERSITY TRAINING This item can be removed from the agenda. Regular Meeting of the Human Rights Commission June 12, 2008 Page 3 NEW BUSINESS STATE REHABILITATION COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM FOR EMPLOYMENTSERVICE NEEDS OF INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES The hearing will be hosted in the Golden Valley City Council Chambers on Wednesday, June 25th, from 0900-1800 hours. An outline for the day was distributed to commissioners. ELECTION OF OFFICERS This item will be postponed until the July meeting due to all members not being present. NEXT MEETING The next meeting will be on Thursday, July 10, 2008 beginning at 7 pm. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Sandvik, seconded by Commissioner Helland to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 pm. JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Meeting of July 2, 2008 The Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Joint Water Commission meeting was called to order at 1 :30 pm, in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room. Commissioners Present Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal Staff Present Guy Johnson, Public Works Director, New Hope Paul Coone, Operations Manager, New Hope Bernie Weber, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, New Hope Tom Mathisen, Public Works Director, Crystal Randy Kloepper, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Crystal Dave Lemke, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Golden Valley Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley Jeannine Clancy, Public Works Director, Golden Valley Approval of JWC Minutes MOVED by McDonald, seconded by Norris and motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 2, 2008 meeting. Purchase of One Trailer Mounted Valve Maintenance/Exerciser and Vacuum Excavation/Cleanout Approval of Trailer Mounted Valve Maintenance/Exerciser and Vacuum Excavation/Cleanout that was approved at the City of Golden Valley Council meeting on June 3,2008. One bid was received from E. H. Wachs Company for the amount of $59,845. MOVED by Norris, seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to approve the purchase of a Trailer Mounted Valve Maintenance/Exerciser and Vacuum Excavation/Cleanout from E. H. Wachs Company for $59,845. Aareement with Environment Financial Group, Inc. (EFG) for Emergency Supply Study Discussion regarding the existing proposal and the necessity of tasks and costs associated with Characterize Emergency Demands and the Hydraulic analysis and engineering analysis of disinfection treatment of pipeline routes to the JWC distribution system from the New Hope well were reviewed. The consensus was that the Commission should re-negotiate the contract with Scott Harder from EFG and trim unnecessary tasks and costs from the contract. Joint Water Commission July 2, 2008 Page 2 Agreement with EFG for Emergency Supply Study - Continued McDonald asked if there was enough money in the budget to cover the cost of the proposal. Virnig responded that the Commission had budgeted $100,000 for professional services. Burt recapped the discussion stating that a new proposal with EFG should be negotiated and the cost should not exceed $41,021.84 and the costs associated with obtaining information concerning the capacity of the General Mills well and New Hope well as part of an emergency supply and demand plan is necessary. The information gathered about the New Hope and General Mills wells will be needed for the cities comprehensive water supply plan. MOVED by Norris, seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to re-negotiate the contract with Environment Financial Group, Inc. (EFG) for the emergency supply study. Receive and File Letter from Environment Financial Group, Inc. Regarding Consulting Engagement with the City of Minneapolis Discussion included the benefits of having the Joint Water Commission represented at the table and a possible conflict of interest with Scott Harder being involved in cost of service adjustment to JWC rates charged by Minneapolis. The consensus was if anyone had objections, a new consulting firm would be hired. MOVED by Norris, seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to receive and file the letter from Environment Financial Group, Inc., dated June 2,2008, noting the conflict of interest but allow Environmental Financial Group, Inc. to enter into an agreement with the City of Minneapolis. Final Bill from MnDOT for Relocation of Water Main under Highway 100 Mathisen received a bill from MnDOT for $36,388 for the costs associated with relocating the water main under Highway 100. After a discussion on MnDOT's accounting procedures, it was recommended that Mathisen contact MnDOT to ensure that this bill is truly a final bill for all costs associated with that project. MOVED by Norris, seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to receive and file the bill from MnDOT and have Mathisen confirm that this is the final bill for the relocation of the water main under Highway 100. Joint Water Commission July 2, 2008 Page 3 Next Meeting The next meeting will be August 6,2008. The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 pm. ATTEST: Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant Thomas D. Burt, Chair Golden Valley Human Services Foundation (GVHSF) Meeting Minutes August 11, 2008 Present: Daniel Blumb, Shannon Breimhurst, Hilmer Erickson, Elissa Heilicher, Teri Holgate, Gloria Johnson, Chris Monroe, Diane Nimmer, Connie Sandler, Steve Schumacher and Toots Vodovoz. Also present Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison. Not Present: Bob Hoyt Call to Order: Chairperson Blumb called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. July 14 minutes: Monroe moved and Heilicher seconded the motion to approve the minutes of July 14. The motion passed unanimously. Golf Tournament: Fackler passed out the list of sponsors for the golf tournament. Heilicher has contacted Crossroad's Deli and Piazza's. Bag stuffers and prizes are needed. Erickson will ask Golden Valley Shopping Center merchants. Volunteer positions were discussed. A sign-up sheet will be sent to commission members. The YMCA has committed 6-8 people. Vodovoz has also contacted Home Free, PRISM, Crisis Nursery for volunteers. Fackler will send golf brochures to the city commissions and council. New Business: Taste of Golden Valley: Monroe reported that there are 48 restaurants in Golden Valley. She will e-mail the list to commission members and ask each member to contact 3A restaurants. Doolittles has committed to the event. Tickets will be available to members at the September meeting. Sponsorship packet/brochure: Breimhurst and Nimmer have met. They are gathering information on the HSF events and sponsor opportunities. Allocation Packet: Fackler reported the packet is ready and agencies have been calling. Packets are due August 29. Agencies will be presenting at the September meeting. Old Business: By-laws review: The Council will be discussing the by-law change at the August 12 Council/Manager meeting. Open Forum: Suggestion to have the agencies we fund bring a picture and short paragraph for a communication board to the September meeting. Fackler will add this information to the meeting invitation. The boards will be placed at the golf luncheon and at the Taste of Golden Valley. Fackler asked if the October meeting date could be changed. Nimmer moved to change the October meeting from October 13 to October 6, Vodovoz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously Blumb reminded commission members that the September meeting will begin at 6 pm due to the agency presentations. Adjournment: Monroe moved to adjourn the meeting, Breimhurst seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jeanne Fackler GVHSF Staff Liaison The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) was called to order at 11:30 a.m., Thursday, July 17,2008, at Golden Valley City Hall by Chair Welch. Ms. Herbert conducted roll call. Roll Call Crystal Golden Valley Medicine Lake Minneapolis Minnetonka New Hope Plymouth Robbinsdale St. Louis Park Also present: Alternate Commissioner Stu Stockhaus Commissioner Linda Loomis, Treasurer Commissioner Cheri Templeman Commissioner Michael Welch, Chair Commissioner Kris Sundberg Commissioner Daniel Stauner Commissioner Ginny Black, Vice Chair Commissioner Karla Peterson Commissioner Manuel Jordan Counsel Engineer Recorder Charlie LeFevere Len Kremer Amy Herbert Laura Adler, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of St. Louis Park Derek Asche, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Plymouth John Barten, Three Rivers Park District Dave Fritzke, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee representative, City of Crystal Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Mark Hansen, SRF Consulting Group Randy Lehr, Three Rivers Park District AI Lundstrom, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley Richard McCoy, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Robbinsdale Mark Nagel, Springsted, Inc. Ron Nims, Citizen, City of Golden Valley John O'Toole, Alternate Commissioner, City of Medicine Lake Jason Quisberg, Alternate Commissioner, City of New Hope Liz Stout, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minnetonka Ms. Loomis noted that the MMKR invoice in the amount of $2,345.00 for audit services was left off of the agenda and requested it be added and noted that the agenda announces the presentation of the May minutes but it should list the June minutes instead. Chair Welch announced that invoice number CVil would be deferred until the August meeting and announced the addition of agenda item 4E - Reimbursement request to the MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency) for Sweeney Lake TMDL Study work. Ms. Loomis moved to approve the agenda and the consent agenda as amended. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. No citizen input on non-agenda items. #248935 vI Page 1 BCWMC July 17,2008, Meeting Minutes A. Presentation of the June 19, 2008, BCWMC meeting minutes. The June 19, 2008, meeting minutes were approved as part of the Consent Agenda. B. Presentation of the Financial Statement. The general and construction account balances reported in the July 2008 Financial Report are as follows: Checking Account Balance TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE 519,033.80 519,033.80 Construction Account Balance (cash) Investment Balance TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BALANCE -Less: Reserved for CIP projects Construction cash/ investments available for projects 2,578,081.95 0.00 2,158,318.76 3,847,879.97 (1,269,798.02) C. Presentation of Invoices for Payment Approval. Invoices: i. Kennedy & Graven - Legal Services through May 31,2008 - invoice for the amount of $1,423.58. ii. Barr Engineering Company - June Engineering Services and TMDL Study work - invoice for the amount of $24,631.31. iii. Amy Herbert - June Recording Administrator Services - invoice for the amount of $2,853.40. iv. Wenck - Review of Golden Valley and Minnetonka Local Water Management Plans - invoice for the amount of $3,375.00. v. City of Plymouth - Reimbursement for 2008 Curlyleaf Pondweed Spot Treatment - invoice for the amount of $15,000. vi. SEH, Inc. - Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Phase 2 Services through May 31, 2008 - invoice for the amount of $1,495.00. vii. SEH, Inc. - Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Phase 2 Services through June 30, 2008 - invoice deferred until August BCWMC meeting. viii. SEH, Inc. - Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Phase 1 Services through June 30, 2008 - invoice in the amount of $2,407.92. ix. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trost - Insurance - invoice for the amount of $3,832.00. #248935 vI x. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trost - Open Meeting Law Coverage- invoice for the amount of $372.00. BCWMC July 17,2008, Meeting Minutes Page 2 xi. MMKR - Final payment for audit for services - invoice for the amount of $2,345.00. Chair Welch requested that the Commission consider invoice Cviii separately from the group of invoices. Ms. Black moved to approve the payment of invoices Ci - Cvi, Cix and Cx. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. By call of roll, the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Loomis moved to approve usiug funds from the 2006 Medicine Lake in-lake treatment for the payment of the reimbursement to the City of Plymouth for the 2008 curlyleaf pondweed spot treatment. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Kremer explained that invoice Cviii was for SEH, Inc.'s Sweeney Lake TMDL Study work utilizing the remaining funds from phase 1 and with the agreement of the MPCA for the use of those remaining funds. Ms. Black asked if the $2,392 of the remaining phase 1 funds would be deducted from phase 2 expenses. Mr. Kremer said the funds likely would not be deducted from the phase 2 costs because the expenses are for early evaluation of data and likely won't lead to future cost savings. Ms. Peterson moved to approve payment of the invoice. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. By call of roll, the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Black moved to approve payment of invoice Cxi to MMKR for audit services in the amount of $2,345.00. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. D. Renewal of BCWMC Insurance through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and Adoption of the "Do Not Waive' resolution. Ms. Black moved to renew the insurance and to adopt the "Do Not Waive" resolution. Mr. Stauner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. E. Approving BCWMC's Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Reimbursement Request to MPCA. Ms. Black moved to approve sending the reimbursement request to the MPCA. Mr. Stauner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. A. North Hennepin Regional Trail: Golden Valley Trail Phase 2. Mr. Kremer explained that linear projects such as this trail projects are difficult in terms of incorporatiug water quality treatment measures. He explained that linear projects such as this one are not required to meet Levell staudards due to right-of-way constraints. Mr. Kremer pointed out that some of this portion of the trail will run along a wooded area, which will receive some of the trail runoff, as will a water quality treatment basin in Schraper Park. Mr. Kremer said the Commission Engineer recommends approval of the project. Mr. Stauner asked if the project investigated the possibility of using a porous surface for the trail. Mr. Barten ofthe Three Rivers Park District said that due to the fact that the trail will be overlying an old railway bed a porous trail surface was not feasible. Ms. Black moved approval of this project. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. Chair Welch commented that the information in the June 12, 2008, Engineer's Memo on this project states that "some innItration and treatment" will be provided by existing buffers and soil permeability. Chair Welch requested that in the future the memo provide more quantification with such statements. The motion carried unanimously. B. City of New Hope Local Water Management Plan Review. Mr. Kremer stated that the comments #248935 vI BCWMC July 17,2008, Meeting Minutes Page 3 from Barr's review of New Hope's local water management plan were included in the meeting packet (memo from Karen Chandler and Tim Brown on July 10, 2008J. Mr. Kremer explained that issues 1 and 2 as discussed in the memo are the most significant issues and need to be addressed by the City. Ms. Black remarked that the second comment from the Metropolitan Council in its June 3, 2008, letter to the BCWMC on the New Hope plan is that while the BCWMC does not have a numerical standard for runoff volume control, many metro-area watershed management organizations have adopted a one-inch standard for control of volume on site. Ms. Black suggested the Commission consider in the future setting a volume control standard. Chair Welch directed Ms. Herbert to add to the September BCWMC agenda a discussion of issues that the Commission has identified as standards that need to be reviewed and! or addressed. Ms. Peterson commented that the Commission should review its standards annually. Mr. Kremer pointed out that the Commission's guidelines allow for new technologies if they demonstrate results that meet the Commission's requirements. Ms. Black asked if the Commission wants T AC's input for the September BCWMC meeting regarding what it thinks should be revised in the Commission's Watershed Management Plan. Mr. Kremer said the TAC has discussed this at various times including when the original plan was developed. Ms. Black moved to approve forwarding the Commission's comments from the memo from Karen Chandler and Tim Brown to the City of New Hope. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. C. Education Committee: Blake School Education Grant Application. Ms. Black reported that the Blake School submitted a grant request, as included in the meeting packet, for $1,000 for plantings around a pond. Ms. Sundberg stated she liked the fact that the school is contributing $5,000 to the project. Mr. Jordan commented that this project has the potential to be an outdoor learning environment. Ms. Black moved to approve funding this grant. Mr. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. D. City of Medicine Lake Comprehensive Plan Review Request. Ms. Templeman commented that the plan will have to be tweaked in terms of its shoreline and storm water runoff ordinances. Mr. LeFevere remarked that the Commission has constructed a letter to send in response to requests from cities for reviews and comments on comprehensive plans. Chair Welch said the Commission could convey its standard message along with the additional message that the BCWMC is willing to work with the City on its shoreline and storm water ordinances. Ms. Templeman moved to send the standard letter to the City of Medicine Lake with the additional comments that the BCWMC is willing to work with the City on its shoreline and storm water ordinances in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. A. Presentation on Sweeney Branch Channel Restoration Project: Golden Valley. Mr. Lundstrom of the City of Golden Valley presented the results of the project that was a partnership between the City of Golden Valley and the BCWMC and utilized the services ofWSB & Associates and Quiring Excavating. As WSB summarized in its close-out letter for the project, prior to the project, the Sweeney Lake Branch of Bassett Creek had eroding banks and sediment deltas present throughout much of its length caused by periodic high velocity flows and the Duck Pond basin was fUled with sediment and had a pipe outfall into the system that was in disrepair. The project included the following improvements: . Clearing and grubbing a buffer area along the banks of the channel; . Lowering the prof"Ile and grade of the creek (two to three feet in some areas); . Shaping the banks to 2:1 slopes; #248935 vI BCWMC July 17, 2008, Meeting Minutes Page 4 · Installing class IV fieldstone riprap over the banks to a three-foot minimum height; · Installing sheet pile weir structures to permanently maintain the reduced grade and provide a pooling effect along the creek for increased wildlife habitat and aesthetics; · Dredging the Duck Pond to an approximate six foot depth for improved treatment capacity; · Establishing native grass, wildflower, and shrub buffer along the sides of the creek; · Grading an overflow swale approximately 1.5 feet above the creek bed back to the existing 96" storm pipe routing to Glen Pond; · Removing and replacing a flared end section and installing a headwall support structure. Ms. Templeman inquired whether the information from Mr. Lundstrom's presentation could be added to the Commission's Web site. Chair Welch directed staff to get bids on costs for posting the project photos and the information from Mr. Lundstrom's presentation onto the Web site. Chair Welch also directed staffto notify the MN Board of Water and Soil Resources once the Sweeney Branch Channel restoration project information is up on the Commission's Web site. Chair Welch also directed the Education and Public Outreach Committee to discuss consistency of BCWMC logo presentation on project signage. Ms. Sundberg commented that the Commission should nominate this project for the Governor's award. Mr. LeFevere said WSB likely would be the entity to nominate this project for the award. B. Discuss Requirements for Improvements and Development Document. Mr. LeFevere said that he and Mr. Kremer are still in discussions with Mr. Brad Wozney of the MN Board of Water and Soil Resources regarding the revisions recommended by the BCWMC to its Requirements for Improvements and Development Document. According to Mr. Wozney, the determination on whether or not the revisions to the document would require a plan amendment is dependent on whether the revisions are changes to the Commission's standards. Mr. LeFevere recommended that the Commission approve the revised document contingent on the fact that BWSR is in favor of approving the revisions without a plan amendment. He said if BWSR determines that the revisions would require a plan amendment then the Commission could go forward with the amendment process. Ms. Black moved that the Commission approve the revised Requirements for Improvements and Development document pending approval from BWSR. Ms. Peterson seconded the motion. Chair Welch remarked that if a meeting between the Commission and BWSR is necessary he would be willing to meet with BWSR. Mr. Kremer said Barr has provided Mr. Wozney with a list of locations in the Commission's Watershed Management Plan where the policies will be included in the revised requirements document and also provided him with a redline strikeout of the revised guidelines. Mr. Kremer reported that he spoke with Mr. Wozney earlier today and he had only two remaining issues. Mr. Kremer stated he felt those two issues could be resolved without a meeting. The motion carried unanimously. C. Discuss Resource Management Plan. Chair Welch explained that the Commission is investigating the plan as a possibility that it could be an avenue of cutting the costs and the time of the Army Corps of Engineers' permitting process for the Commission's CIP projects. Mr. Kremer reminded the Commission that the resource management plan idea was started when the City of Golden Valley submitted a permit application for the Sweeney Branch Channel restoration project presented earlier in today's meeting. The Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) responded to the permit application by stating that the earliest the permit would be approved would be 2009. The City and Barr Engineering pursued other possibilities with the Corps and the Corps granted a letter of conditional approval for the project and suggested the Commission develop a resource management plan as a way of expediting the permitting process for a group of future Commission projects. Mr. Kremer said his July 10, 2008, memo in the meeting packet identifies what information to be contained in the plan has been already gathered by the Commission and what #248935 vI BCWMC July 17, 2008, Meeting Minutes Page 5 information remains to be gathered and also provides more detailed cost estimates about the creation of the plan. Ms. Black asked if the Commission would find it helpful to have an Army Corps of Engineers representative come to the August meeting to discuss the plan. Chair Welch directed Mr. Kremer and Ms. Herbert to invite the Corps representative to the August or September meeting. Mr. Stauner asked if the Commission would save money on the permitting costs down the road if some of the permitting work is done up front as would occur with the resource management plan. Mr. Kremer said yes and that he estimates that the savings to the Commission would be up to 50% of the permitting costs. D. Discuss elP Reserve Fund and Policy. Mr. LeFevere reminded the Commission that its CIP Closed Project Account Policy were guidelines adopted by the Commission on how those monies from the closed CIP projects should be spent and if not spent, then what amount should be accumulated. Upon adoption of the policy, the BCWMC decided it would look at the policy annually to see if the $250,000 accumulation ceiling still made sense. Mr. LeFevere said that this policy addresses the cases in which the Commission receives more money from the county than it requested or the Commission has funds left over from tax-supported projects. Ms. Loomis commented that there are stream bank projects now included in the CIP. Ms. Black recommended that the Commission leave the policy as it is with the $250,000 ceiling and that the Commission discuss it again next year. A. Chair: i. Chair Welch announced that a Boy Scout in a troop in Robbinsdale requested an interview with a member of the Commission and that Commissioner Peterson would be meeting with the Boy Scout. ii. Chair Welch stated that Mark Nagel of Springsted, Inc. would have a first draft of his findings and recommendations for Commission review and suggested that the Administrator Services committee conduct an initial review of the draft. iii. Chair Welch said the Commission training is set for Tuesday, August 12th and directed Ms. Herbert to post the meeting notice and to coordinate the video taping of the training with the City of Golden Valley. B. Commissioners: i. Ms. Loomis announced that the City of Golden Valley is doing a corridor study of Douglas Drive from Highway 55 to the north border of the city. She said Douglas Drive crosses Bassett Creek and the working group would like to meet with a representative of the BCWMC as a stakeholder to talk about issues regarding future land uses along the corridor and improving bike and pedestrian access. Ms. Loomis said she could attend. Ms. Black said she could attend. Mr. Jordan said he could possibly attend. ii. Ms. Templeman announced that Brooke Asleson of the MPCA will attend the Commission's August meeting to provide an update on the Medicine Lake TMDL study. #248935 vI BCWMC July 17,2008, Meeting Minutes Page 6 ill. Chair Welch announced that he and Commissioner Loomis have received a draft work plan for the Wirth Lake TMDL study. iv. Ms. Loomis announced that the first meeting ofthe Upper Mississippi TMDL Study is on Tuesday, July 24th at 8:30 a.m. at the Minneapolis Park Board office. v. Ms. Black announced that she has received a draft of Plymouth's surface water management plan and the Commission should be receiving it soon. C. Committees: i. Education Committee: Ms. Black announced that the seed packets are currently in a BCWMC display and are available in the Plymouth Creek Center and that next the display will go to Crystal and that St. Louis Park has indicated an interest in the display as weD. Ms. Black handed out copies of the City of Plymouth's Environmental Extra and announced that other cities can use the information contained in the publication and that the contact is Margie Virgoren at the City of Plymouth. D. Counsel* E. Engineer: Mr. Kremer Ms. Black moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 2:01 p.m. Michael Welch, Chair Date Date Amy Herbert, Recorder Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary Date #248935 vI BCWMC July 17,2008, Meeting Minutes Page 7 August 22, 2008 AUG t't lOO8 In order to insure the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Golden Valley, we, the undersigned residents of Golden Valley, request that the City of Golden Valley enforce all city codes and ordinances including, but not limited to, Section 4.60 Residential Property Maintenance Code for the residential property at 2430 Quail Avenue North, Golden Valley. Please contact our representative, Barb Cunnnins (763-521-6330), to discuss action on the property; Thank you. Name mffi\ils -~ 7I~ {Z/V1~Q ;jpb if ~-7 '" l?n.-t MJ AHl6-/lfO(1 vf,(1 J!i(n(J /d de Ie. nG 1?e$. i J.- , fa c.\e , -o.f?- Address ) ) J } ) I ), ~!5B.5 ~ a~ ~G,.O ~ ('( Aut... A0 ';<'(Qo5 \.)~ ~ 0, !2 ~ ::;)e:;;- 6 u~ I {tvc. (\ r: 2"80 dl v J.:tt -A- lIb . 'II :( (p(!}r) ryLllj ~ r /J J .Jit;;E:J55e-(f ~~ (}I'il/~ August 22, 2008 In order to insure the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Golden Valley, we, the undersigned residents of Golden Valley, request that the City of Golden Valley enforce all city codes and ordinances including, but not limited to, Section 4.60 Residential Property Maintenance Code for the residential property at 2430 Quail Avenue North, Golden Valley. Please contact our representative, Barb Cummins (763-521-6330), to discuss action on the property. Thank you. Name Address 'If 05 lk0c?(tof:~Sfll cjCjro 1-\ ~$" 0 :D ,/f:{ ~ ~t!J.ss.dl 4f> . J52... JI], ])v- K~, Cj97S- ~ t3ud- ))A. L <17S-}8~~04' ~ '1,-\ S ~\\ A~t rCt~e 2 0+ 2- REHL ESTATE, INC. R€C€/IIEO Sfp 112a G '08 OLoI:N \fAil _ _ f:JRi! ~y Co& 11550 Oberlin Road Minnetonka, MN 55305 GHK (952) 412-1680 Direct (952) 546-5790 FAX gbkrealc!>1ate@gmail.com September 8, 2008 Josh Kunde City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley, MN 55427 RE: 2430 Quail Ave N Josh, I currently have a purchase agreement with a closing scheduled for October 10, 2008 for the residence at 2430 Quail Ave North. I will be taking responsibility for correcting the violations noted on the June 5, 2008 Violation Notice as part of this purchase agreement. For the Handrails and Screen door class I intend to have these items corrected by November 10, 2008. For the Fascia/Soffit, Chimney, Gutters, and Roof, I intend to have these items corrected by December 10,2008. My understanding is that citations were to go out against this property to the C1.lrrentowners and I formally request that those be stayed as they have now entered into this agreement with me I want to be responsible for the rehabilitation of this property. Sincerely .&:-.~ Peter Vickerman President-GHK Real Estate, Inc. 00 LEAGUE Of MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SI:S:CE 1913 Memorandum To: Mayor From: Gary Carlson, Director of Intergovernmental Relations Date: 8/22/2008 Re: 2008 Leag.ue of Minnesota Cities Legislator s of Distinction The League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors recognized 32 legislators this year for their actions and leadership on a wide variety of legislative issues of importance to cities across Minnesota. You will note in the attached letter specific reasons your legislator was chosen for this recognition by the League. I Please share this recognition with your city council and the public at your next council meeting. By publicly acknowledging legislators for their efforts in support of city-friendly legislation, we continue to strengthen the partnership between state and local government and in particular between city officials and state legislators. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Brian Strub at the League of Minnesota Cities at bstrub@lmc.orq, 651-281-1256 or 800-925-1122. Thank you for your efforts to strengthen the partnership between state and city leaders, and for telling your city story. 145 UNIVER5ln'. AVE. 'V'EST ST. PAlH ,""tN 55103-20+4 PHONE (6S!) 2c81-1100 E'X :4:'511 281-1299 rOLL f PetE (SOm 925-1122 WH \n~ ',..-eN.::: 0:::'::; LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 September 2, 2008 Senator Ron Latz 306 Capitol 75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Senator Latz: On behalf of the more than 800 member cities of the League of Minnesota Cities, we are honored to acknowledge your legislative contributions during the 2008 session by recognizing you as a League of Minnesota Cities 2008 Legislator of Distinction. As you know, we pursue flexible, responsible, and accountable municipal authority to provide local solutions to our residents in a wide array of services including safe drinking water, police and fire protection, quality parks and recreation among others. Defending local control and protecting cities from unfunded mandates are core beliefs of the League of Minnesota Cities, and our members pursue these principals with the goal of fostering and encouraging active engaged citizen participation in local governance in communities across Minnesota. Our members recognize that in order to be successful in serving our common constituents, state and city officials must work together as partners to reach solutions that meet the unique needs of rural, suburban, and urban main streets across this state. City leaders also understand that without the support of legislative leaders like you, this partnership - and all the success that results from our cooperation - would not be possible. In particular, during the 2008 session, youplayed a key leadership role on the 1-35 bridge victim's' compensation fund legislation and worked with the League to assure that the final legislation preserved the state and local government tort liability caps. 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST ST. PAUL, MN 55103-2044 PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: (651) 281-1299 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMCORG Senator Ron Latz - September 2, 2008 Page 2 Again, thank you for your efforts to continue Minnesota's strong tradition of a healthy state-local partnership. We hope to see you in Bloomington for the League of Minnesota Cities Regional Meeting on November 20, 2008. Sincerely, ~'7'~-..~rI Mary Hamann-Roland Apple Valley Mayor LMC President ~i'!-~ Ardell Brede Rochester Mayor LMC I st Vice President CC: Mayors in District 44 Mayor Linda Loomis, Golden Valley/ Mayor Eugene "Maxwell, Hopkins Mayor Jeff Jacobs, S1. Louis Park LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 September 2, 2008 Senator Ann Rest 205 Capitol 75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Senator Rest: On behalf of the more than 800 member cities of the League of Minnesota Cities, we are honored to acknowledge your legislative contributions during the 2008 session by recognizing you as a League of Minnesota Cities 2008 Legislator of Distinction. As you know, we pursue flexible, responsible, and accountable municipal authority to provide local solutions to our residents in a wide array of services including safe drinking water, police and fire protection, quality parks and recreation among others. Defending local control and protecting cities from unfunded mandates are core beliefs of the League of Minnesota Cities, and our members pursue these principals with the goal of fostering and encouraging active engaged citizen participation in local governance in communities across Minnesota. Our members recognize that in order to be successful in serving our common constituents, state and city officials must work together as partners to reach solutions that meet the unique needs of rural, suburban, and urban main streets across this state. City leaders also understand that without the support of legislative leaders like you, this partnership - and all the success that results from our cooperation - would not be possible. In particular, during the 2008 session, you were instrumental in the successful passage of several League-supported initiatives including changes to the statutes governing charter cities, the legislation authorizing meetings onMarch 4, the date formerly reserved for party caucuses and the legislation that establishes a framework for state responses to natural disasters. We would also like to acknowledge your open door policy and your unwavering willingness to meet with us to discuss city issues. 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST ST. PAUL. MN 55103-2044 PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: (651) 281-1299 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG Senator Ann Rest September 2, 2008 Page 2 Again, thank you for your efforts to continue Minnesota's strong tradition of a healthy state-local partnership. We hope to see you in Bloomington for the League of Minnesota Cities Regional Meeting on November 20, 2008. Sincerely, ~4~-'/@'.rI Mary Hamann-Roland Apple Valley Mayor LMC President ~V!-~ Ardell Brede Rochester Mayor LMC 1 sf Vice President CC: Mayors in District 45 Mayor ReNae Bowman, Crystal /"" Mayor Linda Loomis, Golden V alleyv' Mayor Martin Opem, New Hope Mayor Kelli, Slavik, Plymouth Mayor Mike Holtz, Robbinsdale September 8,2008 Ms. Linda Loomis, Mayor City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Mr. Tom Burt, City Manager City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Dear Mayor Loomis and Mr. Burt: Major capital improvements are on the horizon at the New Hope Ice Arena and the New Hope City Council is uncertain where funding for the improvements will come from. In June, the City Council authorized the creation of a New Hope Ice Arena Endowment Fund to encourage arena users, stakeholders, area residents and businesses, and our neighboring cities within the School District to play an active role in helping to meet the facility's needs. The New Hope Ice Arena, located at 4949 Louisiana Ave. N., was constructed in 1975. A second sheet of ice was added in 1996. The outdated cooling system for the original north ice sheet is nearing the end of its life cycle, and the city of New Hope does not have the estiri1ated $1.5 million funding in place to replace thea.ging ice refrigeration and dehumidification systems. In addition, remodeling of the arena's COIl1Il1unity room, replacement of the roof and other projects also need to be addressed in the near future. The New Hope Ice Arena is a regional asset that serves hockey players from New Hope, as well as your cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Golden Valley, Plymouth and Robbinsdale. It has been home ice for Cooper and Armstrong boys' and girls' hockey teams since 1975. The arena has been home to local youth hockey associations for many years, and continues to work closely with the Armstrong Cooper Youth Hockey. The facility also serves local figure skaters. The New Hope Figure Skating School provides figure skating instruction to skaters ages three to adult. And, the community room at the arena hosts many recreation programs - including New Hope's very popular dance program as well as many community groups. Of course, these programs serve families from many other cities besides New Hope. The New Hope Ice Arena was built with general obligation bonds, which were paid for by New Hope taxpayers for the good of the greater community. While the city of New Hope has beenrespon$ible forall the operating and maintenance costs, some of these costs have been held down through rentals to users such as Youth HockeyandISD 281. CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 Xylon Avenue North. New Hope, Minnesota 55428-4898. www.ci.new-hope.mn.us City Hall: 763-531-5100. Police (non-emergency): 763-531-5170. Public Works: 763-592-6777. TDD: 763-531-5109 City Hall Fax: 763-531-5136. Police Fax: 763-531-5174. Public Works Fax: 763-592-6776 Page 2 The facility serves the needs of many people beyond New Hope's borders. The New Hope Ice Arena Endowment Fund was established to assist with maintenance needs and improvements to the facility. As stated above, the most urgent need is funding to replace the original sheet of ice. That is where the first $1.5 million will be spent. The Endowment Fund presents an opportunity for everyone who sees the extraordinary benefits the New Hope Ice Arena provides to help "Keep It Cool." All contributions are welcome. The city of New Hope will match 25 percent of all funds received. The goal of the endowment fund is to raise $2.5 million for capital improvement needs at the arena. This request for assistance is being made due to a substantial loss in LGA to the city over the past several years and due to the current economic downturn. The response from the greater community will be a gauge as to the level of community support for maintaining the ice arena and continuing the operation into the future. For more information about the New Hope Ice Arena Endowment Fund, contact city manager Kirk McDonald at 763-531-5112 (kmcdonald@ci.new-hope.mn.us) or parks and recreation director Shari French at 763-531-5152 (sfrench@ci.new-hope.mn.us). Thank you in advance for considering helping the city of New Hope in this time of need. Sincerely, '~~' I:- -'c---.\Z:\",~\ ,.'>. \ > "'>>" Mayor Martin Opem, Sr. Kirk McDonald, City Manager Cc New Hope City Councilmembers Fund Raising Plan for New Hope Ice Arena Endowment Fund "Keep it Cool" The New Hope Ice Arena, located at 4949 Louisiana A venue North in New Hope, Minnesota, was first opened in the fall of 1975. Local hockey enthusiasts worked for a number of years to convince the community of the need for this facility. In July of 1974 the city of New Hope voters approved a referendum to build the arena with General Obligation bonds. The facility is a regional asset which has predominately served youth from the seven cities within the Robbinsdale Area School District 281 boundaries, including Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Golden Valley, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, and New Hope. The city of New Hope has paid the bulk of the cost to run the facility for over 30 years. A second sheet of ice was added in 1996 using a Mighty Ducks grant and TIF funding. This second sheet was added to support the increase in ice time needed due to the addition of girls' hockey at the youth and high school levels. The New Hope Ice Arena has been "home" to 281 high school hockey teams since it opened. It has also been "home" to the local youth hockey associations since 1975 including Cooper Youth Hockey and Armstrong Youth Hockey. The Endowment Fund's goal is to raise $2.5 million. Its purpose is to raise funds to pay for expected capital replacement needs at the New Hope Ice Arena. A community wide effort is needed as this facility serves residents of several cities. The most immediate capital need is expected to be the replacement of the north ice sheet at an estimated cost of $1.5 million. The original ice sheet (north side) dates back to 1975 and utilizes a Holmsten Direct System with a sand floor and ten miles of steel tubing. The system has a life expectancy of 30 years and therefore is on borrowed time. The city's goal is to replace the north ice sheet with an indirect system which is more energy efficient. The replacement date for the north ice sheet at this point is expected to be 2012 but the need could occur earlier. Other funds are needed for remodeling of the Community Room, replacement of the roof, replacement of the dehumidification systems, etc. Staff would like to establish a theme or by-line for the plan and suggests "Keep it Cool" . A number of ideas were brainstormed but that one was chosen. Of course, staff is open to other suggestions. Other cities, including Eden Prairie and Maple Grove, have recently developed programs similar to an endowment fund. Their programs are staff supported but community driven. The leads have been taken by either their Mayor or by representatives of their hockey associations. In the case of these two communities, the fund raising efforts and selling of name rights have been successful. The Endowment Fund was established by the New Hope City Council in February of 2008. The city of New Hope will match up to 25 percent of all funds received. The target audience to be approached for contributions includes: o Robbinsdale Area Schools, District 281 o Armstrong/Cooper Youth Hockey Association o Community residents o Cities within 281 boundaries o Local and regional corporate/business leaders o USA Hockey o Minnesota Wild The Endowment Fund campaign approach will be through mailings, group and individual presentations, web messages, press releases, seeking partnerships within the community, and other various promotional pieces. It is expected that donations will come in many different forms and many different levels. Staff is recommending the following increments be considered: 1) Platinum Level (one opportunity) a) $250,000 or over b) Naming rights for the entire Ice Arena facility for ten years with company logo on a new signboard on 49th A venue as well as on the building sign c) Name on plaque in lobby 2) Gold Level (two opportunities) a) $100,000 to $249,999 b) Naming rights for one of the two sheets of ice for five years c) Company emblem embedded in the named ice sheet d) Name on plaque in lobby 3) Silver Level (two opportunities) a) Over $50,000 to $99,999 b) "Dressing" Zamboni in company logo for five years (such as a pop can, ambulance, garbage truck, etc.) c) Name on plaque in lobby 3) Bronze Level (one opportunity) a) Over $25,000 to $49,999 b) Naming rights for the Community Room for five years c) Name on plaque in lobby 4) Sponsor Level (many opportunities) a) Over $10,000 to $24,999 b) Name on dasher board for five years c) Name on plaque in lobby 5) Friends of the Ice Arena (many opportunities) a) $1,000 to $9,999 b) Name on plaque in arena lobby These donations could come in the form of one time donations or in multi-year commitments. They could come in the form of money or product valued at the levels listed above. alley emorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. F. Approval of Deadline Extension for Final PUD - PUD #105 - Xenia Ridge Prepared By Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the May 6, 2008 City Council meeting, the Council approved the Preliminary PUD Plan of Xenia Ridge, PUD No.1 05 being developed by Opus Northwest. After the Preliminary Plan is approved, City Code requires that the applicant submit the Final PUD Plan within 180 days of Preliminary Plan approval. Due to market conditions and the need for more time for discussions with the HRA regarding Tax Increment Financing, Opus Northwest is requesting that the Final Plan submission date be extended by an additional 180 days for a total of 360 days. The original deadline for submission of the Final Plan is November 2, 2008. With the additional 180 days, the deadline would be May 1, 2009. Erica Miller, Senior Manager, Opus Real Estate Development, has written a letter to me explaining the request. Attachment Letter from Erica Miller, Senior Manager, Opus Real Estate Development, dated August 13, 2008 (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve an extension until May 1, 2009 to submit the Final PUD Plan for PUD No. 105, Xenia Ridge. , OPUS@ OPUS NORTHWEST, L.L.C. A member of The Opus Group THE OPUS GROUP 10350 Bren Road West Minnetonka, MN 55343 Phone 952-656-4444 Fax 952-656-4529 ARC HIT E C T S CON T RAe TOR S D EVE LOP E R S www.opuscorp.com August 13,2008 Sent via Courier Mr. Mark Grimes City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: 700 and 800 Xenia, Golden Valley - Xenia Ridge Final PUD submittal Dear Mark: I appreciate you taking the time to speak with me on Monday regarding Xenia Ridge. As you know, we have gone through the preliminary City approvals for the Xenia Ridge PUD. It is my understanding that the final PUD application must be submitted within 180 days of City Council approval of the preliminary PUD. We are hereby requesting an additional.180-day extension. Weare excited to continue moving toward initiating this development but we are still in discussions with the City of Golden Valley regarding Tax Increment Financing ("TIF"). This is an essential piece of the puzzle for us in the determination of developing the Xenia Ridge site. We are confident that this will be finalized in the next few months but we are reluctant to spend more time on the PUD until we resolve the TIF Agreement. Additionally, while we are committed to this projecta.'1d believe it is the premier site in the west market, the overall economy remains sluggish. Weare continuing our marketing efforts but at this point, we do not have a long list of prospects. However, we do believe that we will see an uptick in the market toward the end of the year and the beginning of next year. As you know, getting a better handle on the market going into the final PUD will allow us to move forward with the development more efficiently. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for an extension of 180 days, or a total of360 days from the date City Council approved the preliminary PUD, for submittal of the final PUD application. Please confirm whether this will require City Council action and if it does, what is the process we should follow to see it through. We appreciate your consideration. THE OPUS GROUP: Atlanta. Austin . Boca Raton . Chicago. Columbus . Dallas . Denver . Houston . Indianapolis . Kansas City . Los Angeles . Milwaukee. Minneapolis Naples. Orange Count yo . Orlando. Pensacola. Philadelphia. Phoenix. Portland. Sacramento. San Diego. San Francisco. Seattle. St. Louis. Tampa. 'Washington, D;C. , OPUS@ If you have any questions or need anything further, please feel free to contact me at 952- 656-4643. Thank you, ~~/JldL-:t0 Ericka M. Miller !J. Senior Manager Real Estate Development c: David Menke, Opus Northwest, L.LC. Thomas Shaver, Opus Northwest, L.L.c. David Hunt, Opus Northwest Construction L.L.C. Beth Duyvejonck, Opus Northwest Construction, L.L.C. Al Daspin, Daspin & Aument, LLP Brad Osmundson, Opus Northwest, L.L. C. alley Mem randum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. G. Approval of Six Month Extension for Filing of Plat for 1017 Ravine Trail Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary Linda McCracken-Hunt, owner of the property located at 1017 Ravine Trail, has requested to extend her final plat approval for the minor subdivision of her property to April 1, 2009. Ms. McCracken-Hunt intends to sell her home, and subdivide her property at the time of sale. To date, Ms. McCracken-Hunt's home remains unsold. On April 1, 2008, the City Council approved the preliminary plat approval to split the lot located at 1017 Ravine Trail. Per City Code, the final plat must be approved within 180 days of preliminary plat approval. An extension to this timeframe would allow Ms. McCracken-Hunt to complete the sale process of her home prior to lot subdivision. Attachment Location Map (1 page) Letter from Linda McCracken-Hunt, dated August 13, 2008 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve an extension until April 1, 2009 to submit the final plat for the property located at 1017 Ravine Trail. , ~'L-= ~" :7];! I 1017 Ravine Trail I ~~ ~~B .~.-.c-.-~ war. WAVZATA BLVD '::t 394 TO N8 1iWY1(Jt) S .... 394 HOV U'~ .., I 5B HW'll00 S TO EO 1394 NO HW'l:!,OO S HUl:D 1394 . INTERSTATE ~4 .... . ". .... _ 1llt'AY~TA BLVD, ..... ~ I.. a,A- \Q$JAJlJ~1~___l J - 1\\ ~ 'I,~~~~~,fj:/ '\--- i ., ,/ ./ '.<~-- -f---' ~ '\ !--~; ~"> r h III I---- ~ W" ;j\'- I-- ) I r !J;~ '- ~'--1 rC f-. r----.J I I--- III <_c-- ~- 4lTI~ J---" i "'''V ~ ~_h-...~_~ ~<1. ~'~'- f f;'(l'~.-,. : ~- i--- ;- 4'-90 'j J '!'(4t.'- ,~c .'E%rm'ihfl- __ "'r"1 ; i' \ \. H '-", \ -.:::::: p, _. / i --~ ",'<~~~ ~,-~,( -11- III .....:--; T f---1I \' -! . -I-- S \" 8L--, 1- ~_f- .....~ . :i lit ~ "'~..,. GLENCRES'lRD.:t, '~ 1 =='i::si ,I 1m ilE' I I. .' F.:::~T -?'Al~ .'T"(t>iTCi:R'~"I'l r !~',- ~~~r/n/ . - 1 \ \ \ 1 , VI. \ ~ "Ii ~I ~.. T [ ,\ 1 , r 'r .C-.~ ,.. CIRCLE ON!> , 'i\ . I. M~~~d we 1394 TO sa HWY1{)O S INTERSTATE 1904 .\ ~ -1 _C .1--- 1:1 ',1 ~ <i) M<'W~~w~"flhciMS ~ ~"ig1'!{Cl LOOiSOO2(C5: o l!$:lIl ;>.. ~ ~. iE ~ ~ j iE " August 13, 2008 Mr. Mark Grimes City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Hunt Residence - Lot Split ~ 1017 Ravine Trail Final Plat Approval Dear Mr. Grimes, On April!, 2008, the City Council approved a preliminary plat approval of our lot split of our residential lot at 1017 Ravine Trail. Since that time, we have placed our house at 1017 Ravine Trail up for sale, with the intent of completing the Final Plat Approval process in conjunction with the sale of our house. At this time, we do not have the sale of our house completed and it is still on the market. In order to finalize the Final Plat Approval, we need to have a financial closing that separates the house and the lot within the mortgage. Our intent was to do this as a part of the closing process on the sale of our house, which has not occurred. We are requesting an extension to April 1, 2009 tocom.plete the Final Plat process, so that the separation of the lot and the sale ofthe house can be coordinated financially. In the meantime, we will continue to have the house on the market. Please call to discuss. ct4#!' Lmda McCracken~Hunt U. l_ (,(2,..101- '-Iff C, pl10fIe alley Mem ndu Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. H. Call for Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management Program - 10/21/08 Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary At this meeting the City Council should call for a public hearing for October 21,2008 at 7 pm to consider certifying the following special assessments: 2008 Pavement Management Program - Includes various improvements for streets in the following locations: . Cherokee Place: Culver Road to Normandy Place . Culver Road: Lilac Drive North to Noble Avenue North . Dawnview Terrace: Lilac Drive North to Scott Avenue North . Drake Road: Quail Avenue North to Cul-de-sac . Glenden Terrace: Triton Drive to Scott Avenue North . Lowry Terrace: Lilac Drive North to Quail Avenue North . Normandy Place: Quail Avenue North to Perry Avenue North . Perry Avenue North: Culver Road to Triton Drive . Quail Avenue North: Culver Road to 34th Avenue North . Regent Avenue North: Culver Road to 34th Avenue North . Scott Avenue North: Dawnview Terrace to Triton Drive . Scott Avenue North: Lilac Drive North to Lowry Terrace . Triton Drive: Lilac Drive North to Regent Avenue North . 33rd Avenue North: Scott Avenue North to Noble Avenue North 2009 Pavement Management Program - Includes various improvements for streets in the following locations: . Bassett Creek Drive: Regent Avenue North to Noble Avenue North . Dawnview Terrace: Regent Avenue North to Noble Avenue North . Dona Lane: Quail Avenue North to Orchard Avenue North . Hampton Avenue North: Scott Avenue North to Regent Avenue North . Marie Lane East: Perry Avenue North to Orchard Avenue North . Marie Lane West: Scott Avenue North to Regent Avenue North . Markay Ridge: Windsor Way to Orchard Avenue North . Minnaqua Drive: Cul-de-sac to Regent Avenue North . Orchard Avenue North: Ordway to Markay ridge . Orchard Avenue North: Marie Lane East to Dawnview Terrace . Ordway: Golden Valley Road to Noble Avenue North . Perry Avenue North: Westbend Road to Markay Ridge . Perry Avenue North: Bassett Creek Drive to Marie Lane East . Quail Avenue North: Bassett Creek Drive to Culver Road . Regent Avenue North: Golden Valley Road to Culver Road . Scott Avenue North: Cul-de-sac to Regent Avenue North . Sorrel Avenue: Regent Avenue North to Ordway . Westbend Road: Scott Avenue North to Ordway . Windsor Way: Westbend Road to Markay Ridge Recommended Action Motion to call a public hearing for special assessments the 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management Program for October 21,2008 at 7 pm. alley M morandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. I. Authorize Agreement with Mn/DOT for Noble Avenue Safe Routes to School Project Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator Summary Last year, the City of Golden Valley, with the support of the Robbinsdale School District, applied and was selected to receive funding from the for Safe Routes to Schools program. The City's application was for a total of $35,000 and included the removal of existing speed limit reduction signs on Noble Avenue near Noble School and replacement of these signs with speed detection signing. These new electronic signs will be activated by a timer to operate during appropriate school hours and will read each vehicle's speed and post it on the sign. The grant also includes elimination of a mid-block crosswalk at an uncontrolled intersection, and modifications to pedestrian landing areas on both sides of Noble Avenue. The need for the project was identified by the City of Golden Valley Neighborhood Traffic Safety Committee. The Safe Routes to School program (SRTS) is funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The goal of the program is to make infrastructure improvements and associated education efforts in order to encourage biking and walking to schools. Cities that have qualifying projects can receive federal funding through their State's Department of Transportation under the federal program. To receive the funding, the City of Golden Valley must enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) who will act as the City's agent to secure the funding. Staff has requested that Mn/DOT prepare an agreement (copy attached) for Council consideration. The City must also pass a resolution accepting the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation as their agent for federal participation in the project. A resolution is also attached. Attachments Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92717 for Federal Participation in Construction (8 pages) Resolution Appointing Commissioner of Transportation as Agent for the City of Golden Valley to Receive Federal Funding Under the Safe Routes to School Program (1 page) Project Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Appointing Commissioner of Transportation as Agent for the City of Golden Valley to Receive Federal Funding Under the Safe Routes to School Program. Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92717 STATE OF MlNNESOTAAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY FOR FEDERAL P ARTICIP A TION IN CONSTRUCTION This agreement is entered into by and between the City of Golden Valley ("City") and the State of Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("Mn/DOT"); Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.36, the City desires Mn/DOT to act as the City's agent in accepting federal funds on the City's behalf for the construction, improvement, or enhancement of transportation financed either in whole or in part by federal funds, hereinafter referred to as the "Project(s)"; and Mn/DOT requires that the terms and conditions of this agency be set forth in an agreement. THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. DUTIES OF THE CITY. A. DESIGNATION. The City designates Mn/DOT to act as its agent in accepting federal funds in its behalf made available for the Project(s). B. STAFFING. 1. The City will furnish and assign a publicly employed licensed engineer, ("Project Engineer"), to be in responsible charge of the Project(s) and to supervise and direct the work t-o be performed under any construction contract let for the Project(s). In the alternative where the City elects to use a private consultant for construction engineering. services, the City will provide a qualified, full-time public employee of the City, to be in responsible charge of the Project(s). The services of the City to be performed hereunder may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the.City is notified in writing by Mn/DOT that such action is permitted under 23 CFR 1.33 and 23 CFR 635.105 and state law. This written consent will in no way relieve the City from its primary responsibility for performance of the work. 2. During the progress ofthe work on the Project( s), the City authorizes its Project Engineer to request in writing specific engineering and/or technical services from N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 2/5/00 (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92717) Page 1 MnIDOT, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.3 9. Such services may be covered by other technical service agreements. IfMn/DOT furnishes the services requested, and ifMn/DOT requests reimbursement, then the City will promptly pay Mn/DOT to reimburse the state .trunk: highway fund for the full cost and expense of furnishing such services. The costs and expenses will include the current Mn/DOT labor additives and overhead rates, subject to adjustment based on actual direct costs that have been verified by audit. Provision of such services will not be deemed to make Mn/DOT a principal or co-principal with respect to the Project(s). C. LETTING. The City will prepare construction contracts In accordance with Minnesota law and applicable Federal laws and regulations. 1. The City will solicit bids after obtaining written llotification from Mn/DOT that the Federal Highway Administration ("FHW A") has authorized the Project(s). Any Project(s) advertised prior to authorization will not be eligible for federal reimbursement. 2. The City will prepare the Proposal for Highway Construction for the construction contract, which will include all of the federal-aid provisions supplied by MnIDOT. 3. The City will prepare and publish the bid solicitation for the Project(s) as required by state and federal laws. The City will include in the solicitation the required language for federal-aid construction contracts as supplied by Mn/DOT. The solicitation will state where the proposals, plans, and specifications are available for the inspection of prospective bidders, and where the City will receive the sealed bids. 4. The City may not include other work in the construction contract for the authorized Project(s) without obtaining prior notification from Mn/DOT that such work is allowed by FHW A. Failure to obtain such notification may result in the loss of some or all of the federal funds for the Project(s). 5. The City will prepare and sell the plan and proposal packages and prepare and distribute any addendums, if needed. 6. The City will receive and open bids. 7. After the bids are opened, the City Council will consider the bids and will award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder, or reject all bids. If the construction contract contains a goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, the City will not award the bid until it has received certification of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation from the Mn/DOT Equal Employment Opportunity Office. N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 2/5/00 (MnlDOT Agreement No: 92717) Page 2 D. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. 1. The City will prepare and execute a construction contract with the lowest responsible bidder, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor," in accordance with the special provisions and the latest edition ofMn/DOT' s Standard Specifications for Construction and all amendments thereto. 2. The Project( s) will be constructed in accordance with plans, special provisions, General Conditions and Divisions II and III of the standard specifications of each Project. The standard specifications will be the latest edition of Mn/DOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, and all amendments thereto. The plans, special provisions: and standard specifications will .be on file at the City Engineer's Office. The plans, special provisions, and specifications are incorporated into this agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein. 3. The City will furnish the personnel, services, supplies, and equipment necessary to properly supervise, inspect, and document the work for the Project(s). The services of the City to be performed hereunder may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the City is notified in writing by Mn/DOT that such action is permitted under 23 CFR 1.33 and 23 CFR 635.105 and state law. This written consent will in no way relieve the City from its primary responsibility for performance of the wOlk 4. The City will document quantities in accordance with the guidelines set forth in theMn/DOT Contract Administration Manual Sections 410 and 420 that were in effect at the time the work was performed. 5. The City will test materials in accordance with the Mn/DOT Schedule of Materials Control in effect at the time each Project was let. The City will notify Mn/DOT when work is in progress on the Project( s) that requires observation by the Independent Assurance Inspector as required by the Independent Assurance Schedule. 6. The City may make changes in the plans orthe character of the work, as may be necessary to complete the Project(s), and may enter into supplemental agreement(s) with the Contractor. The City will not be reimbursed for any costs of any work performed under a supplemental agreement unless Mn/DOT has notified the City that the subject work is eligible for federal funds and sufficient federal funds are available. 7. The City will request approval from Mn/DOT for all costs in excess of the amount of federal funds previously approved for the Project(s) prior to incurring such costs. Failure \ to obtain such approval may result in such costs being disallowed for reimbursement 8. The City will prepare repo~, keep records, and perform work so as to enable Mn/DOT to collect the federal aid sought by the City. Required reports are listed N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 1/5/00 (MnfDOT Agreement No. 92717) Page 3 in the Mn/DOT State Aid Manual, Delegated Contract' Process Checklist, available from MnlDOT's authorized representative. The City will retain. all records and reports in accordance with MnlDOT's record retention schedule for federal aid projects. 9. .Upon completion of the Project(s), the Project Engineer will determine whether the work will be accepted. E. PAYMENTS. 1. The entire cost of the Project(s) is to be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA and by other funds provided by the City. The City will pay any part of the cost or expense of the Project(s) that is not paid by federal funds. 2. The City will prepare partial estimates in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). The Project Engineer will certify each partial estimate. Following certification of the partial estimate, the City will make partial payments to the Contractor in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). 3. Following certification of the partial estimate, the City may request reimbursement for costs eligible for federal funds. The City's request will be made to MnlDOT and will include a copy of the certified partial estimate. 4. Upon completion of the Project(s), the City will prepare a final estimate in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). The Project Engineer will certify the final estimate. Following certification of the fmal estimate, the City will make the final payment to the Contractor in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). . 5. Following certification of the final estimate, the City may request reimbursement for costs eligible for federal funds. The City's request will be made to MnlDOT and will include a copy of the certified final estimate along with the required records. F. LIMITATIONS. 1. The City will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations. 2. Nondiscrimination. It is the policy Qfthe Federal Highway Administration and the State of Minnesota that no person in the United States will, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded- from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or .be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance (42 D.S.C. 2000d). Through expansion of the mandate for nondiscrimination in Title VI and through parallel legislation, the prescribed .bases of discrimination include race, color, sex, national origin, age, N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCJ1\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 2/5/00 (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92717) Page 4 and disability. In addition, the Title VI program has been extended to cover all programs, activities and services of an entity receiving Federal [mancial assistance, whether such programs and activities are Federally assisted or not. Even in the absence of prior discriminatory practice or usage, a recipient in administering a program or activity to which this part applies, is expected to take affirmative action to assure that no person is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, the program or activityon the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. It is the responsibility of the City to carry out the above requirements. 3. Workers' Compensation. Any and all employees of the City or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required or permitted by the City under this agreement will not be considered employees ofMn/DOT, and any and all claims that may arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of Minnesota on beil,alf of said employees, or other persons while so engaged, will in no way be the obligation or responsibility of Mn/DOT. The City will require proof of Workers' CompensatioIl Insuran~e from any contractor and sub- contractor. 4. Utilities. The City will treat all public, private or cooperatively owned utility facilities which directly or indirectly serVe the public and which occupy highway rights of way in conformance with 23 CFR 645 "Utilities" which is incorporated herein by reference. G. AUDIT. 1. . The City will comply with the Single. Audit Act of 1984 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circular A-l33, which are incorporated herein by reference. 2. As provided under Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, subdivision 5, all books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the City are subject to examination by the United States Government, Mn/DOT, and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate, for a minimum of seven years. The CitY will be responsible for any costs associated with the performance of the audit. H. MAINTENANCE. The City assumes full responsibility for the operation and maintenance. of any facility constructed or improved under this Agreement. I. CLAIMS. The City acknowledges that Mn/DOT is acting only as the City's agent for acceptimce and disbursement of federal funds, and not as a principal or co-principal with respect to the Project. .The City will pay any and all lawful claims arising out of or incidental to the Project including, without limitation, claims related to contractor selection (including. the solicitation, evaluation, and acceptance or rejection of bids or proposals), acts or omissions in performing the Project work, and any ultra vires acts. The City will indemnify, defend (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 OCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 2/5/00 (MnIDOT Agreement No. 92717) Page 5 General), and hold Mn/DOT harmless from any claims or costs arising out of or incidental to the Project(s), including reasonable attorney fees incurred by Mn/DOT. The City's indemnification obligation extends to any actions related to the certification ofDBE participation, even if such actions are recommended by Mn/DOT. ll. DUTIES OF Mn/DOT. A. ACCEPTANCE. Mn/DOT accepts designation as Agent of the City for the receipt and disbursement of federal funds and will act in aGcordance herewith. B. PROJECT ACTIVITIES. 1. Mn/DOT will make the necessary requests to the FHW A for authorization to use federal funds for the Project( s), and for reimbursement of eligible costs pursuant to the terms of this agreement. 2. Mn/DOT will provide to the City copies of the required Federal-aid clauses to be included in the bid solicitation and will provide the required Federal-aid provisions to be included in the Proposal for Highway Construction. 3. Mn/DOT will review and certify the DBE participation and notify the City when" certification is complete. If certification of DBE participation (or good faith efforts to achieve such participation) cannot be obtained, then City must decide whether to proceed with awarding the contract. Failure to obtain such certification will result in the pr<?ject becoming ineligible for federal assistarice, and the City must make up any shortfall. 4. Mn/DOT will provide the required labor postings. - C. PAYMENTS. 1. Mn/DOT will receive the federal funds to be paid by the FHW A for the Project(s), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes S 161.36, Subdivision 2. 2. Mn/DOT will reimburse the City, from said federal funds made available to each Project, for each partial payment request, subject to the availability and limits of those funds. 3. Upon completion of the Project(s), Mn/DOT will perform a final inspection and verify the federal and state eligibility of all the payment requests. If the Project is found to have been completed in accordance with the.plans and specifications, Mn/DOT will promptly release any remaining federal funds due the City for the Project(s ). 4. In the event Mn/DOT does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature or other funding source, or funding cannot be continued at a sufficient level to allow for the processing of the federal aid reimbursement requests, the City may at its sole discretion continue the work with local funds only, until such time as N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08,doc 2/5/00 (MnIDOT Agreement No. 9271.7) Page 6 Mn/DOT is able to process the federal aid reimbursement requests. D. AUTHORITY. Mn/DOTmay withhold federal funds, where Mn/DOTortheFHWA determines that the Project(s) was not completed in compliance with federal requirements. E. INSPECTION. Mn/DOT, the FHW A, or duly authorized representatives of the state and federal government will have the right to audit" evaluate and monitor the work performed under this agreement. The City will make available all books, records, and documents pertaining to the work hereunder, for a minimum of seven years following the closing of the construction contract. ill. TORT LIABILITY. Each party is responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of any others and the results thereof. The Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736, governs Mn/DOT liability. IV. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party will assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this agreement without prior written approval of the other party. V. AMENDMENTS. Any amendments/supplements to this Agreement will be in writing and executed by the same parties who executed the original agreement, or their successors in office. VI. AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE DATE. This agreement is effective upon execution by the appropriate State officials pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05. VII. CANCELLATION. This agreement may be canceled by the City or MnlDOT at any time, with or without cause, upon ninety (90) days written notice to the other party. Such termination will not remove any unfulfilled financial obligations of MnlDOT or the City as . set forth in this. Agreement. In the event of such a cancellation the City will be entitled to reimbursement for Mn/DOT -approved federally eligible expenses incurred for work satisfactorily performed on the Project to the date of cancellation subject to the terms of this agreement. VIII. DATA PRACTICES ACT. The parties will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes chapter 13) as it applies to all data gathered, collected, created, or disseminated related to this Agreement. N:\FedAid\Lynnette\agreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 DCP Agency Agreement 08.doc, 2/5/00 (MnIDOT Agreement No. 9271.7) Page 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. L CITY City certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the contract on behalf of the City as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances 2. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By: By: Title: Director. State Aid for Local Transportation Title: Date: Date: 3. COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION By: Qy: Title: Date: Date: N:\FedAid\Lynnette\1lgreements\DCP\Golden Valley 128 OCP Agency Agreement 08.doc 2/5/00 . (MnlDOT Agreement No. 927 J 7) , Page 8 Resolution 08~39 September 16, 2008 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION AS AGENT FOR THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY TO RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDING UNDER THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley has determined it to be advantageous to accept federal funding for its 2008 Safe Routes to School project; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation is authorized by the State of Minnesota to enter into an agreement to act as the Agent for the City of Golden Valley for federal participation in this project; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley that pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 161.36, the Commissioner of Transportation be appointed as Agent of the City of Golden Valley to accept as its agent federal aid funds which may be made available for eligible transportation related projects. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mayor and City Manager, are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the City to execute and enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Transportation prescribing the terms and conditions of said federal aid participation as set forth and contained in "Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement No. 92717," a copy of which said agreement was before the City Council and which is made a part hereof by reference. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. alley emorand m Cou nci I 763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. J. Appointment to Human Rights Commission Prepared By Linda Loomis, Mayor Summary Each year the City Council conducts interviews with persons who have applied to serve on a board and/or commission. After the interviews are conducted the Council makes their appointments. Recommended Action Motion to appoint Robert Hoyt to the Human Rights Commission for a two year term which expires May 1, 2010. Hey Mem randu Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 3. K. Call for Administrative Hearing - Appeal of Administrative Citation - 2560 Brookridge Avenue North - 10/7/08 Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director/City Clerk Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections Services Summary At their meeting of September 16 the City Council should call for an administrative hearing for the appeal of the second administrative citation on 2460 Brookridge Avenue North for October 7,2008 at 6 pm. Section 4.60 Residential Property Maintenance Code has outlined the procedure in Subdivision 12. The property owner has requested an administrative hearing and a letter has been sent to the property owner regarding the hearing. Attachments Letter to property owner for the Administrative Hearing on October 7 at 6 pm (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to call for an Administrative Hearing on an Appeal of Administrative Citation for 2560 Brookridge Avenue North for October 7,2008 at 6 pm. ~.dgO'dm-vaJ.l~ Y September 11, 2008 Bernadette Ganino 16 Oakridge Drive Saugus, MA 01906 Dear Bernadette Ganino: The administrative hearing date for the citation at 2560 Brookridge Avenue North has been scheduled for Tuesday, October 7,2008 at 6 pm. You are invited to attend and present your witnesses and evidence to the Council at this time. The City Code provides the following in Section 4.60 Subdivision 12. Right of Appeal the Administrative Citation. Subdivision 12. Appeals. A. Right of appeal. Any person aggrieved by a compliance order or administrative citation may appeal the compliance order or administrative citation to the Council. Such appeals must be in writing, must specify the grounds for the appeal, must be accompanied by a filing fee, and must be filed with the Clerk within 10 (ten) business days after service of the compliance order or administrative citation. The filing fee shall be set by the Council. Failure to file an appeal shall constitute a waiver of rights to contest the compliance order or administrative citation and the imposition of the administrative penalty or penalties. B. Decision. Upon at least five business days notice to the appellant of the time and place for the hearing the appeal, and within 30 (thirty) days after said appeal is filed, the Council shall hold a hearing thereon, at which the applicant may appear and present evidence as to why the compliance order or administrative citation, or any portion thereof, should not be issued. The Council may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the administrative order or compliance order and shall order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. The Council may postpone a meeting and hold a hearing at a later date, not to exceed 60 (sixty) days after the appeal is filed, when it is necessary to do so. Sincerely, Sue Virnig City Clerk Hey M nd m Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 Agenda Item 4. A. Public Hearing - Ordinance #409 - Rezoning to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) -1100 Douglas Drive North, 1170 Douglas Drive North, 1200 Douglas Drive North, 1300 Douglas Drive North, 6200 Golden Valley Road and 6212 Golden Valley Road Prepared By Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the August 11,2008 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal public hearing on rezoning several parcels at the northeast corner of Douglas Drive North and Golden Valley Road from either Single Family Residential Zoning District (R-1) or Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4). The purpose of the zoning changes is to bring the Zoning map into consistency with the General Land Use Plan map that designates the area for High Density residential uses. The change is necessary if the Applewood Pointe development is to be approved by the City Council. The Applewood Pointe proposal (also on the September 16, 2008 City Council meeting agenda) proposes development that is considered high density. Even though the Applewood Pointe development is being considered as a Planned Unit Development (PUD), City Council policy is to have the development consistent with both the General Land Use Plan map and Zoning map. At the informal public hearing, about a dozen persons spoke as reflected in the Planning Commission minutes from the meeting (attached). After the hearing, the Commission voted 6-1 to recommend approval of the rezoning of each of the six parcels from either Single Family Residential Zoning District (R-1) or Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to the High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) designation. In my staff report to the Planning Commission dated August 5,2008 (attached), I describe the request to rezone the properties and maps indicating the area to be rezoned. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Memo to Planning Commission dated August 5, 2008 (2 pages) Planning Commission minutes dated August 11, 2008 (8 pages) Ordinance No. 409, Rezoning 1100 Douglas Drive North, 1170 Douglas Drive North, 1200 Douglas Drive North and 1300 Douglas Drive North from Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) and Rezoning 6200 Golden Valley Road and 6212 Golden Valley Road from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) (2 pages) Zoning Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet) General Land Use Plan Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 409, Rezoning 1100 Douglas Drive North, 1170 Douglas Drive North, 1200 Douglas Drive North and 1300 Douglas Drive North from Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) and Rezoning 6200 Golden Valley Road and 6212 Golden Valley Road from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4). I 1$06 I J24 Joa .Joo 632& ~316 I I I I I I 6301) I ~ 1400 1375 1436 6425 6401 1336 I 6s 0 0 0 1320 0 1 0 0 1310 0 >>- 0 0 lli 0 0 Z 0 0 643Il 6424 6400 6336 / ~ (jJ 1111 M~r.:.~WJi'I~';-tMS {;<.U~f'~lt{C~ tOO1Q;QI$;';))S o Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: August 5, 2008 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing to Amend the Zoning Map from the Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to the High Density Zoning District (R-4) for 1100,1170, 1200, and 1300 Douglas Dr. N.; and Medium Density Residential Zoning District to High Density Residential Zoning District for 6200 and 6212 Golden Valley Rd.-City of Golden Valley, Applicant The existing General Land Use Plan Map approved by the City Council in 1999 designates all properties on the east side of Douglas Dr. N. that are north of Golden Valley Rd. and west of the railroad tracks for High Density Residential uses. This proposed General Land Use Plan map that will be a part of the City's updated Comprehensive Plan to be approved later this year by the Planning Commission and City Council also designates this property for High Density Housing. It is a requirement of the State of Minnesota that the General Land Use Plan map for a City and the Zoning Map should be consistent. In the case of the area south of Bassett Creek, the zoning map is not consistent with the General Land Use Plan map. The Zoning Map has remained Single Family Residential (R-1) for the four single family or two-family homes along Douglas Dr. and Medium Family Residential (R-3) for the two multi-family buildings at 6212 and 6200 Golden Valley Rd. The General Land Use Plan map designation for this area as High Density Residential allows housing with 12 or more units per acre. The existing R-1 zoning for the lots along Douglas Dr. N. allows five or fewer units per acre and the R-3 zoning for the two lots along Golden Valley Rd. allows no more than 12 units per acre. This is a conflict that must be corrected by amending the Zoning Map to be consistent with the General Land Use Plan map. This discrepancy should have been corrected with the change several years ago to the Zoning Code that eliminated the Multiple Dwelling (M-1, M-2, M-3, and M-4) zoning district and created the new R-3 and R-4 zoning district. The two new zoning districts were created in order to have two multiple residential zoning districts that would better correspond to the Medium and High Density designation on the General Land Use Plan map. The new Medium Density Residential zoning district (R-3) corresponds to the Medium Density designation on the General Land Use Plan map and the High Density Residential zoning district corresponds to the High Density designation on the General Land Use Plan map. 1 It is necessary to amend the zoning map to High Density Residential (R-4) for these parcels in order to make their zoning consistent with the General Land Use Plan map. This is a requirement of state statute. Secondly, United Properties has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to construct about 175 units of cooperative and assisted living units for persons 55 years and older on the properties to be rezoned. The property to be rezoned is about 5.6 acres in area. With the proposed 175 units, the density is over 30 units per acre. Therefore the United Properties development (Applewood Pointe) greatly exceeds the permitted density allowed in both the R-1 and R-3 zoning districts. Recommendation The staff recommends amending the zoning map to change the zoning of the properties at 1100,1170,1200, and 1300 Douglas Dr. N. from Single Family Residential (R-1) to High Density Residential (R-4); and the zoning of the properties at 6212 and 6200 Golden Valley Rd. from Medium Density Residential (R-3) to High Density Residential (R-4). The change in the zoning is consistent with the General Land Use Map dating back to 1999. (The City is in the process of updating its General Land Use Plan map. The proposed update does not change the designation for the subject property.) The high density designation on the General Land Use Plan map has been placed on this property by the City Council due to the need for multiple family housing in Golden Valley and because this is a good location based on accessibility to the street system and access to sidewalks and transit. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Zoning Map (1 page) General Land Use Plan Map (1 page) 2 Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission A regular meeting of the Planning Co ley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Vall". Road, Golden Valleesota, on Monday, Augu J.1, 2008. Chair Keysser called . at 7 pm. 1. MOVE Y Eck, seconded by Cera an 23 08 minutes as submitted. 2. Informal Public Hearing - Prope Applicant: Address: Purpose: ,i:~'g designation consistent with the General land e~ignation Grimes referred to al acres on the northe Density Resid z land Use Plan Residenti and explained that this is a proposal to rezone 5.6 ouglas Drive and Golden Valley Road to the R-4 High n order to make it consistent with the current General t at the properties are currently zoned R-1 Single Family Density Residential. a 1999 the City adopted the current General land Use Plan se properties high density. Since that time staff has not z ning the properties even though state statute requires that zoning alland use plan maps be consistent. He explained that staff is now recomm these properties be rezoned because there has been a request to construct 175 units of housing which is approximately 30 units per acre. He stated that staff is recommending approval of this rezoning because it is consistent with the General land Use Plan map dating back to 1999. Kluchka asked why the City is proposing this rezoning now. Grimes stated that the City is proposing this rezoning now because United Properties is proposing to build 175 units of senior housing and the City's General land Use Plan map and Zoning map have to match. He stated that this rezoning probably should have been done sooner. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11,2008 - Page 2 Schmidgall asked if it would be an option to make the General Land Use Plan map match the Zoning map instead of the other way around. Grimes stated that the City Council has the right to change the General Land Use Plan map how they want. The current policy of the City as shown on the General Land Use Plan map is high density residential. Within the past year, the Planning Commission has suggested as part of the Comprehensive Plan update that these properties remain designated high density because this is a logical location for higher density development in Golden Valley. Keysser opened the public hearing. is Eleanore Kolar, 6186 Golden Valley Road, said she is appalled and even at this meeting. She said she is amazed that the Planning heard of global warming because removing the trees from the deforestation. She said this shows the ignorance of governi the sense is in using this property for someone's monetary g Jamie Fitzgerald, 1400 Florida Avenue North, said the pro s for this meeting was very lax and the only way she foun rom a neighbor who said this proposal was already a done deal. She e h sing stock in the area and said lithe GV Ghetto" is at the top of the hill f the area is small starter family homes with the majority being lon9/:::tiiinei:iri ed residents. She expressed concern over the size of the'i~ropos~~ ecause four-story buildings will tower over the neighborhood. She sai '0t~J~~:,~:s:>ncerns include ambulances constantly driving by and the loss ce ant1trees located on these properties. She said she is worried that thi too much and the City needs to consider the impact on the becau e she is afraid it won't be community friendly. She said she wo osal to include a park or an area open to the public. She questioned t creek and questioned what type of residents the proposed senior ousi have including violent people or people with dementia. She said ou happy if a smaller assisted living home were built but the City needs co ct to the smaller single family homes in the area. Valley Road, said he is concerned that a four-story building will ~. He is also concerned about what the building will look like, lI.affect the traffic. He said this proposal will cause a lot of e difficult getting on and off Golden Valley Road during the Patty B 414 Golden Valley Road, said she did not receive a hearing notice for this meeting or for the meeting held by the applicant last Wednesday. She said at the applicant's meeting they were told that the Comprehensive Plan is caUing for high density on these properties and that is what the City wants. She said she doesn't see how the City can pre-approve things without getting citizen input. She said she was also told by the applicant that they will not make any money from the 74-unit co-op building. She said that the proposed buildings will be too dense and questioned how many acres the project includes. Keysser stated that the project will be on 4.7 acres. Burrets expressed concern about how many people would be allowed to live on an acre. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11,2008 - Page 3 Grimes explained that the R-4 zoning district allows housing in buildings up to 8 stories or 96 feet in height before requiring a Conditional Use Permit. He said in terms of density generally 30 to 35 units per acre is considered to be pretty high density. He referred to the Calvary apartments and co-op property and stated that that has approximately 35 to 40 units per acre and is 10 or 11 stories in height and is the tallest development in Golden Valley. Burrets questioned why the applicant wouldn't just build a little bit bigger assisted living building and forget about the co-op building if they are not going to make from it anyway. She stated people are very unhappy and this is distur . added that it isn't that people don't want this type of use it's the size, design that are the issues. She said the City should be looking f assisted living buildings. They should be providing affordable to move into this neighborhood. Stacy Hoschka, 6400 Golden Valley Road, said she ag,[~~d thlZl~.th the notification process and she spent hours distributing Iii up a down Golden Valley Road. She said she doesn't object to the she would prefer assisted living or senior housing versus another uildl . She said this is going to be the highest density area in Golden stioned how the City wanted the area to look. She said it soun nning Commissioners don't even agree on the amount of density t rea. She stated that the City has made promises with the Envision s "~~m~..Jhe "Kyoto Protocol" and the new Douglas Drive Corridor Study an 0 ho'lCJ the City to these promises. She said she is nervous that this proe low income housing 10 years from now if this project doesn't succee ioned if other senior housing properties are at capacity and stated that t proposed new buildings looks very institutional and they will tower over t . She asked that the applicant work with the neighborhood regar ing ng an open space and said there are a lot of opportunities to be nique. She said residential properties have a big impact on the environment cerned about storm water issues and landscape maintenance an" used so close to the creek. She said she is also concerned out and hearing loud ambulance sirens all day long. She urged the Cites. kd;:~800 Golden Valley Road, said she is opposed to rezoning this area. 14 years ago Covenant Manor approached her because they wanted to ./!: d they were not interested in her family, they only wanted money. She suggeste, ing nice single family homes and stated that the proposed project will change the neighborhood and the tall buildings won't fit in with the rest of the area. Janice Laulainen, 6040 Golden Valley Road, said she loves this area and what the City is doing is uncalled for. She said the gorgeous trees will be gone and she can't understand with all of the senior housing in the area why they need more. She asked why this project isn't being built where the Douglas Drive Apartments or the Copacabana Apartments are located because there is a lot of crime in those areas. She said she's been told that the older people who would be living in the proposed new buildings won't Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 . Page 4 drive and that is "baloney". She said the City is really asking for problems and referred to all the buildings that are for currently for lease. She said the proposed buildings are too high and will block the sun and wreck the view. She asked why this corner and why this is a "cut and dry" deal. She added that if the Planning Commission wants to beautify Golden Valley they should do it with something else. Jeanne Nyatz, 1350 Douglas Drive, said she lives in the condominium building to the north and will look directly at the proposed buildings. She said she thinks the project is well planned and will be meticulously maintained and beautifully landsca She stated that she has never had a problem getting in and out her driveway on ive and she doesn't think that the density of the proposed new buildings will roble Lager asked about the cu Planning Commission h process, keeping th se pr F>lam ap has been designated high the Zoning map consistent with ies need to be rezoned to the Fredric Lager, 6306 Golden Valley Road, suggested that peo through another presentation by United Properties because this meeting has been misinformed and is misrepresenting t United Properties is a local company which has been ound their sixth or seventh similar proposal. They are not co pillaging Golden Valley. He said they will be a go area and he is in support of this proposal if they questioned if rezoning these properties is just fi Keysser explained that the City's Gen density for at least the last nine year~. the existing General Land Use PI High Density Residential R-4 zo ensive Plan update. Grimes explained that the as part of the Comprehensive Plan update designated high density. Jamie Fitzgera against the pr and that t I nue North, said she wants to reiterate that she is not ed that a mass mailing be done to a 10-block radius mission consider tabling this proposal. en Valley Road, referred to Mr. Lager's comment that there has erstanding regarding this proposal and said she wants to know what tood or misrepresented. Fredric 306 Golden Valley Road, stated that he assumes the notification process followed all of the requirements. Grimes explained that the City of Golden Valley mails hearing notices to all property owners within 500 feet. He added that the state statute requires hearing notices be mailed to property owners within 250 feet. Eleanore Kolar, 6186 Golden Valley Road, said she doesn't believe there has been any misrepresentation; people are just expressing their opinions. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11,2008 _ Page 5 Mary Carson, 1601 Kelly Drive, said she drives by this area constantly and if something is going to be done it should be done tastefully because it impacts a lot of people in Golden Valley. She said from what she has heard this project is not well planned. They are going to come in, build, then leave because it is business to them. She said she is concerned about the loss of trees and added that there has to be a way to fit the architecture into the land. Dale Bates, 6140 Golden Valley Road suggested the developers build green roofs in order to release oxygen and save money on heating costs. Kluchka stated that the zoning map says the pro says R-4 and asked for clarification. Grimes stat zoned R-1 and R-3, and the proposal is to rezon il oposed es versus Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser close Keysser clarified that this proposed project is not a "done deal" makes their decision. He also clarified that the City is not th project so it is not up to the City to tell the developer to build the proposed senior housing. but Grimes' memo es are currently Kluchka said he is concerned about g . R-3 zoning district allows for townhom less per acre. The R-4 zoning dis per acre. He stated that the Cit requirements on the Genera consistent. rimes explained that the ily buildings if they are 12 units or -faml buildings with 12 or more units a zoning district to match the density because the two maps were not zoned R-4 High Density Residential and the . the property would remain R-4. Grimes reiterated that ows these properties should be high density housing. Commission and the City Council believe that the ed for high density then the General Land Use Plan map se the High Density designation is the current policy of the bout the density of the condominiums to the north. Grimes said imately 50 units in the condominium which is approximately 25 to 30 density. Schmidgall stated that the City wasn't thinking when it designated these properties high density on the General Land Use Plan map because he can't imagine a 96-foot tall building in this location. He said he thinks medium density would be better in this location particularly because the zoning to the west is R-1 Single Family. He said it looks like this proposal is being squeezed on to these properties and he thinks the General Land Use Plan map needs to be corrected not the Zoning map. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 - Page 6 McCarty said he is concerned that if this property is rezoned to R-4 and this project doesn't go through then someone could build a 96-foot tall building. He suggested reconsidering the General Land Use Plan map designation. Eck said the issue to consider is if R-4 is appropriate in this location because if the land use is changed to R-3 it would shoot this project down. Kluchka questioned if rezoning the properties to R-3 would make the apartments "not developable" . Schmidgall noted that the properties n agreed and stated that the properties n and if the apartments to the north density because of the facts of t n the same situation. Grimes are considered non-conforming y will more than likely be higher Eck stated that if the property is rezoned to R-4 it doesn't necessarily taller or higher density project would be approved. Keysser ques' e could be denied if it were to meet all the zoning code require . Gr" e that a PUD Permit requires a developer to stick to an appro Cera asked if the PUD stays with the land. Grimes saig;.yes a developer in the future wanted to change an approved P to rescind or amend the existing PUD Permit. Ke someone in the future wanted to build somethin would have to amend the PUD. Grimes said Cera asked if the City co Grimes reiterated that th Planning Commissi do table the rezoning r plan designatiqg. He City has looked'! density b use areas higher rezoning request, but deny the PUD request. designated this area high density. If the e that this area should be high density they could k the City Council to reconsider the comprehensive Iden Valley is currently 70% single family homes. The I olden Valley for areas that could be designated higher 'ng Commission and City Council felt there needed to be density uses and it was felt that this was a good area for nt. tH~y need to look at the City and see if there is a better location for this ent and she doesn't think there is. Keysser said he is comfortable with rezoning the property knowing the City has the PUD process for protection. McCarty said he is curious as to what the Douglas Drive Corridor study will find because this project will set the tone for the rest of the corridor if this project goes forward. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11,2008 - Page 7 Keysser stated that the Douglas Drive Corridor study committee has looked at maps to see if change was wanted or not. Hogeboom added that the consensus of the Douglas Drive Corridor study committee was to change these properties to high density. Kluchka said this is one of the better places the City has to do this type of development and he is inclined to support the rezoning. However, he is concerned about traffic because nobody yields at the corner of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive, which needs to be thought about as a part of the Douglas Drive Corridor study. He said they also need to address traffic and impacts to the area. Kluchka asked if there is an development. Grimes sai height of the structures t Zoning Code requir ment . properties until the it is in currentlYLK1uc something morel:i,~ his is Itive to Jbe any Cera said he agrees that there is a need for higher density housing. Eck said this is a NIMBY issue and it is fair to say that higher q never desirable for the neighbors living in the area. He said the neighbor's feelings but if the City was totally sensitive th change. Waldhauser said she supports the rezoning requ Golden Valley needs more senior housing oppo option for seniors. rvations. She said ject is an attractive McCarty said he understands that Gol concerned that if these properties WyCy building and if it meets all of the z;~,it1ing'!:c sJnigher density but he is one could propose at 96-foot tall ents they wouldn't need a PUD. e som ype of overlay or control on future ink so. He explained that if the concern is the nCommission could consider changing the ded that if the City holds off on the rezoning of the edure it would hold the zoning of the land in the state esn't want to playa procedural game he would like ke to rezone the properties to R-3 Medium Density , Density Residential. He said he would rather have a developer ~lIowed to build taller than have the City beg a developer to build r: McCart if the rezoning and PUD are approved and the developer decides not to build this project what the limitations are to the next developer. Grimes stated that the City Council can eliminate or rescind a PUD and go back to what the property is zoned and a future developer would probably have to replat the properties or a PUD can be amended to allow for something else. He reiterated that the PUD takes the plans submitted and holds the developer to them. He stated that from a staff perspective this proposal is consistent with what the City is calling for: He referred to the City's housing plan and noted that it also calls for providing an alternate form of housing. He stated that Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11,2008 _ Page 8 other cities have built this type of product and have proved that this type of housing causes turnover and frees up single family homes for younger families to purchase, Waldhauser said the thinks the City should be looking at all the properties at the same time and needs to be thinking about the whole area. Grimes reiterated that state law requires that General Land Use Plan maps and Zoning maps are consistent with each other. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried 6 to 1 to rE:1F9mmend rezoning the following properties from their current zoning designation hEF:R-t:4 High Density Residential Zoning District. Commissioner Schmidgall votep . 1100, 1170, 1200 and 1300 Douglas Drive North from R- District to R-4 High Density Residential Zoning District . 6200 and 6212 Golden Valley Road from R-3 M District to R-4 High Density Residential Zoning ;oj' Informal Public Hearing - P', Development - Applewood . Purpose: . 4-story, 74-unit senior cooperative 'assisted living building. Grimes referred to are located at the no the same props) i Properties' each b 'I be a 1 He st that one of staff's concer Dou s Drive that the County is re la or sidewalks. He stated that U d is improving sidewalk connectio was the additional 17 feet of right-o - sting to accommodate future road cha turn d Properties is providing additional sidewa as a part of their proposal. He referred to the ORDINANCE NO. 409, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Rezoning 1100 Douglas Drive North, 1170 Douglas Drive North, 1200 Douglas Drive North and 1300 Douglas Drive North from Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) and Rezoning 6200 Golden Valley Road and 6212 Golden Valley Road from Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) City of Golden Valley, Applicant The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" is amended in Section 11.10, Subd. 2, Section 11.30, Subd. 2 by changing the zoning designation of certain tracts of land from either Single Family Zoning District (R-1) or Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) to High Density Residential Zoning District (R-4) Section 2. The tracts of land affected by this ordinance are legally described as: ABSTRACT PROPERTY That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 118, Range 21 bounded by a line described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 28, thence East 17 % rods, thence North 9 rods, thence West 17 % rods, thence South 9 rods to the point of beginning. AND FROM CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 543391 Parcel 1 Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1079, Hennepin County, Minnesota Parcel 2 That part of Lot 29 lying East of a line drawn parallel with and 292.875 feet East of the West line of Section 28, Township 118, Range 21 as measured along the South line of the section and lying South of the center line of Bassett's Creek, Auditor's Subdivision No. 346, Hennepin County, Minnesota AND FROM CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 1216894 Parcel 1 Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 433, Hennepin County, Minnesota Parcel 2 North 200 feet of the West 33 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND FROM CERTIFICATE OF TITLE No. 749697 Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 433, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND FROM CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 795096 Tracts B, C and 0, Registered Land Survey No. 1079, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 16th day of September, 2008. IslLinda R. Loomis Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: IslSusan M. Virnig Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk alley Me 0 ndum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 "60 Days" Deadline: November 6, 2008 Agenda Item 4. B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan Approval - PUD #106 - Applewood Pointe - Northeast corner of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive North Prepared By Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the August 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal public hearing on the preliminary plan for Applewood Pointe, Planned Unit Development (PUD) NO.1 06. This development is being proposed by United Properties. At the hearing, many people spoke as indicated in the attached Planning Commission minutes. After the hearing, the Commission had a lengthy discussion about the proposal and eventually voted 4-3 to recommend approval of the preliminary plan. The Planning Commission recommendation included the five recommendations found in my memo to the Planning Commission dated August 5, 2008. In addition, the Commission added two conditions. The added conditions are that the applicant indicates alternative designs regarding the facade of the assisted living building along Golden Valley Road and the City's consulting traffic engineer address traffic concerns brought up at the Planning Commission meeting. Attached is a memo from the City's traffic engineer, Mike Kotila, PE. Overall, the memo states that the existing design will work from a traffic design standpoint. The developer has also submitted a new site plan and building plan for the assisted living building facing Golden Valley Road. The building has been reduced in length by 35 feet. Also, there have been changes to the articulation of the building along the Golden Valley Road and stone materials added to the building near the intersection of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive. The plans submitted to the Planning Commission and the revised plans are in your agenda packet for comparison. The applicant has also included a perspective drawing of the site. In my staff report to the Planning Commission dated August 5, 2008 (attached), I describe the request to rezone the properties and maps indicating the area to be rezoned. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Applicant's Narrative (3 pages) Planning Commission minutes dated August 11, 2008 (8 pages) Memo to Planning Commission dated August 5, 2008 (4 pages) Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, dated July 30,2008 (6 pages) Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson, dated July 21,2008 (2 pages) Memo from Traffic Engineer Mike Kotila, SEH, dated September 9, 2008 (4 pages) Letter from Director of Transportation & County Engineer, James Grube, Hennepin County (1 page) Letter from Alex Hall, United Properties, dated September 2, 2008 with revised site and building plans (6 pages, loose in agenda packet) Zoning Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet) General Land Use Plan Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet) Site Plans, Survey and Architectural Plans (36 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to approve the preliminary design plan, Applewood Pointe, PUD NO.1 06, subject to the following conditions: 1. The "Preliminary Site Development Plans for Applewood Pointe" prepared by MFRA Associates and dated 7/25/08 shall become a part of this approval. These plans consist of Sheets C-1.01, 2.01, 3.01, 3.02,4.01,4.02,4.03, 5.01, 5.02, 5.03, 6.01, 8.01,9.01, 9.02, and 10.01. 2. The preliminary architectural plans for Applewood Pointe of Golden Valley prepared by JSSH Architects and dated 5/09/08 shall become a part of this approval. These plans consist of Cooperative Sheets CS, A1.1, A2.0, A2.2, A2.3, A2.4, A2.5, A2.6, A2.7, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3, A3.4, A4.1, A4.2, A4.3, A4.4, Assisted Living Sheets A2.1, A2.2, A4.1, and A4.2. 3. The revised preliminary site plans for Applewood Point prepared by MFRA and JSSH showing the proposed pergola detail, landscaping and the changes made to the south building along Golden Valley Road. These plans consist of sheets 1.1, EX-1A and C-9.01A 4. The recommendations and findings made by City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, found in the memo to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated July 30,2008 shall become a part of this approval. 5. The recommendations and findings made by Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson found in the memo to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated July 21,2008 shall become a part of this approval. 6. The recommendations and findings made by Traffic Engineer Mike Kotila,SEH found in the memo to Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works and dated September 9, 2008 shall become a part of this approval. 7. Prior to approval of the Final Plan of Development by the City Council, title to the triangular piece of property now owned by the condominium association north of Bassett Creek shall be in the ownership of Applewood Pointe. -LLLJ ~Oi 6:5265. m5' -"6$39 , 6.1i'llliI 6!'I.ZB 6SlJO lSOll / ~ ,I ~ M~t.~..l"I.\~~"3~'~~ -~.f.~':fi(a.l.ij,O~qlS~ 11-11 z ~ , I II ! { ;. APPLEWOOD POINTE PRELIMINARY PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN United Properties is excited about the opportunity to work with the City of Golden Valley in developing Life-Cycle housing consisting of a senior living campus with the addition of an Assisted Living Community and an Applewood Pointe Cooperative. Over the past year United Properties has been working on a plan with staff that would give us the opportunity to assemble all of the properties in the northeast quadrant of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive. The site consists of approximately 4.74 acres and is bounded by the railroad tracks on the east, Bassett Creek on the north, Douglas Drive on the west, and Golden Valley Road on the south. Because the City of Golden Valley is a First Tier Community, it has a larger number of seniors that have lived in the City for 30 to 50 years. According to the Housing chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, the number of residents age 75 and older nearly doubled between 1990 and 2000. Building housing suitable for these long-time Golden Valley residents will serve both the needs of these aging citizens as well as the City's need to attract a younger population. Residents that have raised their families and lived in the community for many decades are hesitant to leave that community. This is especially true in a City like Golden Valley where the quality of living is extremely high. Because there are so few new options for seniors, many are forced to ,stay in their home beyond the time they would like, and perhaps beyond the time their housing safely meets their needs. We believe that this proposed plan is ideal for allowing Golden Valley residents to remain in their community and for the City of Golden Valley. COOPERATIVE The senior cooperative will be a 3 and 4-story, 74-unit building. The Cooperative is a "for sale" property for independent seniors age 55 and older. The building will have underground parking for the owners providing one stall per unit. Surface parking includes 40 additional stalls on the south side of the building. The community will include 13 unique floor plans ranging from an 835 square foot one bedroom, one bath unit to a 1,764 square foot two bedroom with den unit. Cooperative members own a share of the entire building and grounds, and have a right to occupy a specific unit. Each member purchases a share in the Limited Equity Corporation, and has equal voting status in electing the Cooperative Board of Directors from their membership. Cooperative housing combines the advantages of pride of home ownership with the conveniences of community living. The exterior of the building will consist of brick, stone, stucco, and maintenance-free lap siding. The roof will be asphalt shingled. Residents will have no individual exterior building maintenance obligations. The interior will include a community room with small serving kitchen, a 2-stol)' entrance lobby with multiple seating areas, a library, a sun room, game and craft rooms, conference room, media room, barber shop, great room and an office for the on-site manager. Additional amenities include a guest suite, an exercise room with sauna, and a carwash and woodworking shop. Residents will enjoy a social, interactive, and healthy lifestyle. Cooperative housing provides an affordable option for seniors to have an ownership interest in their housing. We anticipate we will be utilizing a HUD Guaranteed Mortgage which will assist in the long term affordability of the housing for our residents. We also structure our Cooperatives as limited equity coops which means that there is a limit to the amount of annual appreciation the owners receive. Typically we have limited the appreciation to 2% to 2-1/2%. This additional control provides another mechanism for keeping the housing affordable; not only for the initial coop members, but also for future members. ASSISTED LIVING The assisted living facility will be a 3 and 4-story, approximately lOS-unit building with 78 independent! assisted and 27 memory care units. The facility is primarily for assisted living and memory care, but does contain congregate living for independent seniors looking for limited services. The building will have underground parking for staff and residents. Surface parking includes 18 additional stalls on the north side ofthe building. First floor will contain independent Jiving and memory care units. The second, third and forth floors will have assisted living and independent Jiving units. The exterior of the building will consist of brick, stone, stucco, and maintenance-free lap siding complementing the design of the adjacent cooperative building. The roof will be asphalt shingled. The interior wi)) include a serving kitchen, dining area, beauty/ barber area, staff lounge, a 2-story entrance lobby with multiple seating areas, a sun room, private encloseq garden and spa area for memory care, and an office for the on-site manager and nurses. Additional amenities include an exercise room, game room, and an outside patio. Residents will enjoy a social, interactive, and healthy lifestyle. SITE AND LANDSCAPE There will be two entry points into the senior living campus, one from Golden VaHey Road and one from Douglas Drive. The area between the two buildings will consist of exterior parking a central pond with a fountain and an amenity area with a gazebo/ shade structure and seating area. The parking lot will be paved with brick pavers creating the feel of an outdoor plaza between the buildings. . The front entrance area of the site is designed to have a more formal landscape and amenities to welcome the residents and visitors. A loop drive will provide easy access into the site for pick up and drop off of the residents and parking. One naturalistic pond, adjacent to Basset Creek and two decorative pond areas consisting of decorative plantings and fountains provide key focal points on the site. Decorative plantings will extend across the front of the building and along the sides, where it will transition into the general open space at the back of the building. The back of the site will capture landscape complementing the adjoining creek and openspace. Creative storm water design and treatment was also used to minimize impact to the site. Drivelanes, parking lot and building storm water will be coHected into a series of ponds, filtration and infiltration areas, and permeable brick pavers in the central and eastern parking area to provide treatment. Filtration systems have been utilized to reduce pond footprint sizes, lowering the impact of the development. The treated and clean water from the ponds and filtration areas will be directed to the adjacent existing storm sever and Basset Creek. United Properties has worked closely with city staff in developing this community under a PUD that conforms to city standards and is environmentally sensitive. Many me.etings and discussions were committed in ensuring that the project will fit with the vision ofthe community. Special attention was made to develop a plan focusing on protecting the majority of the existing trees around the perimeter of the property. The addition of a public trail along Douglas drive north to the Basset Creek bridge were stemmed from our discussions with staff. fu summary, we look forward to developing a senior living campus in Golden Valley. We have enjoyed a great working relationship with the City, and look forward to breaking ground on this community as soon as possible. AHlbls Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 8 1 other cities have built this type of prod ct and have proved that this type of housing , ses turnover and frees up single f ily homes for younger families to rchase. Waldhause . the thinks the City sh uld be looking at all t perties at the same time and needs to . king about th' whole area. Gr" reiterated that state law , requires that General La maps are consistent with each other. . 1100, 1170, 1 , District to 3. Informal Public Hearing - Prelimina Development - Applewood Poi Applicant: United Properties - Planned Unit Address: Northeast Drive and Golden Valley Road Purpose: e''qqnstruction of a 4-story, 74-unit senior cooperative -story., 105-unit assisted living building. Grimes referred to and stated that the properties involved in this request are located at the no of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road and are the same prop~jb . e previous rezoning request. He stated that United Properties' pr uild two buildings on these properties and create one lot for each b iI 74-unit senior cooperative housing building and the other will be a 1 ng building. The proposed buildings will be three and four ',. stories in stated that the City Engineer and Hennepin County have reviewed thist:),!~?posal ively and Hennepin County has said they do not want access to the site ftEl:n;l Dou s Drive. Therefore there will only be one access located on Golden Valley R0~ said he feels comfortable with only one access because of the population 0 the buildings. He stated that both buildings will have underground and . surface parking and that the amount of parking provided exceeds the City's parking requirements. He stated that one of staffs concerns was the additional 17 feet of right-of-way along Douglas Drive that the County is requesting to accommodate future road changes, turn lanes or sidewalks. He stated that United Properties is providing additional sidewalks and is improving sidewalk connections as a part of their proposal. He referred to the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008_ Page 9 issue of height and explained that the City measures height from grade to the mid-point of the highest gable so the proposed buildings will be from 46 feet to 56 feet in height. He stated that previous speakers brought up the issue of "green" development and suggested the developer discuss their plans. However, regarding storm water management they have gone above and beyond the City's requirements. He stated that the City will be requiring maintenance agreements for the ponds and for the pervious pavers they are proposing. The applicant will also be required to do a tree preservation plan. He referred to the site plan and discussed a small triangular area to the north of their property. He explained that United Properties is in negotiations with.,t ,~. condominium property to north to obtain that triangular property. Withti:ltl1ing that piece of property the proposal will not be allowed to go forward wit t inal PWP approval. He stated that staff is recommending approval of this R;~,ith the .~. comments from the City Engineer, the Deputy Fire Marshall a licat~ining the small triangular property to the north. McCarty noted that the setback along Douglas Drive i would require a variance. Grimes stated that variances PUD process and that the plans that are submitt Grimes added that the County is also asking for asked if the easement would affect the setback. determined from the official right-of-way fQ);rM:heiet Schmidgall asked if the buildings are actu~JIYiti i,~s in height with the parking underneath. Grimes said the par' 10' rade and reiterated that the height of the buildings is approximately 56 fe Iked about the background and history of ey '1k1' into the senior housing market approximately ive co~bps throughout the metro area. He said he rns and added that he has had a neighborhood orhood to go to another one of their sites and see the e who live there. Alex Hall, United Properti United Properties. He st six years ago and th h understands the ne meeting and h~s invi landscaping andt~lk t Hall sai. ifishiSj(l;t~D~.~? 1I0w the City's Comprehensive Plan which calls for higher " density ',al antlb'ased on that, they acquired the properties because they feel ' th, . plan well on this corner. He referred to the 3-story condominium building to the h an that their proposed new buildings will be less than 10 feet taller than that s buildings will not tower above the other buildings in the area. He referred omment that was made about not needing the co-op building and clarified that they do need the density of both buildings to make the project work, however the assisted living building will probably be more profitable. He referred to a site plan and stated that there will be one enclosed parking space per unit for the co-op building and the co-op building is "for sale" housing, not rentals. Hall referred to the concern expressed regarding traffic and stated that the use they are proposing is one of the lower traffic generating uses that can be found. He stated that they have done traffic studies in other cities where they have similar projects. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 200R Page 10 Hall showed a rendering of what the proposed buildings will look like and explained that the colors shown are not the final color choices. He stated that their buildings use a variety of materials such as stucco, Hardie Board siding and stone. He said they welcome the neighbors input on colors and materials. Keysser asked about the roof materials. Hall stated that the roofs will be a dark color, asphalt shingle. Keysser asked about the co-op prices. Hall said the co-op units will sell for approximately $185 per square foot. Keysser asked why they are proposing co-ops instead of condominiums. Hall stated that there is a financial advantage for a co-op er because a co-op has a master mortgage, not individual mortgages like a cond . . e explained that co-op documents are set up to give residents a say in he p erty is run. He stated that they don't just construct the buildings and lea h anag eir own properties with an on-site housing manager and they als e s er. and committees which are not often found in condominiums. orecasts p s ey are building ople moving into ger families. Hall referred to the City's Comprehensive Plan and dis sse which show that the 65+ age group is the fastest growi a product that is needed now and in the future. H~aCla~!it these types of communities it frees up single-fa"ly hous Hall again referred to the City's Compreh stated that they have had a blight anal proposal meet the standard for bligh standards. He said what they are reiterated that their proposal m g blighted properties and f the 5 properties in this e tax increment financing e a Improvement to the City and in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Kluchka asked Hall about trnes r Bloomington location. Hall said the Bloomington site has 95 iliniJs on p 'j,g-lately 3 acres. Keysser asked how the Bloomington units sid. Hal'l . all of the units were sold before they were done with construction and th . 0 aiting list. Kluchka asked how the neighborhood concerns were itig . gton. Hall said he wasn't involved in the Bloomington project but he . 0 in the Roseville project where they created a buffer of "machine v between their project and neighboring single-family homes. ., , gineer for the project, stated that they want to be as "green" as nd save as many trees as possible. He referred to a site plan and t s will remain, which trees will be transplanted and which trees will stated that there will be permeable pavers in the courtyard and rock s in addition to the heavy landscaping being proposed. Keysser asked if there will be a LEED designation on this project. Hall said no because it is very difficult to get LEED certification on residential property. He stated that they will have a central boiler to increase efficiency in the assisted living building and that these proposed units will be more energy efficient than a single-family home. Kluchka asked if there are plans to install bike racks. Hall stated that all of their buildings have several bike racks in the garage level. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008- Page 11 Keysser asked about the location of the nearest bus stop. Grimes said there is a bus stop located across the street. Eck asked if the residents would be able to purchase an additional parking space if they would like. Hall said not in the co-op building because there will be one parking space per unit but there could possibly be spaces available to rent in the assisted living building. Keysser asked about the percentage of single people versus couples. H approximately 50% will be couples. the said Kluchka asked Hall to address the approachability of the entranc site plan and stated that the main entrances are on the interio there will be rear entrances in the back of the assisted livin entrances will have card access or key fob access. He adde installing benches near the creek. Kluchka explained that in previous proposals the buildings that don't look approachable. He said the neighborhood. Teppen stated that there will Drive with a central courtyard to welcom discussions the Planning Commission feels this proposal is different becau~e Kluchka said he understands tha . Craftsman look" or a large flat w intersection and he's afraid i asked if there is a way to showed an elevation dra focal point. Kluchka tate look for ways the b c give an impres 'on t thinks the tree of the ass' Valley 110 Road. sion has discussed ave entrance or face in 'an gateway along Douglas stated that the previous nta;~ office space. He said he ,&Iij,:l::?nd therefore more private. 't wanf the buildings to have a "faux an institution because this is a gateway "Gold Valley" and it won't be appealing. He .... ore approachable to people driving by. Hall ullct'iJlgs and discussed the stone and entrance is a significant mass of a building and he is trying to ind to the environment and feel approachable and where someone would want to live, Keysser said he massing feel. Hall stated that they turned the east end g to help not have such a long expanse of wall along Golden he agrees that there is a lot of building along Golden Valley, g ed that instead of having so much open space with parking in the ider moving the parking to the outside of the building and camouflaging it, then t ing wouldn't be so close to the street. Hall stated that with that configuration they would lose density and they would have to have a T-shaped building. He said that they did consider turning the buildings and that this project as gone through several versions before the one being proposed. Keysser stated that the Douglas Drive side of the buildings looks good to him and questioned if anything could be done along the Golden Valley Road side to help break-up the fayade along the street. Hall stated that could have bump-outs in the fayade along Golden Valley Road. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 _ Page 12 . Fariborz Afsharjavan, JSSH Architects, Architect for the project, stated that some of the issues with the buildings have to do with the setback requirements, the density and the parking requirements. He said the buildings are broken up as much as possible and the site doesn't allow them to do anything differently. He said they are breaking up the fa<;ade with the materials they are using. He added that the end user is going to drive the look of this project because people living in these units don't want to look at cars on Douglas Drive or Golden Valley Road. He referred to the entrance and discussed how it will be a visible focal point. Keysser opened the public hearing. John Paulson, 320 Edgewood Avenue North, asked if the City is taxes to aid this project in any way. Grimes stated that the applicant has requested Tax IncrementnFi added that they have had preliminary discussions wit e Cit. g has been finalized. Paulson said he not opposed to th en I ey pay for it themselves. He said he doesn't want to pay taxe e in constructing another building and taxpayers shouldn't have t pro t. Grimes said that the issue of TIF is an HRA and City Council issu s of that are separate from the land use issues they are discussing att:t VaUey Road, asked how tall the buildings are from the t all said the buildings are approximately 57 to 58 feet inks a 60-foot high building would be considered a six story s to know if these buildings are four or six story buildings. , t City measures height from grade to the middle of the highest d that the existing apartment building is a three story building. Grimes ghts are greater today than when the apartments were built and _. e space between the floors. Sienko asked if she will only see one more story ontn~H posed new buildings compared to the apartments that are there now. Kluchka stated that these new buildings have a slightly steeper gable so essentially it will look like another story visually. Hall added that the proposed new buildings will be approximately 10 feet higher than the condominium building to the north. at~<;Ljt will be used to write down the Kluchka asked how TIF is being use cost of the land. Kluchka asked about the TIF the area and he believes TIF is paid by the prope subsidies because i is not imes said there will be a development plan for mmission will review it. Keysser clarified that xpayers. Paulson said he doesn't believe in erican way to do business. Sienko asked how many feet there will be from the curb to the edge of the building. Grimes said there will be 43 feet from the curb to the building. Sienko asked if between the building and the curb there will be trees, sidewalk and grass. Grimes said yes. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008_ Page 13 Sienko asked why they are proposing so much parking if all the spots are not needed. She suggested they put in more green space instead. Kluchka said it is a matter of use versus capacity. Hall stated that visitors won't have access to the underground garage spaces. He explained that they could probably get rid of half of the underground parking under the assisted living building but it is not cost effective to dig out only half of the underground area. He said he does feel that they will need all of the surface parking. Sienko said her concern is the increased traffic on Golden Valley Road. She said she has concerns about people passing each other on Golden Valley Road when they have to slow down for their driveways. She stated that Golden Valley Road w . t replaced last year and now it will look like it did before it was replaced. She sai inks that a 59-foot tall building is a big building. Stacy Hoschka, 6400 Golden Valley Road, said she agrees w' about having a "faux Craftsman" look along Golden Valley architect said he is not a fan of the massive look. She asked buildings to look like they are proposing just to meet t appli aesthetics are her biggest concern and the four sto overshadow the three story portions. She said tr concerned about what could be built at this loca asked if a PUD includes just the building plans 0 stated that the PUD plans include a lands;c;apihg growing seasons. Hoschka asked if tre~l:Fdie said the applicant will be required to h \)' t~ e CQ,!]1 ';cat e a the . She said the e Clings will largely concern and she is n d n't go through. She the trees too: Grimes ypically in effect for two I e to be replaced. Grimes ';~~~rvation plan. Hoschka asked. if th said the ponds2l'fe. Hoschka asked if the applicant Hall said no. reC!J:l~sing geothermal heating and cooling. nt will be required for the pervious pavers they ding was considered pervious or impervious. Kluchka rvious. Hoschka said ponds are impervious. Valley Road, expressed concern that there is only one , t fo number of cars coming in and out. She asked where deliveries . id she hopes it's not on Golden Valley Road. Keysser reiterated that o lIow access on Douglas Drive. Burrets said the driveway on Golden oing to be dangerous and asked how far away the entrance is from the bridge. said the bridge is about 20 feet away from the entrance. Teppen, stated that the distance from the entrance to the driveway was an issue discussed with the City Engineer and the Deputy Fire Marshal, also with the County. Burrets stated that Hall had said they were considering moving the entrance further to the west. Hall said they are still considering that. Burrets stated that people on Golden Valley Road go 35 to 40 miles per hour and there is not enough space for a person to stop. She said a project this size is not appropriate with one entrance and it is something that needs to be thought about. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 _ Page 14 Burrets asked how the property is going to be lit. Hall said they would follow the City's lighting ordinance requirements. Burrets said she is surprised this property is as expensive as it is considering the blight. She asked how the taxes are figured on co-ops versus condos and how it compares to her house. Keysser stated that the co-op building pays the taxes versus the individuals. Grimes added that the City has no say in a building becoming a condo or a co-op. Hall stated that cities assess co-ops similar to apartment buildings. Burrets said she thinks this project is huge for the size of property it is on and it will be overbuilt. Hoschka stated she is not opposed to the proje e involved in the aesthetics of it. dies that the traffic sing will be less than the numbers ity does know that senior Janice Laulainen, 6040 Golden Valley Road, asked if Golden Valle pays to fix it, the developer or the people who live on Golden Val explained that the City policy is if a street is less than 5 years to make it new again. He said the City has the same concern Q,-~ new streets torn up and not fixed. Laulainen said this project; everyone. Grimes stated that the City can't stop devel. ment street is new. Hall stated that he strongly believes b generated from the proposed four s~8ri~ for a less dense, non-senior proj~7~t~;C3j'1j developments produce less pea~l1our trips. Keysser said h supports buyers shiM~ to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. ch like to see this project built but he thinks it is too big Seeing and hearing no 0 Schmidgall said he would for this site. ject because there is clearly a need for it. Cera said he ell especially since it opens up single family homes for new us line. KI.- hka s ts to see the design better suit the site and he wants to see better trai;~afety a~I~h ntersection. He said he is concerned about the safety of the entrane~and t~e yield sign and crosswalk at that intersection. He said he wants conditiOns'~t~pproval that require the building along Golden Valley Road to articulate and because of the lack of articulation he is going to vote no. Grimes said he can get more traffic and safety information from the City's consulting traffic engineer. He said the City also has concerns about the safety of that intersection and it will also a part of the Douglas Drive Corridor Study. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 15 McCarty said he agrees that Golden Valley needs this type of project but he is also concerned about the traffic and long stretch of building along Golden Valley Road so he is not inclined to support this proposal. Keysser suggested they add a condition to their approval that the building fa<;ade along Golden Valley Road must articulate. Kluchka said his preference would be to table the request. McCarty said he would rather see one building be taller than have the 10 Golden Valley Road. 1. The "Preliminary Site Development Associates and dated 7/25/08 sh consist of Sheets C-1.01, 2.0 8.01, 9.01, 9.02, and 10.01. Pointe" prepared by MRFA i~i~i>pf this approval. These plans .01,4.02,4.03, 5.01, 5.02, 5.03, 6.01, Eck said his initial reaction was that this is a lot of building for thi groups of apartment buildings all over Golden Valley that see in and out of them. He said he is inclined to support the proj MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motio carrie, approval of a PUD at the Northeast Corner of Dougla allow for the construction of a 4-story, 74-unit se 1 05-unit assisted living building with the followin Schmidgall voted no. 2. The preliminary archite by JSSH Architects a plans consist of Coop A2.7, A3.1, A3. 3, A2.2, A4.1, and r Applewood Pointe of Golden Valley prepared / shall become a part of this approval. These heets S, A 1.1, A2.0, A2.2, A2.3, A2.4, A2.5, A2.6, A4.1, A4.2, A4.3, A4.4, Assisted Living Sheets A2.1 , 3. nd Jndings made by City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, found in es, Director of Planning and Development and dated July 30, rt of this approval. e'if;l,gations and findings made by Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson found to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated July 21, 2008 shall rt of this approval. 5. Prior to approval of the final plan of development by the City Council, title to the triangular piece of property now owned by the condominium association north of Bassett Creek shall be in the ownership of Applewood Pointe. 4. 6. The applicant shall show some alternate designs regarding the fa<;ade of the assisted living building along Golden Valley Road. 7. The City's consulting traffic engineer shall address the issues related to the traffic concerns before the proposal goes to the City Council. Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: August 5, 2008 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary PUD Plan for Applewood Pointe- PUD NO.1 06 (Northeast corner of Douglas Dr. N. and Golden Valley Rd.)- United Properties, Applicant Background and Description of Request United Properties, represented by Alex Hall, has entered into agreements with several property owners at the northeast corner of Golden Valley Rd. and Douglas Dr. N. The 4.74 acre site now consists of six lots that are each occupied by housing. The largest lot is the 6200 Golden Valley Rd. property that is occupied by an apartment building constructed in the 1960s. The remainder of the housing is single family homes, duplexes or a triplex. United Properties plans to demolish all the buildings and construct two buildings on the site. The north building is planned for a senior cooperative that would have 74 units. The buildings would be 3 and 4 stories with underground parking. The south building would be for assisted living. The plan for the south building is to have a total of 105 units with 78 assisted living units and 27 memory care units. This building would also be 3 and 4 stories in height with underground parking for staff and residents. The development is best described in the attached "Applewood Pointe Preliminary PUD Development Plan" prepared by Alex Hall of United Properties. The attached site plans indicate that the site will have its sole access from Golden Valley Rd. at the east end of the site. The developer had originally wanted to have a second access on to Douglas Dr. north just north of Golden Valley Rd. However, Hennepin County controls acc~ss to its County roads and the County staff believed that the access to the development just north of Golden Valley Rd. would cause conflicts. Therefore, the site plan was modified to have only one access. After review by the Public Works and Public Safety Departments, the plan was deemed to be acceptable with only one access. (See attached memos from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson and City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE.) The property is designated on the General Land Use Plan map for High Density Residential (over 12 units per acre). However, the zoning map indicates that the property is zoned both Single Family Residential (R-1) and Medium Density Residential (R-3). There is a proposal by the City of Golden Valley to change the zoning to High Density Residential (R-4) that would bring the site into consistency with the General Land Use Plan map. (This rezoning proposal is also on the August 11,2008 Planning Commission agenda.) City policy has been that in the 1 case of a PUD consideration, the underlying General Land Use Plan map and Zoning Map designations should be consistent with the proposal made by the PUD. Therefore, staff is recommending that the zoning map be changed to High Density Residential (R-4) prior to approving the final PUD plan. The City is in the process of studying the land use and bike/pedestrian connections along the Douglas Dr. corridor. It is hoped that the study will be completed in early 2009. The study has taken into account that the Applewood Pointe property will someday be developed into high density housing as outlined on the General Land Use Plan map. Qualification as a PUD Staff has reviewed the application for the PUD to insure that it qualifies to be considered as a PUD. It is the staff's determination that this application does qualify to be considered as a PUD. The development of Applewood Pointe as a PUD is consistent with the intent and purpose provision of the PUD section. Also, the applicant (United Properties) has shown the City contracts for the development of each of the parcels proposed to be part of the PUD. The applicant has also had several pre-application conferences with the City staff and they recently held a neighborhood meeting to get information and feedback from the surrounding property owners. The intent of the use of a PUD is to provide for an optional method of development which permits design flexibility from other provisions of the zoning and subdivision codes including flexibility in uses, height, setbacks, parking requirements and other similar regulations. The staff has reviewed the information submitted for the Preliminary PUD Plan. The staff has determined that the information is complete and, therefore, can go forward with the consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Review of Development Proposal United Properties has proposed two types of senior housing for this site as described in the attached description provided by United Properties. There will be a 74 unit cooperative building at the north end of the site and a 105 unit assisted living building along Golden Valley Rd. The assisted living building will include 27 memory care units. United Properties believes that there is a market for these two types of housing built on one campus. It allows seniors to live independently in the cooperative building and provides for more services in the assisted living building. This allows couples to stay on the same campus if one needs to move to the assisted living while the other remains in the cooperative housing. The City's housing plan has always encouraged a variety of housing types and opportunities Golden Valley residents. As the population ages, the cooperative and assisted living gives nearby residents the option to stay within their community. This helps to "free up" existing single family homes for younger families who would like to live in Golden Valley and enjoy its good schools and amenities. The proposed cooperative and assisted living buildings will each be three and four stories in height. The building elevation plans for each building shows that the majority of the building is four stories with a smaller portion being three stories. The maximum height of the building is 56 ft. with the measurement taken from the mid-point of the highest gable. In comparison, the condominium building to the north of this site is three stories in height. The south elevation of the condo building (creek side) is 46 ft. in height where the basement is exposed. 2 The north elevation of the condo building is 38 ft. in height. The height is measured to the mid- point of the highest gable. The proposed Applewood Pointe buildings meet the setback standards found in the R-4 zoning district with the exception of the front setback along Douglas Dr. The setback for buildings along the public right-of-way is 25 ft. The closest point that the cooperative structure will be to Douglas Dr. N. is about 18 ft. The rear and side setback in the R-4 zoning district is 20 ft. All structures meet this setback requirement. (Note that there is a triangular shape parcel south of Bassett Creek that is owned by the condominium association to the north of the creek. Applewood Pointe has entered into an agreement to purchase this triangle (about 6000 sq. ft.) in order to provide adequate setback area for the cooperative building from the north property line. The final plan of development cannot be approved until Applewood Pointe obtains title to this property.) In comparison, the condominium building to the north is setback a total of 35 ft. from Douglas Dr. N. However, the 35 ft. is measured from the existing right-of-way line for Douglas Dr. in front of the condominium building. The Applewood Pointe setback from Douglas Dr. N. is measured from the right-of-way line for Douglas Dr. N. based on a dedication of an additional 17 ft. along the east side of the road. (Douglas Dr. width in front of Applewood Pointe will be 100 ft. vs. 66 ft. in front of the condominium building to the north.) With the additional dedication, the setback of the Applewood Pointe buildings along Douglas Dr. N. will be in almost the same as the condominium to the north. Hennepin County has also asked for an additional 10ft. wide trail easement along the east side of Douglas Dr. This easement is outside of the right-of-way and may be used by the County for future bike trails. As you will note on the plans, there are sidewalks planned along the east side of Douglas Dr. that will connect to the sidewalk along Golden Valley Rd. In the future, the City hopes to extend sidewalks along the entire length of the east side of Douglas Dr. The Applewood Pointe development indicates that there are a total of 192 parking spaces for both buildings. The cooperative building has 74 underground garage spaces and 40 surface stalls. The assisted living building has 60 underground garage spaces and 18 surface stalls. This exceeds the City's parking requirement for these two types of structures by almost 100 stalls. The City's parking code requires that senior housing have .5 to 1 space per unit and that assisted living have 1 space per every 5 beds. Using the highest requirement for the senior housing (cooperative housing) of 1 space per unit, the total parking required by the zoning code is only 95 spaces. Applewood Pointe believes that the 192 spaces will better serve their residents, visitors and employees. ' The R-4 zoning district states that buildings should occupy no more than 45% of the property and that the total impervious surface should not exceed 60%. Based on the information . provided on their plans, the buildings cover 30.9% of the site and the total impervious surface of the site is about 47% of the site. Applewood Pointe indicates that 53% of the site is landscaped, natural or open (including ponding). United Properties has submitted a landscape plan as part of the submittal package. This plan appears to be well designed. However, the plan must be reviewed by the City's Environmental Coordinator and approved by the Building Board of Review. In addition, the developer must 3 show how the site will meet the City's tree preservation ordinance and come up with a mitigation plan. This plan must be developed and submitted with the final PUD plan. Overall, the staff believes that is a good plan. It provides the City will additional senior and special needs housing. It is located in an area that is designated for high density housing. The site will have more than adequate parking and it will be well landscaped. Applewood Pointe will provide additional right-of-way for future street improvements to Douglas Dr. and additional sidewalks and trails. The design of the buildings appears to be well thought out. In terms of height, it is four stories in height (56 ft.) which is substantially less than the 96 ft. (approximately 8 stories) that is permitted in the R-4 zoning district. Access to the site is limited to Golden Valley Rd. By eliminating a driveway to the site from Douglas Dr., potential conflicts along that minor arterial are greatly reduced. Because these buildings are limited to senior citizens, staff believes that the traffic generation from the site will not be significant during the peak hours when workers are commuting on the busy streets in the area. Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plan for Applewood Pointe, PUD No. 106 with the following conditions: 1. The "Preliminary Site Development Plans for Applewood Pointe" prepared by MRFA Associates and dated 7/25/08 shall become a part of this approval. These plans consist of Sheets C-1.01, 2.01, 3,01, 3.02, 4.01,4.02,4.03, 5.01, 5.02, 5.03, 6.01, 8.01, 9.01, 9.02, and 10.01. 2. The preliminary architectural plans for Applewood Pointe of Golden Valley prepared by JSSH Architects and dated 5/09/08 shall become a part of this approval. These plans consist of Cooperative Sheets CS, A 1.1, A2.0, A2.2, A2.3, A2.4, A2.5, A2.6, A2.7, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3, A3.4, A4.1, A4.2, A4.3, A4.4, Assisted Living Sheets A2.1, A2.2, A4.1, and A4.2. 3. The recommendations and findings made by City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, and found in the memo to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated July 30, 2008 shall become a part of this approval. 4. The recommendations and finding made by Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson and found in the memo to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated July 21, 2008 shall become a part of this approval. 5. Prior to approval of the final plan of development by the City Council, title to the triangular piece of property now owned by the condominium association north of Bassett Creek shall be in the ownership of Applewood Pointe. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Applicant's Narrative titled "Applewood Pointe Preliminary PUD Development Plan" (3 pages) Memo to Mark Grimes from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated July 30, 2008 (6 pages) Memo to Mark Grimes from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson dated July 21,2008 (2 pages) Letter to Mark Grimes from Hennepin County Director of Transportation & County Engineer James Grube dated July 23,2008 (1 page) Site Plans, Survey and Architectural Plans (36 oversized pages) 4 alley Memorandum Public Works 763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax) Date: July 30, 2008 From: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engine:,: .$, Preliminary Design Plan Re-aJJ Applewood Point Assisted Living PUD 106 To: Subject: Public Works staff has reviewed the plans for the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) NO.1 06, Applewood Point. The proposed development, which is located in the northeast corner of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive, consists of two new buildings of co~op and assisted living facilities. Bassett Creek is immediately adjacent to the site on the north, and the CP Railroad tracks are adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. Site Plan and Preliminary Plat Access to this proposed development is provided by a single driveway from Golden Valley Road. The driveway is located in the southeast corner of the site. Site circulation consists of a looped driveway, with parking stalls on the outside of the loop. Access to both buildings and the subsurface parking beneath the buildings is provided from the driveway. Previous discussions with the developer included a request to demonstrate the turning radii of the City's largest fire truck, a 45-foot long single axle vehicle, within the parking lot and driveway. This exhibit was not submitted with the Preliminary PUD plans, and ' must be provided as part of the General Plan submittal. There are several easements along Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road that encumber this site for roadways and utilities. The easements are labeled on Douglas Drive, but not on Golden Valley Road. The developer must document all existing easements on the proposed development site. In addition, all easements for roadways and easements must be vacated as part of the platting process, with the appropriate dedication shown on the final plat. The developer will be required to submit an application for easement vacation as part of the General Plan submittal for this PUD. G:\Developments - PrivatelApplewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 1 The Hennepin County Transportation Department has reviewed this proposed PUD. This review identified the need for additional right-of-way on Douglas Drive to accommodate future upgrading of the roadway. The proposed site plan indicates a total right-of-way dedication on Douglas Drive of 50 feet. In addition, the County is requiring a 1 O-foot wide trail easement along Douglas Drive. The right-of-way and easements shown on the preliminary plat are acceptable as submitted. Because the trail easement must be recorded asa separate document and cannot be shown on the final plat, the developer must provide a legal description for the easement and the City will prepare the easement documents for signature and recording. The preliminary plat submitted for review includes drainage and utility easements to the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of Bassett Creek (elevation of 870.0 feet). However, the City's Floodplain Management Code requires management of the floodplain to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE), which is 2 feet above the BFE, or to an elevation of 872.0 feet. Therefore, the drainage and utility easements over the floodplain must be extended to an elevation of 872.0 feet. Previous discussions with the developer indicated that the triangle of land south of Bassett Creek owned by the condominium association to the north would be incorporated into the PUD. However, this land is not included in any of the proposed plans submitted for review. This additional property must be included in all appropriate plans for the PUD in order to allow staff to fully review the proposed site developments. Douglas Drive is identified as a Primary Bikeway Route in the Hennepin County Bicycle System Plan. Therefore, the developer must dedicate the appropriate easement as discussed earlier in this review, and construct the trail across the property included in the PUD. Discussions with County staff indicate that the trail must be a minimum of 8 feet wide and be paved with asphalt. The developer will be required to obtain the appropriate permits from the Hennepin County Transportation Department and the City of Golden Valley for all work proposed within the rights-of-way for Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road. Copies of all County permits must be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to issuance of City permits for the work. This PUD will require a Development Agreement. The developer will be required to submit detailed construction cost estimates for all sanitary sewer, storm sewer, watermain, storm water management, trail and street excavation and repairs to the City as part of the General Plan submittal. These costs will be used for calculation of the securities required for the Development Agreement. Sanitary Sewer and Water There are existing sanitary sewer and water supplies available in Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road for this proposed development. There is adequate capacity available in these facilities to meet the anticipated demands from the development. G:\Developments - Private\Applewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 2 The developer will be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the sanitary sewer and watermain systems within the proposed PUD. The utilities must be constructed according to City standards and the maintenance requirements will be included in the Development Agreement. This PUD must comply with Chapter 3 of Golden Valley City Code regarding the sanitary sewer system and inflow and infiltration (1/1). In order to comply with Chapter 3, the sanitary sewer services to the existing buildings within the property being developed that are not being reused must be removed in their entirety. If removal of any service is not possible, it must be rehabilitated to eliminate infiltration into the line and may be abandoned in place. The developer must submit an 1/1 compliance plan for the existing service lines with the PUD general plan. In addition, a security of 125 percent of the estimated cost of 1/1 compliance will be required as part of the securities for the PUD. An escrow agreement is currently in place for the existing property at 1200 Douglas Drive. The developer must also determine an approach for the water services to the existing buildings within the PUD. As with the sewer, removal of these services to the main is the goal of the City. Public Works staff will review the removals with the developer to determine the appropriate approach for each service. Golden Valley Road adjacent to this PUD was reconstructed in 2007. Therefore, open cutting of the street should be minimized to the extent possible. If open cutting cannot be avoided, additional street restoration may be necessary. The restoration requirements will be determined at the time of issuance of utility and right~of-way permits. The City reserves the right to require modifications to the utility plan prior to issuance of permits. The developer will be responsible for any additional costs resulting in modifications to the utility plan. Gradina, Drainaaeand Erosion Control This proposed PUD is within the Main Stem sub~district of the Bassett Creek Watershed. Therefore, the development must comply with the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC) Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals} and must be submitted to the BCWMC for its review and approval. As discussed earlier in this review, the Main Stem of Bassett Creek is immediately adjacent to this site on the north side of the property being developed. Because there is a floodplain associated with Bassett Creek, the PUD must comply with Section 11.60 of the Golden Valley City Code. As discussed above, the floodplain for this site is managed to the RFPE of 872.0 feet, and drainage and utility easements are required to this elevation. G:\Developments - Private\Applewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 3 The proposed grading plan indicates grading near the northern most portion of the proposed building that will extend the 872 contour against the building, and apparent patio elevations at an elevation of 872. The grading plan must be revised to keep the proposed 872 contour a minimum of 15 feetfrom the edge of the proposed building. The drainage and utility easements over the floodplain should be platted accordingly. The developer has proposed a combination of on-site ponds, infiltration and storm sewer to provide drainage for the site and bring this PUD in compliance with the BCWMC rate control and water quality requirements. As shown on the grading plan, the developer has proposed an infiltration trench around much of the site. Portions of this infiltration trench will be located beneath an internal trail system that will be built by the developer. Storm water runoff from the rooftops and some localized storm water drainage will discharge into the infiltration trenches, which are constructed of large diameter aggregate and fabric. These trenches are planned to drain into Ponds 2 and 3 as shown on the grading plan. Storm sewer structures have been proposed to serve as outlets from these ponds. The overflow from Pond 2 is into Bassett Creek, and the overflow from Pond 3 is into the storm sewer system on Douglas Drive. The proposed pond outlets must be constructed according to City standard details including skimming and emergency overflow structures. The developer has proposed a system of porous pavement underlain by a drain-tile system to provide storm water drainage in the central portion of the site. A piped outlet draining into the Douglas Drive storm sewer provides the outlet from Pond 1, which is located in the center of the looped driveway in the middle of the site. The proposed storm water management system on site appears to comply with the BCWMC requirements for water quality and rate control. However, long-term maintenance of the porous pavement will be critical in ensuring the ongoing treatment of storm water runoff prior to its discharge into Bassett Creek. Therefore, the developer must submit a maintenance plan for the storm water system on site. This plan will become part of the PUD agreement for the site. The developer has also proposed a series of catch basins within the porous pavement' areas to serve as a backup to the porous pavement. These catch basins are located in low point in the parking lot and will only receive runoff in the event that the porous pavement becomes plugged with accumulated sediment or ice, or in the event of a large rain event, that exceeds the infiltration capacity of the pavement. The proposed catch basins drain into the subgrade beneath the porous pavement, which flows directly into Pond 1. The developer will be required to provide a native vegetation landscaped buffer along Bassett Creek. This buffer area must be located north of the proposed internal trail system and be entirely within the drainage and utility easements over the Bassett Creek G:\Developments - Private\Applewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 4 floodplain. The buffer plan and a maintenance plan must be submitted with the General Plan submittal for the PUD. A City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit must be obtained prior to starting any work on site. In addition, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES General Storm Water Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) prior to starting work on site. The City permit will be issued when a copy of the MPCA permit is provided to the City. Tree Preservation This PUD must comply with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The developer has submitted an inventory and Tree Preservation Plan for the site. The plan does not include the proposed planting schedule for mitigation. The tree mitigation portion of the plan must be submitted with the General Plan submittal for the PUD. Summary and Recommendations Public Works staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for the proposed Applewood Point, Planned Unit Development NO.1 06, subject to the comments contained in this review, which are summarized as follows: 1. The plans be modified to address the floodplain management issues discussed in this review. 2. A truck turning radius plan must be submitted as discussed within this review. 3. A final utility plan, including a plan for compliance with the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance, must be submitted as part of the General plan submittal. This plan must limit the extent of open cutting of Golden Valley Road to the extent possible. 4. The developer must submit a maintenance plan for the porous pavement and storm water management system on site as part of the General Plan submittal. 5. Detailed construction cost estimates for all sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, trail and pavement restoration items be submitted with the General Plan submittal for use in calculation of securities for the PUD. 6. A revised Tree Preservation Plan be submitted to address the issues discussed in this review. 7. The developer must obtain the appropriate review and permits from Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission, and other agencies as discussed in this review. G:\Developments - Private\Applewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 5 Approval is also subject to the review and comment of other City staff. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. C: Tom Burt, City Manager Jeanne Andre, Assistant City Manager Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections Gary Johnson, Building Official Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist G:\Developments - Private\Applewood Point\PreDesignReview 072208.doc 6 o Hey m ran urn Fire Department 763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax) To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: Preliminary Site Development Plan #PUD-1 06, Applewood Point of Golden Valley (Revised) Date: July 21,2008 Cc: Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections The Golden Valley Fire Department staff has reviewed the revised proposed site plan for the Applewood Point project located on the NE corner of Douglas Drive and Golden Vall~y Road. The revised following comments are focused on the site plan, fire department access, water supply, fire protection and landscaping of the site. Site Plan 1. The current site has existing buildings to be demolished. The demolition of all buildings on the site for this proposed project shall be in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code and other city regulatians. 2. The current revised plans indicated that the fire department's apparatus access road cannot be obtained to due to physical terrain. Fire protection safeguards will need to be installed in all of the buildings. Fire Department Access 1. Since the fire department apparatus access driveway from Douglas Drive has been eliminqted, the only fire department access road for the entire complex is the access off of Golden Valley Road. Therefore, it is imperative that a single access road needs to work with the responding fire apparatus and other emergency vehicles. The following requirements for the fire department apparatus access road will be as follows: a. The fire department apparatus access road will be a minimum of 26' wide. The apparatus access road will be the starting point from the driveway entrance on Golden Valley Road to the center point of the circle, around the circle and then out again to the driveway, exiting on Golden Valley Road. The fire department apparatus access road will be a one-way circulation around the circle with the necessary directional one-way signage. b. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be installed in accordance with the Golden Valley City Ordinance. The location of the posted signs will be determined by the fire marshal. c. The turning radius for the fire apparatus access road should be in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code and the fire code official. Requirements include all driveways approach off Golden Valley Road. d. The fire department apparatus access road should be designed and maintained during the different phases of the construction of the site to support the imposed loads of all fire apparatus. The surface of the fire apparatus access road shall be surfaced to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Water Supplv 1. The water supply for the proposed site should be capable of supplying the required fire flow for all fire protection systems, including fire hydrants, fire suppression, sprinkler systems and Class I standpipe systems for both buildings. 2. A post indicator valve will be required for each building. The location and distance of the post indicator valve from the building shall be accessible and protected from any physical damage. Protective barriers shall be installed in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code. 3. The location of the fire hydrants on the proposed revised plan shall be relocated to that the fire department apparatus access road has better traffic circulation within the confines of the inner circle area. The fire hydrant relocations will be determined by the code official. Fire Protection 1. The proposed buildings will require additional fire protection safeguards. The following fire protection safeguards will include, but not be limited to, the following: automatic fire suppression system in all attic and concealed spaces, balconies, apartments, apartment restrooms, Class I standpipes, and the installation of a smoke detection fire alarm system in the common corridors and all storage rooms within each building. 2. The walking path around the proposed site will be used by fire department personnel for emergency access for both buildings. The design and construction of the approved fire department access walkway will be a minimum of 6' wide and the surface of the walkway shall be an approved surface and maintained for all-weather climates. LandscapinQ 1. Fire hydrants, fire department connections and other fire protection system control valves shall not be obstructed by any landscaping materials including, but not limited to, posts, fences, ' vehicles, growth, trash, storage and other materials or objects that would hinder the fire department gaining immediate access to the fire department equipment and/or fire hydrants. If you have any questions regarding these items, please contact me at 763-593-8065. ~ SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Jeannine Clancy Golden Valley Director of Public Works FROM: Mike Kotila, PE Senior Transportation Engineer DATE: September 9, 2008 RE: Applewood Point Assisted Living Facility - Traffic Review SEH No. A-GOLDV9801.01 This memorandum summarizes my review of traffic safety, access, pedestrian, and roadway capacity issues for the proposed Applewood Point Assisted Living development. Existing Conditions The Applewood Point Assisted Living Facility and Senior Co-op Housing facilities will be located in the north-east quadrant of the intersection of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road. Douglas Drive is a four-lane A-Minor Arterial Reliever which serves approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. Golden Valley Road is a Major Collector roadway that serves approximately 3,450 vehicles per day. The intersection of Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive operates under signalized control with channelized right turn lanes for traffic turning from eastbound and westbound Golden Valley Road onto Douglas Drive. Pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian signal indications are provided across the south and west legs of the intersection. No pedestrian accommodations are in place to serve crossings of the north and east legs. Existing land uses on the proposed redevelopment site include several multi-family homes and a fourteen unit apartment building. Three private driveways are in place to provide access to parcels fronting on Golden Valley Road and three existing driveways are in place for those homes that have frontage on Douglas Drive. Golden Valley Road was reconstructed in 2007. Improvements were made to the road and sidewalk which also included replacement of the Canadian Pacific Railroad Bridge over Golden Valley Road immediately easterly of the proposed site. The Douglas Drive intersection with Golden Valley Road was not reconstructed as part of the project, although concept studies for the intersection have been developed. Replacement of the railroad bridge allowed the north abutment to be positioned further from the roadway than the previous bridge which improved sight lines from the existing driveways on the north side of Golden Valley Road west of the bridge. The crash history of this segment of Golden Valley Road was reviewed to identify safety issues that may have existed for the driveways near the old bridge abutment. During the 10 years reviewed, there were no reported crashes involving vehicles entering or exiting a driveway at this location. Proposed Conditions Ingress and egress to/from the Applewood Point site will be provided by a single 26 foot wide driveway to Golden Valley Road. The driveway, located near the east edge of the site, will need to serve residents, employees, deliveries, and emergency vehicle access. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200. Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com I 952.912.2600 I 800.734.6757 I 952.912.2601 fax Applewood Point Assisted Living Facility - Traffic Review September 9,2008 Page 2 Intersection Sight Distance (for the driveway) We have evaluated sight distance at the proposed driveway intersection with Golden Valley Road. The driveway is located near a low point along Golden Valley Road adjacent to the new Canadian Pacific Railroad bridge. Of interest is the ability for drivers exiting the site to have adequate visibility to safely turn right or left onto Golden Valley Road. A southbound driver leaving the site will be controlled by a stop sign. The driver will be required to stop prior to the crosswalk and yield to any conflicting sidewalk users or east-west vehicular traffic. When stopped at the crosswalk, a driver taking a right turn would need to look to the east before pulling out onto Golden Valley Road. The limiting sight line factor to the east is the new railroad bridge abutment. The sight distance available (460 feet) exceeds design guidelines (440 feet is desirable). The sight line is improved compared to the situation that existed prior to bridge replacement. It is typical in this situation that drivers will tend to roll forward into the cross walk area to further improve their sight line before deciding to complete their maneuver. As the driver rolls forward, the line of sight increases to over 800 feet. The high point in the roadway profile east of the railroad bridge will not inhibit safe decisions to be made by drivers exiting from the Applewood Point driveway. A driver taking a left turn from the driveway needs to choose a gap in traffic approaching from both directions. As previously described, the view to the east is not inhibited. When looking to the west, the high point in the roadway occurs approximately 330 feet from the driveway. A driver turning to the east would be able to observe an eastbound vehicle on Golden Valley Road 425 feet or more away (slightly less than the 440 feet desirable). The 440 foot desirable sight line, would allow the entering vehicle to accelerate up to operating speed without causing a driver approaching from behind (eastbound from Douglas Drive intersection) to slow down. The sight distance available will provide adequate time for the exiting driver to pull out into Golden Valley Road, but may occasionally require a conflicting the eastbound driver to slow down. Given that there have been no reported crashes at this location in the last ten years, this maneuver should continue to operate safely. We also acknowledge that older drivers may desire a slightly longer gap in traffic. Site Circulation and Truck Access The site plan is currently configured to allow two-way traffic to circulate through the site which appears to be well suited to serve site circulation needs. The question has been raised regarding the viability of one-way flow within the site. The following issues should be considered or addressed if a one way alternative is to be considered further: . Wrong way movements should be discouraged or physically inhibited . Parking stalls could be angled for ease of access . Counter clockwise flow would eliminate left turn conflicts at the entry points . One-way flow through the Co-op parking garage would compliment the pattern . Raised curbs or island aligned for directional control at each two-way entrance to the circulatory would reinforce the intended circulation pattern . Any blockage of the circulatory road during snow removal or presence ofa moving van, contractor, fire truck, or delivery vehicle would force wrong way movements. If angled parking or the other one way treatments are in place as described above - wrong way movements would create safety issues. Fire truck access to the facility will be through the driveway from Golden Valley Road. Based on the AutoTurn drawing provided by MFRA, the largest fire truck in Golden Valley's fire department will have sufficient space to maneuver through the parking lot. Applewood Point Assisted Living Facility - Traffic Review September 9, 2008 Page 3 Delivery truck access to the site will be provided by the driveway to/from Golden VaIley Road. No loading dock facilities are provided on site. Presuming that the assisted living building would need food service deliveries, we contacted Sysco Food Service to identify the size and type of delivery vehicles that they use. Delivery trucks have 36 foot semi-trailers and an overall tractor-trailer length of roughly 48 feet. We performed a vehicle tracking analysis using AutoTum software for a similar design vehicle. Results indicated that the delivery vehicle would be able to maneuver through the surface parking lot as weB as to and from the public street. Since there are no loading docks planned, off loading the vehicle would need to be performed in the circulatory drive aisle while blocking a portion of the drive aisle and blocking several parking staIls. Trip Generation and Distribution The ITE Trip Generation Manual was used to estimate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed development. ITE rates were also used to estimate the number of trip generated by the existing land uses. Existing uses included nine single family attached units (duplex or quad homes) and one 14 unit low-rise apartment building. The proposed development is estimated to generate daily and peak hour trip volumes as foIlows: Period Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing Uses 178 13 17 Proposed 524 23 35 Net Increase 346 10 18 The planned development is expected to increase the daily number oftrips by approximately 346 trips per day compared to the existing uses that generate approximately 178 daily trips. Due to the nature of the facility, these trips will be spread out through the day with a relatively smaIl number of trips generated during the AM and PM peak hours. The trips entering and exiting the new facility can be separated into two groups. The first group is the residents of the facility, while the second group is the employees and visitors. Each would group would have unique travel characteristics. Residents of the facility will generate traffic primarily on Golden Valley Road or Douglas Drive as they travel to local retail establishments, restaurants and services. Local destinations for residents may typically be favored such as the shopping center on Duluth Street near TH 100 or those in Downtown Golden Valley. Resident trips will occur predominantly in non-peak daylight hours. Employees and visitors trips are more likely to be longer trips using Douglas Drive and Duluth Streets to gain access to/from regional arterials such as TH 100 and TH 55. Employee trips will occur in shifts that may coincide with peak traffic periods. Visitor trips may occur at any time of day but be most prevalent during evening hours and on weekends. Impact on Local Roadway The planned development will generate an increase of 346 daily trips on the roadway system. Only about 7% of these are expected to occur in the PM peak hour while 4% occur during the AM peak hour. Intersection capacity at Douglas Drive and Golden VaIley Road will accommodate the added trips from the development, without the need for capacity improvements. The City is currently engaged in a study of the Douglas Drive Corridor which is expected to define a concept plan for the Golden VaIley Road and Applewood Point Assisted Living Facility - Traffic Review September 9, 2008 Page 4 Douglas Drive intersection. The City and Hennepin County support the addition of left turn lanes at this intersection when it is reconstructed. These types of improvements would benefit all users of the intersection including Applewood residents. Golden Valley's draft comprehensive transportation plan includes guidance on when a traffic impact study is required for a development. This guidance suggests that developments that generate 1,000 or more trips per day or 100 trips in the peak hour should be required to provide a traffic impact study. The Applewood development is not expected to contribute traffic demands that exceed either of these thresholds. Non-motorized traffic Connection to the City's sidewalk and trail system for walking, bicycling or access to public transportation may be desired by residents of the Applewood Point development. The site design does provide pedestrian walkways to the public sidewalk on Golden Valley Road as well as sidewalk improvements along both frontages of the public street system. A new sidewalk is in place on Golden Valley Road to the east. Pedestrian and bicycle destinations include local parks, Luce Line Trail, shopping and other services in downtown Golden Valley. Sidewalk improvements are needed along Douglas Drive to access the Luce Line Trail and will be acknowledged in the City's current study of the Douglas Drive corridor. There are three Metro Transit bus stops near Golden Valley Road and Douglas Drive intersection. The bus stops are located on the north and south side of Golden Valley Road west of Douglas Drive, and on the west side of Douglas Drive south of Golden Valley Road. Pedestrian routes from the Applewood Point development to the transit stops requires crossing at the intersection of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road. The intersection is signalized but crosswalks and pedestrian signals should be improved to serve existing users and future Applewood Point residents. Summary & Recommendations Access to and from Golden Valley Road to the Applewood Pointe Assisted Living development can be safely accommodated by a driveway on the southeast corner of the site. Traffic impacts on the public street system will not require capacity improvements on Golden Valley Road or Douglas Drive. On-site circulation and access to the parking garages and surface parking lots will be functional for passenger vehicles which will comprise the majority of users. Large vehicles, such as delivery trucks or fire trucks will block portions of the circular drive aisles or parking stalls when they are on site making two-way operation preferable to one-way operation. Improvements to off-site pedestrian facilities are recommended. These include trail and sidewalk connections along Douglas Drive, crosswalk and pedestrian signal improvements at the Golden Valley Road/ Douglas Drive intersection. mwr c: Jeff Oliver, City Engineer Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development p:lfj\glgoldvI980JOOlapplewood pointe assisted living facilitylapplewood traffic review memo 090908.doc Hennepin County Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340-5421 612-596-0300, Phone 763-478-4000, FAX 763-478-4030, TOO www.hennepin.us July 23, 2008 Mr. Mark Grimes, Director of Planning City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, Mn 55447 Re: Preliminary Plat - Applewood Pointe CSAH 102, Northeast Quadrant Golden Valley Road Section 28/33, Township 118, Range 21 Hennepin County Plat No. 3139A Review and Recommendations Dear Mr. Grimes: Minnesota Statutes 505.02, 505.03, and 462.358, Plats and Surveys, allow up to 30 days for county review of preliminary plats abutting county roads. We reviewed the above plat revision and offer the following comments: . Hennepin County Transportation finds the updated plat and site plan acceptable as submitted. The City may need to more clearly identify the Golden Valley Road right of way and address the minor sidewalk encroachment at the plat's southwest corner. We acknowledge and appreciate the City's and developer's response to our prior comments eliminating direct access to CSAH 102 and providing adequate right of way for future roadway improvements. . Please inform the developer that all proposed construction within county right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Appropriate forms can be obtained by contacting..our Permits Section at (612) 596-0336. Please direct any response to Dave Zetterstrom at (612) 596-0355. Sincerely, ~/2~ James N. Grube, P.E. Director of Transportation & County Engineer DKZ/sew Cc: Plat Review Committee-Byers 1 Lindgren 1 Holtz 1 Drager 1 Zetterstrom 1 Fackler 1 Lemke Mark Larsen, Hennepin County Surveyor's Office An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper alley Mem rand m Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16,2008 Agenda Item 4. C. Public Item - Appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals Decision - 6925 Medicine Lake Road Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary Ronald Rath, owner of the property located at 6925 Medicine Lake Road, has chosen to appeal a decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals to deny his request for a variance from City Code. In his request to the Board, Mr. Rath asked that a variance be granted for 2.5 feet off the required 28 foot building height requirement to construct a new home. This variance request was in addition to three others which would allow Mr. Rath to construct his proposed home on the property. A final plat and subdivision were approved for this property by the City Council on May 18, 2004. Mr. Rath created plans for his home which reflected zoning regulations at that time. However, with the subsequent passage of Ordinance No. 382 (Single Family Zoning District Regarding Infill Housing Development), Mr. Rath's building plans no longer comply with City Code. At the August meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, Mr. Rath received variances to the side yard setback requirements, front yard setback requirements, and building articulation requirements. However, the majority of the Board was uncomfortable in granting a variance to building height requirements. In formulating its decision to grant a variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals must determine whether or not a hardship exists on the property. Specifically, the Board must consider the following factors: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by official controls. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and is not created by the landowner. 3. A variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff feels that this situation qualifies for a variance to City Code. The property at 6925 Medicine Lake Road is a unique lot, which has significant issues with setback requirements and topography. The lot, which borders the Light Industrial Zoning District to the south and west, and the City of Crystal to the north, does not negatively interfere with the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east. In the opinion of staff, Mr. Rath's proposed plan would work to improve the character of the neighborhood, and increase the stock of quality housing in the City of Golden Valley. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Board of Zoning Appeals meeting minutes dated August 26, 2008 (4 pages) Appeal Form: Board of Zoning Appeals Denial dated August 30, 2008 (3 pages) Memo to the Board of Zoning Appeals dated August 20, 2008 (2 pages) Site plans for proposed home dated January 24, 2007 (4 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet) Pictures of property located 6925 Medicine Lake Road (3 pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to approve variance number 08-08-12, wavering from Section 11.21 Subdivision 11 (B) Height Requirements, granting 2.5 feet off the permitted 28 feet to a distance of 30.5 feet at the proposed south front elevation for the construction of a single family home at 6925 Medicine Lake Road. 1155 1140 o 7105 7100 MADISON AVf Vi 7:t35 M#;it:.,~w,l'l ht:i\tS- ~~~'1vti~C~ tC!'~Gt~~ o 1101 o 8 o 8 0 o t.U!DIONEU<KE'RD' 8 o 8 o o 2.~ o o o 2455 6 I ~ z 2-4DO nuB 2:iI () 6839 6829 68011 6840 Ii""" "..,., Subject Property o 6lI3li o :Ie?" Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 26, 2008 Page 3 6925 Medicine Lake Road (08-08-12) Ronald and Vicki Rath, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirements . 7.75 ft. off the required 22.75 ft. to a distance of 15 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new home. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (8) . 2.5 ft. higher than the allowed 28 ft. in (south front elevation) Purpose: To allow for the construction Request: Waiver from Sectio Requirements 3)(d) Articulation Purpose: Request: ection 11.21, Subd.11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest point e front yard (south) property line. ' To allow for the construction of a deck on a new home. d that the applicants are proposing to build a new home on a vacant lot at the corn dicine Lake Road and Sandburg Lane. He explained that this lot was part of a subdivision done a few years ago and that the house the applicants are planning to build met all of the zoning code requirements at that time. The applicants discovered that the zoning code requirements had significantly changed when they applied for a building permit. Hogeboom stated that if these current variance requests are granted it would basically allow the applicants to build their house using previous zoning code requirements before the "infill ordinance" was adopted. He added that one of the significant hardships in this case is the triangular shaped lot with essentially three front yards. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 26, 2008 Page 4 McCarty referred to the variance regarding the height of the proposed new home and questioned if the previous zoning code allowed for 30 feet of height. Hogeboom said yes and stated that the requested variance is .5 feet higher than the previously allowed 30 feet. McCarty noted that the articulation requirements would not have been met under the previous zoning code requirements either because the previous code required walls to articulate when they reached 40 feet in length. Hogeboom reiterated that the shape of the lot is the hardship in this case. Nelson asked abou 1,400 square feet on square feet bel only buildable p He explai have t code req t the Segelbaum asked if the house would have had to have been built b 0 changed to be considered legally non-conforming. Hogeboom sai applicant was following the regulations of the zoning code at th McCarty asked when the property was subdivided. Hogeboom Nelson asked when the zoning code requirements cha ordinance" was adopted in March 2008. Ronald Rath, Applicant, stated that the property explained that at that time he showed the story house with no articulation in the fr proposed new house that would not ha along Sandburg Lane. He said he meet the current setback requir from the side yard setback re would only be able to build they paid for the lot. d in the fall of2004. He ary drawings showing a 2- at time the only part of his code requirements was the deck ng to Id that deck differently in order to that if he doesn't receive a variance e lot omes virtually unbuildable because he oot house which wouldn't be worth the money tage of the proposed new home. Rath said there will be 900 square feet in the master suite above and 900 t the area he is proposing to build the house on is the and hat he did not pay $80,000 for the lot to build a rambler. of the proposed new house would be 28-30 feet if he didn't ed for the grading of the lot. He added that the new zoning , out destroy this property. at this property is bordered by light industrial properties so there won't the rear of this proposed new house. Sell talked about the many ideas that have been proposed in the past for this corner. He commended the applicant for trying to build a house on this lot. Nelson said she understands the intent of the recently adopted zoning changes but this is certainly a unique lot and the proposed house is not enormous or oversized for this lot. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 26,2008 Page 5 McCarty asked that applicant why he didn't build this house three years ago when the property was subdivided. Rath explained that the mortgage company folded and the amount of construction money available is down to three lenders in the state. McCarty said he feels ambivalent about this proposal. He said he is fine with the side yard setback variance request because the intent of the new zoning requirements was to avoid a "canyon" affect between houses and he doesn't see that as being an issue in this case. He added however that he doesn't believe that the house plans met the previous zoning code requirements either. N kee chang is suppos ause he was caught in the ook nice but the City Council feels that granting these variance said he would like the Council to Rath stated that every jog in a wall costs more to build, insure and h t asked if the proposed deck along Sandburg Lane can be built to 3 property because it is considered a front yard. Segelbaum said ink front setback when considering an open front porch. He expl . allows open front porches, not decks, to be located 30 feet fro line. Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearin, closed the public hearing. Segelbaum said that he feels sympathetic middle of the zoning code changes. He voted to change the zoning code requir requests would go against the City review this proposal to see if thi Kisch said he feels fine gr unique lot and he needs also ok with the variance r fac;ade of the front ho that the height of the could be broug 0 character of the also 2-sto area b ard variance request because this is such a . nce to make this a buildable lot. He said he is articu ion because the front porch breaks up the it is in line with the intent of the zoning code. He said home is an issue for him and he thinks the height , e added that the proposed house will fit in with the od and noted that the next two homes on the same street are omes. McCarty said the Board can't look at the other homes ,in It before the new zoning requirements were adopted. ere are unique circumstances with this property. The proposal is e spirit of the zoning code and the proposed house won't substantially cter of the neighborhood. She added that these are the things the Board consider when granting variances. Sell stated that if this proposed house were being built between two existing houses he could see that there would be some concern but this lot is unique because of its shape and what is located around it. He said due to the many unique circumstances in this case he is in favor of granting the requested variances. He said he would also like these minutes and issues brought to the City Council's attention because maybe the new zoning code requirements need further review. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 26, 2008 Page 6 Segelbaum asked Hogeboom which variances requested are needed as a result of the zoning code changes. Hogeboom said all of the requests except the one for the deck along Sandburg Lane are required as a result of the new zoning code changes. Nelson said she thinks it is important to be consistent when granting variances but this is such a unique circumstance that she doesn't think it will establish any type of precedent. Segelbaum agreed that granting the requested variances wouldn't set a precedent but he reiterated that he is not comfortable going against the zoning code requir that were just recently adopted by the City Council. He said he would oppose the riance requests but he would be in favor of granting the fourth request. He i City Council needs to see this request and make the decision. Sell said that the City Council doesn't tend to overrule the Bo against the Board's decisions. He said he thinks a split vote w in this case. Hogeboom offered to write a report to the . Cou this case. s or go n a denial the issues in McCarty said he would like to vote on the varianc agreed. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Kisc for 7.75 ft. off the required 22.75 ft. to a yard (east) property line to allow fo to 1 to approve the request at its closest point to the side new home. Segelbaum voted no. MOVED by Nelson to approve height to a height of 30.5 home, the motion died du for 2. . higher than the allowed 28 ft. in evation) to allow for the construction of a new second. MOVED by Segelb for 2.5 ft. higher than elevation) to al r by Kisch and motion carried 3 to 2 to deny the request ft. in height to a height of 30.5 ft. (south front Ion of a new home. Nelson and Sell voted no. by Nelson and motion carried 3 to 2 to approve the request Medicine Lake Rd.) with no articulation to allow for the home. McCarty and Segelbaum voted no. MO the req front yard Ibaum, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest point to the h) property line to allow for the construction of a deck on a new home. Rath stated that he has a very unique lot. He stated that is the job of the Board to make these types of decisions, not to pass them on to the City Council to review them. He said with the decisions the Board just made they've basically said that he can't build his house this year. He reiterated that he has to start measuring his lot five feet underground because the Code says elevations have to be taken on both street sides. TO: FROM: APPEAL FORM BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DENIAL " DATE: ~ l.EtJ I d f! I. If Golden Valley City Council Petitioner Name: -'b/tlALf) of U:fftK::t i'l1jJl '. .,,/ ;pi Address: /CJ/II- //Jd~ !!fi, t5't1d , Bus. Phone: OM --Y.?f-/;t/t} Home Phone: ?~3-//t3fP~ Street address of property involved in this petition: {, 9c1 ~ ItJ En:r t!.-;J:A/ E i-itk 'E. ;f~A /J If you are not the owner of all of the property involved in this petition, give the name of the owner and describe the petitioner's interest (legal and otherwise) in this property: Waiver requested and denied was: \r\. ~~ ~J V\ -\- \I 0.. v \ Cd". c.. ~ BZA Denial Appeal Page 2 Appellant's reasons for requesting council's review and consideration of the BZA denial: . See tt ttcta..h€ ~ · Attach 7 copies of the site plan and/or drawings that may clarify the requested variance. If your plan is 11" x 17" or smaller, only one copy is needed. TO: City Council FROM: Ron and Vicki Rath DATE: August 30, 2008 RE: Appellant's reasons for requesting council's review and consideration of the BZA denial Reason 1. Comer lot - walk out Reason 2. Have streets on front, side and back front Reason 3. Code requiring pass elevation of28' front and back with walk out to the rear We passed the front elevation, unable to pass rear elevation due to walk out lot. Based on the new requirements a walk out would not be possible on this. Seeing we can pass the front elevation are asking for this variance for the back front. If a street did not go behind our lot, this would have passed. The street to our rear is not a major through street, rather provides access to residents on this dead end street. We have no neighbors to the rear, the rear of our lot faces an industrial park. Reason 4. Unique shaped lot requires two stories to accommodate house plans with having tuck under garage Reason 5. Board members on the BZA refused to vote for this variance as this new regulation had just been passed by city council and did not want to go against council. Although we understand the importance of having regulations, it is the responsibility of the planning committee to be willing grant exception in situations that present hardships. Reason 6. We bought this lot in 2005 and brought these plans in front of the council in order to get the subdivision and no one advised that we would be in violation, so we assumed we could move forward with these plans. Ron has a copy of the notes from this meeting and the concern at that time was water availability and grading. We really need your help in this matter and appreciate being able to appeal this decision. Thank you. Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: August 20,2008 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Joe Hogeboom, City Planner 6925 Medicine Lake Road Ronald and Vicki Rath, Applicants To: From: Subject: Ronald and Vicki Rath are the owners of the property located at 6925 Medicine Lake Road. Mr. and Ms. Rath are requesting four variances from City Code for the construction of a new single family home. The proposed home requires variances for height requirements, articulation requirements, front yard setback requirements and side yard setback requirements. At the time of lot subdivision several years ago, the applicants' proposed plan for a home met City zoning requirements. However, recent changes to the Single Family R1 Residential Zoning District significantly limit the potential for development on this site. The lot is irregularly shaped as a triangle, which gives it three front yard setback areas. The proposed project requires variances from the following section of City Code: . Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirements A 15 foot side yard setback is required for properties located in the Single Family R1 Residential Zoning District that measure over 100 feet in width. Due to recent changes in City Code an additional .5 feet must be added to the setback requirement for each foot of a structure over 15 feet. This lot measures 261.88 feet in width, and the proposed structure measures 30.5 feet. Therefore, the side yard setback is 22.75 feet. The applicant is requesting 7.75 feet off of the required 22.75 feet to a distance of 15 feet from the closest point of the proposed home to the side (east) yard property line. . Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (B) Height Requirements The City's Zoning Code allows buildings in the Single Family R1 Zoning District to reach a height of 28 feet. The applicant is requesting an additional 2.5 feet in height to a distance of 30.5 feet in height. . Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Articualtion Requirement The City's Zoning Code requires newly constructed single family homes to articulate walls longer than 32 feet by shifting them at least 2 feet in depth for at least 8 feet of length. The applicant is requesting to have no articulation for his proposed home. . Section 11.21, Subd.11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements The City's Zoning Code requires newly constructed single family homes to be located 35 or more feet from the street right-of-way line. The applicant is requesting 4 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 31 feet to the closest point of the front (south) yard property line. This request would allow an attached deck for the proposed home. No prior variances were obtained for this property. Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting September 16, 2008 "60 Days" Deadline: September 24, 2008 Agenda Item 5. A. Continued Item - Authorization to Sign Amended PUD Permit - Calvary Lutheran Church- PUD No. 46 - Amendment No.6 - 7520 Golden Valley Road Prepared By Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the August 6,2008 City Council meeting, the Council continued their discussion on a minor amendment to Calvary Church PUD No. 46 until the September 16, 2008 City Council meeting. The minor amendment proposed by Calvary Church would allow for the construction of a columbarium within the existing church structure and an outside columbarium and memorial garden. This matter has been considered by the City Council on June 17, 2008 and July 15, 2008. At the July 15 meeting, consideration was again continued to a future meeting in order to obtain more information from Calvary about the outdoor columbarium and memorial walk. A letter from Pastor Dornbusch at Calvary has been submitted that includes additional information. This letter is dated July 25, 2008 and was included with the July 15 City Council Agenda packet. In the letter, Calvary suggests limiting the first phase of construction to one pod with three columbaria (72 niches in each columbarium) for a total of 216 niches. Also included in the pod would be benches, liturgical art, pavers and landscaping. The columbaria would be about 6 feet high. They are also requesting that they be able to construct a second pod the same size as the first without going back to the City for a PUD amendment. The second pod would be constructed in one of the pod locations chosen by the church and shown on the site plan. After these two pods are constructed, the PUD would have to be amended for additional pods. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Letter from Pastor Steve Dornbusch dated July 25, 2008 (including 3 photos, loose in agenda packet) (7 pages) Executive Summary for Action dated July 15, 2008 (2 pages) Letter from Pastor Steve Dornbusch dated May 28,2008 (3 pages) Minor PUD Application (3 pages) Plans for indoor columbarium (2 pages) Amended PUD Permit (5 pages) Conceptual plans for outdoor columbarium and memorial prayer garden (3 pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the amended PUD permit for Calvary Lutheran Church, PUD No. 46, Amendment No.6 subject to the following conditions: 1. If the Calvary Church property changes from a church use, the columbarium and the remains in the columbarium niches shall be moved to another appropriate location at no cost to the City of Golden Valley. 2. The height of the columbarium structure shall not exceed 6.5 feet above the ground. 3. No significant trees (as defined by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance) shall be removed due to the construction of the columbarium or walkway. 4. There shall be no outdoor lighting of the columbarium or memorial garden. The only exception would be minimal bollard lighting for the walkway or lighting determined to be necessary for public safety reasons with the approval of the City Manager and Chief of Police. 5. As shown on the site plan prepared by Olsson Associates, only two of the pods may be constructed in a location chosen by Calvary Church. The construction may include walkways to the pods. Each pod will consist of 3 columbaria with 72 niches for a total of 216 niches in each pod. Each pod may include benches, liturgical art, and landscaping. 1.1 1fIOO 7635 1031 1038 1'039 / "- ~ t02:8 1025 :to:ZO ioUi 1008 1004 :tOIlS 1031 i !n:u__~~~.J : 1034; uns ~ : waS _...._. . W7 I'l :Ul24 lil 1020 Uiit-S; ---I 1017 :". i(ji3'~ -~ 1OIl9 1m 1016 1012 la fOO6 1025 .. .....m__l!l 1021 (i: 10t1 ~ t013 ~ ~m 1iJli9 i:ia o 7S1S ~ 605 7SOS COUNTRY CWB DR 7701 o 8 dX)O(X)ooooo 0 07700 1501) p<.'"'''''''' M~('{'<j~\I$~.t-''lN~lMS. ~r~,f!{C! ~~~~.???3 c ....' 763.545.5659 763.545.6953 fax www.calvary.org 7520 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Calvary July 25, 2008 Mr. Mark W. Grimes, AICP Director of Planning and Development City of Golden Valley Re: Amendment to P.D.D. # 46, Proposed Amendment # 6 Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley Dear Mr. Grimes: Calvary Lutheran Church would like to offer some information in light of the comments and questions of the Mayor and other City Council members at the recent city council meeting. The concerns were: a columbarium seems like a cemetery which would not be desirable, the plan seems too expansive and it seems it should have a fence for security. We did not he~ concerns expressed about the indoor columbarium so this letter will focus on our proposed outdoor memorial prayer garden and columbarium. Reasons for an outdoor memorial prayer garden andcolumbarium We desire to construct and operate a columbarium inside our church facility and an outdoor memorial prayer garden and columbarium. In information meetings at Calvary, we are hearing more interest in the outdoor proposal. We expect that there is sufficient interest to justify columbaria - the one inside and the one outside. The primary reason we want to construct both of them is that there is an increasing demand for church columbaria and we want to expand our services to respond to the demand. . There are an increasing number of individuals, nationwide and here in Hennepin County, who are choosing cremation rather than traditional burials. . There is also a significant inqrease in the number of churches that have established a columbarium. Locally, we havelearned of existing and planned Twin Cities church columbaria in Anoka, Eden Prairie, Edina, Excelsior, Mahtomedi, Minneapolis, Mound, New Brighton, Plymouth and St. Louis Park. . Many members and friends of Calvary are excited about the opportunity to have their earthly cremains reside at the church that has meant so much to them. For many of us who have chosen cremation, it is appealing to have our cremains at our church and in a setting inviting for our family and loved ones to remember us for generations. . In the Executive Sunimary for Action for the July 15 Golden Valley City Council Meeting, Mr. Grimes wrote: "Staffhas talked with several cities and churches about outdoor columbaria. In all cases, the City and churches have only positive comments." Our Calvary Task Force has visited many outdoor memorial prayer gardens and columbaria. Recently we asked two staff members at St. Barnabas Lutheran Church in Plymouth if they had difficulty getting city approval for their outdoor memorial prayer garden and columbarium. They responded: "Heavens no, the city council members were strong advocates for our project". . We would like to emphasize the focus of Calvary is responding to needs of the community. Our services are "cradle to grave" and an important part of Calvary's mission is its desire to be a positive force and resource to the Golden Valley community. Calvary provides numerous community benefits, including its childcare programs from infant daycare through pre-kindergarten, its commitment to housing and food support through organizations like Habitat, PRISM, and Families Moving Forward, its desire to help families through support of Golden Valley's women's shelter, numerous support groups that were begun and which meet at Calvary, its commitment to men and women in the armed forces from our area through our extensive military support, the generous sharing of our clergy to help meet the needs of our local nursing homes, the use of Calvary facilities and hundreds of Calvary members to support Golden Valley Days, camps and Vacation Bible School that are available to community children, not just Calvary members, music concerts open to the public, educational opportunities, counseling and community gathering spaces, as well as providing a wonderful housing option for seniors in the community. Thousands of individuals in the community benefit from and appreciate our services. The desire to create a columbarium is a natural extension of Calvary's demonstrated desire to provide community benefit from the "cradle to the grave." . Thousands of people die each year in the Twin Cities. We believe churches and cities have a responsibility to help address the needs of those who die and want their bodies buried or their cremains inumed here in the Twin Cities. If everyone chose traditional burial, there would not be sufficient land available. An increasing large number of people are choosing cremation, in part, because it is more environmentally friendly. . We believe many people in our community and elsewhere will be greatly surprised and disappointed if Golden Valley is the only city in the Twin Cities that does not permit an outdoor memorial garden and columbarium. The expansiveness of our master plan The first phase will consist of one pod including three columbaria, benches, a liturgical art decorative piece, pavers and landscaping. Each columbarium will be about six feet high, nine feet long and two feet deep. Each of the three columbaria will contain about 72 niches. There will also be a memorial wall located along the main pathway, which wall is not shown on the drawing. The memorial wall will consist of a kasota stone structure much like the columbaria and instead of niches, individuals will be able to purchase the right to have the name and dates of a loved one, not inumed at Calvary, inscribed on a plaque and attached to the wall. A main walkway will serve the first pod and the walkway will be completed as funding is available. (' The first phase will consist of 216 niches and if all six pods are ultimately constructed the total number of niches would be 1,300. We are told that these are not large numbers given the size of Calvary and our community. Those eligible to purchase a niche shall be Calvary members, their relatives and loved ones and other individuals actively involved at Calvary. At some point if availability of niches becomes an issue it may be necessary to limit eligibility to Calvary members and their immediate families. For some the conceptual master plan for the area may seem expansive because we have chosen to have the columbaria structures not too massive looking. We would rather have more smaller sized columbaria located throughout the garden rather than have larger sized columbaria in a concentrated area. This approach will be more conducive to the memorial prayer garden theme. We want the area to be a natural and inviting setting for people to walk in and sit down for reflection and meditation. We are attaching photos of several area outdoor memorial prayer gardens and columbaria. Each of them is attractive and inviting. . Edina - Christ Presbyterian Church on Hwy 100 and 70th. . Eden Prairie - St. Andrew Lutheran Church off of Hwy 5 . Plymouth - St. Barnabas Lutheran Church on Old Rockford Road. In the future, the outdoor memorial gardens and columbarium at these churches will likely expand in area. If the Golden Valley City Council believes it necessary to limit your approval at this time, we respectfully request that you approve the first phase described above and one other pod in a location to be determined by Calvary. The idea of fences for security reasons Security has been a subject of much discussion during our planning. We have decided that fencing would not be desirable for several reasons: . It will likely do little to deter a wrongdoer intent on mischief. . It will detract from the inviting natural setting we are working to create. . Other Twin Cities outdoor memorial prayer gardens and columbaria have not installed fencing. The churches chose not to and the cities did not require it. We fully understand that the risks relating to security are the responsibility of Calvary. We intend for all of our church property to be safe. The proposed language of the PUD Amendment recommended by the city staff relating to security lighting is acceptable to us. We will make ourselves available to the City to provide additional information and answer questions. Photos Hey Memo nd m Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2008 "60 Days" Deadline: August 15, 2008 Agenda Item 5. A. Continued Item - Authorization to Sign Amended PUD Permit - Calvary Lutheran Church - PUD No. 46 - Amendment NO.6 -7520 Golden Valley Road Prepared By Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the June 17, 2008 City Council meeting the Council considered a minor PUD amendment for Calvary Church PUD 46 that would allow for the construction of both an indoor and outdoor columbarium. After some discussion, the Council decided that they needed additional information so the discussion was continued to the July 1, 2008 meeting. At the request of Calvary, the discussion was continued until the July 15, 2008 City Council meeting. At the June 17 meeting, the Council wanted clarification regarding several issues and additional language for the Minor PUD amendment. First, the Council asked that a condition be included in the PUD Permit that requires that if the Calvary Church property is no longer used for church purposes, the columbarium would have to be relocated to an appropriate location. The wording that will be added to the PUD permit is as follows: If the Calvary Church property changes from a church use, the columbarium and the remains in the columbarium niches shall be moved to another appropriate location. Second, the Council wanted to insure that the height of the columbarium structure does not exceed the height illustrated on the preliminary plans. Therefore, staff is suggesting that the height of the columbarium structure not exceed 6.5 feet above the ground. Third, there was a concern about tree removal. Calvary agrees that no significant trees (as defined by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance) be removed due to the construction of the columbarium or walkway. Fourth, the Council wanted a condition that forbids artificial lighting of the columbarium and memorial garden surrounding the columbarium. The only exception would be minimal bollard lighting for the walkway or lighting determined to be necessary for public safety reasons with the approval of the City Manager and Chief of Police. Staff has talked to several cities and churches about outdoor columbariums. In all cases, the City and churches have only positive comments. Two cities (Edina and Eden Prairie) have permitted columbariums as a right on church properties and not required any land use permits. Other cities (Plymouth, Mahtomedi, Mound) have required a conditional use permit or amended PUD to allow them to be located on church property. In the City of Minneapolis, Westminster Presbyterian Church has recently constructed a 2,000 niche columbarium. The City of Minneapolis did not require approval of the columbarium, but Minneapolis did approve the site plan for fencing and walls around the columbarium. Attachments Location Map ( 1 page) Amended PUD Permit (5 pages) Letter from Pastor Steve Dornbusch dated May 28, 2008 (3 pages, loose in agenda packet) Minor PUD Application (4 pages, loose in agenda packet) Plans for indoor columbarium (2 pages, loose in agenda packet) Conceptual plans for outdoor columbarium and memorial prayer garden (3 pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the amended PUD permit for Calvary Lutheran Church, PUD No. 46, Amendment No.6, 7520 Golden Valley Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. If the Calvary Church property changes from a church use, the columbarium and the remains in the columbarium niches shall be moved to another appropriate location. 2. The height of the columbarium structure shall not exceed 6.5 feet above the ground. 3. No significant trees (as defined by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance) shall be removed due to the construction of the columbarium or walkway. 4. There shall be no outdoor lighting of the columbarium or memorial garden. The only exception would be minimal bollard lighting for the walkway or lighting determined to be necessary for public safety reasons with the approval of the City Manager and Chief of Police. 763.545.5659 763.545.6953 fax www.calvary.org 7520 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Calvary ~ May 28, 2008 Mr. Mark W. Grimes, AICP Director of Planning and Development City of Golden Valley Re: Amendment to P.D.D. # 46, Amendment # 5 City Council Approval May 18, 2004 Dear Mr. Grimes: Calvary Lutheran Church respectfully requests that the City of Golden Valley-amend our P.U.D. by deleting paragraph 5 of the Land Use Component: The use of any of the church property for a colu11lQarium would reQ"ll;irea.t1.amendment to the P.U.D. . Background of Request We desire to construct and operate a columbatiUJ1ljl1si~e(>ur church facilitY~~a.111.eIfi()~al prayer garden and columbarium outside. A .colu:rnbariUJ1l.is a structure contail1il.:t~~eh~an remains resulting from a cremation. The cremains are placed into an urn, which is placed into a niche, which is located in an above ground columbarium. There are an increasing number of individuals, nationwide and here in Hennepin County, who are choosing cremation rather than traditional burials. There is also an increase in the number of churches that have established a columbarium. We have learned of existing and planned twin cities church columbaria in Anoka, Eden Prairie, Edina, Excelsior, Mahtomedi. Minneapolis, New Brighton, Plymouth, and St. Louis Park. There are also church columbaria in Deerwood, Nisswa, Park Rapids and probably many other cities. We believe there are enough members of Calvary who will wish to purchase a niche to justify and finance the construction of a columbarium inside and outside. We have preliminary conceptual designs for both sites. Before we incur additional design costs, we want to obtain city approval of the requested amendment. Then we will continue with more detailed drawings, and give our congregation members and friends an opportunity to purchase niches prior to the start of construction. We intend to use the approach used by other churches and we will build the columbaria in phases over a long period of time as the demand for niches warrants. The reason we are requesting the deletion of paragraph 5 is to give us the flexibility to expand the number of niches from time to time as demand warrants. This will avoid the need to file with the City an application for an amendment to the P.D.D. each time we wish to add more columbaria niches. We will, of course, obtain the necessary building permits from the City prior to construction. At the time we submitted to the City plans for our building expansion, our architect indicated on the drawings an indoor location for a possible future columbarium. One ofthe council members raised a question about it. We decided to eliminate the columbarium reference because it was not going to be part of our building project at that time and we knew we could come back to the city in future years. Apparently the council member wanted paragraph 5 included in the P.D.D. amendment to clarify that City approval would need to be obtained in the future. Our Proposed Columbarium Proiect Indoors: The indoor columbarium will be located in a room in the south portion of our church facility, near the chapel. Attached is a footprint drawing highlighting the Luther Room and another attachment is the preliminary conceptual drawing of a 200 niche columbarium to be located on the north wall of the Luther Room. Future niches will be added when there is demand for expansion. Many churches place their columbaria along a wall in the narthex and that would be an option for us if the Luther Room reaches capacity. Outdoors: The outdoor memorial prayer garden and columbarium will be located on the northern portion of our property bounded on the south by the outdoor worship area stage and on the north by the bike path. Attached are three preliminary conceptual drawings/renderings: a master plan, a typical pod footprint and a typical pod 3- D rendering. The master plan illustrates what the garden area and columbaria may look like after all the phases have been com.pleted. The first phase is highlighted in color. Weare also eager to complete the main pathway as soon as funds are available. It will be made of pavers and it will provide ADA access to the memorial prayer garden and columbarium as well as our outdoor worship area. The first phase will consist of one pod including three columbaria, benches, a liturgical art decorative piece, pavers and landscaping. Each columbarium will be about six feet high, nine feet long and two feet deep. Each of the three columbaria will contain about 72 niches. There will also be a memorial wall located along the main pathway, which is not shown on the drawing. The memorial wall will consist of a kasota stone structure much like the columbaria and instead of niches, individuals will be able to purchase the right to have the name and dates of a loved one, not inumed at Calvary, inscribed on a plaque and attached to the wall. Tree preservation and enhancement will be very important to us. The location and diameter of the first pod is designed to minimize disturbance to the root structure of the trees. When we stake the site prior to construction, we will locate the pathway and rotate the pod so the columbaria structures are away from the tree roots as much as possible. The footings will be drilled and poured as underground posts with asf ~ ort top, to help minimize tree damage. Weare mindful that anytime the soil near a tree is disturbed there is a risk of tree damage and we will take extra care to minimize any damage. In addition, over time, we plan to add additional varieties of trees, as well as other landscaping. We intend the area to be a beautiful garden area that will be inviting for people to walk in and sit down for meditation and reflection. If all the columbaria shown on the master plan and four memorial walls are built over time the amount of square footage of the structures on the church property would only be impacted slightly. Our property currently consists of about 25% structures totaling about 100,200 s.f. The additional structures would add less than 500 s.f. We will make ourselves available to the City to provide additional information and answer questions. Thank you. fiifl# Senior Pastor Attachments: . P.D.D. Amendment # 5 . Application for Minor PUD Amendment. . A footprint drawing of a portion of the church . Preliminary drawing of our indoor columbarium. . Preliminary master plan with first phase in color . Preliminary footprint of a typical pod . Preliminary 3 - D rendering of a typical pod . Check of $250 for the filing fee. P.U.D. Number: 46 City of Golden Valley Application for Consideration of Planned Unit Development Ordinance Minor PUD Amendment Date of Application: May 28, 2008 *Fee Paid _$250 All information - includina aaendas. staff reports and hearina notices will be sent to the Authorized Representative. Name: Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley, Steve Dornbusch. Senior Pastor Mailing Address: 7520 Golden Valley Road. Golden Valley. MN 55427 Daytime Phone: 763-545-5659 E-Mail Address: sdornbusch@calvary.ora Property Owner: Mailing Address: Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Vallev 7520 Golden Valley Road. Golden Valley. MN 55427 Street Location and/or Address of Property Included in P.U.D.: Legal Description (Attach separate sheet if necessary): Type of Proposal: Small Area: Residential: Business & Professional Office: Redevelopment Area: General Plan Requirements (For all areas): Complete Site Plan: Landscape Plan: Large or Complex Area: Commercial: Industrial: Institutional: Church Mixed Use: Complete Plans for Sidewalks to Service Parking, Recreation, and Service Areas within the Proposed Development: Complete Plans for Storm Water and Surface Water Drainage System: PrelHninary Architectural Plans: Information Indicating~Exterior Wall finishes for All Principal and Accessory Structures: Complete Data as to Dwelling Unit Sizes: Preliminary Plat: Final Plat: Development Agreement: Twelve (12) copies of the above material, with all required supplemental information appropriately signed by a registered architect, registered engineer, or registered land surveyor where required: Copies of all covenants, by-laws of owners association, and Abstract of Title or Registered Property Certificate submitted to City Attorney for examination: Present Zoning of Property: Proposed Use of Property (Be explicit, attach additional pages if necessary): Indoor columbarium and Outdoor Memorial Garden and Columbaria. See cover letter for more information. Number of Structures: Type: Height: (Ft.) No. of Stories: Amenities and/or Recreational Facilities (Le. Pool, Playground, Ballfield, etc): Number of People Intended to Live and/or Work on Site: Adults: Children: Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Proposed: Enclosed: Non-Enclosed: Total Acres of Land in P.U.D.: 9.2 acres - 400.749 sJ. Density (No. of Units per Acre): Indicate the Followina Data bv Percentaaes: Area of P.U. D. Covered by Structures: 25 % - 100,200 sJ. currently Area of P.U.D. Covered by Outside Parking (non-enclosed): see interior street_% Area of P.U.D. Covered by Interior Streets: 38 % 21,336 sJ. south and 131,000 sJ.north, total 152,336 sJ. Area of P.U.D. to be Landscaped: 25 % - 98,720 Natural Area and/or Open Space: 13.5 % - calvary park = 54,240 sJ. Ponding Area: Retention pond system % Zoning Variances: List below all variances from the standard zoning requirements that will be requested if this P.U.D. is approved, and the justification for the City Council to grant such variances (attach additional sheets if needed). We respectfully request that the P.U.D. # 46. Amendment # 5. approved by the City Council on May 18. 2004 be amended by deletina paraaraph 5 of the Land Use Component. which reads: "The use of any of the church property for a columbarium would require an amendment to the P.U.D." Please see our accompanyina letter. I hereby declare that all statements made in this application, and on additional material, are true to the best of my knowledge. SI nature of Applicant May 28, 2008 Steve Dornbusch, Senior Pastor P sident of Calvary Lutheran Church alley May 28, 2008 -------- -----::::::::;;----------------- 1----- 7 c--- ----- J i ~::::::----==J 1 =. L----t-- I KNEeLING I STOOl. :r-:;.:::.:.'l ',I. I Ilf! : 1'11-____.., Illl: 'I'I I lll-----""f :i.lt ! L:===i r------, r------, ! --r--~ok.SJ_i_ ! I I eoFf:IE I I : : TAeLE&: : L______J L______J t:::::-~l I 11' J-----Jl: I III I "I I II' r----..H : I II' L____P ! '------_J ....----.." rf"'"---.." r~~.1 1: II U ,II I I :\.. ,11 Il At I "__'1 I 1"__,, \ L --... L_::::::_l L:::::::_J .....----" .....---11 ~lA'l n 11 H Ji: :;~~ 1\ I I" " I" "'''1' "_._"\ ""-_ .J l~~:::~l L_::::::_.J CEILINCS IolEfad.lT "-112'''+/- ~r. ~rrOl'1 OF 60FFtT "..'10 .,.. A~F. s ecut.PTSTOtlE &~rT TRIM PROFILE" CO! WOOD VENEER TOP AND SIDES ;, CU$TOM 6T AtNED GlA5& WITl-I ACCENT LI~TJNci II BE""'D '~ II II WOOD VENEEFt II FFlONT II II II II II It SOLID SUFiFACEIG......ITE C.TOP N 0) FLOO~ FLAN u_ .... .. _'* ACCENT TILE '''- 1'-01/4" I S'-' 1/2" 4'-101/4" S'-' 1/2" 4'.0" -I--- ~ ACCENT STONE T~ H~ ~:.rl \ t r; 1- \ ~ , \ l't-.J IJ \ '1 \ \., ~ \ \ t 'I" ~ I J 1\ \ H n J I BOTTOM OF SOFFIT A ~ ~l l . ,'.,-.. AFF. V I \} { h~ ~ {\ ~ ViN. EW 3.'-6'" DOOFt r;- WI 6T AINEC GlASS - INSET AND AUTO !- f++- ) III /" 00010 OI"ENEFt I\~ H 1- 11\\ .-\~ ~~!=-r )l~~ / "~11 ,~ / WOOD VENEEFt WOOD ~PEr:> eorTIT AND COUlHN . . . ~ < t . ~ I li I~ .~ ~~ fi~ ~ . ~t CD COLUM6A~IUM AT NORTH WALL Ii I le>0 INOIVlOUAL STor-.Ie HEt10fii!1A!.IZATION NICMeS EAC1-4 SIDE ACcENT STONES WOOD BASE STAINED GLASS wm.J ACCENT LIGj..jTS &CALI!. 31811 . .l:jjia s 1 " t ".3 31&" L Cl) SECTION AT COLUM6ARIUM ecALE.1'. I...... BDH&YOUNI SPACE DESIGN . 4510 Wesl771h SIrHlo SunelOl, Edtn.. MlnnllS_ tsM93-9020 Fu w-ss.t..u!JJ www.bdh).OUnf.com Project Information CALVARY LUTHERAN CHURCH I<NEELING STOOl. &visions No. Date Description Drawing Title PRELIMINARY SPACE PLAN Drawing Information Job Code CALVARY DrrmmBJ DL RnnewedBy 18 Filename Date 4-8-08 1~ ~ "" ~ ~ 5 4 LEGEND 1 SlNC1U\Rf Z_ 3 A1RIJII 4 CA1HERIIC ROOM 5 Cll\l'El +.~ 8 MUSIC AUOIlORlJM 9 IIUSIC 0ff1CD 10 Gl'll1IEI.OW 11 UIlRARY IZ DROP-~ ~E 13 FII!SIlI[ CfI[ 14 GIWlll SN 15 MIlRT1I EIITftY 1& 1lA'iCoIRE 17_ 18 PRESGKJOl. omct 19 SOU1H EIITftY 20 1aICH!N 1 . D 7 PENNSYlVANIA AVENUE FIRST FLOOR PLAN @ P.U.D. #46, Amendment #6 City Council Approval September 16, 2008 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Project Name: Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley Address: 7520 Golden Valley Road, 831 and 835 Pennsylvania Avenue North, Golden Valley, Minnesota Legal Description: Lot 1, 2, 3,4, 5, Block 1, Calvary Lutheran Church, P.U.D. No. 46 Address: Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley 7520 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota Applicant: Owner: Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley Address: 7520 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota Zoning District: Institutional (1-1) Permitted Uses: Uses permitted in this Planned Unit Development are a church, church offices, child care facilities, indoor columbarium and an outdoor columbarium and memorial prayer Qarden with walk, and parking related to these uses. Components: A. land Use Component: 1. Land uses within P.U.D. No. 46 shall be limited to those uses indicated on the approved General Plan P.U.D. Plans for Calvary Church prepared by BWBR Architects and dated 9/12/03. Principal uses shall include all those uses normally considered as part of the operation of a large church congregation including a child care center (including "drop-by" child care.) Until final construction is completed on the main church buildings, the two child care houses at 831 and 855 Pennsylvania Avenue North will continue to be used for child care houses will be removed and the area converted to the use shown on the General Plans. 2. PUD #46 Amendment #5, approved by the City Council on May 18, 2004 allows for the construction of a 4,300 square foot music wing addition. 3. PUD #46 Amendment #6, approved by the City Council on Auqust 6, 2008 allows for the construction of an indoor columbarium and an outdoor columbarium and memorial prayer qarden with walk. The indoor and outdoor columbarium plans are illustrated on the attached building and site drawings prepared by Olsson Associates. The outdoor columbarium shall not exceed 6.5 feet in height above qround level. There shall be no outdoor liqhtinq of the columbarium or memorial qarden. The only exception would be minimal bollard liqhtinq for the walkway or liqhting determined to be necessary for public safety reasons with the approval of the City Manager and the Chief of Police. d-.4.No outdoor use of amplification for voice or music will be permitted except as follows: a. Outdoor services using amplified voice and music will be permitted on a trial basis during the year 2004. During this year, up to three services may be conducted each week between the hours ,of 10 am and 9 pm. Additional outdoor events or services during 2004 may be permitted with notification given to the City at least 72 hours prior to the event with assurances from the Church that no.ise levels would be consistent with other outdoor services in 2004. Such services are permitted for the purpose of determining whether it is possible to develop such reasonable, objective and measurable noise standards as are needed to protect nearby residential uses from the adverse effects of amplified sound that have been experienced in the past. The Church will also notify all property owners located north of the railroad tracks between Pennsylvania Avenue North and Sumter Avenue North up to and including Phoenix Street. b. Upon development of such proposed objective and measurable noise standards, the applicant may submit proposed standards to the City Council for administrative approval. If the City Council determines that such proposed standards, or any modifications to such proposed standards deemed appropriate by the City Council, are adequate to protect nearby residential uses from the adverse effects of amplified sound, the Council may administratively amend this condition to allow the use of amplification for voice or music on such conditions as the Council determines are reasonable and necessary. During the testing the consultant will involve the residents, Church and City in the process. 4,. 5.Th-e General Plans indicate future uses for a chapel and parking deck. These and other expansions would require an amendment to the P.U.D. 5. Q,. The use of any of the church property for a columb:lrium ,<,vould require ::m 3mendment to the P.U.D. 7-c Q.The General Plans indicate future uses for a chapel, and parking deck. These and other expansions would require an amendment to the P.U.D. 8.7.Parking for P.U.D. #46 shall consist of 301 open parking spaces on site as shown on the attached General Plans and 172 parking spaces on the United Properties office building site across Golden Valley Road from the P. U. D. site area made available from Calvary Lutheran Church by means of a cross parking agreement concluded with the Northland Company, dated November 28, 1979. g.~.Landscaping materials shall be adjusted or trimmed to maintain visibility of windows and doors for security purposes. w.~. A berm or plantings shall be put in along the new parking area on Pennsylvania Avenue North and consideration shall be given, by the City, to landscaping along the north boundary as sound abatement. 4-1-.10. Special precautions shall be taken during and after construction to protect against erosion, silting, excessive grading, or any other conditions detrimental to the area. Grading shall be done in a manner so as to avoid dirt storage, disturbing of trees, or other activities beyond the prescribed construction limits. 42..11. Signage shall conform to the City of Golden Valley Sign Code. 12. There shall be no siqnificant trees (as defined by the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance) removed for the construction of the columbarium. memorial prayer garden or walk. 13. As shown on the site plan prepared by Olsson Associates, only two of the pods may be constructed in a location chosen by Calvary Church. The construction may include walkways to the pods. Each pod will consist of 3 columbaria with 72 niches for a total of 216 niches in each pod. Each pod may include benches. liturgical art, and landscapinq. 14. If the property changes from a church use. the columbarium and the remains in the columbarium niches shall be moved bY the property owner to another appropriate location at no cost to the City of Golden Valley. B. Circulation Component: 1. Drives, parking areas and walks shall be located as indicated on the attached General Plans. The findings and recommendations found in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated October 16, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. C. Subdivision Component: 1. All requirements of the subdivision component have been completed. D. Services and Facilities Component: 1. The P.U.D. shall meet all requirements and recommendations of the City Building Inspector, City Fire Marshal and City Sanitarian. The memo and comments from Ed Anderson, City Fire Marshal to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, dated September 25, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. 2. The findings and recommendations of City Engineer, Jeff Oliver, PE, as related to construction of services and facilities found in his memo to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated October 16, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. It is hereby understood and agreed that this Use Permit is a part of the City Council approvals granted on October 2, 1984, April 5, 1988, September 5, 1989, August 6,1991, October 21,2003, aRe' May 18, 2004 and September 16. 2008 relative to Planned Unit Development #46. Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley Witness: By: Title: Date: City of Golden Valley Witness: By: Linda R. Loomis Title: Mayor Date: Witness: By: Thomas D. Burt Title: City Manaqer Date: Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other City Code provisions, regulations and ordinances.