03-03-09 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Regular Meeting
of the
City Council
Golden Valley City Hall
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chamber .
March 3, 2009
6:30 p.m.
The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6
prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
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 - February 17, 2009
B. Approval of Check Registers:
1. City
2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority
C. Licenses:
1. Rental Property Licenses
.2. Solicitor's License - Andco Inc.
3. Solicitor's License - Town & Country Meats, Inc.
4. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Glorybound
5. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Rotary Club
of Golden Valley
6. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Northwest
Suburban Optimist Club
D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions:
1. Planning Commission - January 26, 2009
2. Joint Water Commission - November 5, 2008
3. Environmental Commission - January 26, 2009
4. Open Space and Recreation Commission - November 24, 2008
E. Bids and Quotes:
1. Tractor Loader - Quotes
2. Compressor -Quotes
3. Utility Truck - Quotes
4. Golf Course GreenfTee Mower - Quotes
F. Letters and/or Petitions:
1. Letter from Siah St. Clair Regarding Resignation from Environmental
Commission
G. Authorization to Sign Service Agreements with Home Free and YMCA
H. Affirming Support of Pursuing Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development
Funding for Douglas Drive Corridor Roadway Improvements 09-17
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM
A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan and Subdivision Review - PUD #107 - The Towers
at West End -Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 - Duke Realty,
Applicant
B. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance #416 - Amending Section 11.03, Regarding
Average Grade and Building Height Definitions.
5. OLD BUSINESS
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Announcements of Meetings
B. Mayor and Council Communications
7. ADJOURNMENT
alley
Memorandu
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
Attachments
Loose in agenda packet.
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
alley
M 0 ndum
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. B. 1. 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.
Public ~H~y
M 0 dum
Fire Department
763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 1. Rental Property Licenses
Prepared By
Becky Perkins, Office Clerk
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.
30036
Valley Square Commons
759 Winnetka Avenue North
Multiple Family Rental
$600.00
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff.
alley
Memoran m
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 2. Solicitor's License - Andco Inc.
Prepared By
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, any individual or group intending to godoor-to-door within the City selling
products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to
do so.
Attachments
Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Andco Inc.
1\1' ........:.-
Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City
Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month.
PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLICATION
TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: . $ ~O. C) \)
7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Persons: ~
Golden Valley, MN 5;27 l Type of License Requested: I"V
Enclose the sum of $ ~ 'for (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code
of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary
for obtaining this license. . I / T""s ~ " <::. --'- '/3 S- CJ
m 11.. (01'\ 't-rG( C. ..,...,. I
~l\Jf)('o I V\.C- r
(Business or Individual Name to be Licensed)
I ~ a y- t-t e~ \ c,c,,( LCLII\ C.
(Address, including City, State and Zip Code)
[Y\ctpl( (j.Y'"ouc- m 1'\, ~~?, 69.
(Telephone Number, including Area Code)
NOW, THEREFORE,~1J Il rl Jrr~ cJ '1. hereby makes application for the
(Applicant Name)
period of 3...kf-0-9 through 6/30/E!i-, subject to the conditions and provisions of said City Code.
tV n ( l'1\ rf ~ I Lt.
.f/om e... off-Ice. ((Off> .
~ 0 , r 11/ $"<-f S 1-
~"1(Jcn"Y Lv~ S "'efo
c. A~
Ignature of Applicant/Principal Officer)
REQUIRED LICENSE INFORMATION
Applicant (if different from above):
Name
Address
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
Telephone Number (including area code)
Date of Birth (if an individual)
Business Name of Applicant A-r-J (:) e. 0
::r-I\.L
Address
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
( 0- 'r ~ ~~, G:.-- -\. t" r:J .........
(Corporation, Proprietorship, Par!nership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
Description of goods or services for sale (include prices) or indicate if soliciting donations. If more
space is nee~ed, attach additional sheets (be specific): ~ 'C \> \CL c C. YY'\c.N"'\ i-
t.....) I ",J DW <:; Cl./r'\. ('1 dot.? r s.
Define Business
NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete
information regarding such change or modification.
If the Peddler or Solicitor is so engaged on behalf of an organization, supply:
Address of Organization
'F\ ,....J 0 W -::1 (\ 0-
.
7;;rC)-s ~-e~lo tic Lrl As -~ 31 <-f
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
Telephone Numb27gn~u~~ ~i~ ~o~~ Lf
Define Business t'\). l"1clrJ\..Uc; -.k dCXJvt \
(Corporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
Name of Organization
List the names and addresses of EACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behalf
of said organization in the City, or, in the alternative, the name, address and telephone
number or numbers where a responsible person of said organization will maintain a list of
names and addresses of all persons engaged in peddling or soliciting in the City:
~ I\^-d-..e rsOV'..
(If more space is needed, attach additional sheets)
STATE OF /'f1/rwNt~
'" )) ss.
COUNTY OF t1~i}!Jtlhv)
I, f2{) f\-. f\ r-.rJ4.. ~ (){'\.,
(Officerllndividual)
of
A-I\J D (u)
(Name of Organization)
being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to his/her own
knowledge except as to matters therein stated on information and belief, and as to uch matters,
he/she believes them to be true.
ignature of Applicant/Principal Officer)
alley
Memo ndum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 3. Solicitor's License - Town & Country Meats, Inc.
Prepared By
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling
products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to
do so.
Attachments
Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Town & Country Meats, Inc.
Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City
Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month.
PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLlCA nON
.
01::>
TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: $ <)b : ~
7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Persons: -c:. ... I
Golden Valley, MN 55427 Type of License Requested: rtl4~
Enclose the sum of $ ?O for \ (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code
of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary
for obtaining this license.
Jt\.SDtf\ J\'Nl}O{ /)~ (/ T;w'1 ..; ~,'t:I'I'r 1It/1'q# , ,t.-,?,
(Business or Individual Name to be Licensed) (
;fIi~~,~:;;:/iily~jjii/l~j,J/ no'!, 5S:.4'21
(P<5 l- ~~6 ~ S;q ?t-/
(Telephone Number, including Area Code)
NOW, THEREFORE, ~V\ 1:1,Vl)~j J1 (I hereby makes application for the
(Applicant Name) . .
through 6/30/.at, subject to the conditions and provisions of said City Code.
REQUIRED LICENSE INFORMATION
Applicant (if different from above):
Name
Address
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
Telephone Number (including area code)
Date of Birth (if an individual)
Business Name of Applicant
Address
Define Business
(Include City~ State and Zip Code)
ion, Proprietorship, Pa~nership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
Description of goods or services for sale (include prices) or indicate if soliciting donations. I m e
space is needed, attach additional sheets (be specific): 0..+
See. ~ {"" clv...l { -L
NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete
information regarding such change or .modification.
If the Peddler or Solicitor is so engaged on behalf of an organization, supply:
...-.-
Name of Organization lMV\. 4-CbvtVl-tr'y 1/lJl.ea.-+S( lY{ C,
Address of Organization ..:Jt1 D1> Q ~ ~ \ Av..e. IV. C I' 6: s -kv (. V'ttv1 ~ S; S-t.( 2 Cj
(Include City, State and Zip ode) 1
T~hone Number (Including Area Code)
.....t1tz <; ~ S"3 /- ;;. -:;J '1"5
Define Business L- - c- DY"f . 1111 } 1 ·
(Corporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
List the names and addresses of EACH person who wUl be peddling or soliciting on behalf
of said organization in the City, or,in the alternative, the name, address and telephone
number or numbers where a responsible person of said organization will maintain a list of
names and addresses of all persons engaged in peddling or soliciting in the City:
J6t~")V\ DM,III'< e- ( UD'- /
(If more space is needed, attach additional sheets)
STATE OF (h /Wfl!i,81r1it' )
) ss.
COUNTY OF~}'N )
I, ~~ PI Dol(
(Officerllndividual)
of "1M"" -t6><MIIlt'! ~Js ~C.
(Name of Organi ation) (
being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to hislher own
knowledge except as to matters therein stated on i belief, and as to such matters,
he/she believes them to be true.
JUDITH A. NALLY
NOTARY PUBLIC. MINNESOTA
My Commission Expires Jan 31,2010
Hey
Mem d m
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 4. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Glorybound
Prepared By
Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant
Summary
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 3D-day waiting period.
Attachments
Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages)
Letter from Glorybound requesting waiver of 3D day waiting period (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice
requirement for Glorybound.
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that:
- conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and
- awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year.
QRGANIZATlON.INFQRMATION
Page 1 of 2 9/08
Fee is $50 for each event
For Board Use Only
Check #
$
OrQanization na7~ bo~
Type of non ofit r~zation. Check one.
[g Fraternal Religious IOIVeterans [g Other nonprofit organization
Ma~~;~ JJwm f1uL ~ty3U3 D/d~~ v;jlOde UtJ CS5Lf~7
Name of chief executive officer (CEO) Daytime one number mail address
~/1a~r1 1hortUl S 7/P 3 5J.j/, - 3/ttO
Previous gambling permit number
Attach a copy of ~ of the following for proof of nonprofit status. Check one.
?h!fOIl@4IfJY'1bt;
./tAA
Do not attach a sales tax exempt status .or federal ID employer numbers as they are not proof of nonprofit status.
I 0 I Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR.8 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
~
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.
g
IRS. Affiliate of national, statewide,or international parent nonprofit organization (charter)
If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both 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.
[Q
IRS. proof previously submitted to Gambling Control Board
If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the IRS, no attachment is required.
GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION
Name of premises Where gambling activity will be conducted (for raffles, list the site where the draWing will take place)
, l~ bo~
Address (do not use PO box) ,A _.. City- '1"'....._ \ f. JI Zip Code County
2.'52-5" Wm.. F1lLf- :II~ (U;Y1 Vtl/1J I-kn
Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date'of the drawing)
to
heck the box or boxes that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will conduct:
o Bingo* ~affles 0 Paddlewheels* 0 Pull-Tabs* OTipboards*'
* Gambling equipment for pull-tabs, bingo paper, tipboards, and
paddlewheels must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the
Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo
number selection devices may be borrowed from 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.
Also complete
Page 2 ofthis form.
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
. LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT ACKNO
If the gambling premises is within city limits,
a city official must check (X) the action thafthe
city is taking on this application and sign the
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 (60 days for a 1st class city).
_The application is denied.
Print city name d-
On behalf of the cit , I acknowledge this applic
Date Z- I f? I~
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE
Page 2 of2
9/08
If the gambling premises is located in a township, a
county official must check (X) the action that the county
is taking on this application and sign the application. A
township official must also sign the 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 official receiving application
Title
Date-l-l_
TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within 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
I
Date
The information proVided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the
financial report will be completed and ret med to the Board ithin 30 days of the date of our gambling activity.
Chief executive officer's signature Date f'ebt '5, ~
Complete a separate application for
- one day of gambling activity,
- two or more consecutive days of gambling activity,
- 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
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 return the financial
report form to the Gambling Control Board.
Questions?
Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling
Control Board at 651-639-4076.
Data privacy. This form will be made available
in alternative format (i.e. large print, Braille)
upon request. The information requestl'd 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 will be public
information when received by the Board. All
the other information you provide will be private
data until<;lhe Board issues your perm it. Vllhen
the Boai'd issues your permit, all of the
information.. provided to the Board will become
public. ! If die 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 available 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 international
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.
Febru~rtj 5, 200)
juoltj N~lltj
ctttj of Cfololev\' v~lletj
7g00 Cfololev\' v~lletj Rl>~ol
lSololeV\, v~lletj, MN 55427
De~rjuoltj
The Cflortjbouv\'ol MtV\,tstrtj wtll be ~ostt'^'0 our ~v\'v\'u~llS~v\'quet, fuv\'ol
r~tstv\'g eveV\,t tV\, Mtv\'v\'e~polLs. ov\, M~rc~ 20, 200!}. we ~re requesttv\'g
perVt-ttsstov\' to ~olol ~ r~ffl-e ~t t~ts eveV\, ~v\'ol respectfulltj request t~~t t~e
ctttj CouV\,ctl w~tve t~e custoVlA.~rtj 30 ol~tj w~tttv\'g penool for t~e
ex.eVt-tpttov\' for l~wful g~Vt-tbltv\'g perVt-ttt requtreol for t~ts ttjpe of eveV\,t.
Th~v\'~ tjou for tjour cov\'stoler~ttov\'
sue Kelltj
Tre~surer
C;lortj bouV\,ol
alley
Me orandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 5. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Rotary Club of
Golden Valley
Prepared By
Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant
Summary
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 3D-day waiting period.
Attachments
Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages)
Letter from Rotary Club of Golden Valley 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 Rotary Club of Golden Valley.
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that:
- conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and
- awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year.
ORGANIZATION.INFORMATION
Page 1 of 2 9/08
Fee is $50 for each event
For Board Use Only
Check #
$
Orga . ation name
an. . C!..4AB
Type of nonpr t organization. Check one.
[] Fraternal [] Religious I D I Veterans @] Other nonprofit organization
Mailing address City State Zip Code
GoL b-OL-De/J V 1tLI..E
Previous gambling permit number
-O~ -001
LSoAJ /} &3~ 0 0
Aw..chacQPyof.M()f itlt~f()II()Wil1gfor proOf .of l1()nprofitstilt(l..c:hEJ~k()ne.
Do not attach a sales tax exempt status or federal 10 employer numbers as they are not proof of nonprofit status.
I D I Nonprofit 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
[g] 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.
QIRS -Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization (charter)
If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of QQth..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.
~ IRS - proof previously submitted to Gambling Control Board
If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the IRS, no attachment is required.
GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION
County
),J
pe of gambling activity your organization will conduct:
D Paddlewheels* D Pull- Tabs* DTipboards*
* Gambling equipment for pull-tabs, bingo paper, tipboards, and
paddlewheels must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the
Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo
number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization
authorized to conduct bingo.
To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on Ust
of Ucensed Distributors, or call 651-639-4076.
Also complete
Page 2 of this form.
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
LOCAL .UNIT.OFGOVERNMENT.ACKNOWLEDGMENT
If the gambling premises is within city limits,
a city official must check (X) the action that the
city is taking on this application and sign the
application.
k 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 (60 days for a 1st class city).
_The application is denied.
Print city name
On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this appf aUon.
Date tr IK,--P'i.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE
Page 2 of 2
9/08
If the gambling premises is located in a township, a
county official must check (X) the action that the county
is taking on this application and sign the application. A
township official must also sign the 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 official receiving application
Title
Date-l-l_
TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within 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-l-l_
The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knOWledge. I acknowledge that the
financial report will be completed and returned to the Board within 30 days of the date of our gambling activity.
Chief executive officer's signature
Complete a separate application for each gambing activity:
- one day of gambling activity,
- two or more consecutive days of gambling activity,
- each day a raffle drawing is held
Send application with: a copy of your proof of nonprofrt 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 :;./
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.
Data privacy. This fonn will be made available the Board will be able to process your
in alternative fannat (i.e. large print, Braille) application. Your name and and your
upon request. The infonnation requested on organization's name and address will be public
this fonn (and any attachments) will be used by infonnation when received by the Board. All
the Gambling Control Board (Board) to the other information you provide will be private
detennine your qualifications to be involved in data until the Board issues your pennit. When
lawful gambling activities in Minnesota. You the Board issues your pennit, all of the
have the right to refuse to supply the infonnation provided to the Board will become
information requested; however, if you refuse to public. If the Board does not issue a permit, all
supply this infannation, the Board may not be infonnation provided remains private, with the
able to determine your qualifications and, as a exception of your name and your organization's
consequence, may refuse to issue you a pennit. name and address which will remain public.
If you supply the infonnation requested, Private data are available to: Board members,
Board staff whose work requires access to the
infonnation; Minnesota's Department of Public
Safety; Attorney General; Commissioners of
Administration, Finance, and Revenue;
Legislative Auditor, national and international
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 Iflgal
order authorizes a new use or sharing of
infonnation after this Notice was given; and
anyone with your consent.
Rotary Club of Golden Valley
7001 Golden Valley Road · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55427
February 17,2009
Judy Nally, Administrative Secretary
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
RE: Rotary Club of Golden Valley Annual Fundraiser - May 1,2009
Dear Ms. Nally,
The Golden Valley rotary club will host its annual fund-raising event at the Golden
Valley Country Club on May 1,2009. As part of the event the Club will be
conducting a raffle. We respectfully request that the City Council waive the
customary 30-day waiting period, and approve a lawful gambling Exempt Permit
required for this type of event.
Thank you in advance for you consideration in this manner.
George aulson, President
Rotary Club of Golden Valley
Service Above Self
alley
M morand m
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 6. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Northwest
Suburban Optimist Club
Prepared By
Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant
Summary
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 3D-day waiting period.
Attachments
Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages)
Letter from Northwest Suburban Optimist Club 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 Northwest Suburban Optimist Club.
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that:
- conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and
- awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year.
Page 1 of 2 9/08
Fee is $50 for each event
For Board Use Only
Organization name
NORTHWEST SUBURBAN OPTIMIST CLUB
Type of nonprofit organization. Check one.
101 Fraternal 101 Religious 10lVeterans 11811 Other nonprofit organization
Mailing address City State Zip Code
7001 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley MN 55427
Name of chief executive officer (CEO)
David J. Herbeck
Daytime phone number
763-546-6211
Do not attach a sales tax exempt status or federal 10 employer numbers as they are not: proof of n
11811 Nonprofit 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 hone: 651-296-2803
IQ] 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 org nization officer
contact the IRS at 877-829-5500.
IQIIRS - Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization (cha er)
If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both of the following:
a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a g up ruling, and
b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a su ordinate.
I 01 IRS - proof previously submitted to Gambling Control Board
If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the IRS, no attachment is required.
N~rh~6fPrernfS~Wh~~gambn~~f'aaJ~Wilf6e26tidtictl!kfi(f8r'raffl~g;:"nSt'thej~ite\~h~e"ffi'edi:'
Golden Valley Country Club
M~ss~not~~~ ~
7001 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley
Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date of the drawing)
May 21, 2009 to
Zip Code
55427
County
Hennepin
heck the box or boxes that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will conduct
o Bingo* 181 Raffles OPaddlewheels* OPull-Tabs* OTipboards*
* Gambling equipment for pull-tabs, bingo paper, tipboards, and
paddlewheels must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the
Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo
number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization
authorized to conduct bingo.
To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on Ust
of Ucensed Distributors, or can 651-639-4076.
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
:1.iQIj\IlliEQlfI;(lltcliIEIfjME.mll.tll~".""" ......'.....OOMENltNM!Q'!.......... .
If the gambling premises is within city limits,
a city official must check (X) the action that the
city is taking on this application and sign the
application.
~he application is acknowledged with no waiting period.
_The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting
period, and aHows the Board to issue a permit after 30
days (60 days for a 1st class city).
_The application is denied.
Print city name
On behalf of the city, I acknowledge thi application.
Date 2-- ,20/~
Page 2 of2
9/08
If the gambling premises is located in a township, a
county official must check (X) the action that the county
is taking on this application and sign the application. A
township official must also sign the 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 official receiving application
Title
Date---1---1_
TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to
approve or deny an application [Minnesota Statute 349.213, subel. 2)]
Print township name
Signature of township official acknowledging application
Chief executive officer's signature
Complete a separate appUcation for each gambing activity:
- one day of gambling activity,
- two or more consecutive days of gambling activity,
- 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
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.
Data privacy. This form will be made available the Board wit be able to process your
in aItemative format (i.e. large print, BraiBe) application. Your name and and your
upon request. The information requested on organization's name and address wiD be public
this form (and any attachments) wiI be used by information when received by the Board. AD
the Gambling Control Board (Board) to the other information you provide wiD be private
determine your qualifications to be involved in data until the Board issues your permit. When
lawful gambling activities in Minnesota. You the Board issues your permit, aD of the
have the right to refuse to supply the information provided to the Board will become
information requested; however, if you refuse to public. If the Board does not issue a permit, all
supply this information, the Board may not be information provided remains private, with the
able to determine your qualifications and, as a exception of your name and your organization's
consequence, may refuse to issue you a permit. name and address which will remain public.
If you supply the information requested, Private data are available to: Board members,
Board staff whose work requires access to the
information; Minnesota's Department of Public
Safety; Attorney General; Commissioners of
Administration. F"mance, and Revenue;
Legislative Auditor. national and intemationaJ
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.
NORTHWEST SUBURBAN OPTIMIST CLUB
7001 Golden VaBey Rd, Golden VaBey, MN 55427
Date: February JJ, 2009
Golden Valley City Offices
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Re: Gambling license application for raffle on May 21, 2009
at the Golden Valley Country Club
Attn: Mayor and Council
For the attached application, the Northwest Suburban Optimist Club (formerly Optimist Club of
Golden Valley) respectfully requests a waiver of the usua130 day waiting period.
Thank you.
STbJ,~
Title: iJ.PJidC4'1 f
Phone:. ?~J-~S-J'-I / /4
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City
Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on
Monday, January 26,2009. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, McCarty,
Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development
Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
Commissioner Kluchka was absent.
1. Approval of Minutes
January 12, 2009 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Waldhauser referred to the second paragraph on page 7 and clarified that the
Commission discussed pavers "of any kind" not just pavers. She also clarified that that
when she was talking about screening she was referring to screening with plants.
Eck noted a few typographical errors.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to
approve the January 12, 2009 minutes with the above noted corrections/clarifications.
2. Informal Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat
- Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 - The Towers at West End
Applicant: Duke Realty
Address: Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a 4,400 space (approximate)
parking structure in Golden Valley. This will support up to 1.1
million square feet of proposed office space to be built adjacent to
the ramp in St. Louis Park.
Grimes stated that this proposal consists of two different items, the Planned Unit
Development and the Preliminary Plat. He referred to a location map and noted that
this proposal is located in the far southeast corner of the City. He stated that the
property is designated for commercial/office on both the Comprehensive Plan Map
and the Zoning Map. He showed the Planning Commissioners a map indicating where
hearing notices for this meeting were sent. He explained that typically hearing notices
are sent to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property but in this case that
area was greatly expanded in order to get input from the public.
Grimes referred to a map of the entire project and explained that the retail and service
portion of the project is on the west side of the site and the office portion is on the east
side of the site. He stated that the applicant is going through a similar approval
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 2
process with the City of St. Louis Park because most of the project is in St. Louis Park.
(The Preliminary PUD was recommended for approval by the St. Louis Park Planning
Commission last week.) Only the proposed parking ramp and a portion of the
connections from the ramp to the office building are in Golden Valley. He explained
that the proposed total area of office space is 1.1 million square feet and will be a
phased development in three or four buildings. At this point in time the applicant is
asking for preliminary approval and they intend on waiting for a market for the office
buildings before they will go ahead with the final plan approvals.
He explained that when looking at a preliminary plan it is a broad review to make sure
it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and general development concepts
accepted by the City. He noted that there will be two building permits issues, one from
St. Louis Park for the office buildings and one from Golden Valley for the parking
ramp. He added that building inspections will be done by each City for the buildings in
their City. Each city will handle public safety to the buildings in their City and there will
be cooperation in fire and police calls.
Grimes referred to a drawing of the proposed office buildings and stated that they will
be approximately 9 stories in height. The parking ramp will have six levels above
ground and one level below ground and will be approximately 55 feet in height with the
stair/elevator tower being 75 feet in height. The parking ramp will have approximately
4,400 parking spaces when all of the office buildings are built which is a ratio of 1
space per 250 square feet of floor area as required by the Zoning Code. He stated
that the proposal also calls for bicycle parking at a rate of 10% of the parking stalls
which is more than required by the Zoning Code. He explained that half of the bicycle
parking is proof of parking so only half the bicycle spaces will be built right away. He
added that the applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the parking stalls from the
required 9 feet by 18.5 feet to 8.5 feet by 18 feet. He said staff believes that is
reasonable for a parking ramp facility. He added that the proposed parking ramp will
be located close to the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road with a sidewalk and landscaping
between the parking deck and the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road. The parking deck will
be made of concrete panels that will match the office buildings.
Grimes stated that one concern staff has about this proposed development is the
effect it will have on traffic along the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road to the east. He said
staff is working with Duke regarding traffic calming techniques, increasing pedestrian
accessibility and improving access in and out of the Tyrol neighborhood. He added
that these issues will have to be agreed upon prior to final PUD approval. He referred
to an AUAR study that was done by St. Louis Park which showed traffic from this
development will work with the existing street system and with the improvements that
were proposed in the AUAR study.
Grimes stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed parking ramp with
the following conditions:
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 3
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by
Duke and Walsh Bishop Architects and dated 12/12/08 shall become a part of
this approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1200
parking spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff
Oliver, PE, to MarkW. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated
January 21,2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated
January 9, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
Keysser referred to a map of the site and noted that there are two ingress/egress
points onto what is being called a private road south of Wayzata Blvd. He asked
where the private road leads to heading south. Grimes said the road leads to the
HealthPartners building and goes all the way around the existing building. Keysser
asked if the road will lead to another street or if it will dead-end within the complex.
Grimes said the road will dead-end within the complex. He explained that at one time
during the planning of this project there were four openings on the east side of the
parking ramp. It was the City Council's opinion that it should be reduced to two
openings so that is what the applicant has done. Grimes referred to the City
Engineer's memo and noted that he is concerned about the tee intersection noted on
the plans so that is something that will also need to be addressed by the applicant.
Eck referred to the City Engineer's memo and noted that the concern is considerable
from the neighborhood to the east about the amount of traffic that will be going along
the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road. He asked Grimes to discuss what the traffic calming
techniques will consist of. Grimes referred to a map showing some of the ideas from
the AUAR. He explained that the map shows the intersections of the streets that come
out onto the frontage road and the idea is to increase the sight distance at these
intersections. Eck said that will do nothing regarding the amount of traffic on the
streets, it will only help people get in and out of their neighborhood. Grimes stated that
the AUAR and the analysis done by the city's traffic engineer shows that the streets
have the capacity for the increased traffic, the idea is to improve the intersections. Eck
said it is his understanding from the neighbors that the problem is going to be the
sheer number of cars, not if they are going to be able to see better at the intersections.
Grimes said no one is denying that there isn't going to be more traffic but with some
improvements people will be able to get in and out of the neighborhood safely.
Cera asked if the AUAR considered the traffic when the previous small buildings were
located on this property or if it only considered today's traffic figures. Grimes stated
that there used to be 175,000 square feet of office space on this site and that the
AUAR considered 1.1 million square feet of office space.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 4
Keysser asked if the hotel currently being constructed is a part of this project. Grimes
said no. He ~eferred to a site plan and noted the applicant's proposed hotel location.
Waldhauser asked if there are any specific proposals for traffic calming on the
frontage road. Grimes stated that part of the AUAR looked at ways to help people get
on and off the street at each of the intersections within the South Tyrol and Kennedy
neighborhoods which may include improvements that will slow traffic down as well. He
reiterated that no permits will be issued by the City until the applicant submits plans for
traffic calming that are acceptable to the City. Waldhauser asked if anyone has
considered having fewer, but better controlled connections or access points from the
Tyrol neighborhood to Wayzata Blvd. Grimes stated that the city's traffic engineer
believes improving the sight distance at the intersections will be an improvement for
everyone in the area. Waldhauser said she is concerned that if that plan doesn't work
it will then be at Golden Valley's expense to come up with a solution.
David Bade, Development Manager, Duke Realty, Applicant, showed the Planning
Commission aerial photos of the site from summer 2007 before any work was started.
He then showed an aerial photo of the current conditions of the site. He referred to
perspective drawings showing three and four office buildings and stated that based on
market conditions there may only be three office buildings with the same amount of
square footage.
Waldhauser referred to the shade study that was done and asked if that study was
based on having three or four buildings. Bade said the shade study was based on
having four buildings. He stated that if there are three buildings they would be taller
and the shade study would change.
Bade showed perspective drawings of the proposed buildings connected to the
parking ramp and noted the pedestrian walk-through area that would provide a
pedestrian connection and allow access to the large green space in the center of the
site. He said he realizes that the City has some concerns about the pedestrian walk-
through area and they are willing to change their plans if needed in order to provide a
safe pedestrian connection.
Waldhauser asked the applicant if they have considered splitting the parking ramp into
two smaller ramps instead of having one gigantic ramp. Bade said that they are
flexible with the design of the ramp but it will depend on the types of users in the office
buildings.
Keysser asked if the office buildings themselves will have any parking areas or if all of
the parking will be in the proposed ramp. Bade stated that all of the parking for the
office buildings will be in the ramp.
McCarty asked the applicant if they end up with two buildings if they would still have
one large parking ramp. Bade said they wouldn't necessarily have one large parking
ramp. He reiterated that it is a phased development so it really depends on the type of
users in the office buildings. McCarty asked the applicant if they have any potential
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 5
tenants. Bade said they are hoping the excitement from the retail portion of the project
will draw in office tenants. He stated that construction of the first office tower could
potentially begin late this fall and the buildings typically take 18 months to build.
Keysser asked about parking for the potential hotel use. Bade said the potential hotel
would have some parking under the building, some on-grade surface parking and
maybe a small ramp.
Bade referred to the AUAR and explained that there were certain improvements
brought forward as a result of the AUAR. He discussed the improvements that have
been made to Park Place Blvd. such as lane widening, extra lane capacity, extra turn
lanes, traffic timing and park and ride adjustments. He stated that earlier this year
SEH did a traffic calming study pertaining more to the east side of Highway 100. He
referred to photos of many of the intersections in Golden Valley along Wayzata Blvd.
and discussed some of the proposed improvements such as bump-outs, striping,
shrub clearing and sidewalk extensions. He explained that they understand there are
resident concerns and potential traffic issues. He said they are trying to help the issue
by reducing the number of exit points from the ramp. They are also trying to promote
traffic flow onto Utica which would then use 16th and Park Place and the
improvements that are now in place.
Bade discussed the stormwater management issues with this project and explained
that they have been working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for two
years. He talked about the below grade infiltration pipes they are using to direct water
and reduce run-off by 87% compared to pre-construction conditions. He stated that
they are reducing phosphorus by 65% and they have partnered with the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District to create small green roof areas and options for rain
gardens, green walls and cisterns to capture run-off from the parking ramp to use as
gray water for irrigation.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Gary Cohen, 4530 Douglas Avenue, stated that he has attended many meetings
regarding this and other proposals. He stated that January 29, 2008 was the last
public meeting held on this topic where traffic calming options were discussed. He
said after that time, Duke and the City of Golden Valley ceased discussions regarding
the Golden Valley portion of this proposal. He said he is pleased that Duke has
reduced the number of entrances and exits on the ramp from four to two. He said the
design and quality of the proposed development have never been a concern to him
but his paramount concern is traffic and how it will impact his neighborhood. He said
he has the following requests to make of the Planning Commission and City Council
as they consider this proposal: 1) reconvene a neighborhood meeting in Golden Valley
to review the traffic calming measures, 2) continue traffic counts in the neighborhood
both pre and post construction of the retail portion of the Duke development, 3)
continue to confirm and produce formal documentation showing that there is no
intention of ever extending 16th Street through the entire project allowing traffic to exit
through the development into the Golden Valley neighborhoods, 4) continue to work
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 6
with MnDOT on improving the existing frontage road. He said he has no doubt Duke
will have a high quality project he just his trying to find ways to alleviate traffic
problems that he knows are going to get worse.
Joseph Lee, 400 Tyrol Crest, said his concern is traffic. He said right now on June
Avenue visibility is one issue because of the winding roads, but the quantity of traffic is
a problem as well. He said he would like to see a yellow blinking light or a stop sign
installed. He referred to Mr. Bade's discussion of "bump-outs" as a traffic calming
technique and asked how the bump-outs will help solve the traffic problems.
Robert Lazear, 1519 Natchez Avenue South, said he wrote a letter to the City last
year regarding this proposal and passed out copies of his letter. He said he also
appreciates that Duke and the two cities have listened to the neighbor's concerns and
have done some improvements. He said what it comes down to is that they are a land
locked neighborhood and there are only two ways to get in and out their
neighborhood, making it very difficult. He questioned once this development is done
what can be done to make sure they can safely turn into their neighborhood. He said
he is concerned about traffic from the development being pushed out onto Wayzata
Blvd. rather than onto 16th Street and Park Place which have more capacity. He said
he doesn't recall anyone from MnDOT ever attending any of the meetings regarding
this development and asked if staff could make sure they are in attendance. He said
he believes there is going to be a need for a traffic light on Wayzata Blvd. slightly west
of Natchez Avenue. He referred to the timing of the construction and asked if the
parking ramp will also be developed in phases or if a giant 4,000 space mega ramp is
going to be built if the buildings are built in phases. He added that he would like a
commitment on paper confirming that there will only be two, not four entrance/exit
points from the ramp. He reiterated that his major concern is minimizing traffic and
maximizing safety and agreed that the traffic counts should be revisited in a year or
two from now after the retail space is open.
Todd Shipman, 1510 Fairlawn Way, said it is important to understand that this is a
special piece of street that warrants serious consideration because of the topography
and changes in elevation. He said the City also needs to understand that this area
gets a limited amount of daylight so there is a lot of additional ice and snow that
doesn't get removed. He reiterated that they are a land locked neighborhood so there
are no other alternatives regarding exiting the neighborhood. He said he takes the bus
to work and there is a huge risk of getting hit on the frontage road so he thinks
installing a stoplight is going to be imperative. He said he notices that there is a lot of
commuter traffic that currently parks in the vacant ramps and he doesn't know where
those cars are going to go. He said no matter what the AUAR says the City has to go
a step further and understand the dynamics of the neighborhood.
Betsy Zakrajsheck, 1425 Natchez Avenue South, said traffic and safety are her major
concerns. She said Natchez is currently a major cut through street off of Wayzata
Blvd. and there are no sidewalks on Natchez. She said walking along the frontage
road is dangerous because of the speeding traffic. She is worried about her kids and
the kids in the neighborhood with all of the speeding traffic on Natchez. She said she
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 7
fears that with the back-up of traffic along the frontage road more and more people will
cut through on Natchez to get to Cedar Lake Road to make their way to Highway 100.
James Murray, 1520 Natchez Avenue South, said he is concerned about the AUAR
traffic study because since it was done MnDOT has added lanes along 1-394 down to
the Dunwoody area so now people can cut through and go across to Penn Avenue to
avoid the traffic on 1-394. He said MnDOT has got to have some participation in this
because they've affected the outcome. He said he thinks the traffic study is no longer
relevant to the traffic they are going to have after this proposed development.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public
hearing.
Pat Mascia, Senior Vice President, Twin Cities Operations, Duke Realty Corp., stated
they've been working on this project for almost 5 years. He said this has been a very
civil discussion and process and realizes it is in their best interest to make sure the
traffic works in this development. He said parking and traffic have been the two
biggest challenges of this project. They are trying to make the traffic situation better by
having retail and office uses together because they generate different traffic patterns.
He said the original environmental impact statement that was done on this site in 1989
assumed that there would be an additional million square feet of office space. He said
there is no intention of extending 16th Street through the development.
Mascia explained that there was a period of time between the original neighborhood
meetings and today's meeting because the two cities had originally talked about
having a Joint Powers Agreement but that did not come about, the ramp had to be re-
engineered to change the number of exits from four to two and the market conditions
changed. He referred to the question regarding the use of "bump-outs" as a traffic
calming technique and explained that they are still in the process of figuring out what
measures will work best. He referred to the concern about commuter traffic currently
parking in the vacant ramps and noted that those cars belong to the construction
employees currently working on site and are not commuters as suggested. He added
that he also thinks it's a good idea to work with MnDOT.
Keysser referred to the site plans and asked if any thought has been given to having
all the exits from the parking ramp be on the west side and having no exits on the
north or east sides. Mascia explained that there have to be exits on the north side to
allow the ramp to function properly. He said that the site probably won't be fully
developed for approximately 10 years and reducing the exits from four to two is the
best they can do. Grimes added that the plans would be approved based on the plans
submitted so there can't be any major changes from what has been submitted.
Keysser asked what would happen if one large tenant came in and wanted a different
parking ramp. Grimes explained that if the parking ramp design changes significantly
from what is approved the applicant would have to come back to the City for approval.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 8
Grimes reiterated that there will have to be traffic calming measures approved prior to
final plan approval so that when the office buildings open the traffic improvements will
be in place.
Grimes referred to the proposed pedestrian walk-through in the parking ramp and
stated that staff has some concerns about the safety of it. He said staff would like to
see a pedestrian connection and would like to suggest that language be added saying
the pedestrian walk-through will be revisited at a later date rather than just saying no
to the proposed walk-through at this point.
Keysser asked if it is a reasonable request to do traffic counts in the area after the
retail portion of the project is open. Grimes said traffic counts could be done fairly
easily. He explained that MnDOT has reviewed these plans and they also have
concerns about the frontage road. He said he is more than willing to try to get a
representative from MnDOT to attend a meeting however he thinks they are going to
want to hear a traffic proposal from the City first. He explained that traffic has to meet
certain standards to warrant signs, traffic lights, etc. and that staff is open and willing
to discuss all of the traffic calming techniques available.
Waldhauser referred to the pedestrian walk-through area and said she would like
there to be a condition of approval that there will be a safe and attractive pedestrian
access route from the Tryol area through both the office buildings and parking ramp to
the retail area. Grimes recommended that the Planning Commission specifically add
that language as a condition of approval. McCarty agreed with the need for pedestrian
access through the ramp. Schmidgall said he thinks it could be safely done by
separating the ramp into two crossover drives where cars don't come near
pedestrians.
Grimes said he would also like to add a condition of approval regarding having
another neighborhood meeting to discuss traffic calming issues prior to final plan
approval.
Cera referred to the proposed bump outs on the frontage road intersections and said
in his opinion they are hazardous. He said with the topography, curves and the ice in
that area he feels the bump outs would be dangerous. He agreed that MnDOT really
needs to be involved in this development.
Eck stated that traffic is the number one concern and Golden Valley is being asked to
come up with solutions to a problem that is not of our making. He said the Planning
Commission is being asked to recommend approval of this proposal without having
any valid idea of whether this traffic issue is going to be a serious problem or not or
how it is going to be solved. He said he is in support of the proposal and hopes the
traffic issues are taken seriously.
McCarty said he is concerned about the size of the ramp. He asked if there is any
accommodation in this ramp regarding the future of traffic such as electric cars, hybrid
cars, smaller cars, etc. He asked if the ramp design is based on hist~rical traffic data.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 9
He also asked about the parking ratio requirements and asked if those numbers are
outdated and suggested maybe the ratio be decreased if possible. Grimes stated that
one advantage in building the parking ramp in phases is that these types of items can
be addressed in the future. Mascia said the ramp hasn't been designed yet. He
explained that it will be designed in accordance with the market at the time it is built.
Grimes noted that requiring 1 space per 250 square feet of floor area is fairly standard
and he wants to be flexible depending on the type of tenant using the ramp. Mascia
said they would like to build as few parking spaces as possible because each space
costs money in structured parking. Grimes stated that many of these issues are
addressed in the Traffic Management Plan.
McCarty referred to the idea of recounting the traffic after the retail portion of the site is
open and noted that retail and office use have different peak times so he questions if
the retail counts would be valid for the office use. Keysser agreed that the trips are not
equal but it would give the City more data. Grimes said he is most concerned about
the am and pm peak trips.
Cera said he is having difficulty making a decision about this proposal because he
would like to see the traffic calming information and he would like to hear from
MnDOT.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by McCarty and motion carried to recommend approval of
Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat for The Towers at West End with the
following conditions. Commissioner Cera abstained from voting.
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by
Duke and Walsh Bishop Architects and dated 12/12/08 shall become a part of
this approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1200
parking spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommend.ations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff
Oliver, PE, to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated
January 21,2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated
January 9, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
6. There will be a safe and attractive pedestrian access route from the Tryol area
through both the office buildings and parking ramp to the retail area.
7. Grimes said he would also like to add a condition of approval regarding having
another neighborhood meeting to discuss traffic calming issues prior to final plan
approval.
--Short Recess--
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26,2009
Page 10
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
No reports were given.
5. Other Business
Hogeboom reminded the Commissioners that they are invited to attend the
February 10, 2008 Council/Manager meeting where they will be discussing the
Douglas Drive Corridor study.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 pm.
Lester Eck, Secretary
JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES
Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope
Meeting of November 5,2008
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 Norris seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to approve the
minutes of the October 1,2008 meeting as submitted.
Resolution 08-04 reaardina Joint Water Commission Adoptina the 2009 General
Fund Budaet
Virnig introduced the resolution and stated that the estimated new rate of 6.7% for an
overall increase was used.
The Commission questioned the cost of $7,000 for a Consumer Confidence Report listed
under Professional Services. A discussion ensued about the cost for producing printed
material.
Commissioner Norris introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 08-4
RESOLUTION OF THE JOINT WATER COMMISISON
ADOPTING THE 2009 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner
McDonald and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Burt,
McDonald, and Norris; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Chair and his signature
attested by the Vice Chair.
Joint Water Commission
November 5, 2008
Page 2
Resolution 08-05 regarding Joint Water Commission Adopting the 2009-2013 Capital
Proiects for the Golden Vallev, Crystal, New Hope Joint Water Commission.
Burt introduced his concerns about the fluctuating costs over the next five years. He would
like to see projects prioritized so the cost could be distributed equally over the next five
years, reducing spikes in cost and stabilizing the budget.
Norris would like to see the five-year budget completed with place holders for future
projects.
A suggestion was made that the utility supervisors for Golden Valley, Crystal and New
Hope meet to prioritize upcoming projects and eliminate spikes in expenditures over the
next five years.
Virnig suggested thatthey should also resolve the driveway issues to determine if each city
is responsible for the costs associated with access to the wells.
The consensus was unanimous to bring Resolution 08-5, Resolution Adopting the 2009-
2013 Capital Projects for the Golden Valley- Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission
back after the utility supervisor's prioritized projects.
Other
Mathisen stated that the Met Council Task Force will be meeting in Maple Grove in
December and each City will approve the Resolution that supports the Metropolitan Task
Force.
Next Meeting
The next meeting will be December 3,2008.
Adiournment
The meeting was adjourned at 1 :50 pm.
Thomas D. Burt, Chair
ATTEST:
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Minutes
January 26, 2009
Present: Commissioners Anderson, Baker, Chand lee, Hill, Pawluk and Stremel. Also
present were AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator; and Lisa Nesbitt,
Administrative Assistant.
Absent: Commissioner St. Clair
1. Call to Order
Pawluk called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes - November 24. 2008
MOVED by Baker, seconded by Chandlee, and the motion carried unanimously to approve
the minutes of the November 24,2008 meeting.
3. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement (MCPA)
. MCPA ProQress Report - Lundstrom shared with the Commission, a progress report
that was created by staff, outlining the steps taken toward each of the priority areas
identified by the Commission.
a. Measurement - The City is going to join ICLEI which is an organization
dedicated to assisting local governments with climate protection and
sustainable development.
Energy audits have been completed in City Hall and Public Safety buildings.
, Audits will be conducted in the other buildings soon. Lighting audits will be
completed in February.
b. Education Articles - A draft of an article for the Jan/Feb CityNews was given
to the Commission. The article is titled "What is Going Green". Upcoming
articles include "Measuring Your Carbon Footprint (Mar/April) and "Volunteer
Buckthorn Project Update" (May/June).
c. Development Materials - nothing new
d. Education Forum -Lawrence Baker, from the U ofM, recently spoke at a
Planning conference about how residents can measure their own carbon
footprint. Staff will contact him to see if he can speak at a Commission
meeting.
e. Green Team - The team is looking at city codes that pertain to rain collection
systems, native landscaping, wind energy and solar energy.
. Consideration to Host forum on liquid Assets -
4. Program/Project Updates
1/1 - Commissioners were given a copy of the latest III inspection status report
prepared by staff.
Private Development Updates - Planning Commission is conducting a preliminary
plat hearing for the West End parking garages.
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 2 of 2
5. Commission Member Council Reports
None.
6. Other Business
None.
7. Adiourn
MOVED by Hill, seconded by Anderson, and the motion carried to adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be on February
23,2009 at 7:00 pm.
Hey
OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Brookview Community Center
Monday, November 24,2008
7:00 PM
I. Call to Order
Sandler called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Present:
Roger Bergman, Jim Johnson, Kelly Kuebelbeck, Anne Saffert, Jerry
Sandler, DeDe Scanlon, City Council Member; Jessica Hassis, Golden
Valley Resident; Rick Jacobson, Director of Parks and Recreation;
Brian Erickson, Recreation Supervisor; Ben Disch, Golf Operations
Manager; and Sheila Van Sloun, Administrative Assistant.
Absent:
Ken Graves, Bob Mattison and Jim Vaughan.
III. Agenda changes or Additions
Jacobson added Dog Park discussion.
IV. Approval of Minutes - October 27,2008
MOTION: Moved by Bergman and seconded by Saffert to approve the October
2ih meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
V. ParentlTot Playtime Proposal
Jacobson discussed the petition that was submitted to the City for a parent/tot
playtime within the community.
Scanlon gave a history of the interest for this program. She also gave details on
community discussion for the program.
Erickson gave detail similar programs that are offered in Golden Valley and
surrounding communities. He also discussed staffing, equipment, storage, concerns
and pluses for the program.
MOTION: Moved by Kuebelbeck and seconded by Saffert to recommend the
implementation of the parent/tot playtime to staff. Motion carried
unanimously.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Open Space and Recreation Commission
November 24,2008
Page 2
VI. Brookview Golf Course Update - Ben Disch
Disch gave details on the 2008 season. He said the course closed November 10th
with rounds and revenues being up.
Disch then discussed plans for the 2009 season, including an increase of $1.00 on
the Regulation course and $.50 on the Par 3. He also said they would like to lower
the minimum age for the Par 3 and the Driving Range to 6 years old. Minimum age
is currently 8.
MOTION: Moved by Johnson and seconded by Kuebelbeck to change the
minimum age from 8 to 6 years old on the Par 3 Course and at the
Driving Range. Motion carried unanimously.
Disch also discussed celebrating the golf course's 40th anniversary in 2009 at Valley
Days.
VII. Comprehensive Plan/Park System Plan Update
Jacobson said the city council reviewed the Park Section a month ago and liked
what they saw. He said they made a few recommendations.
Jacobson said all chapters are posted on the city's website for the community to
view and comment.
He also said the Comprehensive Plan goes to the Planning Commission. Final
approval from the Council should happen in 2009.
VIII. New Business
Dog Park
Jacobson said a Golden Valley resident met with Linda Loomis and city staff to
discuss her idea for a dog park within the city.
A committee may be formed to look into fundraising and sponsorship to help with the
cost of the project.
IX. Old Business
Regional Trail
Jacobson said paving is complete, except in With Park. Currently they are cleaning
and doing plantings with anticipated completion in early summer.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Open Space and Recreation Commission
November 24, 2008
Page 3
Canadian Pacific Line
Jacobson said Three Rivers Park District hired a consultant to study the north/south
corridor. He said the study continues to move forward with the Park District soliciting
input from all cities along the corridor regarding problem areas, as well as potential
links between local trail connections.
X. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Moved by Johnson and seconded by Kuebelbeck to adjourn at 8: 15
p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
alley
orandu --
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 1. Purchase One Tractor Loader
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Bert Tracy, PublicWorks Maintenance Manager
Summary
The 2009-2013 Water and Sewer Systems Capital Improvement Program (W&SS-031, page
131) includes $105,000 for one new tractor loader. The tractor loader replaces a 1992 Ford
tractor backhoe with a new Cat articulated tool carrier/loader. Staff will utilize this equipment
for watermain break repairs and utility repairs, utility backfilling of excavations, material
handling of pallets and equipment and miscellaneous utility maintenance activities.
The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded contract 439259 to Zeigler Inc.
for the articulated tool carrier/loader in the amount of $104,132, less the trade-in of a 1992
Ford 655 Tractor backhoe ($11,000) for a total with tax of $99,185.58.
Contract No. Item Vendor Amount
439259 Cat 14G Articulated Wheel Tool Carrier/Loader Ziegler, Inc. $104,132.00
Trade In 1992 Ford 655 N/A ($11,000.00)
Subtotal $93,132.00
Tax $6,053.58
Total $99,185.58
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the purchase of one 2009 Cat IT 14G Articulated Wheel Tool Carrier/Loader
from Zeigler Cat Co., Inc. in the amount of $99,185.58 and authorize the trade in of the 1992
Ford 655 under the same transaction.
alley
emorandum
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 2. Purchase One Compressor
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Summary
The 2009-2013 Water and Sewer Systems Capital Improvement Program (W&SS-10, page
131) includes $29,000 for one 2009185 CFM compressor. The utilities compressor replaces
a 1985 Ingersol Rand 185 CFM compressor. Staff will utilize this equipment for utilities
maintenance activities such as sand blasting fire hydrants, jack hammering asphalt, etc.
The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded contract 440669 to Ziegler Inc.
in the amount of $14,095, plus sales tax of $916.18.
Contract No. Item Vendor Amount
440669 2009 Sullair 185 CFM Compressor ZeiQler, Inc. $14,095.00
Tax $916.18
Total $15,011.18
Recommended Action
Motion to approve purchase of one Sullair 185 DPQ Compressor from Zeigler, Inc. for the
total purchase amount of $15,011.18, including tax.
alley
moran um
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 3. Purchase One 2009 Ford F150 Utilities Truck
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Summary
The 2009-2013 Water and Sewer Systems Capital Improvement Program (W&SS-020, page
131) includes $27,000 for one 2009 utilities truck. The utilities truck replaces a 2000 Ford
F150 utility truck utilized primarily for water meter reading and maintenance. The current
truck has an excess of 110,000 miles. Staff will utilize this equipment for utilities maintenance
activities with the primary use of meter reading, meter maintenance and water sample
collection.
The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded contract 440139 to Elk River
Ford Dodge Jeep Inc. in the amount of $22,504.40 plus sales tax of $1 ,462.79. Minnesota
Materials Management Division has awarded contract 439380 to ABM Equipment for the
utility truck box in the amount of $6,288 plus sales tax of $408.22.
Contract No. Item Vendor Amount
440139 2009 Ford F150 Truck Elk River Ford Dodge Jeep, Inc. $22,504.40
Tax $1,462.79
Subtotal $23,967.19
439380 Utilities Truck Box ABM Equipment, Inc. $6,288.00
Tax 408.72
Subtotal $6,696.72
Total $30,663.91
While the purchase of this equipment exceeds the budgetary estimate by approximately
$3,600, the purchase of the compressor was under budget by $14,000. Therefore, adequate
funds are available in the Water and Sewer Fund to cover the cost of the purchase.
Recommended Action
Motion to approve purchase of one 2009 Ford F150 Utilities Truck from Elk River Ford Dodge
Jeep, Inc. and one utility truck box from ABM Equipment, Inc. for the total purchase amount
of $30,663.91, including tax.
Hey
Memorandum
Park and Recreation
763-512-2342/763-512-2344 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 4. Quotes - Greenrree Mower
Prepared By
Rick Jacobson, Director of Parks and Recreation
Greg Spencer, Golf Course Superintendent
Summary
The 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program GC-003 (page 71) includes $29,000 for the
purchase of one green/tee mower. The mower will come equipped with three reels for
mowing golf course greens and tees at Brookview Golf Course. The mower will replace an
existing green/tee mower.
The Minnesota Materials Management Division awarded Contract No. 440438 for this mower
to MTI Distributing. The City's cost to purchase the green/tee mower is as follows:
Golf Course Greenrree Mower
Trade-In 1996 Greenrree Mower
MN State Sales Tax
Purchase Price to City
$ 28,888.57
$ (1,500.00)
$ 1.780.26
$29,168.83
The overage of $168.83 will be financed from the working capital of the Brookview Golf
Course Fund.
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the purchase of one new green/tee mower and to trade in the City's 1996
Greenrree Mower for a total purchase price, including Minnesota sales tax, in the amount of
$29,168.83.
FEa142009
Ms Linda Loomis, Mayor
Golden Valley City Hall
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Mn 55427
2009
February 18,2009
Dear Mayor Loomis,
It has been my great pleasme to serve on the Golden Valley Environmental Commission
for the last several years. Living in and being involved with such a progressive
community is very satisfying and rewarding.
Unfortunately, my personal family situation has changed, and I am now living outside the
City of Golden Valley. 1, therefore, regrettably, must send you this letter of resignation
from the Environmental Commission.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in Golden Valley's community. The staff,
appointed and elected citizens (like yourself) are all dedicated and committed to asswing
a sustainable and quality future for Golden Valley. It has been my privilege to be a
member of the Environmental Commission.
Sincerely,
~cd~~'
Siah L. St. Clair
10183rd AveNE Apt 204
Fridley, Mn 55432
Cc: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Jon P. Pawluk, Chair, Environmental Commission
:'I<.
;~ ~
,"-
!,;
: .~
. ,
alley
Memo ndum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8003/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. G. Authorization to Sign Service Agreements with Home Free an.d YMCA
Prepared By
Thomas Burt, City Manager
Summary
The City has a long history of using the services of Home Free and YMCA. These services
have in the past been paid for with pull-tab receipts that the Human Services Foundation
distributes to a number of non-profit agencies that serve Golden Valley. Beginning in 2008
payment for these agreements was moved to the General Fund.
Staff recommends the service agreements with Home Free and the YMCA be renewed for
2009.
Attachments
Services Agreement with Missions Inc.lHome Free (4 pages)
Services Agreement with YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis, Northwest Branch (7 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the City Manager to sign the service agreements with Missions Inc.lHome
Free and YMCA of Metropolitan Minneapolis, Northwest Branch.
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement ("Agreement") is made on day of ,2009, by and
between the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY ("City"), whose business address is 7800
Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, and MISSIONS INC.lHOME
FREE ("Provider"), a Minnesota corporation whose address is, 3405 East Medicine
Lake Boulevard; Plymouth, Minnesota 55441.
The Provider is a non-profit organization that has served the City's families since
1984. The Provider's programs and services are unique and are not available through
any other local organization. The Home Free Domestic Assault Intervention Project
facilities a coordinated response to domestic assault among law enforcement, criminal
justice and social service agencies. The Project aims to ensure that Golden Valley
residents receive ongoing support, information and advocacy for domestic-violence
issues.
The City wishes to contract with the Provider to provide community services in
the City. The parties wish to set forth in writing the terms and conditions of their
agreement.
The City and Provider agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Provider shall provide the services as outlined in the attached Exhibit A and
made part hereof.
2. PAYMENT
The City agrees to pay the Provider $20,000 to assist the Provider in providing
the services outlined on the attached Exhibit A.
3. TERM AND TERMINATION
The term of this Agreement shall be from January 1, 2009, through December
31,2009. This Agreement may be terminated at anytime by either party upon sixty (60)
days advance written notice. The City may terminate this Agreement immediately
without notice should Provider (i) fail to provide the Services in accordance with this
Agreement; or (ii) violate any ordinance or regulation of the City of Golden Valley or any
state law or regulation. Extensions of this Agreement may be made by the written
agreement of both parties. The City and Provider shall meet annually each November to
discuss this Agreement and evaluate the Services provided hereunder.
4. NON-ASSIGNMENT
Provider may not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and/or
the services to be performed under it, whether in whole or in part, without the prior
consent of the City.
5. DISCRIMINATION
The Provider agrees not to discriminate in providing services under this
Agreement on the basis of race, sex, creed, national origin, age or religion.
6. INDEMNITY
The Provider agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the City, their
elected officials, officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, losses, or
damages, including attorneys' fees, arising from, allegedly arising from, or related to,
the provision of services under this agreement by the Provider, its employees, agents,
officers, or volunteer workers.
7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Nothing in this agreement is intended, nor may be construed, to create the
relationship of partners or employer/employee between the parties. The Provider, its
officers, agents, employees, and volunteers are, and will remain for all purposes and
services under this agreement, independent contractors.
8. WAIVER
Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement
shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.
9. AUTHORIZED AGENTS
The City's authorized agent for the purpose of administration of this Agreement
is:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427
763-593-8003
The Contractor's authorized Agent is:
Patricia Murphy, Executive Director
Missions Inc.lHome Free
3405 East Medicine Lake Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
763-559-1883
10. NOTICES
Any notices given under this Agreement will be served upon the other party's
authorized agent either personally or by mail at the addresses stated herein.
11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
The Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to
the subject matter herein and supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations
between the parties, as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between
the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments,
deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when
expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided
herein.
Executed as of the day and year first above written,
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY (the "City")
MISSIONS INC.lHOME FREE ("Provider")
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
Patricia Murphy, Executive Director
EXHIBIT A
Services provided by Provider (the "Services")
A. Thro ugh the Domestic Assault Intervention Project, the Provider will facilitate
collaboration among law enforcement, criminal justice and social service
agencies.
B. Th e Provider will provide information and referrals, legal advocacy, systems
advocacy and other support services to victims of domestic violence.
C. The Provider will provide battered women and their children with safety,
advocacy, support and information to help them explore alternatives to living
with a violent partner.
D. The provider will help eliminate the roots of violence by respecting human
diversity, by assisting women in taking control of their lives, and by
developing effective community responses to the needs of battered women
and their children.
E. Th e provider will provide guaranteed shelter space to residents of the City.
F. The Provider will assist women in obtaining legal remedies, housing, financial
resources and medical care.
G. The provider will provide transportation for women to appointments as
needed.
H. The Provider will offer education/support groups and social and recreational
opportunities.
I. The Provider will facilitate placement of children in local schools, work with
. children individually and in groups to assist them in developing age-
appropriate knowledge and skills related to domestic violence issues.
J. The Provider will provide childcare to children when their mothers attend
meetings or appointments.
K. Th e Provider will arrange for its staff or volunteers to speak about domestic
violence issues and distribute information at community events, schools and
at placed of work and worship. Through such community education, the
Provider seeks to increase awareness, knowledge and understanding of
domestic violence.
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement ("Agreement") is made on the day of ,2009, by and between the
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY ("City"), whose business address is 7800 Golden Valley
Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, and YMCA OF METROPOLITAN
MINNEAPOLIS, NORTHWEST BRANCH ("Provider"), a Minnesota corporation whose
address is, 7601 42nd Avenue North; New Hope, Minnesota 55427.
The Provider is a non-profit organization that has served youth and families in the
City for nearly three decades. The Provider's programs and services are unique and are
not available through any other local organization. The Provider employs 52 full-time
and 225 part-time paid staff, has 31 board members and utilizes the services of
approximately 400 volunteers.
The City wishes to contract with the Provider to provide community services in
the City. The parties wish to set forth in writing the terms and conditions of their
ag reement.
The City and Provider agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Provider shall provide the services as outlined in the attached Exhibit A and
made part hereof.
2. PAYMENT
The City agrees to pay the Provider $25,000 to assist the Provider in providing
the services outlined on the attached Exhibit A.
3. TERM AND TERMINATION
The term of this Agreement shall be from January 1,2009, through December
31,2009. This Agreement may be terminated at anytime by either party upon sixty (60)
days advance written notice. The City may terminate this Agreement immediately
without notice should Provider (i) fail to provide the Services in accordance with this
Agreement; or (ii) violate any ordinance or regulation of the City of Golden Valley or any
state law or regulation. Extensions of this Agreement may be made by the written
agreement of both parties. The City and Provider shall meet annually each November to
discuss this Agreement and evaluate the Services provided hereunder.
4. NON-ASSIGNMENT
Provider may not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and/or
the services to be performed under it, whether in whole or in part, without the prior
consent of the City.
5. DISCRIMINATION
The Provider agrees not to discriminate in providing services under this
Agreement on the basis of race, sex, creed, national origin, age or religion.
6. INDEMNITY
The Provider agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the City, their
elected officials, officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, losses, or
damages, including attorneys' fees, arising from, allegedly arising from, or related to,
the provision of services under this agreement by the Provider, its employees, agents,
officers, or volunteer workers.
7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Nothing in this agreement is intended, nor may be construed, to create the
relationship of partners or employer/employee between the parties. The Provider, its
officers, agents, employees, and volunteers are, and will remain for all purposes and
services under this agreement, independent contractors.
8. WAIVER
Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement
shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.
9. AUTHORIZED AGENTS
The City's authorized agent for the purpose of administration of this Agreement
is:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427
763-593-8003
The Contractor's authorized Agent is:
Naomi Chambers-Taylor, Executive Director
Northwest Branch YMCA
7601 42nd Avenue North
New Hope, Minnesota 55427
763-592-5541
10. NOTICES
Any notices given under this Agreement will be served upon the other party's
authorized agent either personally or by mail at the addresses stated herein.
11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
The Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to
the subject matter herein and supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations
between the parties, as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between
the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments,
deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when
expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided
herein.
Executed as of the day and year first above written,
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY (the "City")
YMCA OF METROPOLITAN MINNEAPOLIS,
NORTHWEST BRANCH ("Provider")
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
Naomi Chambers-Taylor, Executive Director
EXHIBIT A
Services provided by Provider (the "Services")
1. The Provider will provide comprehensive services through its Youth Development
Program that combine prevention, intervention, and integration services
customized to the individual needs of the City's youth, families and schools.
2. Through the Youth Development Program, the Provider will assist high-risk and
at-risk youth in resolving the underlying issues and conditions that lead to
destructive behaviors.
3. Through the Youth Development Program, the Provider will utilize methods
aimed at preventing future problems and integrating youth into positive peer
groups and supportive environments.
4. Through the Youth Development Program, the Provider will communicate and
connect with the City's youth and families.
5. Through the Youth Development Program, the Provider will build long-term
relationships between youth and positive, caring adults and peers.
6. Through the Youth Development Program, the Provider will assist youth in
building personal character including a focus upon the values of Respect,
Responsibility, Caring and Honesty.
7. In addition to the Youth Development Program, the Provider will offer a variety of
other cultural, social, recreational, prevention and intervention programs that aim
to reduce juvenile delinquency and recidivism by holding a young person
accountable for his/her actions.
8. The Provider also offers the following services to youth and their families: one-to-
one support; academic assistance; individual, group and family support services
and advocacy; independent living skills training; truancy support and services;
behavior modification groups; recreation and social activities; restitution;
community service and service learning opportunities; mental health, medical
and/or dental advocacy and services; cultural programs and activities; after-
school programs, leadership programs, chemical use and abuse referral;
parenting education; community connections and referral.
9. The Provider will provide intervention at the City's schools upon request.
10. The Provider will provide the only runaway and homeless youth program in the
northwest metro area including 24-hour crisis intervention; short-term emergency
shelter; family reunification; transitional housing and support services.
11. The Provider will conduct group and individual support at elementary, middle and
high schools on issues including anger and stress management; grief and loss;
chemical abuse and chemical dependency in the family; conflict resolution; self-
esteem; friendship and relationship development; truancy support; school
success and independent-living skills.
12.Additionally, the Provider will provide the following services:
. Truancy Program: A collaborative effort between police, schools and the YMCA
that brings together parents and children who are experiencing difficulty with
school attendance to set individual goals for improved school participation. Court
and criminal proceedings can be diverted by successful completion of this
program. YMCA employees assist with leading Truancy seminars as well as
working with local police and schools to help youth and families understand the
truancy process.
. Y's Start: A program with three main components - service, education and
recreation. Y's Start makes it possible for youth ages 11-14 to realize their
potential, develop skills and utilize their talents for the greater benefit of the
community.
. Youth-In-Government: A leadership development program for 7th-12th grade
youth. The program stresses experiential learning and is an excellent forum for
students to explore the concerns, opportunities and diverse perspectives that
touch our world. Moreover, it builds character while developing leadership skills
and promotes youth becoming responsible, active citizens.
. YMCA & Golden Valley Police - Kids and Cops: The purpose of Kids and Cops is
to foster positive relationships between middle school youth and police officers
while offering safe and engaging after-school activities for those who are typically
most at risk of being left alone after school, which is a peak time for youth to
enter into destructive behavior.
. Leaders Club: This group encourages teens to develop strong service and
leadership traits by providing hands-on opportunities to grow and meet new
people. Service, group and individual interaction and regional conferences are
emphasized. Youth also have the opportunity to attend a week long Central
Leaders School where they are immersed in Leadership training and how to
bring their skills back to their individual clubs. Last year, nearly 30 youth
participated in the Leaders Club at Sandburg Middle School.
. Multi-Cultural Achievers: Support and leadership opportunities for high school
students of African descent and their friends. Youth are exposed to a variety of
career opportunities, college options, participate in and value community service
projects this program is run on an association level in area schools.
. YMCA Summer Power: YMCA Summer Power offers youth an alternative to
traditional day care when school is out. K-6th graders are introduced to a variety
of activities including arts and crafts, gym games, swimming and field trips.
Experienced staff provide leadership and guidance designed around the core
values of Honesty, Caring, Respect and Responsibility. Special "School Release
Day Programs" are offered during school breaks.
. YMCA Uproar: This summer program for 7th to 9th grade students allows Middle
School youth an opportunity to be in fun, safe, environment through the summer
months. Youth have the opportunity to explore the metro area through field trips,
develop leadership skills through service learning, and develop as individuals
through character development activities, academic exploration, and positive
relationships with the staff.
. NYPUM (National Youth Project Using Minibikes): This program allows youth a
chance to learn about and ride minibikes as a reward for achieving positive
goals. Youth complete weekly goal plans that develop self-esteem, enhance
values and provide a sense of belonging. Each participant attends a minimum
ten-week program, riding half-days at Camp Manitou. Transportation is provided.
Upon completion, the youth perform for their family and the community.
. Equestrian Program: This program uses horses as a reward for achieving
positive goals. Youth complete weekly goal plans that develop self-esteem,
enhance values and provide a sense of belonging. Each participant attends a
minimum ten-week program, riding half-days at Camp Manitou.
. SUCCESS: Each day youth from District 281 middle school's are bussed over to
the YMCA to participate in the SUCCESS program (Student Undertaking
Character Consciousness while Excelling in School and Social Skills). The
program is designed to appeal to a wide array of youth and help develop
friendships, strengthen academics, foster a sense of belonging and
connectedness, and provide a safe place to go after school.
· Dover Hills Apartment Programming (2500 Rhode Island Avenue North, Golden
Valley): Recreation-based programming out of Dover Hills including weekly
programming during the school year. Dover Hills is one of two housing
complexes in Golden Valley that offer family housing that is subsidized by
Section 8 housing.
Hey
M morandum
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
Agenda Item
3. H. Affirming Support of Pursuing Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development Funding
for Douglas Drive Corridor Roadway Improvements
Prepared By
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Summary
Hennepin County has announced its intention to make $2 million in Capital Bond funds
available to support multi-jurisdictional Transit Oriented Development (TOO) projects. To
qualify for this funding opportunity, projects must include elements of public infrastructural
improvements, must foster transit opportunities, and must be located within an officially
designated redevelopment area.
Staff feels that the proposed improvements along the Douglas Drive Corridor could qualify to
receive funding through this program. Assuming that the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area
is established in 2009, the proposed Douglas Drive improvements meet the qualifications
contained with the funding program guidelines. To complete the application for this funding
opportunity, staff must submit a Resolution to the County, asserting the City's support.
Attachment
Resolution Affirming Golden Valley's Support of Pursuing Hennepin County Transit Oriented
Development Funding for Roadway Improvements in the Douglas Drive Corridor (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Affirming Golden Valley's Support of Pursuing Hennepin County
Transit Oriented Development Funding for Roadway Improvements in the Douglas Drive
Corridor.
Resolution 09-17
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AFFIRMING GOLDEN VALLEY'S SUPPORT OF PURSUING
HENNEPIN COUNTY TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING FOR
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DOUGLAS DRIVE CORRIDOR
March 3, 2009
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Golden Valley is the official governing
body of the City of Golden Valley; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has identified safety concerns for pedestrians and
bicyclists along the Douglas Drive (CSAH 102) Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the City has initiated the Douglas Drive Corridor Study, which has
worked, in part, to identify infrastructural deficiencies on Douglas Drive; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County Department of Housing, Community Works, and
Transit has indicated its intention to fund public transit oriented development projects in
2009; and
WHEREAS, proposed improvements along the Douglas Drive Corridor fit the
description of projects sought for this funding initiative; and
WHEREAS, the immediate need exists for a sidewalk extension to be constructed
on the east side of Douglas Drive between Duluth Street (CSAH 66) and the Luce Line
Regional Trail, as well as other improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Golden Valley and Crystal, along with the Hennepin County
Transportation Department have discussed options that include reconfiguration of Douglas
Drive and inclusion of on-road bicycle accommodations between Golden Valley Road to
Medicine Lake Road, and north into Crystal; and
WHEREAS, this corridor serves numerous high-density housing units in Golden
Valley and major employers such as Honeywell, Tenant Company, and Optum Health, and
numerous transit lines serving Golden Valley and the region; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County, the authoritative agency over Douglas Drive, has
indicated support for these improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley, does hereby support requesting County funds through the 2009 Transit Oriented
. Development (TOO) Program for the construction of infrastructural improvements for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users along the Douglas Drive Corridor.
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
Memorandum
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3, 2009
"60 Days" Deadline: April 13, 2009
Agenda Item
4. A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan and Subdivision Review - PUD #107 - The Towers at
West End - Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 - Duke Realty, Applicant
Prepared By
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Summary
At the January 26, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal
public hearing to consider the preliminary PUD plan for a parking structure serving The
Towers at West End, PUD No. 107. The PUD would allow for the construction of the 4,400
space parking deck that would serve the 1.1 million square feet of office space to be
constructed on a contiguous parcel within the City of St. Louis Park. As explained in my
memo to the Planning Commission dated January 21,2009 (attached), St. Louis Park is
going through a similar PUD process for the office portion of the PUD. In fact, the preliminary
approval of the preliminary PUD plan for the office portion is scheduled for the St. Louis Park
City Council meeting on March 2,2009.
The attached memo from me and the accompanying materials presented by the developer,
Duke Realty, explain the proposed development. In addition, the approved Planning
Commission minutes from the January 26, 2009 Planning Commission meeting are attached.
In those minutes, the discussion by the Commission and input from the public are detailed.
After the hearing was over, the Commission recommended approval on a vote of 5 in favor
with one member abstaining from the vote. The Planning Commission recommended seven
conditions to the approval, adding two conditions that were not in the staff report. The two
. conditions added by the Commission require that there be a safe and attractive pedestrian
access route from the Tyrol area through both the office buildings and parking ramp to the
retail area now under construction by Duke. Also, the Commission suggested, that a
neighborhood meeting be held with the area east of TH 100 to discuss traffic calming issues
prior to final plan approval. These two conditions are listed as Conditions 6 and 7.
Duke Realty has submitted new plans since the plans were reviewed by the Planning
Commission on January 26,2009. The new plans are a part of the information submitted to
the City Council. These revised plans reflect changes requested by the City of St. Louis Park
and a revision of the intersection design just west of TH 100 where the frontage road goes
north. The new design was done to meet the request of the Golden Valley City Engineer and
consulting traffic engineer. Also attached are preliminary traffic calming plans done by Mike
Kotilla, PE, consulting traffic engineer for the City of Golden Valley. These plans were done
last year to give the City ideas about the type of measures that could be done to help improve
visibility and safety along the Wayzata Boulevard frontage road east ofTH 100. Prior to
construction of the parking structure, traffic calming improvements must be done and
assessed to Duke as a public improvement.
Attachments
Location Map ( 1 page)
Planning Commission Minutes dated January 26, 2009 (9 pages)
Memo to Planning Commission, dated January 21,2009 (5 pages)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, dated January 21, 2009 (8 pages)
Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson, dated January 9, 2009 (2 pages)
Letter from Duke Realty to Mark Grimes, dated February 18, 2009 (4 pages)
Letter from Duke Realty to Sean Walther, City of St. Louis Park dated February 18, 2009
(11 pages)
Health Partners Parking Study - Options A, C and D and Wayzata Right Turn Lane Study
(4 pages)
Letter from MnDOT dated January 20,2009 (3 pages)
Memo from David and Jean Hughes Leveque, Paul Lynch and Audrey Cox dated January 20,
2009 (1 page)
Letter from Robert Lazear dated February 11, 2008 (5 pages)
Concepts/Landscape Design Intent Open Space between Offices #2 & #3 (9 pages, loose in
agenda packet)
Applicant's Narrative (12 pages, loose in agenda packet)
SEH Project Area Traffic Calming Treatments ( 8 pages)
Project Renderings (9 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet)
Preliminary Plat (2 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet)
Site Plans (32 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the preliminary design plan, The Towers at West End, PUD No. 107,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by Duke and
Walsh Bishop Architects and dated December 12, 2008 shall become a part of this
approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1,200 parking
spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated January 21,2009 shall
become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated January 9,
2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
6. There will be a safe and attractive pedestrian access route from the Tryol area through
both the office buildings and parking ramp to the retail area.
7. A neighborhood meeting will be held to discuss traffic calming issues prior to final plan
approval.
[
~
sa ttWV100 S to W81394 ... NB ttWnOO S; TO W8 13114
m IN'I1!RST ATE39<J
28
WB.I394fOSBHWY100S ..
m 394HovLN
@
sa HW'ilOQ S TO EB J394'
,lNll'RSTATE 3!U
WAYlAT4 BLVD
City of St. Louis Park
Subject Properties
"'.,/
'" ,
,t) '"
. ,t1 ~ 144S 1450
... toij ;
lji~~:~: :
~ ~ !II 1S25 1530 J ws
. ' I/'lt' ~ ~ ~"U45
I 154S 48110 1549
,
1",,__'1"'dI.lS.~;C!lOOISGlS~
G
~l.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
A regular meeting of the Planning ommission was held at the Golde ley City
Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Go en Valley Road, Golden Vall , innesota, on
day, January 26,2009. Chair order at 7 pm.
1.
Those pre t were Planning Co
Schmidgall an aldhauser. Also
Mark Grimes, City
Commissioner Kluchka
Waldhauser referre 0 the second aragraph on pa nd clarified that the
Commission dis sed pavers "of y kind" not just pave' e also clarified that that
when she wa alking about scree' g she was referring to sc ing with plants.
M ED by Eck, seconded by Wal auser and motion carried unanimously
prove the January 12, 2009 minu s with the above noted corrections/clarifications.
2. Informal Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat
- Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 - The Towers at West End
Applicant: Duke Realty
Address: Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a 4,400 space (approximate)
parking structure in Golden Valley. This will support up to 1.1
million square feet of proposed office space to be built adjacent to
the ramp in St. Louis Park.
Grimes stated that this proposal consists of two different items, the Planned Unit
Development and the Preliminary Plat. He referred to a location map and noted that
this proposal is located in the far southeast corner of the City. He stated that the
property is designated for commercial/office on both the Comprehensive Plan Map
and the Zoning Map. He showed the Planning Commissioners a map indicating where
hearing notices for this meeting were sent. He explained that typically hearing notices
are sent to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property but in this case that
area was greatly expanded in order to get input from the public.
Grimes referred to a map of the entire project and explained that the retail and service
portion of the project is on the west side of the site and the office portion is on the east
side of the site. He stated that the applicant is going through a similar approval
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 2
process with the City of St. Louis Park because most of the project is in St. Louis Park.
(The Preliminary PUD was recommended for approval by the St. Louis Park Planning
Commission last week.) Only the proposed parking ramp and a portion of the
connections from the ramp to the office building are in Golden Valley. He explained
that the proposed total area of office space is 1.1 million square feet and will be a
phased development in three or four buildings. At this point in time the applicant is
asking for preliminary approval and they intend on waiting for a market for the office
buildings before they will go ahead with the final plan approvals.
He explained that when looking at a preliminary plan it is a broad review to make sure
it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and general development concepts
accepted by the City. He noted that there will be two building permits issues, one from
St. Louis Park for the office buildings and one from Golden Valley for the parking
ramp. He added that building inspections will be done by each City for the buildings in
their City. Each city will handle public safety to the buildings in their City and there will
be cooperation in fire and police calls.
Grimes referred to a drawing of the proposed office buildings and stated that they will
be approximately 9 stories in height. The parking ramp will have six levels above
ground and one level below ground and will be approximately 55 feet in height with the
stair/elevator tower being 75 feet in height. The parking ramp will have approximately
4,400 parking spaces when all of the office buildings are built which is a ratio of 1
space per 250 square feet of floor area as required by the Zoning Code. He stated
that the proposal also calls for bicycle parking at a rate of 10% of the parking stalls
which is more than required by the Zoning Code. He explained that half of the bicycle
parking is proof of parking so only half the bicycle spaces will be built right away. He
added that the applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the parking stalls from the
required 9 feet by 18.5 feet to 8.5 feet by 18 feet. He said staff believes that is
reasonable for a parking ramp facility. He added that the proposed parking ramp will
be located close to the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road with a sidewalk and landscaping
between the parking deck and the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road. The parking deck will
be made of concrete panels that will match the office buildings.
Grimes stated that one concern staff has about this proposed development is the
effect it will have on traffic along the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road to the east. He said
staff is working with Duke regarding traffic calming techniques, increasing pedestrian
accessibility and improving access in and out of the Tyrol neighborhood. He added
that these issues will have to be agreed upon prior to final PUD approval. He referred
to an AUAR study that was done by St. Louis Park which showed traffic from this
development will work with the existing street system and with the improvements that
were proposed in the AUAR study.
Grimes stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed parking ramp with
the following conditions:
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 3
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by
Duke and Walsh Bishop Architects and dated 12/12/08 shall become a part of
this approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1200
parking spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff
Oliver, PE, to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated
January 21, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated
January 9, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
Keysser referred to a map of the site and noted that there are two ingress/egress
points onto what is being called a private road south of Wayzata Blvd. He asked.
where the private road leads to heading south. Grimes said the road leads to the
HealthPartners building and goes all the way around the existing building. Keysser
asked if the road will lead to another street or if it will dead-end within the complex.
Grimes said the road will dead-end within the complex. He explained that at one time
during the planning of this project there were four openings on the east side of the
parking ramp. It was the City Council's opinion that it should be reduced to two
openings so that is what the applicant has done. Grimes referred to the City
Engineer's memo and noted that he is concerned about the tee intersection noted on
the plans so that is something that will also need to be addressed by the applicant.
Eck referred to the City Engineer's memo and noted that the concern is considerable
from the neighborhood to the east about the amount of traffic that will be going along
the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road. He asked Grimes to discuss what the traffic calming
techniques will consist of. Grimes referred to a map showing some of the ideas from
the AUAR. He explained that the map shows the intersections of the streets that come
out onto the frontage road and the idea is to increase the sight distance at these
intersections. Eck said that will do nothing regarding the amount of traffic on the
streets, it will only help people get in and out of their neighborhood. Grimes stated that
the AUAR and the analysis done by the city's traffic engineer shows that the streets
have the capacity for the increased traffic, the idea is to improve the intersections. Eck
said it is his understanding from the neighbors that the problem is going to be the
sheer number of cars, not if they are going to be able to see better at the intersections.
Grimes said no one is denying that there isn't going to be more traffic but with some
improvements people will be able to get in and out of the neighborhood safely.
Cera asked if the AUAR considered the traffic when the previous small buildings were
located on this property or if it only considered today's traffic figures. Grimes stated
that there used to be 175,000 square feet of office space on this site and that the
AUAR considered 1.1 million square feet of office space.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 4
Keysser asked if the hotel currently being constructed is a part of this project. Grimes
said no. He referred to a site plan and noted the applicant's proposed hotel location.
Waldhauser asked if there are any specific proposals for traffic calming on the
frontage road. Grimes stated that part of the AUAR looked at ways to help people get
on and off the street at each of the intersections within the South Tyrol and Kennedy
neighborhoods which may include improvements that will slow traffic down as well. He
reiterated that no permits will be issued by the City until the applicant submits plans for
traffic calming that are acceptable to the City. Waldhauser asked if anyone has
considered having fewer, but better controlled connections or access points from the
Tyrol neighborhood to Wayzata Blvd. Grimes stated thatthe city's traffic engineer
believes improving the sight distance at the intersections will be an improvement for
everyone in the area. Waldhauser said she is concerned that if that plan doesn't work
it will then be at Golden Valley's expense to come up with a solution.
David Bade, Development Manager, Duke Realty, Applicant, showed the Planning
Commission aerial photos of the site from summer 2007 before any work was started.
He then showed an aerial photo of the current conditions of the site. He referred to
perspective drawings showing three and four office buildings and stated that based on
market conditions there may only be three office buildings with the same amount of
square footage.
Waldhauser referred to the shade study that was done and asked if that study was
based on having three or four buildings. Bade said the shade study was based on
having four buildings. He stated that if there are three buildings they would be taller
and the shade study would change.
Bade showed perspective drawings of the proposed buildings connected to the
parking ramp and noted the pedestrian walk-through area that would provide a
pedestrian connection and allow access to the large green space in the center of the
site. He said he realizes that the City has some concerns about the pedestrian walk-
through area and they are willing to change their plans if needed in order to provide a
safe pedestrian connection.
Waldhauser asked the applicant if they have considered splitting the parking ramp into
two smaller ramps instead of having one gigantic ramp. Bade said that they are
flexible with the design of the ramp but it will depend on the types of users in the office
buildings.
Keysser asked if the office buildings themselves will have any parking areas or if all of
the parking will be in the proposed ramp. Bade stated that all of the parking for the
office buildings will be in the ramp.
McCarty asked the applicant if they end up with two buildings if they would still have
one large parking ramp. Bade said they wouldn't necessarily have one large parking
ramp. He reiterated that it is a phased development so it really depends on the type of
users in the office buildings. McCarty asked the applicant if they have any potential
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 5
tenants. Bade said they are hoping the excitement from the retail portion of the project
will draw in office tenants. He stated that construction of the first office tower could
potentially begin late this fall and the buildings typically take 18 months to build.
Keysser asked about parking for the potential hotel use. Bade said the potential hotel
would have some parking under the building, some on-grade surface parking and
maybe a small ramp.
Bade referred to the AUAR and explained that there were certain improvements
brought forward as a result of the AUAR. He discussed the improvements that have
been made to Park Place Blvd. such as lane widening, extra lane capacity, extra turn
lanes, traffic timing and park and ride adjustments. He stated that earlier this year
SEH did a traffic calming study pertaining more to the east side of Highway 100. He
referred to photos of many of the intersections in Golden Valley along Wayzata Blvd.
and discussed some of the proposed improvements such as bump-outs, striping,
shrub clearing and sidewalk extensions. He explained that they understand there are
resident concerns and potential traffic issues. He said they are trying to help the issue
by reducing the number of exit points from the ramp. They are also trying to promote
traffic flow onto Utica which would then use 16th and Park Place and the
improvements that are now in place.
Bade discussed the stormwater management issues with this project and explained
that they have been working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for two
years. He talked about the below grade infiltration pipes they are using to direct water
and reduce run-off by 87% compared to pre-construction conditions. He stated that
they are reducing phosphorus by 65% and they have partnered with the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District to create small green roof areas and options for rain
gardens, green walls and cisterns to capture run-off from the parking ramp to use as
gray water for irrigation.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Gary Cohen, 4530 Douglas Avenue, stated that he has attended many meetings
regarding this and other proposals. He stated that January 29,2008 was the last
public meeting held on this topic where traffic calming options were discussed. He
said after that time, Duke and the City of Golden Valley ceased discussions regarding
the Golden Valley portion of this proposal. He said he is pleased that Duke has
reduced the number of entrances and exits on the ramp from four to two. He said the
design and quality of the proposed development have never been a concern to him
but his paramount concern is traffic and how it will impact his neighborhood. He said
he has the following requests to make of the Planning Commission and City Council
as they consider this proposal: 1) reconvene a neighborhood meeting in Golden Valley
to review the traffic calming measures, 2) continue traffic counts in the neighborhood
both pre and post construction of the retail portion of the Duke development, 3)
continue to confirm and produce formal documentation showing that there is no
intention of ever extending 16th Street through the entire project allowing traffic to exit
through the development into the Golden Valley neighborhoods, 4) continue to work
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 6
with MnDOT on improving the existing frontage road. He said he has no doubt Duke
will have a high quality project he just his trying to find ways to alleviate traffic
problems that he knows are going to get worse.
Joseph Lee, 400 Tyrol Crest, said his concern is traffic. He said right now on June
Avenue visibility is one issue because of the winding roads, but the quantity of traffic is
a problem as well. He said he would like to see a yellow blinking light or a stop sign
installed. He referred to Mr. Bade's discussion of "bump-outs" as a traffic calming
technique and asked how the bump-outs will help solve the traffic problems.
Robert Lazear, 1519 Natchez Avenue South, said he wrote a letter to the City last
year regarding this proposal and passed out copies of his letter. He said he also
appreciates that Duke and the two cities have listened to the neighbor's concerns and
have done some improvements. He said what it comes down to is that they are a land
locked neighborhood and there are only two ways to get in and out their
neighborhood, making it very difficult. He questioned once this development is done
what can be done to make sure they can safely turn into their neighborhood. He said
he is concerned about traffic from the development being pushed out onto Wayzata
Blvd. rather than onto 16th Street and Park Place which have more capacity. He said
he doesn't recall anyone from MnDOT ever attending any of the meetings regarding
this development and asked if staff could make sure they are in attendance. He said
he believes there is going to be a need for a traffic light on Wayzata Blvd. slightly west
of Natchez Avenue. He referred to the timing of the construction and asked if the
parking ramp will also be developed in phases or if a giant 4,000 space mega ramp is
going to be built if the buildings are built in phases. He added that he would like a
commitment on paper confirming that there will only be two, not four entrance/exit
points from the ramp. He reiterated that his major concern is minimizing traffic and
maximizing safety and agreed that the traffic counts should be revisited in a year or
two from now after the retail space is open.
Todd Shipman, 1510 Fairlawn Way, said it is important to understand that this is a
special piece of street that warrants serious consideration because of the topography
and changes in elevation. He said the City also needs to understand that this area
gets a limited amount of daylight so there is a lot of additional ice and snow that
doesn't get removed. He reiterated that they are a land locked neighborhood so there
are no other alternatives regarding exiting the neighborhood. He said he takes the bus
to work and there is a huge risk of getting hit on the frontage road so he thinks
installing a stoplight is going to be imperative. He said he notices that there is a lot of
commuter traffic that currently parks in the vacant ramps and he doesn't know where
those cars are going to go. He said no matter what the AUAR says the City has to go
a step further and understand the dynamics of the neighborhood.
Betsy Zakrajsheck, 1425 Natchez Avenue South, said traffic and safety are her major
concerns. She said Natchez is currently a major cut through street off of Wayzata
Blvd. and there are no sidewalks on Natchez. She said walking along the frontage
road is dangerous because of the speeding traffic. She is worried about her kids and
the kids in the neighborhood with all of the speeding traffic on Natchez. She said she
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 7
fears that with the back-up of traffic along the frontage road more and more people will
cut through on Natchez to get to Cedar Lake Road to make their way to Highway 100.
James Murray, 1520 Natchez Avenue South, said he is concerned about the AUAR
traffic study because since it was done MnDOT has added lanes along 1-394 down to
the Dunwoody area so now people can cut through and go across to Penn Avenue to
avoid the traffic on 1-394. He said MnDOT has got to have some participation in this
because they've affected the outcome. He said he thinks the traffic study is no longer
relevant to the traffic they are going to have after this proposed development.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public
hearing.
Pat Mascia, Senior Vice President, Twin Cities Operations, Duke Realty Corp., stated
they've been working on this project for almost 5 years. He said this has been a very
civil discussion and process and realizes it is in their best interest to make sure the
traffic works in this development. He said parking and traffic have been the two
biggest challenges of this project. They are trying to make the traffic situation better by
having retail and office uses together because they generate different traffic patterns.
He said the original environmental impact statement that was done on this site in 1989
assumed that there would be an additional million square feet of office space. He said
there is no intention of extending 16th Street through the development.
Mascia explained that there was a period of time between the original neighborhood
meetings and today's meeting because the two cities had originally talked. about
having a Joint Powers Agreement but that did not come about, the ramp had to be re-
engineered to change the number of exits from four to two and the market conditions
changed. He referred to the question regarding the use of "bump-outs" as a traffic
calming technique and explained that they are still in the process of figuring out what
measures will work best. He referred to the concern about commuter traffic currently
parking in the vacant ramps and noted that those cars belong to the construction
employees currently working on site and are not commuters as suggested. He added
that he also thinks it's a good idea to work with MnDOT.
Keysser referred to the site plans and asked if any thought has been given to having
aU the exits from the parking ramp be on the west side and having no exits on the
north or east sides. Mascia explained that there have to be exits on the north side to
allow the ramp to function properly. He said that the site probably won't be fully
developed for approximately 10 years and reducing the exits from four to two is the
best they can do. Grimes added that the plans would be approved based on the plans
submitted so there can't be any major changes from what has been submitted.
Keysser asked what would happen if one large tenant came in and wanted a different
parking ramp. Grimes explained that if the parking ramp design changes significantly
from what is approved the applicant would have to come back to the City for approval.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 8
Grimes reiterated that there will have to be traffic calming measures approved prior to
final plan approval so that when the office buildings open the traffic improvements will
be in place.
Grimes referred to the proposed pedestrian walk-through in the parking ramp and
stated that staff has some concerns about the safety of it. He said staff would like to
see a pedestrian connection and would like to suggest that language be added saying
the pedestrian walk-through will be revisited at a Jater date rather than just saying no
to the proposed walk-through at this point.
Keysser asked if it is a reasonable request to do traffic counts in the area after the
retail portion of the project is open. Grimes said traffic counts could be done fairly
easily. He explained that MnDOT has reviewed these plans and they also have
concerns about the frontage road. He said he is more than willing to try to get a
representative from MnDOT to attend a meeting however he thinks they are going to
want to hear a traffic proposal from the City first. He explained that traffic has to meet
certain standards to warrant signs, traffic lights, etc. and that staff is open and willing
to discuss all of the traffic calming techniques available.
Waldhauser referred to the pedestrian walk-through area and said she would like
there to be a condition of approval that there will be a safe and attractive pedestrian
access route from the Tryol area through both the office buildings and parking ramp to
the retail area. Grimes recommended that the Planning Commission specifically add
that language as a condition of approval. McCarty agreed with the need for pedestrian
access through the ramp. Schmidgall said he thinks it could be safely done by
separating the ramp into two crossover drives where cars don't come near
pedestrians.
Grimes said he would also like to add a condition of approval regarding having
another neighborhood meeting to discuss traffic calming issues prior to final plan
approval.
Cera referred to the proposed bump outs on the frontage road intersections and said
. in his opinion they are hazardous. He said with the topography, curves and the ice in
that area he feels the bump outs would be dangerous. He agreed that MnDOT really
needs to be involved in this development.
Eck stated that traffic is the number one concern and Golden Valley is being asked to
come up with solutions to a problem that is not of our making. He said the Planning
Commission is being asked to recommend approval of this proposal without having
any valid idea of whether this traffic issue is going to be a serious problem or not or
how it is going to be solved. He said he is in support of the proposal and hopes the
traffic issues are taken seriously.
McCarty said he is concerned about the size of the ramp. He asked if there is any
accommodation in this ramp regarding the future of traffic such as electric cars, hybrid
cars, smaller cars, etc. He asked if the ramp design is based on historical traffic data.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
January 26, 2009
Page 9
He also asked about the parking ratio. requirements and asked if those numbers are
outdated and suggested maybe the ratio be decreased if possible. Grimes stated that
one advantage in building the parking ramp in phases is that these types of items can
be addressed in the future. Mascia said the ramp hasn't been designed yet. He
explained that it will be designed in accordance with the market at the time it is built.
Grimes noted that requiring 1 space per 250 square feet of floor area is fairly standard
and he wants to be flexible depending on the type of tenant using the ramp. Mascia
said they would like to build as few parking spaces as possible because each space
costs money in structured parking. Grimes stated that many of these issues are
addressed in the Traffic Management Plan.
McCarty referred to the idea of recounting the traffic after the retail portion of the site is
open and noted that retail and office use have different peak times so he questions if
the retail counts would be valid for the office use. Keysser agreed that the trips are not
equal but it would give the City more data. Grimes said he is most concerned about
the am and pm peak trips.
Cera said he is having difficulty making a decision about this proposal because he
would like to see the traffic calming information and he would like to hear from
MnDOT.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by McCarty and motion carried to recommend approval of
Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat for The Towers at West End with the
following conditions. Commissioner Cera abstained from voting.
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by
Duke and Walsh Bishop Architects and dated 12/12/08 shall become a part of
this approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1200
parking spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff
Oliver, PE, to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated
January 21, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated
January 9, 2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
6. There will be a safe and attractive pedestrian access route from the Tryol area
through both the office buildings and parking ramp to the retail area.
7. A neighborhood meeting will be held to discuss traffic calming issues prior to final
plan approval.
--Short Recess-
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
January 21, 2009
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing-Preliminary Planned Unit Development
(PUD) Plan and Preliminary Plat for The Towers at West End-PUD
No. 107-5outhwest Quadrant of 1-394 and TH 100-Duke Realty,
Applicant
BACKGROUND
Duke Realty is proposing to construct a phased 1.1 million sq. ft. of office space in up to
four buildings at the southwest quadrant of TH 100 and 1-394. The office development is
called The Towers at West End. This office development is part of the overall West End
development that includes 330,000 sq. ft. of retail and entertainment space, 33,000 sq. ft.
of second story office space above the retail, a 130 room hotel, associated parking
structures, indoor and outdoor public areas, and green space. The total West End
development that spans from Park Place Blvd. on the west to TH 100 on the east is 48.5
acres in size. The Towers at West End will be located on the east 13 acres. Of the 13 acre
site for The Towers, 7.5 acres is located in St. Louis Park and 5.5 acres in Golden Valley.
The City of St. Louis Park has already approved a Planned Unit Development that includes
the West End development without The Towers site. At the present time, the retail, office,
entertainment space is under construction with opening planned for late 2009. The hotel is
not yet under construction. Infrastructure improvements are underway including the
construction of 16th Ave. extended to Utica Ave. Utica Ave. will be reconstructed during the
summer of 2009 in order to be ready for the retail opening. The phasing of the retail
development is explained in the "Overall Master Development Summary" prepared by Duke
and submitted with this PUD application.
The approval process for The Towers development is somewhat unique. Both cities will be
going through a similar PUD process for the 1.1 million sq. ft. office development.
However, each city will approve only that portion that is within their city. In the case of
Golden Valley, only the seven level parking deck and connections to the office buildings are
located in Golden Valley. All four proposed office buildings are located in St. Louis Park
along with small portions of the parking deck. The dual PUD process is the one chosen by
the Golden Valley City Council. Over the past year or two, the staffs from both cities have
considered alternate approval processes including a joint powers agreement to give St.
Louis Park all zoning approvals and to share the property tax revenues from the
development. In the end, Golden Valley believes that providing two planning approvals for
The Towers is most appropriate.
In this case, both cities have about the same timing for a PUD approval. Each planning
commission gets to review the proposal at a preliminary and final phase. The city councils
each approve both a preliminary and final phase. There will obviously have to be
cooperation between the cities to make this development work. Already, the fire and police
departments have met to discuss how fire and emergency calls will be handled. In addition,
the building inspection departments have talked about how to handle the building review
process. Over the years, Golden Valley and St. Louis Park have cooperated on many
services. The staff of both cities believes that the office development will work well despite
the boundary issue. In terms of assessing value to the property for property tax purposes,
the assessor for each community and Hennepin County will deal with this issue. The
County Assessor has told the City of Golden Valley that it is possible to divide the value of
the site based on the boundary line.
The property is currently guided on the General Land Use Plan Map as Commercial/Office.
The proposed office development is consistent with that land use designation. The property
is also zoned Commercial. Within the Commercial zoning district, offices are considered a
permitted use. Up until the past couple of years, this property was used for several low rise
office buildings.
The review of the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning Map indicates that the property
in Golden Valley directly to the east is designated for Low Density Residential uses. This
property is east of TH 100. The property to the north in Golden Valley is designated for
Mixed Use development. This property is on the north side of 1-394. The properties that are
west and south of The Towers is within the borders of St. Louis Park. These St. Louis Park
properties are used for office and retail uses. The two freeways provide a significant barrier
from any nearby residences.
DESCRIPTION OF PUD PROCESS
There are two stages of approval for all PUD applications. This is the first or preliminary
PUD plan stage. The purpose of this stage is two-fold: to give broad concept approval to
the proposal, and to call out issues that must be addressed in detail as the proposal moves
ahead to the Final PUD Plan or the final stage of approval. Preliminary plan approval does
not guarantee that a proposal will become reality. It gives an applicant some assurance of
being on the right track, and some guidance on how to proceed. In the case of the Planning
Commission in particular, the limitation of the preliminary plan approval is clearly laid out.
City Code Section 11.55 Subd. 5(C) states that:
The Planning Commission shall hold an informal public hearing and consider the
application for consistency with the Intent and Purposes provisions and other PUD
requirements and principles and standards adhered to in the City. The Planning
2
Commission's report to the Council shall include recommended changes, conditions, or
modifications.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL
The proposal presented by Duke Realty for The Towers is best described in the attached
"Overall Master Plan Summary" submitted by Duke. This summary does an excellent job of
going over the details of the development. Due to the unique nature of this development
spanning the border between two cities, both cities must issue a PUD permit for the portion
of the development within their respective city. Therefore, Golden Valley's review is limited
to the parking deck and its impact. Information has been provided to the City of Golden
Valley on the entire development in order to understand the context of the entire
development. Within this section, staff will call out certain issues for consideration.
As stated in the summary submitted by Duke, The Towers development will be phased.
The first phase is the construction of the south office tower and the south portion of the
parking structure that is primarily within the City of Golden Valley. The office building will be
9 stories with a total height of 145 ft. It will have about 277,000 sq. ft. of office space. The
office building is totally within the City of St. Louis Park. The parking deck will be seven
levels with a total height of 75 ft. to the top of the stair or elevator shaft. The main portion of
the parking deck will be about 55 ft. high. If and when additional buildings are constructed,
the parking deck will be expanded as per the submitted plans. The future phases will
probably consist of three additional office buildings of about the same size as the phase
one building. However, there is a possibility of reducing the number of buildings to three
with one building up to 20 stories in height. The parking deck would remain the same for
any combination of buildings.
The parking deck will provide parking at a ratio of one space for each 250 sq. ft. of office
space. This is the City of Golden Valley's parking standard. The stall size is proposed to be
8.5 ft. by 18 ft. rather than the 9 ft. by 18.5 ft. required by the City's parking code. However,
the parking code does allow a variance from this size requirement in parking decks due to
the cost of parking decks. It allows the Director of Planning to allow reductions. In this case,
the size reduction is minimal and is acceptable.
In terms of bike parking, the number of bike parking spaces will exceed the City of Golden
Valley's requirement of 5% of the spaces required for vehicles. Duke has chosen to meet
the City of St. Louis Park requirement that is 10%. They are proposing a proof of parking on
50% of the bike spaces which means that half of the spaces will be built now and the other
half when they are needed as determined by the City.
The parking deck is designed to blend in with the proposed office buildings they will serve.
The parking deck will be made of architectural pre-cast concrete panels. The color is shown
on the attached renderings submitted by Duke. Duke has submitted a shadow study
indicating that shadows from the buildings will not have an impact on any adjacent
residential areas.
The parking deck will be tucked close to the east side of the property with only a ten ft.
setback from the side of the parking deck to the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road or private
road that is located south of the point where Wayzata Blvd. goes under TH 100. Within the
3
10ft. setback and street right-of-way will be located a standard size sidewalk and
landscaping as indicated on the submitted plans. (Please note that in the City Engineer's
memo he is recommending that a sidewalk be placed along the entire length of the parking
deck to connect to the existing pedestrian system that exists south and west of the parking
deck. )
The PUD chapter states that buildings shall be located at least 15 ft. from any internal
roads. In this case, the parking deck is located only 10ft. from the private road south of
where Wayzata Blvd. goes under TH 100 and within 10 ft. ofWayzata Blvd. Staff believes
that this 10ft. setback is acceptable in this location due to the adjacent land use (TH 100)
and the landscaping that is proposed next to the deck.
The PUD chapter suggests that the overall hard surface for developments be 90% for
Commercial/Retail uses and 80% for Business uses. The overall hard surface coverage of
The Towers is 82%. This is in the range of the guidelines in the City code.
As stated above, the City Engineer has written a detailed memo regarding site plan, traffic
and pedestrian connection issues. Planning staff agrees with his findings and
recommendations. Planning staff would like to highlight a couple of the engineer's findings.
First, the parking deck access points to Wayzata Blvd. are limited to two points. In early
discussions with Duke, there were four or more driveway openings shown on preliminary
plans. The reduction to two driveways has been made as a result of conversations with
staff and City Council. It is hoped that with only two driveway openings on Wayzata Blvd.,
fewer cars will use Wayzata Blvd. east of TH 100. Second, Duke has committed to finance
certain traffic calming measures west of TH 100. These will be required to be in place at the
time of parking deck construction. Third, there is a concern about the pedestrian walkway
through the parking deck. Staff believes that there are safety concerns with pedestrians
and bikers crossing parking aisles within the parking deck. At this time, staff would like to
eliminate the pedestrian passage through the parking deck and see people use the
proposed sidewalk around the parking deck in order to get to the retail in the West End.
Also attached is a copy of a memo from the Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson that
addresses various issues and his recommendations will be made a part of the
recommendations in this memo.
ELIGIBILITY OF APPLlCA liON
PUDs are regulated under City Code Section 11.55. The staff has reviewed this section
and has determined that the proposed development qualifies for review as a PUD. Duke
has submitted all the necessary information for consideration as required by Section 11.55.
It is the staffs finding that the proposal meets the Intent and Purpose section of the PUD
chapter of the Zoning Code.
Duke has met with City staff on numerous occasions to hammer out the details on this
development. They have also held a neighborhood meeting on Tuesday, January 13, 2009
to introduce this development to the surrounding neighborhoods in Golden Valley and St.
Louis Park. About 30 people attended and over 2000 were invited by a mailed invitation.
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary PUD plan for The Towers as proposed by
Duke Realty. This is a development that has been planned for several years. This is one of
the prime development corners in the Twin Cities. Duke Realty is treating it like a prime
intersection by designating it for 1.1 million sq. ft. of Class A office space along with the
retail that is part of the West End development. Staff understands that this type of location
will be densely developed. Staff believes that Duke has committed to a development that
will be good for the area and have minimized negative effects on surrounding residential
areas. We all know that there will be an increase in traffic. The traffic management plan that
will be developed as part of this development and administered by St. Louis Park will insure
that the traffic impacts from this development will be consistent with the information
submitted by Duke as part of the AUAR review done in 2007.
As indicated in Duke's narrative, this is a phased development that timing will be
determined by the market. Hopefully, construction could begin this fall. If not, Duke will ask
for a delay in the consideration of the final plan similar to what OPUS had done on the site
at the northwest corner of Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr.
The recommendation of approval is subject to the following conditions.
1. The parking deck shown in the plans for The Towers at West End prepared by Duke
and Walsh Bishop Architects and dated 12/12/08 shall become a part of this approval.
2. The parking deck will be phased with the first phase consisting of about 1200 parking
spaces on seven levels.
3. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE,
to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and dated January 21, 2009
shall become a part of this recommendation.
4. The memo and recommendations found in a memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed
Anderson to Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated January
9,2009 shall become a part of this recommendation.
5. The Preliminary Plat of The Towers at West End is acceptable with changes
recommended by the City Engineer.
Attachments :
Location Map ( 1 page)
Applicant's Narrative (12 pages)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, dated January 21, 2009 (8 pages)
Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson, dated January 9,2009 (2 pages)
Memo from Jean Hughes Leveque and David Leveque, 1415 Fairlawn Way (1 page)
Project Renderings (9 oversized pages)
Preliminary Plat (2 oversized pages)
Site Plans (32 oversized pages)
5
ot
alley
Memorandum
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
Date:
January 21,2009
From:
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Jeff Oliver, PE, City EnQinee'zl!!f!f'
Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD 107) Review
The Towers at West End
To:
Subject:
Duke Realty Corporation has submitted plans for a proposed mixed use Planned Unit
Development (PUD) located in the southwest corner of Interstate 394 (1394) and Trunk
Highway 100 (TH 100). The majority of this site is located within the City of St. Louis
Park. However, the eastern portion of the site is located within the City of Golden Valley,
immediately adjacent to TH 100 and Wayzata Boulevard; the south frontage road for
1394. The proposed PUD includes the construction of parking ramps on the portion of
the development within Golden Valley.
Site Plan, Traffic and Pedestrian Connections
The developer has submitted a draft plat of the PUD for review and comment. The final
plat must include 10-foot wide drainage and utility easements adjacent to the Wayzata
Boulevard frontage road on all portions within Golden Valley.
All public sidewalk parallel to Wayzata Boulevard must be located within platted right-of-
way or within dedicated walkway easements. If easements are required, the developer
must submit legal descriptions with the final PUD.
The City of St. Louis Park prepared an Alternative Urban Areawide Analysis (AUAR) for
the proposed PUD. The purpose of the AUAR is to determine potential impacts from the
development to adjacent facilities and to evaluate potential environmental impacts. The
AUAR inclUded a traffic analysis of the development. The City of Golden Valley's
consulting Traffic Engineer, Mike Kotila of SEH, Inc., reviewed the AUAR for potential
traffic impacts in Golden Valley. In addition, the PUD plans have been reviewed for
consistency with the AUAR. A copy of the January 19, 2009 review from SEH is
attached to this memorandum for reference.
The proposed PUD plans include realignment of the Wayzata Boulevard at the point it
curves to pass beneath TH 100. This proposed realignment creates a "tee" intersection
G:\Oevelopments - Private\WestEnd Duke\PrePUD Review 012009.doc
with all-way stop control. The proposed street south of this intersection is a private
roadway to be owned and maintained by the developer. However, because of the
proposed tee intersection alignment, the private roadway appears tobe the through
street intended to carry the majority of the traffic. In order to address this issue, the
developer must revise the site plans to provide through traffic on Wayzata Boulevard
without stop control, and clear delineation that the roadway to the south is a driveway.
These revisions must be part of the final PUD submittal to the City of Golden Valley.
The proposed parking ramps have three primary access points. There is an access
directly onto Wayzata Boulevard on the north end of the parking ramp at the Golden
Valley City limits. A review of the sight lines for traffic entering Wayzata Boulevard at
this location has shown that the sight lines are acceptable for the proposed layout if
there are no obstructions such as landscaping placed in the sight lines. This sight line
limitation must be incorporated into the final PUD plans.
There is also a parking ramp access point from the private driveway paralleling TH 100,
and a final access point in the southwest corner of the ramp that is serviced by the
development's internal street system. The location of the parking ramp access points
are acceptable to the City of Golden Valley and appear to be located to minimize the
desirability of using Wayzata Boulevard east of TH 100.
The City of Golden Valley owns and maintains a concrete sidewalk on the west and
south side of Wayzata Boulevard. This existing sidewalk extends to the east under
TH 100 to connect with the existing sidewalk on Wayzata Boulevard on the east side of
the highway. The developer will be responsible for replacing any of the existing sidewalk
that is damaged as part of the construction.
The proposed site plan also includes construction of a sidewalk'adjacent to the private
driveway south of the Wayzata Boulevard underpass. The sidewalk currently extends
south to a proposed walkway through the parking ramp. This sidewalk must be
extended to the south end of the parking ramp, and then extend west to connect to the
pedestrian system within the development. This proposed sidewalk will be owned and
maintained by the developer.
As discussed above, the developer has proposed extending a pedestrian walkway
through the parking ramp to connect to the pedestrian system in the center of the
proposed development. The proposed walkway will direct pedestrians between parked
vehicles and across three drive aisles of two-way traffic. Because typical driver behavior
inside parking ramps is not conducive to the potential pedestrian volumes generated by
this proposed layout, a potentially hazardous situation may be created by the proposed
layout. Therefore, the plans must be revised to provide pedestrian access from Wayzata
Boulevard outside the parking ramp via the existing and new sidewalks as discussed in
this review.
The AUAR for the West End Development identified traffic concerns on Wayzata
Boulevard (south frontage road) east of TH 100 due to this development, as well as
G:\Developments - Private\WestEnd Duke\PrePUD Review 012009.doc
potential measures to address these concerns. Discussions with the City of St. Louis
Park and Duke Realty refined the traffic calming solutions identified in the AUAR. These
traffic calming measures are attached to the January 19, 2009 SEH review.
The traffic calming measures will be installed by the City of Golden Valley public
improvement project, with 100 percent of the construction and indirect costs paid by the
developer. Details of the financing of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements will be
included in the final PUD for the development..
Utilities
The proposed PUD will receive its sanitary sewer and water service from the City of
St. Louis Park.
There is an existing City of Golden Valley watermain located on the eastern edge of this
site. The existing site conditions plan shows the location of the watermain, but does not
include the extension of the watermain eastward under TH 100 and its connection to the
Golden Valley system on Douglas Avenue. Because this watermain is part of Golden
Valley's connection to the South Tyrol and Kennedy Addition areas, it must be
maintained as a City facility. The developer must properly illustrate this watermain,
including the crossing under TH 100, on the plans for the final PUD submittal.
As identified in the plans, there is an existing easement over the watermain discussed
above. This easement must be vacated as part of the platting of this PUD, and must be
dedicated on the final plat. The new easement must be a.minimum of 20 feet wide
centered over the main, and must include all Golden Valley fire hydrants within the
easement.
As discussed above, the sanitary sewer service to the proposed PUD will be provided
by the City of St. Louis Park. However, this proposed PUD is tributary to the
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) regional sanitary sewer
interceptor 1-GV-461. This MCES interceptor sewer enters the City of Golden Valley at
South Tyrol Park and proceeds northward to TH 55, where it flows to the east and
leaves the City.
The MCES and the City of Golden Valley draft Comprehensive Wastewater Plan have
identified 1-GV-461 as having insufficient capacity. This capacity issue is important to
Golden Valley because the point where potential overflows will occur is north of 1394 in
. the vicinity of North Tyrol Park. The MCES has begun planning for a capital
improvement project to construct a reliever to the interceptor line. This project is
currently in preliminary design with construction scheduled for 2010.
Golden Valley identified the MCES interceptor capacity issue as part of the Alternative
Urban Areawide Analysis (AUAR) prepared by Duke for this proposed PUD. The
Golden Valley concern is based upon additional flows to the interceptor prior to
completion of the MCES reliever project. Based upon discussion with the developer,
G:\DeVelopments - Private\WestEnd Duke\PrePUD Review 012009.doc
MCES, and the City of St. Louis Park, a plan has been developed to monitor existing
sanitary sewer flows to 1-GV-461. In addition, thresholds have been established for
wastewater flows that would require the implementation of on-site retention until the
MCES reliever project could be completed. The City of St. Louis Park will provide
sanitary sewer base flow (pre-development) from this site to Golden Valley as it
becomes available.
Based upon the above discussion relating to 1-GV-461, Public Works staff recommends
that the Preliminary Design Plan for this PUD proceed, but the Final PUD not be
accepted for review until wastewater based flow monitoring has begun and Golden
Valley staff has begun receiving base flow information.
Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control
The property included in this proposed PUD is located within the Minne.haha Creek
Watershed District. With the exception of the boulevard immediately adjacent to
Wayzata Boulevard, the entire development site is tributary to the St. Louis Park storm
drainage system. Storm water runoff from the boulevard areas adjacent to Wayzata
Boulevard drains onto the street and into the storm sewer system owned by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
The developer will be responsible for obtaining any approvals and permits required by
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
A City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit will be required
for the portion of the site within Golden Valley. This permit must be obtained at the time
the parking ramp is constructed.
Tree Preservation
There are no tree preservation requirements for the City of Golden Valley for this PUD.
Summary and Recommendations
Public Works staff recommends approval of the preliminary Planned Unit Development
plans for the proposed Towers at West End development subject to the comments
contained in this review, and the January 19, 2009 review by Mike Kotila of SEH,
summarized as follows:
1. Dedication of easements as required by the City of Golden Valley subdivision
ordinance. .
2. The final PUD plans are modified to address the sight line issues discussed in
the SEH memorandum.
3. Modification of the intersection of the eastern private driveway and Wayzata
Boulevard as outlined.
G:\Developments - Private\WestEnd Duke\PrePUD Review 012009.doc
4. The plans are modified to address the sidewalk locations along Wayzata
Boulevard and through the parking ramps as discussed.
5. The traffic calming measures on Wayzata Boulevard east of TH 100 are
implemented as a public improvement project at the time of parking ramp
construction.
6. The sanitary sewer base flow information for the PUD is submitted to the Golden
Valley Public Works Department prior to submittal of the final PUD application.
7. Subject to the review and comments by other City staff.
Attachments
C: Tom Burt, City Manager
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
Burt Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Mike Kotila, SEH
G;\Developments - Private\WestEnd Duke\PrePUD Review 012009.doc
~
SEH
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
City of Golden Valley
FROM:
Mike Kotila, PE
Senior Transportation Engineer
DATE:
January 19,2009
RE:
Towers of West End Preliminary PUD Review
I have reviewed the Preliminary PUD /Plat drawings (dated December 12,2008) submitted by Duke
Realty Corporation and offer comments on several traffic and transportation related issues.
Wayzata Boulevard Intersection Configuration
Wayzata Boulevard serves as a frontage road to 1-394 functioning as a minor collector. Currently the
frontage road is configured with a fairly sharp curve on the west side of the TH 100 underpass. A private
access road intersects with the frontage road on the curve immediately west of TH.l 00. The private drive
is controlled by a stop sign while Wayzata Boulevard traffic through the curve is not stopped. Sight lines
from the private access are good and the curve tends to slow vehicles on Wayzata Boulevard allowing the
intersection to operate safely. The PUD drawings depict the private driveway intersection with the
frontage road to be reconfigured as a "T" intersection, presumably planned to be controlled as all-way
stop condition. If constructed this way, the function of the frontage road as a collector route will be
diminished and the private drive will have the appearance of a through street. The existing configuration
with a curve in the frontage road and the private drive gaining access to it is preferable to the T
intersection configuration shown in the PUD drawings. Opportunities to flatten the curve and improve the
alignment to and from the underpass alignment should be considered (would require public roadway
realignment and right of way dedication). The existing width ofWayzata Blvd underTH 100 is
approximately 32 feet which will not accommodate the three lane configuration shown in the site plan.
Widening of the frontage road under the bridge should include sidewalk along the south side which may
require replacing the slope pavement with a retaining wall. More detailed plans for this area should be
provided.
Examine Need for Turn Lanes
IfWayzata Boulevard remains a two lane roadway as depicted in the PUD drawings and the parking
garage is constructed as shown, the opportunity for future street widening will have passed due to the
physical constraints on both sides of the street. The developer should provide evidence that right and left
turning traffic can safely and efficiently be served from the proposed access points along Wayzata
Boulevard without unduly delaying other users of roadway.
Parking Garage Access and Sight Distance
Primary access to and from the parking ramps is oriented to Utica Avenue and the number of direct
accesses to the east side of the structure has been reduced from three to two. This is consistent with
Golden Valley's objective of minimizing traffic impacts on the Wayzata Boulevard east ofTH 100.
The most northerly parking garage access onto Wayzata Boulevard has limited intersection sight distance.
Satisfying AASHTO guidelines for 30 mph design speeds prescribe a 335 foot clear line of sight to the
driver's right to safely make a left hand turn from a stop condition. Taking a right turn from a stop
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive. Suite 200, Minnetonka. MN 55343-9301
SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.comI952.912.2600 I 800.734.6757 I 952.912.2601 fax
Towers of West End Preliminary PUD Review
January 19,2009
Page 2
condition requires a 290 foot clear line of sight. The PUD drawings indicate the parking garage structure
wilI be the limiting factor in sight distance for a driver looking to the right and that the corner of Office
Building # 4 would limit the sight line to the left. The AASHTO sight lines may be achieved, but only if
no sight line obstructions occur between the buildings and the traffic lanes on Wayzata Boulevard. This
includes the area between the buildings and the public sidewalk. This area would need to be kept clear of
tall plantings or other fixed objects such as ground mounted signs. Snow storage behind the sidewalk
would also become a sight obstruction.
Public Sidewalk and On-site Routes
Public sidewalk corridors serving users along the frontage road should be modified along with the
Wayzata Blvd intersection configuration suggested above.
The PUD drawings show a private pedestrian route planned through the surface lot in the short term and
through the parking garage in the long term. In both cases, the route crosses multiple two-way drive aisles
creating potentially hazardous conditions for pedestrians. Measures should be taken to eliminate the
vehicular/pedestrian conflicts in or through the parking facilities or reroute the pathway around the
parking areas.
Any private sidewalk connections to the public walk included in the site plan should be designed to
provide adequate levels of safety and security for users. Safety treatments should include, but not be
limited to, open sight lines without obscured areas or hiding places, lighting of pathway and adjacent
areas, security cameras and emergency calI boxes, and alternative choices for users (escape routes).
Wayzata Boulevard Traffic Calming
Traffic calming treatments (bump outs and lane narrowing) have previously been defined and should be
constructed to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. Occupancy of the planned office space and
increased activity to and from the parking ramp structures are anticipated to be the traffic generators that
have the greatest impact to demands along Wayzata Boulevard. Therefore the traffic calming could be a
requirement that is related to that phase of development. Attached with this memorandum, is the traffic
calming concept plan that was developed for this purpose.
Attachment CJe'G' S'eH-.. Vrojec.f'fffetl1rofAi {alm,n'S J(fttf/1\t'ds
. .. (loOS e I h tlPl end <.- padd-)
c: Mark GrImes, Planmng DIrector /
Jeff Oliver, City Engineer
p.\fjlglgoldvl980100lwest end devltowers at west end pud memo. doc
alley
Memorandum
Fire Department
763-593-8079/763-593-8098 (fax)
To:
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning
From:
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
Subject: PUD-107 Towers at the West End
Date: January 9, 2009
cc: Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the PUD packet and application for the Towers at
the West End project located on Wayzata Boulevard. This PUD packet application indicates two
parking ramp parking structures located adjacent to the proposed office towers located in the City of
St. Louis Park. The Golden Valley Fire Department will focus on the fire department access, water
supply and fire protection for this project.
Fire Department Access
1. The fire department apparatus access road should be designed and maintained to support the
imposed load of the fire apparatus and be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving
capabilities.
2. The .fire department access road will be established and posted "No Parking Fire lane"
signage will be required. The installation of the "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and stationary
posts will be installed in accordance with the City of Golden Valley city ordinance.
3. The fire department access road shall not be obstructed in any manner or by any materials
including construction vehicles or other objects that would hinder the fire department
operations or emergency responders during the construction of the building.
4. Dead end fire apparatus access road in excess of 150' in length shall be provided with an
approved area for turning around fire apparatus.
5. The parking ramp structure shall be designed for vehicles low limit and shall be posted at both
entrances of the parking ramp.
Water Supplv
1. _An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fir flow for fire protection for the
parking ramp and for the private parking area below-grade will be required.
2. The installation of fire hydrants will be required in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire
Code and the City of Golden Valley.
3. Fire hydrants shall not be blocked or obstructed by any posts, vents, vehicles or other
obstructions that would deter or hinder immediate access to the fire hydrants.
Fire Protection
1. The installation of the Class I Standpipe System will be required through each level in each
stairwell of the parking ramp and the lower level low-grade private parking garage.
2. The below-grade private parking garage area will require the installation of a fire suppression
sprinkler system throughout the structure. The fire suppression system shall be installed in the
proper temperature control climate at all times.
3. The fire department connection (FOG) for the Class I Standpipe System and for the fire
suppression system shall be installed within 150' of any fire hydrant.
4. The fire alarm system for the parking ramp and structure shall monitor the fire suppression
system and the standpipe system's water flow alarms. The fire alarm activation alarm signal
shall be sent to the central station alarm company and the notification of that alarm shall be
directly sent to the Golden Valley Fire Department.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at #763-593-8065.
,
Duke
~
REALTY CORPORATION
02/18/09
Mr. Mark Grimes
Director of Planning and Development
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
RE: The Towers at West End
Preliminary PUD Application - Preliminary Plat Application
Dear Mr. Grimes:
Duke Realty L.P. is hereby submitting additional information for consideration regarding
the Preliminary PUD application and a Preliminary Plat application for The Towers at West End.
City comments have been reviewed and the drawings have been updated to match. Please see the
attached Response to Comments for additional information.
Below are our responses for the various requirements and requests that were provided in the
Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 21, 2009:
Public Works Memo - 1-21-09
Site Plan. Traffic. and Pedestrian Connections
1. The draft plat has been updated to provide a 10' drainage and utility easement adjacent to
Wayzata Blvd.
2. The public sidewalk on Wayzata Blvd is within the street ROW.
3. The "tee" intersection at Wayzata Blvd and Hwy 100 has been modified to provide
continuous traffic flow as requested. St Louis Park staff and Council preferred the 3 way
stop control design to slow down traffic and provide a safer area for pedestrians. The
current design is a hybrid of the two. Duke will work with both Cities to finalize a design
that is acceptable prior to the Final PUDlPat application.
4. Landscaping has been pulled back from the ROW at the northern entrance to the parking
ramp on Wayzata Blvd to provide better sight lines for exiting traffic.
5. Duke will replace any sidewalk damaged on Wayzata Blvd due to construction activities.
Duke will videotape the sidewalk in the spring to provide a baseline condition.
6. Sidewalk has been added to the east side of the parking garage on private property that
connects from Wayzata Blvd to the Health Partners building.
7. The proposed pedestrian walkway through the parking ramp that provides direct
connection to the development is a requirement of St Louis Park Council and Staff. Duke
will work with both Cities to finalize a design that is mutually agreeable.
8. Duke will continue to work with the City of Golden Valley, MNDOT, and the residents to
identify a traffic calming solution for Wayzata Blvd east of Hwy 100. Duke will also work
with Golden Valley to work through the details of the appropriate amount of private
funding for these improvements prior the Final PUDIPlat application.
Utilities
1. The watermain on the east edge of the site has been updated to show its route under Hwy
100.
2. The corresponding watermain will be vacated and a new easement will be dedicated with
the Final PUDIPlat application.
3. Duke has requested that St Louis Park begin the sanitary sewer baseline monitoring as soon
as possible. In addition the proposed schematic sewer bypass/detention facility has been
noted on the utility plans.
SHE Memo -1119/09
1. The "tee" intersection at Wayzata Blvd and Hwy 100 has been modified to provide
continuous traffic flow as requested. St Louis Park staff and Council preferred the 3 way
stop control design to slow down traffic and provide a safer area for pedestrians. The
current design is a hybrid of the two. Duke will work with both Cities to fmalize a design
that is acceptable prior to the Final PUDlPat application. The third lane directly under the
overpass has been removed from the design. The existing sidewalk on the south side will
be used to connect to the development sidewalk system.
2. A right turn lane study has been prepared for the north entrance to the parking garage on
Wayzata and. is attached as a design option exhibit. The turn lane appears to work without
impacting the placement of the ramp. Duke will continue discussion with Golden Valley as
the ramp designs become fmalized and will have a proposed solution (if necessary) at the
time of the ramp construction in this area.
3. Landscaping has been pulled back from the ROW at the northern entrance to the parking
ramp on Wayzata Blvd to provide better sight lines. Sidewalks have been modified and
added to connect from the underpass to the development without potentially passing
through the parking ramp. The proposed pedestrian walkway through the parking ramp that
provides direct connection to the development is a requirement of. St Louis Park Council
and Staff. Duke will work with both Cities to fmalize a design that is mutually agreeable.
4. Duke will continue to work with the City of Golden Valley, MNDOT, and the residents to
identify a traffic calming solution for Wayzata Blvd east of Hwy 100. Duke will also work
with Golden Valley to work through the details of the appropriate amount of private
funding for these improvements prior the Final PUD/Plat application.
Fire DeDartment Memo - 119/09
1. These comments are noted and will be address at the time of the Final PUDIPlat
application.
MNDOT Memo - 1/20/09
1. The Permanent Wall Easement is being investigated and will be noted on future plans.
2. The "tee" intersection at Wayzata Blvd and Hwy 100 has been modified to provide
continuous traffic flow as requested. St Louis Park staff and Council preferred the 3 way
stop control design to slow down traffic and provide a safer area for pedestrians. The
current design is a hybrid of the two. Duke will work with both Cities and MNDOT to
finalize a design that is acceptable prior to the Final PUD/Pat application. The third lane
directly under the overpass has.been removed from the design.
3. Additional turn lane information has been added to the site plan. A right turn lane study has
been prepared for the north entiance to the parking garage on Wayzata and is attached as a
design option exhibit. The turn lane appears to work without impacting the placement of
the ramp. Duke will continue discussion with Golden Valley and MNDOT as the ramp
designs become fInalized and will have a proposed solution (if necessary) at the time of the
ramp construction in this area.
4. No modifications to the existing storm sewer system are contemplated on Wayzata Blvd at
Hwy 100. All stormwater from the project is directed to onsite infIltration pipe galleries
before releasing to the St Louis Park! Golden Valley street storm sewers. Site stormwater
control has been designed to St Louis Park volume requirements. Drainage calculations
that have been previously provided to both St Louis Park and Golden Valley indicate that
10 year release and 100 year storage requirements are met. Infiltration for the 1" event will
provide additional reduction of stormwater volume. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District has reviewed and approved the overall development stormwater plan. Independent
drainage analysis by the District of the development at full build-out predicts an overall
stormwater volume reduction of 87% and an overall phosphorus ruction of 65%. A copy of
the drainage report will be submitted to MNDOT.
5. MNDOT Access Permits and Utility Permits will be applied for at the time of work in the
area.
We anticipate a continued long term good working relationship with both the City of St
Louis Park and the City of Golden Valley. We share in both Cities' objectives of assuring that this
redevelopment will meet the highest quality standards.
Sincerely,
fuBJ I P. E.
David Bade, P.E., LEED AP
Development Services Manager
Duke Realty
,
Duke
r7
t:-
REALTY CORPORATION
02/18/09
Mr. Sean Walther
Senior Planner
City of St Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St Louis Park, MN 55416
RE: The Towers at West End
Preliminary PUD Application - Preliminary Plat Application
Dear Mr. Walther:
Duke Realty L.P. is hereby submitting additional information for consideration regarding
the Preliminary PUD application and a Preliminary Plat application for The Towers at West End.
City comments have been reviewed and the drawings have been updated to match. Please see the
attached Response to Comments for additional information.
We anticipate a continued long term good working relationship with both the City of St
Louis Park and the City of Golden Valley. We share in both Cities' objectives of assuring that this
redevelopment will meet the highest quality standards.
Sincerely,
W,P.E
David Bade, P.E., LEED AP
Development Services Manager
Duke Realty
Duke Realty Response to St Louis Park City Comments
Date: 02/18/09
The City of St. Louis Park plan review comments are based on The Towers at West End
preliminary plat and preliminary planned unit development plans received on December 15,
2008. Many of these comments will not be included in the Staff Report for the Planning
Commission meeting on January 21, 2009. However, a response to each item and plan revisions
are needed before City Council considers the matter. Comments are organized by Department.
Community Development:
Landscaping:
1. The planned design and use of the courtyard between Office #1 and Office #2 needs to be
revised and improved. The preliminary PUD should show a better concept, so the City and
Duke's expectations of a plaza are clearly established, but recognizing that the actual design
is subject to change when the buildings are built. A wide open lawn is not sufficient. The
other gathering spaces shown around the buildings are nice, but are intimate, and
individually would serve too few people overall.
At this time no further landscape designs are contemplated but Duke has attached some
concept images of the open space between Office #2-3 that addresses the overall desired
character of the space and how it could be integrated into the final design plans. This area is
also under review for possible additional storm water BMP's with the Minnehaha Watershed
District and could also be used for innovative storm water practices including but not limited
to rain gardens.
2. The boulevard trees along the east side of Utica do not match up with the boulevard trees on
the west side. The streetscape seems unbalanced and inconsistent.
Duke will investigate the option of flipping the sidewalk to create a boulevard on the east
side of Utica. This design however is largely tied to how the overall master plan is developed.
The Utica Avenue streetscape within the right-of-way has been adjusted to provide a more
uniform appearance of a parkway along the center islands as well as both east and west curb
lines. At the time of final PUD / Lot development, the landscape architecture can be adjusted
to balance the continuity of Utica Avenue and the architecture of each building and vehicular
access requirements.
Architecture:
3. Class I materials will be required for that portion of the parking ramp in St. Louis Park and
within 20 feet of the Wayzata Boulevard right-of-way.
Golden Valley is in general responsible for the ramp design approvals. No negative
comments have been received concerning the ramp images presented, and additional Class I
materials are not a Golden Valley code requirement. The portion of the ramp within St Louis
Park that is subject to the code requirements is approximately 50'. Compared to the overall
perimeter of the ramp (2560') this length equates to 1.9%. Duke feels that changing
materials to meet the code requirement for such a small portion of the ramp will detract
from the overall image and respectfully requests relief from this requirement.
1
Site Plan (sheetAlOo):
4. Staff suggests the right-of-way on the east side of the ramps be squared off at the
intersection ofWayzata Boulevard and the private driveway, so the entire intersection,
sidewalk and crosswalk are within the right-of-way.
Noted. Duke will work with Golden Valley on this issue. Golden Valley prefers to have a
continuous curve and traffic flow instead of aT-intersection with stop signs. The plans have
been adjusted to provide slightly better sight visibility on the curve while maintaining a thru-
traffic condition. Duke will continue to work with both Cities to finalize a design that is
acceptable prior to the Final PUD/ Plat application.
5. Farther south, the property line cuts into the private road. Can that be corrected with a
vacation? Or is that an acceptable encroachment?
Noted. Duke has begun working with our Title Company and MNDOT on a solution (reverse
easement or turn-back) which will be in place before the Final PUD/Plat application.
6. The sidewalks throughout the office development are located at the back of curb. There
appears to be space available to move them back from the curb and provide a landscaped
boulevard. The inconsistency is especially apparent along Utica, where the streetscape
doesn't matchup with the other side. Better balance between boulevard and foundation
landscaping is needed.
See Item 2.
7. The proposed driveway on the south side of the ramp is not adequately distinguished or
coordinated with the Health Partners entrance, drive lane and parking. A better design is
needed.
The design of the drive lane has been adjusted to accommodate the existing Health Partners
entrance, drive lane and parking. Three additional design options are included as exhibits.
These designs will require coordination and cooperation between Duke and the current
property owner. Duke will continue discussions with the property owner and will adjust the
design at the time of the Final PUD/Plat application.
Plat:
8. Provide required 10' drainage and utility easements along Utica Avenue. A departure would
be acceptable near the on-street loading area(s), but should strive for at least 6 feet.
Added to preliminary plat.
9. See property line adjustments above (#1 of site plan).
Property line adjustments along Wayzata Blvd. and the east drive lane have been added to
the preliminary plat.
10. Connect drainage and utility easement for stormwater to the perimeter easement for public
access.
Added to preliminary plat.
2
Police
11. The Police Department concerns are focused on traffic flow and the parking ramp (CPTED:
lighting, emergency phones, cameras, light-colored paint, etc).
Noted. Additional information will be provided at the time of final design and Final
PUD/Plat submittal. The ramp study information by Walker Parking is included.
Fire
12. The current fire code is the 2007 Minnesota State Fire Code (MSFC).
Noted.
13. Class I standpipes shall be provided in all stairways
Noted.
14. A fire command center shall be provided as spelled out in the MSFC section 509. Location
shall be in proximity to the water service located at the south end of the building.
Noted. Design will be finalized at the time of Final PUD / Plat.
15. Individual floor zone control valves shall be located in the south stairway.
Noted.
16. The fire department connection location shall be approved by the Fire Marshal.
Noted.
17. The underground parking structure shall be provided with a full NFPA 13 compliant
sprinkler system.
Noted.
18. All security locking devices on exit doors shall be reviewed at the time of building permit
submittal.
Noted.
19. ALL on site fire hydrants shall meet the City of St. Louis Park specifications.
Noted. See notes and detail on civil plans.
20. St. Louis Park water mains may need to be looped.
Noted. This mayor may not be feasible but will be investigated along with pressure
requirements at the time of Final PUD/Lot Development.
21. Additionalfire hydrants may be required.
Noted.
Inspections
Additional comments may be provided as part of an in-depth plan review and Plan Review
Report process after each of the various permit applications and associated construction plans
have been submitted. If the design professionals for this project have any questions or concerns
we will be happy to meet with them to discuss their code related issues.
22. Plan Sheet MOO indicates that the North/South corporate boundary separating the City's of
St. Louis Park and Golden Valley bisects the four proposed office/open parking ramp
3
buildings. Additionally, Plan Sheet C2A indicates that the proposed Lot line separating Lot 1
- Block 1 from Out Lot's A and B (as indicated on the propose Plat) will pass through the
proposed Parking Garage. Both of these matters create issues that must be resolved prior to
the issuance of any permits by the City of St. Louis Park.
Noted. Duke will work with both Cities and Hennepin County to create a working solution
prior to the Final PUD/Plat application. The County has reviewed the preliminary plat and is
comfortable with a single Lot with separate PID numbers for each sub parcel.
23. Plan Sheet C3A Separate domestic and fire water services are required to each building
unless the engineer of record for the project provides calculations verifying that the water in
all portions of the combined domestic/fire water service to each building will turn over at
least once every 24 hours to insure the domestic water quality. The use a solenoid for the
separation of domestic and fire water is not permitted unless approved as an alternative
method (Ref: MN Rules Sec 1300.0100, Subp. 13).
Noted. Separate services have been added to the utility plan. Final locations may need to be
adjusted based on each building permit application. Taps will be placed as noted during the
Phase IA Utica Ave infrastructure project.
24. Plan Sheet MOl indicates the use of an exit passageway between Stair #1 and the exit on the
North side of the office portion of the building, and between Stair # 3 and the exit on the
South side of the office portion of the building. Section 1021.1 - Exit Passageway, of the
2006 International Building Code (IBC), in part states: "An exit passageway shall not be
used for any purpose other than as a means of egress."
This code requirement severely limits the uses allowed for the exit passageway's, and
therefore could limit the uses within the surrounding office areas in these buildings. The
design professionals need to review their proposed exiting design for each of these buildings
to verify they are in compliance with the requirements contained in Chapter 10 - Means of
Egress of the 2006 IBC, as amended and adopted as part of the 2007 Minnesota State
Building Code.
Noted. Our architect will investigate and resolve this issue prior to the Final PUD/Plat
application.
Parks and Recreation
25. Remove Patmore Ash and Norway maple from the mix of species. Patmore ash does not have
a future (due to the threat of Emerald ash borer coming to MN, the City quit planting ash 2
years ago on any of its projects) and is an ugly tree besides. Norway maples rarely survives
over 12 inches in diameter (they have many issues for this climate and are not really suited
for it) without severe health, safety and maintenance issues. Please substitute with varieties
of diseased resistant elm trees (Accolade, Valley Forge, and Princeton), ginkgo, or more
honey locust.
See updated Landscape Plan. Patmore Ash and Norway Maple tree species have been
changed.
26. Little leaf lindens are prone to salt damage, so please reconsider them along Utica. The
Boulevard Linden is showing promise as more salt tolerant and is a better looking tree.
Noted.
4
27. Staff suggests continuing the pear trees planting farther north along the parking ramp. It
would help to mitigate the stark, tunnel feeling with Hwy 100 ramp elevated against the tall
ramp (plus they tend to be fairly salt tolerant so they could hopefully withstand the
onslaught of salt spray blowing at them from our lovely NW winter winds).
See updated Landscape Plan. Final locations and quantities of plant material will be
adjusted at the time for final lot development.
28. From our experience with E & G, the City would like to emphasize the need to plant truly
shade tolerant species along the north sides of the tall buildings. We find that the ones
planted at E & G along the north sides do not do well at all (and they were supposed to be
somewhat shade tolerant), particularly the trees.
Noted. Special attention will be made to propose shade tolerant plant material with-in the
building shadow and along the north and north-east sides of each office building at the time
of final lot development.
29. Make sure plants along the north side of Office # 4 are salt tolerant. The City Forester has
observed several trees lost at Olive Garden and Chili's due to the prevalence of salt spray.
Noted.
5
Engineering (consulting engineer Ron Ouanbeck ofTKDA)
The Towers at West End Plat
1. Drainage and utility easements should be provided along the right-of-way lines and lot
lines for the lots and outlots.
Noted. Easements have been added to the preliminary plat on platted property only.
When outlot(s) are platted into lot(s), drainage and utility easements will be added.
2. Easement access should be provided for the drainage and utility easement on Lot
Noted. Added to preliminary plat.
3. The drainage and utility easement on the south side of Lot 1 is not wide enough to
encompass the sanitary sewer and must be revised.
Drainage and utility easement revised to 40'. Method of construction (Open trench or
micro-tunneling) will affect how maintenance is performed. Trench boxing will be
required for any future repairs regardless of construction process due to the number of
relocated utilities in the easement. (water, sanitary sewer, Qwest major lines)
Construction Plans for West End (Phase IA Plans - Utica Ave)
General
1. A Traffic Control Plan should be provided identifying how traffic will be maintained
during construction including access to the Health Partners parking lot.
Noted. Sequencing plans will be provided to City Engineering Staff as part of the Phase
IA Utica Ave permitting applications. (forthcoming)
2. Environmental review of this project indicated a potential need for a sanitary sewer
facility reducing the peak flow in the 30" sanitary sewer. The location reserved for and
design of this facility, including the impact of later construction on the new
infrastructure, should be provided with this Plan.
Noted. The proposed schematic sewer facility location is shown on the updated Utility
Plan for the Towers at West End.
Sheet C2B-PlA
1. The sanitary sewer in Wayzata Boulevard, east of Utica Avenue needs to be abandoned
also.
Noted. See updated plan.
2. Note uB identifies the existing sanitary sewer in Utica Avenue as 30". Rather than 12".
Noted. Existing sewer is 12". See updated plan.
6
3. The Plan should specify that the sanitary sewer flow must be maintained at all times and
a bypass plan to accomplish this must be approved by the City.
Noted. Refer to construction notes on the plan. Duke will provide a bypass plan at the
time of Utility permit for the Phase IA Utica Ave infrastructure work.
Sheet C4B-PlA
1. Street stationing should be added to the Plan.
Noted. Stationing added to plan.
2. A stop sign must be specified for north bound Utica Avenue at 16th Street.
Noted. Stop sign added to the plan.
3. The pull out parallel parking on the east side of Utica Avenue should be constructed with
the street. Details including valley gutter and grades must be included in the Plan.
The parallel parking areas as well as sidewalk on the east side of Utica will be
constructed at the time of the first office tower. Final building sizes, dimensions and
locations are not known at this time and very well could move. Duke will provide
expansion joints at these locations during the construction Utica Ave to minimize any
disruption to the new street when the pullouts are ultimately constructed.
4. A cross section needs to be provided for the temporary bituminous path.
See updated Detail Sheet.
5. A bituminous shoe curb should be added to the west side of the roadway along the east
side of the site to protect it from damage.
Comment unclear.
6. The public sidewalk along the west side of Utica Avenue south of 16th Street veers onto
private property. Either a sidewalk should be constructed in the right-of-way or an
easement provided.
Plans revised to accommodate sidewalk to be within easement. The existing Shops at
West End plat will be adjusted.
Sheet C5B-PHl
1. The catch basin that the temporary sedimentation basin is connected to should be
provided with inlet protection.
See updated plan.
Sheet C6B-PlA
1. All watermain crossings must have at least 18" of clearance. This should be noted on the
plans at applicable locations such as the crossing at approximately 5+55.
See updated plan notes indicate minimum separation.
7
2. CBMH 303 & CBMH 304 are labeled but not shown.
See updated plan.
3. Pipe between CBMH 226 and CBMH 227 is not shown.
See updated plan.
4. Numbering of stations does not match sheet C7B.
To avoid confusion during construction separate, independent stationing is provided for
the Street/ storm and sanitary sewer and water main since they are not parallel.
5. A portion of the line from CBMH 301 to CB 30lA is out of the drainage and utility
easement.
Adjusted.
6. Existing watermain and proposed sanitary sewer profiles should be shown in full and
labeled.
Sanitary sewer and water main crossings only are shown on storm sewer plans. Full
utility profiles are not typically shown on storm sewer profile sheets. Refer to utility plan
for profile information.
7. Profile from CB 302 to CB 305 is labeled incorrectly and should call out one pipe length
instead of three.
See updated plan.
8. The south end of Utica Avenue should have at least a 0.5% grade.
This location is at a high point of a crest vertical curve. Grades will be flatter than 0.5%.
9. Review drainage calculations to check the capacity of the existing storm sewer in
Wayzata Boulevard.
Drainage calculations previously provided indicate that the 10 year release and 100 year
storage requirements are met. . Infiltration for the 1" event will provide additional
reduction of stormwater volume. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed
and approved the overall development stormwater plan. Independent drainage analysis
by the District of the development at full build-out predicts an overall stormwater
volume reduction of 87% and an overall phosphorus ruction of 65% over the pre-
redevelopment condition.
Sheet C6C-PlA
1. Moneygram Drop-off detail- A valley gutter is called out but not shown and some of the
curb spot elevations are misaligned. The Site Plan specified that the drop offbe 8"
reinforced concrete. The detail should be revised including how the valley gutter and
concrete slab will be coordinated.
See updated plan.
2. The Utica Avenue/Olive Garden Drive and Utica Avenue/Wayzata Boulevard details do
not show catch basins that are shown on the Existing Conditions Plan. They should be
included in the Demolition Plan if they are to be removed or included on this sheet if not.
A valley gutter or concrete apron should be provided for the northerly driveway entrance.
See updated plans.
8
Sheet C7B-P1A
1. The 25' to 30' deep sanitary sewer is about 10' from the proposed office building. The
building footing and buried wall should be designed to support future excavation of the
sanitary sewer line including footings extending below the sanitary sewer and a wall
design and any wall coating that allows exposure during excavation without damage.
Modified utility plans, including proposed sanitary sewer and water main locations.
2. Several services and hydrant locations are called out by station, but the stations do not
match what is shown on the plan view.
See updated plan.
3. The note for the water main offset is shown in the wrong location. A note should be
added for this work to notify City staff prior to beginning work.
See updated plan.
4. The hydrant at station 111+22 should call out a wet tap as do the other water service
lines.
See updated plan.
5. The sanitary service at station 113+43 shows a manhole, but it is not labeled and does not
show up in the profile.
See updated plan.
6. A MH is shown between MH 101 & 102A, but is not labeled nor does it show up in the
profile.
See updated plan.
7. A hydrant should be added at the intersection of Utica Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard.
A hydrant exists today at this location. See updated plan to better reflect this.
8. Risers on the profile do not correspond with what is shown in the plan view.
See updated plan.
9. Watermain crossings on the profile do not correspond with the plan View.
See updated plan.
10. Size and type of pipe should be called out on the drop manholes.
Noted. Refer to riser manhole detail for this information. See updated plan.
11. Station of MH 103 in the profile does not match the station of MH 103 in the plan view.
See updated plan.
12. MH 102 to MH 102A does not show size, length, type, or grade of pipe.
See updated plan.
9
Sheet C8B-P1A
1. All seeded areas should be mulched.
Noted. See update plan for additional notes.
2. There should be agreement on maintenance responsibility for the islands in Utica
Avenue prior to project approval.
Noted: Duke will work with City Staff to prepare maintenance agreements which will be
similar to the agreements for the Shops at West End.
Sheet CgA-P1A
1. The pedestrian curb ramp detail does not conform to current Mn/DOT standards.
Detail matches current MNDOT Standard Plate.
Sheet CgB-P1A
1. The drop manhole detail refers to a joint detail. This reference should be clarified to
direct the reader to the appropriate location.
Revised detail. See updated plan.
The Towers at West End - (Preliminary PUD/ Plat Application)
General
1. The Plan does not include utility size, slope and elevation information. This information
should be submitted prior to City Council review of the project.
Information has been added to the plans.
Sheet C1A
1. Permission must be secured for removals on the adjacent property to the south.
Noted. Duke will continue to work with the property owner but based on proceedings
over the last year may need the City's assistance in getting to a mutually beneficial
solution.
Sheet C2B
1. It is unclear how the area on the south side of the drive, south of the parking ramp, will
be finished. Removals are shown on the Demolition Plan, but the Site Plan does not tie
into this area. It appears that access to the Health Partners entrance drive and parking
spaces will be very awkward and should be carefully designed.
Refer to updated plans and concept design options. See Community Development #7
response.
10
Sheet C3A
1. The overland overflow from the area between Office Buildings 1 and 2 and Office
Buildings 3 and 4 is through the parking ramp. If another overflow route cannot be
developed, a definite route should be provided through the ramp that does not
contribute flow to the sanitary sewer system.
No storm water enters the ramp. All stormwater from the buildings and ramp flows to
the infiltration pipe galleries and then Utica Avenue. Further design investigation will be
performed at the time of the Final PUD /Plat application.
Sheet C4A
1. Cross agreements between the office properties must be established for shared utilities
and driveways.
Noted. Will be prepared at the time of Final PUD/Plat.
2. Will fire protection be provided for the parking ramp and if so where is the connection to
the City system?
The ramp will have fire protection. Connections will occur to the west via Utica Avenue
watermain.
3. Show how the irrigation system will be fed from the water supply system.
Irrigation will be designed at the time of the Final PUD/Plat.
Sheet CSA
1. Is the storm sewer connection for the temporary sediment pond permanent? This should
be clarified in the Plans.
This is not a permanent connection. The pipe will be removed at the appropriate time
based on the overall building/development schedule. Added note to the plan.
Sheet C6A
1. The pedestrian curb ramp detail does not conform to current Mn/DOT standards.
Detail matches current MNDOT Standard Plate.
Sheet C7A
1. Trees are located on the sidewalk west of Utica Avenue and south of 16th Street.
Plant locations have been adjusted accordingly.
2. Trees and landscaping may interfere with future maintenance of utilities such as if the
30" sanitary sewer south of Building 1 needs to be excavated. There should be prior
agreement how this will be handled and what each party is responsible for.
Noted. Duke will work with the City on an agreement.
11
I / I I
! IfIJ /
-j-4-~
--
-'-
--
D D
I
~:~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
12' I 12'
I
I
I
~:~
I
I
I
--
----
Engi7eetfrv . PIEming . Sl.fM;yilJ
R A 14lm28lJ1AY1l1UlNctlh.
&A8140
~ .Mi'I'IeacB.fi5+17
phone: 7fJ8I41&(DtO
McCemIII FrR.... Be 7lJa/m)ailI2
AaaciIIII, IlIc. WIIbisI1B: WMN.mIaalm
Duke Realty Corporation
Office at West End
St Louis Park/GoIden Valley
Health Partners Parking Study- Opdon A
\:
.
i I !I.' J
; !
11_-\-tt~ I
"
'\
NOUISOd 03lndncl::.l..../
.:lO l-UOOS K'O
ONIt l.SV3 ~'O SI NO~I
Desl oed: DR
Drawn: JJ
:DR
initial Issue: 02.09.09
Rev.:
Date:
Exhibit Number
--
Protect No. 18055
IjlH I I
, -H-1iI_-,
. I I JI --I
- .... ,.
I
--
---..
-----
-----.
D
D
11G
\ I
1\ '
II \
'\ ~J
i
I
I 12' 12' 12':
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
---'----------
=-'-- _ _ -----------J
----
I
~ ~ ~ II
I i I
Duke Realty Corporation
Office at West End
St louis Park/Golden VaHey
Health Partners Parking Study- OpUon C
--
.....
"
NOI11S0d 03J.ndt'lO:> "" /
.:10 HJ.f1OS tt"O
ONV lSV3 rz'o SI NO~I
X.
ExIIlbU Number
--
ProJect No. 18055
,I! I!J
. ~,.
----.
--
---
a a
-..
S~::
HJ
~N
l_~Y
I
I
_______ JL JL /'I. II
---______ 'V V 1
-- ...............
-..-
EngrestNv . PIeming . ~
RA 141fJ02IBIh.......Norft.
&.tIItUO
~,""""66+fT
p/wIne:~
McCImIIaFrlnkIlGGl -~
AaaclIIII. hie. lllllIsllB:_.Int8.ccm
(Y'V'Y'VY'~
--
"-
".. -'-.-.. ...- -- ......1..-............- .....---
NOlllSOd O3.1ndlroO , -"
.:lO HLnos K'O
aNY .1.8'13 r1:'O Sl NOlll
Exhibit Number
Duke Realty Corporation
omee at West End
St louis ParIc/Golden Valey
Health Partners Parking Study- Option 0
Des ned: DR
Drawn: JJ
roved: DR
initial Issue: 09J19
Rev.:
Date:
Prolect No. 18055
--
\
\
\
d
1\
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
. \
1\
\ \
\ \
\\
I.
II
\ \
! .
\ I
. I
I!
! \
.--
---
'=:1
nd
L_J
--
\
\
\
\
\
OO.OBB=3~~
'V\.lL_
--
Engh1edr1g . PIenr1iIll . ~
FRA 14tm2fll/l.6ollnJl NoI1Il.
Sl.\IIl40
fI&mcUh'MbxlsaIa .55447
phat8:~O
IltcComIII FrIIk... Be: 78I1/41&85J2
AIMCIIlII. .... wallIlIt: l\WIV.nn.ccm
Duke Realty Corporation
Offlce at West End
Sl louis ParIr/GoIden Valley
Wayzata RIght Turn Lane Study
Exhibit Number
--
Prolect No. 18055
.\",ll~ Minnesota Department of Transportation
(f')=r~~.~
~Op1l(~\\'li 1500 West County Road B-2
RO$evilIel MN 55113-3174
January 20. 2009
Joe HClgeboom
City Planner
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Rd
Golden Vl:llJey. MN 55427
IINI_
SUBJECT:
The Towers at West End (Mn/DOT) Review t# P08-075
Southwest QuadmntofTH 394 & TH 100
Golden VaIleyll-Iennepin County
MnlDOT Control Section # 2735
Dear Mr. Hogeboom:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnIDOT) has reviewed the above referenced plat
in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03. subdivision ~ Plats and has the following
comments:
SlI1'Vf!j'S:
MnOOThas a Pennanettt Wall Maintenance Easement on part of the easterly side of this plat.
Since it is a pel'l11anent right, it should be shown as it may impact future development plans for
this area. Please direct any questions regarding survey information to Rick Bruss, MnlDOT
Surveys. at (651) 366-5173.
Desigll:
Please provide information about the proposed changes to 1-394 frontage rOad. It appears that the
geometries will change for the interSection of the frontage road and the bridge for westbound TH
394 ramp to SB TH ] 00. Also include the project limits and grading in relationship to MnlDOT
right of way. Please direct questions regarding this issue to Nancy Jacobson (65 J -234-7647)
MnlDOT's Metro Design Section.
Traj]ic:
Please provide additiOnal information concerning the turn lane lengths and signing for the
frantap road T intersection (WaYlata Boulevard) on the west side of the underpass for TH J 00.
Operations of this interSection may need to verified by MnlDOT through an Inters.ection Control
EV81uatiQn (ICE).
MnIDOTrecommends., a sQuthpound right-turn-Jane on Wayzata Blvd at the northern access for
the Northeast parking ramp. This would improve vehicle ingress/egress efficiency at that
location. Please direct questions regarding these issues to Chad Erickson {6S 1)-234-78 J ] of
MnlDOTTraffic support Section or Wayne Norris, Area Engineer at (651)-234-7724.
Water Resollrces:
Stonn sewer from the development and -frontage road crosses under TN 100, therefore a drainage
permit will be required. The proposed drainage must remain at the same or lesser rates than the
An equal opportunity employer
condition previous to the project. The following information must be submitted with the drainage
penn it application:
1) A grading plan showing existing and proposed contours;
2) Drainage plans and profiles;
3) Drainage area maps for the proposed project showing existing and proposed
drainage areas. Any off-site areas that drain to the project area should also be
included in the drain$ge area maps. The direction of flow for each drainage area
must be indicated by arrows;
4) Existing and proposed drain~gelpond computations for the 2. 10, and 100 year
rain events.
Any work impacting MrtfDOT drainage rates or flow patterns will not be aUowed. Elect:roJ'lic
copies ofhydrauliclhydrologic plans. maps, and models are encouraged. For questions regarding
these comments. please contact Derek Beauduy, MnIOOT Water Resources Section, at (65 1)
234-7522.
Pernlits:
An access permit is required for the proposed access onto dIe MnlDOT frontage road. Furdter, a
Short Form Permit Application is required for the utility connections. Any use of or work widIin
or affecting Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnIDOT's
utility website at www.dot.state.mn.usltecsup/J.ttility . Please include one 11 x 17 plan set and one
full size plan Set with each pel111it application. Please direct any questions regarding permit
requirements to Buck Craig, Mn/DOT's Metro Permits Section,at (651) 234-7911.
. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as
plats and site plans ~o:
Development Review Coordinator
MnIDOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Mn/DOT document SUbmittal gUidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2)
copies of other review documents i~cluding site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a
plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make It submittal incomplete and delay
Mn/DOT's review and response to development proposals. If you happen to have the property
PID#, please include that with your submittal. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in
providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to- delay and/or
return incomplete submittals.
If you have any questions concerning this review. please feel free to contact me at (65 I) 234-
7792.
Sincerely,
f.
Jon P, SO)~
Senior Planner
/Mj
Copy seat via Groupwise:
fChad Erickson
LWayne Norris
Derek Beauduy
Rick Bruss
Tod Shennan
Dale Matti
Ann Braden I Metropolitan Council
Copy: Sean J. Walther, Senior Planner 1St Louis Park
J!ile Copy:
MnlDOT Division File CS 2752
MnlDOT LGL File Golden Valley
Sean J. Walther AICP
Senior Planner
City of S1. Louis park
5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
St. Louis Park, MN 554 16
1/20/2009
DAN S 2 l009
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Neighbors of Fairlawn Way & Avondale
Re: Notice of Public Hearing on Duke Development & parking ramp
We neighbors of Fairlawn Way & Avondale are vehemently opposed to the proposal of
a 4000 space parking structure in our neighborhood. We will bear the brunt of the
additional traffic on the frontage road between Penn Av. to the underpass next to the
proposed parking structure. We are greatly concerned about the additional traffic & how
it will affect our property values. The traffic currently during morning & evening rush
hour makes it extremely difficult to make a left hand turn from Natchez, Fair/awn Way,
June Ave & Tyrol Trail, it will be impossible with added traffic. The frontage road is now
a speedway during rush hourwith drivers coming or going to Target Financial or the
Moneygram Towers trying to beat the traffic on 394 or 100. What about the added
traffic to those roadways? Hwy 100 is a traffic jam everyday. It is bumper to bumper
north & south bound Monday-Friday from 7 to 9:30 am & 3 to 6:30 pm. We are on it
everyday I How will one get on to eastbound 394 with those additional vehicles? They
will race to Penn Ave.down the frontage road!
We do not want the parking rampl
We will be unable to attend the meeting on January 26th, but we want our voices heard.
We have forwarded this to other neighbors who will be attending the meeting.
Sincerely,
Jean Hughes Leveque C2fiJ--.
David Leveque r
1415 Fair/awn Way
Paul Lynch
4520 Avondale
Aurdrey Cox
1410 Fairlawn Way
1k.. Crlj ~t,( r~(.~ rAt] I!~ '"
1ib '2a)fj-0Nj/ rf W4J 11... &( (),;t II(
tc. P....."J _~~U11. "" 112..1/69. M.,
;f~ p,,-.i:t Jut'<: ~ aJ~~JN'" /11 ru
prfJf-.kJ/ Ov/q pletNt,t. -M1tK lktlltEr
Vi Sirv, \0 v~ 0(
/.. zte ()'1
0:..:"'
\li..e
r~1'
! ..........
~ ..~>'!._ ~. J """
J\i'f -C-C. . 1''1.' j
February 11, 2008
Mayor Linda Loomis and
Golden Valley City Council
RE: Im.pact of Duke" Realty Frontage Road Project on South
Tyrol Neighborhood
". Dear Mayor Loomis and Council Members:
ThankY:Qu for" inviting citizen input regarding the Duke Realty/Wayzata Boulevard
frontag~;road project that will be constructed adjacent to our neighborhood.
M:y i:1am~,J~ Robert Lazear. My family and I have lived on the 1500 block of Natchez
,Ay~nu-eS."in GQlden Valley since 1989. I have attended all of the public information
'sessiQp,Sl :regarding this project that have been publicized by Duke Realty and the cities
of St. ~~,~~ Park and Golden Valley.
, "
Manyne~borhoqd residents have welcomed the new "West End" development as
brin~~!iine;po"sitive atnenities to the area. However, at each of the public
infQrm~tto#sessions, 'neighborhood residents have also expressed serious concerns
about ~e:hnpact ofth~",development design on an already stressed traffic system.
The Q-olden'Valley South "Tyrol neighborhood is unique because We are geographically
4/1and}ock.~d~ by the Hjghway 394 and Highway 100 interchange on one side - and
the rErilroad tracks thafrun along Cedar Lake on the other side. The only way that
reside.tit;S.of our neighborhood can access our homes is on the Wayzata Boulevard
fron~:~()ad or Ced.ar Lake Road.
j~ . . ".
,.."... :...
The rusH hour co~~iionat Cedar Lake Road at the stop sign adjacent to the old
Westside V9lkswag9~\l,aealership is already bordering on the intolerable. During the
morning ~"aftepi,~commutes,there are major backups for drivers attempting to
access or !~~ve the":$buth Tyrol neighborhood, the Cedar Trails Condominium complex
in St. Lo~,:~~k, ail.d~the day school at the Jewish Community Center. If you visit
this inter~~on,. d~:r:itlg the moming. rush hour, I am sure that you will agree that
Cedar ~~. ~oad h~$~~eady exceeded its capacity.
This le~y~ the Vi ~ta Boulevard frontage road as the only viable method for most of
us w:ho1t~: U;114e.'South Tyrol neigh:borhood to leave our homes in the moming and
returI))n:t4~,eve'ning~ Even before the "proposed "West End" development, the
Wayzaqi.:')Boulevard frontage road has been a source of concern for neighborhood
reside#t,i,:;,.Although the speed limit on Wayzata Boulevard is nominally 35 mph,
traffiq.9N1#iscollector road is routinely in excess of 50 mph.
:':<', ':i-:;"',." :._. .
~'. .... ,"
Eacb m<?~g,.'I have to take a right turn from northbound Natchez Avenue to go
eastbotuid on Wayzata Boulevard to head downtown. To my left, there is a blind curve
with vehicles that have just gotten off northbound Highway 100 routinely exceeding
\
-.;"
February 12, 2008
Page 2
the speed limit. When I come home in the evening, I have to slow down to make a left
turn onto Natchez facing the same blind curve and speeding vehicles. Other
neighborhood residents attempting to enter or leave South Tyrol onNatcn.ez, -JUne,<>r-
Fairlawn Avenues face the same problems.
Therefore, our concern about the added rush.;.hour traffic that this project will add to
Wayzata Boulevard at the top of our streets is not theoretical. If this issue is not
addressed in the design and permitting process, we will simply face serious problems
getting in and out of our neighborhood.
A number of neighborhood residents attended the "traffic calming" presentation at the
Golden Valley City Hall on January 29,2008, with city staff, a traffic consultant, and
representatives from Duke Realty. It became very clear at the meeting that the traffic
issues on Wayzata Boulevard have yet to be addressed in a comprehensive and serious
manner.
Apparently, the current development plans call for the construction of three large
parking ramps on the Golden Valley portion of the project bordering Wayzata
Boulevard. As designed, these ramps all have entrances and exits directly onto
Wayzata Boulevard. It is obviously anticipated that the tenants of the 1.1 million
square feet of office space on the east side of the site will use Wayzata Boulevard as a
major access to and from these parking ramps during rush hour.
It did not appear that any serious consideration was given to locating the parking
ramps anywhere other than on Wayzata Boulevard. It did not appear that any serious
consideration was given to funneling the parking ramp traffic through Park Place and
Utica Avenue as opposed to Wayzata Boulevard.
The only "trafficcaIming" measure recommended by the traffic consultant hired by
Golden Valley was to narrow the roadway at the tops of Natchez, June, and Fairlawn
Avenues to force the increased traffic to slow down. The traffic consultant indicated
that this would replicate the lane "jog" that was constructed adjacent to the walk
bridge between the North and South Tyrol neighborhoods farther east on Wayzata
Boulevard.
To put it mildly, this "solution" was not met with a great deal of enthusiasm by the
neighbors present at the January 29th meeting. Numerous individuals spoke up about
the hazardous and confusing nature of the current lane "jog" which is adjacent to the
walk bridge. One resident who takes the city bus recounted the frequent near misses
between busses and oncoming vehicles because of the change in lane direction and
width. Frankly, none of us could believe that the city was proposing to recreate this
hazard at the top of our streets.
I would point out to the council that the problem of access and additional traffic flow
coming from these parking ramps has long been identified as a concern. The
"
February 12, 2008
Page 3
addendum to the West End Final Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR) is dated
April 2007. A copy of this document is located on the St. Louis Park web site. Section
B3 of that documents identifies the site access issue. The comment summary states:
Draft AUAR suggested that additional site plan work will evaluate the
proposed location of the ramp access points for the office on the frontage
road along TH 100. Trip distribution assumptions are not credible
unless the site access assumptions are revised.
In response, the developers noted that ''The access locations are not firmly set." The
document goes on to say that "As the city and developer continue to work through the
redevelopment approval process, they will work to reconsider other access options to
make Wayzata Boulevard less attractive."
Before Golden Valley moves forward with a Joint Powers Agreement or any other
approval for this project, the City Council needs to address the proposed location of
the ramp access points and the inevitable impact on rush-hour traffic flow on the
Wayzata Boulevard frontage road.
As a resident of the neighborhood most directly affected by this development, I would
urge the Golden Valley Planning Commission and City Council to ask the following
questions:
1. How many parking ramps are actually going to be built?
2. What are the start and completion dates of each parking ramp?
3. How many parking spaces will be in each parking ramp?
4. Are there any feasible locations for the parking ramps on this 43.5 acre
project site that are not adjacent to Wayzata Boulevard?
5. If the parking ramps stay on the Golden Valley site adjacent to Wayzata
Boulevard, what alternative ramp access point designs have been developed
to route traffic away from Wayzata Boulevard? .
6. What is a credible estimate of the new parking spaces and trips that will be
generated from the project site once these offices and parking ramps are
built?
Although the ramps would be replacing some parking spaces that
surrounded the previous structures (low-rise office buildings, former
Novartis warehouse, and tennis club) many of these were empty parking
spaces that were not being used.
February 12, 2008
Page 4
7. What is a credible estimate of the increased traffic flow on Wayzata
Boulevard from the development and these parking ramps?
The study that was completed by developer assumes that only five percent
of the project traffic would use Wayzata Boulevard.between the development
and Penn Avenue. The Council and its consultants need to take a hard look
at this assumption.
Did the study expressly take into account that these three parking ramps
would have entrances and exits directly to Wayzata Boulevard?
Much of the population density is east of the project site. It is hard to
believe that office tenants coming from the east would rather deal with the
394/100 interchange than take Wayzata Boulevard if it has direct access to
their parking ramp.
Please also note that the AUAR addendum acknowledges that "This
distribution assumes that the regional roadway system is operating at a
reasonable level of service." Anyone who lives in Golden Valley knows that
drivers will avoid 394 if there is another option.
8. What plans have been made to make a pedestrian-friendly access from the
neighborhood to the retail project?
With a movie theater, restaurants, and retail, neighborhood families will
need a way to access the site without getting in a vehicle.
9. What legal and procedural steps does Golden Valley have to take at this
point to approve or deny the Golden Valley portion of the project?
This question was asked at the January 29th meeting in Golden Valley. Staff
did not have a clear answer. Please clarify the following:
a. What is the role of the Golden Valley Planning Commission in approving
this project that will have a major impact on the city?
b.When is the City Council going to be voting on the Joint Powers
Agreement with St. Louis Park?
c. What is the tax revenue sharing agreement between the two cities and
has Golden Valley been asked to provide TIF or other public fmancing?
d. When would the city be approving construction and other permits for the
parking ramps on land located in Golden Valley?
February 12,2008
Page 5
e. When will a public hearing be held on these matters?
f. When will the final vote be taken?
I apologize for the length of this e-mail. However, as a long-time resident of Golden
Valley, I feel that we need to address these issues before it is too late.
Tr~c congestion is not an act of God, but rather the result of individual decisions
made by developers and govemmental bodies on behalf of their citizens. I really
believe that everyone in South Tyrol wants this development to be a win-win situation
for Duke Realty and our neighborhood.
However, unless some changes are made to address the traffic problem on the
Wayzata Boulevard frontage road, those of us who live in South Tyrol (and the
surrounding streets in St. Louis Park) will be put in the impossible situation of having
no safe and reliable way to access our homes during peak travel times.
Thank you for your service to Golden Valley and your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Lazear
Direct Dial Number: (612) 344-0458
rlazear@schwebel.com
RLL/bks
Enclosure
Hey
M mo ndum
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
March 3i 2009
Agenda Item
4. B. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance #416 - Amending Section 11.03, Regarding
Average Grade and Building Height Definitions.
Prepared By
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
Summary
Earlier this year, the Planning Commission recommended approval for the amendment of the
definitions of "Building Height" and "Average Grade" in the City Code. This amendment
addresses the establishment of average grade in cases where buildings that were below the
grade of the street had been removed. Currently, average grade on a lot is determined by the
average grade of a pre-existing structure. However, this causes concern for drainage issues
when the average grade is established below street level. Staff feels that under such
circumstances, the City Engineer, in consultation with the Chief Building Official, should
establish a new average grade. The Planning Commission has requested that staff work to
develop criteria for making the determination of average grade in such situations.
As per the Planning Commission's request, staff has created four criteria which must be
considered prior to the determination of average grade. In addition to these newly created
criteria, staff feels it appropriate to transfer language pertaining to the establishment of
average grade to the section of City Code which defines "Average Grade." In doing so, the
City's official definition of "Building Height" would be shortened and simplified.
Because these additional changes were outside of the Planning Commission's original
recommendation, staff felt it appropriate to hold a second informal public hearing to address
the new language. Upon its second consideration, the Planning Commission supports
amending code to allow staff discretion in determining average grade when drainage issues
exist.
Attachments
Planning Commission Minutes dated February 23,2009 (1 page)
Underline/Overstrike version of Section 11.03, Definitions 8.5 and 12 (2 pages)
Ordinance No. 416, Amending Section 11.03, Regarding Average Grade and Building Height
Definitions (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 416, Amending Section 11.03, Regarding Average Grade and
Building Height Definitions.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
February 23, 2009
4,
- Zoning Code Amendment - Regarding
'Iding Height" and "Average Grade"
City of Golden Valley
To amend the definition of Building Height and Average Grade
in the City Code
Hogeboom reminded the Planning Commission that they revi.ewe? t~is i~em at
their January 12, 2009 meeting. He explained the reason he IS bringing It .back to
the Planning Commission now is that staff has added language to the ordinance
regarding criteria that would be considered .by staff t.o ~lIow the ~verage grade to
be more than one foot higher than the previously eXisting grade If there ar~
drainage issues with the property. He added that there was also language In the
building height definition that referred to average gra~,e so t~~t language has now
been moved to be made a part of the "average grade definition.
App.licant:
Purpose:
Keysser asked if the proposed new language would apply to a property where the
grade was already above the elevation of the street. Hogeboom said no, the
proposed new language would only apply to properties where the grade creates a
drainage issue. Grimes added that staff needs language in the Code that allows
for dealing with extenuating circumstances.
Waldhauser referred to the first paragraph in the definition of "average grade" and
asked if the language means that the average grade for a property facing two
streets would be taken at six points. Hogeboom said he would clarify the language
in the first paragraph.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Rich Baker, 224 Janalyn Circle, stated he thinks criteria nU~bers t~ree~C~ifour in
the proposed new language are quantitative, but criteriaf)umpl3rsone and two are
not.
Keysser explained that criteria numbers two ang)~~~~ewQ~~tQ~ether because staff
needs to know the elevation of the street in o~Qer toet;tablish.a minimum driveway
grade of 3%. Kluchka added that criteria numper one is also quantitative because
it establishes where measurements aretak13n ftQm. Grimes added that every time
a home is demolished elevations aretCllken prior tQ.th.l3demolition in order to
establish the grade for a new house. .
Baker asked if a person could
said this ordinance would not
rm!n order to raise the grade up. Keysser
Seeing and hearing no oOe el~~iwishitlg to speak, Keysser closed the public
hearing.
MOVED by Cl3ra, se(}(mQ~d~tWaldhauser and motion carried unanimously to
recommend a pprBva I of amending definitions 8.5 (Average Grade) and 12
(Buildingltl~i9ht) in.~e(}ti.on 11.03 of the City Code.
8. Automobile Wrecking: The dismantling or disassembling of used motor
vehicles or trailers, or the storage, sale or dumping of dismantled, partially
dismantled, obsolete or wrecked vehicles or their parts.
Source: Ordinance No. 585
Effective Date: 1-14-83
8.5. Average Grade: The average ground elevation of a house or structure taken
at three (3) points along a building line facing a street. If the house or
structure faces more than one (1) street, the average grade shall be for all
sides facing tAe g street.
The grade or average grade of a lot is established at the time of subdivision
approval by the City. If the grade or average grade was not established at
the time of subdivision approval by the City, the City Engineer. in
coordination with the Building Official, shall establish the average grade prior
to construction of the structure.
In the case where a house or structure has been removed from a lot for the
construction of a new house or structure. the average grade for the new
house or structure shall be no more than one (1) foot higher than the grade
or average grade that existed for the house or structure that was removed.
When drainage issues exist, the City Engineer, in coordination with the
Building Official shall determine average grade prior to the issuance of a
building permit, based on the following criteria:
A. Existing elevations prior to demolition
B. Existing street elevations
C. Minimum driveway grade of three percent (3%)
D. Positive drainage occurs away from structures on all adjoining properties
Source: Ordinance No. 382, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 3-28-08
9. Basement: That portion of a building with at least three (3) walls having at
least one-half (1/2) or more of their floor-to ceiling height underground.
10. Buildable Area: That area of a lot which is exclusive of all yards and within
which the principal building must be constructed.
Source: Ordinance No. 585
Effective Date: 1-14-83
11. Building: Any structure for the shelter or enclosure of persons, animals or
property of any kind and when separated by dividing walls without openings,
each portion of such buildings, so separated, shall be deemed a separate
building.
Source: Ordinance No. 80, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 11-28-91
12. Building, Height: The vertical distance or height of a structure shall be
measured from the average grade at thc front building Iinc (strcct sidc) gJl
street sides of the structure to the average height of the highest pitched roof
or the highest point of a flat roof structure. The gr~dc or a'/eragc grade of ~
lot is established ~t the time of subdivision appro'J~1 by the City. If the gr~de
or average grade w~s not established at the time of subdivision approval by
the City, the Director of Public Works shall est~blish the aver~ge grade prior
to construction of the structure, In the cose where 0 house or structure hos
been removed from ~ lot for the construction of 0 ne'.... house or structure,
the ~'Jer~ge gr~de for the new house or structure sholl be no more th~n one
(1) foot higher thon the grade or aver~ge gr~de thot existed for the house or
structure that 'N~S remo'/ed. In the case of ~ corner lot, the ~verage gr~de is
taken from 011 sides of the house or structure f~cing the street.
Source: Ordinance No. 382, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 3-28-08
ORDINANCE NO. 416, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Amending Section 11.03, Regarding Average Grade and Building Height Definitions
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains:
Section 1. City Code Section 11.03, entitled "Definitions" number 8.5 "Average
Grade" is amended to read:
8.5 Average Grade: The average ground elevation of a house or structure taken at
three (3) points along a building line facing a street. If the house or structure
faces more than one (1) street, the average grade shall be for all sides facing a
street.
The grade or average grade of a lot is established at the time of subdivision
approval by the City. If the grade or average grade was not established at the
time of subdivision approval by the City, the City Engineer, in coordination with
the Building Official, shall establish the average grade prior to construction of
the structure.
In the case where a house or structure has been removed from a lot for the
construction of a new house or structure, the average grade for the new house
or structure shall be no more than one (1) foot higher than the grade or average
grade that existed for the house or structure that was removed. When drainage
issues exist, the City Engineer, in coordination with the Building Official shall
determine average grade prior to the issuance of a building permit, based on
the following criteria:
A. Existing elevations prior to demolition
B. Existing street elevations
C. Minimum driveway grade of three percent (3%)
D. Positive drainage occurs away from structures on all adjoining properties
Section 2. City Code Section 11.03, entitled "Definitions" number 12 "Building,
Height" is amended to read:
12. Building, Height: The vertical distance or height of a structure shall be
measured from the average grade at all street sides of the structure to the
average height of the highest pitched roof or the highest point of a flat roof
structure.
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 3rd day of March, 2009.
Is/Linda R. Loomis
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Is/Susan M. VirniQ
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk