06-08-09 PC Agenda
AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, June 8, 2009
7pm
1. Approval of Minutes
a. April 27, 2009 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
2. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan Review - Planned Unit
Development - Xenia Ridge - PUD 108
a. Applicant: Opus Northwest, LLC
b. Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South
c. Purpose: To allow for the construction of approximately 279,000 square
feet of office space and approximately 11,300 square feet of retail space
3. Short Recess
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
5. Other Business
6. Adjournment
This documentisavailableinalternateformats upon a 72.hour request. Please call
763.593-8006 (TTY: 763-593'3968)tomake.a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 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, April 27,2009. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka,
McCarty, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of ing and
Development Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Ad
Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
raph on page seven and
February 23, 2009 Regular Planning Commi
Eck referred to the fourth paragraph on page t
missing at the beginning of the second sente
Waldhauser referred to the first sente
noted that the word "it" was in the w
Eck referred to the second se
the word "infrastructural" s
. t paragraph on page seven and stated
"infrastructure" .
MOVED by Eck, secon
approve the Febru ry 2
ser and motion carried unanimously to
he above noted corrections.
2.
g - Conditional Use Permit - 6210 Wayzata Blvd. -
Pu se - To allow for the sale and repair of electric vehicles in the Mixed
Use zoning district
Hogeboom explained that the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit in
order to allow B2B Segway/Segway Minnesota to sell and service electric vehicles in
the Art Holdings building located at 6210 Wayzata Blvd. He noted that the property is
zoned Mixed Use and is guided on the Comprehensive Plan for Mixed Use.
Hogeboom stated that this is the first request for a Conditional Use Permit in the
Mixed Use zoning district. He explained that the Mixed Use zoning district has a
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 2
provision in it that allows conditional uses in the Commercial zoning district to be
permissible in the Mixed Use zoning district.
Hogeboom referred to his staff report and discussed the ten factors used when
reviewing a Conditional Use application. He stated that staff feels there will be no
negative effects as a result of this proposed use and has determined that this
proposed use does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, it will not affect property
values and it will not impact traffic in the area therefore, staff is recommending
approval of this request with the following conditions:
Kluchka stated that condition number three s
necessary. Hogeboom agreed and sta
conditions of approval were taken fr
requirements.
Ipment.
all be met at all times.
1. All signage must adhere to City sign guidelines for the 1-394
District.
2. The number of employees on the site at anyone time s
3. The hours of normal operation shall be Monday throu
pm.
4. All improvements to the building must meet thegity's
5. All requirements must be met for the installatiorl'CJ
6. All other applicable local, state and federal
trictive and asked if it is
f operation listed in the
arrative.
McCarty asked if condition nu
on the square footage of the
number of employees wa
number of employees i
property has adequate
ing number of employees is based
th plicant's narrative. Hogeboom said the
e applicant's narrative. Keysser asked if the
~\available parking. Hogeboom noted that this
or this1use.
Eck questioned the
Segway. Hoge 0
Art Holdin s w
ope rat t
estate
etween Art Holdings, C. Chase Company and
IS understanding that C. Chase Company is related to
e building and that Segway is the company proposing to
iness. Grimes clarified that C. Chase Company is the real
dings.
f the things he looks for in proposals in the Mixed Use zoning
ey measure against the allowed or conditional uses of the former
zoning roperty. He asked if the Mixed Use zoning designation has made the
proposed use more or less difficult to get. Hogeboom said the Mixed Use zoning
district has made it easier in this case for the applicant because permitted and
conditional uses in the Commercial zoning district are allowed in the Mixed Use
zoning district with a Conditional Use Permit.
Kluchka referred to applicant's narrative regarding their proposed sidewalk and the
applicant using that sidewalk to display and demonstrate their product. He asked if
staff feels that is an appropriate use for a sidewalk. Hogeboom said ordinarily that
would not be an appropriate use for a sidewalk but in this case the proposed sidewalk
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 3
is on their property, not in city right-of-way. He said he feels that part of the intent of
the Mixed Use zoning district is to have some retail uses brought out to the sidewalk.
He added that when the applicant installs the proposed sidewalk he will have to work
with the city's Engineering Department regarding necessary permits. Kluchka said he
would like the Planning Commission to have additional discussion about allowing
product sales and display on sidewalks when the intent in the 1-394 Corridor was to
encourage restaurants and seating on sidewalks.
Waldhauser said she realizes that there will be some industrial, commercial and office
uses in the Mixed Use zoning district but she thinks the City is reall . . g for retail
businesses that serve individuals and have a street presence. S t in this
case it looks like the showroom is going to be on the second I I level
will be a service operation but it looks like the street front s the ea that
Art Holdings has had at this property.
Greg Hennes, Owner, Art Holdings, 6210 Wayzata<~lvd.,
26,000 square feet and he is looking for a tenant to'ta 0
because it is too big for Art Holdings. He expl
operate in this building and will occupy appro
Segway will occupy approximately one-third
floor for Art Holdings is used for office,
upper floor would be used for office
production and picture framing ar
service the vehicles. He adde
parking spaces with proof of
building is
a the space
ings will continue to
-thl of the building; B2B
g. He stated that the upper
ail space. For Segway the
r level for Art Holdings is the
it would be the area they use to
gs currently has 24 employees with 51
itional 36 parking spaces.
Hennes referred to the
be a city sidewalk it will
the building and u
there would also b
s been discussed and explained that it won't
I their property running along the perimeter of
gain access to the east parking lot. He confirmed that
'1Jy of product on the sidewalk as well.
y, explained that B2B Segway is their commercial division
is their retail division. He talked about his current location in
I park and stated that he would like to have more of a retail
hy they would like to move to the proposed location in Golden
at their product is all electric transportation including scooters,
les and Segways.
Keysser asked about Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) products. Benyas said
NEV products have more of a niche market and his business would have some NEV
products but they would not be his main focus. Keysser asked if the products being
sold are "street legal". Benyas said yes and stated that the Segway product is
classified as a pedestrian vehicle so they have to follow the same laws as
pedestrians.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 4
Grimes asked Benyas if he feels comfortable with the area that will be used for test
drives. Benyas said yes and added that he feels there is enough room on the property
for test drives.
Keysser asked Benyas how many customers per day he envisions. Benyas said he
currently has approximately 20 customers per day but he hopes to have more once he
is located in the 1-394 Corridor.
Grimes asked if individuals purchase Segways or if they are purchased by companies.
Benyas stated that approximately 65% of his sales are commercial % are retail.
Kluchka asked if there if there are
Hennes stated that none of his
bus and carpool.
ring the
ure
Grimes asked Benyas if his intent is to display his products o~;,~
day and bring them indoors at night. Benyas said yes. He a~d
there may be some electric cars stored outside.
Keysser asked Benyas if he has any concerns abo t traffi
drives. Benyas said no because it is a fairly quiet a
Eck asked how people would know about thi
mainly find him. There is also some national
show work.
en said his customers
nd he does a lot of trade
S~'Wiithe property for the employees.
yees bike to work but they do ride the
Cera referred to the co ff report regarding the hours of operation and
asked Benyas how he I . as said he would appreciate some flexibility
regarding his hou op . Grimes asked Benyas if he could sell on Sundays.
Benyas said he wil or a dealership license but he won't be able to sell his
cars or motor s. Grimes said he would feel comfortable removing the
condition e ar urs of operation. Waldhauser noted that currently there isn't
reside . area but that could change in the future so they may want to
consid ,g hours. Benyas said his current hours are 8 am to 7 pm on
w kday ppointment on weekends. He added that with his larger retail
pr ce h e to be open on weekends. Cera stated that if the applicant wants
to be eekends the condition regarding hours would have to be changed or
remove es suggested allowing the hours of operation to be from 7 am to 9 pm
every day. The Commissioners agreed.
Hennes asked if the stipulations for Segway apply to the entire building. Grimes said
the stipulations would only apply to this proposed use.
Waldhauser asked if there needs to be a limit on the number of employees. Benyas
said he doesn't foresee having more than 12 employees. Grimes said the parking
works for 12 employees but they could be flexible and allow for 15 employees.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 5
Keysser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Keysser closed the public hearing.
Kluchka asked why there needs to be a limit on the parking or the number of
employees if there is already proof of parking on the property. Grimes said he agrees
that there probably isn't a need for limits on parking or the number of employees.
Grimes stated that he would like to add a condition of approval that the Segway space
is limited to what they've shown on the site plan they submitted with their application.
Benyas referred to the site plan submitted wi
modifications could still be made. Gri
him before the proposal goes to the
bout the
building is two
loading dock in
Kluchka asked if there needs to be a stipulation regarding the si
located in the right-of-way. Grimes said the sidewalk requirem t
the grading and erosion control permit process if one is req
Eck noted that the Segway showroom is on the second
ramp mentioned in the applicant's narrative. Benya~%:xpl
stories in the back and one story in the front. The ram
the service area.
tion and asked if slight
ant to bring a final plan to
g.
McCarty asked Grimes why th
the site plan. He asked what
space in the building. Gri
specific use and the ap
Use Permit if he wants
McCarty asked ab
square feet to the s
require an am
flexibility i ord
Permit
ope rat
a diffe
sp . He
this u
the opp
t to limit this use to how it is shown on
the applicant wanted to use additional
that a Conditional Use Permit is based on a
ve to come back and amend the Conditional
h to an approved Conditional Use Permit.
s if B2B Segway wanted to add a couple hundred of
said technically any change to approved plan would
:a Use Permit. Benyas said he would appreciate some
is business in the future. He asked if the Conditional Use
tire building. Grimes said he would like to see how this
he City says it can be bigger because this is something new
. will probably be awhile before they would need to expand their
h ants to wait and see if there are any issues or concerns regarding
uiring the applicant to come back for amendments would give the City
to address any issues that may arise. The Commissioners agreed.
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the sale and repair of
electric vehicles at 6210 Wayzata Blvd. with the following conditions:
1. All signage must adhere to City sign guidelines for the 1-394 Mixed Use Zoning
District.
2. The hours of normal operation shall not exceed Monday through Sunday from 7 am
to 9 pm.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 6
3. All improvements to the building must meet the City's Building Code requirements.
4. All requirements must be met for the installation of fire safety equipment.
5. All other applicable local, state and federal requirements shall be met at all times.
6. The site plan submitted by Art Holdings and prepared by MS&R shall become a
part of this approval.
7. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for
revocation of the CUP.
8. Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Code Amendment - Regarding
Extension of Time for Submittal of Final PUD Plan
Grimes explained that staff recently looked at
submittal and it was discovered by the City A
the Code that specifically allow the City Coun
even though they had done so in the p
believe that amending the PUD lang
by the City Council is appropriate .
sole discretion of the City COUll
the time granting the extensio
Applicant - City of Golden Valley
Purpose - To amend Section 11.55, Subd. 6(A) (P
Chapter of the Zoning Code) to allow for Extensio
Final PUD Plan
sion for a Final PUD
he asn't provisions in
'me extensions for PUDs
the City Attorney and staff
ension of up to 180 days
"_.,l1ding that the extension is at the
e City Council may add conditions at
Cera asked if the Plan .
Grimes said no, it woul
would have a role in granting extensions.
on the City Council.
Keysser opened t
Keysser close.
. g. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
ng.
d that this proposed change to the Zoning Code makes
M I user, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to
roval to amend Section 11.55, Subd. 6(A) (Planned Unit
Develop hapter of the Zoning Code) to allow for extension of time for
submittal of Final PUD Plan.
9. Consideration of Resolution No. 09-02 Finding that the Redevelopment
Plan for the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area Conforms to the
City's Comprehensive Plan
Grimes reminded the Commissioners that this item was brought to them recently
asking that they review the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area to confirm
that it conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. At that time the new
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 7
Comprehensive Plan had not yet been approved by the City Council. It has since
been adopted by the City Council so staff feels it is now a more appropriate time for
the Planning Commission to find that the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Plan Project
Area conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. He referred to Jeanne Andre,
Assistant Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's memo regarding
the changes that have been made to the Redevelopment Plan and how the Planning
Commissioner's comments have been incorporated into the Plan. He also referred to
his memo where he lists findings regarding the conformance of the Redevelopment
Plan to the Comprehensive Plan.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Kluchka and motion
the Redevelopment Plan for the Douglas Drive Re
conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan a
Kluchka thanked Grimes for providing the findings and asked tha
in the future on projects like this.
done
Waldhauser said she thinks the Redevelopment Plan is
finding that
t ct Area
olution 09-02.
6.
Reports on Meetings of the
Council, Board of Zonin
velopment Authority, City
:':I;&J'1er Meetings
7.
Waldhauser asked
housing units in th
could provide t'
is information available regarding the number of
owner occupied. Hogeboom said yes and that he
:0 the Commission.
rious if the market has driven more homes to become
om discussed foreclosures in Golden Valley and stated that
n working directly with the banks regarding maintenance issues on
es.
Kluchka asked that records be kept regarding proposals in the 1-394 Corridor
District. He said he would like to know if approvals are easier, harder or the same
to obtain as they were when the properties were zoned differently.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 pm.
Hey
Memorandum
Planning
763.593..8095 I 763.593.8109 (fax)
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Date:
Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Plan for Planned Unit Development
(PUD) No.1 08, Xenia Ridge--Opus Northwest, L.L.C., Applicant
June 3, 2009
Subject:
BACKGROUND
At the May 6, 2008 City Council meeting, the City Council held a public hearing on the
preliminary plan approval for PUD No.1 05, Xenia Ridge. After the hearing, the Council
approved the preliminary plan with seven conditions. The Planning Commission had
recommended approval of the preliminary plan at their April 14, 2008 Planning Commission
meeting after an informal public hearing was held. At the September 16, 2008 City Council
meeting, the City Council granted a six month extension in time for the submittal of the final
plan of development for the PUD. The zoning code states that the final PUD plan must be
submitted within six months of the approval of the preliminary plan by the City Council. This
six month period expired on May 1, 2009. Opus was informed that the City Code does not
permit extensions and that if they wanted to continue with the development proposal of Xenia
Ridge, they would have to reapply for a new preliminary plan for Xenia Ridge. (In September
of 2008, an extension was granted In error by the City. The City Attorney has told the staff
that unless an extension is specifically outlined in the city code, no extensions.are permitted.
The City has now approved an amendment to the zoning code to permit such extensions in
the future.) Opus has now submitted a new application for PUD No. 108.
The proposed preliminary plan is identical to the preliminary plan approved by the City
Council on May 6, 2008. Therefore, the staff is using the staff reports done in 2008 when the
preliminary plan for PUD No. 105 was approved. Also, the staff is recommending the
conditions of approval be those approved by the City Council on May 6, 2008 with two added
conditions.
The two conditions recommended by staff relate to the conditions of the existing site. Staff
believes that the existing buildings should be removed from the site by no later than
November 15, 2009 because the buildings present a hazardous condition. The removal shall
be done in a manner prescribed by the building code. The second condition states that until
the buildings are removed from the site, the buildings shall be secured in a manner
acceptable to both City's Public Safety and Building Inspections Departments.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff believes that the preliminary plan for Xenia Ridge, PUD NO.1 08 mixed use
development should be approved. The preliminary plan is identical to the preliminary plan for
PUD No. 105 approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 2008. Since that
time, conditions in the area have not significantly changed. Opus continues to be committed
to the redevelopment of this site and they want to be ready when market conditions turn for
the better.
The staff is recommending the following conditions of approval based on City Council
approval of the preliminary plan for Xenia Ridge PUD No.1 05 approved in May 2008:
1. The Xenia Ridge plan packet consisting of 24 sheets and prepared by Opus Northwest,
L.L.C. shall become a part of this approval. These plans sheets are listed on Sheet
Number CS and include the preliminary plat, site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and
floor plans.
2. Lighting plans must meet the requirements of the City's lighting code. Prior to approval of
building permits for the site, the proposed Photometric Site Plan, including a detailed
balcony lighting plan, will be further reviewed to insure compliance with the plan.
3. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by the Building Board of Review.
4. The findings and recommendations in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated April 7, 2008 shall become a part of this
recommendation. This includes Opus signing an agreement with the City of Golden Valley
that would agree to payment of special assessments for street and other public
improvements. Opus would also waive their right to appeal special assessments as part of
this agreement.
5. The findings and recommendations in the memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated April 7, 2008 shall
become a part of this recommendation.
6. A snow storage plan shall be submitted before approval of the final plan.
Staff is also recommending that the Planning Commission and the City Council make the
following findings:
1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site
and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under
conventional provisions of the ordinance.
2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of
the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep
slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters.
3. Efficient - Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes
preservation) of the land.
4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals.
5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general
health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City.
6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and
all other PUD ordinance provisions.
2
Attachments
Location Map ( 1 page)
Memo from Mark Grimes dated April 9, 2008(4 pages)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated May 29,2009 (8 pages)
Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson dated May 19, 2009 (4 pages)
Applicant's Narrative dated December 4,2007 (2 pages)
Planning Commission Minutes dated April 14, 2008 (6 pages)
City Council Minutes dated May 6,2008 (2 pages)
Xenia Ridge Travel Demand Management Plan (24 pages)
Email from Sheldon & Sandra Olkon, 6051 Laurel Ave. (1 page)
Color Renderings (6 pages)
Site Plans (24 oversized pages)
3
:100
b~:;:::Y
iGltm,J Pond> <'Y~
GLENW!V'P rVE
o.~.r-. ......-.-....."'...... .~................................................ 1.............................................................../...........1.
1:1:. 11S<>>.;./
!!r us ~ buCk PoPd '5701 Sti'J5 [ l
(3 ~ ~v II
I' 1$S Raffi e Pond 5147 \ l
5743
B 8 6100 \:~\ 6010 1/5924j59WLI
120
220
ifI.
~
<t m
of
~ 245
~:
28
1m
00
I
220
240
24t'I
II
.
700
f~[ .... . . .' ~~UREt.A~"
I Subject Properties I
~
e
o
o
o
o
800
900
o
o
00
0000
Q
6224 6210
o
o
o 610$
Q
o
o
5701
6010
5920
28
PARK PLACE 8lVD S TO we 1394
Ci5
INTERSTATt394
EB D94 TO 5B HW'fl00 S
INTERSTATE 394
Map afdal:I""\~~1 Po!c..tUS" CI:l;J}"l';g-t [C) t.00iSG.lS~
>4
5501
21
5501
I>
II 15
I
cl
~
m
~
X
.---.......-. I ~
till
1DlI
116
2Oi)
2lIiI
:ii6
3011
:zOg
3ii
ji9.
327
400
1181
54W
$~lM,
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
April 9, 2008
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Plan for Xenia Ridge--PUD No. 105, Opus Northwest, L.L.C., Applicant
Introduction and Background
Opus Northwest has applied for Preliminary PUD Plan for the construction of a mixed use
development at the northwest corner of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. The existing
buildings on this site are currently vacant and will soon be torn down. The site is about 5.9
acres. The proposed construction will include an 8 story, 279,000 sq. ft. of Class A office space
and about 11,300 sq. ft. of retail, service and restaurant space. There will also be a 6 level
parking deck structure for approximately 1100 vehicles and 60 bikes.
The site has been known as the Olympic Printing site because the printing company was
located on the block for many years. Over the past couple of years, there have been proposals
for the redevelopment of the site that included office, residential and retail uses. Due to
changes in the housing and office market, these plans did not work out. Opus, a large national
developer and builder, has now acquired the rights to develop the site. They believe that this is
a great location for an office building with retail due to its closeness to downtown Minneapolis,
the freeway system and other high quality buildings in the area.
The property is currently designated on the General Land Use Plan map for Mixed Use and on
the Zoning Map as Light Industrial (including office). (A proposal to create a new mixed use
zoning category will be going forward to the Planning Commission and City Council starting
with an informal public hearing before the Planning Commission on April 14, 2008. Final
approval of the new zoning district could be before the City Council in Mayor June 2008.) The
proposed Opus mixed use development is consistent with the proposed mixed use general
land use plan designation, existing Light Industrial zoning and the proposed mixed use zoning
district. This site is also within the Golden Hills Redevelopment area that was established by
the City Council back in the 1984 to encourage high quality development near the freeway
intersection of Xenia Avenue and 1-394. The Xenia Ridge site is one of the last redevelopment
opportunities within the redevelopment area. The Redevelopment Plan states that the
recommended land uses for Olympic Printing site is medium to high density offices with
structured parking. Service uses are also a recommended land use. The proposed Xenia
Ridge development appears to be consistent the redevelopment plan.
1
PUD Process
City staff has reviewed this application for a PUD and it has been determined that the
application is complete. The applicant has submitted all information that is necessary to
accompany the preliminary plan stage of the PUD application. Also, the applicant has had a
pre-application meeting with City staff and held a neighborhood meeting in late 2007 in order
to introduce the development to those living in the area. At the neighborhood meeting,
comments were made and Opus has taken those comments into consideration when
developing their plans. Also, the staff has determined that the proposed Opus development is
consistent with the intent and purpose provision of the PUD chapter of the zoning code.
The PUD process consists of two stages. The first stage is the review and approval of the
Preliminary PUD plan. The Planning Commission is charged with reviewing the materials
submitted by the applicant and holding an informal public hearing on the application. After the
informal public hearing, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on the preliminary
plan to the City Council. The Planning Commission must determine if the application is
consistent with the intent and purpose provision of the PUD requirements and principles and
standards adhered to by the City. The Planning Commission may recommend changes,
conditions or modifications to the preliminary PUD plan.
After receiving the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council holds a
public hearing on the preliminary plan. If the preliminary plan is approved by the City Council,
the applicant may then apply for the Final PUD Plan. The approval of the final plan also
requires an informal public hearing before the Planning Commission and a recommendation
from the Planning Commission. After receiving the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, the City Council holds a public hearing and then makes the final decision on the
approval of the final PUD plan. Generally, the approval of a PUD from preliminary plan
approval to final plan approval takes 3 to 6 months.
Review of Preliminary PUD Plan for Xenia Ridge
Opus applied for the Xenia Ridge PUD in December 2007. They were originally scheduled to
be heard in January 2008 but Opus requested a delay in order to review financing plans and to
make changes to the site plan based on comments received from City staff. A couple of weeks
ago, Opus said that they were ready to begin the review process.
Opus has submitted a thick set of plans for the site that have been reviewed by staff. City
Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, has written a detailed memo to me dated April 7, 2008, listing the
findings and concerns of the Public Works Department. His recommendations will be made a
part of the recommendations found at the end of this memo. I will not repeat what Mr. Oliver
states in his memo. However, I want to highlight several of his points.
There will have to be several improvements made to the street system adjoining this property
in order to accommodate the added traffic from this development and other anticipated
development in the area. The improvements included will be paid for by a combination of
assessments to benefiting property owners in the area and tax increment financing. Without
these improvements, City staff would not recommend approval of the Opus development.
The attached Travel Demand Management Plan is an important tool that the City has to
require that owners of buildings in the area to take responsibility for peak hour traffic. This plan
will have to be reviewed by the Joint Task Force consisting of representations from the Golden
Valley and St. Louis Park City Councils in order to ensure that reasonable access and flow of
2
traffic is maintained in the area. With the changes recommended by Mr. Oliver, the Travel
Demand Management Plan is acceptable.
Mr. Oliver's memo highlights the importance of trails and sidewalks in the area. The proposed
sidewalk and trail system proposed by Opus will compliment the existing pedestrian ways in
the area and allow for easier and safer pedestrian access to businesses along with
opportunities for exercise for residents and employees.
Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson has written a memo to me dated April 7, 2008 that address
issues important to the Public Safety Department. Mr. Anderson has told me that he is
confident that the comments raised in his memo will be incorporated in the final plans for the
PUD. These comments will also be made a part of my recommendation of approval.
I am attaching a copy of the PUD Narrative that was prepared by Opus and dated December
4, 2007. This gives a good overview of the project and describes the building. There have
been a couple of small changes since this was written in December. First, the building space
includes 278,842 sq. ft. of Class A office space and 11,300 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant
space. (This number has increased from the original numbers of 265,000 sq. ft. of office space
and 10,000 sq. ft. of retail space.) Second, Opus would like provide 90 fewer parking spaces
than would be required by the City's parking chapter of the zoning code. (See attached letter
from Ericka Miller, Senior Manager with Opus to Mark Grimes dated February 29, 2008.)
Opus contends that the Travel Demand Management Plan illustrates that this reduction of
parking will still leave more than adequate parking spaces based on the parking requirements
found in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation manual (2004).
(The memo addressing parking is the final memo attached to the Travel Demand Management
Plan dated February 2008.) Overall, this is a reduction of about 7% in parking over what the
code requires. If they are short on parking, the owner of the building would have to add more
spaces or restrict parking demand. On-street parking would not be an option.
As noted in the site plans, there will be 60 bike parking spaces on the first level of parking
deck. The City Code requires that there be bike parking at the rate of 5% of car parking. In this
case, the number of bike spaces exceeds the 5%.
Overall, the staff is pleased with the layout of the site. Opus has proposed a good pedestrian
circulation system throughout the site which they will maintain. They have also provided plaza
space at the corner of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive that will be used by employees in
the area and residents of the area. It is hoped that some of the retail in the Opus building will
attract employees and neighbors of the area. The water feature and landscaping of the site
should make it inviting space. As shown on the plans, there is seating proposed around the
pond and in front of the stores. The overall landscape plan appears to be well thought out. It
will have to receive final approval from the Building Board of Review.
The building is proposed to receive the Gold Certification from the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) program. This means that it is being designed to a high level in
terms of energy efficiency and incorporates many sustainable features such as water use
conservation, on-site storm water design and retention and redevelopment of a brownfield site.
The building is proposed to be eight stories in height. This is two stories less than the tallest
Allianz building to the south along 1-394. Because of the substantial distance (over 300 ft.) of
this proposed building to the closest residential apartment to the northeast and northwest, this
eight story building should not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. The building is
well designed with good materials. The parking deck is also well designed with the use of
3
quality materials. Opus has a good track record in terms of construction of quality buildings
and the maintenance of the buildings.
Recommended Action
Staff believes that the preliminary PUD plan for the Xenia Ridge mixed use development
should be approved. Opus has submitted plans that show a well thought out plan that includes
public spaces, sidewalks and trails, a mix of uses and a building that will receive LEED
certification. Opus has committed to help pay their fair share to improve the existing street
system in order that traffic will continue to operate at an acceptable level of service during
peak hours. A travel demand management plan has been submitted that commits Opus to help
reduce peak hour traffic by various means. The recommended approvals have the following
conditions:
1. The Xenia Ridge plan packet consisting of 24 sheets and prepared by Opus Northwest,
L.L.C. shall become a part of this approval. These plans sheets are listed on Sheet Number
CS and include the preliminary plat, site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and floor plans.
2. Lighting plans must meet the requirements of the City's lighting code. Prior to approval of
building permits for the site, the proposed Photometric Site Plan will be further reviewed to
insure compliance with the plan.
3. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by the Building Board of Review.
4. The findings and recommendations in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated April 7, 2008 shall become a part of this
recommendation. This includes Opus signing an agreement with the City of Golden Valley
that would agree to payment of special assessments for street and other public
improvements. Opus would also waive their right to appeal special assessments as part of
this agreement.
5. The findings and recommendations in the memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Zoning and dated April 7, 2008 shall become a part
of this recommendation.
6. The preliminary PUD plan for Xenia Ridge is consistent with the intent and purpose
provision of the PUD chapter of the zoning code and other planning and development
principles adhered to by the City.
Attachments
Applicant's Narrative dated December 4, 2007 (2 pages)
Letter from Ericka Miller, Opus, dated February 29,2008 (1 page)
Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated April 7, 2008 (8 pages)
Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson dated April 7, 2008 (2 pages)
Xenia Ridge Travel Demand Management Plan (24 pages)
Color Renderings (4 pages)
Site Plans (24 oversized pages)
4
alley
Mem randum
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
Date:
May 29,2009
~ark Grimes, Director of Planning and
A
From:
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer-
To:
Subject:
Xenia Ridge Planned Unit Development
Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed Xenia Ridge Planned Unit Development,
located in the northwest corner of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. These plans
have not been modified from those that were reviewed in 2008. A copy of the April 7,
2008 Public Works review of the proposed PUD is attached for reference.
Public Works staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for the
proposed Xenia Ridge Planned Unit Development subject to the comments contained in
the April 7, 2008 memorandum regarding the same development.
C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
Gary Johnson, Building Official
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PUD Review 052909.doc
Hey
o d
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
Date: April 7, 2008
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Subject: Xenia Ridge, P.U.D. 105
Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) for
Xenia Ridge, a proposed office and retail development and a six story parking ramp.
The proposed PUD is located west of Xenia Avenue, North of Golden Hills Drive and
South of Laurel Avenue.
Public Improvements:
The City of Golden Valley is in the process of developing plans and specifications for a
public improvement project to modify Xenia Avenue, Golden Hills Drive and Laurel
Avenue in the vicinity of this development. These improvements include the installation
of turn lanes, medians, traffic signal modifications, storm drainage improvements and
utility modifications to accommodate this PUD and other existing and potential
development in the area.
This development will be subject to special assessments for the proposed public
improvement projects. These special assessments will be for benefits received by the
subject property for the street improvements, as well as for utility costs directly
attributed to this PUD. By entering into the PUD agreement with the City, the developer
agrees to waive their right to appeal the special assessments.
The developer also agrees to provide access to this site as may be needed for the
public improvement project.
Preliminary Plat and Site Plan:
The preliminary plat submitted by the developer includes the dedication of easements
and additional street right-of-way for the public improvement project as previously
discussed. The City of Golden Valley reserves the right to require additional easement
and right-of-way dedication on this site as construction plans are finalized. The
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
developer will be required to dedicate any additional easements and right-of-way
determined necessary at no cost to the City.
There is an existing 60 foot wide easement for drainage purposes, originally dedicated
to the Minnesota Highway Department, along the western boundary of the proposed
PUD. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) vacated the storm sewer
within this easement as Trunk Highway 12 was upgraded to Interstate 394. Following
the vacation of the storm sewer, the pipe and the easement rights reverted to the City of
Golden Valley. Because the developer is proposing removal and replacement of the
storm sewer within the easement, the easement must be vacated as part of the PUD
approval and rededicated as shown on the preliminary plat. The developer must submit
an application for vacation of this drainage easement as part of the final PUD submittal.
The proposed site plan includes the construction of sidewalks and trails around the
perimeter of the PUD. The concrete sidewalks parallel to Xenia Avenue, Golden Hills
Drive and Laurel Avenues will be owned by the City of Golden Valley and maintained by
the developer. The maintenance requirements for these sidewalks will be included in
the development agreement for the PUD.
The City sidewalks must be located within walkway easements as shown on the
preliminary plat. The developer must submit legal descriptions for these walkway
easements with the submittal for the final PUD. The City will prepare the easement
documents for signing by the developer. The easement documents must be signed and
be ready for recording prior to approval of the final PUD.
The concrete sidewalks paralleling Golden Hills Drive, Xenia Avenue and Laurel
Avenue can be constructed by the developer, or as part of the City's public
improvement project. These walks should be installed near the end of the construction
sequencing of the two projects in order to minimize the risk of damaging the walks. The
City reserves the right to include the sidewalks in its project as construction progresses.
If the City constructs the sidewalks the costs will be specially assessed to this PUD.
The site plan indicates a piece of proposed sidewalk parallel and south of the Xenia
Avenue site access that directs pedestrians towards Xenia Avenue. There will not be a
crosswalk installed at this location and encouraging pedestrians to cross at this location
creates a significant hazard. Therefore, this portion of proposed sidewalk must be
eliminated from the plans.
The bituminous trail along the western property boundary will be owned and maintained
by the developer. The winter maintenance of this trail must be consistent with the
maintenance of the public sidewalk system.
The PUD plans indicate that the bituminous trail along the west side of the site will enter
the adjacent railroad right-of-way at Laurel Avenue. The developer must obtain an
easement from the railroad for this trail, or modify the plans to stay within the
boundaries of the PUD.
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
2
Access to the proposed PUD will be provided from Golden Hills Drive, Xenia Avenue
and Laurel Avenue. There are two access points from Golden Hills Drive. The first
driveway, located in the southwest corner of the site, provides full access into the
parking ramp. Because of the width of this driveway a center median should be installed
to separate the incoming and outgoing traffic at this driveway location.
The second access point from Golden Hills Drive is located approximately 260 feet west
of Xenia Avenue. The driveway will be limited to right-in/right-out access for westbound
traffic.
The Xenia Avenue access will also be limited to right-in/right-out turns for southbound
traffic on Xenia Avenue.
A full site access is proposed from Laurel Avenue in the northwest corner of the site.
This access will provide access into the parking ramp, but will also be the primary
service access to the site. It appears that in order to access the loading dock area of the
office building a truck must pull into the parking ramp and then back out towards the
loading dock. The developer must demonstrate that this truck maneuver is possible and
practical for all anticipated delivery vehicles, including full length semi trucks.
Based upon the plans submitted, it appears that access to the upper levels of the
parking ramp is only available from the south. The developer must clarify the circulation
and access patterns for the parking ramp and provide full parking access from all ramp
entrances.
The right-in/right-out access points from Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive are the
primary access points to the office building drop off and the parking lot in front of the
retail space. It appears that traffic entering the site from Golden Hills Drive wishing to
access the office building drop off will have a difficult left turn at the north-end of the
proposed median. The radius on the median should be reviewed, and be modified as
needed, to provide sufficient turning radius for cars and light delivery vehicles.
In addition, signing and striping must be installed in the vicinity of the drop off loop to
provide counter-clockwise circulation only. This should include prohibition of traffic
turning left into the loop after exiting the parking ramp.
All work performed by the developer within public street right-of-ways must comply with
the City's Right-of-Way Management Ordinance and be built consistent with City
standards and specifications.
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
3
Travel Demand Manaaement Plan:
The developer has submitted a Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) for the
proposed PUD. In order to minimize the impacts that traffic generated from this PUD
has on peak traffic periods, the developer has agreed to develop and implement an
incentive program to promote alternate modes of transportation. These measures
include providing bike lockers and shower facilities, promoting transit and car-pooling
incentives, flexible work schedules, scheduling truck deliveries for off-peak times,
designating a staff member to serve as Commuter Benefits Coordinator, conducting
commuter surveys and participating the formation of a Travel Management
Organization.
As with other office developments within the Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive area,
traffic generation during peak hours is a concern. As discussed above, the TDMP
outlines specific approaches to reducing the peak hour traffic flows to and from the
PUD. In order to provide the ability to further analyze trip generation in the future if
capacity issues develop in this area, the developer must provide the ability for the City
to monitor the traffic in and out of the parking ramp. This capability has been provided at
the Allianz parking ramp and has been included in recent discussions with the owners of
the Colonnade site. The final PUD plans must include specific information regarding a
traffic counting system.
Utility Plan:
The proposed PUD will receive sanitary sewer and water service from extensions of
existing facilities into the site. Adequate capacity is available in the City sanitary sewer
and water systems to accommodate this development.
The proposed sanitary sewer service into the site is acceptable as shown on the utility
plan. This service extension includes work within the right-of-way of Xenia Avenue as
part of the City's public improvement project, and extension of the service into the PUD
by the developer. The developer will be responsible for the construction costs for the
sewer service included in the City project. In addition, the developer will be responsible
for the maintenance of the sewer service from the City's main in Xenia Avenue into
each of the proposed buildings.
There are three existing sanitary sewer services to this site that will not be used
following development. These services will be removed as part of the City's public
improvement project, with all costs specially assessed to the developer.
The proposed water supply system shown on the utility plan must be modified to include
a looped watermain through the site. This loop should utilize the existing 10 inch
diameter pipe previously installed by the City near the Xenia Avenue site entrance, and
connect to the existing 8 inch diameter pipe near the southeast corner of the site. This
watermain loop must not pass beneath the commercial portion of the development as
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
4
currently shown on the plans, and must include individual metered services to each of
the buildings.
The developer must remove the existing 6 inch diameter cast iron hydrant lead that
parallels Xenia Avenue. The new hydrant lead should be a 6 inch diameter ductile iron
pipe.
All watermains within the PUD will be owned and maintained by the developer.
Maintenance guidelines and requirements will be outlined in the development
agreement for the PUD.
The watermain loop, and all hydrant leads on site must be within 20 foot wide drainage
and utility easements as shown on the preliminary plat. The illustrated easements must
be revised to be consistent with the watermain loop discussed above.
Gradina, Drainaae and Erosion Control:
This proposed PUD is located within the Sweeney Lake subdistrict of the Bassett Creek
Watershed. Therefore, the development is subject to the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission's (BCWMC) Requirements for Improvements and
Development Proposals, including the non-degradation requirements. The plans for the
PUD must be approved by the BCWMC prior to final approval of the development.
The proposed development includes the construction of a nutrient and sediment
removal pond in the southeast corner of the site. Based upon the information submitted
it appears that this pond is adequately sized to provide water quality treatment for its
watershed. The discharge from this pond will flow into the existing storm sewer system
in Xenia Avenue, and northwards to the Sweeney Branch of Bassett Creek.
The existing storm sewer located along the western site boundary will be removed and
replaced as previously discussed in this review. The plans for relocating this storm
sewer must be modified to utilize reinforced concrete pipe for this storm sewer.
Due to the size of this development, the developer will be required to obtain a general
storm water discharge permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The
developer must submit a copy of this permit application to the Public Works Department
when the application is made, and a copy of the permit must be provided after it is
issued.
The developer will be required to obtain a City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and
Erosion Control Permit for this proposed project. This permit must be obtained prior to
the start of any work on site.
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
5
Tree Preservation:
This proposed PUD is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. However, due
to the absence of tress on the site a Tree Preservation Permit will not be required. The
development will be required to comply with the City's minimum landscape standards.
Summary and Recommendations:
Public Works staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for the
proposed Xenia Ridge Planned Unit Development subject to the comments contained in
this review. A summary of the major issues to be addressed is as follows. However,
additional points to be addressed are included within the text of this report.
1) The developer must complete an application for easement vacation that runs
concurrently with the PUD Final Plan approval for the drainage easement along
the western edge of the site.
2) The portion of proposed sidewalk parallel to and south of the Xenia Avenue site
access must be removed from the plans.
3) The plans be modified so the asphalt trail in the northwest corner of the site be
located entirely within the subject property, or an easement be acquired from the
railroad for the trail as proposed.
4) The developer must demonstrate the need for the width of the site access in the
southwest corner of the site and include a center median in the driveway to
separate traffic.
5) The developer must address the truck turning and site access issues for
deliveries to the office building at the north access to the parking ramp as
discussed in this review.
6) The site plans must be modified to clarify the site circulation, signing and turning
radii in the vicinity of the office building drop off area and the eastern access
point to the parking ramp.
7) The developer must include ramp metering for all three access points to the
parking ramp, with details provided with the final PUD submittal.
8) The developer must modify the utility plan to incorporate the watermain loop and
other revisions discussed within this review.
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
6
9) The PUD is subject to the review and comment of the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission.
10)The developer must obtain the proper permits from the City of Golden Valley and
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and any other required permits not
specifically discussed, prior to the start of work on site.
The approval of this PUD is also subject to the review and comments of other City staff.
C: Mike Kotila, SEH
Jupe Hale, WSB
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
Gary Johnson, Building Official
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
G:\Developments - Private\Xenia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
7
Hey
Memorandum
Fire Department
763-593-8065 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning
From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
Subject: PUD #108 - Xenia Ridge, 700-800 Xenia Avenue South
Date: May 19, 2009
Cc: Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Jeff Oliver, City Engineer
The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the preliminary PUD plans for the Opus
Development regarding the Xenia Ridge located at 700-800 Xenia Avenue South. This review
has focused on fire department requirements on demolition, fire department apparatus
access, utilities, landscaping and reasonable level of life safety from the hazards of fire or
dangerous conditions and to provide safety to firefighters and emergency responders during
an emergency operation to the site.
Demolition
1. The demolition of the buildings on the current site shall be in accordance with the 2006
Minnesota State Fire Code, Chapter 14.
2. The existing private fire hydrants and other private fire suppression equipment
currently located on the site shall not be salvaged or re-used for this new
development.
3. Remove all existing private fire suppression equipment inside the building including,
but not limited to, fire pumps, wet and dry fire suppression systems, and any other fire
extinguishing equipment located inside the buildings.
Utility Plan
1. Provide post indicator valves (PIV) for all fire suppression water supply systems for
each building and parking ramp located on the proposed plan. The post indicator
valves shall be installed in accordance with recognized fire codes and standards and
shall not be installed near the building collapse zone.
2. The installation of fire hydrants located on this proposed site shall be in accordance
with the Minnesota State Fire Code and also in conjunction with the City of Golden
Valley Engineering Department. The fire hydrants shall not be installed near the
building collapse zone.
3. The proposed underground water service for the fire suppression systems and fire
hydrants for the office tower, parking ramp and retail/office areas shall be installed with
due regard of the installation under the buildings and dead-end water mains and
hydrants.
4. The location of the fire hydrants on the proposed site shall not be obstructed in any
manner or materials including, but not limited to, landscaping, electrical equipment,
gas meters and/or other means that would hinder the fire department's operation.
5. The water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be
provided to premise upon which facilities, buildings, or portions of building are
hereafter constructed or moved into or within the city of Golden Valley.
6. The fire flow requirements for buildings or portions of the building and facilities shall be
determined by an approved method by the fire code official. The fire flow requirements
will be determined by the proposed facilities, building or portion of building, location,
type of construction, type of use of the building, and all floor levels.
Civil Site
1. The fire department access road for the proposed site shall be in accordance with the
Minnesota State Fire Code. The fire department access road shall have a minimum
unobstructed width of 26' in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of the
building more than 30' in height. The fire department access road shall be posted,
"No Parking Fire Lane" in accordance with the City of Golden Valley's City Ordinance.
2. The fire department access road shall be provided for every facility, building or portion
of the building. The access road shall extend to within 150' of all portions of the facility
or any portion of an exterior wall measured to an approved route around the building.
If the fire department access road cannot be installed due to location on the property
or other conditions, an approved alternate means of fire protection or safeguards will
be required. Fire protection or safeguards include, but are not limited to, fire
suppression system, Class I standpipe system, fire alarm system and any other fire
suppression or safeguards approved by the fire code official.
3. The fire department access road shall be designed and maintained to support the
imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather
driving capabilities.
4. The fire department access road shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not
less than 13'6".
5. The inside turning radius shall be a minimum of 20 feet: outside radius shall be a
minimum of 40 feet and shall meet approval of the fire department and the turning
radius shall be identified on submitted site plan for fire department review and
approval.
6. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads exceeding 150' in length shall be provided with
an approved area for turnarounds for the fire apparatus. Please submit a site plan to
the fire code official with a proposed selection(s) of a fire apparatus turnaround for
approval.
LandscapinQ Plan
1. The landscaping materials that are designed for this site shall not be placed or kept
near fire hydrants, fire department connections, post indicator valves or other fire
protection and control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire
hydrants from being immediately deterred or hindered from gaining immediate access.
2. The landscaping materials location on the proposed site shall not be obstructed in any
manner or materials including, but not limited to, electrical equipment, gas meters
required building egress and/or other means that would hinder the fire department's
ground and arielladder operation.
Floor Plans
1. The floor plan will require additional fire protection or safeguards to include, but are not
limited to, fire suppression system, Class I standpipe system, fire alarm system and
any other fire suppression or safeguards approved by the fire code official.
2. The proposed high-rise office building shall be designed in accordance with the
Minnesota Fire/ Building Codes and the high-rise occupancy requirements including,
but not limited to, fire command center, Fire/Police Department radio communication
system compatible with the current 800M Hz digit system, elevator master control
boards and other fire and building emergency operation requirements.
3. The fire department will require a fire department rapid-entry lock box for the proposed
site. The rapid-entry lock box will be installed on all fire department access exterior
entry doors and for each retail tenant space identified on this plan. The rapid-entry lock
boxes can be purchased from the Knox Box Company at httpllwww.knoxbox.com.
4. The fire suppression system and the standpipe system shall be installed in accordance
with the Minnesota State Fire Code and other recognized fire code standards.
5. The location of fire extinguishers throughout the proposed offices building will be in
accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code.
Ramp & Retail Floor Plan
1. The proposed retail concept for this proposed site shall be designed in accordance
with the Minnesota State Fire Code.
2. The parking ramp concept for this proposed site shall be designed in accordance with
the Minnesota State Fire Code. Additional safeguards and fire protection equipment
will be required for this proposed site.
3. The fire department rapid-entry lock boxes will be required for this proposed site. The
lock boxes will be installed on all fire department access exterior entry doors and other
fire department access doors within this retail space. The rapid-entry lock boxes can
be purchased from the Knox Box Company at http://www.knoxbox.com.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 763-593-8065.
, OPUS@
Xenia Ridge
Narrative
PUD Application
December 4, 2007
*Changes reflect updated
plans submitted 2-29-08
Xenia Ridge is a 6 acre, mixed use office and retail development to be located at 700/800 Xenia
Avenue, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Designed and developed by Opus Northwest, L.L.C., ("Opus")
Xenia Ridge will offer state of the art office and retail space conveniently located along 1-394 and
Xenia Avenue, providing convenient access, high visibility and close proximity toa wide variety of
related retail amenities. These features, combined with Opus' plans to develop Xenia Ridge as a Gold-
Certified Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED Project) will make it one of the
premier office and retail projects in the Twin Cities.
278,842* 11,300*
The mixed-use development will consist of over;;;;26S,eoo-square feet of Class A office and:f8;OOO-
square feet of retail providing a unique blend of uses that will be attractive not only to the tenants
within the project, but to the surrounding residential community as well.
PUD Goals
Opus has been working in close collaboration with the City to develop a project that responds to the
stated goals within the PUD ordinance. The following describes some of these planning concepts as
well as the overall development:
~ Development Overview And Architectural Character
The site consists of three primary structures: an 8 story office building, a parking ramp, and a
retaiVoffice condominium structure.
The office building consists of 265,000 square feet and will be located on the northern third of
the property with its access oriented in an east-west direction. This location on the site allows the
building to frame the balance of the development with its front door along its southern fa<tade.
The office building's exterior materials will consist of a slightly reflective green glass with buff
colored architectural precast and metal accents. Each elevation of the building responds to the
site. The south face will contain a greater percentage of glass than any of the other elevations
allowing for maximum natural light into the building. The eastern fa<tade provides views of the
Minneapolis skyline and the north and west facades are softer in appearance with ribbon glass
and architectural precast in response to the wooded neighborhood they face. The building has
comer balconies on three sides. The south fa~ade also has a bold metal accent at its roofline
which will serve as screening for necessary mechanical equipment.
The parking ramp is situated on the site along the western border adjacent to the rail line and
industrial properties providing a natural buffer to these areas. The retail and office
condominiums will integrate along the eastern face of the parking ramp, providing a two story
element that frames the project's central court and gathering area. A continuous metal structure
between the retail and office condominiums provides not only a sheltered sidewalk for the
retailers, but also functions as an exterior balcony for the office users above.
, OPUS@
~ LEED Certification
Opus plans to seek Gold Certification under the LEED for Core and Shell category. Many of the
LEED requirements and goals will provide direct benefit to not only the users of space within the
building, but to the public as a whole. A few of the sustainable features Opus will incorporate
into the building include: onsite stormwater design and retention, high efficiency mechanical
systems, solar orientation of the office building, water use conservation through restricted flow
fixtures, bicycle storage, public transportation via onsite bus stop, under floor air distribution
(UFAD) providing tenants individual temperature control, and easier planning and layout of
space, significant diversion of construction waste from landfills to recycling programs, and
redevelopment of a brownfield site.
~ Landscaping
The heavily landscaped site is intended to compliment the surrounding area and create a
pedestrian-friendly destination for not only the office and retail tenants but the surrounding
residential neighborhood as well. The site includes a prominent water feature at the southeast
corner running along Xenia A venue with a combination of both natural vegetation and hardscape.
This area will serve as a common gathering spot for the development and the community at large.
The property will be entirely flanked by sidewalks and/or walking paths providing easy and
intuitive pedestrian connections throughout. Additionally, the project will enjoy connections to
the City trail systems. These two trails pass along the project's border to the east and south.
~ Access and Traffic
The primary access point for office tenants will be along Golden Hills Drive, which serves as the
entry point for the parking deck. Secondary access, primarily for retail customers, will also take
place along Golden Hills Drive while a right-in and right-out access point will exist along Xenia
Avenue. Finally, a single access point will exist along Laurel Avenue for loading and service
purposes only. This entrance and dock area has been strategically located between the parking
ramp and office tower so as to provide maximum screening from Laurel Avenue.
Pedestrian traffic between the office building and retail will enjoy a covered connection along the
retail frontage and office building's main entrance. Tenants, visitors and the general public will
also be able to enjoy the common green space and seating areas provided throughout the site.
A new MTC bus stop has been planned and incorporated into the site along Golden Hills Drive at
the southern portion of the property.
~ Parking and Maintenance
The parking requirement of 4 spaces per 1,000 rentable square feet has been met under the
submitted site plan. This was accomplished by incorporating on-grade parking plus five (5)
stories of decked parking. * (See.letter from Ericka ~Hller-Opus regarding parki~g
varlance)
A Reciprocal Easement Agreement will govern the use, operations, maintenance, repair design
and construction of the project and create the necessary easements for parking, access, utilities,
signage, construction, etc.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
A regular meeting of the Planni Commission was held at the Golden Valley
City Hall, Council Chambers, 7 0 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley,
'nnesota, on Monday, April 14: 2008. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order
at m.
1.
Eck referred to pa 0 and n,' ed that the sec ~entence should read "Schmidgall
stated that it m s the color g: .es all the way 'throug' material".
Eck refer, to the fifth paragr .,
shoul e "propose". ' I'
VED by Schmidgall, secon, d by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to
approve the March 10, 2008 '. utes with the above noted corrections.
2. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan Review - Planned Unit
Development - Xenia Ridge - PUD 105
Applicant: Opus Northwest, LLC
Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South
Purpose: To allow for the construction of approximately 279,000 square
feet of ()ffice space and approximately 11,300 square feet of
retail space
Grimes stated that Opus is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow
for the construction of a mixed use development on the northwest corner of Golden
Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue South. He noted that the development will consist of
approximately 279,000 square feet of office space, 11,300 square feet of
retail/restaurant space and a fairly large parking ramp which will include 60 spaces
for bicycle parking.
Grimes referred to a location map and stated that that this property is the former
Olympic printing site and it is the last large site in the Golden Hills Redevelopment
district.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
Page 2
Grimes stated that the property is designated Mixed Use on the General Land Use
Plan map and it is zoned Industrial but it will be rezoned to Mixed Use in the future.
He added that he believes this proposal will be consistent with the proposed new
Mixed Use Zoning District.
Grimes referred to City Engineer Jeff Oliver's memo and noted that the proposed
Traffic Management Plan will be also be reviewed by the City of St. Louis Park. He
added that Mr. Oliver would also like to see the installation of a mechanism to
count cars entering and leaving the ramp. He said that overall the proposed plans
seem to work well but it depends on a number of improvements being made on
Golden Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue in order to provide enough capacity in the
future. He explained that the applicant will be assessed for the street
improvements and they are also requesting tax increment financing to help with the
improvements.
Keysser asked Grimes to address the parking variance being requested. Grimes
explained that the applicant originally had planned to meet the parking
requirements but when the traffic plan was done they feel that the 90 less parking
spaces they've proposed will be adequate based on national parking studies. He
stated that generally, Golden Valley likes to see fewer parking spaces if possible
and he feels confident that the proposed amount of parking will work.
Kluchka asked Grimes if the proposed new Mixed Use Zoning District should be
approved by the City Council before this PUD is approved. Grimes said no
because this mixed use proposal is being handled through the PUD.
Keysser asked if there is anything in this PUD proposal that would not fit in with the
proposed new Mixed Use Zoning District. Grimes said he didn't think so.
Waldhauser noted that the building materials would not conform to the proposed
new Mixed Use Zoning District requirements. Grimes explained that the proposal
has to be reviewed using the ordinances that are in effect now because it is difficult
to start reviewing plans under one set of rules and finish reviewing them under a
different set of rules.
David Menke, Vice President of Development for Opus, stated that they have been
working on this proposal for approximately six months and they've incorporated the
input they've received from the neighborhood and city staff into their proposal. He
referred to a site plan and explained that the 5.8 acre site includes office space,
retail space and office condo space. He stated that the corner of Golden Hills Drive
and Xenia Avenue will be viewed as the "front door" of the building and they are
maximizing the green space on the site by having 1,092 parking spaces versus the
1,180 spaces required by the zoning code. He added that they are proposing to
construct a LEED certified building and one of the qualifications is to have fewer
parking spaces than required. He explained that the City's parking requirements
calculate the number of parking spaces based on gross square footage, but that
they are calculating the number of parking spaces based on rentable square
footage.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
Page 3
Menke referred to drawings of the proposed site and buildings and discussed the
layout of the buildings, the sidewalk connectivity and access to the site. He stated
that the buildings will be constructed of architectural, pre-cast panels and glass
curtains with a prominent top on the building to call attention to the front door. He
noted that there will be balconies on the southeast and southwest corners of the
office building and a patio on the north side.
Waldhauser asked if they are proposing a covered entry way on the front side of
the building. Menke said yes and referred to the drawings and pointed out the
entrance and covered area. He discussed the parking for the retail space and
noted that the retail building will help screen a large portion of the parking ramp.
Keysser asked if the office condos were above the retail space or if they were
going to be located in the main office building. Menke said the office condos will be
located above the retail space. He discussed the LEED certification process and
said that they are seeking the gold level of LEED certification (second highest
level) which is tough to do with a multi-tenant building. He discussed solar
orientation, storm water management, water use conservation, under-floor air
ductwork, bicycle parking, locker rooms and state-of-the-art conference roorns. He
referred to the traffic management plan and discussed trails, biking and walking in
the area.
Damon Farber, landscape architect for the project, referred to a drawing of the site
and discussed the vision. He noted that the pond and green space on the corner
will form a gateway and be a visual focus. He said that one very important element
in the design of the site was to make the buildings part of the neighborhood and
respecting the issues in the City. He discussed the series of sidewalks and trails
and noted that the west side of the parking ramp will be a "green wall". He
discussed the plaza area intended to invite the neighborhood in and create a true
sense of place.
Keysser referred to the top on the building and asked if that element will screen the
mechanicals on the roof. Menke said it will provide some screening.
Keysser referred to the building materials on the north wall and asked why it isn't
going to be curtain glass like the other sides. Menke said that is a quieter side of
the building so they wanted to make it less reflective and they wanted to call more
attention to the front.
Cera asked about the timeline of the project. Menke said they would like to begin
construction as soon as possible. He added that it is a challenging market and they
are working on pre-leasing the tenant space.
Keysser asked what type of retail use they envision in this space. Menke said it will
be service based retail. He said they received strong feedback from the
neighborhood that they would like to see some food based businesses.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
Page 4
Keysser asked about the potential size of the individual office condos. Menke said
they could be any size from as small as 1,500 square feet.
Kluchka asked how the West End development in St. Louis Park is impacting this
project. Menke said they are very confident about their retail space but that they
would like to be first to construct their office space.
Keysser asked if any thought had been given to building a small hotel on the site.
Menke stated that their early discussions included a hotel but they believe the
highest and best use for this site is retail and office.
Waldhauser asked Menke if they had considered wrapping the retail space around
the south end of the building. Menke said they had considered that option but it
would take out some of the parking spaces and they felt the area being proposed
for retail was the prime location.
McCarty asked if the office condo users will be able to use the facilities in the other
office building. Menke said yes.
Kluchka referred to the proposed patio on the north side of the building and asked
if that could be made into a more prominent entry. Menke said they wanted to have
the strong entrance element in the front. He said they wanted something in the
back to be a gathering area but not necessarily an entrance. He added that there
are also security issues with having another entrance. Kluchka said he feels there
is no entrance approach to the neighborhood on the north and he would like that
area to feel more approachable. Menke said they could explore the idea of an
entrance on the north but the feedback they got from the neighborhood was that
they wanted a quieter feel on that side of the building. Grimes added that the
applicant received clear direction from the City Council that they wanted the
emphasis of the building to be at the Xenia Avenue/Golden Hills Drive corner.
Waldhauser said she thinks the north side of the building is very attractive and
even though the patio area is not an official entrance it works well and looks like
the back of an apartment building and not just like the back of an office building.
Keysser asked if the retail businesses would have evening and weekend hours
and not just the same hours as the office tenants. Menke said the retail businesses
will have evening and weekend hours and that they will be able to dictate their own
hours.
McCarty asked if this project has room for growth or expansion upwards. Menke
said no.
Keysser referred to the requirement in the proposed new Mixed Use zoning district
regarding 20% of the front fayade being Kasota stone or another type of limestone
and asked how that requirement would have affected this project. Menke said he
thinks the plans would have been similar to what is being proposed. He added that
natural stone has maintenance issues and that some of the pre-cast materials are
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
Page 5
indistinguishable from Kasota stone. Keysser said he thinks the proposed building
is very attractive even though it is not "stone".
Kluchka asked if there will be any screening on the east elevation of the parking
ramp. Menke said yes. There will be an ornamental type of screening with cables
and vines.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Dr. Arnold Leonard, 5212 Colonial Drive, said he would like to address the traffic
congestion in the area. He said with the recently completed apartment building at
Turners Crossroad north of the fire station, Colonnade, Allianz and now Opus their
neighborhood is boxed in. He said he would like to see access from the Glenwood
Avenue intersection with TH 100 to 1-394. This would allow better access to
downtown Minneapolis. He said there could be signs posted and the speed limits
could be decreased but the City should take responsibility to change the access on
Highway 100 going east so people in the area are satisfied.
Keysser asked Grimes why MnDOT won't open access to 1-394. Grimes said that
MnDOT has stated that opening access to 1-394 is a safety issue. He stated that
staff can ask MnDOT again about the issue, but he is not sure how they will
respond.
Dan Steinberg, 1033 Sumter Avenue South, said he likes the idea of looking at
something other than plywood on this site but his concern is also the traffic. He
suggested asking the County to widen Xenia to four lanes. Grimes explained that
Xenia is a city street, not a county street and that the City recently reconstructed
Xenia in an effort to control the traffic. Steinberg said he realized the street was
just rebuilt but with the West End development in St. Louis Park everyone is going
to try to get to Xenia and 1-394. Grimes explained that Golden Valley and St. Louis
Park are working on a bicycle and pedestrian study in this area in order to make it
as safe as possible.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public
hearing.
Kluchka asked Grimes to address the traffic issues. Grimes explained that this
proposal is obviously going to create more trips and that is why the City is requiring
a traffic management plan and improvements to the streets. He stated that traffic
studies have been done with the previous proposals on this site and that staff feels
with the improvements being proposed it will be adequate for the traffic in the area.
He stated that the Golden Hills/Xenia intersection is the biggest concern because
of the car, bus and pedestrian traffic and that during peak hours it will be
congested but future development has been factored into all the City's plans.
Cera referred to the proposed traffic management plan and questioned the
difference in the trip generation numbers in this plan compared to previous
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 14, 2008
Page 6
proposals. Grimes stated that many of the trips are peak hour trips and even with
the additional trips there still is the capacity to handle all of the additional traffic.
Waldhauser asked if the goal of 7% for non-motorized and transit trips is a good
goal. Grimes stated that Allianz has the same goal in their traffic management
plan. Keysser said it is hard to have more pedestrian trips with a multi-tenant
building. Grimes noted that Opus is proposing several things that he thinks will
increase the number of pedestrian trips beyond their goal. Menke added that the
LEED threshold is 5%.
Kluchka said he is concerned about the amount of parking and he finds it
interesting that LEED requirements want less parking. Menke said the requirement
of 4 parking spaces per 1,000 rentable square feet of office space is a ratio that is
pretty tried and true.
Keysser asked if the office condos will have an association. Menke said yes.
Eck said this seems to be a very well planned and thought out project.
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of the Preliminary Plans for Xenia Ridge PUD 105 with the
following conditions:
1. The Xenia Ridge plan packet consisting of 24 sheets and prepared by Opus
Northwest, L.L.C. shall become a part of this approval. These plans sheets are
listed on Sheet Number CS and include the preliminary plat, site plan, grading
plan, landscape plan and floor plans.
2. Lighting plans must meet the requirements of the City's lighting code. Prior to
approval of building permits for the site, the proposed Photometric Site Plan will
be further reviewed to ensure compliance with the plan.
3. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by the Building Board of
Review.
4. The findings and recommendations in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver,
PE, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated April 7, 2008 shall become a
part of this recommendation. This includes Opus signing an agreement with the
City of Golden Valley that would agree to payment of special assessments for
street and other public improvements. Opus would also waive their right to
appeal special assessments as part of this agreement.
5. The findings and recommendations in the memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire
Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Zoning and dated April 7, 2008
shall become a part of this recommendation.
6. The preliminary PUD plan for Xenia Ridge is consistent with the intent and
purpose provision of the PUD chapter of the zoning code and other planning and
development principles adhered to by the City.
Regular Meeting of the City Council
May 6, 2008
Page 3
. ~i and motion carried unanimously to proclaim May
Arbor Month.
ee;--ana/or Wine at Brookview Park
MO Y Pentel, se on~ed by Freibe~g an6ti~~ied unanimously to approve the
ests for beer andl r wine at Brookvlew Park as recomvn~,d by staff.
Public Hearina - Preliminary Desian Plan Approval - PUD #105 - Xenia Ridae - 700
and 800 Xenia Avenue South
David Menke, Vice President of Development for Opus, Damon Farber, architect, Mark
Anderson, MFRA, Craig Vaughan, SRF and Mike Kotila, SEH, presented the plan and
answered questions from the Council.
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, presented the staff report, presented
the Planning Commission report and answered questions from the Council. Thomas Burt
and Jeannine Clancy and Allen Barnard answered questions from the Council.
The Mayor opened the meeting for public input and persons present to do so were
afforded the opportunity to express their views thereon.
Dr. Arnold Leonard, 5212 Colonial Drive, stated that it is very hard to get out of the
neighborhood, there is going to be a lot of development in the area and he feels that
Highway 100 going East on 394 should be opened up to allow for the neighborhood to get
on to the Highway; stated he called MnDOT and asked that it be looked at; stated he
doesn't think it is going to cost too much and does not feel there will be a safety factor to
open it up; feels it will solve a big traffic problem as it is hard to get out of the area now and
will get worse as more development occurs; and feels the Council should take the opening
of Highway 100 into consideration.
Sonia Fortier, 408 Turnpike Road, expressed her concern for traffic in the area; stated the
traffic studies were directed at Golden Hills and Laurel and do not address the Spring
Green residents; stated there are only two ways to get out of the neighborhood; feels the
extra trips generated during rush hour on Laurel and Xenia will create a problem getting in
and out of the area; asked the Council to take that into consideration; feels the Council
should make sure the new development complies with the lighting requirements of the City
Code, stated that now she looks at the parking lights at the Allianz building, wants the
balcony, parking area and parking garage to be screened from the neighborhood.
The Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing.
Regular Meeting of the City Council
May 6, 2008
Page 3
Public Hearina - Preliminary Desian Plan Approval - PUD #105 - Xenia Ridae - 700
and 800 Xenia Avenue South - Continued
MOVED by Pentel, seconded by Freiberg and motion carried unanimously that the City
Council make the following findings:
1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site
and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under
conventional provisions of the ordinance.
2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of
the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including
steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters.
3. Efficient - Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes
preservation) of the land.
4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals.
5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general
health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City.
6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and
all other PUD ordinance provisions.
MOVED by Pentel, seconded by Freiberg and motion carried unanimously to approve the
preliminary design plan, Xenia Ridge, PUD NO.1 05, subject to the following conditions:
1. The Xenia Ridge plan packet consisting of 24 sheets and prepared by Opus Northwest,
L.L.C. shall become a part of this approval. These plans sheets are listed on Sheet
Number CS and include the preliminary plat, site plan, grading plan, landscape plan
and floor plans.
2. Lighting plans must meet the requirements of the City's lighting code. Prior to approval
of building permits for the site, the proposed Photometric Site Plan will be further
reviewed to insure compliance with the plan. Before final plan approval the detail of the
balcony lights be provided to the Council.
3. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by the Building Board of
Review.
4. The findings and recommendations in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and dated April 7, 2008 shall become a part of this
recommendation. This includes Opus signing an agreement with the City of Golden
Valley that would agree to payment of special assessments for street and other public
improvements. Opus would also waive their right to appeal special assessments as part
of this agreement.
5. The findings and recommendations in the memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire
Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated April 7,
2008 shall become a part of this recommendation.
6. A snow storage plan is submitted before approval of the final plan.
I
,
'C.
-<
fJi....
XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
FINAL-DRAFT
Prepared for
Opus Northwest, LLC
Prepared by
SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150
Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
(763) 475-0010
Fax: (763) 475-2429
February 2008
SRF No. 0076333
\
j
'{"
,
,,;....J
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paae
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
PROJECT DESCRiPTION........................................................................... ................ 1
GOALS OF THE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN................................................ 1
DISCLOSURE OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ....................................................... 4
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS............................................................................................. 4
PARKING OPERATIONS............................................................................................ 5
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE ...................................................6
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................................... 6
PROPOSED ACTIONS......................................................................... .............. ........ 6
APPENDIX A - Traffic Study Technical Memorandum
APPENDIX B - Parking Study Technical Memorandum
LIST OF FIGURES
Paae
Figure 1 - Project Area................................................................................. 2
Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan...................................................................... 3
Figure 3A - Alternative Transportation Infrastructure - Transit .................... 7
Figure 3B - Alternative Transportation Infrastructure - Bike/Pedestrian ...... 8
LIST OF TABLES
Paae
Table 1 -Target Transportation Goals Mode Split Goals.............................. 1
Table 2 - Parking Operations Summary - City Requirements ..................... 5
Table 3 - Parking Operations Summary - ITE Parking Demand.................. 5
Table 4 - Transit Operations Summary ........................................................ 6
H:\Projects\6333\TP\FINAL-DRAFT TDMP _ cv _ Rev2.doc
i '..,
, .-
, .
INTRODUCTION
This Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) was prepared for the proposed Opus Xenia
Ridge redevelopment located in the northwest quadrant of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive
in the City of Golden Valley (see Figure 1: Project Location). The project site is currently zoned
light industrial, however, the developer, Opus Northwest L.L.C., is proposing a commercial
Planned Unit Development (PUD). This TDMP identifies a plan of actions to be completed by
the developer with support from various commuter organizations and the City of Golden Valley.
It is designed to create an effective commute management program, which should reduce the
demand for parking at the site and minimize the impact on local roads due to vehicular travel to
and from the development. The success of this plan relies on the level of commitment to
marketing and implementing the programs identified herein, with support from the City, Opus,
and tenant employers.
Project Description
The project site currently contains 37,000 square feet oflight industrial office along with surface
parking. Based on information provided by City staff, the existing office space is assumed 30
percent occupied. The proposed redevelopment would demolish all existing buildings and
parking, and construct new buildings with 278,842 square feet of office space, 7,896 square feet
of retail space and 3,500 square feet of restaurant space. The parking garage will be accessed
from Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive (see Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan). The planned
completion date of construction and opening for full occupancy is 2009.
Goals of the Travel Demand Management Plan
The purpose of this TDMP is to support the overall City of Golden Valley transportation goals.
The objective of this plan is to encourage employees and visitors to use alternative modes of
transportation other than driving alone. This TDMP identifies actions to manage and minimize
vehicle trips and parking generation of the development. It should be noted that this TDMP has
been prepared in consultation with the City of Golden Valley to ensure that key issues are
identified and adequately addressed.
Based on previous TDMP's in the area and with the current status of the transit and
bicycle/pedestrian system, the developer has identified the following goals in terms of mode split
for the project:
Table 1
Target Transportation Mode Split Goals
Mode Split Goals
Auto 93%
Transit/Bicycle/W alking 7%
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 1
.;
~
. vi '<
'" z w
I -~.-/ f-;C I W 0 '" 5 COl'
.; (' <? -IE. _I~ ffi 2. <
I '" ~ lr. 0
j ~) ~.... ___+,.. ~ ~ LAUREL
9 ~ "'k 29. WI'" I
Il!~ :r - ~ ~I 1Il < ~<"
l < 56" I CSt ~ z z
~L~{j1,1 ~!Q!" ~ MARK"ET ~ I ST.
\~~~, ~L 8 I ~- (:~
~ \V;<:JZ~":;~~ f (~ ~
'" ~ -====:--
, '-~-
1< """ i ,-",
o 0 ~.
::> 0 I W. 13th
fil 0 I'
!f ~;;! I ~ i \ LA. 131/2 S..
t:l :r \-----l '
~ \ OR \ W. 14th .
'TWOOD HILlS I . \ -~
W. 16Ih_":>'_:J TEXAS_ i
", 1
u.i ,CIR/
~ <t./ uJ
~ ~l
~ ~ Tj
f\ I ,~/I W. lBth
~ .,,? '-... .s-,S'" /
~, '/
~'\ ,/ ~
~ --lE.
o \ ;;; ,-/
l <: /'
--- -.----,-- . \ \'
'6 \ \ ~ \.
,. \ 5 '
C:1 ~ \ ~ ~ \ w.
-~",
g
m
CONsutTINGGaoll1'.INC.
0076333
January 2008
w
Z
MEM
/'
X
~,/ O~"'\.!! RG MI
?"o~'
MEM ORlAl .
7"'- '" ~
,.
..,
.
51 ~
<
AV.,
POPLAR
AVE.
~~~~
~
Lea -~~J.~OI
LA.
SI.;
i2IW
~ ~
.;
u.i S.
~
iLi
~
.,;
AVE.
w.
ST.
uJ
~
W. 16th
uJ
~
ST.
z
o
1Il
15i
o
~
Z
a. nd
~
~I}
:::>
o
2200
FRANKUN AVE.
~
~
54. QUEBEC OR.
ST.
PROJECT LOCATION
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Opus Northwest, LLC
Figure 1
)
1.
.'-'
The mode split goals should be attainable due to a number of factors working in favor of the site.
First, there is a major transit corridor (1-394) adjacent to the site that will allow employees easy
access to the metropolitan transit system. This corridor includes the Louisiana A venue Transit
Center to the west, Park Place Park and Ride to the east, and High Occupancy Vehicle lanes on
1-394. Second, with the close proximity of amenities within a short distance, many employees
will be able to bike or walk to secondary destinations (i.e. shopping or entertainment).
DISCLOSURE OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
This section of the TDMP summarizes and describes the transportation impacts associated with
the proposed redevelopment. A more detailed traffic and parking review can be found in the
Appendices of this Plan.
Traffic Operations
In September 2006, SRF Consulting Group completed a traffic study for what was then called
the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan. This previous work reviewed the traffic
impacts associated with a redevelopment project at this same location. The former land use
development plan is similar to the proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment plan in scale. As
part of the current Xenia Ridge Redevelopment TDMP, we have completed an addendum to the
previous Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. The purpose of this
addendum is to determine if the operations analysis completed as part of the Miner Site Travel
Demand Management Plan Traffic Study is still valid and applicable to the newly proposed Opus
Xenia Ridge redevelopment.
We have completed a trip generation estimate comparison and subsequent adjacent roadway
volume impact comparison. The trip generation estimate comparison between the two land use
scenarios (former Miner Site and proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopments) indicates that the
newly proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment generates: 1 Q percent more trips during the
a.m. peak hour; 18 percent more trips during the p.m. peak hour; 23 percent more trips on a daily
basis.
In addition to the total trip generation comparison presented above, a total traffic impact
comparison was conducted at the intersection with the lowest level of service from the Miner
Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. The Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive
intersection represents the intersection with the lowest level of service (LOS D). Based on our
r~yiew, the increase in proposed redevelopment trip generation equates to an approximate
I i~ercent increase in the total traffic volume at the intersection of Xenia Avenue and
'Golden Hills Drive. In this context the additional trip generation represents a relatively small
impact. The adjacent roadway network and intersections are capable of handling the additional
trip load with the recommended roadway improvements outlined in. the Miner Site Travel
Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. Therefore, the proposed Opus Xenia Ridge
redevelopment will not create additional impacts on the adjacent roadway network beyond what
was reported in the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. More details
and an expansion of this analysis discussion can be found in Appendix A.
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 4
.
,
,
},
Parking Operations
City Parkin!) Requirements
The City of Golden Valley, through its zoning code, requires developments to provide a
minimum number of off-street parking stalls. The proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment
will consist of office space, retail space and restaurant space. The proposed project plans to
supply 1,092 parking spaces within the development. Based on our review of the City parking
requirements, the proposed project is required to provide 1,182 off-street parking stalls. Based
on the City of Golden Valley parking requirements, the proposed project will have a 90 space
deficit. More details of the parking analysis can be found in Appendix B. Table 2 summarizes
these results.
Table 2
Parking Operations Summary
City of Golden Valley Requirements
Proposed Conditions
(Year of openin2 - 2009)
Proposed Off-Street Supply 1,092 spaces
City of Golden Valley Minimum Requirement * lJ82 spaces
Surplus/(Deficit) (90 spaces)
* See Parking Study technical memorandum for more information.
ITE Parkin!) Demand
A comparison analysis was conducted using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Parking Generation Manual (2004). Table 3 summarizes the results of this analysis. This
method uses key inputs, such as facility size and travel behavior characteristics, to estimate
parking demand. The ITE Parking Generation Manual method estimates the peak parking
occupancy based on surveys. The peak parking occupancy is the number of occupied parking
spaces during the peak usage time for a particular land use.
Assuming current travel behavior characteristics are maintained into the future, the proposed site
will have a future parking demand of approximately 745 stalls during an average weekday.
Please note that the ITE based parking demand values differ from the City of Golden Valley's
minimum parking requirements. This is provided as a comparison exercise only.
Table 3
Parking Operations Summary
ITE Projected Demand
Proposed Conditions
(Year of openin2 - 2009)
Proposed Off-Street Supply 1,092 spaces
ITE Projected Demand * 745 spaces
Surplus/(Deficit) 347 spaces
* See Parking Study technical memorandum for more information.
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 5
.
,
,
)!
Alternative Transportation Infrastructure
The project site is served by transit with direct access to bus routes that run along Xenia Avenue
and Golden Hills Drive. Other bus routes are within close walking distance (see Figure 3A).
These routes serve all regions of the metro area. Table 4 describes the routes that serve the
project directly. These routes run to downtown Minneapolis and the Louisiana Avenue Transit
Center where transfers to routes that serve the rest of the metropolitan area are available.
Table 4
Transit Operations Summary
Peak Frequency Non-Peak
Route Service Area (6 - 9 a.m. and Frequency
3 - 6:30 p.m.)
9 Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, 15 minutes 30 minutes
Downtown Minneapolis
643 Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, 30 minutes N/A
Downtown Minneapolis
The potential for pedestrian and bicycle activity is high within the proposed redevelopment area.
The projects west property line abuts the South Hennepin Regional Trail: Golden Valley to
Medicine Lake. The project site also has regional trails within close biking distance along the
Cedar Lake Trail and Theodore Wirth Parkway. The proximity of the site to these trails can be
seen in Figure 3B. These paths link to other city and regional pathways.
The applicant agrees to provide bicycle storage areas on site that will be sufficient in size and
number for the commercial and office uses. Such storage areas will be shown in the final plans
of the project that will be submitted to the City as part of the building permit application process.
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
The purpose of this section of the TDMP is to outline measures to encourage employees and
visitors of the proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopment to use alternative modes of transportation
instead of driving alone. The implementation of the following actions is the responsibility of the
building owner or manager. The building owner or manager agrees to fund, construct and
maintain all of the actions identified below.
Proposed Actions
The building owner, or manager, will help the City of Golden Valley support and promote
transportation-related goals and policies. To accomplish these goals, the building owner, or
manager, with the assistance of Commuter Connection, will develop and implement an incentive
program in order to actively encoutage employees and visitors to use alternative modes of
transportation. The incentive program will include, but is not limited to, the following strategies
and incentives:
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 6
,
\')1
~
.
I
Legend
.. Project Site
. Bus Sto ps
D Bus Shelters
Bus Routes
..
Routes Serving Sites: 9, 643
Project Site
.
Golden Hills Dr
1-394 Corridor Serving West Metro to
Downtown Minneapolis
Park Place
Park & Ride
....
~
Wayzata. Blv_d
------
rmu
CO!'\iSVLnSC GJ:ot;r.l~c.
ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE - TRANSIT
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Opus Northwest, LLC
Figure 3A
0076333
January 2008
'.
"
Co~ South Hennepin Regional Trail:
t . Golden Valley to Medicine Lake
~ Ir
Cortlawn 'oGir S
'---'
<1>j. ~;
> <l:'
c:x:: ~J
~I U
"'i '-
~ ~I
ro c
o 2
l_ .E1
'\
'I
-~I.
~ l ~ U\
~
! . - \
Ra(jisso~urnPike R~
~R(j ~)
--!::~~4
Laurel Ave
(f)
IV
>
c:x::
ell
"0
'C
o
.<-
"'0
~~
~
6l~
0'
.
Proj ct Site
Circle Owns
---
~
S\
\f'l \ 6\~
(
(f)
IV
>
<l:
c
ell
J::
t
ell
N
Wayzata Blvd
r-
~\
W 16th St
"'"
c~
~I"
<~+.
6lt?,
QI
Gamble Dr
Cedar Lake Trail:
Southwest Metro to Downtown Minneapolis
~ Legend
<l:1
~ . Project Site
'cl
o.
u: - Trails
IV
>
c:x::
W 24th St ~
-'-~'
:::>
~
COSSULnSG Gaocr.l/loic.
ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. BICYCLES
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Opus Northwest, LLC
Figure 38
0076333
January 2008
'-.1
i-'
1.) Support and Promote Bicycling and Walking as Alternatives
The building owner, or manager, will actively promote bicycling and walking as an
alternative means of commuting among the employees and visitors of Xenia Ridge,
primarily through information dissemination and the provision of bicycle storage facilities.
The building owner, or manager, commits to provide bicycle storage facilities (i.e. bike
racks, bike banks and/or bike lockers), to meet the demands of employees and visitors in a
location consistent with the design and landscaping of the redevelopment. Shower
facilities shall also be provided for employees biking or walking to work.
2.) Support Transit as an Alternative
The building owner, or manager, will actively promote transit/as an alternative means of
commuting among the employees and visitors of Xenia Ridge; primarily through
information dissemination. The provision of a transit stop along Golden Hills Drive (i.e.
bus shelter) should be included in the site plan. The building owner, or manager, will work
with Metro Transit to explore the possibilities of expanding bus service that serves the site
directly. The building owner, or manager, will also work with office tenants to develop a
program that will promote employee bus passes for those that choose to use transit a
minimum of three days per week.
3.) Support and Promote Car and Vanpooling
The building owner, or manager, will actively promote car and vanpooling as an alternative
means of commuting among the employees of Xenia Ridge; primarily through information
dissemination. Incentives such as preferential parking location for carpoolers and
motorcycles will be offered.
4.) Provision of Information on Transportation Alternatives
The building owner, or manager, will provide information on all of the transportation
alternatives available to employees and visitors through a variety of mediums.
. Provide route maps and information regarding the Metro Transit bus system,
carpooling and other transportation alternatives on-site and at key locations (lobby,
other building common areas, etc.).
. Conduct a transportation alternatives awareness campaign directed toward
employees, which may include the following:
>- Provide information in orientation packets.
>- Promote flexible schedules for employees, which allow employees to arrive and
leave outside the peak commuting hours with their supervisor's permission and
whenever it is appropriate. This strategy is difficult to implement within an office
development that contains multiple office tenants versus one tenant throughout.
Review of its effectiveness will be reviewed on a continual basis.
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 9
.
,
"
~ Whenever possible and feasible, provide employees with information regarding
telecommuting to promote working from home.
5.) Vehicular Traffic Movement & Access Restriction
The building owner, or manager, will work with large delivery vehicles to access the site
outside of the a.m. and p.m. peak traffic periods. No on-street space will be allocated for
delivery vehicles.
6.) Participation with Regional TDM Organizations
The building owner, or manager, will designate an individual to act as the Commuter
Benefits Coordinator (CBC). The CBC will work closely with Commuter Connection to
disseminate commuting information and materials to employees and visitors; participate in
regional training or informational sessions about TDM programs; be available to meet once
a year with Commuter Connection and/or the City of Golden Valley to review available
regional programs and services; actively and continuously promote expansion of the TDMP
program; and monitor progress on fulfilling TDMP commitments.
7.) Monitoring of Action Implementation and Goal Achievement
The building owner, or manager, will monitor the implementation of the proposed TDMP
.actions and progress made toward achieving the TDMP mode split goals through the
following monitoring program:
. With the assistance of Commuter Connection, conduct a statistically valid baseline
employee commuter survey within the first six months of full occupancy of the
proposed redevelopment.
. With the assistance of Commuter Connection, conduct an employee commuter survey
every two years after the original baseline survey, for ten years or until the TDMP non-
SOV mode split goal of seven (7) percent using an alternative mode of transportation is
achieved.
. After each round of biennial commuter surveys, review the TDMP in conjunction with
Commuter Connection, to determine its effectiveness. Then prepare a status report for
Commuter Connection and the City of Golden Valley to review and approve with
recommendations.
8.) Participate in the Establishment of an area Travel Management Organization (TMO)
The building owner, or manager, will participate in an area-wide TMO (developed by
coalition cities in the area) and become an active member once it is formed. The TMO
should include other developments within one-half mile of the 1-394 and Xenia
A venue/Park Place interchange. The TMO will be responsible for promoting TDM
strategies on an area-wide basis, such as establishing bus pass subsidy percentage standards
and promoting the expansion of transit service in the area.
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 10
,
,\,_t
APPROVED:
Name: Ericka Miller
Title: Senior Manager-
Real Estate Development
Opus Northwest, LLC
Signature:
Date:
APPROVED:
Name: Mark Grimes
Title: Director of Planning and Development
City of Golden Valley
Signature:
Date:
,\ 't
APPENDIX A
XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIC STUDY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
, .'
R:I CONSULTING
ENel I PlANNE
Gaoup, INC.
I D
I MINNEA:OllS
SRF No. 0076333
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
TO: Ericka Miller, Senior Manager - Real Estate Development
Opus Northwest, L.L.C.
FROM: Craig Vaughn, P.E., PTOE, Associate
Jessica Dauer, Engineer
DATE: February 29,2008
SUBJECT: XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY -
ADDENDUM TO THE MINER SITE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
TRAFFIC STUDY
INTRODUCTION
As you requested, we have completed a review of the Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment land use
program in relation to the previously proposed redevelopment project in the northwest quadrant
of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive in the City of Golden Valley (see Figure A-I: Project
Location). The purpose of this addendum is to determine if the operations analysis completed as
part of the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study, dated September 28,
2006, completed by SRF Consulting Group, is still valid and applicable to the newly proposed
Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment. Comparing the new land use program with the previously
proposed redevelopment will allow us to define the order of magnitude and difference between
the two trip generation estimates; thus, indioating the new land use programs impacts and
similarities to the previous operations analysis. This addendum includes a trip generation
estimate comparison and subsequent adjacent roadway volume impact comparison.
LAND-USE SCENARIO COMPARISON
The proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment is expected to be fully constructed by year 2009.
Therefore, the previous forecast horizon and analysis year of 2010 remains valid. All adjacent
development assumptions used in the previous analysis are still valid and applicable under the
updated Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment scenario. The adjacent development assumptions
include redevelopment or expansion of the following sites:
www.srfconsulting.com
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 I Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 I 763.475.0010 Fax: 763.475.2429
i\nE'1ua1 OppiJrtullity Empluyer
,
\ ~")
0HV0l
3i
JaSl8f" ~
VN'IlS1IlO
~
.
or::c
e
:::J
.~
L.L.:
C!:
o
i::
~
o
......
.....
o
~
o
If
:z
::s
0-
I-
:z
w
~
w
<!)
<(
z
<(
~
o
z
<(
~
w
Cl
-I
wU
~ ::1_
I-"W
w Q)
<!) 3:
o:E
- 0
C::z
<( en
:z :::l
WCl..
xO
co
",8
"'N
~~
.......
0:>
0<:
..
...,
.'
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
Scenario 1
Golden Hills Sho in Center
Colonnade Expansion
Allianz Insurance Ex ansion
February 29, 2008
Page 3
Scenario 2
Golden Hills Sho in Center
Colonnade Expansion
Allianz Insurance Ex ansion
Minnea olis West Redevelo ment (Duke Real
Refer to the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study, dated September 28,2006,
for further information.
Note:
Table A-I displays a summary of the trip generation calculations for the former Miner Site
redevelopment scenario, as well as a summary of the trip generation calculations for the newly
proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment. The difference calculated at the bottom of Table A-
I indicates that the newly proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment generates approximately
19 percent more trips during the a.m. peak hour, 18 percent more trips during the p.m. peak hour
and 23 percent more trips daily.
Table A-1
Trip Generation Estimate Comparison
Land Use
Generation
Residential Condominiums
Office
Retail (I)
Hi h- Turnover Restaurant (I)
Coffee Sho (I)
74 units
218,000 s . ft.
2,500 s . ft.
6,000 s . ft.
1,500s .ft.
Subtotal
Reductions
Existin 0 Ice (2)
50 Percent Multi-use
434
2,400
617
763
1,074
5,288
6
297
10
36
39
388
27
41
7
33
26
134
26
55
26
40
20
167
13
270
29
26
19
357
Generation
Office
Office
Retail (I)
Fast-Casual Restaurant/Coffee Sho (I)
Subtotal
Reductions
Existln Li ht Industrial 0 Ice (2)
50 Percent Multi-use
11,650 s . ft.
267,192 s . ft.
7,896 s . ft.
3,500 s . ft.
128
2,942
1,304
2,506
6,880
16
364
21
92
493
2
50
13
61
126
3
68
56
47
174
14
330
61
45
450
(1) 50 percent multi-use reduction applied.
(2) Existing Light Industrial Office was assumed 30 percent occupied, based on information provided by City staff.
,
I'
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
February 29, 2008
Page 4
The directional trip distribution for the proposed site-generated trips was based on the previous
distribution assumptions in the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study.
Figures A-2 and A-3 present a comparison of the year 2010 scenario 2 build conditions (with all
adjacent development assumptions included). These graphics include a combination of
background traffic and trips generated by the former and proposed redevelopments for year 2010
scenario 2 peak hour build conditions.
YEAR 2010 BUILD CONDITION IMPACT
Due to excessive queues observed at key intersections in the project study area, the Miner Site
Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study recommended roadway improvements under
year 2010 no build conditions, with the assumed adjacent development assumptions included.
The recommended roadway improvements were as follows:
· Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane at the 1-394 North ramp to provide dual
right-turn lanes
. Provide a westbound right-turn overlap phase at the 1-394 North Ramp
· Construct an additional northbound and eastbound right-turn lane at the 1-394 South Ramp
to provide dual right~tum lanes
· Provide a northbound and eastbound right-turn overlap phase at the 1-394 South Ramp
. Optimize the signal timing at the 1-394 Ramps
. Eliminate the split phasing at Golden Hills Drive
· Modify the existing westbound left, left/thru, and right-turn lane to represent dual left-turn
lanes and a thrulright-tum lane at Golden Hills Drive
In the recommended improvements listed above, all key intersections were reported to operate at
acceptable LOS D or better and have reasonable queues under year 2010 scenario 2 build
conditions during the peak hours, with the former Miner Site redevelopment scenario. A total
traffic impact comparison was conducted at the intersection with the lowest level of service from
the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. The Xenia Avenue and Golden
Hills Drive intersection represents the intersection with the lowest level of service (LOS D).
Wased on our review, the increase in proposed redevelopment trip generation equates to an
approximate 1.5 percent increase in the total traffic volume at the intersection of Xenia
Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. In this context the additional trip generation represents a
relatively small impact. The adjacent roadway network and intersections are capable of handling
the additional trip load with the recommended roadway improvements outlined in the Miner Site
Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. Based on this and the traffic VOlumD
comparisons shown in Figures A-2 and A-3, the proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopment will not
create additional impacts on the adjacent roadway network beyond what was reported in the
Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study.
!Ii
<'! ~ I c:i
!!: i:ll IX
"l" ::i:
LEa E
----
LA.
en
N.
~
uS
en
~
I 47. FLORIDA CT.
CIR.
--+---
I/i
~I I'
, $1.
~
55. N. WILLOW IA.
FR I ANK
GAMBLE DR.
,
LEGEND
XX - Volumes Based on Former Miner Site Development Plan
gl (XX) - Volumes Based on Proposed Xenia Ridge Development Plan
iil [XX] - Change in Number of Trips
S - Signalized Intersection
.
CoNsu111NG GlIOUl', 1Nc.
YEAR 2010 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES (SCENARIO 2) - A.M. PEAK HOUR F: A 2
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Igure -
Opus Northwest, LLC
0076333
February 2008
~ :..
u:l
~
I
. ;.
LEa f
-----.,
LA.
, .........,.... ,...._
N(;)~
00..... 30 (30) [+0]
oc.nc.n
~~~
f\)~-a. + 10 (10) [+0] ~LY1t
8c.nc.n CIR.
.Jil. 25 (25)[+0] ~~
[+10] (350) 34O-t.. ~ ,.. ~
r->.....w ~G;=
[+0] (10) 10 .. c.nooo
c.nc.n
[-5] (120) 125 ~"::'i~
WEs
Q:
~
I
Co)
CI)
'4-
~ D-
C(,
Z
Sf.
()
5
FR I ANK
GAMBLE DR.
,
LEGEND
XX - Volumes Based on Former Miner Site Development Plan
511 (XX) - Volumes Based on Proposed Xenia Ridge Development Plan
a. [XX] - Change in Number of Trips
S - Signalized Intersection
mIl
CoNIuLTINC GIIOUP.1Nc.
YEAR 2010 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES (SCENARIO 2) . P.M. PEAK HOUR F" A 3
XENIA RIDGE TRAVELDEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Igure .
Opus NorthljlJest, LLC
0076333
February 2008
.\1
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
CONCLUSIONS
As previously stated, the purpose of this addendum is to determine if the operations analysis
completed as part of the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study is still valid
and applicable to the newly proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment. We have completed a
trip generation estimate comparison and subsequent adjacent roadway volume impact
comparison. Based on this analysis, the following comments are offered for your consideration:
· All adjacent development assumptions used in the Miner Site Travel Demand Management
Plan Traffic Study are still valid and applicable under the updated Opus Xenia Ridge
redevelopment scenario.
· The trip generation estimate comparison between the two land use scenarios (former Miner
Site and proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopments) indicates that the newly proposed Opus
Xenia Ridge redevelopment generates approximately 19 percent more trips during the a.m.
peak hour, 18 percent more trips during the p.m. peak hour and 23 percent more trips daily.
· The increase in proposed redevelopment trip generation equates to an approximate 1.5
percent increase in the total traffic volume at the intersection of Xenia A venue and Golden
Hills Drive. In this context the additional trip generation represents a relatively small
impact.
· The adjacent roadway network is capable of handling the additional trip load with the
recommended roadway improvements outlined in the Miner Site Travel Demand
Management Plan Traffic Study. Therefore, the proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment
will not create additional impacts on the adjacent roadway network beyond what was
reported in the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study.
H:\Projects\6333\TS\ReportIFINAL-DRAFT_Xenia Ridge TDMP TS_Rev2.doc
.. ."r
.
APPENDIX B
XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
PARKING STUDY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
., .
. CON S U L T I N(.i G R 0 UP, I N C .
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I DESIGNERS
1M INNfAPOllS
FARGO
MADISON
SRF No. 0076333
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
TO: Ericka Miller, Senior Manager - Real Estate Development
Opus Northwest, L.L.C.
FROM: Jeremy V. Monahan, AICP, Senior Transportation Planner
Craig Vaughn, P.E., PTOE, Associate
DA TE: February 29, 2008
SUBJECT: XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT TDMP PARKING STUDY -
ADDENDUM TO THE MINER SITE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
PARKING STUDY
INTRODUCTION
The objective of this parking analysis is to provide an evaluation of future parking conditions
related to the proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment in the northwest quadrant of Xenia
Avenue and Golden Hills Drive in the City of Golden Valley. SRF Consulting Group completed
a parking study for the previous redevelopment plan of this site in September 2006 (Miner Site
Travel Demand Management Plan Parking Study). The purpose of this addendum is to update
this analysis based on the newly proposed Opus Xenia Ridge redevelopment plan.
Parking is a critical component of any new development. A balance must be struck between
supply and demand. An over supply of parking can result in a lower alternative transportation
mode split and additional traffic congestion, thereby degrading the quality of life of visitors and
workers. On the other hand, the under supply of parking can result in unmarketable properties
and spillover to other area parking facilities.
PROJECT ELEMENTS
The project site currently contains 37,000 square feet of light industrial office space along with
surface parking. Based on information provided by City staff the existing office space is
assumed 30 percent occupied. The proposed redevelopment would demolish all existing
buildings and parking, and construct new buildings with 278,842 square feet of office space,
7,896 square feet of retail space and 3,500 square feet of restaurant space. The planned
completion date of construction and opening for full occupancy is 2009.
www.srfconsulting.com
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 l Minneapolis, MN 55447.4443 763.475.0010 Fax: 763A75.2429
An Equal Opportunity Employet
."'\.
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
February 29, 2008
Page 2
PARKING REQUIREMENT AND DEMAND
To determine how many parking spaces are required and typically demanded for the proposed
redevelopment, the minimum off-street parking requirements were calculated using the City of
Golden Valley zoning code. The projected parking demand was determined using the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual- 3rd Edition (2004).
Minimum City Parking Requirements
The City of Golden Valley, through their zoning code, requires developments to provide a
minimum number of off-street parking stalls. As previously stated, the proposed Xenia Ridge
redevelopment will consist of office space, retail space and restaurant space. The restaurant
space has been identified as fast-casual and a coffee shop. Office space is required to provide
one space for every 250 square feet (or four spaces per 1,000 square feet). Retail establishments
are also required to provide one space for every 250 square feet of retail floor space (or four
spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail floor space). To be conservative, this analysis was
calculated based on the gross retail area. Restaurant space, with a Class I-classification, is
required to provide two and one-half spaces for every 250 square feet (or 10 spaces per 1,000
square feet).
Based on these requirements, the proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopment is required to provide
1,182 spaces. The project plans to supply 1,092 parking spaces within the development. Table
B-1 provides a summary of the parking estimate calculations.
Table B-1
Estimated City Parking Requirement
Use Size City Requirement Parkine Required
Office 278,842 GSF 1 space for every 250 square feet 1 , 115 spaces
Retail 7,896 GSF 1 space for every 250 square feet 32 spaces
Restaurant 3,500 GSF 2.5 spaces for every 250 square feet 35 spaces
Total 1,182 spaces
Provided 1,092 spaces
Surplus / (Deficit) (90 spaces)
Note: Requirement rates from City of Golden Valley City Code Section 11.70 Sub-Division 3
ITE Parking Demand Estimates
To generate parking demand estimates, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking
Generation Manual (2004) was used. This method uses key inputs, such as facility size and
travel behavior characteristics based on surveys, to estimate parking demand. The ITE Parking
Generation Manual method estimates the number of peak parking occupancy, which is the
number of occupied parking spaces during the time of peak usage of a particular land use.
". '.
, '
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
February 29, 2008
Page 3
Assuming current travel behavior characteristics are maintained into the future, the proposed
redevelopment will have a future parking need of approximately 745 stalls during an average
weekday (see Table B-2).
Table B-2
ITE Estimated Parking Demand
Use Size Weekday Demand Rate Peak Parking Demand
Office 278,842 GSF 2.40 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 669 spaces
Retail 7,896 GSF 2.73 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 22 spaces
(Avg. ofM - Th. and Fri; non-Dee)
Restaurant 3,500 GSF 15.4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 54 spaces
Total 745 spaces
Provided 1,092 spaces
Surplus/(Deficit) 347 spaces
Please note that the ITE based parking demand values differ from the City of Golden Valley's
minimum parking requirements. This is provided as a comparison exercise only.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations are offered for
your consideration:
1. The proposed redevelopment is required by City of Golden Valley zoning code to provide
at least 1,182 off-street parking stalls. The proposed redevelopment is expected to be short
of the City's minimum off-street parking requirements by 90 spaces, providing 1,092
parking spaces.
2. Based on existing travel behavior characteristics and the 2004 ITE Parking Generation
Manual, the proposed redevelopment is expected to generate a peak period parking demand
of 745 parking stalls. With the proposed supply of 1,092 spaces, a 347 space parking
demand surplus is projected using this methodology.
H:\Projects\6333\TPIFINAL-DRAFT Parking Study Tech Memo_cv_Rev2.doc
Wittman, Lisa
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
solkon [solkon@comcast.net]
Monday, June 01,20091:02 PM
Wittman, Lisa
Public Hearing for Xenia Ridge
Lisa Wittman
Administrative Assistant
Planning Commission
City of Golden Valley, MN
Dear Ms. Wittman:
I am responding to the notice of a public hearing concerning the planned unit development at Xenia Ridge located at
700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South in Golden Valley. We live at the Laurel Hill West condo complex, 6051 Laurel
Avenue, within one block of the proposed development.
We strongly support the development of this site. For too many years, this site has been an "eyesore" to the
neighborhood and to the residents and visitors of Golden Valley. The existing vacant buildings located there, as
well as the surrounding land, have lacked upkeep. Hopefully, the re-development of this site can be done in the near
future. If the re-development does not occur soon, we request that the City inform the developer to provide the
necessary upkeep.
Thank you for addressing this issue.
Respectfully,
Sheldon and Sandra Olkon
6051 Laurel Avenue, Condo Unit 312
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE Pf'{OPRIET AF~Y MATERIAL and IS thus far llse only by the Intended reCl!Wmt
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you ref-eived this in error, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and its
allachments from all computers,
1
0 c
o::t"
Q
.-
...
ca
>
=
-
0 W
N
.c
...
0 =
......
Q
en
0
r-...
C)
C)
N
a)
N
....
m
..c
E
m
>
0
2
~1
'if
~-" I
~ =
'f = 2
.., ~
"CI
: ~ .- >-
,1- ' :; ClC m
~. II III II cc
ca :::-
II c:::
.- m
C '"C
= 0
>< U)
,\
psd'uO!le^813 4lnoS - 090L - LEVilIOV:J'JOlo:JIU6!s8m090l-lEViln
.;
u
--'
--'
...-
'"
'"
s:
'E
c
02:
'"
""
Co
CJ
-
c
Via ...-
c:
'"
::::)~ E
Co
c
C-i a;
>
0; '"
0
<t
((t
0 e
o::t
Q
--
.....
ca
>
---,-- -I CI)
-
0 LI.I
N
~t :i' -I I .c
, .....
52 ...
Q
I 2
~.R ':t - 1
.tfrr I 0
~ --j
-' -~ ,.....
0
0
\ N
I ai'
N
~
I (1)
..c
E
(1)
~ >
0
2
t- .~ t'
;f-- .
,
i
111
,
.
I I
+-1 + .. j l- t- + r~
I "
l I
~
I ~
- ~
-+ --+ ..
, CI)
--- en 2
\1 :2:
'~'I "C
-- :>.
'--~ cc: (1)
C'C
ca .1 ::>
c::
" -- (1)
"
e I "'C
+ CI) 0
>< ~
. '.
+ t
I
I
I I
I
I
.
~
J.
---I
- ~
I
~l
-~
psd'uO!le^aI3 ~IJON - 090L - LEV<JIOV:J'JOIO:Jlu6!saOl090L - LEV<JI:I
u
.....
.....
-
'"
'"
s:
oS
a
:2:
'"
::l
Cl..
0
-
C
ViD -
c:
'"
:::)1 E
Cl..
c
~i Q;
>
01 '"
0
~
((.
Ol! ~l rl~: :.~E:! D'j~'-
T ~:; T' :" ll"
I I I
: I II
I
; I I'
I I I I
~ J I I
I I , I + .;-
11-t: :. r r-. t-' ! _ !
'1Ii!llJ: D,l]!~'
t- If-' r- j L+"t t
'Ul . i' - :: ~ -j ~ -~
I I
.J _ .J I
I
I
--I
~f.i~. ~~~
.. ~'"
..... ~.
:"".
",;
(
~.<..;-
;;~~;~t.t
'~~;i:
'i-",'" ,.
f-';J
'\
~;,.
, ,,'~
~
I I
L.
-"':
'';l.;
.~
,
I
+-. t
41-_
psd'uO!le^aI3 ~Inos - 090l-l8WIOVJ"JOIOJlu6!sa(]\090l-l8W\:1
0 en
o::t
c
=
.-
....,
=
>
0 CI)
N -
LI.I
....,
0 en
..... CI)
3:
0 olJ
r--.. ....,
C) en
C) =
N LI.I
oi
N
....
(1)
~
E
(1)
>
0
2
CI)
=
"'C
.-
CC1
=1
.- I
il
><
vtO
::)~
c..~
oi
(C:t
2
::2:
:>-
(1)
co
>
c::
(1)
"C
C5
~
u
--'
--'
...
en
'"
;:
'E
o
02:
en
:::I
0..
o
-
o
...
c
'"
E
0..
o
Q;
>
'"
CJ
ex:
I
-J~-
:~l
I I I
II !
, I
II '
I I
I I
I I
,
I I
I I
I I
I I
II P
I I I
'_I.'.'
~:,,';
... ...,c't: !:',;;
~'I ~
~1t' '~j:f'~
_~_ ~~(o~;.,
~-; .~... ':
1
,~
~
of "
"1\ t: ~.
~ __.I.
o
co
-
.-
o
M
ca
.....
Q)
ClC
~
c.
E
ca
ClC
Ln
.....
o
c
=
.-
.....
ca
>
Q)
-
W
.....
~
ca
w
......
o
o
N
ci
N
....
Q)
..c
E
Q)
>
o
2:
Q)
c:n 2:
"'C ~
.- :>.
ClC ~
C6
:::-
.!!! 'I a3
c .' "'C
Q) 0
>< UJ
I I 0-
II '
I-
I i
1
1
Vio
:::)1
c..!i
oi
((+
psd-dwe!j - UO!le^813 Ise3 - 090l-lEWI0I1J-JOIOJIU6!s801090l-lEWQ
u
--'
--'
-
'"
'"
~
oS
S
02:
'"
'"
C-
O
-
o
-
c:
'"
E
C-
o
a;
>
'"
Cl
<(
~i
1/ (
'"0"
"off' t ''t~ , ~';L r.
, L~, h
"1=
I; 1....-
", "'1iI1III'
-
--
-
L-
..
-
-
x.w
ii"
, "".
, .
'. .fi
~
~
ti i~
fl1l7 ,
I~t 0,
I
Ii "
- '
;,...1
~
ti
I-
t
--
-
e-
e-
I 'il
[ ,1_1
..., \ --Z
-
~.
"i'.' ..,,-
\ ,}
t
1.'.
iJ
~
I
,
, ,(
,I
}..t'
,w,
'~;'i!i'
t~')..:.
{
4 ~
~f
[
4
~
I
IE:
E--"
\ .-
~..
--.
Jlt.F
a-=-- (~ r-
. ~.' /)
. I
I~ .
~ I.
,~
,~':' ~
~,~!l .
~TI .
'. -
I
'.. ptJ
.~
''Ii
I
.:~
~j~
I-
~:I
t
. I ;~j
~ I
~ , I
F I.1\, I (
f
\
j\:'"
~
I
I
I
I
.
.
;'1 :if, it'll'
",~~
I
.,
.
I.,;.' '
"
"
.
.
~ '4'
I~~~.
TW
~ -'- .""
~ -4~II'
. 1I1~'; .
~ ~ ,',. 1lIM!.1
I 1 t f ~
::4''' . >:~.
. l' II Ki: ...
~. t' ~ir~~~
) .:...~. ~:,'~l!l'
. f' '\ )0 I'!'\~
. IIj"W, ,," l" r: ~
" It~.&w t' '\;; l,~;
~. Ie"',"';' '" ._,', ,-
1 r~ I
I
Ii
lY~
..
..:.. -
1==1
li-
I
iIr-" , , "
l-
I. "'t"
I
--t-T
L-
- +-.~..
I::i, -
-11~..
f.:f=,
" ~
II"..
..;
rJil
~. ~
I
I
-;;:-
,[!
I
Ii ~
!i -
.,' .-;.; g!.
,! ~ t..,~
.~.,,~. -
~j" :A~'
}""
1<'..;;""
;;
'" ... 'i~
't',-t~:)1> ,.
,,'I: ,"
-'I :,'
':.;:~:~
(
.
r
I_J4~'" u..' ~ \~ :;,
~,:~' ~~. .,' , " \~~~ '.
~. ' '\j ~.... I
JM '-!t.;z'-et J.. ,,'" ~ l"~
!~:,.' :f:~~S'> . :;," .~~ ...~/
~. .... "11 .:. ''Y' -? ' t
.. ,
ff:~
'"
~
:.i,'~ ~ '_, '
't~~~~.~: ~-:~ F~{~ -
.~. t' _. ..~ ~, .,~".,;f'
lr!... :'\.. ,r) ~ ~ ...
~ ~ .:;;'. ,-- ""~~~ .t:', :~. ~-.r ;.: J--!-"-':.I.
"",.;;. ~; f..1 "':l ,"""..,."l I" t' _ . ., 'l'_
". ~.- .~...J .....~.... ,. ""'I" ..:'71-'
~ 7i ~ ':f'r~'~~
... ,.... ~ ,,~~! .~...,~ -. ~
It':./': '. :1t; '~ z h~'-"
~1,>, l~, ' ,.
~" '~..
I
, \.~
"~~. 't~ .
"'~':~ ,~'5~;;~
~,,,,,..ll'r>J'; !.t:. " l< ~ .c,,?; i;;,~~.',".,
'1~- \: ~~ ~.. "_~; ~ .~f:~
...,',.~ 'i ,~~"
fA~; ~t~ ~~~; .
'Ii). """," :tt ".,'~ ' ;j.~, ::,~ '
~;;-r~,:.~ ~.," ,~i;] " ...n~;.:-
1- ~
\:
"... .
.
'i
.,.aI.;#];J0."A.
',(
-
.~
,;;. .
,
~ :;,<t' l
~!1: "'1'"
.:"'~
"-i'(
>'J t"..";..,~;,
.' ~ -" ...
. 1-"" ~
\ -':-'"
.... "'~
J~'.:..~.;f.I -i: '",,"" ,~
I(c.\
~;-'\~
'\ ~~~. ",.
- 1;1
" r
...
~""
~Y'Zt\.
~.;.
:1-;
,~i' ~ '-~.,~.
//I
:~
, -;:-
, .. ",.,.}::y
tT.,,:~ \ '.
:.- "
~. .,.~~~:i'"
~, " .~~\,:~
. '\'.,~:,N',~,
" ~" ~
\~~~ ,
;', @Jl'fl
"
i"'~
.t;,: -.
, ,
" ~,"
.(~
. (_it?
.. \ ~,:>'~
~.
',. "
'" l:~
,
vtil.'::i
:[IIj
C;;,"
"*'''
J;"
,. ~
I I
~#
~~
~
.';~
\
\
\
,
'f/!.
~. ,,~.
~ ;
I
I
-:
\\
. or'
. ,~
I
~.
~
~
I
I
"
~
,Of
I t ~
I
I
I I
/
I
t
I
I
Vie
::::>>~
c..i
0;
((.
Q)
>
.-
......
U
Q)
~
en
...
Q)
a..
,......
o
o
N
en
o
Q)
C)
"C
.-
CC
ca
.-
c
Q)
><
....
a:l
..c
E
a:l
:::-
o
:2
co
-
o
(I)
a:l
c:
c:
:2:
::>-
a:l
CO
:>
c:
a:l
"'C
o
t.!J
U
...J
...J
..-
tIl
C1l
~
oS
:s
:2
tIl
::l
C.
CJ
.....
o
E
C1l
E
c.
o
Q;
>
C1l
CJ
<t
.
"0
en
0..
c
ro
0:::
2
U5
I
r-
X
~
~I
o
co
o
r-
r-
(")
E
6
o
<l:
y
o
(5
(J
c
Cl
"00
Q)
o
6
co
o
r-
I
r-
(")
;;
(;
i OPUS,.
Xenia Ridge
Xenia and Highway 394
Golden Valley, MN
PROJECT INFORMATION
Building Data'
Office Tower
8 Stories Approx. 250,000 S.F
Parking Ramp
Retail
Office Condo
1,125 Stalls
Approx. 10,000 S.F.
Approx. 10,000 S.F.
N
EB
11/09/07
~ I I
o 15 60 120