07-07-09 cc Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Regular Meeting
of the
City Council
Golden Valley City Hall
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chamber
July 7,2009
6:30 p.m.
The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6
prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
B. Presentation of 2009 Minnesota Association of Government Communicators Award
of Excellence and Best of Show -"Three Words" Firefighter Recruitment Campaign
2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be
routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which
event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its
normal sequence on the agenda.
A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting - June 2, 2009
B. Approval of Check Registers:
1. City
2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority
C. Licenses:
1. General Business Licenses
2. Solicitor's License - Edward Jones
3. Solicitor's License - Oak Grove Church
4. Solicitor's License - Twin Cities Siding Professionals
D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions:
1. Planning Commission - June 8, 2009
2. Board of Zoning Appeals - May 26, 2009
3. Joint Water Commission - April 1, 2009
4. Envision Connection Project Board of Directors - May 20, 2009
5. Open Space and Recreation Commission - April 27, 2009
6. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - April 16, 2009
E. Bids and Quotes:
1. Bid - Xerxes Avenue Rehabilitation and Authorization to Sign Agreement with
City of Minneapolis for Roadway Improvements
2. Variable Frequency Drive for Deep Well Pump - Quote
3. Native Plant Installation - 2009 Pavement Management Program - Quote
F. Approval of One Year Extension for Filing of Plat - Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Glen
Urban 2nd Addition (Janalyn Circle and Glencrest Road)
G. Approval of Six Month Extension for Filing of Plat - 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North
H. Authorizing Acceptance of a Traffic Safety Award 09-39
I. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park
3. CONSENT AGENDA - CONTINUED
J. Authorization to Sign Agreement with Brookstone-Vanman, LLC for Right-of-Way
Landscaping and Maintenance - Golden Valley Road and Winnetka Avenue North
K. Authorizing Submittal of Federal Transportation Enhancement Fund Grant
Application - Sidewalk Reconstruction - Douglas Drive 09-40
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM
A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan Approval - PUD #108 - Xenia Ridge - 700
and 800 Xenia Avenue South - OPUS Northwest, LLC., Applicant
5. OLD BUSINESS
A. Second Consideration - Ordinance #420 - Adoption of Amended State Building Code -
Incorporation of 2008 National Electrical Code and Residential/Commercial Energy
Code
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Announcements of Meetings
B. Mayor and Council Communications
7. ADJOURNMENT
kllrl;' 'all ey
Memorandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
1. B. Presentation of 2009 Minnesota Association of Government Communicators Award of
Excellence and Best of Show for Golden Valley's "Three Words" Firefighter Recruitment
Campaign
Prepared By
Cheryl Weiler, Communications Coordinator
Summary
Golden Valley's "Three Words" Firefighter Recruitment Campaign was named Best of Show
at the Northern Lights Communications Awards ceremony held in Burnsville on May 21. The
Minnesota Association of Government Communicators (MAGC) presents these awards
annually to recognize the best in Minnesota government communications. Northern Lights
judges gave the "Three Words" Campaign an award of excellence in the marketing plans
category and nominated it for the year's top honor, Best of Show.
The "Three Words" Firefighter Recruitment Campaign is a collaborative effort between the
Communications staff and Fire Department to update the City's marketing/communications
plan for firefighter recruitment. It focuses on the men and women who serve as paid on-call
firefighters. The plan has three main goals: 1) portray firefighters so potential recruits can
better relate to the job and perhaps see themselves as firefighters, 2) attract recruits from a
populous Golden Valley demographic not traditionally sought out (over age 35), and 3)
highlight aspects of the fire service that develop individuals as well as serve the community.
To take maximum advantage of a small budget, the City used its fire trucks as rolling
billboards featuring photos of City firefighters and the three words that best describe them,
with the last word always being "firefighter." The ads have been on the trucks for a year and
have been seen all over the community. They are also used on posters, flyers, and the City
Web site as well as with firefighter profiles in CityNews. The campaign generated media and
community attention, a record number of potential recruits at the City's firefighter
informational meetings, and six new firefighters.
This spring the City rolled out phase two of the plan, which features the "Three Words
Campaign" carried out on postcards that can be handed out at community events. Nine more
firefighters have joined the original three who are profiled in the campaign. Each postcard
pictures a firefighter, three words, the new recruit date, and on the back, a short profile and
room to advertise recruitment meeting dates or other information. The cards were introduced
at Golden Valley Days and are already a hit, generating 15 phone calls to the City's fire
recruitment hotline within the next week. The whole campaign successfully highlights the
importance of paid, on-call firefighters as well as raises awareness of all aspects of fire safety
for the community.
This year's Northern Lights Award raises the City's total to 19 since 2002. Other Best of Show
nominees this year included "Inside the Park 2008," (visual design- logos/illustrations/graphics),
City of St Louis Park; "Swan Lady," (video news release), Minnesota DNR; "Urban Visions,"
(news or talk show), City of Minneapolis; "Bloomington Sesquicentennial Celebration," (public
information projects-special event), City of Bloomington; "Corporate Report to the
Community," (annual reports), City of Bloomington; "Hopkins Public Schools web site," (web
sites), Hopkins Public Schools; and www.dctc.edu. (web sites), Dakota County Technical
College.
U~i
!\ Va II ey
Memorandum
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. B. 1. Approval of City Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley.
Attachments
Loose in agenda packet.
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
nlfi Vall ey
Memorandum
Finance
763-593-8013 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
Attachments
Loose in agenda packet.
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
OtQ......i. ........ ..
o(jold~nVall ey
Memorandum
Inspections
763-593-8090 I 763-593-3997 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 1. General Business Licenses
Prepared By
Kathryn Pepin, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, some businesses are required to be licensed by the City. Listed below are
the License Number, Applicant, License Type and Fee of those who have submitted an
application for approval.
#3909
Waste Management 9 Refuse/Garbage Vehicles
10050 Naples Street N.E.
$450.00
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff.
toldenValley
M morandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 2. Solicitor's License - Edward Jones
Prepared By
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling
products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to
do so.
Attachments
Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages)
Recommended Action.
Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Edward Jones.
Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City
Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month.
PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLICATION
.
TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: $ '1-0
7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Persons: ' ~
Golden Valley, MN 55427 Type of License Requested: ~^/lu.11Jt-.
Enclose the sum of $-.!d U for J (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code
of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary
for obtaining this license.
tDW IH<-D cl d N ~s.
(Business or Individual Name to be Licensed)
7~01J OL-So.,J fVt&li1 O'f4/!7-- f-1IA..J':{. 6oZ-P&J v~ /I1AI t~'I'Z,.7
(Address, including City, State and Zip Code)} r
lit? 3 S7S- -73/ ~
elephone Number, including Area Code)
NOW, THEREFORE, ~b5H JG-Tft,ltucr hereby makes application for the
(Applicant Name)
period of 7 ff)p1 through 6/30/il, subject to the conditions and provisions of said City Code.
REQUIRED LICENSE INFORMATION
Applicant (if different from above): l. ~
Name ( 051-1 ~7i1e.ITt1. L--r-
-
Address 75"0-0 DI-8/J~ /hG4?dI'Q1t1- UWLf J ~DGN' I/~ fiW ~c{Z.7
(Include City, State andZip Code) ,
Telephone Number (including area code)
Date of Birth (if an individual)
Business Name of Applicant
Address
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
Define Business P #/IJ &<Sit 1,0
(Corporation, Proprietorship, Pa~nership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
Description of goods or services for sale (include prices) or indicate if soliciting donations. If more
space is needed, attach additional sheets (be specific):
-f { IJfW (!,{ 4L- S &.e.J, GG ~ .
NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete
information regarding such change or modification.
If the Peddler or Solicitor is so engaged on behalf of an organization, supply:
Name of Organization
F"C1w~D 0i)"'~
7S"OD. Ol-SD,J tIIlGM ofltfl1....: 1-f:Pf
(Include City, State and Zip Code)
t tn,r.-D5v c/~.* /t1N
I
S>Vl-7
Address of Organization
Te(.'ph~'J Number (Including Area Code)
1(0) ~r~- ?"!;/>
Define Business 7M-TAlCre-$1i ( P
(Corporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation)
List the names and addresses of EACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behalf
of said organization in the City, or. in the alternative. the name, address and telephone
number or numbers where a responsible person of said organization will maintain a list of
names and addresses of all persons engaged in peddling or soliciting in the City:
QA-S sr ~So,J
f#ltJN fiZl&1 i-fJ17Af\JN - 30'2,/ fl~ Wi N #7-01,. rpv" fl\0l/l7J.I, IW SS'L{t,
(If more space is needed, attach additional sheets)
STATE OF IY\lNNt~)
) ss.
COUNTY OF f11,N~tN)
I, \~Iosl-i {&-rreJtfA'-T
(Officer/Individual)
of GutJlffl-I'J ch>!\1bS
(Name of Organization)
being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to his/her own
knowledge except as to matters therein stated on information and belief, nd as to such matters,
he/she believes them to be true.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
~daYOf~ ,20QL
~Sign~
JUDITH A. NALLY
NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010
alley
M morandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 3. Solicitor's License - Oak Grove Church
Prepared By
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling
products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to
do so.
Attachments
Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Oak Grove Church.
Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City
Council Meeting. CouMitMeetings arenormaUy held tho first and third Tuesday of each month
fEQI1ERlSOLlClYOR YO-IE"_; Aet!WCA]1gIf
TO: GoIcItta Velley City Council Fee Paid: $ 5 ()
780000kten Vahy Road Number,Of.Persons:. .... .~~'1~.. ... '..
Gofden Valley. MN 65427 Type of uce.. R~. ~
Enclose the sum of , . . .~O . for. 6+ (number) pecldlef8/$OUCltOf'$ . required by City Code
of tho City of Gok'tM Valkw $M MW compt~ with all th~ roquitement$ of 3Qid Code ~
for obtaining this license.
o (1.~ &rc"Je G~~ 'f l!Jr,\
(8u$~ Of IndividUQt Name to M LiCMsed)
(Add~~~~~~~~1r\t ~ 6b\A~b\J!J\le'f'~ 5~~~
~~.utLo AreGCode) ~,-,
NOW. THEREFORE..DfJ~ . &O'J e. C~ \I'~. .. hereby makM appUcatIOn for the.
7/,A, (Appfteant Nam€t) .
peri . of -7/r7JI~~ through 61301.Jt). $ubj0et to the eondltiofts and provleion$ of $aid City Code,
~UIRfP UQEN$J;lNf.26MA1JQt1
Applicant (if different from above):
Name
Address
~nelude City. $tate and 7ip ('Ada)
Telephone Number (tnclud.1ng ... code)
Date of Birth (if an individuat) ~_ _
Business Name of Applicant
Address
(Include City. State and Zip Code)
Define Susinesa
. (~.P~Of'$h1P. f'artnerShip. eto.; .Stateofln~On)
Description of goods or serviCM for .. (include prices) or Indicate W solJciting; dcmatiOf1I, If more.
~~~~:r;r~=t:Js. fO~ At-\9US.+ UJOq, &heet Will)
\ Y' t \ v...cl e \ b tA.. + ~ Ii l'V'\ ,t-eK \-0; \} e,S) (\r\O" ,€.., t a """ ~\rtc) W, vJ-t JUS"'"
-\MAV\.f +0 \V\.forYV1t (\()\-n\~ lS t:i\c-hALtH\j +O,;Set I~.
NOTE: if the products for sale are changed or modified. you must give the City complete
information reqardinq such change or modification.
If the Peddler or Solicitor is SO engaged on behalf of an organization, supply:
Name of Organization <-OOlL GYov-e- en V\ V'~ V) -
~of~ ~q~ Gultl..vdtt\l~ ~l GPldeY\Vtill-e'fIHN
(jnctude City, State an ZIp Code) 59122-(,JYJ~
Tetephon$ Number (tnctudtng Area COde) 1Cd!:J- gflf- J) 'f J
_.._.c" _
Deftne Business
~.~~~Slateafl~)..
'\.:'---~.
List the names and addresses of eACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behalf
of saJd orqarri%ation in the City, or, in the alternative, the name, address and telephone
number or numbers where tit responsible person of said orpanlzation wm maintain a list of
names andaddreeses of aU persons engaged in peddling Of soliciting in the City:
-lSab1"- kti>n~ v-J f r hr.n~:"h se r '( ~tC4 '(/ . ~Yi:" -'lJtj",tI '1/
Fh.e ~J4l&~e4 Lt atld(lS~ a-V\tI( ~b()\O~rltyJllQ,~.
1 ~ -
(If more space is needed. attach additional sh$ets)
~'Af= OF fl1 'N~ )
lss.
Y OF f/t/J t.nfflJ )
Of Or}~ ~\l~ ~Y't;Jt\
(Name of OrQanimtkm) "
I,
beinQ first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foreQo!nq information is tru0 to h!e.!he; 0'.",;';;
}:t~Ov7:1&jqe $~{cspt .~s to rn~tter;~ tl1ereir: st~te-d on !r~foj. .~;,.~' r"!1 ar:d beUef1 find
hF-/~h~ t'~li~v~~ tMArn tr, ~~- 'H~'; if1.!
:~;;h;;.,r;r-~;{ ~nrl ~W,.,Ft ~'ri }~1{4t,;r~ i'tpP '~hi~
..,nO ""'l
. ..."
JUDITH A. NALLY
NOTARYPUBL .
M Co '. Ie - MINNESOTA
Y mmlsslOO Expires Jan. 31,2010
olden alley
Memorandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. C. 4. Solicitor's License - Twin Cities Siding Professionals
Prepared By
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling
products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to
do so.
Attachments
Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Twin Cities Siding Professionals.
rrn.= em iF aDiJJElI W\U..EV
7&S 553 8101
D&l28f2ii09 t4~ m
IlBI P.DElf.'iD3
"
~ amtfea must b$subrnltledtotheCiy~~tf1eW~ priortotm;'CiW
Coud Meeting. Councft Meetings are normally heki fue'fiml; and. third T~ of ~ month.
PEOOLERlSOlJCffOR LiceNsE APPlICATION
. .
TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid:$. " '3 S
7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Pe'~: -z..
Golden VaHey. MN 55427 Type of Uoerise Requested:
EnclOse the sum of $. :3'5 for "'2... (number) peddlefBlsolicJtors as req~ by City Code
of the Cfty of Golden VBUey and have compled wih all the requlfements of said Code necessary
for obtainlrlg tis I_nee.
T w,~ C\'t1ES S'O\~~. ea.oFfSSl d~AU; ,
'(BUsiness orlndMdual Name to 'w~)
6ftJY. "'(1f.A~' ~61(.. rlJ!J.' . ~_ PAVl.. ,M:N ~tl ~ '
(Address. including City, ~and Zip Colle)
(~S"l ) - Z.S-s:- - z. ~l~ ' , '
(Tetephone Number. inclUding Area Code)
'NOW, THEREFORE. tJlL.l.l~ ~ ~1A',rz..ONf(2...... ;' hereby makes aPPDcation fertile .
(Applicant Ntlrne)
period of throUgh 6I3Ol~ eubjectto the cond1tIonS and pnM&ions of said City Code.
-.
ncipaI Offlcet)
_ fv\ A-N ~ e::-IL '
. REQUIRED U~SElNFORMAnON '
Applicant rlf different from above): ,
'Name, wn..L.,A,v( (""ktl.OJJ/?{l,
, l ~ ~ 5T , Et,fl, (twetl" MN 553JO. ,
(InClude City. state and Zip Code)
rl9lephone Ntmlb.erOttclucfmg area code) (7(P:5> )- 3', l .... Cfoot.1 --
Date 'of Birth (if an mdMduaJ) , 0-6' ( lill e, i7
, .
Business Nattie of Appftt:&int "(\o\)l'" (l.1....u~5 SU"N~ Pf.Of€:$SlOJVAl,,5 "
AddrSS ~L( .........(LA,JSrert- Q..O. ST. PIWL f:1N 5>}('-f
(1i1cIUde ,CitY, state and lip Code)
Define Business ,t-oct.td(z'J\\\ON ' ,;.
, '(Corporation, Pl"QPrietorshipi ~hipi.etc.; State of Incorporatlon)
'~R of goods or aeMces for ole (include prices) or 1ndicate if soi~ donaior\S. If more
,spade is needed, attach additional sheds (be specific): ~\1 fb,-r ( N Et ^ P (10\AlT ME..l.rrS
fort.-. 'f'tt.€e e~nMA~ Q'~ 5\O\J\) ~_ ~ H r)~E;OWCV~
AcJdress
NOTE; If ~ products for sale are changed or modified, you must give 1.t1e City complete
information reg$n:Hng such change or modification.
\0
, Frnm:cnv Of BOLDEN VAU.EV
- ,
7SB 593 BUS
D512i!2D09 14: 13
ID9D P. otmIDDI
If the Peddler or Solicitor l8 so engaged on behalf Of an cHganization, s~
NameafO~Jw\)J G\11/~'S S~~tt\)~ f~€SSLoN-l\l,.s
Address of Organization "be.{ 'f12..Dc)JS~ . pp. . ~A~ ~L t MAJ SS~IY_
~ City, State and Zip Cod&)
Telephone Number (Including Area Code)
..($!~ ) . 2.5""5 - 2#:4 Lf
Define Business . (' ..b(4PO~d N .
(Corporation. Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; state of Inoorpc:ntlon)
liSt the n&1Ms ~ addresses of EACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behaif
'of said o~ in the CIty, Or, in the alternative, the. name; addJes$ and ~ephone ,
number or mm'1ber8 where e respOnsib(~!" person Of said organrtSion wm maintain a list of
'nSlfa and addresses Of aD ~mons engaged in peddDng or soliciting in the CIty:
Wu..klAM Q;,.~a'L-- - H5Z> 4:"" 5'(. f ~ ~Vet.-r~}J 55>10
J./61t... .,.....h\o~BJJ ~ Ic.je) S ~$e"aT ~-r~ST: c.(101~ FA-I [J;, r W( 94~zt..t
,..'
..-..1
-(If more spBce is needed. atEch additional Sheets)
SiATE OFrn fNf\J&rr1f- ), '
) 8$.
COUNTYOF t/tAJfJ[fIrJ)
'I,JIA:1T - ~1ZL~{jrL'f .OfJwt~ trrtCS Sll:mJ~ t'M~~c?Nfi(,S
{Offi~ (NaiTi' of Oiganlzatidn)
_ being first duty swom, depose and say ht all h faregmng imoi'ri1dan IS ~ to hWhet oWn
knoWledge except III to matters ttterem statect on 1nformatiOn and betief, and _to such matters,
heiette believes them to be true.
.2001
JUDITH A. NALLY
NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
My Commission Expires Jan. 31,2010
-o\;,
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 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, June
8, 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 Planning and Development
Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
April 27, 2009 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Eck noted several typographical errors. Waldhauser asked that the last sentence on the
first page be clarified.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve
the April 27, 2009 minutes with the above noted corrections.
2. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan Review - Planned Unit Development-
Xenia Ridge - PUD 108
Applicant: Opus Northwest, LLC
Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South
Purpose: To allow for the construction of approximately 279,000 square feet of
office space and approximately 11,300 square feet of retail space
Grimes explained that this same proposal was brought before the Planning Commission
and City Council last year. He explained that at that time the City Code stated an
applicant has six months after preliminary PUD approval to submit their Final PUD plans.
Since that time, the City Code has been amended to allow an applicant to ask for a 6-
month extension to submit their Final PUD Plans. The preliminary plans for the Xenia
Ridge proposal were approved last year; however those approvals have lapsed, so the
applicant is again seeking approvals for this project.
Grimes referred to his staff report dated June 3 and stated that he has revised it to
include conditions regarding the demolition of the existing buildings within 90 days after
Final PUD plan approval and that prior to the demolition of the building they shall be
made secure. He reiterated that this is the same proposal and the same staff reports that
the Planning Commission reviewed last year.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
Page 2
Tom Shaver, Vice President Real Estate Development, OPUS, stated that the market has
changed significantly since they brought the Xenia Ridge proposal to the City last year.
He said they feel this is a very prominent corner in a healthy corridor but the market is
preventing them from going forward with their plans.
Keysser asked Shaver if OPUS has an approximate time table for this development.
Shaver said he hopes to start on this project a year from now depending on the climate of
the market.
Waldhauser asked Shaver if OPUS is open to considering other uses for this property
such as residential or mixed use if those markets should happen to open up faster than
the office market. Shaver said they are always open to considering other markets
however residential and retail are worse than office right now.
Eck asked why OPUS is coming back at this point if they are unable to indicate a time
frame for this development. Shaver said they would like to have their preliminary PUD
approvals in place so they are prepared if a customer comes forward. Eck asked if OPUS
intends to keep asking the City for extensions until they are ready to build. Shaver said
yes. Grimes added that if substantial changes to the plans occur, OPUS would need to
reapply for PUD approval. Also, the City Council can add conditions to the Preliminary
PUD approval if they wish.
Eck asked what kind of impact the West End development in St. Louis Park will have on
this proposal. Shaver stated that their development has a smaller retail component than
the West End development. Grimes stated that the developers of both projects are in the
same situation with the office market and that both developers will be waiting with their
Preliminary PUD Approvals at this point.
Keysser asked Shaver what happened to the idea of building a hotel. Shaver said the site
is too small for a hotel.
Waldhauser asked what the obstacles are to removing the existing buildings now rather
than after Final PUD approval. Shaver said it is a financial issue. Keysser noted that
OPUS doesn't own the property yet so they can't remove the buildings until they own the
property.
Keysser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Keysser closed the public hearing.
Cera questioned the status of Colonnade's proposal in this area. Grimes said staff has
not heard from them in a while but he thinks they would still like to build an office building
however they are in the same situation with the office market.
Keysser questioned the status of the MnDOT owned property located east of the
Metropolitan and the Good Day Cafe. Hogeboom stated that Global One Commercial has
discussed building luxury rentals and medical office space in that location. They have
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June a, 2009
Page 3
submitted a deposit to the City for the purpose of a traffic study. Grimes added that traffic
and access are going to be the challenges with that site.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan for Xenia Ridge - PUD #10a 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,
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, 200a 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,
200a shall become a part of this recommendation.
6. A snow storage plan shall be submitted before approval of the final plan.
7. The existing buildings on the site shall be demolished within 90 days of approval by
the City Council of the Final PUD Plan.
a. Prior to demolition of the existing buildings on the site the buildings shall be secured
in a manner acceptable to the Golden Valley Public Safety Department and Building
Inspections Department.
The Planning Commission also makes 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.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
Page 4
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.
-Short Recess-
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Waldhauser reported on an APA Brown Bag lunch tour she took of the Heart of City area
in Burnsville.
McCarty reported on the May 26 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. He stated that there
was a request from a resident who started building a deck in his front yard over his
existing front steps without a building permit. The applicant applied for a variance for this
deck because it was too close to the front yard property line however if it would have
been an open front porch, with a roof, he could have built it without a variance. He stated
that the Board of Zoning Appeals would like staff and the Planning Commission to discuss
or better define front porches, stoops, decks, landings, etc. and how close they can be to
the front yard property line. Grimes stated staff would prepare some language for the
Planning Commission to review at their next meeting.
5. Other Business
Kluchka asked about the large dirt pile on the southwest corner of TH 55 and Winnetka
Ave. in Brookview Park. He asked about the plans for the dirt pile and stated that he
would like to see a high density tower located on that corner. Grimes said that it is a
critical storage area for the City and it will probably continue to be used this way. He
said he would talk to the Public Works staff about it.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
May 26, 2009 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Sell
called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Members Kisch, Nelson, Segelbaum, Sell and Planning Commission
Representatives McCarty. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and
Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - March 24, 2009
MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Segelbaum and motion carried unanimously to approve
the March 24, 2009 minutes as submitted.
II. The Petitions are:
4015 Wayzata Blvd. (09-05-02)
Jesse Toutaes, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 5.9 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 6.6 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (west) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and explained that the applicant is
requesting a side yard variance in order to construct a second garage stall. He stated that
this property received variances in 2001 for the construction of a similar proposal however
the garage has not yet been constructed.
McCarty said according to the survey it appears that the proposed garage addition will be
located slightly in front of the existing garage. Hogeboom noted that the existing garage is
35.5 feet away from the front property line. If the applicant wants to build closer than 35
feet to the front property line he would also need to request a front yard variance.
Segelbaum asked Hogeboom to clarify the proposed additions shown on the survey.
Hogeboom explained that the survey illustrates the proposal requested in 2001 and the
current proposal.
Jesse Toutges, Applicant, said he is proposing to build the second garage stall 2 feet
closer to the front property line than the existing garage. He added that the current garage
is 20 feet wide and he would like to have a 22-foot wide garage.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 2
Kisch noted that a front yard variance request for 1.5 ft. off the required 35 ft. would need
to be added to the agenda. The Board agreed.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to add a
variance request to the agenda for 1.5 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.5 ft. at
its closest point to the front yard property line to allow for the construction of a second
garage stall.
Toutges explained that it would be easier for him to move the proposed garage addition
forward because there is a well area he is trying to avoid toward the back of the existing
garage. McCarty asked if the proposed garage could be built over the well area. Toutges
said yes, but it would be more difficult because he would have to "block in" the area and
move the water meter.
Kisch asked if there would be one garage door or two as a result of this proposal. Toutges
said there would be two separate garage doors.
Segelbaum asked if the proposed addition is pushed as far back on the lot as possible but
still avoiding the well area. Toutges said yes, the proposal drawn on the survey comes as
close as he can to the well area. He added that he feels jogging the front of the proposed
new garage out by 2 feet will look more appealing as well.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
Nelson said she doesn't have any issues regarding the side yard variance request.
Segelbaum agreed that the side yard variance request seems reasonable.
Toutges noted that the neighboring property has a garage that is located 2 or 3 feet closer
to their front yard property line than what he is requesting. McCarty questioned if the
curvature of the street is making the neighboring garage appear closer to the front
property line than it really is. Nelson stated that she feels the front yard setbacks along
1-394 should be considered slightly differently than normal front yard setback
requirements.
Kisch stated that the applicant's proposal in 2001 had a different garage configuration
which did not require a front yard variance so there are other options in this case that
would allow the applicant to have a two-stall garage without requiring a front yard variance.
The Board members agreed that there isn't a strong enough hardship in this case to allow
a front yard variance especially since there are other options.
Kisch suggested tabling this request in order to allow the Board time to review how a front
yard variance would impact the surrounding properties. Toutges said he would like to start
his project next week. Sell asked the applicant if he would go ahead with the project if the
Board denies the front yard variance request. Toutges said yes.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 3
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to approve
the request for 5.9 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 6.6 ft. at its closest point to
the side yard (west) property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by McCarty and motion carried 4 to 1 to deny the request for
1.5 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.5 ft. at its closest point to the front (north)
property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall. Sell voted no.
1525 Sumter Ave. N. (09-05-03)
Michael Johnson, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Front Yard Setback
Requirements
. 9 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 26 ft. at its closest point
to the front yard (east) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new deck to be built over existing
front steps.
Hogeboom explained that that the applicant is proposing to construct a deck over his
existing front steps. He stated that the applicant began construction on the deck not
realizing he needed a variance from front yard setback requirements. He added that the
City is considering this structure to be a deck, not a stoop or porch. He noted that if the
applicant were to build a roof over this proposed deck it would be considered an open
front porch and he would be allowed to build it 30 feet from the front property line without a
variance.
Kisch referred to the survey and asked if the 26-foot measurement is from the bottom of
the steps or the edge of the deck. He asked if there is an allowance made to allow steps
to go into the setback area. Hogeboom stated that when a structure is considered a deck
the measurement is taken from the edge of the platform. If this structure was considered a
landing the steps would be included. McCarty questioned if steps would be considered
part of a front porch. Hogeboom said yes.
Michael Johnson, Applicant, referred to his plans for the deck and explained his proposal.
Nelson asked if the partially constructed deck is only missing the steps or if more deck
area is going to be added. Johnson stated that the landing area is already constructed and
that the steps are the only thing yet to be added.
Segelbaum asked the applicant why he isn't just replacing the existing front steps with
larger concrete steps. Johnson stated that a huge new piece of concrete didn't seem
viable and that he was unable to remove the existing concrete. He noted that all of the
houses on his block were built right at the 35-foot front yard setback line.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 4
Sell stated that the applicant really only had 3 feet of landing area when the swing of the
door is considered. He said he agreed that front landing areas should be made larger
because they are safer and more functional.
Segelbaum asked if the existing size of the concrete steps is dictating the size of the
proposed deck. Johnson said yes.
Kisch asked what dictated the proposed triangular shaped side portion of the deck.
Johnson said having the space on the side of the deck allows more room for the door to
swing open.
Segelbaum asked if there will be railings installed. Johnson said there would be a railings
installed on the driveway side of the deck. Segelbaum asked if it is imperative to have
steps around the entire deck. Johnson said he would still need a variance with or without
steps.
McCarty asked the applicant if the City saw him building this deck and made him stop.
Johnson said yes.
Segelbaum asked if the depth of the deck remained the same but the side triangular
portion was removed if there would still be enough room. Johnson said if he removed the
side portion of the deck, the new deck would be where the concrete steps are currently
located.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
Kisch said this is a difficult request because construction of the deck has already began,
the footings are already in place and it would be hard for the applicant to create a new 25
square foot landing without requiring a variance. He said he thinks the landing area could
be made a bit smaller.
Segelbaum said he is not as concerned about the depth of the deck as he is the shape of
the deck. He said he'd be more comfortable if the size of it were reduced and if it had a
rectangular shaped deck/landing area. McCarty agreed and said that if this proposal would
have come before the Board before construction started he wouldn't have supported this
design. He said he is having difficulty allowing the steps in the front.
Kisch said he doesn't think the Board has the right to place design restrictions on the
proposed deck and that the decision should be based on hardship and setback
requirements not style. He said he is inclined to grant the variance request.
Segelbaum said he is focusing more on the size of the landing area.
McCarty said he is concerned that construction of the deck was started without a permit
and in his opinion this proposal is not appropriate.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 5
Sell said he thinks the language in the zoning code needs to be clarified regarding stoops,
landings, decks and front porches. The Board agreed. McCarty said he would address the
issue with the Planning Commission.
Segelbaum suggested adding a condition to limit the width of the deck to 8.6 feet from the
edge of the house and removing the small triangular shaped area on the side. McCarty
asked where the steps would be placed. Segelbaum said he thinks the location of the
steps is a separate issue. Kisch said he thinks the location of the deck and steps are
dependent on each other. McCarty said he is fine with allowing a larger landing area but
he doesn't want to see the steps go any closer to the front yard property line than the
current steps. Sell noted that the steps can't go out into the driveway and if they were on
the side of the deck they would have to walk around the entire deck to access the steps.
Segelbaum said he is comfortable allowing the steps in front but he wants the area to look
more like a landing, not a deck.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Nelson and motion carried 3 to 2 to add a condition
that the landing/platform area of the deck be no larger than 8.6 ft by 5.6 ft. in size. Kisch
and McCarty voted no.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Nelson and motion carried 4 to 1 to allow 9 ft. off the
required 35 ft. to a distance of 26 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line
to allow for the construction of new deck over the existing front steps with the condition
that the landing/platform area of the deck be no larger than 8.6 ft by 5.6 ft. in size.
McCarty voted no.
2301 Brunswick Ave. N. (09-05-04)
Ian & Gretta Biaham, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Front Yard Setback
Requirements
. 5.5 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29.5 ft. at its closest
point to the front yard (east) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 5 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 10ft. at its closest point
to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26,2009
Page 6
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(d) Articulation
Requirements
. The wall of the addition along the south property line will be 37 ft.
in length without articulating
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and explained the applicant's proposal to
construct a second garage stall which requires three variances. He stated that the
hardship noted by the applicant is that they currently have a one-stall garage.
Segelbaum asked if the articulation requirements apply to all walls or just to side walls.
Hogeboom said that only side walls are required to be articulated in order to avoid a tunnel
effect between houses.
Ian Bigham, Applicant, referred to the survey of his property and stated that they are
asking for the new garage addition to be located 31 feet from the front yard property line,
not 29.5 as indicated in the staff report. Nelson asked the applicant why the garage
addition needs to be built closer to the front property line. Bigham explained that the
current garage is only 20 feet deep and there is a thick, concrete porch located to the rear
of the garage that would be difficult to break up.
Segelbaum asked if the new garage could be built in a portion of the porch area since the
porch is being extended into the rear yard. Gretta Bigham, Applicant, stated that the porch
floor is higher than the garage floor.
Nelson said she doesn't have any issues regarding the side yard variance request but is
concerned about the front yard variance request.
Kisch referred to the garage work space shown on the plan drawings and asked
Hogeboom if that would also be considered accessory structure space. Hogeboom said
yes. Kisch noted that the proposed garage space approaches 1,000 square feet. Kisch
suggested that the garage work space and porch be made smaller so they would not need
the articulation variance. Mr. Bigham said he was concerned about the roof trusses if he
shortens the length of the garage and porch.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
Segelbaum said he is alright with the side yard variance and the lack of articulation
however he is concerned by the front yard variance request.
Nelson stated that the way the porch was originally constructed causes somewhat of a
hardship in this case.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 7
Kisch asked the applicants if there would be one or two garage doors on the proposed
new addition. Mr. Bigham said there would be one garage door. Kisch said he is fine with
the lack of articulation in this case. He added that a 20-foot wide garage might work
because there would be sufficient work/storage space in the back of the garage.
Hogeboom referred to the survey and stated that he believes the front yard variance
request for 5.5 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29.5 ft. is correct as stated in the
staff report.
Sell asked if 22 feet x 22 feet is standard for a two-stall garage. Hogeboom said there are
not written standards or minimum requirements but it has been common practice by the
Board to consider a 22 foot x 22 foot garage a minimal two-stall garage.
Nelson asked if the existing house is considered non-conforming because it is located 34
feet from the front property line. Hogeboom said it is not considered non-conforming
because it was built prior to 1982. Segelbaum asked if the proposed new garage addition
would require a variance if it was built along the same front plane as the existing garage.
Hogeboom stated that any new construction would have to follow setback requirements so
the proposed addition would require a one foot variance even if it were built along the
same plane as the front of the existing garage.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to approve a
variance for 1 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 34 ft. at its closest point to the front
yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
MOVED by Nelson, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve a
variance for 5 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 10ft. at its closest point to the side
yard (south) property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Kisch and motion carried 4 to 1 to approve a
variance allowing the wall of the addition along the south property line to be 37 ft. in length
without articulating to allow for the construction of a second garage stall. McCarty voted
no.
1315 Angelo Dr. (09-05-05)
Mohammad & Mariam Vedadi, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 9.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 3 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (north) property line.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26,2009
Page 8
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall with living space
above.
Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and explained the applicant's proposal to
build a second garage stall with living space above. He stated that staff has some concern
about this proposal regarding drainage and the proposed 3-foot distance to the north
property line. He said staff is recommending approval of the proposal however they felt it
would be better if the second garage stall were built 6.5 feet away from the property line
rather than 3 feet as requested which would allow the applicants to have a 20-foot wide
garage.
McCarty said he would feel comfortable allowing the proposed garage to be located 5 feet
from the side yard property line.
Kisch asked if staff's main concern is the grade of the lot. Hogeboom said yes.
Segelbaum asked if there are reasons the applicant couldn't build a detached garage to
the rear of the house. Hogeboom said it would be possible to build a detached garage on
this lot however it would cause a greater disturbance to the lot and a new driveway would
require a 3-foot setback from the property which might also require a variance.
Mohammad Vedadi, Applicant, stated that he is proposing a second garage stall because
currently he has a very small single stall garage. He stated that he originally wanted to add
a 12.5-foot wide garage stall on the north side of his property, however when he had the
property surveyed he realized that property lines weren't located where he thought they
were and the existing garage was located only 12.5 feet away from the side yard property
line. He referred to the staff recommendation and noted that if he built a 20-wide garage
as recommended the inside dimension would only be 18 feet. He referred to the
suggestion of building a detached garage in the back yard and explained that trees would
have to be removed, there is a steep slope, he would still need a variance for a new
driveway and it would look bad aesthetically to have a garage in the back yard.
McCarty asked about the dimensions of the proposed garage. Vedadi stated that if he built
a 9.5-foot wide addition the dimensions of the garage would be 21.5 ft. x 22 ft.
Sell asked if the outside wall of the existing garage would remain. Vedadi said the existing
exterior wall would be removed. Sell asked if there would be one garage door or two.
Vedadi said he would like to have 2 separate garage doors.
Vedadi referred to the survey and noted that the house was placed oddly on lot. There is
22 feet of side yard area on the south side of the lot and only 12.5 feet on the north side of
lot. He noted that there is an additional 17 feet between the property line and the
neighboring property to the north.
Sell said he is concerned about there being enough room along the north property line for
maintenance. Segelbaum added that if the Board allows a variance for the garage addition
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 9
to be built that he would like staff to review the plans again because it would be changing
the staff recommendation of 6.5 feet. Hogeboom stated staff will review the plans again as
part of the building permit process and the drainage and erosion control permit process.
Kisch asked the applicant what he would like the inside garage dimensions to be. Vedadi
said if he stays 5 feet away from the property line the inside dimension would only be 19.5
feet in width. He said the variance he is requesting would allow a 21.S-foot inside
dimension which is a minimal 2-stall garage and it will not ruin the aesthetics of the
neighborhood.
Segelbaum asked the applicant if he has spoken to the neighbors to the north. Vedadi
said he has spoken with his neighbors and they are content with his proposal.
Segelbaum asked the applicant if had considered building a tandem garage. Vedadi
explained that there is an existing bathroom located directly behind the garage so if he
were to build a tandem garage he would have to build it to the front of the house which
would look bad. He said he has considered every option and what he is proposing will
work the best.
Segelbaum said he is concerned about the neighboring house to the north. Vedadi noted
that the neighbor's house is set back 15 feet further on their lot than his and that they have
said they feel it will be ok visually.
McCarty said he is not comfortable with the variance request allowing the garage to be 3
feet away from the side yard property and that he would be more comfortable allowing the
garage to be 5 feet from the property line. He added that he feels a detached garage
could be added to the rear of the house. Vedadi reiterated that he would be opposed to
building a garage in the back yard because logistically and aesthetically it wouldn't work.
He added that there would also be a lot of additional concrete needed to build a garage in
the back and there is very limited storage space and living space in the existing house so
they want the living space above the proposed new garage space.
Segelbaum suggested the applicant buy some property from the neighbor to the south.
Sell stated there could be issues buying property from the south because this property is
not platted.
Kisch stated that grading the rear yard in order to build a garage may cause more
drainage problems. He said it would be environmentally better to build the garage addition
to the side, rather than to the rear, because there would be less impervious surface and
run-off. Sell agreed that there are some grading issues with this lot. Hogeboom stated
that staff agreed that there would be more impact to the surrounding properties if a garage
was built in the back yard.
Sell suggested allowing a 4.5 foot variance in order to allow the applicant to build a 20-foot
wide garage. McCarty stated that 5 feet is the setback requirement for sheds and
detached garages so he would feel more comfortable allowing a 5-foot variance.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 10
Sell opened the public hearing.
Ned Van Hamm, 1300 Angelo Drive, said this is ridiculous because there is almost 20 feet
between the Vedadi's property and the neighboring house to the north. He said it is not
Mr. Vedadi's fault that the original survey of his property was done incorrectly. He said the
City has given variances to other parts of the City such as Hidden Lake and what the
Vedadi's are requesting is reasonable.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Sell closed the public hearing.
Nelson said she would advise the applicant to move before she would advise them to build
a garage in the back yard. She said putting a garage in the back yard would devalue this
property and possibly the surrounding properties as well.
Kisch said he is in favor of granting an 8-foot variance to allow for a 20-foot wide garage to
built 4.5 feet away from the property line. Segelbaum added that the Board's role is to look
at the reasonableness of proposals and to improve the value of properties without
destroying surrounding properties. He said he feels that a 3 foot side yard setback is too
small and he agrees with Kisch's recommendation of allowing the garage to be built within
4.5 feet of the property line.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve a
variance for 8 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 4.5 ft. at its closest point to the
side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall with
living space above.
401 Westwood Dr. S. (09-05-06)
Rebecca Krantz & John Fraser, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 3.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 9 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall with living space
above.
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Articulation
Requirements
. The wall of the addition along the south property line will be 40 ft.
in length without articulating
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26,2009
Page 11
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a second garage stall with living space
above.
Hogeboom explained that the applicants are proposing to construct a second garage stall
with living space above. He stated that they received variances in 2000 for a similar
proposal however they did not build the addition at that time. He added that staff is
recommending approval of the requested variances.
McCarty questioned if the articulation requirements apply to all walls. Hogeboom said that
the articulation requirements apply only to side walls.
Rebecca Krantz, Applicant, showed photos of their existing house and explained the
proposed addition. She stated that the neighbors to south won't be able to see the
addition and there will be no negative impacts to any of the surrounding properties. She
stated that she is trying to have a colonial style house to match the home styles in the
neighborhood.
Kisch asked the applicant why she can't meet the articulation requirements and which
rooms would be affected by the articulation. Krantz stated that the rooms affected by the
articulation would be the dining room and kitchen. She reiterated that no one will be able
to see the proposed addition. McCarty said there seems to be enough room to articulate
the proposed addition.
Joseph Buslovich, Architect for the project, showed the Board some proposed pictures of
the house after the addition and discussed the grade of the lot including a steep slope in
the rear yard. He asked why the wall has to articulate because it is a waste of money and
no one will be able to see it.
Kisch suggested that the dining room area be articulated. He noted that the look and feel
of the interior space would be the same if the dining room wall was articulated in by 2 feet.
Krantz expressed concern that if the wall was articulated it wouldn't look like a colonial
house. McCarty stated that the style of the house is not considered a hardship.
Segelbaum suggested giving the applicants a larger side yard variance in order to allow
them more room to articulate the wall. Buslovich stated that the easiest way to build the
proposed addition is with straight lines and a straight roof. Krantz expressed concern
about the location of a proposed sidewalk if she has to articulate the addition.
Kisch reiterated that he would like to see the dining room portion of the addition be
articulated.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to approve a
variance for 3.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 9 ft. at its closest point to the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
May 26, 2009
Page 12
side yard (south) property line to allow for the construction of a second garage stall with
living space above.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by McCarty and motion carried 4 to 1 to deny the variance
request to allow the wall of the addition along the south property line to be 40 feet in length
without articulating. Segelbaum voted no.
III. Other Business
Election of Officers
MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously elect
Segelbaum as Chair.
MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Sell and motion carried unanimously to elect Kisch as
Vice Chair.
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 pm.
Mike Sell, Chair
Joe Hogeboom, Staff Liaison
JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES
Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope
Meeting of April 1 , 2009
The Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Joint Water Commission meeting was called to
order at 1 :30 pm, in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room.
Commissioners Present
Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley
Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal
Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope
Staff Present
Tom Mathisen, Director of Public Works, Crystal
Randy Kloepper, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Crystal
Guy Johnson, Director of Public Works, New Hope
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works, Golden Valley
Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley
Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager, Golden Valley
Dave Lemke, Utilities Maintenance Supervisor, Golden Valley
Bernie Weber, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, New Hope
Other
Scott Harder, Environmental Financial Group (EFG)
Minutes of February 20, 2009
MOVED by Norris, seconded by Burt and motion carried to approve the minutes of the
February 20, 2009 meeting with noted changes. McDonald abstained due to his absence.
Motion to approve Comprehensive Water Supplv Plan
During the February 20,2009 meeting a motion was made to approve the Comprehensive
Water Supply Plan, contingent on the review and approval of TAC in regards to the
additional text that had yet to be reviewed by TAC. Harder stated that TAC had reviewed
the Comprehensive Water Supply Plan and approved the plan. A decision was made that
the approval of the plan be adopted by resolution instead of a motion.
Resolution 09-02 reaardina Approval of the Comprehensive Water Supplv Plan
Commissioner Norris introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 09-02
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN OF THE JOINT WATER
COMMISSION OF CRYSTAL, GOLDEN VALLEY, AND NEW HOPE
Joint Water Commission
Page 2 of 3
Resolution 09-02 reaardina Approval of the Comprehensive Water Supplv Plan -
Continued
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner
McDonald and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Burt,
Norris, and McDonald; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Chair and his signature
attested by the Vice Chair.
Update on Water Conservation Rates
McDonald stated that each city is currently reviewing their water consumption data and will
meet again. Virnig stated the deadline for the conservation rate is the end of the year and
that they should have something in place as far as a tier rate plan for residential customers
and commercial customers.
Harder stated that he thought Minneapolis was going to charge all customers a higher
usage rate during the summer months.
Virnig stated that the finance directors will meet at the end of April for another meeting on
the tier rate structure.
Updates on JWC - Minneapolis Water Advisory Board
An Advisory Board is being created to attend the meeting in May regarding the Minneapolis
CIP and view the presentation by the Metropolitan Council.
Harder stated that he met with Covin-Roy and Loomis and at the meeting it was decided
that Covin-Roy and Loomis would contact customers and invite them to participate in the
Advisory Board. The customers were defined as Columbia Heights, Hilltop, Edina,
Bloomington and MAC.
Brette Hjelle from Minneapolis and Pat Schutrop from Golden Valley will notify the stake
holders for a meeting scheduled for either Tuesday April 20, or Thursday April 30.
Each member of the JWC would have an appointee and a staff member who would serve
as an alternate.
Norris and McDonald both stated that their mayors would represent their cities as the
appointee on the Board.
Harder stated further that the Advisory Board would have four meetings a year and that the
Board would be comprise of an elected officials from each representing city along with
alternate.
The purpose of the Board would be to report back to the Council and the Board would not
have any advocacy powers.
Joint Water Commission
Page 3 of 3
Approval of JWC to hire KLM to do the inspections on water tower
MOVEd by Norris, seconded by McDonald and motion carried unanimously to authorize
KLM to inspect all three water towers for hail damage at a cost not to exceed $3,000.
Next Meeting
The next meeting will be June 10,2009.
Adiournment
The meeting was adjourned at 2 pm.
Thomas D. Burt, Chair
ATTEST:
Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant
Envision Connection Project
Board of Directors Meeting Minutes
May 20,2009
Present: Sharon Glover, Helene Johnson, Linda Loomis, Philip Lund, Dean Penk,
Marshall Tanick, Blair Tremere and Luke Weisberg (GVCEF Representative)
Absent: Jim Heidelberg
Staff: Jeanne Andre
The meeting began at 7: 10 pm in the Council Conference Room.
Boomers and Civic Engagement
Philip Lund and Helene Johnson gave a brief overview of a conference they attended
about engaging the boomer generation as it hits retirement. The focus of the event was
to identify how to plug into the boomer generation to enhance the quality of life through
service. Philip reported that corporate volunteerism was also addressed and he met
several volunteer coordinators. The Board expressed interest in seeing if the Serve
America Act would support an AmeriCorps worker in the role of volunteer coordinator.
Approval of Minutes
TanicklJohnson moved to approve the minutes of April 23, 2009. Motion carried.
MarshalrTanick requested that a letter of thanks be sent to Dick Crockett of the Edina
Foundation.
Proposed Community Foundation/Non-Profit
The group had a wide ranging discussion on the documents for a Community
Foundation prepared for consideration by the Board. The discussion focused more on
the global issues of strategy and process than on the documents. Issues discussed
included communicating with and involving the City Council and other members of the
community and the best timing and sequence for related activities. Jim Heidelberg sent
written comments for consideration. Further discussion occurred regarding the draft
Mission Statement and how and if a proposed foundation would relate to Envision and
the Connection Project. The members stressed that Bridge Builders could be either
individuals or groups and support should be available for both.
The Board directed staff to incorporate the Mission Statement into the Articles of
Incorporation and By-Laws and send electronic copies to the members for review. Luke
Weisberg volunteered to develop a question and answer format document that could be
used to communicate with others about the proposed foundation and solicit broad
support. Luke will work with others from the Board who have an interest in this
approach. The goal will be to circulate a draft to Board Members for individual
comments by June 12. Luke will then consolidate the comments he receives to prepare
a final draft for Board discussion at its July meeting. It was suggested that this
document may help in developing a Case Statement for the proposed foundation.
Envision Award
Blair Tremere reported that he had submitted a Visi nomination to the City's Web Site,
but has not had a response. Staff will check to determine if the nomination is available,
Envision Connection Project
Board of Directors Meeting Minutes
May 20, 2009 - Page 2
and if not get an email copy of the nomination from Blair. Members have agreed to
review the nominations as a subcommittee prior to regular Board Meetings.
Bridge Building Activities
Quarterly Meeting - The next Quarterly Bridge Builder Meeting is scheduled for June
13. Marshall Tanick agreed to call and email folks about the meeting and bring
refreshments. Dean Penk agreed to convene the meeting. Jeanne Andre will send out
the information regarding folks who expressed interest in Bridge Building activities to
Board Members.
Lilac Planting - Linda Loomis reported that the lilac planting group met and decided to
limit the planting area to Highway 55 between Winnetka and Glenwood. The rationale
for the change is to keep the planting area more compact and closer to the Welcome
Center, which will be at the Spirit of Hope Methodist Church. A delay in planting east of
Glenwood will also better coincide with the 2010 Pavement Management Program,
which includes the Highway 55 frontage road.
Dog Park - Annie Cleveland is getting estimates on fencing for some of the areas
under consideration, including the Humane Society, Theodore Wirth Park by Wirth Lake
and Blaser Park (north of Meadowbrook School).Park and Recreation Director Rick
Jacobson is setting up a meeting with the Humane Society to discuss using a portion of
its property for a dog park.
Buckthorn Busting - Blair Tremere reported that he has had good feedback on a
proposed educational session to help residents identify buckthorn and learn best
practices to remove it. He is considering an event at Brookview Community Center that
would have an educational component combined with a barbeque.
Golden Valley Days 2009
The group congratulated Philip Lund and Luke Weisberg on a great event, in spite of
the weather. Luke reported that attendance was down but still healthy and spread
throughout the day. There was good traffic for the community booths and interest in
Bridge Building activities.
Future Meetings
The next meeting will be on June 18..
The meeting ended at 9:10 pm.
Jeanne Andre, Assistant City Manager
altifValley
OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Brookview Community Center
Monday, April 27, 2009
7:00 PM
I. Call to Order
Sandler called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Present: Roger Bergman, Jim Johnson, Kelly Kuebelbeck, Emily Piper, Anne
Saffert, Jerry Sandler, Jim Vaughan, Linda Loomis, Mayor; Rick Jacobson,
Director of Parks and Recreation; Sheila Van Sloun, Administrative
Assistant; and Annie Gillette Cleveland, Resident.
Absent:
Ken Graves and Bob Mattison.
III. Agenda changes or Additions
Jacobson added Capital Improvement Plan.
IV. Approval of Minutes - February 23, 2009
Kuebelbeck made a change to the attendance record. She stated she was absent at
the February 23rd meeting and Saffert was present.
MOTION: Moved by Vaughan and seconded by Sandler to approve the February
23rd meeting minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
V. Recreation Report - Sue Cook
Cook gave an update on the Youth Basketball programs, which are run in
cooperation with the City of Crystal. The Mites Basketball program for grades K-1
had 109 participants. The Youth Basketball program for grades 2-6 had 27 teams.
She said there were 28-30 volunteer parent coaches this year.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Open Space and Recreation Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 2
Cook said Adult Softball registration for the spring/summer season is complete. We
have 32 Adult Men's teams and 4 Adult Co-Rec teams, which are combined with
New Hope who has 7. She said this year's fall softball season will be changed to 8
teams that play single games for 7 weeks due to work on one of the fields at
Schaper Park, which will not be available for play.
Our summer tennis program will again be run by instructors from Twin Cities Tennis
Camps. Last year's program was one of our most successful. She gave details on
the summer/fall Saturday Camps she is offering this season.
Cook said Concerts in the Park will take place this year on Monday nights at 7:00
p.m.at the Brookview large shelter. Concerts run from June 15th - August 1th. She
added that attendance was great last year.
Cook said she had four Adopt-a-Park openings until the spring/summer brochure
went out in March. Two parks have been adopted since.
Cook said she continues to offer adult basketball programs and adult volleyball at
Davis Community Center. She also offered the Holiday Youth Open Gym over spring
break and it had great attendance.
Cook announced to the Commission that she will be retiring June 30,2009.
VI. Dog Park - Annie Gillette Clevelend
Cleveland was invited to speak to the Commission about the possibility of a dog park
in Golden Valley. She discussed the concept and shared surrounding city dog park
information.
The Commission then discussed possible locations. Jacobson said he and other city
staff will be meeting with Golden Valley Humane Society to discuss their site as a
possible location.
VII. Capital Improvement Plan
Jacobson distributed copies of the CIP, explaining that expenses are being held
level.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Open Space and Recreation Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 3
VIII. Old Business
Sandburg Middle School
Jacobson explained that School District 281 will be closing a few of their schools,
including Sandburg as a middle school. He said District 281 Community Education
will be moved to Sandburg along with other programs. The gyms, pool and ballfields
should still be available.
Luce Line
Jacobson gave an updated explaining that much of the trail is complete. He said that
Three Rivers has talked about a possible grand opening when the trail is complete.
Canadian Pacific
Jacobson said the north/south trail thru Golden Valley from New Hope to
Bloomington is being studied by Three Rivers Park District, as well as staff from the
cities involved. The goal is to put together a feasibility study for future reference.
Deer Survey
Jacobson reported that the cities objectives were met with this year's deer
management program.
X. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Moved by Johnson and seconded by Vaughan to adjourn at 8:30 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
BitsSeft:'~1
. Minu:~~~:.:~t;
........... ,^..1:slt~tI'..IIa.li~g~Jtl~l.It;:;~u'l1tml'$~i~u"';,n.
""i~W~'gf'~I;l~iJ.,16~~q~....
-y.""
".': .'.,--:~- ..,- -. - ~
"'"
"-':'<';
"-".:'-', ....
. -. "
:H..t.!~t;:l$ll.li)!t(i).~.~,~(;J~~" ,.
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) was called to order at 11:35 a.m.,
Thursday, April 16, 2009, at Golden Valley City Hall by Chair Welch. Ms. Herbert conducted roll call.
Roll Call
Crystal
Golden Valley
Medicine Lake
Minneapolis
Minnetonka
New Hope
Plymouth
Robbinsdale
St. Louis Park
Also present:
Alternate Commissioner Stu Stockhaus
Commissioner Linda Loomis, Treasurer
Alternate Commissioner Ted Hoshal
Commissioner Michael Welch, Chair
Commissioner Kris Sundberg
Commissioner Daniel Stauner
Commissioner Ginny Black, Vice Chair
Alternate Commissioner Wayne Sicora
Commissioner Manuel Jordan
Counsel
Engineer
Recorder
Charlie LeFevere
Karen Chandler
Amy Herbert
Derek Asche, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Plymouth
Jeannine Clancy, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley
Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council
Lee Gustafson, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minnetonka
Dave Hanson, Alternate Commissioner, City of Golden Valley
Guy Johnson, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of New Hope
Randy Lehr, Three Rivers Park District
Richard McCoy, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Robbinsdale
Jeff Oliver, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley
Liz Stout, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minnetonka
Elizabeth Thornton, Alternate Commissioner, City of Plymouth
Brad W ozney, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
Mike Wyatt, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Chris Zadak, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
. f).' A." . ".>'.' : "\1"'" .iI: :~( ',"';"S' :,..1,"',,,,,, ,...:,~.:. ,': '. '.. .t' 'A .' ".t"/."::,.:';;",::,,,
~i:",:'.~ i.,: ,:: ij ~:,'.: 11.::':; ;I~qr _,' '. _', .} ,: U '1': f U!l.':f,~ ",.', ", ':'" ';'-1-\,' " .,; Uj ?:-t::->!;}:-:~;.~:'::<
"Ar, ."RB,~~Ia:,t';';~""f;.,r;"SJ~,O,.@,.f:tIJ,i' ......,~:Q~en . ~. .......9~P .... a:.\:,,~.T!:";..
Ms. Loomis requested to amend the agenda to include an invoice from MMKR for auditing services
through March 31, 2009. Ms. Black moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Jordan seconded the motion. The
motion carried unanimously. Chair Welch requested the addition of item 7D - Counsel Communications-
to the consent agenda. Ms. Loomis moved approval of the consent agenda as amended. Ms. Black
seconded the motion. The motion carried with eight votes in favor. The City of Medicine Lake abstained
from the vote.
.3.... ;.Qi~il~~i.I~I~~~:,;Qn:r9'Ot1..Agend'a1terns
No citizen input on non-agenda items.
1#249239 vl
BCWMC April 16,2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 1
3~Adt)1Jmi.i
A. Presentation of the March 19, 2009, BCWMC meeting minutes. The minutes were approved as
part of the Consent Agenda.
B. Presentation of the Financial Statement. The April financial report was received and approved as
part of the Consent Agenda.
The general and construction account balances reported in the April 2009 Financial Report are as
follows:
Checking Account Balance
TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE
666,174.61
666,174.61
Construction Account Balance
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BALANCE
-Less: Reserved for CIP projects
Construction cash! investments available for projects
2,843,712.58
2,843,712.58
3,566,387.20
(722,674.62)
C. Presentation of Invoices for Payment Approval.
Invoices:
i. Kennedy & Graven - Legal Services through February 28, 2009 - invoice for
the amount of $1,766.75.
Ii. Barr Engineering Company - March Engineering Services - invoice for the
amount of $34,735.98.
iii. Barr Engineering Company - February Sweeney Lake TMDL Phase n
Services - invoice for the amount of $432.50.
iv. Amy Herbert - March Recording Administrator Services - invoice for the
amount of $4,019.85.
v. MMKR - Audit Services through February 28, 2009 - invoice for the amount
of $1,500.
vi. MMKR - Audit Services through March 31, 2009 - invoice for the amount of
$5,300.
vii. Lakeshore Weekly News - Public Hearing Notice publication - invoice for the
amount of $145.55
viii. Prairie Moon Nursery - Seed Packets for Education Outreach - invoice for the
amount of $355.18.
ix. Pauline Langsdorf - Reimbursement for Education Expenses (Seed packet
labels) - invoice in the amount of 12.00
#249239 v1
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 2
x. City of St. Louis Park - Westwood Lake Project (Westdale Park Pond)
Reimbursement - invoice for the amount of $51,495.42.
xi. SEH, Inc. - Sweeney Lake TMDL Work through February 28, 2009 - invoice
for the amount of $5,625.00.
Ms. Black moved to approve all of the invoices. Mr. Stauner seconded the motion. By call of roll, the
motion carried with eight votes in favor. The City of Medicine Lake abstained from the vote.
:4':I:ew,:~q~'~
A. Mike Wyatt, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), and Chris Zadak, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Presentation on Watershed-wide TMDL Experiences. Mr.
Wyatt said he will talk about TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Load Studies) in general and about
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's approach to TMDLs. He said the MCWD's approach
to TMDLs is that the District sees the studies as opportunities to get positive things done and in the
ground. Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD has worked closely with the MPCA to be a facilitator to make
sure the TMDLs meet the watershed's needs and to work with the community. He said that in his
opinion, the TMDLs are tools to force collaboration where collaboration might not otherwise exist.
Mr. Wyatt said he considers TMDLs as opportunities to work with communities, to get everyone
at the table, and to do broad-scale planning to achieve a broad-scale goal.
Mr. Wyatt handed around maps of the Minnehaha Creek subwatershed, which is an area of 60-
square miles from the outlet of Lake Minnetonka flowing to the Mississippi River. He said three
things make this subwatershed different from the Bassett Creek Watershed:
1. The water flowing out of Lake Minnetonka is relatively clean from a pollution standpoint;
2. There is a dam at Lake Minnetonka where the creek flows can be controlled within the
parameters set by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR); and,
3. Near the outlet ofthe watershed is Lake Hiawatha, which is the end-receiving waterbody
in the watershed and the indicator of the water quality of Minnehaha Creek.
He said the TMDL only affects the communities that drain into Minnehaha Creek as opposed to
affecting all 29 communities in the watershed since the water flowing out of Lake Minnetonka is
relatively clean. Mr. Wyatt talked about the Minnehaha Creek's listed impairments: biota,
chlorides, fecal coliform (e. Cob'), and nutrients. He explained that with TMDLs some type of
pollutant needs to be regulated. He said it can be a struggle to identify a pollutant that needs to be
regulated in the waterbody for certain types of impairments such as biota or dissolved oxygen. Mr.
Wyatt stated the Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) has given guidance for such cases. He
said the EPA recommends identifying and dealing with surrogates. Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD is
therefore looking at the nutrients going down to Lake Hiawatha. He said that by regulating the
nutrients, the MCWD can address other TMDLs. He explained that by conducting a TMDL to try
and limit the nutrients going into Lake Hiawatha, by default the TMDL will limit the nutrients
going into the Creek. He mentioned that there isn't an in-stream standard for nutrients in the
Creek but there is for Lake Hiawatha.
Mr. Wyatt said the TMDL will be underway this spring with the goal of a draft TMDL by the end
of 2009. He said the MCWD will be looking at the biota problem and fish habitat problem and
also how to optimize fish habitat in the Creek so that when there are fish in the Creek, they have a
place to go as opposed to ensuring fish are there all of the time. He said that in his opinion it is not
realistic that fISh will be in the Creek all of the time.
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 3
Mr. Zadak commented that it makes sense to look at all of the impairments on a Creek at the same
time, with perhaps the starting point being a biota TMDL and the other impairments being seen
as stressors to the biota. He said there is a potential listing of Minnehaha Creek as being impaired
for dissolved oxygen but that by virtue of addressing the phosphorus impairment, the dissolved
oxygen impairment would be addressed and wouldn't need to be addressed by a different TMDL
study. He said a difficulty with the watershed-wide approach is that when lakes are in the system,
they often require individual effort and aren't as easy to put into a scope of work as a creek. He
said it may be harder but it is encouraged to capture the lake impairments at the same time as
other impairments in the watershed. Mr. Zadak said the MCWD is doing a lake TMDL separate
from the creek TMDL.
Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD has a $76, 000,000 budget planned for capital improvements in the
watershed. He said the end product, in his opinion, of the forced collaboration through TMDLs is
that everyone gets together around the table and looks at the proposed improvements and orients
the proposed improvements toward achieving the results of the TMDL and collaborating on
getting the improvements in the ground. Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD hopes that by doing the
TMDL, planning is accomplished that gets everyone on board and makes the job of the MCWD
easier in the future when projects come up.
Mr. Wyatt said that in the legal aspect of the TMDL there is a load allocation prescribed for each
community. He said the MCWD has taken a large portion of the load allocation, around 80% to
85%, and has claimed ownership of it. Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD's position has been to take on
dealing with the impairments and paying for the work through its capital improvements. He said
it gives cities a rwancial incentive to have the MCWD be a part of the process. Mr. Wyatt said the
burden on a city-by-city level would be less in a collaborative environment since the MCWD offers
the opportunity to use regional funding and a more efficient use of public resources.
Ms. Black commented on the differences between the structure of a watershed district and a
watershed management organization.
Chair Welch asked to what degree have the MPCA and! or the EP A developed the formula they
will use to calculate how impairments are being addressed through the use of surrogates. Mr.
Zadak said the EP A is asking for separate balanced TMDL equations and load allocations for
each parameter. He said there are some impairments that are not pollutants, like biota and low
dissolved oxygen, where strong enough technical cases can be made to link pollutants to
impairments such as euthrophication with depressed dissolved oxygen levels.
Chair Welch asked Mr. Zadak to speak on the development of creek protocols. Mr. Zadak said the
MPCA is working on a case study that could serve as an example as opposed to a protocol that
establishes the only way to conduct the TMDL study. He said that over time the Elm Creek
Watershed-wide TMDL, currently being put together, will serve as an excellent example.
Mr. Hoshal asked Mr. Wyatt if the MCWD has an inventory of all of the outfalls into the
Minnehaha Creek. Mr. Wyatt replied that one of the things that makes the MCWD well-
positioned to facilitate the TMDLs is the fact that the District has invested roughly $2,000,000 in
technical data acquisition along Minnehaha Creek over the last 10 years. He said the District has
put together a hydrologic and hydraulic model for the entire watershed. Mr. Wyatt said the
MCWD also conducted a stream assessment by having stream geomorphologists start at the
Mississippi River and walk up to Lake Minnetonka and inventory all the outfalls along the way.
He said they divided Minnehaha Creek into 30 different reaches and classified each reach for
different assessment criteria and were able to characterize the stability of the banks and beds and
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 4
overall hydrological health of the entire system. Mr. Wyatt said the MCWD has water quality data
starting back from the 1970s and the District's general philosophy always has been that the
District monitors the lakes and streams not for today but for the people who are going to be doing
the work 20 years from now. He said the most valuable thing the MCWD believes it can provide is
good, solid data and a long period of record for flow data and water quality data. He said the
MCWD has this wealth of information to draw from and it serves as the basis for a lot of its work.
Mr. Boshal inquired if any of the MCWD's TMDLs address nitrogen loading. Mr. Wyatt said no
and said the MCWD's assumption is if it deals with phosphorus it will be dealing with nitrogen.
Mr. Zadak said the MPCA is in the process of revising its water quality standards to include
nutrient standards, including both phosphorus and nitrogen, in streams.
Mr. LeFevere asked if anything is happening on a regional basis regarding chlorides. Mr. Zadak
said there is an ongoing options analysis to see if there could be a metro-wide effort to address
chloride. He said it may be a TMDL or may be something else in order to achieve reductions to
meet standards in streams across the metro area. He said the contract for the Minnehaha Creek
TMDL includes addressing chlorides and the thinking is that because a biota TMDL study is part
of the process, evaluation of the stressors affecting the biota needs to be conducted and chloride
can be one ofthe stressors evaluated. Mr. Zadak commented that the case ofthe Minnehaha Creek
biota impairment and how it will be addressed will be unique because of the lack of water in the
Creek. He said there may be a recategorization of no TMDL for biota.
Mr. Asche commented that cities have non-degradation requirements where possible best
management practices need to be in place to reduce the volume of discharge. He said it seems that
it may be a possible conflict with the biota portion of a creek TMDL study. Mr. Wyatt said the
approach of the MCWD is to focus on inmtration as a method of reducing stormwater volumes
with the understanding that stormwater inmtrated into the ground doesn't disappear but re-
emerges into the Creek in the form of base flow. He said the particular geology of the Creek and of
South Minneapolis makes it possible.
Chair Welch asked Mr. Lehr to e-mail to the Commission Recorder the Elm Creek Watershed-
wide TMDL plan for review of the TMDL design.
B. 2009 Minnetonka Street Rehabilitation. Ms. Chandler explained that this project requires
Commission review because it is a street reconstruction project greater than tlve acres and because
it proposes a surface water diversion of approximately 2.5 acres (0.6 acres of impervious snrface)
from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed into the Bassett Creek Watershed, which will address
flooding issues. She stated that the project includes utility, curb and gutter improvements and a
reconstruction of approximately 1.8 miles of residential streets. She said the project will not have
floodplain impacts bnt will increase the amount of impervions surface by 0.7 acres. Ms. Chandler
reminded the Commission that the Commission's Watershed Management Plan doesn't require
street reconstruction projects to meet Levell standards. Ms. Chandler reported that items a - g in
the April 8, 2009, Engineer's Memo on the project have been addressed. Mr. Stauner asked how
many grit chambers are being installed. Ms. Stout replied that the project will be installing sump
manholes not grit chambers. Ms. Black suggested the Commission Engineer review the plans to
make sure they accurately reflect the installation of sump manholes and not grit chambers. Ms.
Black moved approval of the project with conditions d (for the sump manholes to be indicated onethe plans), h, and i in the April 8th Engineer's Memo on the project. Mr. Stauner seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
C. BCWMC Project Web Site. The Commission decided that in order to save resources and to
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 5
make meeting materials more accessible, the meeting packet will get posted on the Commission's
Web site at www.bassettcreekwmo.orl! and the Commission Recorder will send out an e-mail link
each month when the meeting materials are online. The Commission agreed that commissioners
and alternate commissioners who want to receive a hard copy can request to be on the mailing list
maintained by the Recorder. The Commission decided that the hard copy will not include copies of
the meeting minutes, invoices, or information-only items. Chair Welch requested that this topic be
revisited at the July BCWMC meeting for review of the new procedures.
A. Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Update. Chair Welch stated that Mr. Ron Leaf of SEH, Inc.
provided an update on the TMDL study in a March 23, 2009, memo to the Commission. Chair
Welch reported that a keynote of the memo is that there will be a work group meeting on
Thursday, April 23rd with the city and technical representatives to discuss the numbers from the
models and discuss how the rest of the public rollout of the TMDL study information will occur.
B. Medicine Lake TMDL Study Update. Chair Welch reported on the April 9th Medicine Lake
Steering Committee meeting. He said there was a rollout of the data from the model and some
allocation numbers. Chair Welch said the numbers reported included a total phosphorus load:
7,520 pounds. He said the MPCA representative presented the allocation as 4,170 pounds of the
total 7,520 pounds are from the watershed, 3,100 pounds are from the in-lake source of curlyleaf
pondweed, and 250 pounds are from atmospheric deposits. Chair Welch reported that the TMDL
number set is 3,000 pounds, which means the reduction required is 4,520 pounds of phosphorus.
Chair Welch remarked that he thinks the discussion of the modeling and the application to load
allocation will continue at the next Medicine Lake stakeholder meeting. He said there was
discussion at the stakeholder meeting on how to set the margin of safety and how to set allocations
based on the criteria that have been agreed on by the stakeholders. Chair Welch said the project is
roughly four months behind the schedule set in the TMDL study work plan.
C. BCWMC's Draft 2008 Annual Report. The Commission approved adding in "The Year
in Brief" summary to the introduction. Mr. LeFevere recommended adding a section to "The
Year in Brief' that discusses the BCWMC's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) work. Mr. Sicora
recommended adding links to further information on the BCWMC's Web site. Mr. Womey,
BWSR mentioned PRAP (performance Review and Assistance Program) and said the emphasis of
that program is how well LGUs (local governmental units) are implementing their plans. He
recommended that the BCWMC tie the Annual Report back to its watershed comprehensive plan
and also recommended the Commission include its self-analyses in the annual report because then
the Commission will have less administrative work to do when it undergoes the PRAP.
D. BCWMC 2010 Operating Budget - Initial Discussion. Chair Welch reported that the Budget
Committee met on April 9th for a preliminary discussion ofthe 2010 budget. Ms. Loomis handed
out a draft budget prepared by the Deputy Treasurer based on the Committee's directions and on
input from the Commission Engineer and Attorney on their 2010 budgets. The Commission went
through the draft budget by line item for feedback and a revised budget will be presented at the
May BCWMC meeting.
E. 2009 BCWMC Draft Watershed Tour Itinerary. The Commission set the watershed tour for
the morning of June 11th and discussed the draft watershed tour itinerary prepared by Barr
Engineering with recommendations from the TAC and presented in the April 7, 2009, memo.
Chair Welch asked Ms. Herbert to conf"mn with Derek Asche regarding homeowner approval for
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 6
the Plymouth Creek Channel Erosion site and suggested the Wirth Lake site could be a drive-by
down the parkway to Glenwood on the way to the Twins Stadium.
F. BCWMC's Missions and Goals. Chair Welch said the Administrative Services Committee
discussed that the Commission will want to look at its goals and come up with a way to state the
BCWMC's mission in a succinct manner that doesn't just repeat its statutory goals. He said the
Committee drafted up a list of goals, listed in the March 13, 2009, memo in the meeting packet, for
the Commission to discuss and consider adopting as its touchpoints to focus on from the time of
adoption through the ensuing year. The Commission decided to continue the discussion of this
item at the May BCWMC meeting.
[Commissioner Black departs.)
A. Chair:
i. Chair Welch announced there was an article in the April 13th edition of the Star Tribune
regarding street sweeping. He said the City of Plymouth's sweeping program and the benefits
of sweeping for reducing phosphorus loading into Medicine Lake were mentioned and Derek
Asche was quoted. Ms. Black passed around a copy of the article.
ii. Chair Welch announced that on Wednesday, April 22, at 11:00 a.m. he, Mr. LeFevere, Mr.
Herbert of Barr, and Mr. Stauner if he is avallable will be meeting to discuss the 60-day rule
regarding project proposal reviews and the BCWMC's process regarding the reviews. He said
it will be a work session and that interested TAC members are invited and that Mr. Asche has
indicated he will attend the session. Chair Welch said the Commission and TAC members will
have future opportunities to comment on the subject.
B. Commissioners:
i. Mr. Stauner mentioned that Shingle Creek has an annual watershed clean-up week that
coincides with Earth Day. He said Shingle Creek looked at doing the event jointly with other
watersheds and although the organization of it didn't occur this year Mr. Stauner
recommends Bassett Creek consider it for next year.
ii. Mr. Stauner mentioned that on March 30th he went to the annual Shallow Lake Forum
sponsored by the University of Mankato. He said there is a Web site with information at
www.shallowlake.info.
iii. Ms. Sundberg announced that on Tuesday, May 5th, at 7pm at the American Legion in
Chanhassen the Rlley-Purgatory watershed is having its twice annual meeting and will be
discussing carp removal.
iv. Mr. Jordan announced that the BCWMC Education Display will be on display at the Earth
Day and Arbor Day events at St. Louis Park.
v. Ms. Thornton reported that the Education and Public Outreach Committee handed out all of
the seed packets it brought at the Plymouth Yard and Garden Expo.
C. Committees:
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 7
i. Administrative Services: Chair Welch said the Administrative Committee will need to
schedule a meeting.
D. Counsel*
E. Engineer:
i. Ms. Chandler reported on the Hennepin Conservation District (HCD) Forum. She said two
main ideas were being discussed. She said one idea is that if the legislature approved Clean
Water Legacy funds project by project then it might make sense for Hennepin County to
prepare on behalf of the watershed an omnibus grant application proposing projects in the
County. Ms. Chandler said the other idea is if BWSR is the grantor of the Clean Water Legacy
funds then it would be easier to apply for the grants and Hennepin County would just like to
know who applied for grants and for what projects and how much money and if the grants
were awarded. Ms. Loomis said during the small group discussion Brad Wozney said BWSR
would prefer a consolidated application instead of individual applications. Ms. Chandler said
the HCD is planning to create a summary of the forum discussion.
ii. Ms. Chandler said the Resource Management Plan will be submitted to the Army Corps of
Engineers next week and it will also be posted on the Web site. Chair Welch asked that an e-
mail be sent to the Commissioners once the RMP is posted on the Web site.
';!'~iji,',~~j:pij!r~mGllj~~i;!;
Ms. Loomis moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Sundberg seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at
2:20 p.m.
Michael Wclch, Charr
Date
Amy Herbert, Recorder
Date
Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary Date
#249239 vI
BCWMC April 16, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Page 8
tol
'Valley
moran m
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 1. Authorize Cooperative Agreement with the City of Minneapolis and Award Contract
for the Xerxes Avenue Rehabilitation Project, City Improvement Project No. 08-13
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator
Summary
Xerxes Avenue North, between Plymouth Avenue North and McNair Avenue North, is
scheduled for rehabilitation in the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (S-026, page
117). The street qualifies for a mill and overlay because of the pavement condition, presence
of curb and gutter and existing drainage improvements. Xerxes Avenue is the jurisdictional
boundary between the cities of Minneapolis and Golden Valley and the Public Works
Departments for the two communities have been working collaboratively to develop a
cooperative agreement to rehabilitate the entire street at one time. The City of Golden Valley
has been serving as the lead agency for the project.
Bids for the Xerxes Avenue Rehabilitation Project, City Improvement Project No. 08-13, were
opened on June 23,2009. The following bids were received:
Hardrives, Inc.
Northwest Asphalt, Inc.
Asphalt Surface Technologies, Inc.
North Valley, Inc.
Midwest Asphalt Corp.
C.S. McCrossan, Inc.
Bituminous Roadways, Inc.
Engineer's Estimate
$331,174.57
$336,089.82
$376,538.83
$375,470.35
$381,352.50
$423,039.20
$439,262.50
$373,794.00
Attachments
Agreement Between the City of Minneapolis and the City of Golden Valley for Roadway
Improvements on Xerxes Avenue Between Plymouth Avenue and McNair Avenue North
(5 pages)
Location map (1 page, loose in agenda packet)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize entering into a cooperative agreement with the City of Minneapolis for
Xerxes Avenue North (Plymouth Avenue and McNair Avenue North) Rehabilitation Project;
Project 08-13.
Motion to award the bid for the Xerxes Avenue North (Plymouth Avenue and McNair Avenue
North) Rehabilitation Project to the lowest responsible bidder, Hardrives, Inc., in the amount
of $331,174.57.
AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
FOR ROADWAYUMPROVEMENTS ON XERXES AVENUE BETWEEN PLYMOUTH
AVENUE AND MCNAIR AVENUE NORTH
TillS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), effective upon the date of execution by both parties, is made and
entered into by and between the City of Minneapolis, a municipal corporation, and the City of Golden Valley, a
municipal corporation, (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties").
WHEREAS:
1. Xerxes Avenue is a north south street that follows the city limits between the City of Minneapolis and the
City of Golden Valley with approximately 76% of the street surface located within the City of Minneapolis and the
remaining 24% lying within the City of Golden Valley.
2. The City of Golden Valley wishes to renovate their portion of Xerxes A venue as part of their Street
Maintenance Program.
3. The City of Minneapolis has determined that they would also wish to renovate their portion of Xerxes
Avenue.
4. Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, subdivision 1 authorizes two governmental units to enter into
interagency agreements.
5. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the responsibilities of each party with respect to the
construction of the Improvements.
NOW THEREFORE, the Council and the City agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1 CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
1. Plans and Specifications. The City of Golden Valley shall prepare and certify by a
Professional Engineer licensed in the state of Minnesota the plans for the proposed improvements ("Plans")
including the applicable Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) specifications for the
improvements and shall submit to the City of Minneapolis for its review and approval. The proposed
improvements ("Improvements") shall include the milling and bituminous overlaying of the entire street surface
and the removal and replacement of any failed curb and gutter along with minor storm sewer construction and
localized soil corrections. The City of Golden Valley shall also prepare a schedule for the Improvements and
shall submit the final schedule to the City of Minneapolis for the completion of the work, as the necessary
approvals and documentation are completed.
2. Construction. The City of Golden Valley shall be responsible for the construction of the
Improvements. The City of Golden Valley shall contract for all of the work related to the Improvements. The
City of Golden Valley shall direct, inspect, and supervise all construction activities performed under this
Agreement, and shall perform all construction engineering and inspection functions in connection with the
Improvements. The construction of the Improvements shall be performed in compliance with the Project Scope
of Work. The City of Golden Valley shall perform all other acts and functions necessary to cause the
construction of the Improvements to be completed in a satisfactory manner. The City of Golden Valley will
administer the contract for the construction of the Improvements ("Construction Contract"). Construction of the
Improvements shall be completed by October 31, 2009.
The City of Minneapolis agrees that the City of Golden Valley may make changes in the Plans or in the
character of the Construction Contract that are reasonably necessary to cause the construction to be in all things
performed and completed in a satisfactory manner in accordance to accepted engineering standards. It is further
agreed by the City of Minneapolis that the City of Golden Valley may enter into any change orders or
supplemental agreements to the Construction Contract for the performance of any additional construction or
construction occasioned by any necessary, advantageous or desirable changes in plans, within the original
concept of the Improvements. The City of Minneapolis shall be notified of changes that may result in an
increase or decrease to the City's of Minneapolis cost participation estimated herein. Minneapolis staff shall
either approve or deny all such changes within 24 hours of receipt of the change request.
3. Permits. The City of Golden Valley and the City of Minneapolis shall obtain all construction
permits and/or any other permits and sanctions that may be required in connection with the construction of the
Improvements within their own jurisdiction.
4. Inspection by the City of Minneapolis. The construction of the Improvements shall be open to
inspection by the City of Minneapolis. If the City of Minneapolis believes that the construction has not been
properly performed or that the construction is defective, the City of Minneapolis shall inform City of Golden
Valley authorized representative in writing, within 24 hours, of those defects and as to what steps in the opinion
of the City of Minneapolis must be taken by City of Golden Valley to make the construction acceptable. Should
there be a disagreement between the Cities regarding the acceptability of the work, the final determination shall
be made by adherence to Divisions IT and ill of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's Standard
Specifications for Construction, 2005 edition, and all its current supplements.
ARTICLE 2 PAYMENT
A preliminary cost estimate for the construction of the improvements, Exhibit A attached, has been
reviewed and approved by both the City of Golden Valley and the City of Minneapolis. Although some of the
items are exclusively costs of either the City of Minneapolis or the City of Golden Valley, generally the cost
breakdown on most items is seventy six percent (76%) Minneapolis and twenty four percent (24%) Golden
Valley. The City of Minneapolis shall submit, within 30 days of execution of this Agreement, partial payment
to the City of Golden Valley in the amount of 50% of its share of the estimated cost as shown on Exhibit A.
Upon completion of the Improvements the City of Golden Valley shall prepare a final cost statement based on
fmal quantities and unit prices for the entire project based on the format and allocations set forth in Exhibit A
and submit a copy to the City of Minneapolis for their review. The City of Minneapolis shall submit in writing
the amount and rationale for any disputed costs to the City of Golden Valley within 30 days and resolve all
disputed costs in good faith. Upon reaching agreement on the final cost statement, the City of Minneapolis shall
promptly pay the City of Golden Valley for its share of the total costs of the Improvements as set forth in the
fmal cost inventory. The City of Minneapolis' total obligation under this Agreement is estimated to be the
approximate amount of $390,706.25. It is understood and agreed that the payment amounts are estimates and
that the actual payment amounts shall be based on actual costs and contract unit prices, as specified elsewhere
throughout this Agreement.
If the City of Minneapolis fails to pay the City of Golden Valley within 45 days of its receipt of the final
cost inventory, the City of Golden Valley may proceed in law and equity to enforce this Agreement and require
the City of Minneapolis to pay the total amount for which it is responsible pursuant to this Agreement.
ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Examination of Books, Records, Etc. As provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05,
subdivision 5, the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the City of Golden
Valley and the City of Minneapolis relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by both parties, and
either the legislative auditor or the state auditor as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from final payment.
2. Workers Compensation Claims. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any
claims arising under the Workers Compensation Act.
3. Liability Claims. Each party agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and the results
thereof, to the extent authorized by the law, and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the
results thereof. Both parties liability is covered by the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chapter 466. Both parties each
warrant that they are able to comply wi1h the aforementioned indemnity requirements through an insurance or
self-insurance program and have minimum coverage consistent with the liability limits contained in Minn. Stat.
Chapter 466.
The Construction Contract shall require the contractor to indemnify, defend, and hold the City of
Golden Valley and City of Minneapolis, their officers and employees harmless from any liability, claims,
damages, costs, judgments, or expenses. 1bis language shall be agreed upon by both City of Golden Valley and
City of Minneapolis and placed in the Special Provisions for this project. City of Golden Valley and City of
Minneapolis shall be named as additional. insured for the Commercial General Liability coverage with respect to
operations covered under the Construction Contract for this project.
4. Authorized Agent. The City of Golden Valley's Authorized Agent for the purpose of the
administration of this Agreement is Jeannine Clancy, Public Work Director, or her successor. Her current
address and telephone number is 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427, (763) 593-8035.
The City of Minneapolis Authorized Agent for the purpose of the administration of this Agreement is
Don Elwood, Director of Transportation Planning and Engineering, or his successor. His current address and
telephone number is 309 2nd Avenue South, Room 300, Minneapolis, MN 55401-2268, (612) 673-3622.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed in their
respective names as of the date first written above.
FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
Approved
Department Head responsible for Contract Monitoring for this contract
Countersigned:
Finance Officer Designee
Approved as to Form
By:
Assistant City Attorney
Date
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manager
Date
EXHIBIT A: PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
Xerxes Avenue from Plymouth Avenue to McNalr Avenue
Rev. 5/81D9
Mpls Mpls GV GV Contract
SD8C. No. Item Unit Unit Price Quan Share Quan Share Total Quan Amount
STREET
2021.601 MOBIUZATlON LS $17700.00 0.76 513.452.00 0.24 $4.248.00 1 $17.700;00
2104.601 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUITER LF $3.00 1072 $3 216.00 680 S2040.00 1752 S5.256.00
2104.501 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF $9.00 8 $72.00 8 !m.00
2104.603 REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SF $1.00 1610 $1.610.00 1610 $1 610.00
2104.605 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT SY $7.00 217 $1519.00 36 $252.00 253 $1771.00
2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY $5.00 799 $3995.00 449 S2~45.00 1248 $6.240.00
2104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH $250.00 1 $250.00 1 $260.00
2104.511 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT- FULL DEPTH LF $10.00 29 $290.00 29 $290.00
2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT- FULL DEPTH LF 14.00 297 1.188.00 71 5284.00 368 $1 472.00
2105.601 COMMON EXCAVATION CY 11.00 1065 111715.00 590 $6490.00 1655 S18.205.00
2105.609 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TON 10.00 981 9.810.00 825 :8:260.00 1806 $18060.00
2123.810 STREET SWEEPING (WI PICKUP BROOM) DAY 200.00 17.6 ~ 500.00 7.5 1 500.00 26 $5 000.00
2211.601 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5100% CRUSHED TON 16.00 321 54.815.00 142 ;2.130.00 463 $6945.00
2231.605 MIXTURE FOR JOINTS & CRACKS (TYPE 1) LB 6.00 142 S852.00 60 $300.00 192 $1152.00
2232.601 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE SV 2.00 8308 $16618.00 2912 $5.824.00 11220 $22 440.00
2360.601 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 6.00 1023 $66.495.00 350 S22. 750.00 1373 $89 245.00
2350.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON m.OO 1393 $76615.00 102 ~"i610.00 1495 $82.225.00
2350.505 TYPE LV4 BITUMINOUS MIXTURE FOR TON l 100.00 3 S3OO.00 5 $500.00 8 $800.00
2357.502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 2.00 1706 $3410.00 683 l1 166.00 2288 $4.576.00
2401.541 REINFORCMENT BARS LB i3.00 30 590.00 9 $27.00 39 $117.00
2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH S 00.00 4 $1 200.00 4 $1.200.00
2506.603 RECONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURES LF S 600.00 20 512.000.00 4 $2..400.00 24 $14400.00
2506.516 F&I CASTING ASSEMBLY - 700-7, 711 EACH $1.000 00 1 $1 000.00 1 $1 000.00
2506.622 ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTINGS EACH $650.00 13 $8450.00 2 51 300.00 15 $9.750.00
252t.501 48 CONCRETE WALK SF !R3.60 1810 $5.635.00 1610 $5635.00
2531.501 CONCRETE CURB AND.GU1TER, DES 8624 LF $15.00 1072 $16 080.00 680 $10~0.00 1752 9:26.280.00
2531.607 eaCONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $45.00 36 $1 620.00 36 $1 620.00
2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $7000.00 0.76 $5.320.00 0.24 $1 680.00 1 $7 000.00
2564.603 248 SOLID LINE WHITE- EPOXY LF S7.00 120 $840.00 49 SMg.OO 189 $1183.00
2564.604 CROSSWALK MARKING - EPOXY SF M.OO 279 $1.395.00 153 $765.00 432 $2 160.00
2575.506 SODDING W/4" TOPSOIL SY 110.00 596 $5.950.00 378 $3 780.00 974 ~74O.oo
STORM SEWER
2606.602 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 60- EACH $4.000.00 1 $4.000.00 1 ".000.00
SPEC. PRm WIMCO INLET PROTECTION EACH $150.00 15 $2.260.00 5 !l:760.00 20 $3.000.00
ALT BID ITEMS
2211.601 RECYCLED AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 7 TON 321 142 463
2564.603 48 SOUD LINE - EPOXY LF $0.50 3400 $1 700.00 3400 $1 700.00 6800 $3 400.00
CONSTRUCTION COST $284160.00 $89.644.00 !l;373794.oo
10% CONTINGENCIES $28.416.00 !l;8964.4O $37379.40
25% ADMINISTRATION COST $78141.25 $24652.10 $102 793~
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST S390,706.25 $123.260.50 $513,96$.76
G:IPROJECTSIOverlsy ""'lsalslXelxeo Avenue (2OOll)IlW!Rl\Xetua 0'I8IIay EalIm _7 Q..8..09JdIOC
L~.",\ U t _----- l
~ 1 ,[ PeRRY AVE. N
<l1....... I
~T """, "'1 \.. ~ "'\ ""'" '" ,
SPR. G V",LLE.'f CI .- ~ l
'lla~'\~~ \
~
oN
~......... ;;1. - I 16~<lR
.... (S\lfDGe"'....,
~ll.,C)_...... r 111
\ "'\. b:::i!!!.
.. .1IY,,\~1il<'; :.;... ,
;Ij.'o//fIl \ ~~ I /?
,,, """ ~'11 "'?
I'. G($ ~
., C~Jfd~S'3)fV,:l-::~ !! I
(CAilRtAGEP'Atk) ~
/ ~ \,
~~"'\~
~~. . . RJ~
~~. '. ',,""
, . ~0
"/l)
V .!lJ'
,
'.\l,
~I.\>G.""
''''(tel'~o
1 1
t...J I
r-:~
U'~
CS><9~
~
(
At..tJl:1~, o~
.
/
~ ~ iO:.
510 a r---....... ~
:t>8",~
E~
o
",-i"
....,
<:J
~~
(llo.aNliA)\\
__J
I
I
j J
)
I
1l9sse9 ~./
)\3aJ~;':"--' .-
VR... . ~ ;.y--.....,--..
/.'-"'1 c'
;uff j';.......
r!? J 11,,'0 -....,..... .'. .
o ... ~ DOll
;: ~. (i -- . ' w,,," ".'
~~"-~~-
YORK ~N.
~iiiii." ..
....--=7
X'E"F~XES JS..VE I\J
l'SF'RlJCE.'TR )
KYLE" PL "8
( ~
'"
'"
s
KYLE. AVE.
t'E.,GE.Nq DR ,
/ .)
INllWIA AVE II
( ~"
'\II:>!~""
~j _"J",..,,/
~~ \ 4
~..
.,.~
J IlQ 1133U~
-'"
s:
(")
Z
III
~.
)>
<
~
z
~
o
""
m
~
f:"
0
<
m
'=0::0
-r
3 )>
g -<
......
::::r
~><
CD CD
::J X
ffi CD
...... CJ)
0
s:~
() CD
~ ::J
::;" C
)> CD
a5 z
~ 0
CD .,
r-+
z::J""
--
~
......~I>/
tl-~.;-r
.J
~Golden Valley
Memorandum
Park and Recreation
763-512-2342/763-512-2344 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 2. Quotes - Purchase of Variable Frequency Drive for Deep Well Pump
Prepared By
Greg Spencer, Golf Course Superintendent
Summary
The variable frequency drive that runs one of the two deep well pumps no longer works. The
Golf Course will need to replace this pump so that they can maintain the greens. This was not
expected and the financing will come from the Golf Course reserves.
The following quotes were taken:
Tax
Total
$22,664.20
1,473.17
$24,137.37
MTI Distributing
Tax
Total
$24,634.00
1.601.24
$26,235.24
Midwest Pump and Control
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the purchase of a variable frequency drive for the deep well from the
lowest responsible bidder, MTI Distributing for $24,137.37, including sales tax.
~tolden Valley
Memorandum
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. E. 3. Award Contract for 2009 PMP Native Plant Installation
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Summary
The 2009 Pavement Management Program (PMP) includes the development of three storm
water management ponds. Two of the ponds are adjacent to Regent Avenue and Westbend
Avenue. The third pond is located adjacent to Scott Avenue near Hampton Road. All three
storm water management facilities are scheduled to be planted with a native plant buffer
along the ponds banks and surrounding property.
Two of the storm water quality facilities are ponds and a third will be constructed as a wooded
wetland. A variety of native plants are scheduled to be installed. Plant materials range from
over a dozen varieties of native trees, a few native shrub varieties, several mixes of native
grasses and an assortment of shore land and upland native flower mixes.
There were four specification holders for the project. Two of the planholders submitted a
quote. The results of the quotes provided are as follows:
Minnesota Native Landscapes, Inc.
Prairie Restoration, Inc.
$30,093.10
$36,302.90
Funding for the 2009 PMP Native Plant Installation project is identified in the 2009-2013
Storm Sewer Capital Improvement Plan (SS-1, page 121).
If approved, the work will be completed late summer into early fall of this year. The contract
includes a one-year warranty and maintenance agreement.
Attachments
Storm Water Pond Location Map (1 page, loose in agenda packet)
Pond Planting Visual (3 pages, loose in agenda packet)
Recommended Action
Motion to award the contract to Minnesota Native Landscapes, Inc. in the amount of
$30,093.10 for the 2009 PMP Native Plant Installation Project.
~----
2009 Pavement Management Program
Storm Water Pond
Location Map
Sources: Print Date: 6130109
Hennepin County Surveyors Office N
for Property Lines (2009). J..
Aero-Metric for Aerial Photography (2008) ~
o
250
500
1,000
.Ff
~
r ~- ~
I
i'i!fjJ '
. t;'
";;"T
........------- .~
-----
,..' ,
'l. \JJiI,-' ,I 0 I ',If,
~. ~~"'ii1/ D ,ill, ·
:J IJ1:.~~' 0 jf~'
~ ~ '~~ ~ /i:U/ "r
~t1N,.. >" () pb~::~;: 'I
, -.. ,,'~
~ . Ilr : ,
~~. ~ ",/ /l~:::- "'I..
~ ':! .~~*
iyo // I
- /;J- <) i~,Ji:r~.j
~ :'~~
~~ 0 :.l j '"""'
') J) o/{',"},'
/ J' 6
I , v
(1' IJ ,r--r'
/ II J.'... ,
I
/
I 'I
;I / Q
\, I
,
,
) I
~ / @'
I// !?
// $,,"
" 0
~~r ff
~i>,
.
';."
'"
v
l ~ .'~.
...;t ~";
l
{~
~
.~
I
~'
j'~;~~~
~
t,?
o//~
~
-'
I ...
-t'-.
.Ii
;~~ . ,.\~..~~'-.
. ~~. 1
- .i.
f!l....
..,.
"r-
........q
[j..
I
t I
I
'J\;;
'~';~J.
~ ~~~.~
t~~,.t
~...,"..Y
.., ,l
:~"
"-~' ~
" ,....
:-f<~'ii.
tR
~
,
..:~. .
..... ::1
::::l ,0
. I
~
W
~
II
p
I I
I:
o
*€
0---
I,',.
,.;,;;........
.,
'3A V IN~03t1
1-
,....
0~-..J
...
~ _.~ ~
~
=
q
I'l'~
1 ~ ~'.J - -
{1 )
,
l' I
,
,I
I "
I /
I I
I /
I I
I If
Jv
::.
~1
I t
LJ
,
*"
r--.
r--. (f)
(f) :::> ,.
i
:::> 0 ,
0 0::: r--.
:::> w r--. (f)
0 LL (f) :::>
:::> 0
u z 0 0:::
W 0 :::> w
0 U 0 LL
'-" '-" -
U z
I LLl l.Ll W 0
W W 0 U
0::: 0::: '-" '-"
f- f-
~ W W
C) C) W w
Z Z 0::: 0:::
f- f- f- f-
1 (f) (f) ~ ~
x x w w
w w z z
0 I:.
z 'J ,
w ~JW ct - I""
G ~" l) ''--
~~'~-.
W :jo<f;
--l
- -
0)
~~
o
'T ~ -,,.:::-
Q
o
""
~~
.J
~~--
---'
Ic?Oc?.#
IOOc?.#
, '
Jl ;;
...,
"
~..-
. ,
:1!'
~.'
.:t..
<J
,
.
;,
O?/Z/t' ~ i
1 . ~~ ." } dl"i
r:; ~ Q,'. ~,Jt,'~i>',* ,~;,'t~"
-" ,\!.J..:~ ~'f , '" 1/
I 't' ~',." '" ',. .. .J;-~
' '(.}... -- -'or-:-
.., "'''''' '" - ~ ~ ~,~~ '" . J
'''~''!",.. . . ",,', j
'4: '.f
,0' ,: ..
"".;<., -,
ct" ~ $ iJ"~ .~ .. '''1 "'-
~:~ J
I" I A
,/k~~:"
l II Q ~J
vJ~ n
rl flj ,}
..1'/" ~J-:,
/..' lfT IllJ
I~ '
(,
II
\\
" '
~.
H
t/
II
~
/;:.' ~\
,/ '-~ -.-
~ \, ':/.~-.
(? ~. ' .
1/ ~.
/'
I ~"~
I
L-~
7 -.
--
..
- -1
I
~
..('
. ......."..
>Ii;
j.,
..
J1, ._._.... .....
....0_ C'>.
- -~
- ", {V
'.~~
I.... I
-, r
f .~,'~
._'!
... "
i
.~.' ..,
7..
'"'"
:'''''?<.',' :"'\.:" ..{
..~;~., -;. ~,.1ltt't.
'..' ~.~t~:.ij~;
"..
/'
"
",
\
\
'--~:.
~--
:.1. = 0:;=. "'"
'3A V ~Ni!~~~ ","' '-" .
:::
'.~ ~y., '. -
~::?
~. .......
/::-2
/
g<;:g -..;
....
..j)
A,' (
{." t
\ r,
'il
~=
.!l IOIIIi ~ = ~1iiOi C
- .<,i""J ~~,,~~,., ". -
~ ..lo.-
. r
'3A V llO~S~. ,
t~~': ~,I
"
-.
t
, -.."1-l1
:r- ~,t:~
,." '"
;;1.~_
,~.<
~~1.~, . ~ ,
'-r.~,. "., _'~ ~,:z...
,'5! <~~ , II' "'/"";
~.":?~' ' .;;.;
\.. ',.' '"
\
\
\
"'t
S;\. ...,. A J" \
~'.{ \
~
,.
...
o~g
0~g
C
<;i'
r'.
~"-
t ~r'
.\ ,
1J.t1,.,,~~ 1 _ n.
'.
t~~:::""",
" .. ~
....... ....... . ~
-- ~ ',"
...--..
...--.. (.f)
(.f) :::J
:::J 0
0 0:::
:::J w
0 lL.
U Z
w 0
0 U
"--/ '-"
W W
W w
0::: 0:::
l- f-
C')
Z
I-
(.f)
X
W
C')
Z
I-
(.f)
X
W
~
...--.. r
...--.. (.f)
(.f) :::J
:::J 0
0 0:::
:::J w
0 LL
U Z
w 0 '-
0 U
"--/ "--/
W W
w w
0::: 0:::
l- I-
5 5
w w
Z Z
, .. ,.,....~I
~ -'~" ""......"':'- ._'f'.'!-: ',-
~-.. ~.~1:
. 0 ,
z :.:.., :.Df1t
w ..
f" ~ .r
......., ..,'
l~. "f'.'
.,')'., n'
I;
- -L
'...~ 'I; Fi
"
~ r ;.
'., f.:.JIL.:J
~-- .
~
~
~ "0' I
~1I
li~
)112670
:~.~. '..
'/~,:,"'f -~W'<d':!~_ t1L__
LEGEND
-.. ~j,:~:'~
w
>
4:
III:-
j' 0
0' k..J
(J) .
.28'
I'
rJ~"
."
(j
-
I
......"
o
Q
--,r--
. .
,~
.~
h.
~
~- -
''*1,,,.
'P~
~~:o:.
...
.'
}I, -12'
'.'. ~.L.
~,' ..
,
tl
1'. ~,
~ ""'\' - {/,
~ \lip
n
c
<S>~.
'~~l
~""~~'A'
-~'!>' )'
, a
)~~~
"~~..,. '. "..~
"..." '-i"~~
:;,:.....
......'
----.-.I
~
..
I.
..
EXISTING TREE (DECIDUOUS)
EXISTING TREE (CONIFEROUSJI
NEW TREE (DECIDUOUS)
t
1'J
NEW TREE
(CONIFEROUS) ~
_ _~J
"f
-~ ..~
.
"..
~
---
I
~
/26'6.f)~
-t. _. ,'~
/51/0
, "''Y.
,~. t;~.-.
'. ... -~..;.. ....:~.,
.to, .l~" J~>"'''
.r '~-
\J/'-:...t... . J. _
)'t. .. . .:~ '...... ...
,jift';~" -"I'" 0: :'
--
- ---
"
HAMPTON RD.
~- - ~'?"
'. f, ..;....... ~ ')
.. ~
,
...-
/5105
g
I r~~ lJ ~!
.~ ....~
,~:~ ~.i".. 1/
~ -f" .......,
....r:..".".~ .~...
.. .)
.IS ~ _ .
..--->00
>....~,~.
'li. ~~K',,"..,,
~ , .1
";'
alley
Memorandum
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7,2009
Agenda Item
3. F. Approval of One Year Extension for Filing of Plat for Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Glen
Urban 2nd Addition (Janalyn Circle and Glencrest Road)
Prepared By
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Summary
Rocky DiGiacomo, applicant and Veryle and DeOnne Hudson, property owners located at
301 Janalyn Circle, have requested a second extension for final plat approval for the minor
subdivision of the Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Glenurban 2nd Addition to July 13, 2010. The
parties involved still intend to subdivide the property however market conditions have affected
the sale of the properties.
On July 15, 2008, the City Council approved the preliminary plat to allow splitting Lots 11 and
12, Block 3, Glenurban 2nd Addition into 3 new lots. On December 16, 2008, the City Council
approved an extension for the final plat approval to July 14, 2009. Per City Code, the final
plat must be approved within 180 days of preliminary plat approval. An extension to this
timeframe would allow the applicant and property owners to move forward with this project.
Attachment
Location Map (1 page)
Letter from Rocky DiGiacomo, dated June 19, 2009 (1 page)
Email from Veryle Logan Hudson and DeOnne Hudson, dated June 24,2009 (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve an extension until July 13, 2010 to submit the final plat for Lots 11 and 12,
Block 3, Glenurban 2nd Addition.
4S35
1<
u}
'7
-- \
~'\~ \ \
.......~~. \
8
20
1-
--
4600
4520
!
I
4300
fl
4270
,...-..-.
3:
~
u I
C') u
'i
~ 21
'--
, ,--
4240
42lil1 4Z5O
G05
.. ,,- --.. -GU!NWQODAVE'" . ...
I
:5 :
I ~ U I
.. .M>>: .. _\m\_\_ _
~ ....... ; DO~. ~,___
,.- -" ~
I_~ I Subjec~ Prol>erties I ~ ~ 28 22S 221
120 I ' 30D
21Q , -
i
24
4409
4313 413lI9 43GS
4333
---
ill I
3118
454fI 4520 45. ! 309
4_ I
~ 401 400
1--1'" Wl!5TWOOD LN.~
~
4541 4521 45U 4flO 4fI9 40lI
43tiI
430ll
r---.. '---
401 r---........
---...... 4301
505 r--.
511
40
4520 45SO 508 . l.------ 416
~4S30 5T1UI.WBEMYUI': /1
/ ',so 609
617
4lI2l 4511 4SII1
"'<
~ /1;';;~!-~~:..;1; .. \' \
f/'~~~""'.<..;i:<i.< -------\
'~
50ll
!lO4
su
641
4263
42S3
430D
4223
5U
516
52t
700
708
4115
16
Q43
i08 2U4
100
2U
v~
. ......-----
.. / ...-- 201 .
217
209 20S
208
213
310
4224
42U 4116 410ll
4100
GLfNcREST RD
4ZU
4201 4115
4101
sa
529 535
541
JANAlYN em -
-
f--
I--
f--
t---
f--
III
:5_
~r-
:lit
I--
j
....-..:
)
~
DI
----.
IACOMO
HOMES & RENOVATION, INC.
June 19th 2009
Attn: Mark G.
Planning Dept.
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Rd.
Golden Valley MN
RE: 3 lot split of lots II & 12 block 3, Glenurban Second Addition
Hello Mark
I would like to ask of the City Council for an extension of 12 months for the required
plat submittal regarding the 3 lot split in Tyrol Hills approved in Aug. '08. There has
been no drop in interest on my part to move forward with this project; however
market conditions have forced me to put this on hold for an unknown period of time.
have procured a surveyor ready to proceed when the housing market improves. The
empty lot 12 will continue to be mowed and maintained for neighborhood aesthetics.
Please let me know if you or the council needs anything further from me to act on this
request. Thank you,
Rocky DiGiacomo
Cell 6127107900
Fax 952 591 7654
rgdigiacomo@earthlink.net
DGHomesandRenovation.com
11655 Ridgemount Ave. W.
Minnetonka MN 55305
Jun :.!b Ul::I Ut):U1 p
p.1
Hudson, Veryle L
Subject:
FW: 3 lot split of Lots 11.12 block 3, Glenurban Second Addition
To: 'mgrlmes@ci.golden~vaDey.mn.us'
Subject: 3 lot split of Lots 11,12 block 3, Glenurban Second Addition
Mark Grimes and the CIty Coundl of Golden Valley
Planning Department
CIty of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Vallev Rd.
Golden Valley, MN
Date: June 24, 2009
This letter serves as a request for a second extension of 12 months for the required plat submittal regarding the 3 lot
split in TVrol Hills
Approved August, 20OS. We are working with Rocky DiGiacomo with a purchase agreement on the home at 301 Jana Iyn
Circle.
The Market conditions are producing few Buyers ready and able to purchase anyone of the three lots at this time. Most
feel that
The market may Improve in 2009-2010, with more corporate relocations taking place for this price range home.
We are still planning to move forward with this project with your assistance in extending the deadline for 12 months.
Please let us know if you need any additional information.
S1~.i-~' . ~
/2 ~7 u~,~.:<<-Jft:..(ctj~.
Veryle Logan Hudson & DeOnne Hudson
301 Janalyn Circle
Golden Valley, MN 55416
. Home 763-374-3287
Cell 612-723-6019 Veryle errnlil vlhudson@cbbumet.com
Cell 763-242-5436 DeOnne email deonnel024@comcast.net
1
alley
Memorandum
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. G. Approval of Six Month Extension for Filing of Plat - 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North
Prepared By
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Summary
Peter Ralph, owner of the property located at 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North, has
requested to extend the final plat approval for the lot consolidation of his three separate lots
(South 40 feet of Lot 2 together with Lots 3 and 4, Block 6 Winnetka) to January 13, 2010.
The applicant still intends to consolidate the property.
On January 6,2009, the City Council approved the preliminary plat to allow the consolidation
of the three lots. Per City Code, the final plat must be approved within 180 days of preliminary
plat approval. An extension to this timeframe would allow the applicant to move forward with
this project.
Attachment
Location Map (1 page)
Email from Peter Ralph, dated July 1,2009 (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve an extension until January 13, 2010 to submit the final plat for 1425 Rhode
Island Avenue North.
~ . .
- .' ..J. '- - -- .. - - ... .- -. -. ... ..J.. '., .- -- - - '.~ - - ~ -
... ... - - ... - .. OLYMPIA 5T -. .- .- -. : I
JlI25
I ; ! I
I 78fI5 I "1'159 m1 1 J54B 1SIlJ. I 1ISl 1J01
I 184S I " i
dJIt . I
.1 \ I
I P4S I IS40 i I lS4fI dU
1 U41 ; 040' 1541 I
I
am Z HJ6 I I Z U32
I ISD U3Z
I I i IIID
I I d1J I :tSt6 lS2Il
1S2B I I
l$t)1 - I l5l6 I ISlG
I I 1Sl7
d11
i I l5tl9 I ssoa lSiS I
1900 I ! I 1
f :tIi08 lS09 j l5DlI Z f 1lIl>>
~ I I I I lSIIlI
Z nOil I5DO IB01 I
I 184fI 78IlD n4t) J 7filII'I
...... I & I
~
'- J...
- . t- - - .~- - ~ - - - - -. ... -'1 ,.- -- WDlSJ)ALfl.1fF N .- .... .. .... .... .. ".... .. .- .- .. - - -. _.. _M ".... .. -. - - -- -
I 1
I I I I I 1
1fRi)I I :&44Il "I7S9 ~
l447 f 1440 7II'Il
I l447 I Property I
I : ~I
I 3A34 I : ~.ubject -
I 1C4O I
MJ9 I '. MD
I I OR".
1m l432 l43S
I ... I I
1425 I r
I 1424 l42S i
1425 ! I l424 1G5
I 14aD i42ll i i
I I 1416 Mn I
1413 i I i
I
I :t4GlI 14D!l I I
I
I 1401 I l4t'I8 :l4G9 ! l40D 7.124 1514
I
IMiJJl j I 1400 ;
I 1MIlI 780/1 I
I ; Il41llI l40l
i ; I i
I
:tS2S '"'M _.. .... - - .-. .- -.. - - _. - __1. ... -. .~... - .- - -- ... .- ..-., '-" ... _. ... .. ... - .. . .. KNOU.STN - - .. ... .. - - - - -
I
! i I
! I 7.SOS
:I3l9 i i
l320 1821 1ft! d25 7'1>> 712l 1'713 ms 7fiS1 76Z9 76J3 m7 I 1>>iI 752B 75Zl
I I
I I I UfJ1
I3U I i i
I ! 1
I
I I I
1301 i i I
! I 1fi24 i'GU
i U90 7820 7812 taG! i 130D 7728 7nIJ 779 'mI4 1m 1325 I 13fi)tJ 7011 1&20 751%
I I j
(f). I I I
I : I
I . ... ...- .... . ^ - .. -+ . .- ...... .. .. .. _. . ".. ,.. PLYMOIII'H AVl: N. .. ... -. ... ... _t.. "- .- - . - - .' . - -.
. ._.._ .... ..... '''i '"~I
~~"'lhAd8~.~t,jlJllC!\.02lOOl~ I I I I : I "I "i ,-,
I
Wittman. Lisa
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Peter Ralph [PRalph@gittleman.com]
Wednesday, July 01,20091:16 PM
Wittman, Lisa
Lot Consolidation 1425 Rhode Island Avenue, Golden Valley.
Dear Lisa,
I am requesting a 6-month extension to the lot consolidation of the above property that was approved January 6th 2009.
The lot consolidation/re-platting is currently in process but will not be completed by July 5th 2009.
Sincerely
Peter Ralph.
Peter Ralph
Director of Maintenance Services
1801 American Boulevard East
Bloomington
MN 55425
ceI/612-280-1140
pralph@gittleman.com
THIS COMMUNiCA nON MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHEFiViiSE PROPRiETARY MATERIAL and IS thus for use ollly t)y t.h, intended feq:1ient.
Any unauthorized review. use. disclosure or dlstribulIOn is prohibited. If you r.i:'ceived II.is in erfor please notify the sender and delete ltt~, r~.mlill and its
attachments fTom all C'-Omputers
1
Memorandum
Police Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. H. Receipt of Safe & Sober Challenge Grant
Prepared By
Stacy Altonen, Chief of Police
Summary
In partnership with the New Hope, Crystal and Robbinsdale Police Departments, the Golden
Valley Police Department applied for a multi-city traffic enforcement grant from the Office of
Traffic Safety (OTS), State of Minnesota. The Golden Valley Police Department agreed to be
the lead agency for administering the grant. The OTS has judged this application and
awarded a $40,000 grant to further the goals of increased traffic safety including impaired
driving enforcement, seat belt enforcement and other hazardous moving violations
enforcement. The Golden Valley Police Department has been the recipient of four previous
grants/awards from the OTS.
Attachments
Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a Traffic Safety Grant (1 page)
Recommendation
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a Traffic Safety Award.
Resolution 09-39
July 7,2009
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A TRAFFIC SAFETY AWARD
WHEREAS, the Golden Valley Police Department desired to protect the health of its
citizens by improving traffic safety and participating in the Safe & Sober program; and
WHEREAS, under the provision of the Highway Safety Act the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety has funding to promote traffic safety; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety has judged the Golden
Valley Police Department's efforts to decrease impaired driving and increase seat belt use
to be exceptional, and notes that the Golden Valley, New Hope, Crystal and Robbinsdale
Police Departments wish to work together to achieve these goals; and the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety wishes to reward those effort by providing additional funding
for the Golden Valley, New Hope, Crystal and Robbinsdale departments;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Golden Valley Police Department
enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic
Safety for the period from October 1, 2009 to September 30, 2010.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chief of Police of the City of Golden Valley is
hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project
on behalf of the Golden Valley Police Department.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief of Police of the City of Golden Valley is
hereby authorized to be the fiscal agent and administer the grant on behalf of the Golden
Valley Police Department.
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and her signature attested by the City Clerk.
alley
Memorandum
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. I. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park
Prepared By
Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per City Code Section 10.83, Subd. 2 I. "No person shall possess, display, consume or
use alcoholic beverages on any City park property, unless permission is granted by the
Council." As part of the application process for a Facilities Use Permit to use the large and
small picnic shelters at Brookview Park the applicant has the option to pay an additional $10
to be able to serve beer and/or wine. Attached is a list of the individuals and/or organizations
who have requested that option.
Attachment
Beer and/or Wine Request List (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by
staff.
BEER AND/OR WINE REQUEST LIST
NUMBER CC
IN DATE
INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION DATE TIME GROUP SHELTER BEER OR WINE APPROVED
Magenic 07 -09 11 am - dusk 50 large beer & wine 07-07-09
Allianz 07-16 5 pm - dusk 30 large beer & wine 07-07 -09
Laura Ostrowski 07 -19 11 am - 4 pm 50 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Minntech Corp. 07-22 5 pm - dusk 40 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Allianz Life 07-22 11 am - 4 pm 90 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Inscape Publishing 07-23 5 pm - dusk 50 small beer & wine 07-07 -09
Baltazar Rodriguez 07-26 5 pm - dusk 25 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Quest Star Capital 08-07 5 pm - dusk 80 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Judy Super 08-09 5 pm - dusk 40 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
General Mills 08-11 11 am - 4 pm 120 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Kris Allen 08-13 5 pm - dusk 50 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Allianz Life 08-13 11 am - 4 pm 21 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Dow Jones 08-19 11 am - 4 pm 100 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Park Nicollet 08-20 11 am - 4 pm 15 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Laura Ward 08-28 5 pm - dusk 50 small beer & wine 07 -07 -09
McCoy's 09-07 5 pm - dusk 50 large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
Costco Warehouse 09-07 11 am - 4 pm ? large beer & wine 07 -07 -09
lenValley
rnorandurn
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7,2009
Agenda Item
3. J. Authorize Agreement with Brookstone-Vanman, LLC for Right-of-Way Landscaping and
Maintenance
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Summary
Brookstone-Vanman, LLC, the property management company for the Town Square Retail
area, located on the northwest corner of Winnetka Avenue North and Golden Valley Road,
has requested to replace mature evergreen shrubs with low growing plant materials in order
to improve the sightlines to the shopping center. An agreement has been developed to allow
Brookstone-Vanman, LLC to remove the evergreen shrubs and replace the plant material
with approved perennial plants at Brookstone-Vanman's expense. Brookstone-Vanman will
be responsible for providing a warranty on all such plant material at the present time and in
the foreseeable future.
The agreement also requires that Brookstone-Vanman, LLC maintain all new plant materials,
and weed and re-mulch the planting beds within the landscaped boulevard. The wood mulch
provided by Brookstone-Vanman must be approved by the City.
Attachments
Agreement between the Brookstone-Vanman, LLC and the City of Golden Valley for
Landscaping and Maintenance (4 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize entering into agreement between the Brookstone-Vanman, LLC and the
City of Golden Valley for landscaping and maintenance.
AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE BROOKSTONE- V ANMAN, LLC AND THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY FOR LANDSCAPING AND MAINTENANCE
(Regarding Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Wesley Commons P.U.D. No. 86,
Hennepin County, Minnesota)
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), effective June ---,2009, is made and entered into
by and between Brookstone-Vanman, LLC, a limited liability company (hereinafter known as the
"Company") and the City of Golden Valley, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter known as the
"City" and collectively referred to as the "Parties").
WHEREAS, Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Wesley Commons P.D.D. No. 86, Hennepin County,
Minnesota are adjacent to a landscaped boulevard area located between such property and the
adjacent streets of Winnetka Avenue North and Golden Valley Road;
WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to change some of the existing plant materials
within such landscaped boulevard area, and;
WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth their agreement with respect to the installation
and future maintenance of such plant materials placed in the landscaped boulevard area;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as
follows:
The terms, conditions and obligations of this Agreement shall run with the land and shall
be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective
successors, heirs and assigns;
1. The Company shall:
(a) Remove at its expense the existing evergreen shrubs and install all
additional plant materials in accordance with Exhibit A (the landscape
"Plan"). The Company hereby warrants all such plant materials installed
by them, now and for the foreseeable future;
(b) Maintain all such plant materials including, but not limited to, plant
trimming, dead wooding and dividing as necessary, of all lawn areas,
shrub beds and perennial gardens within such entire landscaped boulevard
area;
(c) Weed and re-mulch (with similar wood mulch approved by the City) the
planting beds within the landscaped boulevard;
(d) Remove and replace all landscaping items installed by the Company -
which, in the opinion of the City, disturbs or disrupts the landscaping
items or landscaping plan for which the City is responsible.
2. The City shall maintain the remaining pre-existing trees (as of the date of
execution of this Agreement), potted annuals, irrigation, banner, lighting and hardscape
within the landscaped boulevard area;
3. Each party agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and the results
thereof, to the extent authorized by the law, and shall not be responsible for the acts of
the other party and the results thereof. The City's liability is subject to the provisions of
Minn. Stat. Chapter 466. Each party warrants to the other that it is able to comply with
the aforementioned indemnity requirements through an insurance or self-insurance
program and has minimum coverage consistent with the liability limits contained in
Minn. Stat. Chapter 466.
4. The Company shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City of Golden
Valley, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all liability , claims,
damages, costs, judgments, or expenses. The City of Golden Valley shall be named as
additional insured for the Company's Commercial General Liability coverage with
respect to operations covered by the Agreement.
5. The City's Authorized Agent for purposes of this Agreement is Jeannine
Clancy, Public Work Director, or her successor. Her current address and telephone
number is 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427, (763) 593-8035.
6. The Company's Authorized Agent for purposes of this Agreement is
Richard V. Martens, President, Brookstone, Inc. His current address and telephone
number is 810 N Lilac Drive, Suite 212 Golden Valley, MN 55422, (763) 208-7214.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed in their respective names as of the date below.
H:\JUNK\Agreement Landscape Maintenance - Brookstone-VanmanGV -1084350v2.doc
Date: June I ~ , 2009.
:~C~'LLC
Title CiPJ,u 1Vtt\1V~/I.;
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) .
.0 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~y of June, 2009, by
\F-Iwttrd marfent;,. , the cJt,'& m4Mre/" of Brookstone-Vanman, LLC, a
Ll-t!.../ limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
JUDITH A. NALLY
NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010
().'1\
Date: July -' 2009.
CITY OF GOLDEN V ALLEY
By
Its Mayor
And
Its City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of July, 2009, by
LindaR. Loomis, Mayor, and Thomas D. Burt, City Manager, of the City of Golden Valley,
Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
H:\JUNK\Agreement Landscape Maintenance - Brookstone-VanmanGV - 1084350v2.doc
"tJ
~
~
::::;:
~
j
~
Exhibit A
Remove ExIstIng Arborvitae Hedge Blocking Store
VlsIbOlty Replace with Karl Foerster Grass Hedge
Keep exJsUng 2 rows of day ll/ys
~eQeNP
1
-- I
8 ~~f~ I
ThIs proposed planting plan replaces the existing resource
Intensive plantlngs that block the vlslbllity and architectural
elements of Golden VaUey Town Square.
The existing plantlngs are replaced with Salt-tolerant, Low-
malntenance~ Xerlscape perennials.
The Required Maintenance of this proposed planting would be
transferred to Golden Valley Town Square when approved.
COMMON NAWI: scn:NI1FfC NM
. ~~~ Htlmeroa& ' StolIa do Oro'
e 64 ~<l$1hl t1Mded I'Jat!ltI ~.StolIadoOro'
Gl 2B !:Il5lhl1'_~
$ ~I~- 1'''''''''''''''WbtJsSpIre'
.. f;-t SsJum SsJIrn Mil
e 'lO ~ H.u&tem '1'Jum PuMmq'
VIcInIly Map
I~ ~co:.~ I=~ I
...
Golden Valley Town Square - Maintenance and Sustainability Plan
Sidewalk and Comer Landscape Plan
~ 6116109
D&ta ~. tinbl d
n.r:::1. _~~
l
alley
g..'m.'"
>
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
3. K. Resolution Authorizing Submittal of a Federal Transportation Enhancement Fund Grant
Application for Sidewalk Reconstruction on Douglas Drive
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Summary
The existing sidewalk on the west side of Douglas Drive between Golden Valley Road and
Medicine Lake Road was constructed in 1967, prior to the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and its standards were implemented. The existing sidewalk has numerous structural
defects and original design features that result in noncompliance with ADA standards. As a
result, there have been numerous vehicle/pedestrian accidents, including one recent fatality,
where accessibility of the sidewalk may have contributed.
The Federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act includes a
Transportation Enhancements category that includes pedestrian improvements. The
Transportation Enhancements grants award maximum is $1,000,000, with a local match of
20% required.
Public Works staff has prepared an application for a Transportation Enhancement Grant to
remove and replace the existing sidewalk on the west side of Douglas Drive in 2013. The
proposed new facility will be fully compliant with ADA Standards including ramps, slopes,
obstruction removal and a pedestrian railroad signal. The estimated cost for the Douglas
Drive sidewalk project is as follows:
Federal TE Funding
City FundinQ
Project Total
$ 808,800
$ 202.200
$1,011,000
The City's grant application has been submitted with the support of the Courage Center and
Hennepin County.
Attachments
Resolution Authorizing Submittal of a Federal Transportation Enhancement Fund Grant
Application to Reconstruct Sidewalk on Douglas Drive Between Golden Valley Road and
Medicine Lake Road (1 page)
Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution Authorizing Submittal of a Federal Transportation Enhancement Fund
Grant Application to Reconstruct Sidewalk on Douglas Drive Between Golden Valley Road
and Medicine Lake Road.
Resolution 09-40
July 7,2009
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION
ENHANCEMENT FUND GRANT APPLICATION TO RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK ON
DOUGLAS DRIVE BETWEEN GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD AND MEDICINE LAKE ROAD
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota has an interest in improving safety
and access for pedestrians, including persons with disabilities, along the west side of
Douglas Drive between Golden Valley Road and Medicine Lake Road; and
WHEREAS, a safe and accessible sidewalk will result in increased pedestrian usage
and a decrease in vehicle trips on Douglas Drive; and
WH EREAS, the United States Government has made Transportation Enhancement
Grants available through its Safe Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act which are
desired by the City to reconstruct the sidewalk; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley that:
1. Staff is directed to prepare and submit a grant application for Safe Flexible
Efficient Transportation Equity Act Transportation Enhancement funds for the
reconstruction of existing sidewalk on the west side of Douglas Drive between
Golden Valley Road and Medicine Lake Road; and
2. If said grant is awarded to the City of Golden Valley, the City Council authorizes
the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a grant agreement.
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and her signature attested by the City Clerk.
oW
alley
M morandum
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
"60 Days" Deadline: September 4, 2009
Agenda Item
4. A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan Approval - PUD No.1 08 - Xenia Ridge - 700
and 800 Xenia Avenue South - OPUS Northwest, L.L.C., Applicant
Prepared By
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Summary
At the June 8, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal public
hearing to consider the Preliminary Plan for Xenia Ridge, PUD NO.1 08. The developer is
OPUS Northwest, L.L.C. After the hearing (no one spoke), the Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plan that included eight conditions.
The Commission also made six findings regarding the Preliminary PUD plan.
As indicated in my attached memo to the Planning Commission dated June 3, 2009, the City
Council previously approved a Preliminary Plan for PUD No.1 05, Xenia Ridge. (This
Preliminary Plan is identical to the proposed Preliminary Plan for PUD NO.1 08.) This
approval was given on May 6, 2008. With the approval of the Preliminary Plan, the applicant
is required to make application for the Final Plan within six months of approval of the
Preliminary Plan. On September 16, 2008, the City Council gave OPUS an extension of six
months for the application of the Final Plan. This six month extension expired on May 1,
2009. It was determined that another extension of time was not permitted by zoning code at
that time. Therefore, OPUS decided to apply for a new Preliminary Plan exactly the same as
the one approved by the City Council in May 2008.
The attached memo from me dated June 3, 2009 describes the proposed Preliminary Plan for
PUD No.1 08, Xenia Ridge and the conditions and findings considered by the Planning
Commission. The attached minutes from the June 8, 2009 Planning Commission meeting
indicates that the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Preliminary Plan with the
conditions and findings recommended by staff.
Attachments
Location Map (1 page)
Planning Commission Minutes dated June 8, 2009 (4 pages)
Memo to Planning Commission dated June 3, 2009 (3 pages)
Memo from Planning Commission 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)
Email from Sheldon and Sandra Olkon, 6051 Laurel Avenue, dated June 1, 2009 (1 page)
Xenia Ridge Travel Demand Management Plan (24 pages, loose in agenda packet)
Color Renderings (6 pages oversized pages, loose in agenda packet)
Site Plans (24 oversized pages, loose in agenda packet)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the preliminary design plan, Xenia Ridge, PUD No.108, subject to the
following conditions and findings:
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, 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 Development, 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 May 19, 2009 shall
become a part of this recommendation.
6. A snow storage plan shall be submitted before approval of the Final Plan.
7. The existing buildings on the site shall be demolished within 90 days of approval by the
City Council of the Final PUD Plan.
8. Prior to demolition of the existing buildings on the site the buildings shall be secured in a
manner acceptable to the Golden Valley Public Safety Department and Building
Inspections Department.
Findim:ls:
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.
[~:l GJ - I t~j ....I~
(..........
. S43ll
..;....,;,:.....
-.._"
5501
Z40
BI!I ~
220
240
llOrI
3Z5 328
S4S 340
56S 3lID .
55lJ1
00
fI
I
28
I
~ I~
n QGl
\~ 0
-(51
.';, " \I'
I
70D
IiI r
I Subject Properties I
e
to1
o
o
o
()
o
GOLOEN HlU5 DR
~ WAVZATA BLVD
80Il
9I'tlI
0 00
0 0 0000
0
0 61105
0
0 6022
0
0
5101
6224 6210
5920
28
PAIl!t PLACE 8LVDSTO Wii\1394
INn!RSTA"iI'E 3~
ED 1394 TO so tiWV100 S
'(1)
INTERSTATE 394
1Mp___",,.,uS.G<w'lf'l'IClt.OQlSG!S2Q.1!l
.. 0 .. 'c. "
~~
;
i!
~
~
~
:rUR.NPIICI RD "
4 tOD '
UlIJ 1GB
117 Ufl
_ %OIl
209 _
ns :21,
319 lIlIII
321
4011
55110
, .i~~
.~
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
A ular meeting of the Planning Commi ion was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,
Councl .ambers, 7800 Golden Valley R ad, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Mond June
8, 2009. Ch eysser called the meetin to order at 7 pm.
, uchka, McCarty,
nning and Development
rative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
Eck noted sev
first page b
pographical errors.
rified.
M by Eck, seconded by Waldhaus' and motion carried unanimously
. e April 27, 2009 minutes with the abov noted corrections.
",'
2. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan Review - Planned Unit Development-
Xenia Ridge - PUD 108
Applicant: Opus Northwest, LLC
Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South
Purpose: To allow for the construction of approximately 279,000 square feet of
office space and approximately 11,300 square feet of retail space
Grimes explained that this same proposal was brought before the Planning Commission
and City Council last year. He explained that at that time the City Code stated an
applicant has six months after preliminary PUD approval to submit their Final PUD plans.
Since that time, the City Code has been amended to allow an applicant to ask for a 6-
month extension to submit their Final PUD Plans. The preliminary plans for the Xenia
Ridge proposal were approved last year; however those approvals have lapsed, so the
applicant is again seeking approvals for this project.
Grimes referred to his staff report dated June 3 and stated that he has revised it to
include conditions regarding the demolition of the existing buildings within 90 days after
Final PUD plan approval and that prior to the demolition of the building they shall be
made secure. He reiterated that this is the same proposal and the same staff reports that
the Planning Commission reviewed last year.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
Page 2
Tom Shaver, Vice President Real Estate Development, OPUS, stated that the market has
changed significantly since they brought the Xenia Ridge proposal to the City last year.
He said they feel this is a very prominent comer in a healthy corridor but the market is
preventing them from going forward with their plans.
Keysser asked Shaver if OPUS has an approximate time table for this development.
Shaver said he hopes to start on this project a year from now depending on the climate of
the market.
Waldhauser asked Shaver if OPUS is open to considering other uses for this property
such as residential or mixed use if those markets should happen to open up faster than
the office market. Shaver said they are always open to considering other markets
however residential and retail are worse than office right now.
Eck asked why OPUS is coming back at this point if they are unable to indicate a time
frame for this development. Shaver said they would like to have their preliminary PUD
approvals in place so they are prepared if a customer comes forward. Eck asked if OPUS
intends to keep asking the City for extensions until they are ready to build. Shaver said
yes. Grimes added that if substantial changes to the plans occur, OPUS would need to
reapply for PUD approval. Also, the City Council can add conditions to the Preliminary
PUD approval if they wish.
Eck asked what kind of impact the West End development in St. Louis Park will have on
this proposal. Shaver stated that their development has a smaller retail component than
the West End development. Grimes stated that the developers of both projects are in the
same situation with the office market and that both developers will be waiting with their
Preliminary PUD Approvals at this point.
Keysser asked Shaver what happened to the idea of building a hotel. Shaver said the site
is too small for a hotel.
Waldhauser asked what the obstacles are to removing the existing buildings now rather
than after Final PUD approval. Shaver said it is a financial issue. Keysser noted that
OPUS doesn't own the property yet so they can't remove the buildings until they own the
property .
Keysser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment,
Keysser closed the public hearing.
Cera questioned the status of Colonnade's proposal in this area. Grimes said staff has
not heard from them in a while but he thinks they would still like to build an office building
however they are in the same situation with the office market.
Keysser questioned the status of the MnDOT owned property located east of the
Metropolitan and the Good Day Cafe. Hogeboom stated that Global One Commercial has
discussed building luxury rentals and medical office space in that location. They have
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
Page 3
submitted a deposit to the City for the purpose of a traffic study. Grimes added that traffic
and access are going to be the challenges with that site.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan for Xenia Ridge - PUD #108 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,
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.
7. The existing buildings on the site shall be demolished within 90 days of approval by
the City Council of the Final PUD Plan.
8. Prior to demolition of the existing buildings on the site the buildings shall be secured
in a manner acceptable to the Golden Valley Public Safety Department and Building
Inspections Department.
The Planning Commission also makes 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.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 8, 2009
Page 4
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.
-Short Recess-
Reports on Meetings of the
Council, Board of Zoning A
using and Redevelopment Authority, City
eals and other Meetings
hauser reported on an APA Br . n Bag lunch tour she took of the Heart of City area
sville. .~
McCarty orted on the May 26 B . rd of Zoning Appeals meeting. He that there
was a reque from a resident who tarted building a deck in his fro rd over his
existing front s s without a buildi permit. The applicant ap' or a variance for this
deck because it too close to t . front yard property Iin wever if it would have
been an open front rch, with a r 'f, he could have byJj without a variance. He stated
that the Board of Zoni Appeals , uld like staff.. a.llJ9J4tl1e Planning Commission to discuss
or better define front por S, sto . :8, decks, lar:u;U<<Qs, etc. and how close they can be to
the front yard property line. ime tated st, ,~~J1 ould prepare some language for the
Planning Commission to revi eir n .' meeting.
eeting was adjourned at 7:5 m.
5. Other Business
Kluchka asked about the I i
Ave. in Brookview Park., "' aske'
would like to see~hi density to
critical storage are or the City a
said he wou/' to the Public W .
6 ./
. Journment
{
Lester Eck, Secretary
Valley
M morandum
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.1 08.
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.1 05 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 within 90 days of
approval by the City Council of the Final PUD Plan 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.1 05 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.
7. The existing buildings on the site shall be demolished within 90 days of approval by the
City Council of the Final PUD Plan.
8. Prior to demolition of the existing buildings on the site the buildings shall be secured in a
manner acceptable to the Golden Valley Public Safety Department and Building
Inspections Department.
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.
2
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.
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
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.1 05, 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 a.ll 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 hoids 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 5t. 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
G~<
"Gat
Vall ey
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 t',.
Xenia Ridge Planned Unit Development
To:
Subject:
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
Id_HVall ey
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-inlright-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-inlright-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 Management 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 comer 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\X.enia Ridge\PrePUD 040708.doc
7
l
alley
Memorandum
Fire Department
763-593-8065 /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.
Utilitv 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
drivina 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.
Landscaoina 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
A venue, 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;;;265,ee0-square feet of Class A office and::i9;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 factade.
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 fac;ade 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 fac;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
LEBD 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
comer running along Xenia Avenue 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 Miller-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, 78 0 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley,
'nnesota, on Monday, April 14t2008. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order
at m.' /
Those pr t ,:""re Planning q mmissioners Cera,. ~sser, K1uch~,
McCarty, Scli " all and Wald. user. Also pres ~as Director of Planning and
Development Mar, rimes, Ci lanner Jo~_eboom and Administrative
Assistant Lisa Wittma . /\.-fj!-'
J
1.
ed that the sec entence should read "Schmidgall
s all the way 'throu' material".
Eck refe. to the fifth parag~ 't h on page five and noted tha
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 office 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 comer 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 rooms. 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 HillslXenia 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
a0~
*A
Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan Approval- PUD #105 - Xenia Ridge -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 Tern closed the public hearing.
Regular Meeting of the City Council
May 6, 2008
Page 3
Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan Approval - PUD #105 - Xenia Ridge - 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. 105, 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.
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 lIeyesorell 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
=-___T_'~..~'..~_......,,...._"""'_~=_:"""',m>I<__=."'~_.>>=,."".,,.~>_:<~-,,,,...,..,~"''''''''''~.:.,,,,,,,<,",,,,,""'_''!>''_'''=~'''^'~~''"'''''''-''''~:'',:<,,,,,''''''<V'''''''''''''''''::''''~."V."';';_:W>,,~,',',....,.,.o:<"",.,
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MA TERIAL and is thus for use only by the Intended recipient
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution IS prohibited. If you received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and its
attachments from all computers.
1
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
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paae
I NTROD UCTION ............................................................................................................. 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 t - Project Area................................................................................. 2
Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan ...................................................................... 3
Figure 3A - Alternative Transportation Infrastructure - Transit .................... 7
Figure 38 - 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
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 I: 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 of light 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
-y ( ~ "J'\ g\ osvi'! MOCNaw) /!! I
~ 'N 'V1 VMO ov:; J \ ~O"" '1I.L
'It r/, ~ M >- ~:> r( . 5 \ ~ ~ !!I TV 9f ~ N IAv II
r\~ 0 VNV IONI ~iii 2 < !y:S >-~) ~ 1 :000 Q I
J 'N 8 ~ ~ ~G> - '4.\".... Bi f ;>-
~, f'~~~~;;llf ~~~;nls
! I 1, 'N CI '3AV Z3H:>lVN os '3AV ~.; (("
'3AV ~ I ~ m 'N'3AV ~ \,
; r~ 'b 9 ~ "!2~::: C
[!] ~. ~ ~~ I' 'all ~~l
3NTBOV S ~~~ lPAF Q',o:.. ~ ! ~ 'll@
o ~~) 0 u ~
'f\-.lA. c,.... <LJ_ g 'lSJ. 'QlI NMVl ~ 00
I /c ~~,,-- :; ~.P/"_~ ,
~ 'b.O,~~~~-; -:- j Ii
f./ju ll. ' @' '^v _ \
ilS~ ~ / ~~~i~~b
3lI'fB~'t-~~~D'9 'm1lB ~1lI~~~~S;~~ ~'3AV AV=:'\
Q 0 II aONWW Z' III g r. '[r, ti (.O\
! / f 'N'a.-\v 0 '3 , 1/ f) awOlSllOVl9 ~
~~" ~:::::::- - '$'3AV :=. !i! '/ \' Do \
cJ VI A ~ ~ !cC ~) '3AV ~ ~ ill l;; . ~ :'.'3AV JlOIMSN01I9
IYd 0 ,\'0VlI0100 mill I '3AV 1 00VlI 010:> '\ ,- -t-
9' r/, ':fT>IM 0 '3AVV10JIVO Na01= :l: = ,.: O!:JPOc
~~~'" "'Q 0 lI3(]NV1'1Od.vaooa '3AV :! ~lOJIVO l!!" 7~
.. \ os -I 000 '\. /'<1
'3AV OOOMa:? ""0 1 ~:t 3= ~v OooMaOOa~~
lIa... V 'S'3AVI ~i _
~-l-~~v W ,~ Y 3i z '3AV
\ 0...\ 'N'3AV .f-' ., ~ tl . VOIlI07" '- V ..... ~ :i
h "tI:::}- VI!llloa~ / ~'3AV 0 ~ ~ '$'3AV ~ 1/ 1:;' .. Y ~ V1\
\ \:V ~ aiV IH$dVMI ~ 'lIIO lil ,!;
~ \ \\V~ ~ <, !-wI '3AV OHVOI %,0. '^ vi 0:> 'M ~ alIIHSdIWH '3AV a::1WH l!! ~Ol
'" 1'.,." 'S'3AVliaSll3f' ti
~ 'N '3AV lil ~ Q 'N'3AV liaSll3f'
~\ ~ ~ ~ 'N '3AV 'S'3AV, ~ '" ~ III~ r ti '3AV ~ 'i liaSlBr ~
~ @. f r JJOfUN3JI J.JI:>RINaJI .. IJJW'\ '3AV 'i J.:JI:>/UNaJI ;c
P~-? ~ y-- G ":"^" VNVISIl101 ~'3AV 8 f VNVIS 1001 '3AV VNVISIOO
~ ~".r!l! ~ 'S'3AVONVl.ll W m ! '3AV ~AlIVW
U 'V1 SITS '0: lllIVdl<BOllv: '$ 'iJA'f 'fQ'l~ ! ~ /y ;C '3AV ti OVAaN J
-2.. f'~ ~o! .(~ ~I - ~@r~~ .,~O J0 ! c
~ 'lIO ^,,,,, I a~ . 'i1 ^" ""'--- (;:J '3AV ~ t;i
~ @NOOW,nVI-II"-.k.;'S'3Ai- VlNVA'IASNN3".". ~Wi' \ ;C t;i ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~L 1 9 ~
~"'\ 0NVlSI ~ ~ ~o~ -1\f :>a&alll:> / l2 ! ti ~ -;
. ..... _ \ ~ '$ ; \ 'iJAV 1 0NV1$J aOOIi~ /!:$;c
~ '6 l1l ~t> tfl!l i '$ 'iJAV lIa1Wns / I It;c ~ ~ T ~ ~;>-~ 'i
I\u :I: 'N > ~ '3AV ~NNIM rI S I~_ fj9;./-b Ir. ~ : ~ ~r\ '3AV ~~" A~~ "^" :::
-.J'lIIO' $ ~\f HYlOllh 000M19M ~ t:i ',- // \ ~
) / t ~ :1" -j/lo. ,-" -. .. """'''',..'' ~
LJ ( ~'h ~ ~ aaa -////~c,o:+ ~ ~; '3AV V1\~" --'0 I 00 I ~
~
~
~
00
Ja
~
J ~
~ ~
ll..
... 0
ll..
~
I 8'1) Q
I /
~ ~Q'
~\!~ ~ "t'
~~~
.rS..d~N ~ ~
'3AV awnr-/
J~I :S:$
-()).q,;, ~ ~ ~ ~ T~'<,
!: (I' 'l/::l ::l ...,
~ ff ~ ~ ~ ~
<5 ~ .jil'~~ ~ i ~
m^:'^:~\f,,8~ S\
O .,) '3AV : ~ ::: \\ J
'1~ '3AV ... :::t
~ NOJaONJ~ \ :r
~ '3A~
~~~
~J,~
'Y """ --=::::: "'"
os '3AV V:>Il/l ~ W r~ ::;
O~\
i 'OA19" ~ ).jil'
~-:s
Q.t~
~~/
<: oS'
~\
"--,
r's
a:>Vld JIlIVd
)~
~~
~ \
ti
.c
~
;c
~
~
NO~O ~
~
e
~
u:
..;
z
::s
a..
I-
Z
W
::a:
w
(!)
<C
~
::a:
Cl
<::~
Orij
j:::Cl
~ ill u
o ~::1_
-.I I- 1;)
I- w Q)
~ 8~
=:; a:: 0
o ::s:;
"'" z ~
~w~
- >< 0
~
!i ~
Ii! (')0
CI (') N
~ ~ ~
" 0::>
S 0<:
R ~
u
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 Avenue 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: 19 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:5])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 Parkina Reauirements
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
OiearofoDenin~-2009)
Proposed Off-Street Supply 1,092 spaces
City of Golden Valley Minimum Requirement * 1.182 spaces
Surplus/(Deficit) (90 spaces)
.. See Parking Study technical memorandum for more information.
ITE Parkina 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 npte 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 oDenin~ - 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 Minneaoolis
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 encourage 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
~
Legend
. Project Site
. Bus stops
LJ Bus Shelters
(.3B'"",~"" Bus Routes
.
Routes Serving Sites: 9, 643
Project Site
.
Golden Hills pr,__u_
- - ~-
-~-7.-
I
I
/
/
/
i
/
~,.
Louisiana Avenue Transit Station
1-394 Corridor Serving West Metro to
Downtown Minneapolis
Park Place
Park & Ride
-
UJ
.";
_ p___,_ _W~yzatctBI'ld_ _ _____
------.
rmIi
CoNSlJl.nNG GIlOlJl',INc
ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. TRANSIT
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Opus Northwest, LLC
Figure 3A
0076333
January 2006
,....
-e Il \~
(5 \~
[1 ,
Q) ,
E i
.= ',--_ J __ _ _
R~~I~J
South Hennepin Regional Trail: ~
Golden Valley to Medicine Lake
I
~
<C
U
~ I
<<l jjC
o 2
_ 00
Laurel Ave
(JJ
Q)
~
{g
~
~
~
~
&"&
Q'
.
proj ct Site
Circle Dwns
-----~
"
---
~
~ata Blvd
,/,r
/'
....m. S \
\j'J. ,\'0'""
I
I
/'
Gamble Dr
Q) Legend
~
~ . Project Site
;::
o
u: - Trails
m
ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. BICYCLES
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Opus Northwest, LLC
CoNstn.11NG GROllP,lNc
0076333
January 2008
--...
"""
\-
b~
00
~~
-_/
Figure 38
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 TOM 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 TOMP 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 venuelPark Place interchange. The TMO will be responsible for promoting TOM
strategies on an area-wide basis, such as establishing bus pass subsidy percentage standards
and promoting the expansion of transit service in th~ area.
Xenia Ridge Redevelopment
February 2008
DRAFT Travel Demand Management Plan
Page 10
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:
APPENDIX A
XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIC STUDY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
aCONSULTINGGROUP, INC.
ENCINEERS I PLANNERS I DESICNERS
I MI.NNfAP. nlls
FARCO
MADISON
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 proj ect 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, indicating 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
An Equal Opportunity Emplqye:r
-y ! ~ ~\ III "Sv/" M~../!!J I
i 'N VI MOl <MIl'I I ~ ~>:: "Ill
~ ~ YNV I:: ~i ; V:~ e R ~ B tv: "7JB
~~~'---=, '.. ~. i ~ ~ .""" !(>
'l1O~ m~'" j... '< ~ 3llOV<<IlIV g Ii vr :5 i ~0lI oWln S
i. 110 I i 4; I
'N... :S 'OooMlS~; ,~~ ~l l sf):
o 3C11SJ JHIIIlI /2 ~ w.Q", ~ ~
iI, , ~i -aAV ~ "S -aAV ~l3lD1VN r;; f C
ll,. 0 _ "S-aAV
'Cl ~ VMVJJO ~
i ! g q VMYJJO ~-~(j
~Gll J> ~ ( ~/\
~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~H i .
h 3NTEIOV S ~
,?~O~ 0;; ~~ 8 i:!
~ .J C. < b "S1 NMVI i-z fi\
I - ~ .., Sf\O'P :f 'QlI : [j LV
/J L ;)1711 i r;Dld NIl Ill- ~')'~' e :"; ~
~~" 5.~; -: j. r'.
I ~ ~\)'O ~ :: 1@:r-;Jo.'iVillSX\!
~ ~ 8 I ~ --L -. ~; ~ \ i.
~ ~~l>t- H ~'OlI;><.~~~~ ,f ~
aIIVf.l SOl- )8 aHO -,rs""s ........~ ~ f
,,0. 'CIlI 15
r~ ~TllH~NJ)f ~ 9 ,-; -.....:: IAV WMIV1Y\
~ cf llaaN'I3W Z III g / / ~' \ f.O\
; 4' ~ ~ Q 'S-aAV ~ ~ /. ' I, :INOISllOV1II \ \::J
~ 'VI .( it1;r: ~ ~ l ~ oN' ~al (/ / II;; P.O~ '\.-aAV lClMSNIImI
d <c c pvlI01O:l S1lIH / I -aAY I 0CIYll \ 0100 -t
"Q' i 'Xf'IM g '3AVV.lOllVO' Na0100 ! :; <5 ~ '\ OfJ/ooc;
..~# "'\ lBQNVWOd -I COQNaOO3 \ -aAY :! tlOJMl!!! '" -7'~
g V !Ill ;--" -aAV OOONaOO3; ti fu 'S-aAY r-;;, ~ ~~ aooM3003~/ ~
~'S6 ~ // W f :5 f, 'r i. '3AV
~ 'N-aAV / ~<v , ~ ~ ti YCJJllO'>-;- ~ :;; ~v ~
-~... I ~\-tl'" ;ac:/.=V ~ 'lIO ~ 'S-aAY ~ 4' {: \ ~ ~
~ ~ \ \ '6 < / Q. ~ 'M ~ 3lI1HMWH liAr -aA \
~ ~ --("~~. !-aAV OHVCl;i 'S:v~ !Illt- v ~ !!! ~ Iii
' ~ ~ · ~. \ \ ~ l' / .~. - ~ ~ ~v i _ .
~ 8 ~ \ ! '" 16 ~ -;Jo.V 'S-aAY, ~ A_ I;i 3i ~
~ I ~ ~ l r ~ All:lIlINall t;i ~ '\ -aAV 3i J.XlIIlI>SlI i.
,p;o~' '0 l/" G '"'I>I-;Jo." VNVlSIl101 ~'3AV 8 I VNY/S UIOl '3AY VNYISlllO
~ -Ir.:>J' ~ ~ "S-aAYOHVt~ W ID / ! -aAV ~AllVW
iil < '< I ~ r Iii I
l) VI SIT8 ~ :>>lIVd~ - 'o/a4~ ~ J
- ~~ l~:- "S '3A'4 >;) 3ir -aAY ~I roVo\3N < ~
\ ~ ,- tl~-: ,..:::" ....,.;:: ~ ;1 ~'. ~I! ~.
- - J ~;~ ~ /~~ ! Iii ~ $ ~
~ CNVISl acoHll ~ ..~o .; \ _ ~ 3i i. \:l
~ "S .0 \ .. CINYJsJ 300Hll ~ :5 I
~ ~~~~ - ,Ie 3i
B~, ~ ~. _ ,,~ 6Iv'~ i~ ~svx;
'\ ~J~ B ~ ~~~~ i:'....=. i ~ ~:'.. '" ;. ~. ~
I ~. ... NlBJSM 1/YJ1l 7/1// iJI" :...:." ~
~ -0 Ai fi7 /J. ~ ii'v 1l'f". !$" '^V
) "'\~7~/ '01/ il <ISH1NVHJ/// ...... I~ 8 :! ~ L-----r-;t
~~// . //1/ ~o>.; V' ~ 3i -aAV Y1\ ~ d'O 10'0 ( "
OAV
(~\\!':~-I! \.l" V
~j 1#1
ss'4 d $N ~ /. I
OAY 3NIIr 'i ~ ~'
'J~~rp/~ ~/II.l ~
3 ~ '~~~:i 01 ~r'
~~\f".f Q g'< ul 18 a ~c:,..'
~AI~~ ~ -/ aH:>lVN 1 ~
"'" \ ~A. -aAV ! / VMYJJO \\ a.; :::t
J -~ NOElNIlId \~ ~
~ "^~ on
)~ .L' ~
'--~~~ ~ \ \
^,,--,, "~ ~ :::---"'::~.!c
Y ,~, l!Jr
'S -aAV YOIIIl ~ \~\i
i 'CM19\ ~ ~~,
v.uo
iOVW)lllYd
~
-aAV
)~ 1
/# \
NVHUlVZ
~\
00
.....
.
q:
e
::s
.~
LL:
z
~
a..
I-
z
W
~
W
~
~
c
ts~
i:::c
() ~ g
o i:2 ~
..... I- 1ii
I- w (J)
oLU 8 ~
""") 0::: 0
o <( :;
"'" Z;:]
Q:~8-
2
. co
~ ~~
u m~
J 8)
Ms. Ericka Miller
Opus Northwest, LLC
February 29, 2008
Page 3
Scenario 1
Golden Hills Sho in Center
Colonnade Expansion
Allianz Insurance Ex ansion
Note: Refer to the Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study, dated September 28, 2006,
for further information.
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
~Q~rMiIiet
Generation
Residential Condominiums
Office
Retail (1
Hi -Turnover Restaurant 1
Coffee Sho (1)
74 units
218,000 s . ft.
2,500 s . ft.
6,000 s . ft.
1,500 s . ft.
Subtotal
434
2,400
617
763
1,074
5,288
6 27 26 13
297 41 55 270
10 7 26 29
36 33 40 26
39 26 20 19
388 134 167 357
eni
Generation
Office
Office
Retail (1)
Fast-Casual Restaurant/Coffee Sho (1)
Subtotal
Reductions
Existin Li ht Industrial 0 . ce (2)
50 Percent Multi-use
Pro~sed XenillRi
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
3
68
56
47
174
14
330
61
45
450
2
50
13
61
126
(I) 50 percent multi-use reduction applied.
(2) Existing Light Industrial Office was assumed 30 percent occupied, based on information provided by City staff.
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....turn 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 thru/right-turn 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).
Based 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 Si~
Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study. Based on this and the traffic volume 1
comparisons shown in Figures A-2 and A-3, the proposed Xenia Ridge redevelopment will no0
create additional impacts on the adjacent roadway network beyond what was reported in the
Miner Site Travel Demand Management Plan Traffic Study.
;
~o i ~-1~~1 ~~Y~~~g/:il~
g ~ ~ "uS (~~ '" ~
N. COR _ _ __
~
u:i
I.E8 E
-------
LA.
~ s.
~
I 47. FLORIDA CT.
C\R.
GLEN CRE:
.!ANA
i
~
~
i.~
~
01 FR lANK
~
GAMBLE DR.
,
LEGEND
XX - Volumes Based on Former Miner Site Development Plan
S11 (XX) - Volumes Based on Proposed Xenia Ridge Development Plan
a [XX] - Change-in Number of Trips
5 - Signalized Intersection
rmIi
CoNsuL"IING GaollP.lNc.
YEAR 2010 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES (SCENARIO 2) . A.M. PEAK HOUR !=J' A 2
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Igure .
Opus Northwest, LLC
0076333
February 2008
!I i
;;1 ~
l.EB f
--.."
LA.
-- I .... . VlCk 1,.,I""l \
t:3(;;.-
gO'"
_SS
N<')
00'"
0(71(71
J~~ I .L . ~.- - t(,\...J <:r~.
[+10](350) 340 J.
[+0] (10) 10.\ 81 m 5 jo~ lA. ~ CRE:
[-5] (120) 125 ~ -::; -n .!ANA
N.
u.I S.
~
i
... 47. FLORIDA CT.
II~
~
. lli!
~I t 8T,
<5
5
il FR
ANI<
GAMBLE DR.
.
LEGEND
XX - Volumes Based on Former Miner Site Development Plan
~ I (XX) - Volumes Based on Proposed Xenia Ridge Development Plan
il [XX] - Change in Number of Trips
S - Signalized Intersection
m
CoNstltnNG G1IOtlI'.1Nc.
YEAR 2010 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES (SCENARIO 2) . P.M. PEAK HOUR !=i' A 3
XENIA RIDGE TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Igure -
Opus Northwest, LLC
0076333
February 2008
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 Avenue 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\Report\FINAL-DRAFT_Xenia Ridge TDMP TS_Rev2.doc
APPENDIX B
XENIA RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT
PARKING STUDY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
me ONSULTING G RO UP, I Ne.
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I DESIGNERS
I Mf~N['\POI.lS
FARGO
MM)l SON
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
DATE: 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 I Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 i 763.475.0010 Fax: 763.475.2429
All Equnl Oppoll/lllity Eml'loyer
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 I (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 aSF 2.40 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 669 spaces
Retail 7,896 aSF 2.73 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 22 spaces
(Avg. ofM - Th. and Fri; non-Dee)
Restaurant 3,500 aSF 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\TPIF1NAL-DRAFT Parking Study Tech Memo_cv_Rev2.doc
w
Valley
Memorandum
Fire Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
July 7, 2009
Agenda Item
5. A. Second Consideration - Ordinance #420 - Adoption of Amended State Building Code -
Incorporation of 2008 National Electrical Code and Residential/Commercial Energy Code
Prepared By
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Summary
The State of Minnesota adopted the 2008 National Electrical Code, replacing the previously
adopted 2005 Code. The 2008 Code will be effective locally upon City Council adoption. The
National Electrical Code is required to be adopted locally and is enforced by the State of
Minnesota Electrical Inspector assigned to Golden Valley.
The State of Minnesota adopted the 1322 Residential Energy Code and 1323 Commercial
Energy Code. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. developed and published the new code as a nationally recognized standard.
The new Code will replace Minnesota Energy Code 7670,7672,7674 and 7678.
Attachment
Ordinance No. 420, Adoption of Amended State Building Code - Incorporation of 2008
National Electrical Code and Residential/Commercial Energy Code (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve on Second Consideration, Ordinance No. 420, Adoption of Amended State
Building Code - Incorporation of 2008 National Electrical Code and Residential/Commercial
Energy Code.
ORDINANCE NO. 420, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Adopting the Amended State Building Code
Incorporation of the 2008 National Electrical Code and
Residential/Commercial Energy Code
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains:
Section 1. City Code Section 4.01, entitled "Building Code Adopted", is amended by
deleting item J, "1315 - Adoption of the 2005 National Electrical Code" and replacing it with
a new item J, which reads "J. 1315 -Adoption of the 2008 National Electrical Code".
Section 2. City Code Section 4.01, entitled "Building Code Adopted", is amended by
deleting item U, "7670, 7672, 7674, 7676 and 7678, Minnesota Energy Code" and replacing
it with a new item U, which reads "U. 1322 Residential Energy Code and 1323 Commercial
Energy Code."
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 4.99 entitled
"Violation A Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by
reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage
and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this day of July, 2009.
Is/Linda R. Loomis
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Is/Susan M. Virnio
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk