Loading...
08-28-06 PC Agenda AGENDA Golden Valley Planning Commission Joint Meeting with the Environmental Commission Lighting Ordinance Discussion Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room Monday, August 28, 2006 6pm I. Lighting Ordinance Discussion Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Council Chambers 7pm I. Approval of minutes July 24, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting II. Informal Public Hearing - General Land Use Plan Map Amendment Applicant: City of Golden Valley Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South Purpose: To change the General Land Use Plan Map designation for the properties at 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South from Light Industrial to Mixed Use. III. Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Design Plan - Union X, LLC, Miner Site - PUD No.1 03 Applicant: Union Land X, LLC Address: 700 and 800 Xenia Avenue South Purpose: To allow for a mixed use development that includes approximately 200,000 sq. ft. of office space, a 74 unit condominium building and about 15,000 sq. ft. of retail space IV. Reports on meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other meetings V. Other business Subdivision Ordinance and Infill Housing Development - Lot Splits VI. Adjournment . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 24, 2006 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, July 24,2006. 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 Planning Intern Aaron er and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Director of Planning and De ark Grimes was absent 1. Approval of Minutes July 10, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting n Meeting MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by McCarty an approve the July 10, 2006 minutes as submitte July 17, 2006 Joint City Council/PI MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by approve the July 17, 2006 minute . 2. Discussion on July 17 Meeting Regardin Ordinance - Lo nt Council/Planning Commission n Ordinance and Infill Housing Subdivision Keysser explained' Council directed th and infill hous' 17 Joint Council/Planning Commission meeting the mission to start looking at the Subdivision Ordinance a's zoning ordinance appealed to him at first but then he adopted this approach, there could be an issue of fairness. If this a person with a 20,000 square foot lot (currently permissible to subdivide their lot if the median lot size in the neighborhood was eet, but a person with a 26,000 square foot lot in this same neighborhood Keysser agreed and stated that Golden Valley doesn't have clearly defined neighborhoods and that it would be very difficult to figure the median lot size. . McCarty asked if the Planning Commission has seen a lot of subdivision requests and if they have been for existing double lots or for single lots. Keysser stated that the Commission has seen several. He stated that he would like to receive a map from staff that shows how many lots in the City could be candidates for a subdivision. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 24, 2006 Page 2 Keysser referred to an outline he drafted after the joint City CouncillPlanning Commission meeting and stated that he thinks the two biggest issues they hear from residents about is the change of character in their neighborhood and drainage issues. Schmidgall stated that he thinks that the "change in the character of the neighborhood" is really just a smokescreen people use when they don't want change in their neighborhood. Cera stated that big houses also concern residents and changes the character of neighborhoods. He added that the size of homes is one issue the Planning Commission could look at. Schmidgall said that since a lot of the home additions are in compli Code, it leads him to believe that most of the houses are a lot s I Waldhauser said that is why it is good to be looking at these' Zoning ould be. Cera stated that St. Louis Park used to have a finished sq and asked staff to look in to their ordinances. Keysse said about how many lots in the City are susceptible to s t they used to get the facts Waldhauser said she thinks they should look a right now are dealing with the Zoning Code no ISlon rdinance, but the issues ision Ordinance. Eck referred to the study that Keysse susceptible to subdivision and stat area, but could not be subdivide . Kluchka added that it would b as-is and which lots could stated it is likely staff co g which lots in the City could be e lots that are 20,000 square feet in e way the house is positioned on the lot. h map of which lots could be subdivided if the house were to be torn down. Hanauer McCarty said he a Ordinance if it is th could also 100 Ordinance. K Idhauser that it makes sense to look at the Zoning tes they are considering changing. Hanauer said he tes and what could be done under the current Zoning at information from other first ring suburbs would also help. City of Bloomington and stated they have neighborhoods that rYe. He suggested staff look at their ordinances. Keysser said he t things that are more objective such as storm water management and he City has to enforce agreements and get compliance. Schmidgall stated that he think it is fair that a new house should have to solve the whole neighborh d's drainage problem. Keysser agreed but added that a new house could adversely affect the neighborhood. Cera suggested they look at permeable versus impermeable surfaces as well. Keysser suggested that the City Engineer come to a Planning Commission meeting to help educate them about storm water management because he would like to understand it better. Waldhauser stated that they have to separate the storm water issue from the subdivision issue because the storm water issue is city-wide. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 24, 2006 Page 3 . She said she doesn't think subdivisions are the cause of drainage problems or a solution to them. Eck added that sometimes new buildings can help other property's drainage problems. Keysser suggested that staff look at other cities, Maplewood in particular, to get more information about rain gardens. Hanauer said he would. Waldhauser said to make sure he knows what types of soils these other cities have. Cera suggested that they make a list of all of the various tools they've discussed and list the pros and cons of each. . Hanauer mentioned that APA has a report on infill guidelines a a copy of it to the Planning Commissioners. He explained so report to address infill development are: setbacks, height, ratio. He stressed that if a City tries to change the rules mi problems. He suggested they really look at the heigh 'ssue one of the biggest issues. Cera added that where th issue. ould get eAPA ing volume lead to eed that height is red from is also an Waldhauser said she thinks that before the should establish some goals or parame to accomplish. to do all sorts of research they ut what things they are trying Kluchka referred to his list of no suggested the Planning Com to the "character of the nei vious joint meeting with the Council and mmon elements and see how they relate sue and the drainage issues. Keysser suggested that Kluchka prepared em documents togethe i rs look at the notes he prepared and the notes with any comments and he will combine the two ce members if they would like to add anything to this . analyn Circle, stated that she appreciates the work the Planning g. She referred to the comment said about "McMansions" being a or people who don't like change and said she hopes the Planning Comm esn't believe that. She said she added a second story on her house but people wo an't know it because it was done respectfully to the neighborhood. She said "tear downs" are the issue and that there are six just in her neighborhood. She said they are not worried about people making their houses bigger or more modern, they are worried about the sun being taken away because it is height that adds weight to a neighborhood and some of these new homes are just big and vulgar. She stated that Golden Valley is a city of defined neighborhoods and that she doesn't know of any area in Golden Valley that can't be defined. Keysser clarified that he didn't mean that neighborhoods aren't defined geographically, he meant that neighborhoods aren't defined by a single house style or specific lot size. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission July 24, 2006 Page 4 Kluchka referred to the issue of height and stated that they need to look at the "tricks" with the grading of lots. Waldhauser stated that the City could require steeper setbacks for higher homes. Hanauer said that he would look into the issues that have been discussed and get some information to the Planning Commission in the future. 3. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No reports were given. 4. Other Business No other business was discussed. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 pm. . . . . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: August 22, 2006 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Amendment to General land Use Plan Map from Light Industrial to Mixed Use for the 5.9 acres at the Northwest Corner of Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr. (Olympic Printing site at 700 and 800 Xenia Ave.)-Request Made by Union land X, llC At the July 5,2006 City Council meeting, the Council held a public hearing to amend the City's General land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. After the public hearing, the Council approved the amendment that created a Mixed Use land use category. The Mixed Use (MU) category is defined as follows: Mixed Use (MU): This category includes tracts of land, buildings, or structures that support two or more land uses which are complementary to one another, support the ability to live, work, shop and/or play within a defined land use area, and are in a compact urban form. This category includes the following principal uses: residential, office, retail, public and entertainment. The Mixed Use land use category was recommended to the City Council by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission discussed the new category at their meetings on March 27, 2006, May 22,2006, and June 12, 2006. At the June 12 meeting, the Commission also held an informal public hearing. After the hearing, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Mixed Use (MU) category. A request to amend the General land Use Plan to include a Mixed Use category was made by Frank Dunbar, the representative of Union land X, llC. He was told by staff that without a mixed land use category in the General land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, the development of the 5.9 acre Olympic Printing site would not be possible due to the current designation as Light Industrial on the General land Use Plan map. The proposed use of the site for a combination of offices, housing and retail does not fit the current Light Industrial land use designation. The adoption of a new Mixed Use category would allow this property to be re- guided as Mixed Use and allow the rezoning of the property from Light Industrial to a mixed use Planned Unit Development. . . . Process to Amend the Comprehensive Plan Any change to the Comprehensive Plan is made at the sole discretion of the City Council. In other words, a property owner or citizen cannot make an application to change the Comprehensive Plan like a conditional use permit, rezoning or variance. Changes to the Comprehensive Plan can only go forward if the City Council so orders. In this case, the City Council received a request by Union Land X, LLC to create a new mixed land use category and change the 5.9 acre site to Mixed Use in order to allow Union Land X, LLC to go forward with a PUD application. This PUD application would allow for a mixed use development that includes about 200,000 sq. ft. of office space, a 74 unit condominium building and about 15,000 sq. ft. of retail space. After considering the request by Union Land X, LLC, the Council allowed consideration of the change to go forward. Section 11.90, Subdivision 7 of the Zoning Code outlines the process for amending the Comprehensive Plan. It states that the Council may amend the Comprehensive Plan only after the Planning Commission holds a public hearing on the change. In this case, the Commission is holding a public hearing on the change of the land use category from Light Industrial to Mixed Use (MU) for the former Olympic Printing site. After a recommendation from the Planning Commission is received, the City Council will then vote on the change. A vote to change the Compressive Plan requires a 2/3 majority vote of all members of the City Council. (In other words, four of the five members have to vote in favor of the change to the Comprehensive Plan.) As indicated in Section 11.90, Subdivision 7, there are no specific findings that are required to be made by the Planning Commission in the consideration of a change to the Comprehensive Plan. (In this case, the amendment to the General Land Use Plan map and the preliminary PUD plan are being considered by the Planning Commission at the same meeting. This allows the Commission the opportunity to see the type of mixed use that is being proposed and vote on them at the same meeting. The City Council will also consider the General Land Use Plan map change and Preliminary PUD at the same meeting.) Current Planning for 1-394 Corridor The City is nearing the end of a planning process for the 1-394 Corridor that includes the part of Golden Valley south of Laurel Ave. between Rhode Island Ave. and TH 100. The planning process has been ongoing for the past year and has involved URS, Inc. (the City's planning consultant on this project), staff, and an advisory committee made up of representatives from the City Council, Planning Commission, staff and consultant. The advisory committee has met a number of times to give direction to the study. As the study is coming to a close, the findings of the study are being finalized. The findings include: 1. The study will be used to guide the City in changing the Comprehensive Plan for the corridor and adopting a new Mixed Use zoning category for the corridor. 2. City Council direction is that the City will not use its powers to redevelop the corridor like it has in the past in redevelopment areas such as Golden Hills or Valley Square. Instead, the hope is that the plans and zoning ordinances that come out of this planning process will shape the way that the market redevelops the corridor. . 3. The City is aware of the impacts from new development on surrounding residential areas. The mixed use development concept will allow new development taking into consideration the limitations of the area related to criteria such as traffic, storm water runoff, and visual impacts. 4. Any new development in the 1-394 corridor should have an overall benefit to the entire City and enhance it as a place to live and work. 5. The City realizes that there will be new residential growth in Golden Valley over the next 20 years. Well planned, mixed use developments along transportation corridors is a logical place for more intense development that will help the City of Golden Valley meet its portion of expected residential growth in the metro area over the next 20 years. . The proposed Union Land X, LLC development at the northwest comer of Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr. is a mixed use development as described in the accompanying report on the proposed PUD. When redevelopment began in the Golden Hills area in the late 1980's and into the 1990's, the idea of mixed use was not considered. The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and City Council called for the Olympic Printing site to be used for medium to high density offices. With the continued concern in the past several years related to traffic generation, the creation of a mixed use development on this site would allow for dense development that would have less of a peak hour traffic impact than if the block was used entirely for office development. The conversion of this block to the Mixed Use (MU) category is consistent with the goals of the City to allow development in the 1-394 corridor that will not overload the existing and planned street system, increase housing opportunities consistent with the City's housing plan, provide a wide variety of employment opportunities and increase the retail choices for people living and working south of TH 55. If the City Council does decide to change the General Land Use Plan map to MU for the Olympic site, it may be appropriate for the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to recommend a change in the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan to indicate that a mixed use development is appropriate in this and other parts of the Golden Hills Redevelopment area. Recommended Action Property in the 1-394 corridor is valuable and developers will want to develop it as intensely as possible in order to maximize their return on investment. The development of this area for mixed uses will provide the development community with the opportunity to make a good return on investment in a way that will help minimize the effects of single-use development such as high-rise office. Staff recommends that the General Land Use Plan map for the Olympic Printing site (the 5.9 acres at the northwest corner of Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr.) be guided Mixed Use (MU). This is a change from the current guiding of the area for Light Industrial uses. Attachments Letter from Union Land X, LLC, dated February 28, 2006 (3 pages) General Land Use Plan Map ( 1 page) . Photo of site (1 page) . Union Land X, LlC 5000 Glenwood Avenue Golden ValleYrMN 55422 763-377-7090 M Hand Delivered "~ February 28, 2006 Mr, MarkW. Grimes, AICP . Director of Planning and Development City of Golden Valley City l1all- 7800 G()lden Valley Road Golden Valley, l'vfN 55427 Re: Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Miner Site Dear Mr. Grimes: At a December 15, 2005 neighborhood meeting to discuss potential redevelopment oftlle Miner Site, the residents who participated were generally supportive of a mixed use development on that site. with housing, office, and limited retail. . On January 2, 2006 we wrote to you to formally request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for a mixed use development on the Miner Site, located at the southeast corner of Golden Llills Drive and Xenia Avenue South. You responded by letter dated January 24 that the City Council would discuss this matter at their February 14 Council/Manager meeting, That discussion took place, and the marteI' was referred to the March 6 City Councilmceting. The purpose of this letter is to provide our perspective and supportive commentary for our request lor a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to enable our mixed-use project to moVe forward to the next step in tbe process, i.e. our application for a Planned Unit Development CPUD). We have reviewed the fcHlowing planning policy documents and studies, from which we have drawn the thrust of our comments: · Goldt~n Valley Comprehensive Plan (General Land Use Plan and the Housing Golden Valley) · Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan (last amended in ! 999) · Envision Golden Valley: A Shared Vision for Golden Valley's Future · Principles for the 1-394 Corridor Study Land Use Uivcrsity I Mixing of Uses vs. Separation of Uscs The General Land Use Plan map uses map categories for single-purpose uses. However, the Land Use Goals call for a balanced distribution ofland llses and point to the desire to accommodate land use diversity. The Land Use Policies acknowledge the Metro Council's regional growth strategy and state that the City of Golden Valley shall seek reasonable ways to foster efficient land use pattems, accommodate mixed use developments, and increase land use . . density where appropriate, in dealing with the 1-394 corridor, the Lund Use ()bjectives call for studying the corridor to determine if the area would be beller served by amending the plan to indicate commercial or office uses rather than industrial. Housing Golden Valley states thatthe City of Golden Valley, as part of its Livable Communities commitment, has pledged its best efforts toward increasing the percentage of modest~cost homes, increasing the percentage of non-detached housing styles, and incrcasing the average density of non-detached housing developments. Among the Housing Policies are two that encourage the consideration ofmixed-use I site-specific urban design approach to certain types of redevelopment opportunities: · The City shall continue to offer the flexibility of the Planned Unit Development option to housing developers who demonstrate an ability to successfully apply contemporaryJand planning priudplesand coordinated community design philosophies. · To protect the integrity and desirabi lity of established residential ncighborhoods,the City shall evaluate the discontinuatiQIl of isolated and aging non-residential uses through buyout. and/or amendments to the comprehcllsiveplan map as opportunities arise. . 'file Miner Site is located within the Golden Hills Central Area in the Golden Hills Uedcvelol)ment Piau. For the Central Area, this Plan callsfbr a mix of medium to high density office, service, and light industrial uses, with structured parking to cncourage maximnm site density without compromising green spa,,',:. The Plan noted the potential expansion/upgrading of the printing Cacility at the northwest quadran! of Xenia/Golden H ills Drive, or redevelopment of the site by others. T'he citizens who developed the Shared Vision for Golden Valley's Futun~ talked about "Connecting," noting that this notion isn't just about getting from place to place, bm it's also about bringing people together ..", by fostering inviting public places, vir,al businesses, and community institutions where people work and play, encounter their fellow citizens, and discover COmmon interests, The Development category of the Envision Guide expMds (In the desire for a more integrated community by encouraging commercial development that reinforces community identity and engagement. It defines cornrntwcial development to include pl<,<<-'es where business, entertninmcnt., housing, and govcmmcnt services gracefully coexist Further, it encourages such cOlnmercial development t.o take advantage of existing infrastructure along 1-:394 (and IIwy 55). Lastly, the Principles f(x the 1~3()4 Corridor Study foclls on enabling the corridor to evolve t.oward a diverse mix of land uses. including residential as well as commercial and industrial, noting thata mix of activities, uses and densities will help to sustain the corridor through changing economic cycles, consumer preferences, and housing trends. The Principles call fot' maximizing integration rather than separation of land uses, and improving the visual coherence and attractiveness of the corridor, and improving the connectivity for all modes oftransportation. Summary Conclusions The City of Golden Valley policy directives noted above. as well as COllllTH;mts made by the public aUnc Dec.ernber 15,2005 community meeting, point clearly to the desire of the community's leadership and residents to faci!itnte the evolution of Golden Valley into a more closely kll it. more connected community. . . We believe that mixed-use development, created through a high quality environment characterized by wel I-designed bui ldings, landscaped open. space. amenities that include a well- integrated trllnsport?lion plan (vehicular, parking, and enhanced access to transit) and attractive pedcstrinll acc(:~ssal1d circulation, if; the most exciting amleffective 111ethod of achieving this ties ired connectivity. Bold and distinctive, yet contextual, mixed-use development, such as we are proposing for the Miner Site, would alsoenhancc the character and identity of Golden Valley. Therefore, we request that the COllllcil go f(}rward with formal consideration of the amendment to Golden Valley's Comprehensive Plan to facilitate the consideration ofa mixed-use Planned Unit Development proposal forredeve]opment of the Miner Site. Thank you for your consideratioll. As you know, \ve will work with the City to develop the site into an t~nd use that the community can be proud of. Please c~JlI with any questions. SinCt~rdy, Union Land X, L.LC "''''';'-'-2'' '7 ':)// r. .<:{:!~;:if 7 '" Frank C. Dunbar Chief Manager . . CITY OF GOLDE^r VALLE'Y . \:' .' Sandbulg ~ /lliddle School \.... . ME~~~~!KE ROAD " ..:*$ ~ 1-;', ~ :9 ;~ I I '" . 0 ,15 ;:tJ}l ::-;.,....... ! I ~ , ~ ait.;t: " .. "--, 'j. .'tr 'l~ 1 ) l') ,~~ - ';';-;';-'1' ~..""~' ~~ ~~.t~ . ''-',j'" ~11'.!1iI "~('f.' .:~i"f':i'\',~,. '" :t:.' ~ "'''''''''Y'Y'lW('li'~'''''' ...,...c..."....,.,.,..... '.~ ~j\;./f.:/~i ~t.'.;;:'!" CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK~- '~.~;3~~ '3 94 Westwood Hills Environmental Education Center ""'-i'tlfEast'A Ti: . GENERAL LAND USE PLAN RESIDENTIAL o Low Density (Less than 5 units per acre) _ Medium Density (5 to 11.9 units per acre) .. High Density (12 or more units per acre) COMMERCIAL ~_ Office .. Commercial (also includes Office) INDUSTRIAL o Light Industrial (also includes Office) 11II Industrial (also includes Office) b~~~ Open Space - Public and Private ownershiP. c:J Schools and Religious Facilities L .' ,J Public Facilities - Miscellaneous _ Semi-Public Facilities - Miscellaneous _ Open Water ~ Wetlands National Wetland Inventory - not field verified ~ (Minor adjustments made to some wetlands) ~ Railroad Existing Local Trail Proposed Local Trail Regional Trail Proposed Regional Trail Pedestrian Bridge Road Rights-of-Way .......... _PEO Municipal Line 1 inch = 1.833 feet (J) . ---- ....101 ....ffl_ool Thibault -SSOC'~TES tln.Iot..., ...,...10. Golden Valley May 1999 Comprehensive Plan 1999 - 2020 ~ URBANWORKS ARC HIT E C T U R E... . g ~. , " P' I 5$" I "' a!:.~.. Union Land X LLC Golden Valley, MN 01.02.2006 Miner Site . . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: August23,2006 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing-:-Preliminary PUD Plan for Redevelopment of the Miner Site at 700-800 Xenia Ave. into a Mixed Use Development-Union Land X, LLC, Applicant BACKGROUND Union Land X, LLC, represented by Frank Dunbar, Chief Manager, has entered into an agreement to purchase the 5.9 acres at the northwest corner of Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr. The property currently consists of two lots. This property is located north of the Allianz headquarters. The property currently has two office/warehouse buildings located on it. Both buildings total around 37,000 sq. ft. in area. The south building along Golden Hills Dr. is vacant and the north building is partially occupied. Union Land X proposes to tear down the two buildings and use the property for the construction of a mixed use development including a 10 level office building (218,000 sq. ft.), a parking deck attached to the office building (5.5 levels), restaurant and retail space on the first level of the office building (10,000 sq. ft.) and a 74 unit condominium building (12 levels). The property is currently designated Light Industrial on the City's General Land Use Plan map and Light Industrial on the City's zoning map. In order for this proposal to go forward, the General Land Use Plan designation for the property must be changed from Light Industrial to Mixed Use (MU). This change to the General Land Use Plan map is also being considered by the Planning Commission at the August 28, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. If the Commission recommends approval of the change to the General Land Use Plan map, the proposal can then move forward to the zoning phase. In this case, the zoning phase is the request to create a mixed use Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the site. The mixed use development proposed by Union Land X is not consistent with the existing Light Industrial zoning. This property is located within the Golden Hills Redevelopment District. Within this redevelopment district that reaches from Colorado Ave. on the west, Turners Crossroad on the east, 1-394 on south and Laurel Ave. on the north, much new development has occurred over the past 20 years. The City created this redevelopment area in the 1980's in order to encourage and foster good development at the then future interchange with 1-394 at Xenia Ave. 1 . The redevelopment in the area has included both public and private invesfment including new streets, storm water ponds, new office buildings, and a motel. The Miner site is the last major site left to be redeveloped in the Redevelopment Area. The original Redevelopment Plan indicated that the best use of Miner site would be for office space or for the upgrading of the existing buildings for continued office/warehouse and light industrial uses. The proposed redevelopment by Union Land X does not include any financial participation by the City of Golden Valley or the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Any costs related to public improvements necessary for the development to go forward will be paid for by Union Land X. This may include improvements to the streets to enhance traffic flow and circulation. As a result of the redevelopment that has occurred in the Golden Hills area, many public improvements have been done that make the redevelopment of the Miner site possible. This includes all the work that has been done to improve traffic flow into and out of the area. Since the late 1980's, the City has carefully reviewed all development that has been built to make sure that the street systems in and around the Golden Hills area will continue to operate at an acceptable level after each development. With each new development in the area, the City has required updated traffic information to determine how traffic will work with the new development. In certain instances, improvements to the local street systems had to be made. The Cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park have also worked together to consider the effects of development on the shared freeway interchanges along 1-394. Both cities have adopted an ordinance that requires traffic management plans for developments within the 1- 394 corridor and laid out a plan for street improvements in the area. . The City is in the process of finalizing the 1-394 Corridor Study. The purpose of this study is to re-evaluate the existing land use regulations for the corridor and to recommend changes to the City's General Land Use Plan and zoning ordinance. The Miner site is within the Corridor Study area. It is appropriate to consider the guiding principles for the Corridor Study when reviewing this development. These eight principles are: 1. Enable the corridor to evolve toward a diverse mix of land uses, including residential as well as commercial and industrial. 2. Maximize integration rather than separation of land uses, where appropriate. 3. Maintain the corridor as an employment center. 4. Improve the visual coherence and attractiveness of the corridor. 5. Improve connectivity for all modes of transportation. 6. Foster neighborhood-serving retail and services. 7. Maintain and improve the functioning of intersections and highway interchanges. 8. Foster sustainable development and work to establish a balance between urban and natural systems. It is the staffs opinion that this development is consistent with these eight principles for the corridor after carefully examining the plan and written materials submitted by Union Land X. . 2 . QUALIFICATION AS A PUD 'Section 11.55 of the Zoning Code outlines the requirements for planned unit developments. It indicates that the purpose of a PUD is to permit flexibility from other provisions of the zoning code including flexibility in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements, number of buildings on a lot and similar requirements. Subdivision 1 of Section 11.55 outlines the purpose of the PUD section and indicates 11 items that a PUD is to encourage or achieve. In the case of the Miner redevelopment, it is the staff opinion that the proposal is consistent with this purpose section. The PUD chapter also indicates standards and guidelines for all planned unit developments. Staff finds that these standards and guidelines are met. Therefore, the Miner proposal may be considered as a PUD. Staff has reviewed the application submitted by Union Land X and finds it to be complete and acceptable for consideration as a PUD. Along with the application, Union Land has submitted all necessary information for the staff to evaluate the proposal. Union Land X has held two neighborhood meetings as required by the PUD ordinance. The PUD process consists of two stages. If the preliminary plan is approved by the City Council after a recommendation is received by the Planning Commission, the applicant must then apply for the final PUD plan approval. This final plan stage is also reviewed by the Planning Commission and the final plan approved by the City Council . After discussion with the City Attorney, it was decided that the only zoning that would permit a mixed use development is the PUD. No other zoning district would permit all three of the uses proposed by Union Land X within the same development. When the Purpose and Intent language of the PUD section of the Zoning Code is read, it is clear that a mixed use development that includes office, retail and residential uses is consistent within a PUD zoning district. PROJECT DETAILS The proposed redevelopment plans are illustrated on the plans submitted with the PUD application. This package of plans includes 27 pages prepared by UrbanWorks, the project architect. Other information submitted with the application includes an addendum to the application dated July 6,2006. The addendum gives additional explanation regarding the proposal. A copy of the traffic management plan prepared for the Miner site by SRF Consulting Group is also attached. The entire site is 5.9 acres in size and is bounded by Laurel Ave. on the north, Xenia Ave. on the east, Golden Hills Dr. on the south and the CP railroad tracks on the west. The proposal is to create two lots. The north lot would be 1.2 acres and provide the space for the 12 story condo building and two level parking deck. The south lot would be 4.7 acres in size and provide for the 10 level office building with retail on the first level along with the 5.5 level parking deck. . The condo building is to be a 12 story building with 74 units. (When Union Land X first spoke to staff about this size of the condo, it was in the 90-100 unit range. It has now been reduced to 74 units to meet the market's demand for larger units. The size of the building has remained the same but some of the units have been made larger.) The height of the condo building is 136 ft. This height is about 25 ft. less than the 10 level office building that is 160 ft. in height. 3 . The units will be sold at market rate. The developer will be able to discuss price ranges at the Planning Commission meeting. The office building is 10 levels with 218,000 sq. ft. of office space and 10,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant space on the first level. There is also a 5.5 level parking deck attached to the west end of the office building. The office building is 160 ft. in height which is less than the taller of the Allianz buildings to the south. As permitted in other developments within the Golden Hills area that required a PUD, the setback for some of the buildings and landscape areas are proposed to be less than would be required in an office or residential zoning district. The condo building and the office building do meet or exceed the 35 ft. setback along all streets. The parking deck for the condo is 35 ft. from Laurel Ave. The parking deck for the office building is as close as 22 ft. from Golden Hills Dr. Outside of a PUD, all setback areas along a public street must be landscaped. In this case, the surface parking areas for the condo is totally within the front setback areas along Laurel Ave. For the office building, the surface parking lot is partially within the setback area along Golden Hills Dr. Also, they have provided a plaza area along the Golden Hills Dr. and Xenia Ave. intersection that is "hardscape". Within this plaza area, they have provided seating and landscaped areas. The office building is setback farther than the required 35 ft. from the intersection of Golden Hills Dr. and Xenia Ave. in order to provide more plaza and public space. The provision of this plaza is consistent with City goals to create neighborhood servicing retail areas and gathering places. The PUD will provide a total of 1207 parking spaces. Of those, 149 are located in the two level parking deck for the condo building or in the small parking area for guests along Laurel Ave. This amount of parking exceeds the City's parking requirement of two spaces for each unit in a multiple family building. . The office building will have 1058 parking spaces with 1036 of those spaces in the 5.5 level parking deck attached to the west side of the office building. There is a small, 22 space surface parking lot along Golden Hills Dr. that will primarily serve the retail uses on the first level. Overall, the parking for the office and retail space exceeds the City's parking requirement by about 25 spaces. (The consultant for Union Land X used the City's parking requirements from the old parking section of the zoning code. The new parking requirements require slightly less parking for retail and residential uses. Therefore, Union Land X is providing more than the 1180 spaces required by the zoning code.) As part of the Travel Demand Management Plan, the developer has committed to providing bicycle storage facilities to meet the demands of residents and employees. This includes shower facilities near the bike locker area for employees that bike or walk to work. The developer has also committed to providing at least one bike space for each residential unit. This bike storage shall be shown on the final PUD plan. The developer will be working with the City and the Metropolitan Council to determine the best location for a bus stop(s) for the site. This may include the requirement for the construction of a bus shelter. . The PUD does show that there will be a sidewalk around the entire block including a trail along the railroad tracks on the west side of the parking deck. This will encourage walking and a connection to the surrounding neighborhoods. 4 . Also, the site plan shows a significant plaza area near the Xenia Ave. and Golden Hills Dr. intersection. This will encourage pedestrian movement and a gathering space for workers and residents of the area. It is hoped that the small retail area on the first level will be used by both the employees and residents in and near the Golden Hills area. The developer has submitted a landscape plan that indicates a great deal of plant material for the site. As indicated on the site plan, about 24% of the site is considered "green" where no building or paving is located. The plaza area that is "hardscape" is not included in this 24%. Landscaping is strategically located in the "hardscape" areas to make them more welcoming to pedestrians. The landscape plan does appear to be well designed. However, this landscape plan will have to be reviewed by the City's Environmental Coordinator and the Building Board of Review to determine if minimum landscape standards are met and to make suggestions regarding the type of plant material used and location of plant material. The site does indicate the location of a pond. The pond will be used as both an amenity for the site and for storm water retention and management. (The storm water ponding issues are addressed in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE.) As indicated on the site plan, the restaurant area will overlook a portion of the pond. The pond will also help provide a separation between the condo building and the office building. . The building materials are indicated on the plans. It appears that the office building will be have aluminum and glass curtain wall system with insulated glass. The parking decks will have articulated pre-cast panels with simulated stone banding. The condominium building will made from pre-cast concrete panels. As indicated on the elevation plans, there will be large windows and balconies on all sides on the building. All buildings on the site are designed by UrbanWorks Architecture. One of the most significant issues related to this PUD is the ability of the existing street system to handle the additional traffic that will be generated from the office, retail and condominium buildings. After much discussion, the staff believes that the traffic generated from this site can be handled by the existing street system with some modifications suggested by City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, and the City's consulting traffic engineer, Mike Kotila, PE. The information about traffic generation is addressed in Mr. Oliver's memo that is attached. The developer is aware of the requirements made by the City and has agreed to go forward with the Travel Demand Management Plan that has been submitted and reviewed by the City. This Travel Demand Management Plan will be made a part of the PUD permit. Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson has written a memo to me dated August 2,2006 regarding the Miner site. This memo clearly states the requirements of the Fire Department. This memo has been received by the developer and he has stated that the requirements will be met. . RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the preliminary PUD plan for the Miner site. This plan includes the construction of a 218,000 sq. ft. office building with an additional 1 0,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant space on the first level, a 74 unit condominium building, and approximately 1200 parking spaces in two parking decks. The plan has been developed in a coordinated manner by Union Land X. 5 . They have worked with City staff to develop a site plan that will provide for good pedestrian and vehicle circulation. It appears that the traffic generated from this development will be able to function on the existing street system with some improvements that will be paid for by the developer. (If this development is completed, staff believes that there is remaining traffic capacity for additional development on the vacant parcel next to the Colonnade if certain other improvements are made to the local street system.) As stated in this memo, the City is concerned about maintaining an acceptable level of service throughout the Golden Hills area and the surrounding neighborhoods. This property is a valuable piece of land within the 1-394 Corridor and the Golden Hills area. Any redevelopment of the area will be dense as compared to the existing use or even the maximum use that would be permitted in the Light Industrial zoning district. Because of the location near the 1-394 interchange with Xenia Ave. and the surrounding land uses, this more intense development is inevitable. The City's job is to make sure that the development that does go into the area benefits the City and surrounding neighborhood and that the impacts such as traffic and storm water runoff are mitigated. The recommended approval has the following conditions: 1. The 27 sheet Miner Site Plan Submittal prepared by UrbanWorks and dated 8/22/06 shall become a part of this approval. 2. The Union Land X, LLC Application for Preliminary PUD Plan and attachments shall become a part of this approval. . 3. The Miner Site Redevelopment Travel Demand Management Plan (Draft) prepared by SRF Consulting Group, dated June 2006 shall become a part of this approval. . 4. The Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated August 2, 2006 shall become a part of this approval. 5. The Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated August 24, 2006 (with attachment) shall become a part of this approval. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Memo from City Engineer, Jeff Oliver, dated August 24, 2006 (8 pages) Memo from Deputy Fire Marshal, Ed Anderson, dated August 2,2006 (2 pages) Application Cover Letter from Union Land X, LLC, dated August 21,2006 (1 page Preliminary Design Plan PUD Application, dated July 6, 2006 (4 pages) Code Analysis prepared by UrbanWorks Architecture, dated August 22,2006 (4 pages) Project Narrative, dated July 6, 2006 (5 pages) Draft Travel Demand Management Plan prepared by SRF, dated June 2006(43 pages) Plans prepared by UrbanWorks Architecture, dated August 22,2006 (27 oversized pages) " 6 1.. -2 :j -~ :z ~ -i -t~ -~ 1 ~ 'i J "Q _m ~ INTIH'tSTATE 3'94 eD 1394 TO so HWY100 S ... .. INTeRSTATe 394. (l) M~~'"qilNCNS,' Ca;1f'~'lfi.tCit.OOlSms2))5 o ilEOO . . . . emorandum Public Works 763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax) alley Date: August 24, 2006 To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer NJ Preliminary Design Plan Revi:Wanned Unit Development NO.1 03 From: Subject: Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed plans for the Preliminary Design Plan for Planned Unit Development (PUD) NO.1 03, Miner Site. The site being considered for development has also been known as the Olympic Printing site, and is located north of Golden Hills Drive, west of Xenia Avenue South and south of Laurel Avenue. The proposed PUD consists of a mixed use development with a high rise residential building on the northern portion of the site and a commercial/office building on the southern portion of the site. Public Improvements: The proposed development of this site will require modifications to the existing street system surrounding the PUD, including turn lane and median work, public utility work, public sidewalk construction, as well as other modifications to existing city systems. Therefore, the developer will be required to enter into a Public Improvement Agreement for the anticipated work, which will be designed and constructed as a City Public Improvement Project. The agreement will include the developer paying for the improvements and all indirect costs incurred for project development, management and construction, as special assessments. Further details of the anticipated public improvement project will be discussed later in this review. Preliminary Plat and Site Plan: The final plat for this development, which will be required at the time of final PUD approval, must include easements consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance. These easements will include drainage and utility easements centered over all watermain facilities on site. In addition, the final plat must incorporate all rights-of-way and easement dedications discussed within this review. There are several railroad spur easements across the property being developed. The developer must provide evidence that these easements have been vacated prior to forwarding the development for final plan review. There is an existing drainage and utility easement along the western edge of the property being developed. This easement was originally granted to the Minnesota G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc . Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for drainage and highway purposes. However, it appears that the MnDOT rights for highway purposes have expired, and the easement may have been turned over to the City. The developer is pursuing the status of this easement and must provide documentation of its status prior to review of the final PUD plans. If the easement has been conveyed to the City it can be vacated as part of the final plat for the PUD. The final plat must include dedication of additional street right-of-way at the intersection of Laurel Avenue and Xenia Avenue South South, and along Xenia Avenue South South. The right-of-way must be located a minimum of five feet behind the curb lines for each street. The proposed sidewalk construction shown on the Golden Hills Drive, Xenia Avenue South and Laurel Avenue frontage of the PUD will be constructed as part of the public improvement project. These sidewalks will be a minimum of six-feet wide with a minimum boulevard of four-feet where ever possible. When the sidewalks must be constructed adjacent to the back of curb it must be a minimum of eight-feet wide. The sidewalks adjacent to the streets will be owned and maintained by the City of Golden Valley. . All sidewalks within the development boundary will be owned and maintained by the developer. This includes the proposed trail along the western PUD boundary that is parallel to the railroad tracks. The public sidewalks discussed above must be within walkway easements to be dedicated by the developer to the City. These easements must extend from the right-of- way line to one foot behind the sidewalk on the property side. These easements must be dedicated under separate document, with the developer providing the legal descriptions for the easements as part of final plan submittal. The City will prepare the easement documents for signature and recording as part of the final PUD approval. The proposed curb lines, median alignments, turn lanes and sidewalk locations shown on the plans are consistent with the City's currently anticipated public improvements. However, the layout is subject to change based upon final PUD review and construction plan preparation. The developer must agree to provide additional rights-of-way and easements deemed necessary during final design of the PUD and public improvements. Full access into this PUD will be provided in the northwest and southwest corners of the site. The access in the southwest corner will lead into the parking ramp for the commercial and office building, and must align with the driveway into Allianz on the south side of Golden Hills Drive. The proposed surface parking lot along Golden Hills Drive will also be accessible from this access point. The proposed parking ramp for the commercial and office building will also be constructed to allow fire department access through the ramp to the rest of the site. . G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc 2 . As discussed above, the site access in the northwest corner of the PUD will also provide full access. This will be the primary access point to the parking ramp for the residential building as well as for service vehicles to both buildings. The proposed mid-block site access from Golden Hills Drive will be limited to a right in/right out access. The access point onto Laurel Avenue in the northeast corner of the site, which serves a portion of the visitor parking for the residential building, will be a right-out access only. The proposed mid-block access point onto Xenia Avenue South will also be a right- in/right-out access only. The proposed layout of this access point includes a center median and appears to be satisfactory to accommodate emergency vehicles and semi- trucks that will be providing service to the proposed PUD. . In order to maximize safety along Xenia Avenue South by minimizing unprotected turning movements, both openings in the center median will be closed as part of the public improvement project. The closure of these medians will result in the driveway from 701 Xenia Avenue South, located on the east side of Xenia Avenue South, becoming a right-in/right-out access point. In order to provide adequate public safety access to the 701 building, the developer has prepared concept plans for modifying the existing access onto Laurel Avenue to a full access point. These modifications will require coordination with the owners of the 701 Xenia Avenue South building. Due to the circuitous nature of the adjacent local streets, the creation of a full access point onto Laurel Avenue from 701 Xenia Avenue South will not create significant amounts of additional traffic through the residential neighborhood east of Turners Crossroad. The pubic improvement project will also include the installation of signal interconnect system along Xenia Avenue South to provide connection between the traffic signal systems at Laurel Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. This conduit will allow for coordination of the signal timings north of 1-394, and the future optimization of all the signals along Xenia Avenue South and Park Place to the south of 1-394. Further modifications to the traffic signals adjacent to the site that are deemed necessary during design of the public improvement project, will also be incorporated into the project. The public improvement project may also include modifications to other legs of intersections not immediately adjacent to the proposed PUD. The City is currently in the process of preparing a concept plan for the entire intersection based upon the projected development. The costs of these improvements will be determined during final plan preparation and will be appropriately paid for by other property owners in the area. Other potential improvements that may be incorporated into the public improvement project include expansion of the railroad crossing at Golden Hills Drive to accommodate street modifications, sidewalk construction and a railroad signal system. . The proposed PUD plans are being forwarded to Metro Transit for review and comment. The installation of bus shelters on site will be based the comments of Metro Transit and the City. Any bus shelters determined necessary will be constructed by the developer, or as part of the public improvement project. Determination of construction responsibility will be made at the time of final PUD review. G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc 3 . . . Travel Demand Management Plan and Traffic Impacts: The developer has submitted a Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) as part of the PUD. This TDMP outlines actions to be taken by the developer to minimize traffic impacts on the adjacent roadways, and at other intersections in the vicinity of the PUD. City staff and the City's consulting traffic engineer have been working with the developer over a significant period of time on the information included in the TDMP, and in the traffic generation report included in the TDMP. The efforts to minimize vehicle trips to and from the proposed PUD that are outlined within the TDMP seem reasonable and if achieved, will help minimize traffic impacts in the area. A review memo from Mike Kotila, Traffic Engineer from SEH Inc. (SEH), dated August 24,2006 (attached for reference) makes additional recommendations to further strengthen the TDMP. The traffic study included with the TDMP indicates that following complete development of the area and implementation of the improvements included in the study, all intersections will operate at a Level of Service D or better. Staff and the City's traffic engineer agree with this conclusion. In addition, the trip generation from this PUD is consistent with the Golden Hills Traffic Study performed for the City by SEH in 2004. The 2004 study assigned total trips within the Xenia Avenue South and Golden Hills Drive area with an end result of all intersections operating at an acceptable Level of Service following build out. The proposed public improvement project discussed within this review incorporates the recommended street improvements that are needed as a result of the PUD. Additional improvements based upon proposed development in the southeast quadrant of Xenia Avenue South and Golden Hills Drive will be incorporated into the public improvement project if that redevelopment occurs in the near future. Utilitv Plan: The proposed PUD will receive sanitary sewer and water service from extensions into the site from existing City utilities within adjacent roadways. Adequate capacity is available in the city sanitary sewer and water supply systems to meet the demands from the development. The Utility Plan submitted with the PUD appears to be satisfactory as proposed. The extension of stubs to the property lines will be included in the public improvement project discussed earlier in this review. The ownership and maintenance of the sanitary sewer and water systems on-site will be the responsibility of the developer from the connection point to the city systems and throughout the PUD. A maintenance agreement.for these utilities will be required as part of the final PUD approval. The public improvement project will also include the required disconnection and removal of the existing sanitary sewer and water services into the site. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control: G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc 4 . This proposed PUD is located within the Sweeney Lake sub-district of the Bassett Creek Watershed. Therefore, the development will be subject to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC) Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals for water quality. This policy requires the installation of water quality ponds and other best management practices on-site to protect downstream water bodies. The proposed Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan submitted for review includes the construction of a storm water pond in the east-central portion of the site. This pond will provide water quality treatment and rate control for the site. In addition, the developer has proposed the installation of two rain water gardens (infiltration basins) and an environmental manhole immediately adjacent to the east side of the residential building. These facilities will provide water quality treatment for runoff from portions of the site that are not flowing to the pond. Specific design information for the rain gardens must be included in the final PUD submittal. . The only portion of the site that will not receive runoff treatment for water quality prior to discharge from the site is along the western and southern boundaries. The storm water runoff from the western portion of the site, between the parking ramp and the property line, is into the railroad right-of-way and then northward into a storm sewer system in Laurel Avenue. The receiving storm sewer system flows into the Xenia Avenue regional pond that was constructed by the City for rate control and water quality improvements. Runoff from the southern portion of the site is onto Golden Hills Drive; and into the existing storm sewer system that also flows to the Xenia Avenue pond. Therefore, runoff from the entire site receives the required water quality treatment. The developer must submit the grading plan and all storm water calculations to the BCWMC for its review and comment as part of the final PUD approval process. This submittal must include documentation that the proposed rain gardens and environmental manhole will provide a comparable level of nutrient removal as a NURP pond. The developer will be required to obtain a City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit for this project. This permit must be obtained prior to the start of any work on site. Because the site disturbing activity on this site is in excess of one acre, the developer will be required to obtain a NPDES General Storm Water Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency prior to the start of work on site. A copy of the permit application, once it is obtained, must be provided to the Public Works Department for its records. . The storm sewer system on-site, including all catch basins, manholes, pipes, ponds, rain gardens and environmental manholes will be owned and maintained by the developer from the point of connection to the existing City system into the property. The developer will be required to enter into a maintenance agreement for these facilities as part of the final PUD approval. G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc 5 . . . The proposed storm water management system on site will reduce peak runoff from the site following construction. Tree Preservation: This PUD will be subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. Information regarding compliance with the tree preservation ordinance must be submitted with final PUD plans. Summary and Recommendations: Public Works staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for Planned Unit Development No. 103 subject to the following conditions. 1. The developer must enter into a Public Improvement Agreement for modifications to Laurel Avenue, Xenia Avenue South and Golden Hills Drive; utility service installation, sidewalk construction and other improvements as discussed in this review. 2. The developer must dedicate rights-of-way and easements deemed necessary by the City throughout the PUD and public improvement process at no cost to the City. 3. The developer must provide documentation to the City that the railroad easements discussed in this review have been vacated. 4. The developer must provide documentation of the status of the drainage easement across the western portion of the site as part of the final PUD submittal. 5. Subject to the review and comment of Metro Transit. 6. Subject to the review and comment of the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission. 7. The developer must enter into maintenance agreements for the private sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, water quality measures and sidewalks as outlined within this review. 8. Subject to the review and comment of other City staff. C: Tom Burt, City Manager Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections Gary Johnson, Building Official Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Mike Kotila, SEH AI Murra, SEH G:\Developments-Private\Olympic Printing\PUD PreReview 082406.doc 6 . . . ~ SEH DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Grimes, Planning Director City of Golden Valley FROM: Mike Kotila, Traffic Engineer DATE: August 24, 2006 RE: Miner Site Plan and Traffic Study SEH No. AGOLDV9801.00 14.00 I have reviewed the revised Miner Site Redevelopment Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) dated August 2006. The TDMP proposes measures for travel demand management to reduce impacts of the site generated trips. The TDMP also assesses traffic impacts on the local roadway network and evaluates the proposed parking demand and parking supply for all uses on the site. Most of the questions and comments that we made on the June 2006 draft TDMP have been adequately addressed. ill this memo I have identified points of interest, and potential opportunities to. strengthen the TDMP agreement. Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) The TDMP and Traffic Study Report state that 2010 build and no-build conditions report that all signalized intersections operate at an acceptable LOS. It should be noted that many capacity improvements are assumed to be made as mitigation for traffic impacts from other developments in the XenialPark Place corridor. These improvements are assumed to be in place as part of the described "no- build" improvements for the Miner site. No discreet assessment of impacts for the Miner Site without the other developments has been performed. However the traffic study conclusions do state that the City may require the Minor Site developer to contribute fmancially to road improvements based upon contribution of traffic demands or other means. Parking supply exceeds City code requirements as well as ITE (illstitute of Transportation Engineers) guidelines. Target goals for transportation mode splits set in the TDMP are 70-80% Auto, 15-25% Transit and 5% Bike/Walk. TDMP Actions proposed by the developer (beginning on page 14 of the TDMP) are identified below. Opportunities to strengthen the agreement language are parenthesized in bold text. 1. Support and Promote Bicycling and Walking as Alternatives. (No suggestions for strengthening) 2. Support Transit as an Alternative - "The developer will . . . . develop a program that could (will) subsidize employee's bus passes for those that choose to use transit a minimum of three days per week. (The monthly bus pass subsidy shall be a minimum of _ %) Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.comI952.912.2600 I 800.734.6757 I 952.912.2601 fax . . . Miner Site Plan and Traffic Study August 24, 2006 Page 2 3. Support and Promote Car and Vanpooling - "Incentives such as preferential parking location for carpoolers and motorcycles may (will) be offered as well." (Specify number of spaces) 4. Provisions of Information on Transportation Alternatives. - (No suggestions for strengthening) 5. Vehicular Traffic Movement & Access Restriction - "The egress flow ofthe parking ramp will be monitored electronically by building management." (Results shall be reported to the City annually.) 6. Participation with Regional TDM Organizations - "The developer... will designate and fund an individual to act as the Commuter Benefits Coordinator (CBC). The CBC will. . . actively (and continuously) promote expansion of the TDMP program." 7. Monitoring of Action Implementation and Goal Achievement - "These recommendations may (will) require an alternative compliance program if significant progress toward achieving the TDMP goal is not demonstrated." Appendix A . Traffic Study Technical Memorandum Additions, correction and clarifications to the traffic study have been made. The study now identifies the contribution of traffic flow from other developments so that assignment of responsibility for improvements can be identified. As previously stated, the report acknowledges that the Miner Development may be required to contribute to street and capacity improvements based upon contribution of added traffic - or other means. Previous studies have identified the possible need for a WB right turn lane on Golden Hills Drive approaching Xenia A venue. This was not specified as a required mitigation as part of this study because the Colonnade Phase II expansion was assumed to be 200,000 square feet of office space and delay/LOS criteria did not identify the need. The need for the right turn lane should still be considered as part of mitigation for the Colonnade due to WB left turn queues that will block the WB through and right turn movements. Appendix B - Parking Study Comments and concerns identified in the draft report have been addressed. p:\fjlglgoldv\980100lminer sitelminer tdmp connnents.82406.doc ~ . . . < Memorandum Fire Department 763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax) Public ~U~Y To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: PUD 103- Miner Site Date: August 2, 2006 cc: Mark Kuhnly, Fire Chief The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the plans submitted for the Planned Unit Development at Miner Olympic Printing Site. This review has focused on the following, fire department access, demolition, utility plan and landscaping. Page C 1.0 Demolition Plan 1. The demolition of the building on the current site shall be in accordance with the MN State Fire Code. 2. The existing private fire hydrants and other private fire suppression equipment currently located on the site shall not be salvaged or re-used. 3. Remove the Fire Department rapid entry access lock boxes from each building prior to demolition of the buildings. Page C3.0 Utility Plan 1. Provide post indicator valves for the fire suppression water mains for each building and parking ramp. 2. The installation of fire hydrants located on the proposed site shall be in accordance with the MN State Fire Code and also in conjunction with the City of Golden Valley Engineering Department. 3. The location of the fire hydrants on the site shall not be obstructed by any matter or materials, including but not limited to, landscaping, electrical equipment, or other means that would hinder the fire departments operations. Page L001 Master Plan 1. The Fire Department access road for the site shall be in accordance with the MN State Fire Code. The Fire Department access road shall have a minimum un-obstructed width of 26' in the immediate vicinity of any buildings or portion of the buildings more than 30' in height. 2. . 3. 4. 5. 6. Fire Department access roads shall be provided for every facility's building or portion of the building. The access roads shall extend to within 150' of all portions of the facilities or any portion of the exterior walls 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 alternative means of fire protection or safeguards will be required. The Fire Department access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. The Fire Department access road shall have an un-obstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13'6". All Fire Department access roads shall have a 45' inside turning radius for all fire apparatus. The proposed high-rise building will be designed in accordance with the fire and building codes on high-rise occupancy requirements, including but not limited to, fire department communication systems, elevator master control boards and other items indicated in the MN State Fire Code requirements. Page L300 Landscaping 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 control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately deterred or hindered from gaining immediate access. Page A-1 01 Office Level 1 1. The fire department's rapid entry lock boxes will be required. The lock boxes will be installed on all fire department access exterior entry doors and for each tenant space identified on the plan. . 2. The fire suppression system and the stand-pipe system will be installed in accordance with the MN State Fire Code and other recognized fire code standards. Page 101-8 Residential Level 1 1. The proposed residential concept for this site shall be designed in accordance with the MN State Fire Code. 2. The enclosed 62-stall parking garage shall be designed in accordance with the MN State Fire Code. 3. The fire department rapid entry lock boxes will be required. The lock boxes will be installed on all fire department access exterior entry doors and other fire department access doors within the building. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065. . . . . Planning Commission Housing Policy Review 1) What exactly are the issues of concern? o Sub-dividing large lots o In-fill development o Large new/rebuilt houses 2) What is it about these issues that are perceived as prOblems by the community? (A) "Character of community" - subdivision creates too much density; new or remodeled house is too large to match other homes in neighborhood (B) Storm water runoff; potential for increased flooding of neighboring homes and yards 3) What are the relevant facts which we need to research? o Number of properties that are potential candidates for subdivision under current ordinance and zoning code. o Existing patterns of neighborhoods with homogenous housing styles/sizes o Subdivision ordinances and zoning code provisions in similar cities (first ring suburbs) o Current state-of-the-art in storm-water management techniques and technologies o Prior experience in using water management techniques - compliance and enforcement o Possible legal issues (taking?) 4) Possible directions to take: (A) "character of community" (i) Research and review data (above) including information sessions with Public Works and City Attorney (ii) Explore and prioritize options in tweaking zoning ordinance provisions that are relevant (coverage ratio, height, setbacks) (iii) Weigh trade-ofts between tightened restrictions and loss of continued development (publiC interest vs. private rights) . . . (6) Storm water runoff and flooding (i) review storm-water management options and their applicability here (ii) review past experience in compliance with and enforcement of water management techniques (ours and other communities) (iii) consider additional forms of enforcement/compliance, including Letters of Credit, performance bonds, personal guarantees, maintenance agreements - understand legal enforceability 5) Action steps (A) Meet with Public Works, Planning, and City Attorney to learn more about underlying facts (6) Review ordinances from other cities; possibly meet with their Commissioners (C) Conduct public hearing to obtain feedback and ideas (0) Write draft report to City Council (E) Obtain feedback; submit final report to City Council; presentation