12-27-99 PC Agenda
Ie
.
e
IV.
I.
1i
.1
~ I
I
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, December 27,1999
7:00 P.M.
Approval of Minutes - December 13, 1999
II.
Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning from Light Industrial to Commercial
Applicant:
Address:
Purpose:
III.
Allianz Life USA and Duke-Weeks, Applicants
Properties bounded by Golden Hills Drive to the north, Xenia Avenue to the
east, 1-394 and 5760 & 5800 Wayzata Blvd., and adjacent parking lot,. to
the south and the Soo Line Railroad to the west
Rezone those parcels of land with a designation of Light Industrial (former
MnDOT land which is now vacant, and the properties at 950 Xenia Avenue
and 5740 Wayzata Blvd.) to the Commercial zoning district.
Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning from Street Right-of-Way to Commercial
Applicant:
Address:
City of Golden Valley
Existing Wayzata Blvd that runs along the Soo Line Railroad to the east
and the west property line of the former MnDOT property and the existing
Breck Ice Arena parking lot. !
I
Rezone that portion of the existing Wayzata Blvd. Frontage ~oad from
Street Right-of-Way to Commercial \.
Informal Public Hearing - Allianz Life USA Addition, Planned Unit Development
(P.U.D.) No. 87
Purpose:
Applicant:
Address:
Request:
Allianz Life USA - Duke-Weeks
That area bounded by Golden Hills Drive to the north, Xenia Avenue to the
east, 1-394 to the south and the Soo Line Railroad to the west
To allow for the construction of a two-phase office development on the site.
The first phase consists of a 10-story, 400,000 sq.ft. building, with a 6-
level, 1400 stall-parking ramp, including surface parking. The second
phase is proposed to be a 5-6 story building, with a parking ramp and
surface parking to accommodate 800 additional cars.
- Short Recess -
.1,
IV. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
V.
Oth.er Business . . ( A (Hi...- ,,~\
APA ~~ _ I'LtW- JJ'-60 ~ v -0 10 nN \
Adjournment .trN wN'fvt..u.;..<A 0 cCff~
~.
.~
VI.
Planning Commission Guidelines for Public Input
The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. The Commission will
recommend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon the Commission's determination of whether the
proposed use is permitted under the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the proposed use will, or will not,
adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood.
The Commission holds informal public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to leam, first-hand, what such proposals
are, and to permit you to ask questions and offer comments. Your questions and comments become part of the record and will a
be used by the Council, along with the Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision. .,
With the completion of the informal public hearing(s) there will be a short recess before the Commission continues with the
remainder of the agenda.
To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Commission will utilize the following
procedure:
1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recommendation from staff. Commissi~n members may
ask questions of staff. !
2.
3.
The applicant will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the Commission. i
The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so indicate by raiJing their hands.
The Chair may set a time limit for individual questions/comments if a large number of persons have Indicated a desire
to speak. Spokespersons for groups will have a longer period of time for questions/comments.
Please give your full name and address clearly when recognized by the Chair. Remember, your questions!
comments are for the record.
,
'I
I
i
I
4.
5. Direct your questions/comments to the Chair. The Chair will determine who will answer your questions.
6. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had the opportunity to speak
'initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal.
7. At the close of the public hearing, the Commission will discuss the proposal and take appropriate action.
-
'-~'"'':'''''~-'''''''";:''"-.'''''''''''''';'-''''''~ ""'-:':-' -'<,..-..-.....--".-,'~~.
,....,. . '-.-"~..,.,..,.'. -'-"":'-.-." -r"-",~-:,-;~"-;;-"",.'-" --
i
I
.,-.,~...,~I
i
I
~
.
The Planning Commission
minutes for the meeting of
December 13, 1999 are not
available at this time.
.
.
~
:.I
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
December 22, 1999
Golden Valley Planning Commission
Mary Dold, Planning Assistant
Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning - Portion of Property from
Light Industrial to Commercial and Road Right-of-Way to
Commercial - Property bounded by Golden Hills Drive to the
North, Xenia Avenue to the East, 1-394 to the south and the Soo
Line Railroad to the west - Allianz Life USA/Duke-Weeks and
City of Golden Valley, Applicants
Allianz Life USA is proposing to construct its Corporate Headquarters on the subject
property, which is 12.78 acres in size. The property is located at the northwest comer
of Xenia Avenue and 1-394. The proposal is for a two-phase development. The first
phase is for the construction of a 10-story, 400,000 sq.ft. office building, including a
1,454 stall parking ramp and 150 surface parking spaces. Allianz believes the design of
the phase I building will accommodate its projected needs at this time. This first phase
building would house approximately 1200 employees and hope to occupy the building
by summer of 2001. The proposed second phase includes a 5-6 story, 200,000 sq.ft.
office building and parking ramp and surface parking to accommodate an additional
800 cars. This building would be linked to the phase I building by a skyway co~nection.
Its projected build-out is 2007/2008. ,
I
The applicants are requesting to rezone portions of the subject property from t~e Light
Industrial ZOning. district and street right-of-way to the Commercial zoning distn~t.
Attached for your review is a portion of the zoning map that details the areas t at would
be rezoned and also the existing zoning of the subject property. (Please note t . at the
zoning map has not been updated to include the extended Golden Hills Drive and
newly platted properties on the north and south sides of Golden Hills Drive.) The
subject property is bounded by Golden Hills Drive on the north, Xenia Avenue on the
east, 1-394 and 5760 & 5800 Wayzata Blvd. and adjacent parking lot, to the south and
the Soo Line Railroad to the west.
The existing light industrial zoning of the subject properties at 900 and 950 Xenia
Avenue (former MnDOT property and Palm Beach Products) dates back to March of
1952 when it was rezoned from Industrial to Light Industrial. Very little information
could be found on this early rezoning, so it is unclear what type of use was being
proposed. Contemporary Designs Inc. requested a rezoning of the property at 5740
Wayzata Blvd. in September of 1978 from Commercial to Light Industrial. The
,6
.
.
.
properties fronting Wayzata Blvd. have had a zoning of Commercial prior to 1965.
Contemporary Designs wanted to use the existing building for furniture storage and
display only and would not provide furnishings to the public. The Council granted the
rezoning to light industrial at its meeting of October 16, 1978.
The Allianz site includes the existing Wayzata Frontage Road that runs along the east
side of the Soo Line Railroad (see attached portion of zoning map). According to the
City Attorney, City staff should direct the Planning Commission and City Council to take
action on zoning this property to commercial because Allianz has included it as part of
its site. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of this zoning of street
right-of-way to commercial, two conditions must accompany it. The first condition is
that the zoning only occurs if the City Council approves the General Plan of
Development; and second, the vacation of this street is approved. Both these
conditions must take place in order for the zoning to occur.
Staff believes the commercial designation is the best fit for the land in that it gives the
applicant more flexibility in the proposed uses for the site. As can be seen by the
attached list of permitted uses (Section 11.30, Subd. 3), offices, including medical and
dental, are permitted.
The City's General Land Use Plan Map has designated the subject property as
commercial, which includes office.
The subject property is located in the .Central Area of the Golden Hills Redevelopment
District. The Central area is bounded by the Soo Line Railroad on the west, 1-394 on
the south, Turners Crossroad on the east and by Laurel Avenue on the north.
"Planned Characteristics" for this area is for a mix of medium to high-density office,
service, and light industrial uses. The plan calls for the. highest and greatest emphasis
on office uses immediately adjacent to 1-394. It also recommends structured parking
without compromising green space. A "Current Action Plan Componenf calls for
development of 220,000 sq.ft. or more of office building associated with a parking deck.
and related service uses at the southwest quadrant of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills
Drive (Central Area of Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan attached). Staff believes the
Allianz proposal meets the intention of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan.
Recommended Action
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval for the
rezoning of the properties that are now zoned "Light Industrial" to Commercial; and to
zone the Wayzata Frontage Road along the east side of the Soo Line Railroad to the
Commercial zoning district. This rezoning should be conditioned on the City Council
approving the General Plan of Development for P.U.D. No. 87 and the vacation of the
street right-of-way.
Attachments:
- Location Map
. - Portion of Zoning Map
- Section 11.30, Subd. 3
- Central Area. Component of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan
2
SUBJECT PROPERTY
T .3RD ADD.
a
It/((
17f..oS
-.
....
......
'.
It
2
t
.
.
II"OD
GOL.DEN
25'~.7Z
8
~s
o
5C.0
c..
'oJ>.>
.. I
~::
2 ~~ I
lb .
ll:- I
I
I
f.:) I
-1U.D I
,
,
I
. ,
5901 I
,
171J.~7 so ,
(
.
..- J~.J'$(J
~ \ \
~aJ '"
~ I a
.
I -:::0
I
t e
!h 8 l>
CD 0
...
<
~~
.(C(
..
6 ~
...
.;
I
I
1-
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
t?>
,
~\9
J-.
~~
I \S'
. I
:=
~
...
I I t 1 tf
I C,1 f~
I ,\ 6.;:~~~t
~~---~--+-.-
~~ ~ I7D-
J ~~ ......\
,I 'Y
'228 ,
HZ 45740 57Z0~ ~ 56/0 34Z.5 OOC.N 5/5856 309.6
:i i::-"-:- ~ AVE-:~ - -/00,.- - - -~ - -.- i8'.08'Co ..TD~";''';';2.- T -:.
'~I...s ..." ,.::,!, ~. 1\ ~~
. .:::.! ~ ~
a ~. i ~
~ I !~
~ ~ --
a IV
. ,
co I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fEsr!
o
F'
A
);)
\ ~.
/
,
.
~
10
/Va
.
....
...
'"
.
66/
CII'
01
I
HILLS
~
~
..
't
~
~
DRIVE
o
Z,S.D,j
18'1.'7\
~
.,)\
~. t
<)
23&./k
277. f"f .
I\l
it
. ..... ~... 00'd- I
--;;;'.':"'"""~' ".
. . ..0 Q;j
o '."""- "1:1',
....h........~ ....
. -.. ....
.'. 0-.
....: . 'AtX..~
}" .... \-:
(3400)
Me earth ys
i
r 4. S.
~ D".
(~t... 500
4Z5.6! -
'0
:....~.__~~2 NO~_\_~_
, 'd, Soz,'
t( iRcsm.G5
Lt: 54U!
A.. c-"L.&
,
,
-_.: ....
...O':
-~.............
549. 7
..
....~.
.....
rpROPOSElJREZONINGI
-
1-394
1-394
1-394
-
::.-----
-
~
.
I EXISTING ZONING
. -. -.
1-394
~
1-394
1-394 .~ -=- ~
\ \ \_ ~~,- ~r"\'-
" q-- ~~~
(
~~.-~
.
~ 11.30
SECTION 11.30. COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Commercial Zoning District is
to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and
serve customers from the community and are located in areas which are well served by
collector and arter'ial street facilities.
Subdivision 2. District Established. Properties shall be established within
the Commercial Zoning District in the manner provided for in Section 11.90, Subdivision 3
of this Chapter, and when thus established shall be incorporated in this Section 11.30, .
Subdivision 2 by an ordinance which makes cross-reference to this Section 11.30 and
which shall become a part hereof and of Section 11.10, Subdivision 2 thereof, as fully as if
set forth herein. In addition the Commercial Zoning Districts thus established, and/or any
subsequent changes to the same which shall be made and established in a similar
manner, shall be reflected in the official zoning map of the City as provided in Section
11.11 of this Chapter.
Subdivision 3. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the
Commercial Zoning District:
. A. Bakeries.
B. Barber shop and/or beauty parlor.
C. Catering establishments.
D. Comfort stations.
E. Delicatessen.
clothing.
F. Dressmaking and tailoring establishments, including retail sales of
G. Clothing, shoes and/or accessories sales (retail).
H. Electric repair shops.
I. Electronic equipment ~ales.
J. Financial institutions.
K Floral shops (not to include nurseries).
.
L. Furniture sales and repair.
GOLDEN VALLEY CC
277
(6-15-98)
.. 9 11.30
M. Hardware, paint, and decorating stores.
N. Hotels and motels.
O. Lodge halls.
P. Messenger and telegraph services.
Q. Offices, including medical and dental.
R. Pharmacies.
S. Photograph supplies and/or galleries.
T. Plumbing shops.
U. Post office.
V. Printing shops.
W. Public garage.
. X. Recreation buildings and structures (public and private),
including gymnasium, racquetball, etc.
Y.
Z.
AA.
profit.
SS.
CC.
DO.
Class I restaurants.
Shoe repair shops.
Skating rinks (ice or roller) privately owned and operated for
I
I
I
Shopping centers (general retail - convenience s~OPPing).
Theaters.
Trade or industrial training schools, both public and private.
EE.. Generel retail services and/or sales not otherwise listed as a
Conditional Use in Subdivision 4, below.
.
GOLDEN VALLEYCC
Source: Ordinance No. 569
Effective Date: 7-16-82
278
(6-15-98)
e
e
e.
~ 11.30
FF. Massage parlors, saunas, rap parlors, conversation parlors,
escort services, model services, dancing services, hostess services, adult encounter
group services, adult sensitivity group services and other similar adult oriented services
that require City licensing pursuant to other provisions ofthe City Code.
Source: Ordinance No. 603
Effective Date: 8-26-83
GG. Tanning parlors.
Source: Ordinance No. 609
Effective 'Date: 11-11-83
HH. Essential Services - Class I
Source: Ordinance No. 80, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 11-28-91
II. Seasonal Farm Produce Sales
Source: Ordinance No. 127, 2nd Series
Effective Date: 4-27-95
Subdivision 4. Conditional Uses.
A. Animal hospitals, veterinary clinics, and/or pet grooming facilities.
installation.
B. Auto repair shops, including tire and auto accessory repair and
C. Car wash.
D. Convenience food stores.
shops, etc.
E. Drive-in retail establishments, such as banks, cleaning, photo
F. Gasoline service stations.
G. Mortuaries.
H. Off-street parking for adjacent cOrTJmercial or industrial uses.
I. Outdoor sales, including car lots, auto and equipment rentals.
J. Outside storage and/or sales of horticultural nursery sites,
temporary farmers market, and itinerant sales.
GOLDEN VALLEY CC
279
(6-15-98)
I
.
Central Area
This sub-area was the earliest focus of activity in Golden Hills, with proposals
under consideration for today's Colonnade office tower as soon as the
redevelopment plan was in place. Redevelopment efforts lost steam as the real
estate market took a downturn in the late 1980's, but market recovery and the
completion of 1-394 have combined to make the area very attractive to developers
once again. (Exhibit D)
Boundaries and Size
Bounded on the west by the 500 Line railroad, on the south by the adjusted city
Iimitsll-394 fence line, on the east by Turners Crossroad, and on the north by
Laurel Avenue.
Approximately 42.7 acres in size.
.
Original Land Use Characteristics (19841
. Mix of industrial, commercial, and hospitality/service uses, not always correctly
zoned.
. Numerous other zoning nonconformities, including inadequate on-site parking,
inadequate or nonexistent landscaped areas, structures too big for sites, and
unscreened outdoor storage of equipment or materials.
. Increasing building and fire code violations, structural decline, and building
vacancy.
. Traffic congestion on Turners Crossroad approaching Highway 12.
. Very limited east-west circulation options. I
I
I
. No part of area ever platted, extreme variation in parcel sizes, several p~rcels
of inadequate size or poor configuration for optimized site use. \
Known/Anticipated 1-394 Impacts (1984)
. 1-394 interchange at Xenia Avenue with associated detachment of local
frontage road segment, requiring significant right-of-way acquisition.
. Change in north/south traffic circulation patterns, and associated change in
orientation of some building "fronts" due to highway approach route shifting
from Turners Crossroad to Xenia Avenue.
. Reduced traffic congestion, but potential negative impacts on businesses
. abutting highway, due to detached location of new frontage road.
12
.
.
.
Planned Characteristics
Mix of medium to high density office, service, and light industrial uses. Highest
densities and greatest emphasis on office uses immediately adjacent to 1-394.
Structured parking encouraged in order to maximize site density without
compromising green space. Provision of improved access and circulation system.
Some existing buildings may be suitable for retention with aesthetic and code
compliance improvements.
Activities ComDleted or Underway to Date
. Construction of missing laurel Avenue segment.
. MnDOT construction of 1-394 access elements.
. HRA acquisition of excess 1-394 right-of-way remnants.
. Minor adjustment of Golden Valley/St. louis Park city limits.
. Colonnade office development ~ 409,000 square feet of office and related
service uses in 15-story-high building with associated parking ramp.
Current Action Plan ComDonents
. Minor acquisition of additiona~Xenia Avenue right-of-way between detached
frontage road (Golden Hills Drive) and laurel Avenue, plus completion of road
and signalization work to accommodate new development.
. Acquisition of properties in block bounded by Xenia Avenue, 1-394, the
railroad tracks, and Golden Hills Drive.
. Potential acquisition of properties lying north of Golden Hills Drive on both
sides of Xenia Avenue.
. Completion of development on Colonnade block.
. Development of 220,000 or more square foot office building with associated
parking deck and related service uses at southwest quadrant of Xenia/Golden
Hills Drive.
. Potential cooperation with owner of Olympic Printing on expansion/upgrading
or demolition/redevelopment of printing facility at northwest quadrant of
Xenia/Golden Hills Drive, or redevelopment of the site by others.
. Development of 130,000 to 230,000 square foot office building, not to exceed
six stories in height, on the block northeast of the Xenia/Golden Hills Drive
intersection.
14
1'1
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
December 22, 1999
Golden Valley Planning Commission
Mark W. Grimes
Director of Planning and Development
Informal Public Hearing - Allianz Life USA Addition, Preliminary Design
Plan Office Development for Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) No. 87-
Allianz Life/Duke-Weeks, Applicants
RE:
Backaround
In August, 1999, Allianz Life USA entered into an agreement with the Golden Valley
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) in order to purchase the 12.7 acres at the
northwest comer of Xenia Avenue and 1-394. The site is currently occupied by four existing
businesses, street right-of-way proposed to be vacated, and some vacant property owned
by the HRA. The four businesses include Baby and Teen, Tires Plus, Breck Ice Arena and
Palm Beach Products. The agreement with the HRA requires that Allianz construct its
corporate headquarters on the site. This would consist of two phases. The first phase
building would include a ten-story office building containing 400,OOO-sq. ft. of office space.
Also included is a six level parking ramp with 1,454 spaces. The second phase includes a
200,000-sq. ft. office building, skywaylink to the Phase One building and a 736 parking
space addition to the Phase One parking ramp. Phase One is proposed to be completed in
the summer of 2001, and Phase Two is anticipated to be completed in 2008. I
The HRA entered into a development agreement with Duke-Weeks Realty regarding
development of this site prior to signing the agreement with Allianz. This agreem~nt with
Duke-Weeks remains in place if Allianz does not receive the necessary apprOVal~frOm the
City Council for development of their corporate headquarters. The agreement wit Duke-
Weeks requires that the HRA will acquire the site and sell it to Duke-Weeks for th
construction of a minimum 230,000-sq. ft. office building. The building could be as large as
400,OOO-sq. ft. if approved by the City Council. The HRA has already begun the process to
acquire the 12.7 -acre site based on the signed development agreement with Duke-Weeks. If
Allianz does not get the necessary approvals, Duke-Weeks is required to begin construction
in the spring of 2001. Allianz would like to begin construction of their proposed building by
spring of 2000 in order that they can occupy the first phase by summer, 2001.
.
.
.
.
The Planning Commission is aware of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
process that Allianz has already completed. This EAW was necessary in order for the
project to proceed. Due to the size of this proposed two-phase development, State rules
require that an EAW had to be. completed for the site. On December 7, 1999, the City
Council passed a "Negative Declaration" which states that no further environmental study is
needed for this project to go forward to the City planning process. In this approval, the City
Council did not say there were no environmental concerns. The City Council stated that
they believe that the environmental issues that have been raised through the EAW process
can be mitigated as part of the PUD process. The Planning Commission each received a
copy of the EAW. Attached is a copy of the comments made by the City to each of the
comments received regarding the EAW.
Please note in these comments that there was a standard answer given to many of the
comments. This standard answer states that the comment was not relevant to the EAWand
that the concerns addressed by the comment would be addressed at another level such as
the PUD process. I suggest that the Commission review these comments to get an idea
aboutthe concerns addressed by some members of the public.
Allianz has requested that this development be considered as part of a Planned Unit
Development (PUD). This development is eligible to be considered as a PUD for several
reasons. First, this development is in the Golden Hills Redevelopment District. The Zoning
Code states that any development in a redevelopment district may be considered as a PUD.
Second, this is a major development with two office buildings and a parking ramp to be built
in two phases. Third, there are proposed to be two or more uses in this PUD for a period of
time. The HRA and Allianz have agreed to allow Breck Ice Arena to stay on the site until.
they have constructed a new arena. It is anticipated that Breck will be able to open arena in
late 2000 or early 2001. They are looking at two sites in Golden Valley with the preferred
relocationsi~e being next to the Metropolitan. There may also be a period of time during the
construction of the Allianz building that the Palm Beach building to the north would remain.
It is anticipated that Palm Beach would be moving shortly after construction of the Allianz
building would begin. The HRA and Allianz are trying to be as accommodating as possible
to meet the needs of the existing businesses for relocation.
In order for the PUDto go forward, the Planning Commission must also consider the
rezoning of a portion of the site from Light Industrial to Commercial, and zoning the street
right-of-way that will be vacated as part of the redevelopment to Commercial. By rezoning
this entire site Commercial, the zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. A memo from Planning Assistant Mary Dold outlines the rezoning request and
recommends that the rezoning be approved. (As indicated in her memo, the proposed use
of the site for the office headquarters is consistent with the comprehensive plan map and
the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan.)
Existing Site DescriDtion
The Allianz site is about 12.7 acres. All buildings on the site would be demolished in order
to make way for the construction of the office building. As stated above, the ice arena would
remain on the site for a period. of time while a new arena is being constructed. It is
anticipated that the ice arena would be demolished in late 2000 or early 2001. Palm Beach
may remain on the site while some Allianz construction occurs. Palm Beach should be off
the site by summer or fall of 2000.
2
.
.
.
As indicated on the maps, access to the site is by both Golden Hills Drive and Xenia
Avenue. The site is adjacent to 1-394; however, there is no direct access. Access to 1-394 is
gained from the Xenia Avenue ramp for both eastbound and westbound trips. Access is
also gained to TH 100 from the eastbound ramp to 1-394. .The frontage roads that now exist
on the west and south sides of the site will be vacated and become a part of the overall 12.7
acre site.
The overall site is relatively flat. There are some trees behind the Palm Beach building.
These trees will be addressed as part of the Tree Preservation Plan that must be submitted
and approved by the City. The site does have some areas of poor soil as is commonplace
throughout the Golden Hills area. Environmental studies have been done on the site that
has not turned up any significant areas of concern.
The property to the west, north and east is all part of the Golden Hills Redevelopment
District established by the City of Golden Valley in 1984. The area to the west consists of
the Holiday Inn Express, regional holding pond, and three single story office warehouse
buildings developed by Duke-Weeks. These three building have an estimated 270,000
sq.ft. of floor space, primarily office. The area to the north of this building is the Olympic
Printing property. It remains an active printing operation. It is about seven acres in area.
The owner has shown interest in selling the property for redevelopment. The property to the
northeast Is the new, six-story, 180,000 sq.ft United Properties office building. It is in the
final stages of construction and will be open for occupancy in the next several months. The
property to the east is the Colonnade office building that was completed in 1986. This
building is 15 stories in height with a four level parking ramp. The building is about 400,000
sq.ft. There is a vacant parcel next to the Colonnade that was planned for a 240-room hotel.
It is now unlikely that such a hotel would be built. The City and HRA continue to wait for
plans for this site from the owner (the same company that owns the Colonnade). The
property to the south of this site is in St. louis Park and is used for retail and office uses.
The closest residential buildings to this site are over 700 feet away. They include single
family homes on Turner's Crossroad and the apartments and condominiums on laurel
Avenue.
ProDosed DeveloDment
The proposal made by Allianz would allow for the construction of 600,000 sq.ft. of office
space and a 2200 space parking ramp. Allianz had provided a good descriptionOt the
proposed development in the packet they submitted with their PUD application. this also
includes site building elevations, site plans, preliminary landscape plans, prelimin~ry grading
and drainage plans and preliminary plat indicating that the site will be one lot. \
Plannina Issues
There are a number of issues that staff would like to highlight in the discussion of this
proposed PUD. They are as follows:
3
-.
.
.
.
Traffic Generation. As part of the EAW, one of the primary concerns that was raised by
persons that made comments related to traffic generation from the site, This information is
available to you as part of the EAW and the response to the comments. The staff and City
Council believe that the data and analysis provided by professional traffic engineering
consulting firms for the City are accurate. The staff is recommending that the Planning
Commission accept this traffic information when considering their decision regarding the
PUD.
The EAW does indicate that there would be a significant number of trips created by this
proposed office development that would have some impact on the local street system. (It is
estimated that the 600,000-sq.ft. office building would generate 5,250 daily vehicle trips with
778 trip ends in the AM peak hour [7:30 AM to 8:30 AM] and 752 trip ends during the PM
peak hour [4:30 PM to 5:30 PM].) However, the analysis indicates that with certain
improvements, the additional trips generated by the Allianz development can be handled by
the existing street system. These improvements are listed on page 18 of the "Golden Hills
Office Development Technical Traffic Report" prepared by Benshoof and Associates, Inc. for
the City of Golden Valley. City staff will further evaluate- these suggested improvements and
recommend construction as needed. The proposed site plan submitted as part of this PUD
package would have to be altered slightly to include extra right-of-way for turn lanes. (See
attached report from City Engineer dated Dec. 22, 1999.)
One of the concerns addressed in the EAW relates to traffic on the ramps to 1-394. The
staff was disappointed that MnDOT did not comment during the EAW process. However,
they did send a comment two weeks after the comment period closed. MnDOT noted that
the proposed development may cause congestion in at the 1-3941Xenia Avenue area and
suggested that additional traffic analysis be done. The City and St. Louis Park will be doing
additional traffic analysis in this area as part of the Joint Traffic Management Task Force. It
is anticipated that this work will be done in January and February 2000. The City staff will -
also be scheduling a meeting with MnDOT officials to discuss the Xenia Avenuell-394 issue.
As noted in the EAW, traffic congestion problems will occur.on the collector/distributor lanes
for eastbound 1-394 with or without the Allianz development.
One of the key elements to mitigating traffic congestion in the area is the development of a
Traffic Management Plan. The staff and Allianz believe that this type of Plan would work to
help alleviate congestion at the intersections of 1-394 and other areas. Allianz has
committed to developing such a plan to help reduce peak hour traffic. They_ have submitted
information that is attached that outlines the type of programs that would reduce traffic.
These ideas are a great start. In fact, Allianz has already implemented some of these ideas
at their existing offices in Minneapolis and St. Louis Park. However, the traffic management
plan has to be specific. It will have to indicate exactly how many trips that they intend to
reduce during the AM and PM peak hour by the use of flextime, car-pooling and the like.
These reductions will also have to be verifiable. The Traffic Management Plan will have to
be submitted for review by the Joint Task Force of the Cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis
Park. (Attached is the 1-394 Zoning Overlay Ordinance and the Joint. Powers Agreement
creating the Task Force.) It is anticipated that this Traffic Management Plan will go before
the Task Force in January. The Plan is now in the process of being drafted. The final
Traffic Management Plan will become a part of the PUD permit.
The staff believes that a Traffic Management Plan with a single user building will have a
greater chance of succeeding than if the building were multi-tenant. The one owner has
much greater control over the employees and, therefore, can better control access to and
from the site.
4
.
.
.
Several of the concerns addressed by those who commented on the EAW were regarding
the affect of increased traffic on the neighborhoods. Rather than being a technical issue,
the issue related more to how increased trips that may "filter through" the neighborhood
would effect the quality of life in Golden Valley. (The traffic report indicates that there would
be minor increases in traffic volumes in the residential neighborhoods.) This is a matter that
the Planning Commission will probably be asked to consider.
Parkina. The proposed Allianz development meets the City's office parking requirement of
one space for each 250-sq. ft. of office area. The Phase One development will include 1600
parking stalls, 1454 in the six level ramp and 150 surface parking spaces. The amount of
, parking for Phase Two will increase to 2190 ramp spaces (by expanding the ramp to the
west) and 241 surface spaces for a total of 2431 spaces.
Allianz is requesting that during Phase One, the 150 surface spaces to the west of the
Phase One ramp be designated as proof of parking. In other words, this parking would be
constructed only if needed and left as green area. Staff will recommend allowing the proof
of parking because there are only 1200 employees proposed for the Phase One buildi,ng.
The 1454 spaces in the ramp and few spaces in front of the building will adequately meet
their parking demand.
Circulation. City Engineer Jeff Oliver has addressed the circulation issue in his memo
dated Dec. 22, 1999. The Planning staff concurs with his findings to eliminate the east
driveway off Golden Hills Drive as an entrance to this site. The staff is suggesting that the
entrance be relocated directly into the ramp at least 300 feet from the Xenia Avenue/Golden
Hills Drive intersection. Allianz has committed to making this change along with others to
improve site circulation and street access.
Allianz is proposing a service entrance on the south side of the building that will be
accessed from the west driveway. "This service entrance would allow for delivery of food for
the cafeteria and necessary supplies.
When the second phase building is constructed a second level skYway will link the two
buildings together. Access to the parking ramp would be direct from both the Phase One
and Phase Two office buildings.
Setback. Although this is a PUD, the staff would like to maintain the setbacks that are
stipulated in the Zoning District in which the proposal 'is made. In this case, the property is
zoned Commercial (or will be.) The proposed development will meet the requireq 35-foot
front yard setback on the Golden Hills Drive and the Xenia Avenue side. Along t~e west
side, the proposed driveway and parking area will meet the sideyard setback requirement of
10 feet. The building will exceed the 35-foot setback requirement from 1-394. Hokever, the
parking area along 1-394 is proposed to be only 20 feet rather than the required 35 feet.
The City has granted variances for parking setbacks from 1-394 in the Golden Hills
Redevelopment area.
Heiaht. The proposed Phase One office building is proposed to be 10 stories in height. A
six story-parking ramp would be constructed adjacent to the office building. The parking
ramp would be about 60 feet in height. The Phase Two office building is proposed to be 5-6
stories in height. The Redevelopment Plan for the Golden Hills Area indicates that this area
is planned for medium to high-density office uses immediately adjacent to 1-394. Plans for
this site would include structured parking to maximize site density without compromising
green space. The proposed Allianz development is consistent with the vision for this area in
terms of height and use.
5
"
.
.
.
The height that is permitted in the Commercial zoning district isthree stories. Height may
exceed three stories as part of a PUD permit as long as it is determined that the additional
height is consistent with good planning principals. In this case, the overall height of 10
stories is consistent with the vision for the area stipulated in the Golden Hills
Redevelopment Plan.
Landscapina. As part of the PUD application, Allianz has submitted a preliminary
landscape plan that indicates their landscape vision for the site. This extensive landscape
plan illustrates significant landscaping along all four sides of the ramp and edges of the site.
They are also planning interior gardens south of the parking ramp and east of the Phase
One office building. The landscape plan will be reviewed in detail as part of the Building
Board of Review approval. Environmental Technician AI Lunstrom will also give the final
plan a review.
Site Densitv. The PUD submittal states that over 5 acres of the 12.7-acre site w()uld be
open space. This open space includes setback areas and gardens. It also includes surface
parking areas. Overall, this development does have greater open area due to the
construction of a large parking ramp. As development progresses, Allianz would like the
City to consider proof of parking arrangements for the surface parking area west of the
Phase Two building. This would allow for more green space if the parking were not
immediately needed.
Appearance of the Buildina. The PUD plans include building elevations to indicate the
scale. of the building and the type of materials that would be used. It appears that the
proposed buildings are attractive and enhanced by the extensive landscaping on the site.
The Building Board of Review will also review the building elevation plans and make
suggestions.
Temporary Uses on the Site. As stated above, Breck Ice Arena would remain on this site
through. part of the construction of Phase One. Access to Breck would be from the west
driveway that would be constructed as part of Phase One to gain access to the service court
on the 1-394 side of the building. When Breck moves from the site, the arena would be
demolished. This area would be converted to green or open space until the Phase Two
building is constructed.
The Palm Beach building may remain on the site during the initial stages of the Allianz
development. The Phase One office building has been located so that construction on that
building can begin while allowing Palm Beach to occupy their building. It is anticipated that
Palm Beach would be moving in the summer of 2000. The parking ramp cannot be started
until the Palm Beach building is removed.
The PUD permitwill indicate that both the Breck ice arena and Palm Beach building are
temporary uses on the site that would have to be removed by specific dates.
Liahtina. Allianz will have to submit a lighting plan for this site. This Plan would be
approved as part of the General Plan of Development. The staff is not as concerned about
lighting at this site because it is not adjacent to any residential areas.
Enaineerina Issues. City Engineer Jeff Oliver has an attached memo dated Dec. 22, 1999
which address issues such as drainage, access, utilities, grading and erosion control,and
water quality. He also addresses some traffic issues. These issues are important to the
development of the site so staff strongly encourages review of his memo.
6
.
.
.
Buildina and Public Safety Issues. The Inspections Department has met with the
architects and building of the Allianz building to discuss public safety and building inspection
issues. Preliminary review indicates that the proposed plan provides for adequate public
safety access. Further review will be required. Deputy Fire Marshall Ed Anderson has.
submitted a memo to the Planning staff regarding his preliminary site plan review (attached).
Indirect Source Permit. The state requires that an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) be issued
prior to the granting of a building permit for this building. The Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency issues this ISP. The purpose of the ISP is to determine that the development meets
state air quality standards related to carbon monoxide emissions and that state noise
standards are met. Allianz is now in the process of applying for the ISP. Based on the
information submitted as part of the EAW, the ISP should be granted by the State because
the proposed development (after both phases are built) meet or exceed state standards for
noise and carbon monoxide emissions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for Allianz Life USA
Addition, P.U.D. No. 87. This approval would allow for Allianz to go forward in developing
the General Plan of Development in a manner that is consistent with the information
submitted as part of the Preliminary Design Plan. The proposed use of the 12.7 -acre site is
consistent with the Zoning Code and the vision for the area that is outlined in the Golden
Hills Redevelopment Plan.
The proposed use of the site does require the City to make some changes to its existing
street system and accept more traffic. However, the traffic analysis work that was done as
part of the EAW indicates that with certain traffic related improvements, the increased traffic
can be accommodated without dramatically increasing traffic and having a negative impact
on the local street system. These mitigation measures mean that AlIianz must develop a
Traffic Management Plan that would reduce AM and PM peak hour traffic.
The site plan must also be altered to move the entrance to the site from Golden Hills Drive
farther to the west in order to provide for safe and orderly access to the site. Other issues
related to site design and access are found in Mr. Oliver's memo and will be made a part of
the staff recommendation. I
The staff is recommending the following conditions on the Preliminary Design Pla~ approval
for the Allianz office development: I
1. The plans submitted with the "Preliminary PUD Submittal for the Allianz LiJp/Life
USA Corporate Campus Master Plan" dated Dec. S, 1999 shall become a part of this
approval. These plans include building elevations, area plan, site plans (Phase One
and Two), topographic survey, grading, drainage and erosion control plan, utility plan
and preliminary plat. Louks and Associates, Inc. and Architectural Alliance prepared
these plans and maps. These plans indicate the construction of SOO,OOO-sq. ft. of
office space built in two phases. A six story-parking ramp with 2190 spaces is
included in this approval.
7
.
2. The memo dated Dec. 22, 1999.and prepared by City Engineer Jeff Oliver shall
become a part of this approval. One of the recommendations is to move the eastern
driveway from Golden Hills Drive into the site. The driveway must be moved to the
west in order to reduce conflicts at the Xenia/Golden Hills Drive intersection. Other
site improvements related to access and circulation are also addressed in this
memo.
3. A traffic management plan must be developed and submitted to the Joint Task Force
for review in January 2000. The plan shall outline specific techniques that will be
taken by Allianz to reduce peak hour traffic. These must be measurable. The final
traffic management plan will become a part of the PUD permit.
4. The PUD will allow for Breck Ice Arena to remain a temporary use on the site. After
Breck abandons the site, Allianz will immediately tear down the ice arena and return
it to open space and green area until it is used for the Phase Two building. The ice
arena may stay on the site until no later than Aug. 2001.
5. The PUD will allow for the Palm Beach building to stay on the site as a temporary
use. When Palm Beach abandons the site, Allianz will immediately tear down the
building and use it for the construction for the Phase One buildings. The Palm
Beach building may stay on the site no later than Dec. 1, 2000.
6. The memo from Deputy Fire Marshall Ed Anderson and dated Dec. 15, 1999 to Mark
W. Grimes, Planning Director, shall become a part of this approval.
7. The landscape plan submitted with the preliminary design plan shall become a part
of the approval. The plan was prepared by the Architectural Alliance and dated
12/6/99. The.plan is subject to revision by the Building Board of Review.
8. All signs for the development shall meet the sign requirements for office buildings in
the Commercial zoning district.
9. Allianz will work with Metro Transit on the location of bus stops and shelt19rs on or
adjacent to their property.
10. The City will not require that the surface parking areas west of the ramp (Phase
One) and along the railroad tracks (in Phase Two) be constructed unless and need
is shown. If additional parking is needed, Allianz will be required to construct the
surface parking spaces shown on the plans.
.
Attachments:
Location Map
EAW comments
Staff Memo to Mark Grimes from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated
December 22, 1999
1-394 Zoning Overlay Ordinance and Joint Powers Agreement
Staff Memo to Mark Grimes from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson
dated December
Allianz Booklet and Site Plans
.
8
It/(l.. "'" -".
2 ..~ I <4- ... ~tD
~ .. lG '"
ll) . I , ~ ..
... ~ \ . a
, I .... :::0
.~ .
ne.,GS C".. I ,
I ,.,... , ... ... e
~I '; '"' 8
I 6 ... ... ~
I. ~ , !>' t ~~ .... 0
OjU.D '"'I " "J9. 7d'
J J .
-. J I ~ I t t (/
I I 'f"
I I ~
I :: I G.~ tf
I I I & . ..
I ..; I ~~
'"
I .. ~();---t2 - - .-
.... I , .'
~...' I . ~~ ~ 17D-
'" <? ,
5901 \12 .....\
I I . ~
174.47 So ,
I
.' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~Esr:
~
)
~ /
li.
. .
~%
....
~ .,'
fl"
i SUBJECT PROPERTY
'r 3RD ADD.
2
"'"
"""
~j" (3400)
Me earth ys
c; fA'S.
0 tp JO
t
. ( ~L..' 500 .
. .
, .-....
5';97 ~...."'.. iZs 6! .' ,
;::;
..
I
I
I
'7311 N. I7'J' '10" W- I
. '...1
~
,
2
.,
.
00
GOkDEN
2~./.7Z
'8
~s
'lJ
J38./0
.....
:.:'" "
: 1,
"'l,...
;'1' '..
i'" "
,
~ 1... S.
~
a
,
~
o
\ :
I t'l
l~
't..
I ,
I ~~
..
~
z
..
in
...
...
'"
...
'"
.
:"';l
"-
!I'
o
A
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CIl1
01
I
! :~
. I~
~ :~
1\10
o
....
...
'""
.
86/
DRIVE
,(/,0
't
!
...
III
'"
~
..
HILLS
2,S.t1.J
16'1,17\
~
--0
Dc::.
"a
14
~
~
~
'"
.>.
~I
Z3",/~
Z77. ir
N
.-":
';P;
~ ~
"':1.<12 '0.
......:...~o~ I
; .......: '~.'
: :.-~.'''' 00" 1
..............~ ....~
. '. "
. 0--
.;. .:' 'A Ii..~
y ...... I~
'0
Co .f5[ 1_ N6-;-l-~.
,- 'f ~- -,,-
t( iFf.sm.6S
lL" S4W J
R: 584'/1.51 5J1.!~ I' S"'l.'!;.
I
.
,
....
r
r
e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.e
I
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
EA W COMMENTS
Note to revi~wers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following
notice of the EA W in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of
infonnation, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS.
1. Project title Golden Hills Business Park
2. Proposer Allianz LifelLife USA
Contact person: Margery Hughes
Title: Chief Operating Officer
Address: 300 South Hie:hwav 169
City. State. ZIP: Minneapolis. MN 55426
Phone: (612) 591-5217
Fax: (612) 525-6066
E-mail: hue:hesmtlUlifeus.com
3. RGU City of Golden Valley
Contact person: Mark Grimes
Title: Director of Planninl! and Development
Address: 7800 Golden Valley Road
City. state. ZIP: Golden Valley. MN 55427
Phone: (612) 593-8097
Fax: (612) 593-8109
E-mail: mgrimesauci.golden-valley.mn.us
4. Rellson for EA W preparation (check one)
EIS scoping X Mandatory EA W
Proposer volunteered
Citizen petition
RGU discretion
IfEA W or EIS is mandatory, give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name.
4410.4300. Subpart 14 -- Industrial. Commercial and Institutional Facilities
5. Project location County: Hennepin
Cityffownship: City of Golden Valley
SY2
NW y.. Section 4
Township 117 North
Range 21 West
COMMENTS'
The following comments have been received during the 30 day EA W comment period which ended on
December 1, 1999:
Agency or EntitvlPerson
1. Fish and Wildlife Service
2. Marcia Anderson et a1.
3. Ellis Gottlieb
4. Mary Hepokoski
. 5. Bill Dabnan
6. Tracy Murphy
7. Linda Loomis
8. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
9. Caron Rubin
10. Minnesota Historical Society
11. Amy Rosen
12. Gerald Mundt
13. Joanne Savitt
14. Dale and Carol Gerdin
15. Dr. and Mrs. HuberH. Serr
16. Diane Mundt
Date
October 22, 1999'
October 24, 1999
November 09, 1999
November 16, 1999
November 16,1999
November 16, 1999
November 16, 1999
November 16, 1999
November 18, 1999
November 19, 1999
November 24, 1999
November 28, 1999
November 28, 1999
November 28, 1999
November 29,1999
November 29, 1999
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EAW Comments
Page 1
December 3, J 999
~
17. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
18. David Hanson
19. Catherine McIntire
20. Marcia Anderson
21. City of St. Louis Park
22. Resident Petition
23. Laurence and Patricia Jocelyn
24. Helen Ekman
November 29, 1999
November 30, 1999
November 30,1999
December 1, 1999
December 1, 1999
December 1,1999
December 1, 1999
December 1,1999
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1. Comments of United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Comment 1-1: This project has been reviewed under the authority of and in accordance with
provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and
the Fish, Wildlife Service's Mitigation Policy, and Endangered Species Act. There are "no
Objections" to this project as reviewed under these Acts, Policy or Orders.
Response 1-1: No issue to address.
2. Comments of Citizen Petition
Comment 2-1: We believe the Allianz development is too large for the community and would
create too much traffic. for surrounding residential neighborhoods. We request that the City
Council and lIRA slow down the development process for Golden Hills to allow full citizen
discussion city-wide, outside public hearings.
Response 2-2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, .or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission
during the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
.
3. Comments of Ellis Gottlieb
Comment 3-1: An EIS is required because the project is a phased or connected action.
I
I
I
Response 3-1: The proposed project is neither a connected action nor a phased action as they are
dermed in the Minnesota Rules. A "connected action" is dermed in Minnesota Rules, Section
4410.0200, subpart 9b as two projects determined to be related by any of the following ways: (a)
one project directly induces the other; (b) one project is a prerequisite for the other; or (c) neither
project is justified by itself. The Duke-Weeks Realty proposal under consideration has not been
induced by another project, is not a prerequisite for another project and does not rely on another
project for justification. Accordingly it is not a connected action. i
A "phased action" is dermed in subpart 60 to mean two or more projects to be undertaken by the
same proposer that is determined to (a) have environmental effects on the same geographic area;
and (b) are substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited period of time. The
Duke-Weeks Realty proposal does not mvolve one or more additional projects that are
substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited period of time. Accordingly, the
current proposal is not a phased action under the defmitions in the Minnesota Rules.
Since the Duke-Weeks.Realty proposal is neither a connected action nor a phased action, an EIS is
not required for these reasons. .
Comment 3-2: Benshoof admits the lTE book shows a trip generation rate of 11.01 cars per day
per 1,000 square feet of office building area. This would increase daily trips from 5,250 to 6,606.
.
I
I
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 2
December 3, 1999
r
.
I
Response 3-2: The daily trip generation projection of 5,250 vehicle trip ends, which was
presented in the EA W, was calculated through an equation presented on page 1052 in the
following publication: "Trip Generation, 6th Edition", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997.
The equation defmes the line of best fit through the data points and thus is a more valid method to
predict trip generation for a particular development than is using the average rate.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
Comment 3-3: The Bureau of Transportation Statistics has published a report indicating that a trip
generation rate of 12.43 cars per 1,000 square feet is more appropriate for this type of office
building. "At 12.43 trips the number of daily trips would soar to 7,458".
Response 3-3: The referenced Bureau of Transportation Statistics report is dated January, 1985.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers resource that we used for the trip generation projects is
dated 1997 and includes a substantially larger data base and refined methodologies, as compared
to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics report.
Comment 3-4: Given the Project setting, a trip generation rate of 12.5 to 13.0 trips per 1,000
square feet of building area may be more appropriate.
Response 3-4: As stated previously, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics report is outdated.
The equation we used is presented in a 1997 publication by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers and represents the most valid and current method of projecting the number of trips
generated by this type of development. .
Comment 3-5: The City recently submitted a request to the Metropolitan Council for an
amendment to its General Plan. Under the revised General Plan many parcels throughout the City
would be "up zoned" so as to allow more intense development The EA W fails to address
redevelopment in areas of the city which are being upzoned. Redevelopment would result in a
significant increase in traffic which was not address in the EA W.
Response 3-5: Section 27 of the EA W does address all relevant subject areas that have been
reguided from Industrial to. CommerciaVOffice. The traffic study does take into account these
change in uses. The area adjacent to the project bounded by Laurel on the north, Colorado on the
east, Highway 394 on the south and Rhode Island on the west has not been reguided.
Comment 3-6: Immediately south of the Project lies Interstate 394, and east-west limited access
freeway connecting downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul with the western suburbs. The project
area is served by two freeway interchanges; the Louisiana A venue exit is less than one J;I1ile from
the proposed project while the Xenia exit abuts the Project.
The area immediately surrounding the Project is home to over 37 fast-food and 'sit down
restaurants, some 23 car dealerships and related automotive services plus several bUlge home
improvement centers: (See attached comment for list and map) I,
I
Response 3-6: No issue to address.
Comment 3-7: It appears that the traffic analysis failed to reference, or take into account, daily or
peak period traffic generation from planned projects within the study area.
Response 3-7: All trips to and from every existing land use. in the study area have been accounted
for in the 1999 existing volumes. To accurately project 2008 volumes without the proposed office
development, information was obtained from Golden Valley and St Louis Park staff regarding the
following three categories of developments that would cause additional trips on roadways in the
area: a) development that have recently been constructed, but are not yet fully occupied, b)
development that presently are under construction, and c) development that have been approved
and for which construction is imminent. Through this process, we accounted fOr all developments
within the area of potential impact that would be adding additional trips to the roadway system by
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 3
December 3. J 999
2008. City staff have indicated the specific status of all 14 developments cited in respondent's
statement are either out of the area, have minimal impact or are included in the study.
Comment 3-8: The EA W claims to have studied existing traffic conditions in 1999, however,
there is no evidence that the traffic analysis included projects which were either under construction
or constructed and not yet stabilized (fully leased).
.
Response 3-8: This item is addressed in the response to the preceding response. City staff have
indicated the specific status of all 14 developments cited in the respondent's statement are either
out of the area, have minimal impact, or are included in the study.
Comment 3-9:. The EA W studied four primary and twelve secondary intersections. The traffic
patterns for the proposed project will affect several additional intersections. In order to access
Highway 55, workers at the proposed project will use Western to connect with Winnetka in order
to bypass the poor conditions at Laurel and Winnetka or they may elect to use Glenwood as a
connection to Highway 55. A study of the following intersections is highly recommended to
better understand the result of the patterns:
~ Western Avenue/Glenwood
~ West A venue/Ridgeway
~ Western Avenue/Winnetka Avenue
~ Winnetka A venue/Highway 55
~ Highway 100 on-ramps from eastbound Highway 394
~ 169 on-ramps from 394
~ 169 on-ramps from Highway 55 (critical intersection)
Response 3-9: Detailed traffic forecasts and analyses regarding the ramps between 1-394 and
Highway 100 are presented.in the traffic study report submitted with the EA W. This information
is provided in Figures 21-4 and 21-5 and on pages 11 and 12. On pages 12 through 17 in the
traffic study report, detailed traffic forecasts and analyses are presented regarding potential traffic
effects at 12 intersections within the secondary study area. Most of these intersections are closer
to the subject development site than the additional intersections identified by Mr. Gottlieb and thus
would be subject to greater traffic effects by the development than the respondent's additional
intersections. Since the traffic study showed that no significant effects would be experienced at
any of the 12 secondary intersections, we are highly confident that the proposed development
would not cause any significant traffic impacts at any of the additional intersections identified by
the respondent.
.
Comment 3-10: The traffic analysis studied a total of 16-intersections, some of which are
presently operating at "C", "0" and "E" levels of service. Despite the dramatic increase in
proposed traffic as a result of this and other traffic sources the traffic study concluded that none of
the studied intersections will be significantly impacted. This contradicts a previous traffic study
conducted by the City. In 1997 the City of Golden Valley engaged the rum ofSEH to undertake a
traffic study of the project area. Even though this study is now outdated as it failed to include
many recently announce projects.. the study indicates significant traffic impacts as a result of
development.
It does not seem logical that the additional 5,200 to 7,000 daily car trips from Allianz in addition
to the thousands of additional trips from planned and absorbing projects would have no significant
impact on intersections in the study area. This belief is supported by the SEH study~ On the
surface, the Benshoof analysis appears to be deeply flawed.
Response 3-10: In a letter to Mark Grimes dated November 16, 1999 (the comments of which are
included below), Cynthia Drake of the SEH firm stated, "Based on the land uses identified by
Benshoof, we concur with the assumptions for trip distribution, trip generation and the traffic
impact analysis with one exception. In the trip generation section,. the trips for the
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EAW Comments
Page 4
December 3, 1999
r
l-
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,e
I
office/warehouse in area D is short by 79 trips through an addition error. However, this amount is
low compared to the overall trips for the study area and will not change any of the conclusions of
the report."
Comment 3-11: The Project lies within an area generally referred to as the West Sector of the
Metro Area. In the past year this sector has seen the development of nearly 500,000 SF of office
space with another 2.4 million SF of space under construction or planned. This tremendous influx
of new space has caused vacancy rates to climb. By encouraging (subsidizing) development
which would not normally occur, the City is contributing to over development at the expense of
private developers who have their money, not public's money, at risk.
Response 3-11: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited. to the city council or planning commission
during the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 3...12: Section 31 of the EA W states that areduction in scale of the Project is not
possible because Allianz would seek another site. If Allianz were to pass on this site it is almost
certain that Duke would revert back to the initial development plans fora 230,000 SF to 400,000
SF development
Response 3-12: . The EA W only addresses the proposed Allianz project, not all other projects that
could be considered for this location. The scale of the Allianz project cannot be reduced because
Allianz LifelLife USA will be relocating and consolidating its corporate office at the site and
needs the full proposed building spac.e to house its employees and allow for company growth.
Comment 3-13: Section 29 of the EA W states that there are no known cumulative impacts for the
Project area. We believe there will be cumulative impacts on traffic, noise, and auto pollution.
Because the EA W failed to include several million square feet of planned and absorbing projects
we believe the EA W is incomplete and an Environmental Impact Study is necessary.
Response 3-13: Section 29 states that "There are no known cumulative environmental impacts for
the Project area, except for potential impacts related to traffic (noise and CO levels). Theseissues
are addressed in the Indirect Source Permit application"., which is being reviewed by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
The EA W did not fail to include square footage for planned and absorbing projects. All
development that have recently been constructed, but are not yet fully occupied, development that
presently are under construction, and developments that have been approved and for which
construction is imminent were included in the traffic study.
Comment 3-14: By signing off on the a EAW with these questions unanswered the City of
Golden Valley leaves itself open to a legal challenge with respect to the accuracy of the EA W.
Response 3-14: The RGU is aware that its decisions are always open to a legal challenge.
Comment 3-15: The EA W is not the appropriate environmental document for the project. The
traffic portion of the EA W is significantly flawed due to the underestimation of trip generation
rates, by not including various planned projects and by ignoring projects which were not
stabilized (fully leased) in 1999.
Response 3-15: According to 4410.4300, Subpart 14 - Industrial, Commercial and Institutional
Facilities of the Minnesota Rules, an EA W is the appropriate environmental document for the
project The EA W is not flawed and does not underestimate trip generation rate, nor does it ignore
projects which were not stabilized.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EAW Comments
. Page 5
December 3, 1999
o. ___-~. .
.,
1
Comment 3-16: The EA W should be rejected.
.
Response 3-16: See response to 3-13 above.
Comment 3-17: An Environmental Impact Study should be required.
Response 3-17: See response to 3-13 above.
Comment 3-18: The traffic analysis should be expanded to include additional intersections.
Response 3-18: See Response 3-9 above. Since the traffic study showed that no significant
effects would be experienced at any of the 12 secondary intersections, we are highly confident that
the proposed development would not cause any significant traffic impacts at any other
intersections. Therefore an expanded traffic analysis is not necessary.
Comment 3-19: The traffic analysis should utilize more accurate trip generation rates.
Response 3-19: See Response 3-2 above.
Comment 3-20: The traffic analysis should include the impact of planned projects and projects
which are open but not.fully occupied.
Response 3-20: See Response 3-7 above.
Comment 3-21: The traffic analysis should recommend a mitigation measures to deal with the
increased traffic. These measures must keep traffic out of the adjacent residential neighborhood.
Response 3-21: Allianz will be required to prepare a Traffic Management Plan which will serve to
mitigate increased traffic.
.
Comment 3-22: The environmental report should consider a smaller project (200,000 SF) as a
viable alternative. .
I
Response 3-22: See Response 3-12 above.
Comment 3-23: Light, noise, vehicle emissions and carbon monoxide should be addressed in the
environmental report.
I
Response 3-23: Sections 22 and 23 does address vehicle emissions and carbon monoxide.
Section 24 addresses noise. Section 26 addresses light
I
Comments 3-24: More analysis of post 2008 conditions needs to be undertaken.
I
Response 3-24: See Response 3-7 above.
Comments 3-25: It is improper for the City to act further on this project without more public
input
I
Response 3-25: The ROD has abided by Minnesota Rules relating to the EA W and the public
input process. The City has even held a special meeting that exceeds requirements to allow for
additional public input .
I
I
..
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 6
December 3, 1999
r
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
4.
Comments of Mary Hepokoski
Comment 4-1: The SEH firm used the term "worst case scenario", in their traffic study report
dated February, 1997 for the Golden Hills Redevelopment Area. Table 3 on page 14 in the SEH
report indicates anticipated changes in land use based on information provided by City staff.
"How much does this development exceed the worst case scenario used in that study?"
Response 4-1: For the property encompassing the subject development, the land use changes from
the existing situation to the proposed project are correlated with the land use changes addressed in
the 1997 SEH report. The proposed project would add to the site a 600,000 square foot office
development and would eliminate the following existing uses: 20,700 square foot Breck ice arena,
11,300 square foot Tires Plus store, 13,000 square foot Baby and Teen store and 48,000 square
foot Palm Beach building. The following new development would be added adjacent to the
Allianz site: 152 motel rooms, 9,000 square foot restaurant and 100,000 square foot office
building.
5.
Comments of Bill Dalman
Comment 5-1: How did the traffic studies take into account the access limiting effect that freeway
meters have on freeways with the result being a redirection of traffic through local streets?
Response 5-1: Prior to assigning the development trips to particular roadways, we carefully
accounted for all factors that affect the directional and routing patterns of trips to and from
particular developments in the a.m. and p.m. peak periods: Such factors included the presence of
ramp meters and the following other items: number of traffic lanes on particular roadways, traffic
controls at particular intersections, speed limits on particular roadways, available capacity on
particular roadways and the residential locations of persons who would be working in the new
office building. Our projections account for the expectation that some motorists will seek to. avoid
delays at the ramp meters by using other routes.
......,._........-
6.
Comments of Tracy Murphv
Comment 6-1: How has the Golden Hills Redevelopment changed from the original proposal in
1984?
Response 6- 1: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
I
The proposed Allianz project is consistent with the land uses identified in 1984. The ~Uilding
height of the Allianz proposal (10-12 stories) is higher than the 4-6 story heights anticipated in
1984. .However, the 1984 study did not have a square footage limitation. The Allianz building is
a step down in height from the Colonnade.
Comment 6-2: If the City is looking for quality development, how do they define it?
Response 6-2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the . project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not . limited to the city council or planning commission and.
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
The city considers the following as important attributes of quality development: building quality,
landscaping, transitional land uses, compatibility ofoses and tax base.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 7
December 3, 1999
Comment 6-3: If taxes drop 5-6% in 10 years, what will happen to our property values in the'
residential area?
.
ResDonse 6-3: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forom which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
The City anticipates that property values will continue to rise in the residential areas.
Comment 6-4: My understanding is that the City does not, by law, need to clean up a
development site. Either the customer, the developer, or the City needs to do the clean up.
Usually the City ends up paying but it is not required by law.
ReSDonse 6-4: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forom which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
One of the purposes of Tax Increment Financing is to provide the clean up cost for contaminated
land where it is not practical to seek recovery from the responsible party or where the responsible
party is unknown.
Comment 6-5: What is the next step in the process? Can we get an outline of how the process
works?
ResDonse 6-5: The RGU will determine the adequacy of the EA W. The RGU has three options:
1) declare a negative declaration; 2) delay decision for 30 days for further review or 3) determine
an EIS is needed. In the event a negative general declaration is declared, the Planned Unit
Development (POO) process will commence. A minimum of three public hearings will be held
during the POO process at which .time all relevant issues will be discussed. In the event that.
preliminary and fmal POO approval is received, the project will proceed to construction.
.
Comment 6-6: In the survey by Decision Resources, did we ask traffic impact questions?
ResDonse 6-6: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forom which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. I
The survey prepared by Decision Resources, L TO did ask traffic related questions. For example,
question 84 states "how would you rate. the ease of getting to and from work? Question 25 asks
for reasons of approval or disapproval of the City's participation in the redevelopment of 1-394.
The response choices included traffic impacts.
Comment 6-7: I would like it noted that the survey by Development Resources was completed
before the Allianz project was made public in the September l(fh newsletter.
ResDonse 6-7: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 8
D.~cember 3, J 999
r
l-
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
The survey by Development Resources was commenced prior to and completed after the
September 10tli newsletter. Also, the Allianz project was brought to the HRA in August and was
published in the Suncoast Post and Minneapolis Star Tribune in August.
Comment 6-8: There was a petition this summer to put a stop light. and sidewalk in the
LaureVWinnetka.This was very misleading as it never mentioned redevelopment.
ReSPonse 6-8: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
The referenced stop light is one mile away from the proposed Allianz project and is not applicable
to the proposed development. See also Response 3-9 above.
7. Comments of Linda Loomis
Comment 7-1: Ifam concerned that because of an apparent conflict of interest, the city is ignoring
the fact that this Tax Increment District has both phased actions and connected actions sufficient
to warrant the preparation of a Mandatory Environmental Impact Statement.
Response 7-1: See Response 3-1 above.
Comment 7-2: The city has interests in this project beyond the usual interests of a city in
redeveloping a tax increment district, because the city awarded the sale of$II,150,000 in Taxable
General Obligation Bonds, in order to proceed with the acquisition of land and relocation of
businesses that will be affected by this development. The city entered in an agreement with Duke
Weeks Realty on August 10, 1999 for the construction of a 600,000 Sq. ft. office building to house
AllianzLifelLife USA Insurance Company. They started the process for the EA W at that time.
October 5, 1999 the city authorized the sale and issuance of the aforementioned bonds, and
awarded the sale on October 19, 999, well after the need for the EA W was established.
I believe that according to the environmental review regulations that once it has been detennined
that an environmental review is required for a project the city is prohibited from makmg "final
decisions". This includes any "discretionary action by a government unit to entitle or assist a
particular project to proceed, includingfmancial subsidies or other assistance" (page 6, Chapter 2
Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules).
Ii
I believe that the selling of bonds for the purpose of acquiring land, relocating displaced
business~s and remediation of polluted areas within the boundaries of the proposed project
constitute such action, and therefore the city has violated the rules of the State of Minnesota
Environment Rules, or at the very least violated the intent of the rules.
Response 7-2: The RGU has an agreement with Duke-Weeks for a 220,000 square foot office
development. The City is required under this agreement to purchase the property to sell to the
developer. Sale of bonds is necessary to meet this obligation. Duke has proposed substituting the
600,000 square foot Allianz project under its existing agreement contingent on successful
completion of the EA W and planning process.
Comment 7-3: The city has also stated, "There are known cumulative environmental impacts
from the Project area, except potential impacts related to traffic (noise and CO levels)." The
traffic study prepared for the EA W used factors for traffic generation that underestimate the
EnvironmentQ1 Assessment Worksheet
EAW Comments
Page 9
D.ecember J, 1999
amount of traffic expected to be generated from this and other projects in the area. The
infrastrucrore in this area can not support the traffic currently using the streets in this area and yet
the city can say that this project has only "potential impacts related to traffic".
.
ResDonse 7-3: We are confident that the year 2008 traffic projections accurately account for all
existing traffic and all additional trips generated by the proposed development and other new
developments in the area, which are expected to be completed by 2008. Pages 10 - 12 in the
traffic study report included with the EA W present detailed analyses regarding the ability of
intersections within the primary study area to accommodate the project 2008 traffic volumes. In
some instances the analyses indicated that the existing intersections could adequately
accommodate the projected traffic volumes. In other instances potential difficulties were
identified and candidate mitigation measures were suggested to provide adequate operations.
Comment 7-4: It is clear that according to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules an
Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared for this proposed development. Ideally an
Alternate Urban Areawide Review should be prepared for the entire 1-394 corridor jointly with the
city of St. Louis Park.
ResDonse 7-4: See Response 3-1 above.
8. Comments of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
Comment 8-1: We have reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and associated
Technical Traffic Report for the proposed Allianz development prepared by Benshoof and
Associates. An EA W usually analyzes the roadways and intersections which are subject to major
traffic impact because of the proposed development. The City Council enlarged the scope of this
EA W to verify that other key intersections in the area do not have major traffic impact because of
the proposed development.
Based on the land uses identified by Benshoof, we concur with the assumptions for trip
distribution, trip generation and the traffic impact analysis with one exception. In the trip
generation section, the trips for the office/warehouse in area D is short by 79 trips through an
addition error. However, this amount is low compared to the overall trips for the study area and
will not change any of the conclusions of the report.
.
ResDonse 8-1: No issue to address.
Comment 8-2: The EA W indicates that the intersection of Xenia A venue and Golden Hills Drive
will need mitigation by 2008 to ensure adequate traffic operation. SEH is working with the City
to determine if any additional right-of-way needs should be identified for the City's furore capital
improvement program.
ResDonse 8-2: No issue to address.
Comment 8-3: If more than half of the intersections within the XenialVernon interchange (now
the Xenia A venuelPark Place Boulevard interchange) exceed Level of Service E (LOS) in the p.m.
peak hour three out of five consecutive business days, the proposed development is subject to a
traffic management plan. Only one of these three intersections will exceed LOS E in the p.m.
peak hour in the year 2008 (with the assumed land uses). Therefore, the proposed developme~t
does not meet the level of service conditions in the Ordinance. However, City staff has indicated
that the reserve capacity limits of the Ordinance will be exceeded. Consequently, Allianz will
need to implement a traffic management plan. .
ResDonse 8-3: Allianz has in place in their current facility a Traffic Management Plan and plans
to continue their traffic management efforts.
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
. Page 10
December 3. J 999
I'
I-
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
Comment 8-4: The traffic report notes that future levels of service on the collector-distributor
roads of the 1-394 and T.H. 100 interchange can improve with mitigation due to the Ordinance. It
should be noted that the collector-distributor roads are not subject to the conditions of the
Ordinance but rather are subject to review by MnlDOT.
Response 8-4: No issue to address.
9. Comments of Caron Rubin
Comment 9-1: I am strongly opposed to the development of such high density office buildings
and uses; and terrifically worried about the huge increase ii1 traffic in my neighborhood
Response 9-1: Please see Section 21 of the EA W which addresses traffic impacts related to the
development.
10. Comments of Minnesota Historical Society
Comment 10-1: The EA W has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota
Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act
and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600. There are no properties listed on
the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological
properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Therefore, in our opinion, the "no"
response to question 25a is appropriate.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for
federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted tour office with
reference to the assisting federal agency.
Response 10-1: The project is not considered for federal assistance. No federal permits or
approvals are anticipated.
11. Comments of Amv Rosen
Comment 11-1: I amconcemed with the traffic density that will be generated from this large of a
project and the traffic impact it will have on the surrounding areas.
Response 11-1: Please see Section 21 of the EA W.
Comment 11-2. This change in use forthis site is dramatically different from the proposed use of
the are that the city has proposed for the last year or so. These buildings will have a huge impact
on the traffic levels with regards to the access to the immediate freeways. The congestion tp 394
is already significant at the metered ramps in both the eastbound and westbound lanes.
Response 11-2: Please see Section 21 of the EAW. The traffic study included in the EAW does
take into account the metered ramps.
Comment 11-3: The building currently under construction on the Roberts Hamilton site has yet to
be finished and the true impact and. traffic levels have yet to be measured and evaluated in
relationship to the estimates of the traffic planners. I feel it would be prudent to evaluate the .
impact on the area before committing to another significant draw of traffic into the area. .
Response 11-3: Buildings currently under construction were included in the traffic study.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EAW Comments
Page 11
December 3, 1999
Comment 11-4; I support the upgrading and developing of the commercial area along 394. It is
important to upgrade the buildings in the older area, work towards a cohesive mix of use both
from a use and visual respect and to enhance the tax base of the City. However, it is important to
understand the limitations that. such a condensed portion of land can handle. There are f1x~d
access points to this area that cannot be expanded upon because of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Glenwood and Jersey Avenue are not roads that are intended to service commuter traffic of these
levels; they are residential entrances to the neighborhood.
.
Response 11-4: Glenwood is a county "A" Minor Arterial Reliever that is designed to provide
direct relief for traffic on major metropolitan highways. These roadways are proposed to
accommodate medium-length trips as well as providing relief to congested principal arterials.
Jersey is a Municipal State Aid Local Collector which is designed to collect traffic from the
neighbors and business areas and distribute it to the arterials.
Comment 11-5: I feel that traffic into these areas must be addressed with the intent to protect our
neighborhoods from the spillage of the commercial area into the residential neighborhoods. There
must be more enforcement along Glenwood A venue regarding posted speed limits. The following
areas should have posted sign age during rush hours limiting traffic to residents only; a policy
currently in place in South Tyrol; Turner's Crossroads, Turnpike & Law Terrace- The Georgia,
Westchester and Dakota areas north of Glenwood - the Glenwood and Laurel. The area is
intended to be residential and not for the use of test driving of cars or supporting cut through,
impatient commut~rs fighting the traffic on Hwy 55, 100, 394.
Response 11-5: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 11-6: There has to be a compromise that can satisfy both the needs of the City and the
committed residents who do not want to be forced from our neighborhoods. The residents would
indeed be willing to share the extra $500 per year in taxes versus paying the savings through the
day to day impact of the added traffic and the reduction in value to our homes over time because
of the negative impact to the quiet use and enjoyment of the adjacent neighborhoods.
.
Response 11-6: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 11-7: I encourage you to delay the commitment to this project until the tramc levels
can be measured in reality once the Xenia-LaurellGlenwood road is completed and the new office
. tower on the Roberts Hamilton site is occupied.. The allure of the area is one that will always
attract a respectful tenant to the area. The residents expect you to support their wishes for a
thoughtful and careful decision with regards to the continued development of the area.
Response 11-7: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. .
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 12
December 3, 1999
12. Comments of Gerald Mundt
Comment 12-1: The proposed project, adjacent to a prime Golden Valley single family residential
neighborhood with elementary school, church, and quiet residential streets, would be like a shark
in a small ocean bay - bound to have a ripple effect on the little fish trying to live a quiet home
life. The area along 1-394 is certainly commercial, but unique in that a single family residential
neighborhood is on the east and north without "step down" type uses which could buffer the
somewhat control traffic. The development should be reduced in size to reduce this shark effect
not only on the adjacent homes, but the ripples that would extend out to the entire southeast part of
Golden Valley.
Response 12-1: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
13. Comments of Joanne Savitt
Comment 13-1: I feel that the gentleman who explained about the traffic patterns and flow did not
do his homework very will. I have lived in Golden Valley f9r over twenty years at my present
location off of Western A venue, and feel that I am very well aware of what the traffic situation is
in the area of the proposed building. I truly find it hard to believe that this mega building will not
cause too many major traffic problems for the neighbors. I have heard that there is a possibility
that there will be more traffic on Western and Jersey. I have also heard rumors that you would
close off Pennsylvania at Laurel. Where then do the residents cross?
Response 13-1: See Response 3-7 above.
Comments 13-2: Have any of you ever seen the 394 east and west entrances on the timed ramps
in the rush hour?
Response 13-2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy,or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 13-3: How were the people picked for the City Survey. What is the breakdown of
where they live and their ages?
,
Response 13-3: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It ~serts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
14. Comments of Dale and Carol Gerdin
Comment 14-1: We are in favor of the Allianz building in Golden Hills. It will be a profit center
providing employment for our people, a tax base that will help fund our city government and an
attractive building for our area. .
Negative .comments about. this proposed building reminds me of the negative comments by
neighbors of the south Wirth apartment complex on Theodore Wirth Parkway in the 1980s. The
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 13
December 3, 1999
negatives were: increased crime and increased traffic, etc. Well, the building was approved, built,
landscaped beautifully (like a park) and none of the negative things occurred.
The Allianz building, we are sure, will be just as attractive, successful and a credit to our
neighborhood.
.
Response 14-1: No issue to address.
15. Comments of Dr. and Mrs. Huber H. Serr
Comment 15-1: As residents of the "Spring Green" section of Golden Valley, we feel there is an
urgent need to caution as the proposed Allianz project is evaluated by the City Council. We built
our present home 45 years ago and seen the area change from almost rural to big city urban. We
are already facing increased traffic problems from the Colonnade complex and its new neighbor to
be completed next spring. We have endured the inconvenience of that construction along with the
Xenia Avenue project completion. In the end we are told that the village will "mitigate"the
impact on our area.
The answers to our questions about what specific mitigation measures would or could be
implemented has been very, very, vague. What specific mitigation measures would or could be
implemented? The new building proposal should be evaluated proactively.
Response 15-1: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
The City Code will require that Allianz prepare a Traffic ManagementPlan as a part of the PUD
process. This Traffic Management Plan will be reviewed by the Joint Task Force formed by the
cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park.
.
Comment 15-2: We also have air and water quality concerns. Our quality of life involves much
more than the bottom line tax advantage.
Response 15-2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but,is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 15-3: We request that an EIS be conducted for the Allianz project.
Response 15-3: An EIS is not required for this project. See Response 3-1 above.
16. Comments of Diane Mundt
Comment 16-1: I am writing to express concern about the size of the proposed Allianz project and
the effect on our neighborhood. Reference is made to an article in the Star Tribune regarding'how
drivers shift to city streets and other local roads rather than wait on metered freeway ramps and the
dangers this causes to residents of the local streets. We are particularly wInerable in this
neighborhood because we are between Hwy. 394 and Hwy. 55, which is usually less crowded, so
we are particularly prone to cut-through traffic. I do not think it's a good idea to exceed the figure
of 300,000 square feet for a project. .
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Co,,!,nenJs
Page 14
D,ece,,!ber 3, 1999
I"
I.
.'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
Response 16-1: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding . the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning. commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
See Responses 3-7 and 3-8 above.
17. Comments of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Comment 17-1: The Department of Natural Resources (ONR) has reviewed the EAW for the
Golden Hills Business Park project. We do not recommend preparation of an environmental
impact statement (BIS) for the project. We agree that it is unlikely that the project itself will result
in significant water quality impacts, and in fact, will likely improve the quality of water leaving
the site from current conditions.
Response 17-1: As we continue with the PUD process, an effort will be made to increase the
green space for this campus which will ultimately improve both the quantity and quality of the
runoff leaving our site. The additional comments in the Department of Natural Resources Letter
do not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an opinion regarding the approval or
denial of the project, questions the city planning policy, or references a specific concern that is not
related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in a different forum which includes but is
not limited to the city council or planning commission and the Planned Unit Development (PUD)
process.
18. Comments of David Hanson
Comment 18-1: Reading through the entire report was a pleasant surprise. It seemed to me to be
well written and balanced. I wish to complement Mark Grimes and the rest of the staff for their
successful negotiations to attract such a fmn to our city. I am sure that the Council Members also
had a hand in this effort.
There will be those who wish to the city could stay as it was in 1950, but that is not to be. With
Highway 394 through the middle of the city, it is obvious that we will continue to attract this kind
of development. The attention to the traffic patterns and street traffic seems to be will done. One
possible suggestion to handle the peaks of traffic would be to stagger the starting times for the
Allianz employees. Perhaps, they will themselves establish a two-shift operation with their phone
contacts all over the country or the world. This might enable an early start before traffic builds up
and a second shift in early afternoon. This certainly should not be a requirement, but is offered as
a suggestion.
Allianz has a very good looking, well-landscaped office in Minneapolis. The preliminary plans
seem to indicate they want to have an even better looking presence along the 394 Freeway. I
would certainly be counter productive to cause unusual traffic problems in the neighborhood. We
would expect Allianz to be good citizens in our community.
Response 18-1: No issue to address.
19. Comments of Catherine McIntire
Comment 19-1: I believe that there is a need for an EIS because the infonnation on the potential
car pollution is incomplet~ and the anticipated traffic increases. There is definitely a need for an
EIS as the developers are suggesting that the pollution level will be 8.6 - notably just under the
requirement of9.
Environmental Assessment Works!reet
EA W Comments
Page 15
December 3, 1999
Response 19-1: See Responses 3-1, 3-7 and 3-8 above. The air emissions infonnation provided in
Section 22 of the EA W provides that the maximum carbon monoxide levels could reach 8.6 ppm,
which is still below the Minnesota CO standards. The project requires an Indirect Source Pennit
Application to be issued to the PMCA prior to construction.
.
Comment 19-2: The residents of Golden Valley prefer more shopping areas instead of office
buildings.
Response 2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
20. Comments of Marcia Anderson
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Comment 20-1: The traffic study did not take into account all of the nearby developments that
will jointly impact traffic in the area.
Response 20-1: The traffic. study did fully account for all additional developments that are
expected to generate new trips by 2008 through intersections in the study area as addressed in the
traffic study report and in the responses to comments 3.
Comment 20-2: In addition, the traffic study does not address impacts of increased traffic on
nearby neighborhood quality of life at all - only on what the streets will bear in tenns of driver
delays.
Response 20-2: The 12 intersections in the secondary study area that were analyzed in the traffic
study specifically were chosen to include potentially affected intersections along local collector
routes in neighborhood areas. The consideration of potential effects at these intersections, which
is addressed on pages 12 through 17 in the traffic study report, specifically accounted for all
possible impacts. The conclusions, as presented on pages 16 and 17, are that no negative impacts
would be experienced at any of the intersections, primarily because the traffic volume increase due
to the proposed development would be small.
.
Comment 20-3: The traffic report does not acknowledge the existing traffic problems in the area
from current levels of traffic.
Response 20-3: The starting point for the analyses presented in the traffic study report are the
existing volumes experienced in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, as presented on Figures 21-4 and
21-5 in the traffic study report. Current levels of traffic service for all major intersections that
were not under construction at the time of the analysis were detennined and are present~d on the
following pages in the traffic study report: 10,11 and 16.1
Comment 20-4: During the public hearing on that decision, traffic engineers claimed that there
would be little increase in traffic onto Xenia/Glenwood from Golden Hills. In fact, this report
claims, on Figure 21-3, that 45 percent of the increased traffic from the developments noted in the
study, will be distributed onto the portion of Xenia north of Laurel, and moving through the school
crossing intersection.
Response 20-4: Unfortunately, Ms. Anderson has misinterpreted Figure 21-3. She apparently
added he percentages shown on Xenia A venue just south of Glenwood A venue for the' four
portions of the figure to obtain the value of 45 percent. This is incorrect because the four portions
of this figure are not additive. The percentage shown on Xenia A venue in each of the four
portions of the figure represents the estimated percentage of trips generated by new developments
in the shaded areas that would travel on Xenia Avenue south of Glenwood Avenue. For example,
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 16
December 3,1999
I-
I-
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
the IS percent shown in the upper left portion of the figure means that an estimated IS percent of
the trips generated by new developments on sites A and E would be expected to use Xenia Avenue
just south of Glenwood A venue. The percentage of trips to and from other development areas that
would use Xenia Avenue ranges from five to IS percent.
21.
Comments or the City or St. Louis Park
Comment 21-1: The traffic analysis needs to be revised to include proposed future development
in St.Louis Park. Duke anticipates constructing 736,000 square feet of additional office
development by 2008 east of Park Place Boulevard and south of 1-394, per an Environmental
Impact Statement that was approved in 1989. In addition, CSM Corporation has received
preliminary approval from the City for fmancial assistance for 219 hotel units and 80 townhouse
units at 394 and Zarthan Avenue.
Response 21-1: On page 3 of the traffic study report included with the EAW, it is stated that the
proposed development is expected to be completed by 2007 and thus that the analysis year is
2008. This page also indicates the inquiries that were made with staff from St. Louis Park and
Golden Valley regarding developments expected to be completed and fully occupied by 2008.
Contrary to the suggestion raised in the St. Louis Park comment letter, it is not necessary to
include the two referenced developments in the traffic study for the EA W for the following three
reasons:
a) The response from St. Louis Park staff regarding expected future developments was
provided in a memorandum dated September 14, 1999. . In this memorandum the two
developments referenced in their December I comment letter are listed as
"Anticipated/possible fu~re development (5 to 10 years". This indicates that the
developments would be expected between 2005. and 2010.
b) An addendum dated July, 1997 for the EIS referenced in the December I comment letter
states that "the completion date for the total project is not estimated to be at least year
2010".
c) The development at 394 and Zarthan Avenue would not have a significant effect on the
intersections addressed for this project because the development location is somewhat
removed from the subject intersections and because the net additional trips generated by
the development (after accounting for trips generated by existing uses on the property
that would be eliminated) would not be very great.
Comment 21-2: The traffic analysis does not include some intersections that would be affected by
the proposal. The analysis should include in the secondary study area Park Place Boulevard and
West 16th Street and Park Place Boulevard and Cedar Lake Road.
Response 21-2: These two intersections doe not need to be analyzed in this EAW for the
following two reasons:
a) The two intersections already have been analyzed extensively through prior traffic studies
for planned developments in St. Louis Park.
b) As indicated in Figure 21-3 in the traffic study report included with the EA W, only 10
percent of the trips generated by planned developments in Golden Valley are expected to
operate through one or both of the identified intersections.
22. Resident Petition
Comment 22-1: Resident petition which urges the city council to require the preparation of aD EIS.
for the Allianz project. Considering the cumulative impacts of the entire redevelopment area on
the surrounding neighborhoods by traffic, noise and pollution.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 17
December 3, 1999
ResDonse 22-1: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not liniited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
.
23. Comments of Laurence and Patricia Jocelvn
Comment 23-1: What type of projects require federal permits or approvals?
ResDonse 23-1: The proposed Allianz campus does not require any federal permits or approvals.
Comment 23-2: What size projects require a complete EIS?
ResDonse 23-2: It depends on the size and type of. development and size of the local
governmental unit. Please see guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules available from
the Minnesota Planning Environmental Quality Board.
Comment 23-3: Why did the city use outdated (1997) information in their estimates for traffic
study, rather than the most current and up to date information available?
ResDonse 23-3: As presented in Figures 21-4 and 21-5 and in Table 21-2 of the traffic study
report, the traffic study used 1999 volumes to represent existing conditions. As presented on page
3 of the traffic study report, current information was obtained regarding new developments
expected to be completed by 2008.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Comment 23-4: Why did the city choose.to not include the amount of end trips for the recently
completed, and in progress redevelopment projects taking place within the Redevelopment and
adjacent areas.
.
ResDonse 23-4: The end trips were included in the traffic study. See Response 3-7 and 3-8 above.
Comment 23-5: With an existing known traffic problem along Laurel Ave. at the intersections of
Xenia, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and W~etka, how are these roadways expected to handle the
new influx of traffic to be generated by all of the redevelopment occurring within the rectangle
borders of 394 on the south, Highway 55 on the north, Highway 100 on the East and Winnetka on
the west?
ResDonse 23-5: Page 10 of the traffic study report indicates that the intersection of Laurel Avenue
and Xenia A venue will accommodate the projected 2008 volumes during both the a.m. and p.m.
peak hours at level of service C. As indicated on pages 16 and 17 of the traffic study report, the
proposed development would increase peak hour volumes through the intersections o~ Laurel
A venue with Winnetka A venue, Pennsylvania Avenue and Louisiana Avenue by just one ItO three
percent. This minimal increase will not cause any adverse impacts at these intersections. The City
currently is undertaking a process. to address existing traffic and pedestrian issues at these
locations..
Comment 23-6: Regarding required permits of which there are at least nineteen applicable in the
EA W document. There is one regional pending and one city approved but not adopted permit
filed. Isn't the city way ahead of itself, having entered into an agreement with Duke/Allianz prior
to applicationlapprovaV adoption of the majority of these permits?
ResDonse 23-6: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 18
December 3, 1999
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-7: What is the current level of debt of our City?
Response 23-7: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or. denial of the project, questions city. planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-8: How much more debt is our city's current administration looking at saddling on
its citizens?
Response 23-8: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy,or
references a specific concern that is not related to the 'EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-9: Why is Golden Valley even considering this when office space vacancy along the
394 corridor has increased and is expected to climb to over 20% by the end of the year2000?
Response 23-9: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EAW. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specifjc concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council, planning commission, or
Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-10: What is the burden we will be saddled with when Allianz merges with the next
big insurance conglomerate that comes along?
Response 23-10: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council, planning commission, or
Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-11: Are we in competition with 81. Louis Park to satisfy the ego's of our current city
administration? '
I
! I
Response 23-11: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. \ ~t asserts
an opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but is not limited to the city council or planning commission and
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Comment 23-12: Reference to Mr. Joynes comment about swapping the current Breck site valued
at $500,00 for ~e new site valued at $1.5 million.
Response 23-12: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It asserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning poliCy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes but. is not limited to the city council, planning commission, or
Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 19
December 3,1999
24. Comments of Helen Ekman
Comment 24-1: Statement of agreement with Ellis Gottlieb comments.
.
Response 24-1: See Responses 3-1 through 3-2Sabove.
.
.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
EA W Comments
Page 20
December 3,1999
'\
r
I'
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ADDENDUM TO EA W COMl\ffiNTS
Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following
notice of the EA W in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the acc~cy and completeness of
infonnation, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS.
1. Project title Golden Hills Business Park
2. Proposer Allianz UfelLife USA
Contact oerson: Mare:erv Humes
Title: Chief Ooeratine: Officer
Address: 300 South Hie:hwav 169
City. State. ZIP: Minneaoolis. MN 55426
Phone: (612) 591-5217
Fax: (612) 525-6066
E-mail: humesmltUlifeus.com
3. RGU City of Golden Valley
Contact oerson: Mark Grimes
Title: Director of Plannine: and Develooment
Address: 7800 Golden Valley Road
City. state. ZIP: Golden Valley. MN 55427
Phone: (612) 593-8097
Fax: (612) 593-8109
E-mail: me:rimesltUci.e:olden-vallev.mn.us
4. Reason for EA W preparation (check one)
EIS scoping X Mandatorv EA W
Proposer volunteered
Citizen petition
RGU discretion
IfEA W.or EIS is mandatory, give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name.
4410.4300. Suboart 14 - Industrial. Commercial and Institutional Facilities
5. Project location County: Henneoin
CitylTownship: City of Golden Vallev
S~
NW ~ Section 4
Townshio 117 North
Rane:e 21 West
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
25.
Ae:encv or EntitvIPerson
Linda Loomis
Date
November 30, 1999
25. Comments of Linda Loomis
Comment 25-1: I believe that this project does qualify as a phased action and that all projects
undertaken in this tax increment district and surrounding redevelopment area in the past three
years should be considered when making a determination of a phased action for the following
reason:
All of the projects undertaken in this redevelopment area in the past three years have been
developed by the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Therefore the HRA
should be considered as the proposer for each of these projects:
· Allianz (phase 1)
· Allianz (phase 2)
· Golden Valley Business Center
· United Properties Development
proposed 2000 start
proposed 2007 completion
completed 1999
started sprint 1999
400,000 SF
200,000 SF
257,000 SF
189,000 SF
· Meadowbrook School
· Xenia A venue Extension
proposed start summer 2000
started fall 1998
I 89,000SF
When considered as a phased action, the above projects clearly meet the threshold established in
the Minnesota Environmental Rules for a mandatory EIS. The fact the lIRA has acted as a real
estate development company and has purchased and resold the land for the purpose of
redevelopment, qualifies the HRA as the proposer and thus these actions should be considered
together as a phased action. The fact that well over 1,000,000 SF of commerciaVofficelwarehouse .
space has been or is proposed to be built in this area, without ever having any environmental
review until now, should also be taken into consideration. These projects all required amendments
to the land use element of the comprehensive plan and have also required the land to be up-zoned.
I believe this is exactly the type of redevelopment the 1997 amendments to the environmental
review laws were meant to address.
.
Response 25-1: A "phased action" is dermed in subpart 60 to inean two or more projects to be
undertaken by the same proposer that is determined to (a) have environmental effects on the same
geographic area; and (b) are substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited
period of time. Although the HRA has participated in the acquisition of the property in the
redevelopment area, the HRA is not the proposer. The proposer, as identified in the EA W, is
Allianz UfelLife USA. The Allianz UfelLife USA proposal does not involve one or. more
additional projects that are substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited period
of time. Accordingly, the current proposal is not a. phased action under the definitions in the
Minnesota Rules, even if one assumed the HRA was the "proposer". The proposal does not
involve a phased action because the current proposal or. the other projects mentioned are not
substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited period of time. Therefore, an
EIS is not required. .
Comment 25-2: Whether or not this develop~ent meets the legal thresholds of the environmental
review rules, I do think that rather than deal in legalities it is up to the city council to protect the
investments of the property owners of the city and look at the impact of all the expected
redevelopment occurring in this area. When looked at as a whole the Golden Hills Tax Increment
District does impact a significant number of homeowners and other businesses. To say otherwise
is to ignore common sense. There are cumulative impacts you can not deny this. This area has
been up zoned and the density of the redevelopment continues to increase. The impacts should be
addressed. Part of the traffic problems of this area is the lack of continuity of the road system, will
adding more traffic to the equation solve the problem? I think not. Solutions must be proposed.
The solutions afforded by the 1-394 Overlay District Zoning Ordinance are mostly incentive
programs paid for by the public. What will these incentives cost? Who will pay for them? What
if these incentives don't work? What if the projects planned, but not yet given approval are built?
How will this affect the impact of traffic? None of these questions are addressed in the EA W.
More thorough study needs to be done.
\\
Response 25-2: The statement does not question the adequacy or scope of the EA W. It aSserts an
opinion regarding the approval or denial of the project, questions city planning policy, or
references a specific concern that is not related to the EA W. The statement should be addressed in
a different forum which includes, but is not limited to, the city council or planning commission
during the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. Note also that the 1-394 traffic
management ordinance is enforceable as law - it is not nearly an incentive program.
.
Comment 25-3: The analysis of vehicle related air emissions indicates that post completion
projections predict 8-hour average CO levels of 8.6 ppm. The traffic study estimates under
represent the amount of traffic generated by this project and. 8.6 ppm is very close to the ppm
allowed under Minnesota CO standards. There are no mitigation measures mentioned if the traffic
analysis is found to be incorrect and CO levels should exceed the 9 ppm level. What if the amount
of traffic has been underestimated? Since the expected CO levels are so close to the top end of
recommended levels, shouldn't the traffic study include the worst case analysis?
.
ResDonse 25-3: See Responses 3-7 and 3-8 above. The air emissions information provided in
Section 22 of the EA W provides that the maximum carbon monoxide levels could reach 8.6 ppm,
which is still below the Minnesota CO standards. The project requires an Indirect Source Permit
Application to be issued to the PMCA prior to construction..
,
.'
if
.
.
.
~
c
PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
December 22,1999
Mark Grimes, Director of Plan~ing.. Development
Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer
Preliminary Design Plan Revi . nz
Public Works staff has reviewed the plans submitted for the proposed Allianz PUD.
This proposed development is located within the Golden Hills Redevelopment Area on
the south side of Golden Hills Drive, west of Xenia Avenue, and north ofl-394. This
review discusses the issues that have been identified that must.be.addressed as part of
the development.
Preliminary Plat:
1) The preliminary plat must include the locations of all existing and proposed
easements on the site.
2) The preliminary plat includes the former Wayzata Boulevard (North Frontage Road)
on the south and west sides of the property. Although the frontage road has been
turned over to the City, it has not yet been vacated. Therefore, the vacation of this
right-of-way must occur concurrently with the PUD and platting of the site. The
frontage road must also be removed as part of the development. Because there are
city and other utilities located within the right of way, a drainage and utility easement
must be platted to cover the entire existing roadway. This easement must be shown
on the preliminary and final plats.
3) There are several existing easements across these parcels that run in favor of the
City of Golden Valley. In the past, easements such as these have been lost when
replatting occurs. Therefore, we recommend that all the existing city easements be
vacated as part of this development and rededicated on the final plat. Legal
descriptions for the existing easements must be provided as part of the General Plan
submittal so the vacation process can run concurrently with the PUD and platting.
4) Additional right-of-way will likely be required along Xenia Avenue, and possibly on
Golden Hills Drive, due to additions of turn lanes to accommodate peak hour traffic
on this site. The extent of the additional right of way needed will be determined
during further review of the site plans.
.
.
Site Plan:
1) The preliminary plans for this PUD have been forwarded to SEH, the City's
consulting traffic engineer, for review and comment. In SEH's December 20, 1999
review, which is attached to this memo for reference, several site issues are
identified that have potential impacts on traffic flow on Golden Hills Drive and Xenia
Avenue. These issues are highlighted as follows:
a) The proposed eastern access onto Golden Hills Drive is problematic for several
reasons. The first is the arrangement of two northbound left turn lanes
consolidating into a single westbound lane and a left turn lane into Allianz. The
second concern is the location of the drive in relation to the eastbound right turn
lane onto Xenia Avenue. SEH recommends elimination of the proposed
northeast driveway into the site.
.
i) City staff recently met with the Allianz development team to discuss this
issue. Several options were presented that eliminate the problems
associated with this site access. One of these options includes turning the
proposed access into a widened pedestrian corridor from the front of the
building to Golden Hills Drive. This alternative will also require thatthe main
access into the site be moved significantly westward, and may need to be
through the parking ramp. The pedestrian access will also serve as an
additional emergency vehicle access to the front of the building. This
proposal has been forwarded to SEH. Comments regarding this proposal,
and other changes highlighted in this review, will be available at the time this
PUD is reviewed by Planning Commission.
b) The drop off/ramp entrance/parking area adjacent to Xenia Avenue needs to be
revised to provide clearer traffic movement. Clarification of circulation in this
area will eliminate the possibility of backup onto Xenia Avenue.
I
i) Allianz has also proposed changes to the plans in this portion of th~ site to
address these issues. Rearrangement of the parking area and relocation if the
driveway into the parking ramp are among these changes.
c) A southbound right turn lane off Xenia Avenue into the site is recommended.
i) Allianz has agreed to incorporate this recommendation into the site plans.
.
d) The proposed bus stop location on the plans is very near the right turn lane for
eastbound Golden Hills Drive traffic. This bus stop should be relocated to the
west to avoid conflicts with the turn lane. Allianz and City staff should meet with
Metro Transit to further discuss this issue, and issues relating to the required
Traffic Management Plan. Final location of the bus stop as it relates to traffic
circulation on and off site, as well as where it can best serve its passengers,
must be determined as part of the General Plan submittal for the site.
F:\GROUPS\ENG\DEVELOPMENTS-HRA\GOLDEN HILLS CENTRAL\PRELIM DESIGN MEMO.DOC 2
. e) The proposed service area for phase 1 appears to be too small for deliveries by
semi-trucks, but will function for smaller single unit type delivery trucks. The
layout of the service area should be reviewed in regards to the anticipated
deliveries. However, the proposed service area for the completed site appears to
be adequate for all types and sizes of delivery trucks. Temporary construction to
facilitate all anticipated uses of the service area should be included on the plans
for phase 1.
f) This review places a strong emphasis on the importance of a site specific Traffic
Management Plan for the Allianz site. This issue is discussed later in this review.
.
2) The traffic study portion of the Allianz EAW included several recommendations for
revisions to Xenia Avenue and other adjacent streets to accommodate peak hour
traffic generated by the Allianz development. These recommendations included
additional turn lanes and restriping of the roadways. City staff is in the process of
working with SEH to determine the full extent of these improvements. Staff will also
investigate the feasibility of constructing these improvements prior to the opening of
the Allianz building.
3) The developer has submitted a draft "Traffic ManagementPlann as part of this
submittal. This plan generally discusses existing programs that are offered by
Allianz at its current location that can, and will be, elements of the Traffic
Management Plan for this site. In its December 20, 1999 review, SEH recommends
thatthis draft plan be expanded upon to become a site specific plan that will have
impact on the peak hour trips for this site. The Final Traffic Management Plan must
be developed as part of the General Plan for the PUD. ' ,
Grading. Drainage and Erosion Control Plan:
1) This proposed development is located within the Sweeney Lake Branch of the
Bassett Creek Watershed. Because of the size of the project it must comply with the
Water Quality Policy of the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission
(BCWMC).
2) The rate control and water quality ponding requirements for this proposed PUD have
been met with the construction of the storm water pond in the northwest quadrant of
Xenia and Laurel Avenues. The Xenia Avenue pond was constructed assuming that
all of this site'would drain through the pond to meet the BCWMC requirements.
Therefore, if the site is developed as shown in the submitted plans, with all of the
site runoff routed into the storm sewer in Xenia Avenue and through the pond, no
water quality treatment or ponding will be required on site. However, should the
drainage from the site be changed to another direction, water quality ponding for that
drainage must be 'provided.
.
F:\GROUPS\ENG\DEVELOPMENTS-HRA\GOLDEN HILLS CENTRAL\PRELIM DESIGN MEMO.DOC 3
.
.
.
3) A final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan must be submitted with the
General Plan for this PUD. This plan must be prepared in accordance with City and
BCWMC standards. Approval from the Commission is needed prior to the beginning
of any work on site. A final plan that has been approved by the City must be
submitted at least two weeks prior to the BCWMC meeting at which it will be
considered.
4) Site grading for this development will also require a General Storm Water Discharge
Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. A copy of the permit
application must be provided to the City, and a copy of the permit once received,
must also be forwarded to the City.
Utility Plan:
1) City sanitary sewer and water are available on the south and east sides of this site.
These utilities are adequately sized to accommodate the anticipated flows from this
development.
2) A Final Utility Plan will be required with the General Plan submittal for this PUD.
This plan must include specific information regarding materials, pipe sizes and
. locations. Staff will comment on the location and spacing of the fire hydrants on site
as part of the review of the final plan.
Tree Preservation Plan:
The applicant must submit a Final Tree Preservation Plan, prepared in accordance with
City Code and standards, as part of the General Plan submittal.
Conclusion and Recommendations:
Based upon the above discussion it appears that the proposed Allianz PUD is!
acceptable from a Public Works perspective, if the access and traffic issues di~cussed
in this review are addressed satisfactorily. Therefore, staff recommends appr~val of the
Preliminary Design Plan subject to the following issues being further addresse during
the General Plan review and approval process: .
1) The applicant prepares final Utility; Tree Preservation; and Grading, Drainage and
Erosion Control Plans as part of the General Plan submittal.
2) Dedication of additional right-of-way on Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive as
determined necessary by staff.
F:\GROUPS\ENG\DEVELOPMENTS-HRA\GOLDEN HILLS CENTRAL\PRELIM DESIGN MEMO.DOC 4
. 3) Revision of the site access and internal circulation issues outlined in the December
20, 1999 review by SEH. These issues include:
a) Revision of the accesses onto Golden Hills Drive including the addition of turn
lanes as appropriate.
b) Revision of the surface parking, drop-off and ramp access area adjacent to Xenia
Avenue including the addition of a southbound right turn lane from Xenia Avenue.
c) _ Relocation of the bus stop on Golden Hills Drive.
d) Review of the service area for phase 1.
4) Development of a site specific Traffic Management Plan for this site as outlined in
the SEH review dated December 20, 1999.
5) Subject to the comments of other City staff.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Attachments
C:
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Technician
.
.
F:\GROUPS\ENG\DEVELOPMENTS-HRA\GOLDEN HILLS CENTRAL\PRELIM DESIGN MEMO. DOC 5
.'
~. "':SeJ
353S vAONA/S CENTER DRIVE. 200 SEH CENTER. ST. PAUl.. MN 557 70 651 490-2000 800 325-2055
AROHlTECTURE · ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION
December 20, 1999
RE: Golden Valley, Minnesota
AlIianz Life
Site Plan Review
SEH No. A-GOLDV9801.00
Mr. Jeff Oliver
City Engineer
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427-4508
Dear Jeff:
We have reviewed the Site Plan for Allianz Life dated December 6, 1999. We have reviewed both
Phase One and Phase Two and have several concerns.
.
Tbe report and the Site Plan indicate access to the parking ramp from Ihree driveways. While it
would be desirable to provide multiple access points because of the volumes, some of the driveways
are in locations which are nOl desirable. The driveway in the. northeast comer of the development
onto Golden Hills Drive is in a very poor location for access.
As part of the Traffic Plan, the lanes on Xenia A venue will be modified to provide for two
northbound left turn lanes. Allowing a left turn from westbound Golden Hills Drive into the
northeasterly access point will have impact on the dual left turns from northbound XeFa Avenue.
Left turn traffic will make the comer and immediately face traffic. seeking to make a lpft turn into
the entrance to Allianz Life. This is very undesirable, could lead to rear end accidents I' could lead
to a backUp into the intersection of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive.
A second conflict would exist between traffic exiting from the driveway onto Golden '115 Drive.
The access point is into a right turn lane, As part of the traffic study, it was determined that an.
eastbound right turn lane should be free flowing onto Xenia Avenue, By introducing a driveway into
the middle of the right turn lane, there is a vet)' distinct possibility that traffic from the development
turning right and then seeking to make a left turn pnto.Xenia Avenue would block the free flowing
eastbound right turn lane. Traffic turning to th.e left from the development onto Golden Hills Drive
might also find a problem in getting through the backup of traffic from Xenia A venue and then have
problems finding a gap in westbound traffic, especially in light of the dual nonhbound to westbound
left turn lanes,
.
Finally, eastbound traffic tumingright at Xenia Avenue and other traffic turning right into the
entrance will use the same right turn lane, There is a distinct probability that traffic signaling to turn
SHOHrEWOTT
HENDRICKSON INC.
MfNNEAPOUS. MN
sr. CLOIJO, MN
CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI
MADISON. WI
LAKE COUNTY, IN
EOIJAL OPPORTVNITY EMPLOYER
.... .y, vv ..v"".....~... A ~ vv.. ....,,, ",I.VV
......"
... ...v~...... ,~
'tf:J ""V
Mr. Jeff Oliver .
~ J December 20, 1999
Page 2
.
.
.
right into the entrance will be struck from behind by vehicles anticipating the turn signal is for a right
turn onto Xenia Avenue. Experience has shown that entrances in this location will not operate. well.
Access onto Xenia Avenue will be right in and right au[ only. The entrance is relatively close to the
1-394 intersection. It should not create a problem for the traffic leaving and intending to turn right
to go west onto the 1-394 westbound ramp. Traffic seeking to go to southbound Xenia A venue or
southbound to eastbound left turn onto 1-394 may be delayed slightly. The backup will be into the
parking area. The signal at Xenia A venue and Golden Hills Drive will provide some gaps, but the
free flow eastbound to southbound right turn at heavy times will use these gaps. There is also Some
concern that nonhbound traffic will attempt to make a U turn at Golden Hills Drive to use this access
point
With the two entrances in the northeast and east side facing problems, more traffic will use the single
access point on the west side. If traffic is spread throughout the morning peak hour, there will be
the ability to make the westbound left turn. It will require 8 westbound left turn lane. The design
of the left turn lane at this point needs to be very carefully considered especially in . light of the
merging of the two northbound left turns fr9m Xenia Avenue into. a single westbound lane on
Golden Hills Drive.
There are also a few internal circulation concerns. The drop off and square area on the east side of
the building will have some undefmed movements. Traffic attempting to enter or exit some of the
parking spaces will have an extremely difficult time with any volume of traffic coming from Xenia
A venue. We feel that this needs a considerable ~mount of review in tenns of providing very defined
routes for traffic and direction to either the parking ramp or the drop off area.
The ground level layout for the parking ramp is not shown. It is assumed that some of the parking
spaces in the southeast and southwest comers will be removed to provide access. With the high
volume of traffic attempting to use this aisle, the parking stalls on the south side on the ground level
will be of little value. There is also the need for additional aisle space to accommodate tbe
significant volumes of traffic turning onto the up ramps or turning traffic from the down ramps.
The service conn for Phase One is relatively small. While it could serve smaller tnlcks reasonably
well, there will be some maneuvering whicbwill be necessary. A larger single unit can maneuver
within the site. A small semi-trailer of food service type design can also maneuver. Any over the
road semi-trUck will not have adequate room.
The Site Plan also shows a proposed bus stop which would be at the devel~pment of the right ~
lane for eastbound Golden Hills Drive at Xenia Avenue. It may be desirable to move the bus stop
further to the west and utilize aturU out area'to pennit the bus to reenter Golden Hills Drive prior
to the right turn lane for Xenia A venue.
With the limited amount of a~cess which is easily available to Golden Hills Drive or Xenia Avenue
during the rush hours, it will become necessaxy to instigate a very defined Traffic Management Plan.
..
'.
.
.
.
Mr. Jeff Oliver
December 20, 1999
Page 3
The traffic study prepared by Jim Benshoof spread the anticipated traffic volumes over both the .
morning and evening rush periods. This will allow adequate capacity with the limited number of
access points. A greater concentration in the a.m. peale period wili back up traffic on Golden Hills
Drive. A concentrated departUre time will back up traffic on the site, in the parking ramp and in the
parking aisles. A connection would be desirable to allow the parking ramp to exit onto southbound
Xenia Avenue on site, recognizing that there will be some delays caused by other southbound traffic.
We feel that several steps should be taken prior to site plan approval. The entrance at the northeast
corner, leading onto Golden Hills Drive, is at a very poor location and should not be permitted. The
circulation area at the drop off and the parking ramp entrance on the east side of the building should
be redesigned to provide for well defined movements and parking areas. The lane mangements On
Golden Hills Drive from Xenia A venue to across the railroad tracks should be reviewed in
conjunction with ,the entrance location for the development An adequate design to perinit
development of a left turn lane for theA1lianz building and still permit the merging of the two
northbound left turn movements is essential. The bus stop should be moved further to the west. If
the entrance on the east side is to accept southbound right turns from Xenia A venue, a short right
turn lane should be provided. This will require some additional right-of-way. The compatibility of
the type of service trucks anticipated should be coordinated with the available maneuvering room
in Phase One. A Traffic Management Plan will be essential given the limited amount of access and
me closeness to the intersection of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive.
If you have any questions or need any further comments, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
~~~
\
\
Glen Van Wonner, P.E.
Manager, Transportation Engineering Group
sah
P:\projecls\gh\golc1v\9801\c\oliver2.d20.wpd
--...... .,., Ill"" .I.~..... I"AA. V<J.L Ij~U ~J.~U
::iJiti
. ...... GOLD EN VAL
JgJ 002
1.1
.~SetJ
3535 VADNAIS CENTER ORNE, 200 SEH CENTER. ST. PAUL, MN 55'70 651 49().2OOQ 800 325-2055
ARCHITECTURE · ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL. TRANSPORTATION
Dec:ember 20, 1999
RE: Golden Valley, Minnesota
Allianz Life
Traffic Management Plan Review
SEH No. A-GOLDV9801.00
Mr. Jeff Oliver
City Engineer
City of Golden Valley
.7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427-4508
Dear Jeff:
.
We have reviewed the Traffic Management Plan of Allianz Life which was referenced in a
December 3 internal memorandum. The memorandum points to flexible work hours, mass transit,
car pooling program, a transporta:tion coordinator and employee wellness programs as part of the
Traffic Management Plan. We have reviewed each and are providing comments to you for whatever
action you feel is necessary.
The memorandum points out that Allianz Life has bad a flexible work plan since 1987. They
indicate that the base office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., but that employees may work hours
between 6:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.rn. They estimate that 30 percent of their employees work outside the
nonna18:oo a.m. to 5:00 p.m. business hours.
A flexible work hours program can be beneficial in reducing the peak impact of a major office
building. It allows employees [0 start and leave at various times within guidelines. Allianz allows
employees to begin any time between 6:30 and 9:00 8.m. With a standard work length day, the
leaving times would also be varied.
This type of a program has the potential to reduce the peak hour concentration of traffic. However,
if a significant ilumber of employees are very time clock oriented, such as in a clerical oriented
office, most employees will leave very close to their quitting times. still resulting in a high peak
characteristic for traffic. SEH has a true flexible hours program and with a high percentage of
employees salaried, many employees work beyond their nonnal quitting times and we have a
continual flow of traffic leaving the building rather than a peaking characteristic. For a clerical
oriented office, this would not be true.
.
The provision of flexible work hours could have a significant impact on traffic if it were managed
such that a maximum percentage of employees would be leaving at a specific time. This would have
a forced spreading of the traffic coming from tbe Allianz building. To be part of. a Tiaffic
SkOnre.uOTT
HENDRICI<SON INC,
MINNEAP01.1S. MN
ST. a.OUD. MN
CHIPPEWA FAU.S. WI
MADISON, WI
LAKE COUNTY. IN
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~~'~V'~~ Dun ~,;.~ rAA V~~ .~u ,~~u
I~
.
.
.
<:IJ:.a.
......... ~U1.U J:.1'I Y AJ..
I(!,JUU')
Mr. Jeff Oliver
December 20, 1999
Page 2
Management Plan, there needs to be some commitment 10 spreading the starting and finishing times
rather than merely pennitting it
A1lianz also helps subsidize public transportation for employees. This will work well at a location
where transit is readily available to different pans of the metropolitan area and where schedules fit
in with the flexible work time of the employees. These programs work well in downtown areas
especially where there is also a shortage of parking and frequent bus service.
In a suburb, the ability of employees to take transit to various locations in the metropolitan area is
diminished. We recently studied the potential move of a major employer from downtown toa
suburb in the 51. Paul area and found that the transit availability for employees was significantly
diminished and that very few employees would be able to continue to use transit. The Metropolitan
Council Transit Operations (MCTO) is currently revising its concept for providing. transit services
in suburban areas. To have transit as a component of a Transportation Management Plan for Allianz.
an understanding of the future availability of transit to 1-394 and Xenia Avenue must be understood.
While encouragement of utilization of transit is good, the actual ability to utilize it must be analyzed
to determine whether it has any impact in a Transportation Management Plan.
Priority parking for car pools generally works well. The 3M Corporation has us~ car pools and van
pools with priority parking to great advantage. However, their priority parking is very close to the
entrance to a building and the other parking has a substantial outside walk in most instances. Allianz
has mostpsrking inside a parking ramp. Thus, priority parking is not much of an advantage except
to lower floors to reduce exit time.
While encouraging car pooling is very beneficial, a Transportation Management Plan should have
some greater incentive for use of a car pool. The ability to access priority lanes for the interstate,
bypassing the ramp meters, would be beneficial. However, some internal in~entive or
encouragement is also needed. '
Allianz has indicated they will have a transportation coordinator. It would be very benefid~al to have
a single source of contact at Allianz. It may be beneficial. to meet with the coordinator 1d start to
review or develop the Transponation Management Plan in advance of the process for the review of
the traffic impacts of the proposed Allianz building.
The wellness'program cited in the" memorandum can have.a positive impact on traffic. Locker
facilities can further encourage employees to walk or bicycle, but the seasons in Minnesota don't
encourage this as a year-long commute system. The ability to provide for exercising during the day
helps in forcing employees to begin or end their day outside the normal hours.
The on-site cafeteria and the potential trail connections to promote walking to lunch can reduce
traffic during the noon hour periods. This does not have much impact on the 8.m. and p.rn. peaks
which are the major concerns.
. ,
1.12/20/$9 HON 12:43 FAX 651 490 2150
SEH
...... GOLD EN VAL
~004
I.
.
.
.
Mr. Jeff Oliver
December 20, 1999
Page 3
The Traffic Management Plan utilized by Allianz Life at its existing buildings is probably beneficial
in reducing the peak impacts of traffic. However, the adjustments which need to be made for
suburban development may reduce the effectiveness of the existing plan. In addition. the plan only
penmts the potential reduction of peaking ramer than managing it. A true Transportation
Management Plan will need to have some statistical breakdown of how the system. will be managed,
what volumes will be pennitted to enter and leave at specific times, and how the management system
will be enforced or created. The plan.88 presented is a good Start, but does not meet the .specifics that
we would visualize in a plan for Golden Valley.
Sincerely,
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
~~U/~
Glen Van Wormer, P.E.
Manager. Transportation Engineering Group
sah
F:\projec:b'\gh\goldv\9801\C\Olivu.d20.wpd
;~l;
J
.
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 174, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning)
Provisions Relating to Traffic Management Fees and Assessments
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley does hereby ordain as follows:
Section' 1. City Code Section 11.56, entitled. "1-394 Overlay Zoning District
Ordinance" is amended by deleting Subd. 9 in its entirety and replacing it as follows:
Subd. 9. T~affic Management Fees and Assessments. Under the authority. in
Minnesota Statute ~ 462.353, Subd. 4, each owner of a parcel or development subject
to the terms of this ordinance shall pay a traffic management administrative fee of $ .10 .
per square foot of gross floor area. Fifty (50)% of the fee shall be paid at the time such
owner applies for a conditional use permit or planned unit development permit for such
development and (50)% of the fee shall be paid at the time such owner applies for a
building permit therefor.. The fees shall be collected by the city and deposited as a
separate fund under the authority of the Joint Task Force. The fund will be used by the
Joint Task Force only for its costs incurred in reviewing,investigating and administering
traffic management plans under this ordinance. Should the costs of administering and .
enforcing this ordinance require it, the city r~serves the right to periodically assess such
costs to the parcels within the area covered. The city also reserves the right to
periodically assess the parcels within the respective areas for the costs involved in
implementing capital improvements designed to reduce traffic congestion, facilitate
transit use, and implement traffic management plans in the vicinity of Xenia/Park Place
Boulevard and 1-394, Louisiana Avenue and 1-394, and Boone Avenue and 1-394.
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 11.99.
entitled 'Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by re~erence, as
though repeated verbatim herein. !
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its pa1sage and
publication as required by law. i
Adopted by the City Council this 17th day of February, 1998.
ATTEST:
IslMary E. Anderson
Mary E. Anderson, Mayor
IslShirley J. Nelson
Shirley J. Nelson, City Clerk
;
,
o /,~ ~/JMLIJhLL U-r~
.5l.f #/.81/7a.
"I
.
GOLDEN VALLEY/ST. LOUIS PARK
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
REGARDING
1-394 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICr ORDINANCE
This Agreement is made this
(J7a(Cn
:oM
day
, 1989 by. and between the CITY OF GOLDEN
of
VALLEY ("Golden Valley") and the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PA.RK ("St.
Louis Park"), both of which are sometimes hereinafter
collectively referred to as the "parti~s" or the "cities".
WHEREAS, the United States and Minnesota Departments of
Transportation are upgrading State Highway No. 12 to become
. Interstate Highway 394 which will alter transportation patterns
and foster new development and redevelopment along the highway
corridor,
WHEREASj.the construction of Interstate Highway 394 will
generate traffic congestion on both the freeway system and the
local street networks in portions of St. Louis Park and Golden
Valley resulting in traffic congestion, air pOllution, noise
pollution and other environmental problems, and
WHEREAS, since the Interstate Highway 394 corridor runs
along the common border between Golderi Valley and St. Louis
Park, the two cities have studied the situation and entered into
.
.
~
. this Agreement to address the problems caused by the
construction of Interstate Highway 394;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties have en~ered into this Joint
Powers Agreement under the authority conferred by Minn. Stat.
~ 471.59 for the purposes of addressing the traffic, ~ir
pollution, noise pollution and environmental problems caused by
the design of 1-394 which they recognize must be addressed
together, as follows:
l~ Co~temporaneous with the execution of this Joint
Powers Agreement, each-city has passed the model ordinance,
attached hereto and referred to herein as the 1-394 Overlay
. Zoning District Ordinance, for the portion of the 1-394 Overlay
Zoning District lying within its boundaries.
2. During the term of this Agreement, each city shall not
vary, amend or repeal the 1-394 Overlay Zoning District
Golden Valley and St. Louis Park.
I
'bf
,
\
Ordinance without the written consent of the city councils
3. Within its respective jurisdiction, each city shall
apply and enforce the 1-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
according to its terms.
.
I 4. Each city recognizes that the concentration of. motor
vehicles in the 1-394 corridor and the development encouraged by
-2-
.
.
.
"
it may create dangerous levels of air pollution in the
Xenia/Vernon I-394 interchange area. :n order to address this
issue each city agrees to commission a joint study of the
expected air quality impacts in the I-394 corridor and share the
costs thereof equally. Should the study indicate, that joint
efforts between the cities are required to alleviate the air
quality issues, each city pledges its good faith and cooperation
to work with the other city to achieve a satisfactory solution
to the air quality issues in the I-394 corridor.
5. Given the base conditions used by Strgar-Roscoe-
Fausch, Inc. in its 1-394 Traffic Impact Study for the Cities of
Golden Valley and st. Louis Park, dated August 1~87, as
supplemented there is a reserve capacity of office development
at the Xenia-Vernon/I-394 interchange of approximately 2~230,000
square feet. The parties agree to allocate 60% of the re~erve
capacity, or 1,338,000 square feet, to the City of St. Louis
Park and 40%, or 892,000 square feet, to the City of Golden
Valley. The Study indicates a reserve capacity of office
development in the Louisiana Avenue/I-394 interchange area of
1,575,000 square feet which has been allocated by the parties
10% or 157,500 square feet to St. Louis Park and 90% or
1,417,500 square feet to Golden Valley. The Study also
indicates a reserve capacity of office development in the
General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue/I-394 interchange area of
885,000 square feet which has been cUlocated 100% to Golden
Valley. The parties agree that the total amount of reserve
-3-
.
. ..
.
capacity should be reevaluated on or about January 1 each year
'\
,
in order to determine its validity. If a reevaluation should
incorrect, the parties agree to amend this Joint Powers
'--;0-
\
\,
indicate that the original assumed reserve capacity was
Agreement and the attached ordinance to reflect the reevaluated
number. - ,
,
6. The Cities agree to 'carefully review the suggested
public improvements contained within the Strgar-Roscoe-Fausc~,
Inc. I~394 Traffic Impact Study, dated August 1987, to deter~ine
which should be undertaken and according to what timetable.
Thereafter, each city shall fashion an appropriate method for
accomplishing such public improvements within its jurisdiction
. and undertake them when required by development, 'traffic
demands, etc. A list of the public improvements which may be
necessary for the moderate growth scenario assumed in the study
is attached as Exhibit A.
\
7. This Joint Powers Agreement shall continue in fu~l
I
I
force and effect until cancelled by mutual consent of the C'lities
of Golden Valley .nd St. Louis Park.
"
8. Upon violation of this Agreement or the 1-394 Overlay
Zoning District Ordinance by either city, the other city shall
.first attempt mediation under the Rules of the American
Arbitration Association; thereafter, ithe other city m~y enforce
.' this Agreement or the 1-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
-4-
\
.
.
.
against the city violating the Agreement or Ordinance by
obtaining an injunction, 'a mandatory i~junction or a writ of
mandamus, whichever one or more is appropriate, in court and the
prevailing party shall recover from the city violating this
Agreement or the Ordinance all of its costs and reasonable
attorney's fees for enforcing the terms thereof.
This Agreement is entered into on the date written above.
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
By
0~~ a~~
Its M 'or
By
CITY OF ST.
By
~IJ.J.~
It Mayor
By
f44/IJ 1>&21.
Its City Manager
.~ .
.,.....
-5-
..
ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
NEEDED FOR LEVELS OF GROWTH ALONG 1-394'
~ SUGGESTED IN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
GOLDEN VALLEY IMPROVEMENTS
\
Location
GLENWOOD & TURNERS
1-394 NORTH FRONTAGE
ROAD & XENIA
GLENWOOD & HAROLD
GLENWOOD & JERSEY
LOUISIANA & 1-394
NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD
XENIA & LAUREL
TURNERS & LAUREL
~ONE & B CROCKER
~ENWOOD & TURNERS
WINNETKA & HAROLD
WINNETKA & 1-394 SOUTH
FRONTAGE ROAD
LOUISIANA & LAUREL
LAUREL & JERSEY
TH 55 & BOONE
TH 55 & WINNETKA
TH 55 & DOUGLAS
WINNETKA & LAUREL
TURNERS (GLENWOOD 10
LAUREL
LOUISIANA (1-394 TO
LAUREL)
~
Other
Recommended Responsible
Improvements Agency'
WIDEN TO: EB-LT/R, WB-L/TR, NB-LT/R HENNEPIN COUNTY
WIDEN TO: EB-L/T/R, WB-L/TR AND SIGNALS MN/DOT
WESTBOUND BYPASS LANE HENNEPIN COUNTY
WESTBOUND BYPASS & EASTBOUND RIGHT TURN HENNEPIN COUNTY
WIDEN TO: EB-L/T/R, WB-L/TR, NB-L/T/R, MN/DOT
SB-L/T/TR; SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
WIDEN TO: EB-T/R, WB-L/T, NB-L/R
AND SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
WIDEN TO: EB-L/R, SB-T/R, NB-L/T
AND ALL ,STOPS
NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE
WIDEN TO L/T/R FOR EACH APPROACH
HENNEPIN COUNTY
ADD TURN LANtS
WIDEN TO: SB-L/R, EB-L/T, WB-T/R
HENNEPIN COUNTY
MN/DOT
WB LEFT TURN & NB RIGHT TURN LANES
EB LEFT TURN & WB RIGHT TURN LANES
WIDEN TO: SB-L/T/R, NB-L/T/T/R
WIDEN TO: SB-L/LT/T/R, NB-L/LT/T/R
WIDEN TO: SB-L/L/T/T/R
SB BYPASS & NB RIGHT TURN LANES
WIDEN 10 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION
I
MN/DlpT
MN/DbT
MN/DOT
HENNEPIN COUNTY
WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION
PLUS TURN LANES
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Key: L = Left Turn Lane
T = Thru,Lane
R:= Right Turn Lane
LT or TR = Optional Use Lane
frR = Right Turn Lane With Free Right Island
.
.
\
.
ST. LOUIS PARK IMPROVEMENTS
Location
B Crocker & Ford Rd
1-394 SOUTH FRONTAGE
ROAD AND TEXAS
LOUISIANA & 1-394
SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD
VERNON & CEDAR LAKE RD
ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
NEEDED FOR LEVELS OF GROWTH ALONG 1-394
SUGGESTED IN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
Recommended
Improvements
WIDEN TO: EB COMB.L&T/T&R,
NB COMB.l&T/frR, SB 2 OUTBOUND
LANES, WB L/L/COMB.T&R AND SIGNALS
WIDEN TO:NB-L/R, WB-L/T, EB COMB.
T&R AND SIGNALS
WIDEN TO:EB-L/T/R, WB-L/T/R AND
SIGNALIZE WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
WIDEN EACH APPROACH TO: LL/TT/frR
B CROCKER (FORD RD TO EB-T/T/frR, WB-T/T
CSAH 18
ASIANA AVENUE (1-394) NB-l LANE. SB-1 LANE, CENTER TURN
. f!'CEDAR LAKE ROAD) LANE FOR EACH DIRECTION
VERNON & GAMBLES SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
CEDAR LAKE ROAD
(VICINITY OF VERNON)
1-394 & VERNON SOUTH
FRONTAGE ROAD
WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION
PLUS TURN LANES
WB DOUBLE RIGHT TURN LANES AND 3 THRU
LANES IN EACH DIRECTION ON VERNON
Other
Responsible
Agency
MN/DOT
MN/DOT
HENNEPIN COUNTY
HENNEPIN COUNTY
MN/DOT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~-
Key: L = Left Turn Lane
T ~ Thru Lane
R = Right Turn Lane
LT or TR = Optional Use Lane
frR = Right Turn Lane With Free Right Island
.
1
.
ley
DATE:
December 15, 1999
TO:
Mark Grimes
Director of Planning and Zoning
Ed Anderson -a::
Deputy Fire Marsh~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Proj ect.
Preliminary Site Plan Review for the Allianz Life Insurance
Listed below are the preliminary site plan review comments for the Allianz
Life Insurance Project.
1) Provide fire hydrants throughout the complex. The installation of the
fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with the Minnesota State
Fire Code and in conjunction with the City of Golden Valley's City
Engineer requirements.
2) Provide fire department access roads in accordance with the Minnesota
State Fire Code.
3) Provide the proper turning radius for fire apparatus in accordance with
the Minnesota State Fire Code.
4) The fire department will require a (PN) post indicator valve for all fire
suppression systems for all buildings and parking ramps.
5) The fire department access road for the entire complex shall be
designed, constructed and maintained to support the imposed loads of
the weight of the fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so
as to provide all weather driving capabilities.
6) Vertical clearance for fire apparatus shall be not less than 13 feet 6
inches. The vertical clearance shall be unobstructed.
7) Fire suppression and Class I standpipe systems will be required
throughout the buildings and parking ramps.
8) The fire alarm/detection system will be designed and installed in
accordance with the high rise requirements listed in the Minnesota
State Fire and Building Codes.
9) Stairway identification signs will be required in accordance with the
Minnesota State Fire Code.
10) The fire department will require approved fire department access lock
boxes. See Fire Marshal for more details.
If you have any questions, please call me at 593-8065.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
Allianz Life/Life USA
Corporate Campus Master Plan
Preliminary pun Submittal
Golden Valley, Minnesota
December 6, 1999
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
ALLIANZ LIFEILIFE USA
PROJECT CONTACT SHEET
OWNER: (AIlianz LifelLife USA)
Maggie Hughes
President
300 South Highway 169
Minneapolis, MN 55426
612/591-5217
Fax: 612/525-6066
Hughesm@lifeusa.com
Ed Fitzpatrick
Second Vice President
300 South Highway 169
Minneapolis, MN 55426
612/847-6891
Fax: 612/525-6400
Ed _Fitzpatrick@allianz1ife.com
DEVELOPER:
CERSA PARTNERS
150 South Fifth Street, Suite 3200
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Principal:
James B. Vos, 612/373-0290; fax: 612/337-8459
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN TEAM:
ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE
400 Clinton Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Principal:
Thomas J. DeAngelo, AlA, 612/874-4107; fax: 612/871-7212
Email: tdeangelo@archalliance.com
Project Architect: Jessica Huennekens, 612/874-4107; fax: 612/871-7212
Email: ihuennek@archalliance.com
SITE DEVELOPMENT TEAM:
Loucks & Associates, Inc.
7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Project En~ineer: Jeremy Boots, 612/424-5505; fax: 612/424-5822
Email: iboots@loucksmclagan.com
Princival :
Tom Loucks, 612/424-5505; fax: 612/424-5822
Email: tIoucks@loucksmc1agan.com
Oslund and Associates
115 Washington Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Principal:
Thomas Oslund, ASLA, FAAR, 612/359-9144; fax 612/359-9625
Allianz Life/Life USA
12/8/99
Page 1 of 1
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
AIlianz LifelLife USA Corporate Headquarters
General Project Description
AIlianz LifelLife USA is proposing to establish a Corporate Headquarters on a 12.78 acre site located
at the northwest corner of Xenia Avenue and Interstate 394.
AIlianz LifelLife USA is an established company with over 100 years of history as a Minnesota-based
company. We have been in our current location for over 50 years. To continue this heritage, we want
to build a home that will be of high quality to enhance the community and attract employees looking
for a quality work environment.
The project is generally envisioned as two phases. The first phase is planned as a 400,000 gsf office
building and includes a private cafeteria, a training center, a data center, general building storage and
general office space. The Phase One Building is planned to be 10-12 stories, with floor plates in the
range of 35-40,000 square feet per floor. Phase One also includes on-site parking for 1600 cars, with
approximately 1425 cars planned in a connected parking ramp. The Phase One Building is designed
to accommodate the projected needs of AIlianz following its 1999 acquisition of Life USA, and is
projected to house' approximately 1200 people at the time of occupancy in the late summer of 200 1.
The Phase Two Building is envisioned as future office space and is planned at 200,000 gsf in a 5-6
story building, connected with a skyway link to the Phase One Building. Additional parking to
accommodate the Phase Two building is planned in an adjacent parking ramp and with surface
parking to accommodate an additional 800 cars.
Master Plan
The master plan for the AIlianz LifelLife USA corporate headquarters is based on three guiding
principals:
1. Create a presence for AlIianz LifeILife USA along the 1-394 corridor. The new headquarters
will provide a strong positive image and a memorable presence for the company, which has had
over a 100-year history as a Minnesota-based organization. The site provides an excellent
opportunity to develop a strong public image along the 1-394 corridor.
2. Create a campus setting. The development of the new headquarters provides the opportunity to
create a corporate campus for AIlianz LifelLife USA. The campus will unify the company into
one facility with amenities of over 5 acres of open space. A shared common green space between
the phase I and phase II structures will result in encouraging interaction among groups after the
phase II building is constructed.
3. Use program elements to create strong edge definition. Define the edges of the site by
utilizing the program elements. Placing the parking structure to the north and the office structures
to the south create strong edges along both of those sides. Similarly, placing the phase I building
towards the eastern edge and the phase II building towards the western edge provides a unique
opportunity for a significant open space in the interior of the campus. The edges are further
defined with strong vegetation bands on all sides to create the setting that signifies this site as a
corporate campus.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I J!!~,~
I
AI/ianz/Ufe USA
SITE LOCATION MAP
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
Design Description
The Allianz Campus is envisioned as a quality-working environment that expresses the Corporation's
commitment to its employees, its customers, and the community. In general terms, the buildings and
ramp structures are envisioned as a cohesive combination of stone, glass, and precast and emphasis is
placed on quality landscaping and preservation of green space.
The site has prominent visibility from the 1-394 corridor and is surrounded by office and commercial
uses in all directions. Access to the site is achieved from Golden Hills Drive at two entrance points
and from Xenia Avenue (southbound only). This pattern of access creates a major entrance plaza to
the campus visible from the comer of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. The Phase One
Building is positioned at the comer of Xenia Avenue and 1-394.
Visitors and employees entering the site can be dropped off at the main entrance to the building or
proceed directly into the attached parking ramp from any of the site entrances. Employees parking in
the ramp can then connect directly into the main lobby of the building at grade level. Multiple
entrances to the ramp are planned to alleviate stacking on adjacent streets. Sidewalks are proposed
along Golden Hills Drive and Xenia Avenue with connections to the main entrance to the building,
encouraging pedestrian connections between the building and the surrounding park trails. and transit
stops. A potential transit stop could be incorporated along Golden Hills Drive, near the main site
entrance.
The Phase One Parking Ramp is visually a six-story structure with eight levels of parking. The
lowest level is below grade. The height of the ramp (approximately 60 feet) and the number of levels
are the result of design goals to reduce the amount of broad surface parking and to maximize the
opportunities for generous landscape areas that can complement the environment. The parking ramp
is envisioned as predominantly precast, with exterior finishes that harmonize with the building to
create a cohesive campus image. The parking ramp and the building together frame the entrance
plaza that opens itselfup to the community.
The two buildings proposed as part of the master plan are intended to be of similar materials to create
a campus image that is classic and timeless. The Phase One building is currently planned to be 10
stories, with an additional basement and penthouse for enclosed mechanical equipment. The building
form opens up to the entrance plaza and welcomes visitors with its stepped massing and glassy lobby.
A garden is proposed adjacent to the entrance to the east and is visible from the intersection of Xenia
and 1-394.
The building entrance is currently envisioned as a three-story lobby at the heart of the building. At
the second floor is a dining center and training rooms of varying sizes. The dining center opens up to
a terrace that pulls sunlight through the heart of the building and will be used for large internal
meeting and informal conferencing in addition to dining. The upper floors of the building are
predominantly office space that will be designed to respond flexibly to the dynamic needs of the
Corporation. Large floor plates, access flooring to accommodate changes in technology, and 10 foot
ceiling heights define a predominantly open environment where daylight is accessible by everyone.
A service dock (planned for three dock doors) is located to the west of the Phase One Building and is
accessed from the existing frontage road from the west. Due to the depressed level of the Ipterstate,
the loading area will be screened from view by both freeway travelers and neighbors.
A green courtyard is created adjacent to the building to the west, forming a space that can link the
Phase One Building with the Phase Two Building. This future building is envisioned as 5-6 stories.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
Signage identifying Allianz is envisioned near the top ofthe building and visible from the freeway. A
smaller signage monument is envisioned at the corner of Xenia and Golden Hills Drive, as part of the
landscaped entrance court.
A significant feature of the proposed Corporate Master Plan is that approximately 44% of the site is
given over to landscaped area. While this percentage may vary slightly as the project develops, this is
a significant departure from typical office developments and illustrates Allianz Life's commitment to
a campus philosophy and community image.
Variances
The only intended variance to conventional zoning is for a variance on the south side surface-parking
strip, adjacent to the Interstate right-of-way, to allow more green up front nearer the more visible
sides of the property. This variance also provides better access to utilities and utilizes existing
pavmg.
Allianz is showing a proof of parking for the additional 150 surface parking stalls in phase 1. It is
estimated that at move in Allianz will have approximately 1200 employees. The portion of the ramp
that is being constructed with phase 1 will have 1454 stalls. This will adequately serve the parking
demands for the building. If the parking demands are not adequately met or the second phase is
constructed the proof of parking will be added.
LandscaDin!!
The landscaping for the site is envisioned as a series of textural planes, punctured by rows of
deciduous and evergreen hedges and trees. These planes are further defined by the introduction of
garden like spaces at the building entries and the central courtyard space. The majority of the ground
plane that is not planted with trees or shrubs will be grass lawn, except for a few special places, where
native grasses will be used as an ornamental planting.
Gradin!! and Draina!!e
The pre-developed site prior to the raised facilities contained 8.7 acres of impervious surface and 4.1
acres of green space. The AIlianzlLife USA campus proposal has 7.2 acres of impervious surface and
5.6 acres of green space. 5.6 acres of green space results in a decrease in storm water runoff from the
previous uses of the site.
The building first floor elevation is proposed at an 884 elevation, which is approximately seven feet
higher than the entrance at Golden Hills Road but is the same elevation as the existing frontage road.
The proposed project drainage splits at the phase 2 building with the southeast 3.0 acres draining to
an existing storm sewer system along the west property line, the rest of the 12.78 acres drains to the
existing storm sewer system along Xenia A venue north into an existing NURP pond constructed as
part of the Xenia Avenue Extension project. When this NURP pond was constructed it included the
treatment of our site for both the quality and quantity of storm water runoff.
Erosion control is to be installed prior to start of grading. Silt fencing will be installed in. all areas
where there is, potential runoff off the property. Rock entrance pads will be constructed at Golden
Hills Road to assist in keeping soil material from being carried to the adjacent roads. Upon
completion of the storm sewer, silt barriers will be installed around the structures to minimize silt
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I.
I
infiltration. Final erosion control will be completed when the sodding and landscaping work is
completed.
Utilities
Existing 8" watermains are located in the Frontage Road and Xenia Avenue. A proposed 6" line will
be extended from the existing line on the Frontage Road to each building in the Service Area. The
system is adequate in both size and pressure to serve the proposed buildings.
Existing 12" and 8" sanitary sewer lines are located in the Frontage Road and Xenia Avenue. A
proposed 6" line will be extended from the existing line on the Frontage Road to each building in the
Service Area. The system has adequate depth to serve the new buildings.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
That part of Government Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6, Section 4, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying southeasterly of the easterly right of way line of the Soo Line Railroad,
and lying northerly of a line 33.00 feet southerly of and parallel with the East- West Quarter line
of said Section 4 and lying westerly and southerly of a line described as commencing at the East
Quarter comer of said Section4; thence South 87 degrees 36 minutes 43 seconds West, assumed
bearing, along said Quarter line of Section 4, a distance of 620.69 feet; thence South 02 degrees
23 minutes 17 seconds East, a distance of 33.00 feet to said line lying 33.00 feet southerly of and
parallel with the East-West Quarter line of Section 4 and the point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence North 02 degrees 23 minutes 17 seconds West, a distance of 33.00 feet; thence
North 10 degrees 11 minutes 41 seconds West, a distance of 197.95 feet; thence North 21
degrees 57 minutes 51 seconds West, a distance of 95.97 feet; thence northerly a distance of
285.33 feet, along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 862.43 feet and a
central angle of 18 degrees 57 minutes 21 seconds; hence North 03 degrees 00 minutes 30
seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 17.84 feet; thence westerly, a distance of 46.82
feet, along a tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius of 30.00 feet and a central
angle of 89 degrees 24 minutes 51 seconds; thence South 87 degrees 34 minutes 39 seconds
West, tangent to last described curve, a distance of 274.22 feet; thence North 86 degrees 35
minutes 21 seconds West, a distance of 98.39 feet; thence South 87 degrees 34 minutes 39
seconds West, a distance of 244. 14 feet to said easterly right of way line of the Soo Line Railroad
and said line there terminating.
Area of above described property = 556,799 square feet or 12.782 acres
Note: This description is from a survey prepared by Sunde Land Surveying, LLC, dated April 2,
1999
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
SITE DATA
1. Total Area
2. Building Area Summary (GSF)
Phase I
Phase 2
3. Building Surface Area Summary:
Maximum Structure Surface Area Allowed
Per Standard Zoning 40% of total area
Phase I
Phase 2
Ramp
Phase 1 Parking Stalls required per Zoning
(400 x 4) =
Phase 2 Parking Stalls required per Zoning
(600x4)=
Phase 1 Parking Stalls Proposed:
Surface Parking
Ramp Parking
Phase 2 Parking Stalls Proposed:
Surface Parking
Ramp Parking
4. Site Surface Area Summary:
Maximum Outside Surface Parking Area
Required per standard Zoning]
(20% of556,799 s.f.)
Surface Parking Area and Interior
Street Area Proposed:
Landscaped Area Proposed:
556,799 s.f.
12.782acres
400,000 g.s.f.
200,000 g.s.f.
222,720 s.f.
42,356 s.f.
41,214 s.f.
87.053 s.f.
170,623 s.f. Total Structure Surface Area
= 31 % of total surface are
1600 total stalls required for phase 1
2400 total stalls required for phase 2
150 stalls
1454 stalls
1600 total stalls proposed phase 1
241 stalls
2190 stalls
2431 total stalls proposed phase 2
111,360 s.f.
141,464 s.f. phase 1 & 2
= 25% of total area
244,712 s.f. phase 1 & 2
= 44% of total area
"
;' ...'.;" -._ ~ ",;:'.:~:j.,~'::'5n.:.:r':' ::~?~;{?
;..,.-;
,.;:rj
~
~,,:;!,,:"l.j7
,.:illl ',--' 'b ~I':J
.... :.11-' ~.,.. ,~~_. ~.. _' -.....,.:...:~~....... - .;,.';'"
~,,----ojl:I~'
.~
'"
1::
_,; ...:t'- .'.. 1'1.;
It
EAST (XENIA AVENUE) ELEVATION
.' .... . . I' ,.~,. '.." r.i;\'1
";::' ......~:::.. iAI!lan~~.
.! .'
t-- -'.. . . . . . .' . '.' II
~ ....,.- .. ....... -
~ -- .,}. .;,;;. -: .', " " II
f-- ,.~ -...
f-- ..
t- f' ~ ~ "-.1
If--
!-- .--
<f,- - .. ~ I '. ,
.. .. . . .. . I-:-- 1:=:-: A~l"'.. . .. --
;:;I; . ." II I I I- '< ,.1", ,III I "II
~ .. I 'I: . r- 1= .,i<JI ," - II ..
_LL , ,. .. ". '. I==- _,' . i-' '.'
~-=i+ ., - . L -'-' f-- ,," r.,,' - II Ii . . II
I----U-' I I' '-- '" , ,;
P I .c .., i...,::::: '.<v,'~,..,.".,',.,. ,,' :.' ~,,~
~ p. -- - ,,' .. ~ - ~~Jir.'l\.~I': ~1f..J /'11 ''Y ,'-' . { ".. ,Il Jllr ,,' . ,'--" ~=;:;:;.Jl~~ . ~l!:
(..- ^ :,1\, ') " ';;' '~~l~t ~iJ; - If~:;..-t:CX~1-=:L1 ~ IJ.~1:) II. .. .1'1 'Xi ~-'~ n--+<~. r;. ~....~, t-~' iT, 'j- ......:., ..,.r ~;"'-"'''''"';''II'' ,"9.' '1';:0"""';11> ',' ,: -~~,,~.It..r .=.~ ;-':'I'-;;';<.(l'7'~ fJ;i~i'fif ~~r""ll~':I~t\I~3f.ftt~:l:I~~~O~
\.,,~,)JX~ MA--?... . f . .' . "'Yf"O;l'!." ~ ;.".tw. ~ ~~i --'~ ' . ;r~ i . b\,..I' IA~ '1\:1' . ~^-.'l!A.lo,...~~.,,, "'lYXJ
1\ -y 1r :.iJ!~I_1!iZ '"1" -v""T- .1'}1 'iijf'<T- 1f"~ T'r--~'1l1r T...~!'f1r~-.!j':,~~'.. . , "'-V~ LLc ~'I~~ .:C<:If+~~ . "'nrJS~~'~;'l_.. m \~:TI,.lH~"1 ....'~';:. ~.:. .,_. ..:" .~""!:J_~a>.:::---......"'"T,) , . r: .
...,.,."....,:,...,.,,;, :,,"~ ".:' ",;II .,....":'.-~~,~";.:. ~',''''..A.,..,..'~ ",~"..-,",'.._ ""~:~-'4 .:.:'~... _",""'_"~ .~., ...- ',_, ". ""~,:-/",""~"_;:.1._l'\;.",;"""__~,,,~,.;.,,_~":l.o__....z-=.::.........t_..-.,.... , ....."
/
"
...~ ..';'':'~;' -_._-~--..--_.__.~.-.__.._-_.-~ ---~...- ~-.---....-~"
=----------~"....-
. r..
SOUTH (I 394) ELEV A nON
ProJect ALLlANZ/L1FE USA CORPORATE CAMPUS Comm. No. 2000-015 ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE
GOLDEN VALLEY, ~N Dol. 12 06 99
Titl. PRELIMINARY P.U.D. 400 CLIFTON AVENUE SOUTH
Drawing No.
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55403.3291
atO TEL 1112)171.5703 FAX 11121871-7212
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
1
1
I'
1
I
~
i
II"
Bi~
"ll~ II
I:!!j! Jl
!JEh
~.
I
I
a
s
.
II
.
7
A
.
c
POl<<l
D
CORPORATE CAMPUS AREA PLAN, PHASE 1 & 2
~
lOll'
art
.
.
SITE DATA
lTClll_12JI2
I""""""" I
.. _"'_(G&F.~
-,
-,
-....
l!!.l!!e!
...........TClll
I. -.---s....,:
---...-
,.,--
..._.....-l2I.l2D"""
--...-
P!lQt --. a.&tqt.
Ptz.t2 _ .st.2!4a;.t.
RIqt _ I7JEl8Q.I.
I f70,6Zt.~:.=-=: I
A.- t PdrISikMMd
pwSllDidlarq-
-.
-'---
",,---
_.
.........-....,
2CCOkiaI....IlIc.d....2
-'---
Sufal'drl - UilIIIt6
..._ _ l!Il.III!!l
.......--....,
-'---
am.PIlttlQ_ 24tlllb
...- - 8"__112
4 SlIo_"'_
----...
-,.,--
ZlIrlfi5lU&t1ql.. II' - ",'-.
--.......
btIdIrar.t_~ _ 114t,018QJL1IIlIII162-2K0I1I:tII1lldIte.. I
\..BndIapedlnaPlllllll8lld:--.t 12M.712IiQ.I.~'.2._~"fllIlbIlIIfa.. I
10
ARtHlTEtTOBAl ALLIANCE
.. CUf111 A_' IU1II
.--.....-.........
flLUIIIIII1I1I".11II
"'II1I1In.m.
.....,. .....
0IIutld and ~
I~ltl -: -' .-~_
(It I) _..
1M .....
LaIIcb and a-kdn
nao_,-__
""""-.---
(IU) --
I ...., ..., IIIi III ..... _ -'" lr
..-..---......
........... ~ -........
..-..-
For __
.,
1Il1o_
....- -
_for
-p-
-
~
_ Be. 2GllO-OIS
_ .n
-
_ I2GJII
......
ALUANZ UFE
UFE USA
CORPORATE CAMPUS
GOLDEN VALLEY. UN
.....1Il1o
AREA PLAN
PIfASE 2
a PrellDminarv
Not for co~
.
~
I
I ·
Uti
It~.
ij~~~Jl
!Jlh
a
S
s
"
.
7
.
I'
A
. .
" '.
. .~ .. .
:.' .... &:1'-':.:::::..:-:...\\. . .-:;~~~i:U~:J-{~,~:~',- ..,\. ....':,..... .:........\\.~.....:...:
. ~.. ,........................ ..~.. ....\\
-' '.' '. .'. ,:,::-::",;,,:~::,<::,::':r;.;,;..':.'~.. :. ..... ".: "':. \ \. 6.
/fl
. ..... . . -.'
." . .',;'~<<:;'~.;;:;:: h c.,:; :'?>~;';'", . " .,\: ;:". \; ". .
.
bf........
11....
c
D
CORPORATE CAMPUS SITE PLAN, PHASE 1 & 2
~
fill
IlIt
ARtHlTEtTUBAl ALLIANCE
... c..,.. A..... I..,'
MIlIIUIlIUI, _llITA ......1111
nU..UIII1I1.n.ma
'AllIl1.IIIl.m. .
........ r.....-
0IIuIld and -'-lafII
IJS-.:.' .-!ld_
(112) ...,..
ClIoI r.....-
lDucb CIIId AaMIaIn
==-~~-
(IIJ) --
I....,.... ...~_ -""..
._:.,_ .....1-
.., . -.......
..-..-
,., --
If
--
~-
_lor
_.JIIl.
-
~
_ It. ~G15
_ ,fH
-
_ 1211311
f'nIocI
AWANZ UFE
UFE USA
CORPORATE CAMPUS
GOlDEN VALLEY, UN
..... -
8TE PLAN
PIfA8E 2
a Preliminarv
Not for conatiUCil8n
"
.
c
D
I
I
I E
il.
8t~1l
ij~t!!~Jl
!~.dii!
a
3
10
II
.
7
.
.
A BtHlTEtTUBAl ALLIANCE
-~
. . .
. .. . .
. .... . ". . '.... ."
:.. .......~.. ;.:...:.:'.:~...::': .~:' :. ..~.... .'.::;:":'::~.:.:'.' -~:. .:'>.:. .,,' . .
,:-,. .:: .....,:-:.:...:.,:..,;:..:..::.::'::::: ""..: .. .:,.::.....:." ....:..~::...: :. ..
': ~:':' .:: "'. "',
~:::J::~ ~:::::t::::~:
~<:{~i_ .t~3~~'
~~~p~:::
'~OF~
'm~ ~~
.. . '0-
",:':.;' '.':.'.:. .., ...'t.'
jr-"
. lM_
r-----Jt------....
i '
. I
I '
. I
,
,
40_-
/
,
I ...
fi.:------------ .
......
.. - - - - -
. .
'. Fe' ....... .:>::n:,;.(,';'.:;<{i\',:': '.
~.>.. ....
. . .
. ::: .... ".' .. ,: . .
.... ",(~.,:'.., .'.<',S.:::.:);"::':"':'<?:"'~ ./!;}j::i'::f,:;;:.~t';'j':~r;:'~, ;<::.:. ',:'..;':::'.: ...\ ."X:{:':;: ::.,;';::: .;-j'{::Y':.::..:::'<.' ....V.-;'.. '.': .
... C1.'. ".......n.
___.ITA.M...Ut.
nu....llI1ll1n.ma
fAll II1IUI1.m.
..-. .....-
0IIuncl 0IId ~
.It~.... !Id_
~"
CIII .....-
Loudca and u-rota
7lIlIO_a-.__
.... II-. ___
(Ill) __
........., "'=:r:- -- '"
._-..- ......
0....... _....."
--,,-
rot ___
:~:~::. <j:':'"
::.' ". ..... ',1',
;.' '-':":"'.:
:. ......
",-: .;.
... ..
If
--
.......- -
;J.G
__
_'.lID.
-
~
_... 2lllllI-lIlS
_ .f8
-
_ 12mllll
........
ALUANZ UFE
UFE USA
CORPORATE CAMPUS
'::'::i1~';::::::~;~;_~~~~:;:~;~:
GOLDEN VALLEY. UN
llNolIot -
CORPORATE CAMPUS SITE PLAN, PHASE 1
~
8ITE PLAN
PHASE t
a Pre~Dmilnarv
Not for conitNCi8n
!II
l1lIt
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I-
I-
I
I
I.
I
I
J
lith
a
s
.
It
1
.
10
~ 11
,.".. 10
A I ~~... 9
..... 9
:/111". 7
...... 9
u.... 5
u.... 4
IR... a
~A.. 2
. -
~.... 1
.....I!iIllM
~
SITEJBUILDING SECTION AA
LOCATION MAP
..' \ I ~.;:' .
.
fit
.,
~ ~ONEBUlDmG t-~ PAmNG~ ~
~
11
iO
i'
i
7
B
i
4
a
2
1
dI!ttM
~
---
c
dIWM
~
~
1.IlOl
EAST ELEVATION
fit
lIlII
o
~
I. ~1WOBUJLDING ~ (P~) ~ PHASEONEBUllDtlG ~
E
GWll
8llN!0!l1'llECAllT
Il1IHl
---
11lsmES)
I......
SOUTH ELEVATION
fit
.,
ABtHlTEtJOBAl ALLIANCE
... C'If'" A....llDn.
1I_1,1II....IIU.14lJoml
TI......III1.II".....
'AI mil """"
I.tMaopo ......
0IIund and AuNlata
I.JS-, ':J' .-~_
(112) .......
1M loIIow
LauclallIIIII ~
--,---
==----
'..... ..., ...~- """ "
.._"'.. .....1-
0... ...... _ II ... ..
..-..-
.. --
If
--
.......- -.-
--
_'.WI.
-
~
_Ie. ~
_ .flf
-
_ 12 IU III
......
AWANZ UfE
UFE USA
CORPORATE CAMPUS
GOLDEN VALLEY. UN
...... 1Il1o
PreOOmil'1larv
Not for eonatiUCii6n
\~~
r'T D i RAST A
v I I;
~1o
'<
t')
. ." .':' ~
("'v
,l-.J~
407.. ,..,....<'-=
r""...'
r' J' NORTH
r-
..)
~...-.=.- 0 50 100
i\n.....J
SCALE IN FEET
.-----
~
..') '-.>
v .
,
"'""'"-
I-STOlrI" o:JNCRETE 8I.OCI(
HQ(ItC"'~
S54"7"J'E
Jo. 6.J
h
.-. .',' . ,-" S8'--'~"W HWY. NO 394 ........ .
. .' '. ..' ,-..... WTERST;;4TE . .
:. '! ." A' . .... ..... -..'
,'. .'.. . ,'"
.' '. . ~ .
. . 'I
,', . '.' .
. .
..'
c')
.... .
"
.... ,
...."
....,::;;
.........
....>
~....
o
~:.'
........
cJ
cJ
"("
....>
I~""
1...1../
cJ
.... .../ f......
~O /-J
," 1...1 I
'- """oJ
"...
-...
G') l1
..J J....
~ c-'i
~ Q"'
- ~('
c~
t:,J' ~
rJ.J ,,;
,-, t-
i,]
~~
,0 .
~...
~
CAUTION
TBIB DRAWING WAS PBBPAIIED FOB llEVIE1f BY TBB CLIENT.
CITY AND OTBBB BEGlILATOBY AGENCIES. TBB DRAWING SHOtlLD
NOT BE BEL1BD UPON FOB CONSTRUCTION OR FOB TBB PREPARATION
01' OTBBB PLANS. TBIB DRAWING IS SDBJECT TO I'OTlIEB mmsIONS
AS BEQ1IJBED BY TBB CLIENT OB OTBBB llEVIE1fING AGENCIBS.
....-
V.y/
GOLDEN HILLS
BUSINESS PARK
GOLDEN VALLEY, MN
-
AWANZ LIFE/LIFE USA
.lllOSllUIII_,II
IIlI1lEAI'I1JS, MIIIIlESGTl 554Z8
c/O: IWlDI HIlGIlI:S
($12) 591-5217
CITYOP
.. 1\ City of
- '" . Golden Valley
MINNESOTA
A1I:IllIIR
A8CHlTECTURAL ALLIANCE
400 CLIFTON AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOU8~ MINNESOTA !84ft-UII
TELEPHONE 11121171-110a
FAX (.121 nt.nll
.......,""'"
CI-IIBllIlmlllIC01OIImDlilI
CS-l ~~~
<<:4-1 PIIBUIII!WI!' D'I'JLl'IT PLA1It
to-l PRELDOlWIY PLAT
I ..., -.... Dlcl tlIII ,., ~ . ,... _
......e,- _....,.... ~., tllItl
_ 0 ~ bfItnd .......... r..-. __ .. '-
.,12lI aca 0'1_
1....1- 1
lllWM- .......
..
.....
~~
-.-.-.-.-
--~,.,..~-
EXISTING CONDITIONS
L:JI CH I
I
I.
I
\a I
~ \ r4l,;"J \
\~ UI '\-
,
R A
,.. ...
... I
l-
I'"
I
......
.....
o
l:.....
.......
c.)
c-J
"'1:.. A " ...
t ~ 'OJ .
\ ~_ _ftl!llI:
-\\. -<> . . , . C '/ ""...
I
c?
... .
""
:::.1
~
"
I
I
,{. .J
t")
I
"~
I.;;
Cj
.....~' 1-.....
o C')
\~ ,LV
'''!i':.h,
-...
<.-
I'\)v
....'1.'\\.(..
,....... ()'I.""
l-(';v .......
.)-
I
I
I-
NOBTB
hrtJOO
SCALB IN FBBT
I
--
--
........
t;.,.J
.."f
I
I;~ fi
~I ,,>
~ r'j
.... (j
:.. ""
/f ..~
,0" ro./
,.~ ....
ti
~
<'I .
':j'v
<).
,
..."c-
,-~
I
I
$5<;":7'I:!T
Jf).fJJ
I
I.
I
. .,
::-
....
.....
. : INTERSTATE 394 QN-AAMP
"
CA1JTION
I
'IBIS DItaIII8 'DB ..._ JaB ...... _ !1m 1lUIlIr,
Cll'l'MID .... -..mar MII5CDI !1m __ 8II'01IUl
..., . -.aD 1JPOlIf JaB _._~ oa JaB !1m __ ...&~
., .... JlI.&'I8. 'IBIS IIUIJ1IG . 8IDImCl' to IUIIIII ___
111_ _!1m IlUIlIr oa.... __ .
INTERSTATE 394
GOLDEN HILLS
BUSINESS PARK
GOLDEN VALLEY, MN
ALUANZ UFI/UFE USA
IlIO SlIUIB _ '8 .
IIIIII".II'lIU! IIIIE5llIA _
~1I.II1lDr1lllHS
(tl2)Itl-52l7
CITY OP
.. 1\ City of
- ... - Golden Valley
MINNESOTA
..........
ARCHITECTURAl ALLIANCE
400 CLlFTOII AYEIIUE 80UTH
MIMMEAPlUI, MIMME.llTA 1.....1211
TELEPlIOME 1.111.71-171.
FAX 11121171-1111
...... I ......
a-.
.......
........ COIlIIlDllIII
~~'1,'f,~a-
PIII!UIOlWIT Imflft' ......
PIII!UIOlWIT I'f.&1'
C4-1
......1
........--............,...-
~_-.__.,e.:t~......
- .."................ ,....... .....
......fII~
.....
--
II"'Jr.iI'E'-~..=-
C_~.~tt_.-a. OlIO..
- ...~---~ ...............
..fir "'....,.,-~......
= s::.=:=....:: ...........::- .
=-._..-:'=-::'t.~.:~
~:a:f.~~-::""',
,.... 1- I
---- ......
...
.....-
'n~
~&..~ .~.,~
-- . ....... . ..,......... .......
---=......==-.-
GRADING, DRAINAGE AND
EROSION CON'l'ROL PLAN I
L::J1~1 II
I
I.
I
\
/
/
/
;.
....>
<C....
o
;..'...,....
cj....
Cj
"'(
C>
1\.
I
L..
,....
~,
"-' .
t\ I r\
I'll V.
727.24
~
v
..,
I
I
G')
.... '
"
.... '
...."
....'-
<:
I
/
R1.IlBER O\'ERl.Ay.
J
125
I
/j
1;:::-
)
I
~>
<C....
t.1..j
Cj
.... ,,' ;......
~O ,G')
\" 1..1 I
~ ..."
~...
-"
<~
t-VV
, ,.:~('
"'"..... '
, I-J'
I~()V
..)
I
I
NORTH
I.
hfi...jDD
SCALE IN FEET
---
I
"'-
.;..,-/
oJ
c? _6~
"'oJ J....
"-..J ii
::: t:S'
'f
, V'
<'"l '..)'
~
,0'
':,....
I
"~~
\~F
~\
\~ \~~ EXISTING
~ ~ '7 \ it" COLONNADE
,,~ \\ \\ \ .....~ BUILDING
\\In....'''~.\ " JC
~':'". lj;~~~ ~....~ ,,- 15Stor1es
't~\ _....~ ~\ ...
't.\if,. _
~ \ \ ' S54"7'IJ'c
~ . J0.6J
I
I
//
,
/ /'
,
/ ,,'
/ ,'/
,
I
I
c: c
t:J' :;}
i/ (';
'- ti
~'J
~~
I
I
/269.60 '\ /,--/~
PRO!'OSEl) I / /
l/T1IJTY EASEWENT.d--'
I.
I
INlERSTATE 394 oN-AAMP
CAUTION
I
IN1ERSTATE 394
'l'BIS D1tl1rlNG WAS PBEPABED FOB BEVIEY BY TID!l CLlBNT.
CITY' AND OTBEB REGtlL\TOBY AGENCIES. TID!l DBl1llNG SBOtlLD
NOT BE RELIED UPON FOB CONSTJIUC'l'ION OR FOB TID!l PBEPABlTION
OF OTBEB PI.\NS. 'l'BIS D1tl1rlNG IS SUB1BCT TO FllTIID BE9JSlONS
AS BIQtIlBBD BY TID!l CLlBNT OR OTIIBR BEVJB1IJNG AGENCIES.
GOLDEN HillS
BUSINESS PARK
GOLDEN VALLEY. MN
-
ALLlANZ LIFE/LIFE USA
.llIOSlIUTIl_Yl69
IIOOiW'OlIS, IIINHESOTA S542&
c/o: IWIGERl' IlUGIIIS
(612) 591-52\7
CITY 0'
.. 1\ City of
- "" . Golden Valley
MINNESOTA
.-
ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE
400 CLIFTON AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA U4C1S-UII
TELEPHONE (.12117'.170.
FAX 18121111.7212
BIIBSt I 'ITItE
Cl-I
.......
C4-.
......
IlllIllTlNlI COIIIlmDIIB
~~~B
PllEUIIIIWlT llTll.m .......
PIlI:lIIOIWI'II'lJIr
1__-=7Ull1ttlll:l..~.~_
J"PC"db1_or_,.,clnat~..,tlldl
.. 0 dlq ~"..... ~ ..... 1M...
ofe.lItGted--='
.... ..
....
1- 1- I
---
...
.....
JL~~
-.-.-.-.-
--..:::.u::t~-
FIGURE 14
UTILlTY PLAN
~I C4-11
~
I
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF:
I.
I
NORTH
hJi...J0
ElCISTING PROPEllTY OESCRll'TIllN
Thot part of Go'lIernment Lot, 3. 4, 0 ond e. SectIon 4, TownshIp
117, Ranoe 2J, _In Caml~ u_ta. '''''' __Wl10f
the easterly right of -;I Ilne of tho Soa line Ralltood. and
~ ii:U~~~Ilno-: t,' o'l"":L.:'_ ~ ="~)lng
westerly and s:autherI, of 0 One desc:rQ)ed as cornmenc~ at the
Eat Quarter oomor of MIld SectIon 4; thence South '7 defreea J8
_4J-.Woot,__90"",",oo!dllll_llno
of SoclJon", _ of 820.66 _ _ South 02 _
23 mInutes 17 aeonde Eaat, a dtatCll'tC8 of 3100 re.t to aaId line
IJfna 33.00 feet aoutherl, of and pordIeI wfth the Eoat-Wnt
awtter nne of Sec:tJon .. and the potnt of beatnntn; of the Ilne
to be cIescrtbed; tMnoe North 02 dogreea 23 mInutes f7 seconds
Woot, . _ of 33.00_ _North 10 _ II
mtnutes 41 seconds West. a dIatance of 191.95 feet: thcnco North
21 dclgreos 07 mIm.rtcs DI IeCOl'tda West. a dJatanco of "-97 feet;
=- c:::'foa:=h~~ ~ :CS:2.~ ~: 0
central ont of 18 clotrea 57 mliwtes 21 seconds; hence North OJ
== of r7~teafe: =- ~m:ce-:f ::82 a
feet. oIong a tcmgentlG1 CUJW concow to the southwest hovInt 0
rad!uII of 3G.OO fest oncI a Cl!lfttral ClI'lgIe of 89 de;rea 24 mlnvtn
at seconds; thence South 87 de:grca 34 mfnuta 39 acon:cfa WCII"
tangent to lost da:wlkd curwe. 0 dtstanoo of 274.22 fut;
~~u:a"C. ~= ~-=:. ~~a;~ofo
Car:: ~4.::' IG~ -:: ~,",,~9~ lIne of the
~ of _ __ '-1 - 556._ _ fool or 12.162
ALLIANZ LIFE USA ADDITION
SCALE IN FEET
I
-B
I
I
,
I
...~
<'...
o
~:....
......
CJ
Cj
~<
1"\
LJ
"""'" ......
-~I ~........
t't-jv. )
_727.24
I
G'J
....J
... .
.....,
...~
"'1""
Note: Land ~t.&tlGtldot~ tr,;u 0 2. ~ prcpcred by Sunde
~c
-
I
I
~
~
\
.t ~
'. <0\/
,<-
-0,";.....
ifa....
Cj
IJ:
")
I
...~ ~'
c~j I~'
... . f..
J,'f e,,'/ I
~.') l,.j ,
~,.. IJ / 1
-,.. lII;' 1......,,'
I I. ,/
IV .
I,
-ltH.D.m,
- -/,/
-- ,
,
'. I /'
....:;... I
,'? (:: I'
~y ~S" I
,;)...~~.).( I ,/
,9 r:' ,
-~.)- ~,~ ,
\... C'} f
if I,'
,
11/
IV 1/
UiJ
, <0'
'J'
I.
..)
I
I
...~
?,....I
J
I
.. {:; ,
,
I
I
I
>e ~ '-.............
~ I . \:.~.=
. :~~_~ m__~m
-,I ___~~ .........
,.- ''''''----,-- .........
'" ~~~l", I ..
~~ I I : ".
\~ I '. :
\' I
" \
I.
I
f
L
58r.16'4J"W . .... """ ..
~~-i";:'
/269.60 \ i ..7
~~~/~
. }'
CAUTION
I
THIS D1IA1IING WAS PREPABBD FOR 1lB'iJBlf BY THE CUEN'l.
ClTY AND OTBBB Bl!GtlLA.'lOBY AGENCIES. TBE DBA'lJNG SJI0tlLD
NOT BE BELIED OPON FOB CONSTBUC'l'JON OR POR TBE PREPARATION
01' OTBBR PLANS. THIS DBA1IING IS S1lJUEC1' TO I'llTBEB BEVlSJONS
AS REQUIRED BY TBE CL1BNT OR OTBBB BEYInING AGENCJBS.
GOLDEN HillS
BUSINESS PARK
GOLDEN VALLEY, MN
ALLlANZ LIFE/LIFE USA
3lll SOUTH _T 119
IIOOIEAPOUS, IIIIIK!SOt\ 55426
C/o: IWllEllI IlllGIIIS
(612) 591-5217
CI T TOP
... 1\ City of
- "" - Golden Valley
MINNESOTA
.6BllIIrIICZ
A8CHlTECTU8AL ALLIANCE
4110 CLIFTON AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA 114D3..81111
TELEPHONE 1112117'.1103
FAX 11121111..7111
'""""
mIB
Cl-l
.....,
......
C6-.
IIIIlmIIlICIIlIIlllIOlOl
~~=-
PIIIlIJIOIIWlY llTIlm PLAII
PIIIlIJIOIIWlY .....
1~~tI'IOItldI....,.-..NpCW'I_
prIIpllNCIbJ_._.,__~_1bGt1
_a"""*-d~LGlld~__o.
....otI..st:at:eof.....
.......
....-
1- 1- I
~:: I=="~T RIVISDCS
--.......
..
--
. 4udr1 .
J,:,:,& - ~ '*'- ~
-.-.-.-.-
--..:::.=:rl:'l.r.-
PRELIMINARY PLAT
1-n:?O II ce-11
.~\ .
Ij
.
.
.
"
Allianz Life
Memorandum
Date: D~cember -3, 1999
To: Maggie Hughes
From: Ed. Fitzpatrick
Employee Support Services
I
Subject: Allianz Life - Traffic Management Plan
City ordinances require that an owner of a building such as the Allianz Life building must develop
a Traffic Management Plan. Following is a narrative of the current Allianz Life programs which
support the Traffic Management Plan requirements.
Allianz Life Traffic Management Plan
Allianz Life is aware thatthe'development of the Golden Hills site, as the corporate office for
Allianz Life,wiII have an impact on the traffic within the surrounding community. We view
ourselves as a member of the community and recognize that being a responsible citizen is
important. We intend to be a resident of Golden Valley for may years to come. Allianz Life is an
established company with over 100 years of history as a Minnesota based company. We have
been in our current location for over 50 years. To continue this heritage, we are plaryning to build
a home that will be of high quality to enhance the community and attract employees looking for a
quality work environment. . i
Allianz Life recognizes the need to engage ourselves with the community. We have \- history of
supporting programs which bring the employees and community together. Some of t~e programs
include: Employee wellness programs, subsidized m~ss transit and car po.ol programs, flexible
work hours, priority parking for car pooling, community volunteer programs Corporate Charitable
Giving and community clean-up efforts. .
As part of the Traffic Management Plan Allianz Life would commit to support efforts to manage
the traffic to minimize the quality of life impact on the community. The programs currently in
place are: .
Flexible Work Hours:
Allianz Life has a flexible work hours program which has been in place since 1987. This program
enables an employee to work a schedule which meets their personal needs as well as the
~
,
corporate needs. Our office hours are from 6:30 am-to 6 PM 5 days per week. Currently
approximately 30% of our employees work a schedule which is outside the normal 8 to 5 office .
business hours. We will continue this program. As a single tenant building we will work with the
local community to monitor the impact the starting and ending times will have on the traffic.
Mass Transit and Car Pooling Program:
We currently sell and subsidize public transportation passes for our employees. The company
pays 50% of the- cost of a bus or car pool pass. We will continue to support tAe programs. In
the design of the building we will work with the city and mass transit companies-to provide bus
stops for our employees and transit scheduling to encourage the use of mass transit as an
option.
- .-
To encourage car pooling we provide priority parking in our parking lots. We will continue this
program.
Transportation Coordinator
Currently our facilities group works with the local community to address any traffic or parking
issues that arise~ We will continue this 'practice and have a single source of contact who will work
with the community to address concerns and issues.
Allianz Life will work closely with the community to review traffic patterns and educate our
employees on any issues and implement changes if necessary.
-
Employee Wellness Programs
.
Allianz Life is a firm believer in promoting wellness for our employees. We have a large number
of employees who exercise during the day. In the design of the building we will be providing
locker facilities to accommodate employees who walk or bicycle to work. Many employees also
walk or run during the day. The community provides an excellent trail system. To augment this
we will design into our landscape plan sidewalks which will promote employee access to the trails.
We have found this reduces the traffic coming and going from the facility during the day.
In our new building we will also be providing a subsidized cafeteria for our employees. Having
an on-site cafeteria reduces the number of employees who will leave the building during the
working day. This will reduce the traffic during the noon hours.
cc: City of Golden Valley City Planner
Attachments
.
, ,.
.
Pay & Hours
Flexible Work Hours
Effective Date:. 01/01/92
Revision Date: Not Applicable.
Related Guidelines
Hours of Employment, Overtime, and shift Premium ~
Guideline
.
Flexible Work Hours may enable employees to have a daily or weekly work
schedule that is more convenient for their personal situation within the framework
of maintaining effective area operations. Refer to the guideline "Hours of
Employment, Overtime, and Shift Premium" ~ for information regarding work
hours.
The Flexible Work Hours program is designed to help you create a work schedule
on a daily or weekly. basis that is pe~onally convenient and yet maintains
effective area operations.
You can request the Flexible Work Hours program from your manager. Your
Flexible Work Hours program is subject to your area work requirements 'as
determined by your manager. .
Starting times for Flexible Work Hours are from 6:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. five. days
per week. Starting times can be set within this time period.
Once your Flexible Work Hour schedule is established, it is considered permanent
and should remain in effect for a minimum of six months (subject to effective area
operations).
Provisions
. Eligibility
All full-time and part-time employees are eligible for flexible hours.
. Conditions
- Each manager has the authority to determine whether. Flexible Work Hours .
can be established for all or some of the positions in their area
> The regular work day runs from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (8 1/2 hours - 5 days
per week).
> Employees can request to work flexible work hours (5 days per week)
from their manager. Starting times for flexible work hours are 6:30.- 9:00
a.m.
> The lunch and break periods are to be taken as per the schedule established
by each manager.
> The Overtime Policy remains unchanged.
> Employees may request exceptions to the Flexible Work Hours Policy
from their manager. Refer to the guideline "Hours of Employment,
Overtime, and Shift Premium" II for information regarding work hours.
The priorities for decisions regarding flexible hours are:
> Maintenance of effective area operations, phone coverage and client
service.
> Additional costs to the Company.
> Employee performance.
> Employee preference.
- Normally, a Flexible Work Hours schedule is considered permanent and
should remain in effect for a minimum of six months. However, managers
,. should be sensitive to the individual needs or situations that may occur
regarding work hours of their employees that are outside of these guidelines.
I
,
I
Procedures . i
- The manager determines whether employees can be put on a FI~xible Work
Hours Schedule, what. the sche~ule will be, and m~es necessary changes
using the priorities for decisions listed above.
A record of employees working in the Flexible Work Hours Program and their
schedules must be maintained for review by Human Resources and Payroll.
Exceptions to this policy should be approved in advance by the manager's
Senior Vice President (for example: work at home, variable work day hours,'
four (4) day work weeks, and so on). Refer to the guideline "Hours of
Employment, Overtime, and Shift Premium" IIfor information regarding work
hours.
.
.
it"
.
.
.
Employee Progr~ms & Services
-
Bus CardNan Pool Pass
Effective Date: 11/01/92
Revision Date: 01/01/93
Related Guidelines
None.
Guideline
Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America (Allianz Life) encourages
ridership of the mass transit system. Therefore, an employee may purchase a
monthly bus card via payroll deduction at a discount through Allianz Life, or
arrange for participation in a van pool which could also be payroll deducted.
To assist an. employee with the cost of the monthly bus card or van pool pass,
A1lianz Life will subsidize up to one-half the cost. The first $60.00 of the
monthly subsidy will be a non-taxable b~nefit to the employee. IRS regulations
allow for exclusion of the subsidy from an employee's compensation.
Bus cards for Minneapolis employees are distributed monthly with the end of the
month paycheck. Van pool passes need to be arranged for by the employee and
reimbursement coordinated with Human Resources.
Procedures
Employee:
- 'Contact Human Resources and complete a form authorizing the deduction of
the monthly amount of the bus' card or van pool pass from the paycheck.
(Direct reimbursement for the van pool should be submitted via a check
request.)
Forward the authorization to Corporate Human Resources Payroll for
processing.
Cancel the payroll deduction for the bus card or van pool by notifying Payroll
in Corporate Human Resources via writing or electronic mail.
.-
Security
.
Building Security
Effictive Date: 11/01/92
- Revision Date: NotApplicable.
Related Guidelines
Information Security ~
Guideline
Allianz. Life Insurance Company of North America (Allianz Life) provides
employees with safe and secure working conditions, in the interest of employees,
for good business practices, and in compliance with legal requirements.
This guideline states actions the Company takes to provide this security and the
role all employees have in keeping Company sites safe and accident free.
Building security and access, theft, and medical, as well as nonmedical procedures .
are addressed.
Provisions
Security Guards
The home offices of Allianz Life have security personnel on site 24 hours per day,
or when Company receptionists who monitor entrance to the building are not at
work.
Security personnel at field - offices are available as' provided by building
management/owners at the location of each office.
Security Access C~rds
Security access cards are used at most sites and for a variety of security l?urposes:
employee identification, as well as building, office, or elevator access.
Some sites provide the added security measure of requiring that employees wear a .
photo badge at all times for identification and to access company premises.
,-
I
.
.
.
Visitors
The company welcomes visitors but must assure that each visitor is not a security
risk when given access t~ the building. For that reason, visitors are not allowed
access to most company sites without escort by an employee.
Visitors must sign in, and some sites require that visitors wear a visifor's
identification badge.
Safety Team
The Safety Team. is trained by building security management. This team
periodically monitors the building to ~sure it is free of fire hazards and that fire .
equipment is operational. The Safety Team is also trained on specific emergency
procedures for fire, bad weather, bomb threats, or other emergencies which could
require immediate evacuation of the building at a time when exit may be difficult.
Theft or Loss
While the company is not liable for lost or stolen personal items, employees are
encouraged to take precautionary measures to minimize this kind ofloss by:
- Not leaving purses or wallets or other personal items of value in plain sight or
unattended anywhere in a work area.
Safeguarding company keys at all times.
Marking personal propertY for identification.
Parking Lot Security I
1
Security in par~ lot areas is provided to employees according to ~mpany site
parking facilities regulations. \ .
i
Procedures
...
Er:nergencies
Employees witnessing a suspicious or threatening situation, or any eI?ergency
must immediately contact building services/security management, company
management, and call 911 when necessary.
In case of a medical or nonmedical emergency, each site activates emergency
procedures through building services/security management. Security Team
members (if provided at company site) must then contact appropriate members of
their team and begin emergency procedures.
.
Medical Emergencies
An employee who becomes aware of an actual or potential emergency calls 911,
building services/security management and the Safety Team (if available on site).
Fire Emergency
An employee who becomes aware of. a fire, regardless of the size must sound a
fire alarm located in the building, contact 911, building services/security
management and the Safety Team (if. available on site) and prepare for. the
possibility of evacuating the building.. .
Weather/Storm Emergency
In the event of severe weather emergency, employees will be notified over the
public address system or the site's form of all employee communication.
According to weather conditions, employees will be advised where in the building
to wait out the situation, or advised to evacuate the premises..
Bomb Threat
An employee who receives or is aware of a bomb threat must immediately
advise the manager, and building serVices/security management.
An announcement will then be made to all employees to evacuate the building.
Emplo~ees will be advised when it is safe to return to work.
Security Cards
Human Resources delivers to each employee a building access card and or an
employee identification card on their first day of work.
An employee who loses a security access card contacts building
services/security. Lost non-electronic employee identification cards are
reported to Human Resources.
Lost and Found
While there is no Lost and Found in the company, it is recommended that an
employee who loses or finds another person's belonging. should immediately .
report the incident to their manager.
"r . - t
"
~
.
.
.
..
LifeUSA@)
February 26, 1999
TO:
FROM:
REF:
All Home Office Owners
C.h~ritabl~ c.ontribntinn~ Cnmmittep. nfthp..Dwners' Council
EXCITING NEw APPROACH TO COMMUNITY SUPPORTI
WE WANT TO MAKE AWORLD OF DIFFERENCE. At our.!}uarterlymeetin...g with
the OOC, we talked about refining, improving and renewing our commitment to giving to
the community.
Life USA is a leader in the industry. We also want to be a leader in giving to the -
community. We.hQpe that the QewlY e!panded-prQgram of commQPity sqpport reflects
our commitment and support of your involvement in the Twin Cities.
.
Effective immediately, every Owner will be able t.Q de$jgnate $100 -Pet: year t9 any
organization that is important to you personally, paid for by LifeUSA This is in lieu of
"feeling in a bind" when. you are ap-proached by Owners with so many..good causes. You
can choose any cause throughout the year. Let us know that's where you want all or part
of your $100 to go. You can do this by simply submitting the attached form to the
Charitable Contributions Committee of the Owners' Council any time during the year you.
want to make.a contribution.from the.$lOO.
In addition, effective immediately (and working out scheduling in your area), every owner
can take one paid day a year for volunteer community work.
We're not through giving yet. As an enterprise, we want to tie more closely to our core
philosophies to support families, educatioIlo self reliance and building long tenn
relationships. Therefore, we believe it will have more of an impact if every two years, we
choose three organizations that we can contribute time and money to during the year.
(This year it's $100,000.) These may be the organizations you decide to spend your day
supporting.
In this effort, we need your help. Attached is"a form where you can list three
organizations whose objectives you think mesh with LifeUSA's values. It can be an
organization we've already worked with (Wayside House, Washburn, .etc.) or someone
new. We'll tally up your re~onses and then have the top five organizations come in and
make brief presentations. Then, we all can choose.
Here's a few final notes. First... the Holding company will also have a contributions budget
they will continue to use to support organizations they designate. Second, attached is the
Charitable Contributions Committee's mission statement and objectives for your reference.
Please complete the ''Make a World of Difference" form included and return to the box
by the reception area on seventh floor no later than March 5. If you hav~ guestions... don't
hesitate to call Bonnie Hicks, ext 5343 or Carrie Newman, ext. 6176. Thank you.
~
.
.
.