The URL can be used to link to this page

10-10-88 PC Agenda � . ` Gblden Va1)ey Planning Commission Civic Center, 7800 Go}den Valley Road Monday, October 10, 1988 � ' 7:00 P.M. - AGENDA I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 26, 1988 II. PRESENTATION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. Ron Clark Construction - Area C of Valley Square B, Lincoln Property Company - NE Quadrant of Highway 55 and Highway 100 in fxpanded Narth Wirth Parkway Redevelopment District C. Bossardt Christenson Carparation - Narth i�irth Parkway Redevelopment District ' III. I-394' OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE IV. REPORT ON OCTOBER 4, 19$8 CTTY COU�ICIL �IEETING � * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * � * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PLANNING COMMISSION 6UIDELINES fOR PUBLTC INPUT The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. The Commission will recormnend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon the Co�nission's determination of whether the proposed use is permitted under the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the pro- ' posed use will, or will not, adversely affect the surround9ng neighborhood. The Commission holds informaT public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to learn, 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 be used by the Gouncil, along with the Co�nission's recomnendation, in reaching its decision, To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comnents and questions, the Corrrnission will utilize the following procedure: 1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recommendatiorr from staff. Commission rr�mbers may ask questions of staff. ' 2. The proponent will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the Commission. 3. The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so indicate by raising their hands. The Chair may set a time limit for individual questions/comnents if a large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak. Spakespersons for groups'will have a longer period of time for questions/comrnents. 4. Please give your full name and address clearly when recognized by the Chair. Remember, your questions/comnents are for the record. � 5. ,Direct your questions/comnents 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 initial}y. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal. 7. At the close of the public hearing, the Cominission will discuss the proposaJ and take appropriate action. i MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNTNG COMMISSION � September 26, 1988 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The meeting was called to order by Chair Prazak at 7:00 P.M. 7hose present were Commissioners Kapsner, Leppik, McCracken-Hunt, Prazak, and Russell . Commissioner McAleese was not present at the beginning of the meeting. Commissioner Lewis was absent. Alsa present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, Beth Knoblauch, City Planr�er, and Gloria Anderson, planning Secretary. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 It was moved by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Leppik, and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 14, 1988 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner McAleese arrived at the meeting. II . INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PACE ADDITION APPLICANT: PACE Laboratories � LOCATION: 1700 Block of Douglas Drive REQUEST: Approval of the Preliminary Plat of PACE Addition Which Proposes to Combine Six Lots Into One Lot in the a Business and Professional Offices Zoning District 7his item was introduced by Chair Prazak. Director Grimes reviewed the request by PACE Labs for consolidation of their six lots into one parcel as they planned to connect the buildings and this would eliminate need for variances. He noted that one of the neighbors had talked to him regarding a small parcel on the east (Parcel E). He noted that this parcel was zoned for Open Development and would remain so even though it was to be combined with the other parcels. Commissioner Russell asked if there could be two zoning categories in one parcel and Director Grimes indicated that he had discussed this with the Gity Attorney and he could see no problem with the two zoning categories in one parcel . Commissioner McCracken-Hunt asked if this small parcel could be used as a separate parcel . Director Grimes said it could not because it would not have street frontage. Mr. Steve Vanderboom of PACE Labs was present. He stated that PACE had purchased the small lot in anticipatian of possibly using it as a picnic area for employees, not a lot to build on. He noted that he did not have any strong feelings as to whether this parcel was part of the plat or not. � Chair Prazak apened the informal public hearing. . _ : T � � . . � . � . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 26, 1988 Page 2 � Ms. Janet Culver, 1510 West Constance Drive, stated she and other neighbors had concerns that if all these parcels were combined, PACE would be able to build a larger building with much more density than they can build as the lots are now. Director Grimes expiained that Parcel E could `not be built on as it was zoned Open Development and because the setback requirements, if it were rezoned, would make it almost impossible. !ie also noted that there is a limit of three stories for a building and even if a third story was constructed they would not have enough parking to meet the requirements of the Zoning Code. Commissioner Leppik asked if there would be a buffer between the PACE property and the residential area. Director Grimes explained that the setback for Business and Professional Offices to a Residential Zoning District is 50 feet to the building and 25 feet to parking. . The i!�formal public hearing was closed. Commissioner Leppik stated she felt there would be no reason to deny the request for the consolidation of the lots but that the neighbors do have a legitimate concern. She suggested PACE consider using a landscape buffer between their property and the residential homes. Chair Prazak noted that he would like to see the approval state that Parcel E remain Open Development Zoning. � Commissioner McAleese stated he felt that combining the parcels was a better process than seeking variances. Commissioner Leppik questioned why this would not be a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as there would be more control over landscaping on the residential side. Director Grim�s said that it would all be one building with one use and PUD's usually consisted of several buildings with several different uses. Commissioner Russell felt appropriate landscaping would make it more acceptable to the neighbors. Commissioner McCracken-Hunt felt that perhaps we should include landscape buffers in our Zoning Code to have better control over it. Mr. Vanderboom stated he would be willing to go over the landscaping plans with the neighbors. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that this would be a good idea. It was moved by Commissioner Leppik, seconded by Commissioner McAleese, and motion carried unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the Preliminary Plat of pACE Addition with the stipulation that Parcel E retain its current Open Development Zoning. � y ' ' Minutes of the Golden Va11ey Planning Commission September 26, 1988 Page 3 � III. PRESENTATION OF RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL FOR AREA C OF VALLEY SQUARE AND BOSSARDT CHRISTENSON CORPORATION PROPOSAL FOR NORTH WIRTH Neither Ron Clark Construction nor Bossardt Christenson Corporation were present to make a presentation of their proposals and will be rescheduled at a future meeting. IV. GOMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE City Planner Beth Knoblauch reviewed the status of the current effort to update the Comprehensive Plan and staff's plans to continue this update. It was suggested by several Commissioners that landscaping, sign regulations and the way the Zoning Code addresses decks and three-car garages should also be looked at in connection with the Comprehensive Plan. V. MAYOR'S MEETING ON HOUSING Commissioners Kapsner and Russell stated they planned to attend. Commissioner McAleese intlicated he wouTd make the meeting if he did not have a confliet with another meeting scheduled that day. VI. REPORT ON HRA, BZA, AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Reports were given on the September 14, 1988 HRA meeting, the September 15, 1988 BZA meeting and the September 19, 1988 City Council meeting. � The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 P.M. � October 5, 1988 � T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission fROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Presentation by HRA Designated Developers for the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area and Area C of Valley Square Recently the HRA has designated three developers to work in two redevelopment areas. At this point, each of the developers has submitted preliminary plans to the HRA. They have also worked with the staff to determine that their proposed redevelopment project is financially feasible. At this time, the HRA staff believes that developments are feasible from a financial and land use perspective. However, there is much work still to be done including coming to a development agreement with the HRA and getting PUD approval . At this time, the HRA is at the early stages of drafting a development agreement with each of the developers. The following developers will be at the Planning Gommission meeting to present their preliminary plans. 7:00 P.M. - Ron C1ark Construction Company. Ron Clark or Dave Sebold will attend the meeting. They are working to redevelop all of Area C in Valley Square (see attached map) including the triangle area south of the fire station on Golden Valley Road (old Point Restaurant site), Their plan is to construct � about 100,000 square feet of retail space on two levels and 100 apartment units. They would like to begin construction in 1989. 7:30 P.M. - Lincoln Property Company. Richard Myers of Lincoln Property Company is proposing to construct 590 luxury apartment units in the far west portion of the expanded North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area (see attached map). The area is about 25 acres and includes the old Holiday property, the General Motors Training Center, Jax Restaurant and the 122 unit Valley Village apartments. In order to accommodate this redevelopment, the City is working with MnDOT to construct a signal at Highway 55 near the old White House. This is a MnDOT safety project. It also increases the development capacity of the area north of Highway 55. The safety project will also include a new frontage road west of the o1d White House along the north side of Highway 55 and the east side of Highway 100. The uncontrolled access to Highway lOD near the General Motors facility will be closed, They would like to begin construction in 1989. 8:00 P.M. - Bossardt Christenson Corporation. John Bossardt of Bossardt Christenson Corporation is proposing to redevelop a portion of the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area. The portion he is proposing to redevelop includes the Otto Bock, Action Electric, Juhl Brokerage and Soo Line properties (see attached map) . His plan is to build about 150,000 to 200,000 square feet of Class A office space in two buildings along Highway 55. He also plans to build 60,000 to 90,000 square feet of office/warehouse or light manufacturing space on the north end of the site along the Soo Line tracks. It is hoped that Dahlberg Electronics will be the tenant or owner of the light manufacturing � space. This would allow Dahlberg to move out of Valley Square Area C. i Golden Valley Planning Commission October 5, 1988 �- --- Rage 2 � The redevelopment of this part of the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area will require street and highway improvements including an additional traffic signal at Ardmore Avenue west of Meadow Lane. The staff has met with MnDQT regarding this issue and MnDOT indicated the second signal into this area appears feasible. Bossardt Christenson Corporation would like to begin con- struction in 1989. Attachments: Site Location Maps (3) � � . ' -- .__ _ �� 4. ; oocaQO i �.b ..,�. i � � a � aC� o � � i ° I C'a 0 ' • �00� i b "" � � o ; � o o � � � I � o = i �1 [� ° � .c c. � � v c � N O j g � i � ��' � I N +� � _; > �J � � U L � � � � � .G C �� ; o � � a a � � — � \ oa � —� � � y i �� ro � � � ' � � i '- �� Y� ,i ¢ c.a E ,� a� � � � a �� ' �� t�� Q� 11j � ° �� , °� d „ \ � � a � •-a" �-............. ...�.r.u�v . . . � I I � � - �-+.�-�' D . // � .��- � . . �� -. � . � / I � �`� �� . � . �/ . � . � . j/ I � . � � t1 � � .. . . . � � /;/'/�. . . . i � � � l � � i i� � } � '_� � P�i � �� / 0 ./ � ; . $/ 0 � '� � T . / g � � % � ��1 � � > � y �/ � ' c ! � � Q /= w � % � Q � // � � J/ j � I�-! � o � �..� r�-;---- � i I� � : � ' � �� 1 I i = r � I �I � �, � ' . �; � = o � �� _. � � : i � � a� � �� I N i �� I � l I I � I 1 ' I � I i O � 1 I � i , ..�. �.�. �� n � , '; , r�_ li�' IIIIIIIII -' . - . . e � � - ' � �tllllltl ' : . . . . �1i:�: ,,� ;c� __ ;�� Ilillf111111 • . . . �. . . �u _ �a � � ;�o�� c�< <.,- � ��i � � .,,� � . .� . o . ,, _ � � ��... . � ,�� ., . - � ' �'C�Q . � ■ h�� oiii�� ° + �� . o . , � � , e�!!e- �`�i c� t7:: � • . . . .. . ., _ , f r t7�V' � ' • v ' � � �� . . � . • . . . , Q00 ' , e . . . . . � � � - , . o - _ : . i • . , pd . - O � . . � o . , , . . _ _ , .o, � �! . „ . - �, . _ _ � , - �o � . � • � _ . , . � . . e � � = _ � ' . ': �=�►, �� : r � _ . � r .. .I , � . �� _, , • . . �� ` ' � �. .-�--:,. t � . , . . , , • • � � . Q � ; �� ...-- v ' ' 000 � ��oe - � - -� ° . _ _ � ,� � _ �" I �� . - e aaa000 � - � -o -v. � . � � � o- aD. 0 ��D00 _c� '� � . �. -1 - � °► � c�� t� - � aaci v -0000v� ��.,..-- - '�� o°o- . . . tm� � �a � � 0 � o►. i � r • � :� ....� . : . o a . _ O , � - � _ �oo . . e � o �� e -eeeeeo vo -- - _ _ _ : . � � � � �°'� ° � � O � ° e �o o�ol� . � � � , , • ' � o �o �► � u . ao'o o '�� ► � o 0 0 c � a °' , o ° � i �.. ; O � � ' 0 � W � � �""'aJ'�y� p p � p � ui p O p�p . O O i s`�y � (�"� � � � C � �t..J o� d � p 0 �� u • O p p O 0 � �O • � •c O � O ' 0 �' c � O � O , � �� c o � �'�, o � � L' O � � s�'. +°+'a �O O � � >� a'i � � � `` " c.'�� c � � p O ', O p � � � O � � � ^ \\ . � +� C � O O Q / }' W \ +� RJ L E � � Q/ C �-' eC t/1 a C7 O � ' >Q ~/� . f3� N i. L Q ��O Q J '! am°c,°�a O , o � o �� ._ .� � Q ,r,0 , O aG.� J � � o � �� d rY'Z W - � °o o �, . GJ ��i ° 0 =o �� `0� � *�•�� uu f • --/�� O O • �,,, W�n Z o OO 0 � m � O � � t�� Q .�� p . "'�' . s o — .r-- � T T ,'' o g' o � . . r � f . i .� �� -.� .�.� -� � � . ,�M � � � �`- �-' �` o 00000000 ` � �� 0 i p o� O • .oR��_�� aT�� t � 0 p�'0i0� � . 0 O 0 O -� Q� p (O � p o ` o 000`�o� o 0 0 ° ° oa . �AW � � o 0 0 0 0 ' � c � � 0 � O � p O O O 0 O � � � O 0 —_— •.--- a�,� O O O '� � � 0 � O O t �� N��;{ = O O w O O � . C 0 � 0 �0'0 0 0 �0 ` � � a 0 0 3 I � �` O ) 0 Q ' 0 � 0 � 0 0'0 0 � � 0 � 0 O Q O ` � 0 � O � � 0 CO00O 'O O � � � OO O O �. O ��► O ,� p 0 e� /� O O ,1 � ��O _..L- O O�0 O O O O O p � O � � � �- • � ,�, i , .. r � , . October 5, 1988 � T0: Golden Va11ey Planning Commission FROM; Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Draft I-394 Overlay Zoning Ordinance and Joint Powers Agreement I am attaching a copy of the I-394 Overlay Zoning Ordinance, Joint Powers Agreement and a summary memo from Allen Barnard. This ordinance was recently given preliminary approval by the I-394 Task Force and the two City Councils for public review prior to official public hearings. Currently, the Twin West Chamber of Commerce is reviewing the draft ordinance in order to get the business perspective. I have asked Allen Barnard to come to the October 24 Planning Commission meeting to informally review the proposed ordinance before official public hearings are held in November. Allen was the one most responsible for writing the ordinance and a member of the I-394 Task Force. � Attachments � � � i , ., ' , � DRAFT 9-22-88 GOLDEN YALLEY/ST. LOUIS PARK JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT REGARDING 1-394 OVERLAY 20NING DISTRICT ORDINANCE . This Agreement is made this day of , 1988 by and between the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY ("Golden Valley") and the CITY OF ST. LOUIS FARK ("St . Louis Park") , both of which are sometimes hereinafter - collectively referred to as the "parties" 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, WHEREAS, the construction of Interstate Highway 394 wi11 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 399 corridor runs along the common border between Golden Valley and St. Louis � Park, the two cities have studied the situation and entered into -, • - - � . � �-- — � ' � this Agreement to acldress the problems caused by the construction of Interstate Highway 394 ; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties have entered into this Joint Powers Agreement under the authority conferred by Minn. Stat . § 471,59 for the purposes of addressing the traffic, air pollution, noise pollution and environmental problems caused by the design of I-394 which they recognize must be addressed together, as follows : 1. Contemporaneous with the execution of this Joint Powers Agreement, each city has passed the model ordinance, attached hereto and referred to herein as the I-394 Overlay � Zoning District Ordinance, for the portion of the I-394 Overlay Zoning District lying within its boundaries, effective December , 1988 . 2 . During the term of this Agreernent, each city shall not vary, amend or repeal the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance without the written consent of the city councils of Golden Valley and St . Louis Park. . 3 . Within its respective jurisdiction, each city shall apply and enforce the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance accordinq to its terms. • _2_ . + : 4 . Each city recognizes that the concentration af motor � vehicles in the I-394 corridor and the development encouraged by it may create dangerous levels of air pollution in the Xenia/Vernon I-394 interchange area. In 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 I-394 Traffic Impact Study for the Cities of � Golden Valley and St . Louis Park, dated August 1987, as supglemented there is a reserve capacity of office development at the Xenia-Vernon/I-394 interchange of approximately 1,767, 000 square feet . The parties agree to allocate 60% of the reserve capacity, or 1, 060,200 square feet, to the City of St . Louis Park and 40%, or 706, 800 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 which has been allocated by the parties 10°� or 157, 500 square feet to St. Louis Park and 90°s or 1,417, 500 square feet to Golden Valley. The Study also indicates a reserve capacity of office development in the General Mi11s 8oulevard/Boone � Avenue/I-394 interchange area of 800,000 square feet which has -3- r been allocated 100% to Golden Valley. The parties agree that � the total amount of reserve capacity should be reevaluated on or about January 1 each year in order to determine its validity. If a reevaluation should indicate that the original assumed reserve capacity was incorrect, the parties agree to amend this Joint Powers 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-Fausch, Inc. I-394 Traffic Impact Study, dated August 1987, to determine which should be undertaken and according to what timetable. Thereaf ter, each city shall fashion an appropria.te method for � accomplishing such public improvements within its jurisdiction and undertake them when required by development, traffic demands, etc. The lists of suggested public improvements are attached as Exhibits A, B and C. 7. This Joint Powers Agreement shall continue in Pull force and effect until cancelled by mutual consent of the Cities of Golden Valley and St . Louis Park. 8. Upon violation of this Agreement or the I-399 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance by either city, the other city shall first attempt mediation under the Rules of the American Arbitration Association; thereafter, the other city may enforce � this Agreement or the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance _4_ f against the city violating the Agreement or Ordinance by � btainin an in 'unction a manclator in'unction or a writ of 0 9 7 . Y 7 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 Its Mayor � By Its City Manager CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK By Its Mayor � , By ' Its City Manager � � i '�I -5- I � . � MODEL OR0INANCE � 1-394 Overiay Zoning Dtstrict Ordinance Section 1. Purpose. 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. It will also 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 . Since the Interstate Highway 394 corridor runs along the common border between the Cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park, they have studied the � situatian and entered into a Joint Powers Agreement respecting the same. This Ordinance is intended to impose on all developments which will contain more than . 6 square feet of gross floor area per each square foot of land area within a lot or parcel in the I-394 corridor the condition that once the traffic generated at the Xenia/Vernon interchange, the Louisiana Avenue interchange and the General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue interchange exceeds certain levels of service, the developments will be required to prepare and effectuate traffic management plans which will serve to reduce the traffic congestion, air and noise pollution and other environmental problems associated with them. The Ordinance does not prohibit development, but, rather, � ' permits develapment assuming appropriate traffic management plans are in place and effect. The Joint Task Force will review � and insure their com liance with this Ordinance. the plans P Section 2 . Definitions . A. "Gross floor area" means the sum of the gross horizontal areas of the floor(s) of such building or buildings measured from the exterior faces and exterior ells or from the centerline of party walls separating two buildings. Basements devoted to storage and space devoted to off street parking shall not be included. B. "Zone A" is that part of the land lying in Golden Valley/St . Louis Park within the following described area: Following the South line of Circle Downs easterly from the intersection o€ Turners Crossroad and Circle Downs to State Highway 100; continue south along the westerly line • of State Highway 100 to the northerly line of Parkdale Drive and continuing in a westerly direction across Vernon Avenue to the intersection of Cedar Lake Road; continue in a northwesterly direction on the north line of Cedar Lake Road to the intersection of Zarthan Avenue; continue along the east line of Zarthan Avenue north to the intersection of 16th Street West; continue west along the north line of 16th Street West to the east line of the Minneapolis, Northfield & Southern Railway right of way (except that portion which contains U.S. Highway 12) ; continue northeasterly along the east line of the Minneapolis, Northfield & Southern Railway right of way to the east line of Laurel Avenue; continue east along the southerly line of Laurel Avenue to the intersection of Turners Crossroad and continue south on the westerly line of Turners Crossroad to the intersection of Circle Downs, the point of beginning. � -2- � �--__ �---- • C. "Zone B" is that part of the land lying in � Golden Valley/St. Louis Paxk within the following described area: Following the south line of Laurel Avenue east from the intersection of Winnetka Avenue and Laurel Avenue; continue on the southerly line of Laurel Avenue east to t he westerly line of the Minneapolis, Northfield & Southern Railway right of way; continue in a southwesterly direction along the westerly line of the railway right of way (except that portion which crosses U.S. Highway 12) to the intersection of 16th Street West; corrtinue on the northerly line of 16th Street West westerly in a straight line to the east line of Hampshire Avenue; continue on the west line of Hampshire Avenue north to the intersection with 14th Street West; continue on the northerly line of 14th Street West west to the intersection with Pennsylvania Avenue; eontinue on the easterly line of Pennsylvania Avenue north to the intersection with 13 1/2 Street West; continue on the northerly line of 13 1/2 Street West west to the intersection of � Rhode Island Avenue; continue on the easterly line of Rhode Island Avenue north to the intersection of 13th Avenue; continue on the north line of 13th Avenue west to the intersection with Texas Avenue; continue on the easterly line of Texas Avenue north to its intersection with U.S. Highway 12 ; continue on the northerly line of U.S. Highway 12 west to the intersection of Winnetka Avenue South; continue on the easterly line of Winnetka Avenue South north to the intersection of Laurel Avenue, the point of beginning . D. "Zone C" is that part of the land lying in Golden Valley/St . Louis Park within the following described area: Following the south line of Betty Crocker Drive east from the intersection of County Road 18 and Betty Crocker Drive to the intersection with General Mills Boulevazd; continue on the west line of General Mills Boulevard south to the northerly line of Section 6, Township 117, Range 21; continue east on the northerly line o€ Section 6, � Township 117, Range 21 to the intersection -3- _ ' with Winnetka Avenue South; continue on the center line of Winnetka Avenue South south � (except that portion which crosses U.S. Highway 12) extended to the boundary line of the Cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park; continue on said boundary line west to the east line of County Road 18; continue on the east line of County Road 18 north (except that portion which crosses U.S. Highway 12) to the intersection with Betty Crocker Drive, the point of beginning . E. "Level of Service A" means traffic moves freely. All waiting vehicles clear on every green interval . Low percentage of stops on major movements (average delay per vehicle _ 5 seconds) . F. "Level of Service B" means traffic moves fairly freely. All waiting vehicles will still probably clear on each green interval . Vehicles on the major movements can expect a less than 50% probability of stopping (average delay per vehicle _ 15 seeonds) . G. "Level of Service C" means traffic moves � smoothly. Some minor movements may not completely clear on every green interval . Vehicles on the major movements can expect a greater than 50% probability of stopping (average delay per vehicle _ 25 seconds) . H. "Level of Service D" means an acceptable intersection operation for peak period flow. Many intersection movements may not clear on every green interval . Some vehicles on the major movements may still go through the intersection without having to stop (average delay per vehicle _ 40 seconds) . I . "Level of Service E" means unstable traffic flows . All intersection movements experience failure to clear on their green intervals. No vehicles are able to go through the intersection without stopping (average delay per vehicle _ 60 seconds) ." J. "Level of Service F" means saturation condition. All vehicles must stop and all vehicles will probably require more than one � green interval to travel through the intersection (average delay per vehicle 60 seconds) . -4- . • K. "Xenia/Vernon interchange" means the area in which Xenia and Vernon Avenues cross I-394 � and the eastbound and westbound exit and entrance ramps intersect with them and the Xenia/Vernon intersections with the frontage roads on both the north and south sides of I-394 . L. "Louisiana Avenue interchange" means the area in which Louisiana Avenue crosses I-394 and the westbound and eastbound exit and entrance ramps intersect with it and the Louisiana Avenue intersections with the frontage roads on the north and south sides of I-394 . M. "General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue interchange means the area in which General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue crosses I-394 and the eastbound and westbound exit ramps intersect with them and the Boone Avenue intersection with the frontage roads on the south side of I-394 . N. "Reserve Capacity" means the amount of additional gross floor office area that may be constructed in order to reach a given traffic level of service. The total reserve � capacity for the Xenia/Vernon interchange is 1, 767, 000 square feet of office development which has been allocated 600 or 1,060, 200 square feet to St . Louis Fark and 40°$ or 706, 800 square feet to Golden Valley. The total reserve capacity for the Louisiana Avenue interchange is 1, 575, 000 square feet of office development which has been allocated 10� or 157, 500 square feet to St . Louis Park and 90% or 1,417, 500 square feet to Golden Valley. The total reserve capacity for the General Mills Boulevard/ Boone Avenue interchange is 800, 000 square feet of office development which has been allocated 100% to Golden Valley. O. "P.M. peak hour" means the period of time between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on business days of the week. Section 3 . Area Covered. The area covered by the I-394 Overlay Zoning District is that portion of Zones A, 8 and C � lying within the boundaries of (Golden Valley/St . Louis Park) . -5- . ' The Ordinance is intended to supplement or overlay the existing � zoning of lots or parcels in the area covered, not to contradict or replace the existing zoning. Section 4 . Imposition of Conditions . A: All developments in the area covered by this Ordinance which will contain more than . 6 square feet of gross floor area per each square foot of land area within a lat or parcel shall obtain a conditional use permit or planned unit development permit in . conformance with the terms of this Ordinance. B. In addition to the other land use requirements of the City Code, the conditional use permit or planned unit development permit required by Section 4 .A. above shall contain the following conditions : 1 . For all parcels located within Zone A, � each time the traffic generated for one hour during the p.m. peak hour three days out of five consecutive business days exceeds Level of Service E at more than half of the intersections within the Xenia/Vernon interchange, or once the reserve capacity allocated to the city for this interchange has been used, whichever is first, the owner shall prepare and effectuate an original or revised traffic management plan which has been previously approved by the Joint Task Farce. The traffie management plan shall be designed to reduce the traffic generated by or from the parcel by a percenta9e which, in conjunction with the other parcels in the zone, will serve to adequately remove the p.m. peak hour excess traffic (or keep it within the city's allocable portion of the reserve capacity, if that applies) , given the p.m. peak hour trips assumed to be generated by the parcel based on the table attached hereto as Exhibit 1. � -5- .� 2. For all parcels located within Zone B, each time the traffic generated for one � hour during the p.m. peak hour three days out of five consecutive business days exceeds Level of Service D at more - than half of the intersections within the Louisiana Avenue interchange, or once the reserve capacity allocated to the city for this interchange has been used, whichever is first, the owner shall prepare and effectuate an original or revised traffic management plan which has been previously approved by the Joint Task Force. The traffic management plan shall be designed to reduce the traffic generated by or from the parcel by a percentage which, in conjunction with the other parcels in the zone, will serve to adequately remove the p.m. peak hour excess traffic given the p.m. peak hour trips assumed to be generated by the parcel based on the table attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 3 . For all parcels located within Zone C, each time the traffic generated for one hour during the p.m. peak hour three � days out of five consecutive business days exceeds Level of Service D at more than half of the intersections within the General Mills Boulevard/Boone Av.enue interchange, or once the reserve capacity allocated to the city for this interchange has been used, whichever is first, the owner shall prepare and effectuate an original or revised traffic management plan which has been previously approved by the Joint Task Force. The traffic management plan shall be designed to reduce the traffic generated by or from the parcel by a percentage which, in conjunction with the other parcels in the zone, will serve to adequately remove the p.m. peak hour excess traffic given the p.m. peak hour trips assumed to be generated by the parcel based on the table attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 4 . Each development containing more than .6 square feet of gross floor area per each square foot of land area within a � lot or parcel within one of the three -7- ' zones shall monitor the ;traffic generated by it, the number and times • to be determined by the Joint Task Force, and it shall supply such traffic volume figures to the Joint Task Force. Each planning department will publish those figures yearly. The Joint Task Force shall determine the acceptable methods of ineasuzing traffic volumes, the acceptability of persons or firms undertaking it and all other reasonable requirements in connection therewith. C. Each developer or owner of a parcel who leases the parcel to one or more tenants shall include in each lease a reference to' the necessity for traffic management plans under this Ordinance and shall attach a copy of this Ordinance to each lease as an exhibit . Section 5 . Owner Requirement . Each development on a parcel which is required to have a traffic management plan by � the terms of this Ordinance shall manage the traffic it generates in such a way as to substantially meet the terms of the traffic management plan for that parcel . Section 6 . Traffic Management Plan. The traffic management plan shall be prepared by a qualified treffic engineer and sha11 utilize the appropriate techniques available to reduce the p.m. peak hour traffic generated by the parcel, including but not limited to: A. Ride sharing incentive programs which may include activities to encourage and assist the formation of car, van and bus pools, such as cash payments or subsidies and preferential parking charges and parking � space location, and other analogous incentive programs; -g- . �_— � —_ ,� B. Public transit incentive programs whi�h may � include the provision of paratransit services to and from convenient public transit sites and to accommodate mid-day and evening excursions, the constructing of transit sheiters and amenities, the construction of bus/rail transit stations and related facilities, the dedication of land and the provision of other subsidies for the construction and operation of public transit facilities, the provision of transit fare media subsidies and marketing programs, and the provision of other analogous incentive programs. C. Recommended improvements in public transit which services the site of the proposed use, such as changes in service routes, increases in the frequency of service, alternations in the location of facilities, the establishment of fare incentive programs and other measures designed to make public transit more accessible to occupants of the proposed use. D. Bicycle and pedestrian incentive measures which may include the provision of bicycle � parking and storage facilities, the construction and extension of bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways, the provision of shower and locker facilities and similar incentive features . E. In the case of office and industrial uses, variable work hour, or flex time, programs under which employees working at the proposed use will stagger their work hours in order to affect a reduction in the amount of peak period traffic to and/or fxom the use which would otherwise occur . F. Measures to reduce the reliance on single-occupancy vehicles by employees and others who will travel to and from the proposed use which may include parking fee structures tailored to discourage single-occupancy vehicles, proscription of tenant-employer subsidy of garking costs for single-occupancy vehicles, time and other access restrictions to parking spaces in on-site parking £acilities, and programs to support and encourage the utilization o£ � alternative transportation modes. -9- • G. Use and accessory use design options which � reduce reliance on single-occupency vehicles by employees and others who will travel to and from the proposed use, such as the provision of less parking area than that required under the provisions of this chapter, shared parking arrangements, the incorporation of residential units (in the case of proposed commercial uses) and otfier analogous design features. H. Any other technique or combination of techniques capable of reducing the traffic and related impacts of the proposed use. Section 7. Nonconforming traffic generation uses. Nonconforming traffic generation uses are all uses within the area covered by this overlay ordinance which existed or had approved land use and building permits therefor before the effective date of this Ordinance. If a nonconforming traffic � generation use exceeds more than . 6 square feet of gross floor area per each square foot of land area within a lot or parcel , it may not be altered or modified unless it conforms to the terms of this Ordinance. Section 8. Joint Task Force. The Joint Task Force shall consist of eight members : two elected officials from each city, each city manager and a staff inember appointed by the city manager from each city. Its function shall be to pexiodically monitor the traf€ic generation and air pollution in Zones A, B and C and to review traffic management plans and insure their compliance with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance. It also sha11 adopt and promulgate rules of procedure. If the i - _�o- ,'. Joint Task Force deadlocks, the issue or matter shall be � submitted first to mediatian under the Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Thereafter, upon agreement of the parties, the issue or matter may be submitted under the Rules of the American Arbitration Association to binding arbitration by a single arbitrator chosen by the parties, or if they cannot agree, by the Hennepin County District Court . The arbitration shall proceed under the Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Section 9 . Traffic Management Administrative Fees . Under the authority in Minn. Stat. § 462 . 353 , subd. 4 , at the time each owner of a parcel or development subject to the terms of this Ordinance applies for a conditional use permit or planned "�' unit development permit for a development covered by the terms of this Ordinance, in addition to other fees required by the City Code, he or she shall pay a traffic management administrative fee of $. 10 per square foot of gross floor area . 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 reserves the right to peribdically assess such costs to the parcels within the area covered by it. � 4962U -11- . ., , . � ; •� ( . , * 7o tn Z Ci t*� 2 ?r7 M 7D 7o O O 7D 70 :c7 '� �-+ fD tD G O 7 'O W � 1D fD r+� r+► fD lD !D � H W rt *t r't 1-� R f'r N G. R K r+� rA N W (A O ro � t1t < N rt, fD IO f* C a C� 1�+•F+� • • • A r- r- w rS r 0+ N ►�• r- fI A C � 3 ►-• l� � n c*\ C rt r �+ fD fD Z 3 V� N•w� N � � a v � .c c °'•o a� �- v n v n � p.�a t+� ? 1 f+ M :i7 h F• O O N � (D f"r Fr NN NN 1 Q • � � � a o 3 3 � � r o0 0o v �o R O � (D � 00 00 � N O�i t'r! hIS �p O W \ X 7C X 7C N M+�3 Z x7 K . . . . p+-t7 • � x �. � V� t!! tA N �`� � Y . . . . 7 N �a.+ V '� �7 "*! '� ►3 ti7 �D ''h � � � ' l,�7 "� ,E • V� M �. tJ� � � c � a � � m v � �o � � � � � � z � v ' .� o o c� c� o0o 0 00 0o OQO � � � 0 o v � 000 0 00 00 � t•1 p O 1T� 03o O o0 0o CCG H A y tn N tn tn N N N N tn � � • 'TJ "s7 'TJ "i3 '�7 "rJ '+7 '�7 "� 3 t=7 ' - � . � M � N • � O � Z � �D b fD � � � K � _ r. � m C3' � � ~' � � � - � r r"' �_ � A O O O O O H � �.. O OOOtT O ►r � . . . . . 2 � C � W � p p .1 b.► O N O� F+ N ta t�.t A O� ,y p �C t1� W A v O O �C v A. 1-� N h+ t.�► �F �► IF �► � � x f+ O OOON O p+ A ►"' �'' 000 E..� O � . . C C� ,� � � � . . . . . . • v . tJ► !�+ W �l N N .i OD t7� N Q� M, N W �� p� tJ1 G� A V1 �1 A N O� O� `J �"� v L7 y r * * �► t► � • Z "�J � C� . � � H I a o z u . � �0 ��-+ � � y O O O 7'C . � . � y � . , . .° ' MEMORANDUM OF COMMENTS � RE: I-394 Joint Powers Agreement and I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance DATE: September 20, 1988 FROM: I-394 Joint Task Force The City Councils of the City of Golden Valley and the City of St . Louis Park appointed the I-394 Joint Task Force to study and make recommendations concerning the traffic congestion problems and environmental problems expected from the construction of I-394 and development in the I-394 corridor. The I-394 Joint Task Force has studied the problems and the potential methods available to address the problem. The result is the attached Golden Valley/St . Louis Park Joint Powers Agreement and the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT 1. The recommendations of the Joint Task Force are based in part on the Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. I-394 Traffic Impact Study, dated August 1987, as supplemented, and their expertise. � The concept of "reserve capacity" is the additional amount of development allowable because the base condition, or current condition, of traffic at an intersection does not produce the assigned level of traffic service permitted. In other words, the intersection will permit additional development in its zone before the acceptable level is reached and the experts can compute what that amount of additional development is . Traffic "levels of service" describe the amount of traffic congestion, or lack of it, at an intersection and are accepted definitions used by the traffic engineering profession. . 2 . The concept embodied in the Joint Powers Agreement and I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance is for the Cities to agree to impose upon themselves an overlay zoning district which requires traffic management plans under certain conditions . Once the reserve capacity or a designated traffic level of service is exceeded at one of the I-394 interchanges, all landowners who apply for permits after passage of the ordinance are required to prepare traffic management plans which are designed to reduce the traffic at the designated intexchange on I-394 by a given percentage based on assumed trip generation per square foot of building floor area. 3. Paragraphs l, 2 and 3 of the Joint Powers Agreement provide for the passage of the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance, its effectiveness and the pledge of each city to � e �' enforce it according to its terms. Because variances in Golden � Valley are granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Golden Valley City Attorney's office is researching whether it is possible to require all requests for variances from only this traffic management ordinance to be determined by the City Council . If permissible, the intent is to recommend such a change in the Golden Valley Zoning Code so that the procedure in both cities is the same. 4 . Paragraph 4 recognizes that levels of air pollution in excess of acceptable standards may be created in the Xenia/Vernon I-394 interchange area. Accordingly, it provides for the joint commission of a study and good faith and cooperation by the cities to solve any identifiable problems . 5. Paragraph S contains the agreement of the parties to allocate the reserve capacity of office development at the three interchanges involved. The parties carefully researched all aspects of the existing conditions and determined that the appropriate allocations were 60-40 at the Xenia/Vernon interchange, 10-90 at the Louisiana Avenue interchange and 0 100 at the General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue interchange. The existing conditions examined included the relative percentage of development in the areas at the current time, the base level of development assumed in the Strgar-Roscae-Frausch report, the moderate and high growth scenarios and the amounts af � development expected in the areas . Note that with respect to the Louisiana Avenue interchange, Golden Valley has the only area which will probably be developed in a dense manner so as to require regulation. With respect to the General Mills Boulevard/Boone Avenue interchange, all of the affected area lies in Golden Valley. 6 . Many public improvements within Golden Valley and St . Louis Park are necessary to make the assumptions contained within the Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. I-394 Traffic Impact Study dated August 1987, as supplemented, effective. Accordingly, the parties have agreed to review them carefully and to determine which should be undertaken and according to what timetable. The responsibility for accomplishing them fall on each city separately. 7. The Joint Powers Agreement specifically provides for mediation upon a violation of the agreement or the ordinance by either city and, if that does not work, for the other city to obtain an appropriate court order to effectuate the Joint Powers Agreement or ordinance. Finally, attorney fees and costs are provided for the prevailing party to allocate the burden of such a proceeding on the violating party. � �- -2- . � L----- � � MODEL ORDiNANCE � l. Section 1 of the Model Ordinance sets out the general problem that is addressed by the Model Ordinance and the method used to respond to it. The idea is not to require traffic management plans until they are necessary; plans are not required until the traffic congestion at a given interchange deteriorates beyond a given level of service or the existing reserve capacity is consumed, whichever is first. In addition, the ordinance only affects those developments for which permits are obtained after the effective date of the ordinance. This treats non-conforming traffic generators in the same manner as non-conforming uses under traditional zoning oxdinances . Finally, the floor/land area ratio is designed to limit the ordinance to dense developments, those that exceed the ratio for a 3-story office building with required parking and setbacks, not all developments. 2 . Seetion 2 contains the definitions of many of the important terms of the ordinance, including the zones covered by the ordinance. The definitions of the various levels of services were provided by the traffic engineering firm, Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch. The interchanges are defined to include several intersections within them so that one can specifically determine whether a specified level of service at an interchange has been exceeded. Reserve capacity has been defined and the allocation agreement specified within the ordinance. Note that � the ordinance is only concernec] with traffic generated at the p.m. peak hour, which is the period of time between 4 p.m, and 6 p.m. on business days of the week. 3. Section 3 indicates what area is covered by the ordinance and makes it clear that the ordinance is intended to overlay existing zoning - not replace it. 4 . The conditions of the ordinance are imposed by Section 4 . Subparagraph A contains the requirement that all developments which will contain more than . 6 square feet of gross floor area per each square foot of land area within a lot or parcel shall obtain a conditional use permit or planned unit development permit . The imposition of this requirement may require a conditional use permit or planned unit development permit in some situations where they are not currently required. However, such permit can then be designed to include the conditions contained in subparagraph B. 5. Subparagraph B outlines the conditions which are to be contained in the permit. As one can see, once the level of traffic generated exceeds an acceptable level of service designated in the ordinance or the reserve capacity allocated to the city for the specific interchange has been consumed, whichever is first, all owners subject to the ordinance must prepare traffic management plans. The idea is to require the � _ -3- i . . ' " . ' .' ' . ' .. . � . �� owner to prepare the traffic management plan and then submit it to the Joint Task Force for approval. The Joint Task Force's function is administrative or ministerial. It will retain a traffic engineerinq consultant to review the plan and existing conditions and to indicate whether the plan will sufficiently reduce traffic generation so as to meet the acceptable level of service. 6. Of course, all planning and zoning issues af£ecting a proposed development shall be routed through the planning staff, the respective planning commissions and the city councils as in the past. The only change will be that once a traffic management plan is required, it shall be routed to the Joint Task Force for review. All of ttre existing zoninq, parking, setback and other limitations contained within the zoning and building regulations of the respective cities shall continue to apply to all parcels within Zones A, B and C. In addition, all of the functions of city staff, city commissions and the city council regarding the existing building and zoning regulations shall eontinue as in the past. The only change made by this ordinance is to refer traffic management plans to the Joint Task Force for review. The Joint Task Force's review of traffic management plans is limited by the specific ordinance language indicating how they are to be designed and the specific items which may be included in them, which are set forth in detail in Section 6 of the ordinance. � 7. Subdivision B (4) of Section 4 requires that each development covered by the ordinance shall regularly monitor traffic generated by it and supply the traffic volume figures obtained to the Joint Task Force. The planning department of each city will publish the figures yearly and the Joint Task Force shall determine the acceptable methods of ineasuring traffic volumes, etc. Subparagraph C of Section 4 provides that each developer or owner who leases land to one or more tenants shall include reference to the necessity for traffic management plans in the lease and attach a copy of the ordinance to the lease. The purpose of this provision is to preempt the argument that lessees have vested rights which the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance eannot impair. Since lessees will have notice of the ordinance, there should be no problem enforcing it against owners who have such lessees . 8. Section S of the ordinance requires each deveiopment to manage the traffic it generates so as to comply with the ordinance. 9. Section 6 provides detail on the items which traffic management plans may utilize to regulate traffic generated by any given parcel . � 10. Nonconforminq traffic generation uses are addressed in Section 7 of the ordinance. The idea is to differentiate non-conforming qeneration uses from other non-conforming uses -4- � * traditionally addressed in zoning codes. Non-conforming traffic � generation uses may not be altered or modified so as to increase them by more than 10$ in gross floor area unless an approved traffic management plan is provided and effectuated. 11. Section 8 provides for appointment of the Joint Task Force by each of the cities involved. The Task Force is to review traffic management plans and insure their compliance with the intent and gurpose of the ordinance. It is also to adopt and promulgate rules of process so that it is clear who prepares traffic management plans, who reviews them and how the Joint Task Force interrelates with existing planning commissions and so forth. Finally, there is a deadlock provision which provides for mediation and, upon agreement, binding arbitration. 12 . Traffic management administrative fees are provided by Section 9 . The idea is to generate a fund from which the expenses of the Joint Task Force may be paid. The fees are solely for administering the ordinance, reviewing traffic management plans and monitoring traffic generation. sazsu Attached is a map of the zanes referred to. i • _S_ I . , . � ,...; .,. .. � : ....;�.. . �,, __ .(/��. ,. .•y ..,.M .. . r i•��tie� �S�• •�� • s s .�� J ,,. :'..)• .» ' �. '.,: � �\\ �; �"i.1.�/ I ' ` . �� •� ! I �� \�� .N. � , ./-1 \ � + l. " _ , r+.�� / � � � � `,' � � �� : v', o t e � o ,y .n�•� . . � +� ;� e � a f r � ; j � t .� � � �' � �ti�e � �i. / � � 4� i!. t' � �.y � .1 1 +. .y n v i: � 1 ).� •' « •�0 �� N ` . :� U ••.., ..��R � ' ;� -v'• - � /,^ 9ti.r1 .r. � :. .. r i. r� ��• • \i • �` ... �:a....•.. _ �.Lw � ��.w� ' � � � • )��)�wt�• •fi �T•��p S a • . , .E� � , i ♦� •` )9J�r.aw `' � w t • * � '�' � w Q a . . � , . .-� s •�c.�..� - . � _ ,, •.,.� .,.,, ... .T . � i • ♦., d� • i•�.... .o... ` Y • .. ,.• i . ��a �•s., ,+._ �: �� . ' t � �r�.,,, � � • sp f � `• � d a � j .o • w �,�n• . . � = r b w e• ♦�J�w�� Jr� l I � r •\� i ` �. .�o• �s.� �`o. �.��°: 3 d �� .b , •. . • � v..•s � �. .. z \ J ;' :�• v i� •. ao' i� � �r�.� `� �y .. �.� �lo .�• /�� . . � �/� :�•• �.` .� r�.�...r� i•. r -��. �.. � r�.)... b :R�� i�'� r. �b. l '...r^ V/ ,., , . .,. . . ,•. • ,..� .....0 .,:- � ;� , . .... � W �\ �� p •.��, ;�M J-�%�t�� .•.`tA•� .` Oi) ..�nr a � �� 0 �Y � < ' .��1 �N � r� )�C� j• O �. . � •' � _ T ••�! �o•�a. „� „p�7��f -?..ye s� . a,. Q _ „ N " I �� ° .�.`• o � ' ''_ ° • .. . " � �•• ¢ f� '�� g � � ��,e, o H a 1; � ` �� ' • •�'• Z . ..,e • .o..,• ',.e o+�e�• W � � ��e� � � � •� .t. . )'• e • . .� , o Yr� s .Si7 . .� O �v . VV ` =� a=�` _� :�o.�u ��^� 'r.+r1�� J . � , � � � 1� •1Y4. �.� ' J . Z � �/ h.. �J �: �-- � O ` � �� .��I . �)•t �i �n� t� � � r •. . ,... . � � � . � ��'��b.� f's � •t.:• ,� \ �. . •�e6 �,w J . ' ` �` � v/ J �'� . ,...,� �- N •�c�, _��.r. � � �•�• . � �� - � �� 6 Q < . . . ��p. .. .. . „• n J �.O• �0 Ut •. .�' � . . . . . r• o_c. !�-'\ • � ^"J+1 y� � .� ' � �'' ��o; t �•.. ;, V W ;� i : '�•o, L- : .oQ �e.�s G�� . ys ♦9-e� i. — Q �, � .., r r ,: .�r.. � � � �, ;� ,� � �.., � �� ,.. o � i i 1•.:r•o � �.a le `��s�w�� y� 1• . 5�� . � . , S Y ' •r ��, �„� , �...:"f Q C7 L •: i : + . _'`•� ;.� i .y ' \,S�t/ l.�a � •1 .lr . . "i• O^••�• • ••a •, .. . � .} . •• J !� � �� \ ��! * � h)� ]�.• �'�� . � Q � 1��I�t 5•^ l'��M , � �' � t ��• q4t S.n[.. � �� I ] 11 7r�'�• > � �: . , � �. . �� f � c'c.e�w ' �Z � 9•� 9+• �.s�w j Y . ,�,�,� �•.e • .. � . .1 .. '1n •.. ••)�e . l�w • ♦•7�s �Q . � . a :ac .s. ��v,q• a ��. � . �.o r0'.i�: -�C �Q w +• � .i >t i,n- � C rv a < f� , 1...�• .� ••..�� Srr)• H r ; � ,•� .•..••.s�.�a „ �,� . � W d r� � v•n ..a�. . � .•�� .o . v� M � . ° ii. �..' •, r , �o� . ' �� ,� )�e :)• �,� • � V `..• •, \ 1N = .,�„� � � � • • ; tL • o . �. • S' ~� � . . � �L � l= -�. •., ;• • .. � � „� Y � � 1. � ; •� ��. : �" t . •..• �y, �� S .� ��..� � � .'� W � .. .,•.;•- � �.,•• , a�'s �ti, � ,. H . '. �' • ��• •• a �. _.h �a• �� • � • • ` � e .� � � °�� ± '� a �' � � M � a N � •o• , t :r ` s' . s. �„ � t c�, ` . + .- O � .� .• i O ' . r9 � t`� � /T t/> > s , �► � .c � � . . ti- � � •�c �j • � � �.. i � . � �. , ,,.� P � ;. .,�,�. W F " � a J ,•• • •• o �� `�` � . Y � � . ' ♦ �•e ��: : r � �.•.•�•o o � e� "\ � .t� . . : ± � a N- ' .r �, ,j. . a• �� ,.. :.,., . � � g � ,5,� W I� � : �; �" ' . ,� ,•• ��•'��.,.,;�. . ' ,`!fl ^ � �� . _ . � . � . ` 7' `. 2 .� ; �; .. � . o _ . ,o., , .=,� �. � o � . s r� t ` �. � � �+�, � �nSw:) O .. i a �'a � ,t.r.•• j Q i� •• •`9i.I• . = s> a � �.. •: Or �f7r_+M)� � �.� � o i . . � � � �}° ' ' • . f � �i ' •, Oe.,i � 0 -�s' ; au� T� � � �. u w riS •�JI R Js • , � O , . � • ti , i f �• .»�• p�. )p� � �.� .a ' e . . . �y� i . �.��o... O . � +s r�. •� r).�np fn . �,. �~:' . �. �.O Z� . �� w.�. �'' y. � � ��LG�t��S • ��; - � � �� + � w '�'j ' ' O z J, � j •'+ � .'��_ J ' ... ' � � : ,•, • •,. = m f . •�� Y!�M . .�• . • rl:= . � C�Ci.J1�'Y� f .+ Q s^ �1�! F � rC •` �00: ).o) ~ .��L i e � s I�.n!� � 1 � r��^Y � . . I y'`� � , e V F ' � •� row, '• ; ' i ! ` r0 rOr e ^ � ir �a' 7� /.;\ ♦w"' ��' � I � ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR LEVELS OF GROWTH ALONG I-394 SUGGESTED IN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT �OLDEN VALLEY IMPROVEMENTS Other Recommended Responsible Location Improvements Agency GLENWOOD & TURNERS WIDEN T0: E6-LT/R, WB-L/TR, NB-LT/R HENNEPIN COUNTY i-394 NORTH FRONTAGE WIDEN T0: EB-L/T/R, WB-L/TR AND SIGNALS MN/DOT ROAD & XENIA GLENWOOD & HAROLD WESTSOUND BYPASS LANE HENNEPIN COUNTY GLENWOOD & JERSEY WESTBOUND BYPASS & EASTBOUND RIGHT TURN HENNEPIN COUNTY LOUISIANA & I-394 WIDEN T0: EB-L/T/R, WB-L/TR, NB-L/T/R, MN/DOT NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD SB-L/T/TR; SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET XENIA & LAUREL WiDEN T0: fB-T/R, WB-L/T, NB-L/R AND SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET TURNERS & LAUREL WIDEN T0: EB-L/R, SB-T/R, NB-L/T AND ALL STOPS BOONE & B CROCKER NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE GLENWOOD & TURNERS WIDEN TO L/T/R FOR EACH APPROACH HENNEPIN COUNTY �WINNETKA & HAROLD ADD TURN LANES HENNEPIN COUNTY WINNETKA & I-394 SOUTH WIDEN T0: SB-L/R, EB-L/T, WB-T/R MN/DOT FRONTAGE ROAD LOUISIANA & LAUREL WB LEFT TURN & NB RIGHT TURN LANES LAUREL & JERSEY EB LEFT TURN & WB RIGHT TURN LANES TH 55 & BOONE WIDEN T0: SB-L/T/R, NB-L/T/T/R MN/DOT TH 55 & WINNETKA WIDEN TO: SB-L/LT/T/R, NB-L/LT/T/R MN/DOT TH 55 & DOUGLAS WIDEN T0: SB-1/L/T/T/R MN/DOT WINNETKA & LAUREL SB BYPASS & NB RIGHT TURN LANES HENNEPIN COUNTY TURNERS (GLENWOOD TO WIDEN TQ 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTIQN LAUREL LOUISIANA (I-394 TO WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION LAUREL) PLUS TURN LANES �Key: L = Left Turn iane LT or TR = Optional Use Lane T = Thru Lane frR = Right Turn Lane With Free Right Island R = Right Turn Lane r ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR LEVELS OF GROWTH ALONG I-394 SUGGESTED IN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT � ST. LOUIS PARK IMPROVEMENTS Other Recommended Responsible Location Improvements Agency B Crocker & Ford Rd WIDEN T0: EB COMB.L&T/T&R, NB COMB.L&T/frR, SB 2 OUTBOUND LANES, WB L/L/COMB.T&R ANO SIGNALS I-394 SOUTH FRONTAGE WIDEN T0: N8-L/R, WB-L/T, EB COMB. MN/DOT ROAD AND TEXAS T&R AND SIGNALS LOUISIANA & I-394 WIDEN TO: EB-L/T/R, WB-L/T/R AND MN/DOT SOUTH FRONTAGf ROAD SIGNALIZE WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET VERNON & CEDAR LAKE RD WIDEN EACH APPROACH T0: LL/TT/frR HENNEPIN COUNTY 6 CROCKER (FORD RD TO EB-T/T/frR, WB-7/T CSAH 18 LOUISIANA AVENUE (I-394) NB-1 LANE, SB-1 LANE, CENTER TURN �0 CEDAR LAKE ROAD) LANE fOR EACH DIRECTION VERNON & GAMBLES SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET CEDAR LAKE ROAD WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION HENNEPIN COUNTY (VICINITY OF VERNON) PLUS TURN LANES � I-394 & VERNON SOUTHI WB DOUBLE RIGHT TURN LANES AND 3 THRU MN/DOT fRONTAGE ROAD LANES IN EACH DIRECTION ON VERNON Key: L = Left Turn iane T = Thru Lane R = Ri ght Turri Lane , tT or TR = Optional Use Lane frR = Right Turn Lane With Free Right Island �