10-24-88 PC Agenda . .. . . . . , . . . . . . .f
. Y, �
Golden Valley Planning Commission
Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Monda , October 24, 1988
�� 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA '
I. APPROYAL OF FtIi�I�TES - OCTOBER 1Q, 1988
II. INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: H. i. Enterprises, Inc.
LOCATION: 7925 Wayzata Boulevard
REQUEST: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Tire �
Service and Light Automotive Repair in a Commercial
Zoning District
III. REVIEW OF I-394 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE
IV. REPORTS ON HRA, BZA AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
� PLANNING COMMISSION GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC INPUT
The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use. The Comnission
will recomnend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based upon the Comnission'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 surrounding neighborhood.
The Comnission holds informal 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 cortments. Your questions and comments become
part of the record and will be used by the Council, along with the Comnission's recomr�ndation, in reaching
its decision.
To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your cortments and questions, the Comnission will utilize the
following procedure:
1. The Comnission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recom�ndation from staff. Comnission
members may ask questions of staff.
2. The proponent will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the Comnission.
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/com►�nts if a
large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak. Spokespersons for groups will have a
longer period of time for questions/coimients.
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 initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal.
7. At the close of the public hearing� the Comnission wi11 discuss the proposal and take appropriate
action.
4
'�
MINUTES OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
! October 10, 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 7:02 P.M.
Those present were Commissioners Kapsner, Leppik, McAleese, McCracken-Hunt,
Prazak, and Russell . Commissioner Lewis was absent. Also present were Mark
Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, and Beth Knoblauch, City Planner.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
It was moved by Commissioner McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Commissioner McAleese,
and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 26, 1988
Planning Commission meeting.
II . PRESENTATION BY DAVE SEBOLD REPRESENTING RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION - AREA C
OF VALLEY SQUARE
Director of Planning and Development Grimes said that Ron Clark Construction had
been designated developer of Area C in Valley Square and that the HRA was in the
process of negotiating a development agreement with them. He introduced Mr. Dave
Sebold from Ron Clark Construction.
Mr. Sebold presented the preliminary plans for the block which show about
� 100,000 square feet of retail space and office/service space on two levels.
There is also a six-story, 100 unit apartment building on the site. Mr. Sebold
stated that the retail portion will probably be mid price retail with a fashion
orientation. The apartment units will be in the mid to upper price range.
The Planning Commission addressed concerns regarding the adequacy of parking on
the site and the lack of area for landscaping and setback. There was also a
discussion about the accessibility of the apartments to the retail space. The
Planning Commission felt that the residents should have access to the retail
shops so that they do not have to go outside.
III . PRESENTATION BY RICHARD MYERS REPRESfNTING LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY -
HIGHWAYS 100 AND 55 EXPANDED NQRTH WIRTH PARKWAY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Director of Planning and Development Grimes introduced Richard Myers of Lincoln
Property Company. They are proposing a 590 unit apartment development at the
northeast corner of Highways 100 and 55. The area is in the expanded North
Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area. The proposed use of the apartments is con-
sistent with the goals of the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment Area plan.
Mr. Myers presented drawings of the proposed development. He said that the site
is 24 acres. He is looking at a two phase development with the first phase
beginning in the summer of 1989 with a completion in mid 1990. The second phase
would begin in mid 1990 and finish in 1991.
�
4
'( �
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 10, 1988
Page 2
� There are two distinct building types. The first type is a 3 - 4 story typical
apartment with underground parking. The second type is a two-level walkup
building with a courtyard. The apartments would have a front and back side for
improved ventilation and exposure to the sun. All units will have washers and
dryers. A11 units will have at least one underground parking space. There are
plans for superior amenities with the complex including indoor and outdoor pools,
tennis courts, walking and jogging trails and a 5,000 square foot club house.
The Planning Commission discussed the access to the site. They agreed that the
proposed traffic signal near the old White House will improve access to the
area. However, there was some concern regarding the need for a second access to
the site from the north. Director Grimes explained that in 1991 or 1992 the
plan is for MnDOT to complete the frontage road system to the north across the
railraad tracks and thereby give the development a second access.
There was also concern regarding the removal of 112 moderate rent units and
replacing them with high rent, luxury units.
IV. PRESENTATION BY JOHN BOSSARDT REPRESENTING BOSSARDT CHRISTENSON
CORPORATION - NORTH WIRTH PARKWAY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Director of Planning and Development Grimes introduced John Bossardt of Bossardt
Christenson Corporation and Ron Erickson of Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects.
Bossardt Christenson is proposing to redevelop the Otto Bock, Juhl Brokerage,
Action Electric and Soo Line properties in the North Wirth Parkway Redevelopment
* Area.
Mr. Erickson presented drawings of the site plan and building elevations. The
plan is to construct 200,000 square feet of Class A office space on Highway 55
in two buildings and 70,000 to 90,000 square feet of light manufacturing or
office/high tech space a]ong the railroad tracks to the north. The office
buildings would be up to eight stories in height. There is the possibility of a
restaurant on the first level of one of the office buildings. Parking for the
site would be to the north of the office building with the possibility of a
parking deck.
Access to the site is from Highway 55. The City is currently working with MnDOT
to get approval of a second signal at Ardmore.
The Planning Commission was impressed by the proposal of Bossardt Christenson.
V. I-394 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE
Director of Planning and Development Grimes said that City Attorney Allen
Barnard would be present at the next Planning Commission meeting to discuss the
I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 P. M.
�
�
,� ,
October 17, 1988
�
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Beth Knoblauch, City Planner
SUBJECT: Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit for H. I.
Enterprises, Inc. , 7925 Wayzata Boulevard
Ms. Beverly Kottas, acting for H. I. Enterprises, Inc. , has filed an application
for a Conditional Use Permit to allow tire service and light automotive repair
for up to four vehicles at a t�me at the site of the Golden Va11ey Mini Mart.
The site i� zoned far commercial use, an� auto repair is a permitted conditional
use in commercial districts. The convenience store and gas station currently
occupying the site are both conditional uses as well , so this request would add a
third conditional use to the site.
H. I. Enterprises was denied a similar CUP amendment in 1983 because the City at
that time had strong reservations about allowing auto repair at the site in
question. According to the City's ordinances, reapplication can be made if six
months or more have elapsed since the matter was last considered. As listed on
the application, the reasons for the present request are: 1) the access limita-
tions imposed by I-394 require a stronger attraction at the site to maintain a
� profit�ble business, and 2) the other H. I. Enterprises site, rented from the
City and located in the Valley Square Redevelopment Area, will be put out of
business as development proceeds. Both of these facts have been well known to
the Kottas family since they began operations at the two sites.
The Golden Valley Mini Mart represents a successful redevelopment of two margin-
aliy usefui sites. The operation has been clean and attractive. The I-394
corridor to the front, and an e�sbar�kment to the rear, provide partial buffers for
adjacent uses.
The site is not served by City water or sewer. The Pollution Control Agency
would have to determine whether the on-site sewage holding tank could handle the
additional load s�enerate� by th� �ncr°eased number of employees and customers.
The Waste Cor�trol Commission would have to regulate the collection and disposal
of the hazardous waste by-products of the auto repair and servicing activities.
Setback and parking waivers were required in order to construct the existing
facility, and additional waivers would have to be granted by the City's Board of
Zoning Appeals to accommodate the proposed use. H. I . Enterprises should go to
each of these agencies for the necessary licenses and approval before proceeding
to the City Council for final approval of the CUP.
In determining whether or not to recommend approval of a request for a Conditional
Use Permit, the Planning Commission must make findings on ten separate items. In
the case of H. I. Enterprises, the following findings may be made:
�
L
t �
Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 17, 1988
Page 2
�
1. Demonstrated need for the proposed use.
The Yellow Pages directory lists twenty locations within Golden Valley that offer
some form of auto repair, auto servicing, or tire sales. At least three of these
locations are or may be going out of business because of the City's redevelopment
activities. Clearly, H. I. Enterprises feels that there is ample demand for auto
servicing in Golden Valley, or it would not be requesting the CUP.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which designates the
site for commercial uses.
3. Effect upon property values in the neighboring area.
The Golden Valley Mini Mart is clean and well-run, with no indication that it has
caused harm to nearby property values thus far. The addition of an automobile
repair and servicing area does carry some risk of adverse impacts extending
off-site, but such impacts generally are the result of poorly planned and/or
poorly operated facilities. The characteristics of the site itself will serve to
limit potential off-site impacts. If there are to be any problems, the Thorpe
property to the west is the most likely to be affected, especially since the
applicants' proposal would extend their building to within five feet of the
property line on that side.
� 4. Effect of any anticipated traffic generation upon the current traffic flow
and congestion in the area.
Because this is a combined facility, it is difficult to predict how many new
trips would be generated by people who would not be going there for another
purpose. The changing access configuration caused by the construction of I-394
also presents an �r�knawn factor. However, it is not anticipated that the addi-
tion of the four proposed service ba�os �ill have a significant impact on the
area's overall traffic flow. There is a potential for on-site congestion caused
by inadequate parking and loading and poor circulation.
5. Effect of any increases in population and density upon surrounding land uses.
The proposal involves no population increase. However, the development density
of the site relative to the City's ordinances will be rather high. Considerable
setback and parking waivers are involved, making this a very tight site for the
activities included on it. This may cause some infringement on adjacent uses or
on public right-of-way.
6. Increase in noise levels to be caused by the proposed use.
There may be some increased noise due to the use of machinery and the testing of
car engines. This should not extend noticeably beyond the premises except
possibly in the warm weather months when service bay doors are more likely to be
� left open.
�
� .
Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 17, 1988
� Page 3
7. Any odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibration to be caused by the proposed use.
Again the use of machinery and the running of engines may cause increased levels
of these undesirable elements.
8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals or vermin in the area to be
caused by the proposed use.
The proposed use is not expected to attract insects or other pests.
9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure or use.
The proposed structure would be an addition to the existing building, extending
westerly for an average distance of 110 feet with a depth of 35 feet. There
would be four service bays in a row adjacent to the existing building and opening
to the north, with a storage area at the westernmost end.
10. Any other effect upon the general public health, safety, and welfare of the
City and its residents.
There are certain conditions that should always be of some concern to those
charged with protecting the public welfare. The lack of municipal sewer and
water services, the generation of hazardous waste products, and the divergence
� from specified setback and parking requirements are such conditions of concern on
the Golden Valley Mini Mart site. However, if H. I. Enterprises obtains the
necessary licenses and approvals regarding these conditions, then the proposed
use is not likely to have a major impact on the general public.
According to Planning Commission minutes, Ms. Kottas stated in 1983 that other
operators of combined gas stations and convenience stores had found that such
facilities were not conducive to the addition of auto repair services. This
raises a question as to whether conditions have changed enough since then to make
the current proposal feasible. If the auto repair activity fails, what alterna-
tive use will then be proposed for the structural addition?
The Planning Commission may wish to consider a recommendation for two service
bays rather than the four requested in the application. This would be enough to
replace the service bays lost at the other H. I. Enterprise facility, it would
not require a setback waiver adjacent to the Thorpe property, it would require
fewer parking spaces, and there might be less concern over the feasibility of
service/repair activities at this site.
The following conditions should be included in any recommendation made by the
Planning Commission:
1. Site improvements shall conform to the site sketch dated September 27, 1988
and on file in the Planning and Development Office, except for specific
alterations dictated by a City or State office as a prerequisite to obtain-
� ing necessary approval or licensing for the site. In the case of such
alterations, an amended site plan shall be submitted for filing in the
Planning and Development Office.
�
�� .
Golden Valley Planning Commission
October 17, 1988
Page 4
� mu m
2. The site st co ply wTth or receive waivers from all applicable State and
local regulations, including but not necessarily iimited to those of the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Waste Management Board,
and the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals.
3. All conditional uses on the site, existing and proposed, shall be included
in the new Conditional Use Permit so that no previously authorized permit
shall be applicable; this is an administrative detail only, and shall not be
taken to alter the provisions regarding previously permitted activities.
4. No further structural additions shall be permitted on the site, and no
additional uses shall be allows; this shall not prevent the site owners from
applying for future alterations to the structure or substitutions of use as
long as no additions are involved.
5. The exterior facing on the structural addition must match as close1y as
possible with the existing structure, no windows are to be permitted in the
westerly wall of the addition, and no access larger than a standard
pedestrian entry shall be allowed on any exterior wall of the area marked
for storage.
6. The area so marked shall not be used for any purpose other than the dead
storage for which it is labelled on the site sketch.
� 7. There shall be no outside storage of materials, and any refuse area shall be
screened from view.
8. Failure to comply with any of the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit
shall be grounds for its revocation, pursuant to a two-thirds affirmative
vote by the City Council .
�
. . . . �� �• v I
'+� � " Z/ I?• "LS . • '�. • .. '� , ��4 P�,�S �n ,
I` • : " � � t�; ��! �w � � � ��,�,±�� �, �ivo.� •
' • ` s 1� � � �xt� R-�' ! - '`
vice � � �D . E A ,Qpq� s � . �; *�-- x �
� /4 • �, � i � � 4 � $ � ' •� rtla�ol R `:«' �, f'�
; � y � R � // /D � �d 7 � s � ' A Nsa� ���►� '` �''t.��:
. = f; � � � _ _ • �n • • s��z�' �._�•
o � . _ , s•Itt
3 � �' - �`Tr. F�tlf )�!'1'�g '� %/ V/ - "i �X�� � tc �
• ..
��r t�p � •'.� �`�iy: O� _ �$; �j �� .��Yy/�e � ! s•� � � 3
�S%S'yll� . �- '� �+ w "Ju--. � � �
• , �
: :� lS.1��.� +� :�$ � � ,�i' -�7 �� ���f0� � ; �"" + i 1
, • __:�
o� � T ,� �'# "�� ';�� 8� � � � w
�
� �.. o W ...�.t»m� � - ! i-dt
r f 0 ,. �n� 3 � �� � Q �� � *-., �' N �J.!.'--•:►rr.Tf �st
�i �6 = � ; � � `� ' �n � ; � �.�I�t_ �_ _ji�. �S• Z I�
"` �� w s ' Tit-�' � � '� =3 Y^. .� ���
• y ,� � ��� � 8 � � � � . _ : �i .. l.I
;`� S • 3 '�^, � '� =t '. _!.. '�•
' � ,�u ., � 3�� E �REGORY r �. � t� ��`' ` i!
`' I rs...4 N� °��s �$ �tRQ -- --- �� 10
d � ` ° _ -
� � � "'+ t ' �� ' A ;��' o !�'` • f -- - - ���';`� '�f��!
� r .
i v OQ N $^ �s j �:� . � 8 /� �� r,, -�l�
LL � �. • n t
. � w � A • • � r � . � -
���. � • � T��
�� ~ Z�� � � • � �/0 , �'� � • /� ' �� ' W n
�` 8 $ 1 K . � Q �
� r..�, t�°`'�► � _ .� 3 $ . ♦- - - �-• . ��_ _ .
, "''4. � � �. �• � � :` Q ' � �. • IS b .
� - �'q�y- '` • � -!�o �' � •
, , � � . � w ►i . �' - -
�� ; '�� ��- � � !/ � � , . 4 � . � ♦ - - - - -'t�` , e ,,
`'� � �� . �\ �. � , � '�� isl.tf • ��'S
� �,,, • r� • � 6� RtE '�
.` ��� �'•�,. �
Q �/ ti
'I� `�(� � �� �� ��-' /��; � •`•��,1s lf• ` W ,j � /� .
¢�
�� , � ��s•/ � .� .� � �_ -i�w � w��
.
� ���. • � '�- - - ' y :� tt
3� � � '��� o � �'� � � ��9� j � - -��$ � �-.�- -
.
• �% � � � '' '� ��e is • /j P` Z!
� � j� ' � �,'�o` i� �' q��T rE�_ i t4 ' �
a . �'�' .� h�, � �. ,�/+ /` S . s. ---�-
�1 � �� � !C . ,f_ -�is,�_ - - �� --�-;�
�, .�ij'�� c � �__��.� '�-_--:_ �-�
• �.w' � . s \ � �� � /�' -
S'� �'0- '?'�. FZao�o) ~ ,� . + - :- j , � -�'1` �---
. �t �. r-
�'
RK � � ah Ad�•- ,` • �� ���•s�.s.' e•r�. � . 1 ' . .,,_
. i �•,, „� .- o ,�. ��.1,.,.,a. �•f•�+w .
. . � j ' S � �'�� �t„' -�� � 1
. . . � �
.• ' � � `��1�� ������'��
� _ • .
. . � - . . � �� .
, / •00 - _ 1�.9-
. . • . . � , H. 4 EN1'EAPR19tS�'ft t �
. ; - 7925 WAYZATA BLW. i. ENTERPRISES. INC. . � ��
. . - • . ' .� -. _ . . t•���!�?APpUS. �.! •-T825 WAYZATA BlVO. �
_'.' . • . . � . . . !!IINNJIPOUS� MN 554Za
- ,, . . , . , . ��.T • � �l.at.
_ ,r_ '�. „ � � t• . �' ; • r. . , � ����� �• ���y • ' ,� �� .f '
� '• ,. . . . , - N iH•' . :� ;, , � � •.►i K 7Ax
• . • :. " . I,•_ -- ' ' COL�N/ r �H PLA:S L�f ::t�'- eJ� �F�c CL�IJ-;
r '
�► -�-- E�a
. ', �1 �I____ r'~'"Z-. ..r;'�y.�s.�..r '�
�'•• ,�• /�, '�`2..��_ y___ �
�s.y ! 'Lr.:,.,�+
' ;�, : �J�, .r . •- • . ..n. �i.Y.-�-��...�, . .
}
.`' .. , ' I � . . ; 1 I .
i
' I
���� � � : i � L
� �, . � ,
, . �
.' �� -.� -.
: ..
,.��•.. - _
-�i4-�`,�..,
-----_
',� ,�1, ,.
� � �
� �
`+r�-. ',
.� � "- �
'' �
� .
� /
� .
. i
�,
` �� � �
� , .
� ' �
i �� � ,
( /� !J � '
� i
� � �
i
i
_ i
i �
/ �
�
� kj ��\` j .
.�
.��
.
,
, ,
,
�
�
i
�
,
� / W
� I / / �
� u
a
�
�
{
�
� October 19, 1988
T0: Golden Valley Planning Commission
FROM: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
SUBJECT: I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
City Attorney Allen Barnard will be at the October 24 Planning Commission
meeting to review the I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance.
�
Attachment: Copy of I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
�
.; �
• ' �
. '
'� DRAFT 9-22-88
GOLDEN VALLEY/ST. LOUIS PARK
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
REGARDING
1-394 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE
.
This Agreement is made this day
of , 1988 by and between the CITY OF GOLDEN
VALLEY ("Galden Valley") and the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ("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,
WHEREASp the construction of Interstate Highway 394 will
generate traffic cong�stion on both the freeway system and the
local street networks i�a pc+rtsc�ns of St . Louis Park and Golden
Valley resu3ting 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 Golden 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 entered into this Joint
Powers Agreement under the authority conferred by Minn. Stat.
� 971.59 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 Ordi�nance, for the portion of the I-394 Overlay
Zoning District lying within its boundaries, effective
December , 1988.
2 . During the term of this Agreement, 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
according to its terms .
�
_2_
r' .
' ,
; � 4 . Each city recognizes that the concentration of motox
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 adaress this
issue each city agrees to commission a joint study of the
expected air qvality 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
supplemented 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$, or 706, 8Q0 square feet , to the City of Golden
Valley. The Study indicates a reserve capacity of office
development in the Louisiana Avenue/I-394 interchange area of
1,575,000 which has been allocated by the parties 10% or 157, 500
square feet to St. Louis Park and 90$ or 1,417, 500 square feet
to Golden Valley. The Stuay also indicates a reserve capacity
of office development in the General Mills Boulevard/Boone
� rchan e area of 800,000 square feet which has
Avenue/I-394 inte g
_3_
�
•� been allocated 100� to Golden Valley. The parties agree that
the total amount of reserve capacity should be reevaluated on or
about 3�nuary 1 each year in order to determine its validity.
If a reevaluation shauld 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.
Thereafter, 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-394 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-399 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
-4-
.� .
�
� against the city violating the Agreement or Ordinance by
. �
obtaining an injunction, a mandatory injunction 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
Its Mayor
�
By
Its City Manager
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manager
�
_5_
, , .
,
, � MODEL ORDINANCE
� I-394 Overlay Zoning Dtstrict Ordinance
Section l. Purpose. The United States and Minnesota
Departments of Transportation are upgradinq State Highway No. 12
to become Inte�rstat� Highway 394 which will alter transportation
patterns and foster new dev+��c��ment 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
situation and entered into a Joint Powers Agreement respecting
the same. This Orclinance 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 development assuming appropriate traffic management
� plans are in place and effect. The Joint Task Force will review
the plans and insure their compliance with this Ordinance.
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 of 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 ;
continu� west along the north line of 16th
5tr��t �est t� 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
beginninq.
�
-2- _
C. "Zone B" is that part of the land lying in
� Golden Valley/St. Louis Park 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 the
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;
continue 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; continue 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.
�. "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 Mi11s Boulevard;
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 of 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 _
S 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
seconds) .
� G. "Level of Service C" means traffic moves
smooth2y. 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 secands) .
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
(averaqe 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) .
_d_
.� 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 .
t�e "�e��r�r� Capacity" means the amount of
adc3itional 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 60°� or 1,060 , 200
square feet to St . Louis Park 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 .
Lo«is Park and 90$ or 1 ,417, 500 square feet
to Golden Valley. The total reserve
capacity for the General Mi11s Boulevard/
Boone Avenue interchange is 800, OD0 square
feet of office developmen*_ which has been
allocated 1Q0°� 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 th�t portion of Zones A, B and C
lying within the boundaries of (Golden Valley/St . Loui� 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 9 . 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 lot 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 :
l . 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 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 (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 l.
�
-6-
.� 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 prepaxe 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 l.
4 . Each development containing more than
.6 square feet of gross floor area per
each square foot of land area within a
� 1ot 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 ineasuring traffic
volumes, the acceptability of persons
or firms undertakinq it and all other
reasonable requirements in connection
therewith.
�. Each developer or owner of a parcel who
ieases the parcel to one or more tenants
shall include in each 2ease 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 traffic
engineer and shall 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;
- _6_
,� B. Public tra�sit incentive programs which may
� include the provision of paratransit
services to ana from convenient public
transit sites and to accommodate mid-day and
evening excursions, the constructing of
transit shelters 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 �s cha��es in service routes, increases
in the frequency af sezvice, alternations in
the location of facilities, the
establishment of fare incentive programs and
other measures designed to make public
txansit 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
�n �rder to affect a reduction in the amount
of peak p�riod traffic to and/or from 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 parking costs for
single-occupancy vehicles, time and other
access restrictions to parking spaces in
on-site parking facilities, and programs to
support and encourage the utiliz�tion of
� alternative transportation modes.
-9-
, . � .
• G. Use and accessory use design options which
� reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles
by employees and others who wi11 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 other
analogous design features.
H. Any other technique or combination of
techniques capable of reducinq 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 ci,ty,
each city manager and a staff inember appointed by the city
manager from each city. Its function shall be to periodically
monitor the traffic 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 shall adopt and promulgate rules of procedure. If the
' -10-
. �
,' Joint Task Force deadlocks, the issue or matter shall be
� submitted first to mediation 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 bindinq 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 $. l0 per square foot of gross floor area .
The fees shall be collected by the city and deposited as a
segarate 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 orclinance. Should the costs of
administering and enforcing this Ordinance require it, the city
reserves the right to periodically assess such costs to the
parcels within the area covered by it.
�
4962U -11-
.
., ,
• � I.�
• � * 7o tn 2 c� t+7 S 7� M 70 70 O O 7b 7D 70 � � �
tD !D G O 7 'O W 7 fD lD r+r r+, lD lD !D � w
A r'S �"4 t� R f'* N L1. ft R r� r+� W ff1 IA � «p �O
p� < N rn tD W K C Or G► F�►��- • • • A
�... �... r» rt r Or N w►�- [� A C C�
r f> > f'') c►\ C rt � �+ N f� w►3.-� N c7 f�
a y �D `� C r•O A�r' w v N V N � G��G � t'z*7 ?OO
? 1 M� � �
F+ O O H 9 (D K 1� N N N N v1 C • � H
� C H � � 7 ~ o O O O f� � '+0 '0 H
� r�j � 7� 7 C 7 C 7 C w�3 � _�
� � �A... 1-A+ tA (A �A N �`C •
. . • • � �
� N �.+ O' 'nf '� "+� '+f �3 '�7
W '�! � � � � � '�
� . N [�
.-. ti�
f+
v r�+ � tp Y r-+ 7�� r �-+ �+ �' �+ r Z n Cp
' � O O [s7 f� 000 O 00 00 GG � H � K
O O G � O O O O O O O O �
H o p t*� o3o 0 00 0o CCC H A
.9 V� tn tn tn tn cn cn N tn O
«� "�7 '+7 '+7 '� "� '� "'7 ''7 3
. •p
ts7 ' ' �
.
H
. a p
� z '
�
ce �+o
t�7 � 3
rC '
? � �
~• fD Cr7
� fD �+
r• � � � -
rt
� � _
o Z � C
� �.. p OOOt?� O 1-� A 00 OOO
. . . . .
N . � . . . • . . • N � t,,,� A O� ,b
p W O OJWO N � v Ah+
p �p tJ� u a .,1 G O � � * � N ►+ � ^ �3
1-►
x A h+ h+ 0 0 0 C � H
� �.. O OOOA1 C � � � . . • • �
. C� • � • . . . . . � � a
1-+ W �iNN •i NO� NN41 ��
• 1i� O� t7► W A V1 J A N 01 0� �i M+ J L)
V� �' r +► �► +► t�7
. Z
'� i �
.
d � H
7 �'+
a o
u
z
, o �o
��-+ N
.
O
O
O
X
.
�
.
� N
.
'+9
b � .
• .
.
MEMORANDUM OF COMMENTS
�
RE: I-394 Joint Powers Agreement and
I-394 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance
DATE: September 20, 1986
. FROM: I-394 3oint 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 Va11ey/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 �oncept 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 ievel 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-399 Overlay Zoning District Ordinance is for the Cities to
agree to impose upon themselves an overlay zoning district which
requires traffic management plans under �ertain 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 interchange 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
�' enforce it according to its terms . Because variances in Golden
� Va11ey are granted by the Board of Zoninq Appeals, the Golden
Valley City Attorney's office is researching whether it is
possible to require a21 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 . Paraqraph 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 5 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-Roscoe-Frausch report, the
moderate and high growth scenarios and the amounts of
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-
�� MODEL ORDINANCE
1. 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-conforminq traffic generators in the same manner as
non-conforming uses under traditional zoning ordinances .
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 . Section 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 concerned 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
designatec� 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-
� 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 engineering consultant to review the plan and eaisting
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 planninq and zoninq issues affecting 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 the existing zoning, 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 continue 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 shali 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 cannot impair. Since lessees will have
notice of the ordinance, there should be no problem enforcing it
against owners who have such lessees.
8. Section 5 of the ordinance requires each development
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
a�y given parcel .
� 10. Nonconforming traffic generation uses are a�dressed in
Section 7 of the ordinance. The iaea is to differentiate
non-conforming generation 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. Sectian 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 purpose 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.
saxsu
Attached is a map of the zones referred to.
i �
�
_5-
,•
� � ,..._ .,. • � � �:'•��' � � t� ` \�.\
�� �^. .. . .. 1,,.1 . '� .
c� •,. � � . .�
„� .�. ..� .,•'�r \
� !'_ r�1 ' •� � � � �� ��, C W
• � � � {:
:r� `r ' .. � � � � `t� � � ' �
lo., t �� . � e � �o � y •V ..I»..
�C � � s � � � �..� •� .�. �
7 �� �' ! �., � •
1 �:.. . � . - �
� � i�" : � , ,.,, ..o , _
�• �.• • �
f ��M a��� � •�9r�1 � � e � �'� �� .
• � ... �+....... �.. ��'' � '. . . \"i .
� • )w:l�wt�� � � "'M� �/ ��•.. .
.0.�...... F � �
♦. •` )D�•�•r `' � • t . � ~_ i • Q � .
. a � ► ♦'• w�Ot)h• � . • � ,•r . wr. .
• = � ,. • � �� . .
�...� i M r• • ,
•o•- "� : Y '� t ,��..,, '• •i £ '"' .»- '
:�0 + . o , t •e w
� r s w �t �J�„� :r�. � � .�. �
. � � r � �
\ , . : ��N ' i j �• N�o , • .. � ` y„•� � Z \ .
1 � . ' w. .. •. 'i: � � .�r•� � /y .• .�.e ' •r� .� �^ .
� .• .� ^�. /N).�. / 1N � .)\1��` 1•�• Ih7��• : � /Nf �•• . '.���Z ..� � .
...,. , , ,., r .,k .....� . :_ �� . . ... . � W
. .,�., ` �-�ai• .p.n. � . OJ •�rws � � • �
'Y :� • :
` � � �.��� M �r. )•1['` O
�. � •^ _ "'"• v. -���•, -o•�•.. ��
.�, O N �c
� � .�`• e 5 �-- - . _ _ •� ''' ¢
` Of � ' E
., � .:,�.�1 �, °s z d
1�: � �� ,� . , .:�. y
_,. • .o..r ',.. o..�• W �
��e� � . � .� . . • ��� " � � .
�Y, ° ` , l ^ Y•� �Sil� � . O.
�� � � � .•�•s��• l .�o..f. �„� :rwr»� J
• '� - � '. .�w. ... � � . Z
i �� H
�,_.. .�� O `\ � •..1�1 I�t i M• tR �
� I�•:' j`_ � � v
.:.= - � r .. ,.. . , .� �
� j`:''�'• �•• � �.:• \ _K �,� _ — +'+o � J
� ' ��r . ....�� �i N N � ~,t,•� ..Q
•t ��� . � �
�1 �:o.�. ... �\ ,;• > •.O t0 ►v •.� .�'� » . �
. . •Ts!� , ',� �~ �.� =.��o. � )•.. r - � /1 2
;� i V' � � ..Q �s:��.., y.� . . ._ � Q.
� = " � ,� � �..' ��ar. �.. .: .rr.� � JO
j t .�•.r•� + . . . �.� Is ��w�•� �^�r � � . n
� � ' •J ��� ��•�.• ••��� Q �
} . ��e i _ 1• M
. f �••j �.� / ��S�1' .1,�P � �) •7' �i
•r. p..`.1. ...,.` 6 � � �.� �•� 1 ♦1. ���, .. .�U . L Q
', � - r•�•.�. ♦ «w � - l , , ye ��e c.nf' . � ` �
. . 1�•�1��•.�. � g � YJ
� f i ��'s.��w ' �i l•� 9�•��.��w {f. Y .
�••i • . .w
1 _ � • n..�„ ' � �.�,' + ' •• tr. • •'�" 0� v/ `
'•vi�•r i i f. � �•o r ^�' J C . � V
. ' S :3� •►. . ri, � �� ° a
� r ' f �� �'' •c'.�••.Sa�1a• �.•�,+, '` y + �..�� t.�l• lA W d .
^ � ,...�. ;�. . N � �. . ,,, � �
. � � . r
,^. +. , , �,.. ~, ,o . \ • �. ? � V
�•� �. ' . � ' s : • ��
• • o- � � i„� �. � {L
`" �' ,• • � + �
• •�� : • •• � i ~ �
► .; ; ., ' .` .. •.y� • •�•.c Z Q
.. .: W
.. .���� . .M� .,,� � r J, 1• �
� �� �• � . ~� � N� �
. � ,�, ' �.P, r s � • .. � �. � l'O
:: � aa N ; ,. . � .e • r a _
t •ra9 � '� �. 1/j• . , ► �• t ► ��► � O
1- / ��„ ' �j .� a � •e
,�- .� ,; � o� o� � •
' J
• _ '' c � s �„ ,•. • ..o � } �. .; W
i ♦� c.e' ��: : r� r•✓.�� � J .t ) r� ' .
: f � N- ♦
1 ,.. :.,., '. z � ". W
� r -< ,.. _•,.,.....�M � ^ �� �
. �,. .t ..,r _ � .
- ! ., t _ -.: •. O � �
1 � �-�' c �}.
I �� � :_. � o _ �
.� .
- .: . . � • ,_ ,,,.,. :
; . : ,.... i 1
+ r s s �� � „�� ji� w� ip�:NOI�� .: � . ° ' .
� 0
� � �' • 0�.,� � � .
� ...- : .... r .� , ��
o � � •�w � J• • IM ti3
� � t . � : � • .f��,. )���
� �. .� O
� r � , ae
.��o... L +�e
•� H•r�[ G� , �. . • �-. •• �p=Z
.�•� +��• . '•�C, :'" •. • •
� , • � '• --.j . "� �. a .J, ���
i� � • i a � - • � ���
i . ,�, .. �,. - .
' .�� .... '� .�.
� � � f � �. C• �. •�•� •, � i 00: Hv) ��Z � : i� L1
C � ���Y �
�,./ i ... �;I• : .o w...i• n � �=°"' '' ' ' `�"�
� . '� ♦ w..• . Y ;. . . • e
. � ,
ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
NEEDED FOR IEVELS OF GROWTH ALONG I-394
SUGGESTED IN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
�OLDEN VALLEY IMPROYEMENTS
Other
Recorrm�ended Responsi bl e
Location Improvements Agency
GLENWOOD & TURNERS WIDEN T0: EB-LT/R, WB-L/TR, NB-LT/R HENNEPIN COtINTY
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: EB-T/R, WB-L/T, NB-L/R
AND SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
TURNERS & LAUREL WIDEN T0: f6-L/R, SB-T/R, NB-L/T
AND ALL STOPS
BOONE & B CROCKER NORTHBOUNO LEFT TURN LANE
�LENWOOD & 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/D07
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: S6-L/T/R, NB-L/T/T/R MN/DOT
TH 55 & WINNETKA WIDEN T0: SB-L/LT/T/R, NB-L/LT/T/R MN/DOT
TH 55 & DOUGLAS WIDEN T0: SB-L/L/T/T/R MN/DOT
WINNETKA & LAUREL SB BYPASS & NB RIGHT TURN LANES HENNEPIN COUNTY
TURNERS (GLENWOOD TO WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION
LAUREL
LOUISIANA (I-394 TO WIDEN TO 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION
LAUREL) PLUS TURN LANES
�- - - - s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = - - -nal UseLane - - - - - - - - - - - -
Key; L Left Turn Lane LT or TR Optio
T = Thru Lane frR = Right 'furn Lane With Free Right Island
R = Right Turn Lane
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.I&T/frR, SB 2 OUTBOUND
LANES, WB L/L/COMB.TbR AND SIGNALS
I-394 SOUTH FRONTAGE WIDEN T0: NB-L/R, WB-L/T, EB COMB. MN/DOT
ROAD AND TEXAS T&R AND SIGNALS
LOUISIANA & I-394 WIDEN T0: EB-L/7/R, WB-L/T/R AND MN/DOT
SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD SIGNALIZE WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
VERNON & CEDAR LAKE RD WIDEN EACH APPROACH T0: LL/TT/frR HENNEPIN COUNTY
B CROCKER (FORD RD TO EB-T/T/frR, WB-Y/T
CSAH 18
LOUISIANA AVENUE (I-394) NB-1 LANE, SB-1 LANE, CENTER TURN
�O CEDAR LAKE ROAD) LANE FOR EACH DIRECTION
VERNON & GAMBLES SIGNALS WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET
CEDAR LAKE ROAD WIDEN T0 2 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION HENNEPIN COUNTY
(VICINITY OF VERNON) PLUS TURN LANES •
I-394 & VERNON SOUTH WB DOUBLE RIGHT TURN LANES AND 3 THRU MN/DOT
FRONTAGE ROAD LANES IN EACH DIRECTION ON VERNON
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
�