The URL can be used to link to this page

07-15-14 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber July 15, 2014 6:30 pm The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7 pm 1. CALL TO ORDER PAGES A. Roll Call B. Pledge of Allegiance 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting - July 1, 2014 3-9 B. Approval of City Check Register 10 C. Licenses: 1. Solicitor's License - Bill Sweatt, Realtor 11-13 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - PRISM 14-16 D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Human Services Fund - June 9, 2014 17-18 2. Joint Water Commission June 4, 2014 19-20 E. Approval of Extension for Filing of Plat and Submitting Final PUD Plan Application - 21-24 PUD #107 - The Towers at West End - Duke Realty, Applicant F. Adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat PUD No. 115 and Authorization to Sign PUD 25-36 Permit and PUD Development Agreement - Morrie's Golden Valley 14-57 G. Authorize Appointment of Golden Valley Teen Committee Members 37 H. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or Wine Brookview Park 38-39 I. Adopt Second Consideration — Ordinance #520 —Amendment to Master Fee 40-41 Schedule for City Utility Bill Water Fee for Emergency Water Supply J. Adopt Second Consideration - Ordinance #521 - Amending, Ratifying and Readopting 42-44 Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections K. Authorization to Sign Amendment to Agreement with Hennepin County for Assessing 45-59 Services L. Adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat - Olson Tralee 14-58 60-62 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM A. Public Hearing - Ordinance #523 - Amending Section 11.03 Definitions, and Section 63-81 11.21, Subd. 6, Buildable Lots, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), to Modify the Definition of Lot Width B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Kate's Woods - 221 Sunnyridge Lane 82-105 C. Public Hearing - Ordinance #524 - Final Design Plan Approval - Tennant Company 106-176 PUD #114 - Tennant Company, Applicant 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. First Consideration - City Code Section 2.30-2.36 - City Departments 177-186 B. First Consideration - Proposed Revisions to City Code, Section 9.07, Parking During 187-190 Snow Plowing and Removal C. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Interfund Loan from the Storm Utility Fund to the Water 191-193 and Sewer Fund for Emergency Water Supply 14-59 D. Bottineau Transitway Update 194 E. Announcements of Meetings F. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT Housing and Redevelopment Authority Executive Session to immediately follow City Council Meeting in Manager's Conference room Webb Golden Valley, LLC vs Global One Golden Valley, LLC UNOFFICIAL MINUTES vallev CITY COUNCIL MEETING ' GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Harris, Council Members Fonnest, Clausen, Schmidgall and Snope. 1 B. Pledge of Allegiance 1C. Board and Commission Oath of Office and Presentation of Certificate of Appointment. Mayor Harris administered the oath of office and presented a certificate of appointment, city mug and pin to: Mr. Ronald Blum - Planning Commission and Mr. Larry Johnson - Environmental Commission. 1D. Summarization of City Council Executive Session held on June 19, 2014 regarding Evaluation of City Manager Mayor Harris read the summary statement. 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to approve the agenda of July 1, 2014 as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the consent agenda of July 1, 2014 as revised to remove items: 3E-Authorize Agreement with SEH, Inc. for Natural Resources Management Plan and 3M-Agreement between Minnesota DNR and City for Tree Planting on Public Property and the motion carried unanimously. 3A. Approve Minutes of Special City Council Meeting June 16, 2014, City Council Meeting June 17, 2014 and Executive Session Statement June 19, 2014. 3131. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3C1. Approve the solicitor's license for North Country Food Alliance. 3C2. Approve the solicitor's license for Bayport Roofing and Siding. 3C3. Approve the solicitor's license for Irakli Chigolashvili on behalf of Edward Jones 3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows: 1. Planning Commission - May 28, 2014 2. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - May 15, 2014 3. Envision Connection Project Executive Board - April 17, 2014 4. Community Center Task Force - May 20, 2014 . 3F. Authorize Cooperative Agreement for preparation of feasibility report for Honeywell Pond Expansion at Douglas Drive and Duluth Street, Project BC-4 with the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission and authorize agreement for professional engineering services with WSB & Associates, Inc. to complete a feasibility study in an amount not to exceed $29,800. Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- July 1, 2014 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA - continued 3G. Adopt Resolution 14-54 approving the appointment of Election Judges for the Primary Election to be held on August 12, 2014. 3H. Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign amended Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force 2014 Co-Operative Agreement. 31. Adopt Resolution 14-55 Appointing Jerold Frevel as Building Official. 3.1. Approve requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. 3K. To receive and file the May 2014 Financial Reports. 3L. Authorize the Mayor and City Manager sign consulting services agreement with Stephen Tokle Inspections, Inc. for electrical inspections. 3M. Authnri�ing nmondmon� }/� A r the Tree Planting Grant Fund �}Y7'-�UTTf� CI"IT7��e '�ATITTGTrGG rrClTfCf � 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3E. Authorize Agreement with SEH, Inc. for Natural Resources Management Plan Council Member Fonnest requested staff to provide additional details regarding the Natural Resources Management Plan. Public Works Specialist Eckman provided an overview of the Plan and answered questions for the Council. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to authorize agreement with SEH, Inc. for Natural Resources Management Plan in an amount not to exceed $43,882 and the motion carried unanimously. 3M. Authorize Amendment to Agreement for the Tree Planting Grant Funded by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Council Member Fonnest requested staff provide information regarding the tree planting grant and in particularly the plan for dealing with ash trees in the City. Public Works Specialist Eckman descripted the City's tree planting plan and answered questions from the Council. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Resolution 14-56 authorizing amendment to grant agreement between Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and City of Golden Valley for the General Obligation Bond proceeds designated for Tree Planting on Public Property and the motion carried unanimously. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 4A. Public Hearing - Final Design Plan Approval - Tennant Company PUD No. 114 - 701 Lilac Drive North - Tennant Company, Applicant City Planner Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to table this item until the July 15, 2014 City Council meeting and the motion carried unanimously. Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- July 1, 2014 4B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan for Carousel Automobiles PUD No. 95, Amendment#3 - 9191 and 9393 Wayzata Boulevard - Twin Cities Automotive DBA Golden Valley TCAP., LLC, Applicant City Planner Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. Mr. Pisinski, Applicant, and Mr. Hoang, Architect, reviewed the plans and answered questions from the Council Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was much Council discussion regarding the proposed lighting plans from the applicant and in particularly for the Porsche portion for the site. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to approve the Preliminary Plan for Carousel Automobiles PUD No. 95, Amendment #3, subject to the following conditions with revises made to item number 5: 1. The plans prepared by Baker Associates and submitted with the application on May 8, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated June 2, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated June 3, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. Parking in the lot south of Wayzata Boulevard shall be limited to inventory vehicles. Employee parking in this area will not be permitted. 5. The lightiRg plan shall be revised te bFiRg the lightiRg IeVeIS Of the eRtire site GORfbrmanGe with the Fequirernents of the Gity'6 GutdooF Lighting Code (SeGtign 11.734 within peried of five year 5 The lighting plan shall be revised so that the lighting levels of the Porsche portion of the site will conform to the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code (Section 11.73) and will consider revising the lighting over whole site within a period of five years. 6. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. In addition the Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 5(E): 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- July 1, 2014 4B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plan for Carousel Automobiles PUD — continued 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. 4C. Public Hearing - Ordinance #519 - Rezoning from Single Family Residential Zoning District (R-1) to Moderate Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) - 1001 Lilac Drive North - Max Zelayaran, Applicant City Planner Zimmerman stated that items 4C and 4D are related issues. He presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. Attorney Barnard answered questions from the Council. City Manager Burt answered questions from the Council. Mr. Max Zelayaran, Applicant, reviewed his plans and answered questions from the Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. Mr. Randy Anderson, 5645 Lindsay Street, stated he was not opposed to redevelopment but he is opposed to having two twin homes built on the lot. He is concerned about having more rental properties in the area and that the applicant stated he would built the single family home for $200,000. He is worried as to where the driveway placements will be due to the busy street is on a hill. He would like to see a park on the lot but would be okay with two single homes and one twin home. Mr. Michael Garant, 5540 Lindsay Street, stated he would be okay with two single homes and one twin home but not the proposed one single home and two twin homes. He stated Lilac Drive is a busy street that at one time had stop signs. He would like the signs back up. Ms. Renee Bergquist, 5620 Lindsay Street, stated she is not opposed to two single homes and one twin but does not feel there is not enough room for the proposed two twins and one single family home. She is concerned about the noise levels due to the fact the new homes will be built on a hill above her home. She also stated the neighborhood has had past sewer flowing issues and feels more homes in the area will bring more issues. She would like to see a park or community garden on the lot. Mr. Anderson stated at a neighborhood meeting he attended, it was stated the sewer flowing issues would be address when the street improvements were done. The improvements were scheduled to be done in 2016 but now have been pushed to 2018 or later. Mr. Mick Bergquist, 5620 Lindsay Street, stated he is concerned about water drainage in the area. He feels that if these homes are built, because they are on a hill that he would have water drainage problems. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was much Council discussion regarding the proposed variance for rezoning and the subdivision of the lot. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Mayor Harris to table this item until the August 19, 2014 City Council meeting and extend the application date, upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Clausen, Fonnest and Harris and the following voted against: Schmidgall and Snope and the motion carried. Unofficial City Council Minutes -5- July 1, 2014 4D. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Golden Valley Homes - 1001 Lilac Drive North City Planner Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to table this item until the August 19, 2014 City Council meeting, upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Clausen, Fonnest and Harris and the following voted against: Schmidgall and Snope and the motion carried. 4E. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Olson Tralee - 125 Cutacross Road City Planner Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. Mr. Peter Knaeble, Applicant, reviewed his plans and answered questions for the Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to approve the Preliminary Plat for Olson Tralee, 125 Cutacross Road, subject to the following conditions and the motion carried unanimously. 1. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 2. A park dedication fee of$1,400 shall be paid before final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated March 17, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6A. First Consideration - Ordinance #520 - Water Fee on City Utility Bill for Emergency Water Supply Finance Director Virnig presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. City Manager Burt answered questions from the Council. MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to adopt First Consideration, Ordinance #520, Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule for City Utility Bill Water Fee for Emergency Water Supply and the motion carried unanimously. 6B. First Consideration - Ordinance #521 - Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections City Manager Burt presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt First Consideration, Ordinance #521, Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections and the motion carried unanimously. Unofficial City Council Minutes -6- July 1, 2014 6C. Consideration of Recycling Centers as a Permitted Use in the Industrial and Light Industrial Zoning Districts; and Option to Establish a Moratorium for Additional Study City Planner Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from the Council. Attorney Barnard answered questions from the Council. City Manager Burt answered questions from the Council. There was much Council discussion regarding recycling centers, the proposed moratorium and the City's current zoning ordinances. MOTION made Council Member Fonnest and seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt the moratorium as amended to a six month moratorium on recycling centers upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Clausen, Fonnest and Harris and the following voted against: Schmidgall and Snope and the motion carried. 6D. Announcements of Meetings. The City Offices are closed on July 4, 2014 in observance of Independence Day. A Concert in the Park featuring the Choo Bob Show will be held on July 7, 2014 at 7 pm at Brookview Park. The next Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting will be held on July 8, 2014 at 6:30 pm. The next Council/Manager meeting will be held on July 8, 2014 immediately following the HRA meeting. The Human Services Fund Golf Classic will be held on July 11, 2014 from 8 am to 1 pm at Brookview Golf Course. A Concert in the Park featuring the Robbinsdale City Band will be held on June 26, 2014 at 7 pm at Brookview Park. The Golden Valley Ice Cream Social and Concert in the Park featuring the John Philip Sousa Band will be held on July 14, 2014 at 7 pm at Brookview Park. The next City Council meeting will be held on July 15, 2014 at 6:30 pm. City Manager Burt reviewed the upcoming agenda for the Council/Manager meeting to be held on July 8. A quarterly neighborhood meeting in the northwest section of the City will be held on July 29, 2014. A retirement party for Community Development Director Mark Grimes will be held on July 30, 2014 at Brookview. Unofficial City Council Minutes -7- July 1, 2014 6E. Mayor and Council Communications. Council Member Clausen gave an update on the progress of the lawn bowling which is scheduled to open in August at Brookview Golf Course. Mayor Harris stated he was offered a table at the Market in the Valley to answer questions. Mayor Harris stated the Sweeny Lake Home Association Annual Boat Parade will be held on July 13, 2014 at 11 am. Mayor Harris stated that the Laurel Hills West Association meeting will be held on August 20, 2014 at 7:30 pm. Mayor Harris gave an update on the Bass Lake Joint Powers Agreement. Adjournment MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Fonnest and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:54 pm. Shepard Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk catty D f11 golden V MEMORANDUM valley Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. B. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. city 0 gotaen MEMORANDUM valley City Administration Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 1S, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. Solicitor's License - Bill Sweatt, Realtor Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to do SO. Attachments • Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Bill Sweatt, Realtor. Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month. PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLICATION TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: $ 45.00 7800 Golden Valley Road Number of Persons: 3 Golden Valley, MN 55427 Type of License: Peddler Solicitor (circle one) Enclose the sum of$ 45.00 for 3 (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary for obtaining this license. Bill Sweatt, Realtor (Business or Individual Name or Organization to be Licensed) MN Business ID Federal Business ID (FEIN) Define Business Individual (Corporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, Non-Profit, State of Incorporation or Individual) 2145 Spruce Trail (Address) Golden Valley, MN 55422 City, State and Zip Code) 763-522-7306, 612-275-2831 m/txt (Telephone Number, including Area Code) NOW, THEREFORE, Bill Sweatt hereby makes application for (Applicant Name) period of 6 Months through 12/31 L 14, subject to the conditions and provisions of said City Code. (Signature of Applicant/Principal Officer) Description of goods or services for sale (include prices) or indicate if soliciting donations. If more space is needed, attach additional sheets (be specific): Real Estate Services NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete information regarding such change or modification. List the names and addresses of EACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behalf of said organization in the City, or, in the alternative, the name, address and telephone number or numbers where a responsible person of said organization will maintain a list of names and addresses of all persons engaged in peddling or soliciting in the City: Bill Sweatt - Same Address Linda Sweatt - Same Address Will Sweatt- Same Address (If more space is needed, attach additional sheets) STATE OF Minnesota ) ) ss. COUNTY OF Hennepin ) I, Bill Sweatt of Bill Sweatt, Realtor (Officer/Individual) (Name of Organization) being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to his/her own knowledge except as to matters therein stated on information and belief, and as to such matters, he/she believes them to be true. Signature o Applicant/Principal Officer) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 0—r — ay of 20,7 (Signature) ■ 8 JUDITH A. NALLY NOTARY PUBLJGAgOT1A My CWMb"e*W ift ma w a city o gotaen1!'-V' M E M 0 R A N D U M valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement- PRISM Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit an application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or denied by the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the 30-day waiting period. Attachments • Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for PRISM. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 5/14 Page 1 of 2 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: Application fee (non refundable) - conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and -awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. If application is postmarked or received 30 days or If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the licensing more before the event$50; otherwise $100. specialist assigned to your county. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization name Previous gambling permit number PRISM Minnesota tax ID number, if any Federal employer ID number(FEIN), if any 41-144209 Type of nonprofit organization. Check one. Fraternal Religious Veterans X Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City State Zip code County 730 Florida Ave S Golden Valley MN 55426 Hennepin Name of chief executive officer [CEO) Daytime phone number E-mail address Michelle Ness 763-432-4201 mness@prismmpis.org NONPROFIT STATUS Attach a copy of ONE of the following for proof of nonprofit status. Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55103 Phone: 651-296-2803 X IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact the IRS at 877-829-5500. IRS-Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization [charter] If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both of the following: a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION Name of premises where the gambling event will be conducted. For raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place. Good Shepherd Church Address [do not use PO box] City or township Zip code County 145 Jersey Ave S Golden Valley 55426 Hennepin Date[s] of activity. For raffles, indicate the date of the drawing. September 12, 2014 Check each type of gambling activity that your organization will conduct. _Bingo* X Raffle [total value of raffle prizes awarded for year$ ] _Paddlewheels* _Pull-tabs* _Tipboards* *Gambling equipment for bingo paper, paddlewheels, pull-tabs, and tipboards must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on Distributors under the WHO'S WHO?LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-539-1900. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit 5/14 Page 2 of 2 LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT CITY APPROVAL COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises i � located within city limits located in a township The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 [60 days for a 1st class city). days. _The application iifs,,deniiieedd..a The application is denied. Print city name K/r�/W C�� V ', Print county name Signatur of c per nnel Signature of county personnel Title Date 7 Title Date TOWNSHIP. If required by the county. On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny �. 7C � lllrll#bf OY r Melfi# 11nus SI 1`- an application, � � per Minnesota Statutes 349.166.] Print township name Signature of township officer Title Date CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and retuned to the Board with- 30 days of the event date. Chief executive officer's signature '1 Date Print name REQUIREMENTS Complete a separate application for: Financial report and recordkeeping required • all non-consecutive days, or A financial report form and instructions will be included with • all gambling conducted on one day (at multiple locations). your permit, or use the online filf-in form available at www.gcb.state.mn.us. Within 30 days of the event date, complete and return Send application with: _a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. _application fee (non refundable). Make check payable to Questions? "State of Minnesota." Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at 651-539-1900. To: Gambling Control Board This form will be made available in alternative format(i.e.large print,Braille) 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South upon request. Roseville, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: The information requested on this All other information provided will be pri- General;Commissioners of Administration, form(and any attachments)will be used by the Gambling vate data about your organization until the Minnesota Management&Budget,and Control Board(Board)to determine your organization's Board issues the permit. When the Board Revenue; Legislative Auditor, national and qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in issues the permit, all information provided international gambling regulatory agencies; Minnesota. Your organization has the right to refuse to will become public. If the Board does not anyone pursuant to court order;other indi- supply the information; however,if your organization issue a permit,all information provided viduals and agencies specifically authorized refuses to supply this information,the Board may not be remains private,with the exception of your by state or federal law to have access to able to determine your organization's qualifications and, organization's name and address which will the information; individuals and agencies as a consequence, may refuse to issue a permit. If your remain public. Private data about your for which law or legal order authorizes a organization supplies the information requested,the Board organization are available to: Board mem- new use or sharing of information after this will be able to process the application. Your organization's bers,Board staff whose work requires notice was given;and anyone with your name and address will be public information when received access to the information; Minnesota's written consent. by the Board. Department of Public Safety; Attorney Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF) Meeting Minutes June 9, 2014 Present: Hilmer Erickson, Kathryn Frommer, Elissa Heilicher, Michael Herring, Alan Ingber, Carolyn Kaehr, Jennifer Rudolph, Connie Sandler, Peggy Watkins and Andrew Wold. Also present: Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison. Not Attending: Craig McDaniels and Toots Vodovoz. Call to Order: Wold called the meeting to order at 6:47 p.m. Agenda Changes or Additions: No additions or changes to the agenda. Introduction of New members: The Commission introduced themselves and welcomed new members Michael Herring and Jennifer Rudolph. May 12 minutes: Sandler moved and Erickson seconded the motion to approve the minutes from May 12. The motion passed unanimously. By-Law Review: The by-laws were reviewed by attending members. No changes were made. Heilicher moved and Frommer seconded the motion to approve the by-laws. Motion passed unanimously. Application Packet: The Application packet was reviewed. Changes will be sent to the Communications Department for updating. Fackler will send the packet to members for approval before posting on the website. Upcoming Events: July 11th — Golf Classic. Sponsors: Checks have been received from Preferred One, Anonymous Donor, Rudy Luther Toyota, WSB & Associates and BNC Bank. Members discussed contacting other businesses in Golden Valley. Fackler asked members to send her the contact person and a letter will be sent. Door Prize Solicitation: Members offered to contact businesses for door prizes. Fackler will send members a reminder to contact the businesses. Food/Beverages: Heilicher and Fackler will coordinate the food and beverages for the event. Volunteers: Sandy Werts, the Volunteer Coordinator, will be contacting members to volunteer for the event. Other Business: Board and Commission Dinner: The annual Board and Commission Dinner is scheduled for Thursday, June 12 at Brookview. Reservations are due today for the event. Solicitation Letter.'As of today, $10,354 has been received. Roster Update/Nametags: The roster was updated. Nametags were ordered for the Commission members. Both items were distributed at the meeting. Anything Else?:Wold suggested adding a third fund-raising event. Events discussed were: Lawn Bowling Tournament during Valley Days, a "block party" with food trucks and music, a ribfest cook-off. Fackler will check with Golf to see if September 13th is available for a tournament. Sandler reminded the members that the next meeting is scheduled for Monday, June 9. Adjournment: Frommer moved to adjourn the meeting, Erickson seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Andrew Wold, GVHSF Chair Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Meeting of June 4, 2014 The Golden Valley — Crystal — New Hope Joint Water Commission meeting was called to order at 1:33 p.m. in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room. Commissioners Present Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal Staff Present Tom Mathisen, City Engineer, Crystal Randy Kloepper, Utilities Superintendent, Crystal Bob Paschke, Director of Public Works, New Hope Bernie Weber, Operations Manager, New Hope Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Supervisor Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor, Golden Valley Mitch Hoeft, Utilities Engineer, Golden Valley Pat Schutrop, Administrative Assistant, Golden Valley Others Present Steve Nelson, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Minutes of May 7, 2014 Meeting MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to approve the minutes of the May 7, 2014 meeting as presented. Motion carried. JWC Draft 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program The draft 2015-2019 CIP was presented for discussion. Two new projects were added: Douglas Drive Pipe Analysis for $33,000 scheduled for 2014 and Arc Flash Hazard Analysis for $20,000 in 2015. The security fence project at the Golden Valley reservoir moved from 2014 to 2015. The Douglas Drive pipe analysis is necessary in order to move forward with the Douglas Drive rehabilitation project design. The Arc Flash Hazard Analysis is to meet OSHA safety requirements. The Emergency Water Supply Well Project is kept in the CIP for information purposes. The cities are each responsible for paying those amounts toward the well drilling project. The formal CIP will be presented at the next JWC meeting for approval. Award Contract for Emergency Backup Water Supply Project The bid opening took place at 11 am, Wednesday, May 28, in the City of Golden Valley Council Chambers. The following bids were received: E.H. Renner & Sons $1,006,000.00 (cable tool method) Mark J. Traut Wells $1,127,605.00 (dual rotary method) Keys Well Drilling $1,195,260.00 (cable tool method) Mark J. Traut Wells uses dual rotary (DR) which is less disruptive and a more efficient construction method for drilling the wells. Nelson said DR would complete a well in 90 days versus 240 days using the cable tool (CT) method. The CT method will also generate substantial pounding noise and vibration. Joint Water Commission June 4, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Due to the amount of extra time it will take to drill the wells using the CT method and the added noise impact to the neighborhood, it is the recommendation of Bolton & Menk, Inc. to award the contract to Mark J. Traut Wells based on the construction method proposed which is better suited to the project. The TAC discussed the recommendation and agreed with the recommendation made by Bolton & Menk. MOVED by Norris and seconded by McDonald to award the Emergency Backup Water Supply well drilling project to Mark J. Traut Wells in the amount of$1,127,605 with simultaneous construction (90 days) to start in September 2014. Motion carried. The September start date will accommodate the completion of the portion of the CSAH 9 project involving the shutdown of the Crystal reservoir and therefore reducing the risk of having to take the Golden Valley reservoir out of service and the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Department's request to avoid potential conflicts with service at its golf course. If the drilling begins in September, Golden Valley is confident the well can be completed by December 2014. The watermain portion of the work will be advertised in the next couple of weeks. In addition to the watermain segment, there will be one more portion of the project that will need to go out for bids. The JWC directed Bolton & Menk, Inc. to do the advertisement for bids for the watermain. Bert Tracy put together some preliminary operating costs for the JWC to review. He noted that when the test pumping is done, the water will be directed down the storm sewer. Update on County Road 9 Project The contractor had a late start, but the project is moving ahead. Temporary water services have been installed to some Robbinsdale residents. Mathisen has not heard of any changes to the completion date. Update on Crystal Pump Station Generator Project The main control panel needed to be changed out in pump room. Mathisen received a Tier 2 Electric Service Agreement, Peak-Controlled Tiered Services, from Xcel Energy for the Chair's signature. Other Business None. Next Meeting The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 2, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. Adiournment Chair Burt adjourned the meeting at 2:07 p.m. Thomas D. Burt, Chair ATTEST: Pat Schutrop, Recording Secretary City 0 golden MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. E. Approval of Full Extension for Filing of Plat and Submitting Final PUD Plan Application - PUD #107 -The Towers at West End - Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100- Duke Realty, Applicant Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary At the May 20, 2014, City Council meeting, the Council approved a motion to extend the submission date until September 17, 2014, (180 days) for the Final PUD application and final plat for The Towers at West End PUD No. 107. The extension was subject to four conditions. Condition No. 3 requires that City staff would report back to the City Council 60 days after the May 20, 2014, approval about whether or not Duke was demonstrating that it was making efforts to work with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) about locating a permanent lift station for the construction of I-GV-461 Reliever on The Towers at West End site. If City staff found that Duke was making efforts to work with the MCES, the final 120 days of the extension would be approved by the City Council. If effort was not being made, the City Council could revoke the extension beyond 60 days. Public Works staff has been involved in meetings and has been monitoring correspondence between MCES and Duke regarding the placement of the lift station and associated infrastructure needed for the construction of I-GV-461 Reliever. Based on the discussions that are underway, staff believes that efforts are being made by the MCES and Duke to site the lift station on the Duke property. Attachments 0 Executive Summary For Action dated May 20, 2014 (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve full extension for filing of Final Plat and submitting Final PUD Plan Application for The Towers at West End PUD No. 107 to September 17, 2014, because City staff has determined that Duke has demonstrated it is making good faith efforts to work with MCES to locate a lift station for I-GV-461 on The Towers at West End property. The approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Duke shall submit cash deposits as requested by the City to cover legal and engineering costs incurred by the City for consideration of the Preliminary Plan. 2. Duke will be financially responsible for road construction under TH 100 and intersection improvements on the east side of TH 100 and traffic calming along the frontage road east of TH 100, to occur at the time building permits are applied for by Duke. 3. Duke shall cooperate with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) in the construction of the 1-GV-461 Reliever project. The Reliever project is required to be constructed by MCES to increase sanitary sewer capacity to serve Duke's West End development and other future development in certain parts of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. MCES and Duke to reach a conclusion on the permanent location of the lift station, the force main alignment, and all other appurtenances needed for the construction of the 1-GV- 461 force main within the vicinity of the Duke property. All temporary and permanent easements shall be identified, and all land shall be transferred in connection with the project. If the City or MCES determines that there has not been adequate cooperation from Duke, the City retains the right to place additional conditions on future extensions to the Preliminary PUD Plan or the Final PUD Plan. city 0 gotclen1l.,, MEMORANDUM va Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting May 20, 2014 Agenda Item 3. J. Approval of Conditional Extension for Filing of Plat and Submitting Final PUD Plan Application - PUD #107 -The Towers at West End - Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100- Duke Realty, Applicant Prepared By Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Summary At the March 3, 2009 City Council meeting, the Council approved the Preliminary PUD Plan and Preliminary Plat for The Towers at West End PUD No. 107. The Council has approved ten 180-day extensions since the original Preliminary PUD approval. The Preliminary PUD Plan and Preliminary Plat provide for the construction of a 4,000+ space parking deck attached to several office buildings that are located in St. Louis Park. Due to market conditions, Duke is requesting an extension for the filing of their applications for the Final PUD plan and the Final Plat. At this time, staff recommends that the extension of the PUD approval be a conditional 180 days. Staff will monitor the efforts by MCES and Duke to reach a conclusion on the permanent location of the lift station, the forcemain alignment, and all other appurtenances needed for the construction of the 1-GV-461 forcemain within the vicinity of the Duke property. All temporary and permanent easements shall be identified, and all land shall be transferred in connection with the project. Duke shall demonstrate to the City of Golden Valley its good faith efforts to act in accordance with the requirements of the PUD. Staff will report the status of Duke's progress with the MCES in 60 days (July 19, 2014). If adequate progress is being made to meet the terms of the PUD, the Council may extend the PUD for an additional term not to exceed 120 days (September 17, 2014). If adequate progress is not being made to meet the terms of the PUD, the Council may revoke any further extension of the PUD preliminary approval beyond the first approximate 60 days. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Letter from Duke Realty requesting an extension dated May 6, 2014 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve an extension for submittal of the Final PUD Plan application and the Final Plat for The Towers at West End, PUD No. 107 until September 17, 2014, subject to the following conditions: 1. Duke shall submit cash deposits as requested by the City to cover legal and engineering costs incurred by the City for consideration of the Preliminary Plan. 2. Duke will be financially responsible for road construction under TH 100 and intersection improvements on the east side of TH 100 and traffic calming along the frontage road east of TH 100, to occur at the time building permits are applied for by Duke. 3. Duke shall cooperate with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) in the construction of the 1-GV-461 Reliever project. The Reliever project is required to be constructed by MCES to increase sanitary sewer capacity to serve Duke's West End development and other future development in certain parts of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. MCES and Duke to reach a conclusion on the permanent location of the lift station, the force main alignment, and all other appurtenances needed for the construction of the 1-GV-461 force main within the vicinity of the Duke property. All temporary and permanent easements shall be identified, and all land shall be transferred in connection with the project. If the City or MCES determines that there has not been adequate cooperation from Duke, the City retains the right to place additional conditions on future extensions to the Preliminary PUD Plan or the Final PUD Plan. 4. Duke shall demonstrate to the City of Golden Valley its good faith efforts to act in accordance with the requirements of the PUD. Staff will report the status of Duke's progress with the MCES in 60 days. If adequate progress is being made to meet the terms of the PUD, the Council may extend the PUD for an additional term not to exceed 120 days. If adequate progress is not being made to meet the terms of the PUD, the Council may revoke any further extension of the PUD preliminary approval beyond the first approximate 60 days. If Council finds that adequate progress is being made to meet the terms of the PUD, the Council may permit the extension of the PUD preliminary approval to continue for the remaining approximate 120 days. city o1 11 f V 0� got a cnl .V, MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. Approval of Plat - Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 and Authorization to Sign PUD Permit and PUD Development Agreement- Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary At the June 17, 2014, City Council meeting, the Council held a public hearing on the Final PUD Plan for Morrie's Automotive (Bentley/Maserati). After the hearing, the Council approved the Final Plan, The Final Plat, PUD Permit and PUD Development Agreement have been prepared for consideration. City staff has reviewed the documents and has found them to be consistent with the approved Final PUD Plan and the requirements of the City Code. Attachments • PUD Permit - Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 (3 pages) • PUD Development Agreement- Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 (6 pages) • Resolution for Approval of Plat- Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 (1 page) • Final Plat- Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat- Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the PUD Permit and Development Agreement for Morrie's Golden Valley PUD No. 115. Morrie's Golden Valley - P.U.D. No. 115 City Council Approval: June 17, 2014 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Project Name: Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No. 115 Location: 7400 Wayzata Boulevard, Golden Valley, Minnesota Legal Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No. 115 Applicant: Morrie's Automotive Group Address: 12520 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka, MN 55305 Owner: Wagener Properties, LLC Address: 12520 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka, MN 55305 Zoning District: 1-394 Mixed Use Permitted Uses: The PUD Permit allows for the existing Morrie's Cadillac dealership and a new Maserati and Bentley dealership on a newly created lot in the southeast corner of the site. Components: A. Land Use 1. The plans prepared by mfra and Darwin Lindahl Architects, dated April 25, 2014, submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits for construction within PUD No. 115, the applicant shall submit a final plat to the City for approval. 3. A park dedication fee of $80,640, or 2% of the land value, shall be paid before Final Plat approval. B. Construction 1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No. 115 Page 2 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The design specifications, including building location, fagade treatment and materials, and site design, as submitted by the applicant, shall become part of this approval. 4. All signs on the property must meet the requirements of the City's sign code. C. Grading, Utilities, Access and Other Engineering Issues 1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from Public Works Specialist Eric Eckman to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated October 16, 2012 shall become a part of this approval. 2. Access to the newly created Lot 2 shall be maintained via a driveway easement. The Developer must submit a copy of the recorded driveway easement to the City. D. Subdivision 1. Proof of filing of the plat shall take the form of a certified copy of the fully recorded plat, or a receipt from the County specifically noting that the applicant has paid for such a copy to be sent to the City when it becomes available. 2. The name of the final plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 115" in its title. It is hereby understood and agreed that this P.U.D. Permit is a part of the City Council approval granted on June 17, 2014. Any changes to this PUD Permit shall require an amendment. Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No. 115 Page 3 Wagener Properties, LLC Witness: By: Title: Date: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Witness: By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Date: Witness: By: Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Date: Warning: This permit is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. #115 AGREEMENT dated this 15th day of July, 2014, by and between the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and Wagener Properties, LLC (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Development Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a Planned Unit Development (PUD 115) known as Morrie's Golden Valley, which land is legally described on Attachment One, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"). 2. Conditions of Development Approval. The City has approved the Planned Unit Development on the following conditions: a. Conformance to, and inclusion of, all provisions of the Final Plans for Morrie's Luxury Auto dated April 25, 2014, prepared by mfra and Darwin Lindahl Architects, and on file with the City (hereinafter referred to as the "Final Plans" ). b. Access to the newly created Lot 2 shall be maintained via a driveway easement. The Developer must submit a copy of the recorded driveway easement to the City. c. Marketable title in the Developer, if the City Attorney determines a title review is necessary before Final Plat approval. d. An Inflow and Infiltration Certificate of Compliance must be obtained for the new Maserati/Bentley building prior to occupancy. e. The Developer must enter into a Maintenance Agreement for the stormwater quality treatment facilities and storm sewer facilities being constructed as part of the PUD. f. The Developer must obtain Stormwater Management, Right-of-Way, Management, Sewer and Water, and any other permits that may be required for development of this site. g. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 115" in its title. h. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code 3. Effect of Development Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement. 4. Development Plans. The subject property shall be developed in accordance with the approved plans, original copies of which are on file with the City Department of Public Works. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Agreement,the written terms shall control. 1 5. Installation by Developer. The Developer shall install or cause to be installed and pay for the following, hereinafter referred to as the "Developer Improvements." a. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments. b. Surveying and staking of work required to be performed by the Developer. c. Installation of gas, electric, telephone, and cable lines prior to building occupancy. d. Installation of sewer and water services to serve the building. e. Installation of driveway aprons. f. Construction of a public sidewalk along Pennsylvania Avenue South, adjacent to this PUD, including the connection south to the pedestrian bridge which crosses 1-394, in accordance with Public Works comments on Final PUD dated May 19, 2014. Public sidewalks must meet City and ADA accessibility standards. The City will own and maintain the sidewalk following completion of construction. Depending on the final location of the sidewalk, the Developer may need to dedicate a permanent walkway easement to the City. g. Other items as necessary to complete the development as stipulated herein or in accordance with Public Works comments on Final PUD dated May 19, 2014. h. The grading, erosion control and landscaping, all of which shall all be made in accordance with City approved plans. 6. Permit. The Developer and Owner hereby grant the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a permit to enter the Subject Property to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the site development including construction. 7. Assessment for Public Works Costs. a. The Developer shall submit a Stand-by Irrevocable Letter of Credit, or Cash Deposit, for the following: i. The Developer shall construct a public sidewalk along Pennsylvania Avenue South within the public right-of-way or public walkway easement adjacent to Pennsylvania Avenue South as part of the Morrie's Automotive Group development as shown on approved plans on file in the City Engineer's office. The Letter of Credit or Cash Deposit submitted by the Developer shall include 125% of the estimated cost (calculated at $8,000 x 125% = 10,000) to construct the sidewalk as a guarantee that the work will be completed in a timely manner and in accordance with City standards. Five percent (5%) of the security required herein will be retained by the City until a one-year warranty period following final acceptance of the public improvements has been completed. ii. The Letter of Credit or Cash Deposit submitted by the Developer shall include 125% of the estimated cost (calculated at $15,000 x 125% _ $18,750)to furnish and install the landscape plant materials. The landscape plantings must survive a two-year warranty period and will be inspected by the City two years after project completion. The landscape portion of the security required herein may be reduced by 50%following acceptance of the completed landscape plan. The remaining balance of the landscape costs will be retained by the City for a warranty period of two years to ensure survival of the plant materials. The 2 remaining balance of the landscape costs will be released following acceptance of the two-year warranty inspection. 8. Property Fees, Charges and Assessments.The Developer and Owner understand that one or both of them, or their contractor(s), will be required to pay for the Subject Property fees, charges and assessments in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The rates for each of these items will be set according to the current rate structure at the time the building permit is received. The Developer is responsible for the following fees: a. Traffic Management Fee—$2,098.60 b. Park Dedication Fee—The Developer is assessed a Park Dedication Fee of $80,640, or 2%of the land value. Payment in full is required prior to Final Plat approval. 9. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy the cost in whole or in part as a special assessment against the Subject Property. The Developer and Owner, waives its rights to notice of hearing and hearing on such assessments and the right to appeal such assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. 10. Miscellaneous. a. The Developer represents to the City that the development of the Subject Property complies with all city, county, metropolitan, state and federal laws and regulations including, but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. b. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. c. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. d. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. e. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release. f. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer and Owner agree to provide the execution of amendments to this Agreement, as are necessary to effect the recording hereof. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the 3 Developer's request, the City will execute and deliver to the Developer or owner a release. g. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to the City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. h. Neither Developer nor Owner may assign this Agreement without the written permission of the City. 11. Notices. Required notices to the Developer and Owner shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following addresses: Morrie's Automotive Group 12520 Wayzata Blvd Minnetonka, MN 55305 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: City Manager City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor By: Thomas D. Burt, City Manager 4 DEVELOPER By: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2014, by Shepard M. Harris, Mayor, and Thomas D. Burt, City Manager, of the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2014, by Morrie's Automotive Group, on behalf of the said Developer. Notary Public 5 ATTACHMENT 1 Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No.115, Hennepin County, Minnesota Resolution 14-57 July 15, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT MORRIE'S GOLDEN VALLEY P.U.D. NO. 115 WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, pursuant to due notice, has heretofore conducted a public hearing on the proposed plat to be known as Morrie's Golden Valley P.U.D. No. 115 covering the following described tracts of land: That part of the following described property lying westerly of a line drawn from a point in the southerly line of said property, distant 42.57 feet East of the Southwest corner thereof to a point in the West line of said property, distant 204.87 feet South of Northwest corner thereof; That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE '/4 NW '/4) lying west of the East 10 acres thereof and southerly of a line drawn from a point in the westerly line of said Tract, distant 588 feet southerly from the Northwest corner thereof, as measured along said westerly line from the Northwest corner of said Tract, to a point on the easterly line of said Tract, distant 585 feet southerly, as measured along said easterly line from the Northeast corner of said Tract, except the westerly 500 feet, front and rear, of the above-described property, Section 5, Township 117, Range 21 And All of the following described Tract: The westerly 500 feet front and rear of the following described tract of property to-wit: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE Y4 NW Y4) lying west of the East 10 acres thereof and southerly of a line drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Tract 588 feet southerly from the Northwest corner thereof as measured along said westerly line from the Northwest corner of said Tract, to a point on the easterly line of said Tract distant 585 feet southerly as measured along said easterly line from the Northeast corner of said Tract, Section 5, Township 117, Range 21, except that part which lies easterly of a line drawn from a point in the North line of said property distant 204.87 feet south of the Northeast corner thereof. WHEREAS, all persons present were given the opportunity to be heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, and the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized and instructed to sign the original of said plat and to do all other things necessary and proper in the premises. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. DRAFT MORRIES GOLDEN VALLEY P . U . D . N 115 R.T.DOC.NO. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:That Wagener Properties LLC,a Minnesota limited liability company,fee I Marcus F.Hampton do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision;that I am a NW CDR ER OF THE EAST 10.00 owner,of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin,State of Minnesota,to wit: duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota;that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary ACRES of THE SE 1/4 OF 1HE_- survey;that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat;that all monuments depicted on I NW CORNER OF THE SE 1/4 OF N LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 SEC.5,TWP.117,RGE.21 That part of the following described property lying Westerly of a line drawn from a point in the Southerly line of this plat have been,or will be correctly set within one year;that all water boundaries and wet lands,as defined in ME NW 1/4 SEG 5,TWP.117.RGE 21 - - �.' NW 1/4 SEC.5,THP.117,RGE.21 - - -- - - . Y --,/� said property distant 42.57 feet East of the Southwest corner thereof to a point in the West line of said property, Minnesota Statutes,Section 505.01,Subd.3,as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this Plat;and I ! distant 204.87 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof;that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. r g I Quarter lying West of the East 10 acres thereof and Southerly of a line drawn from a point in the Westerly line of r$ v�iI said Tract,distant 588 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner thereof,as measured along said Westerly line Dated this_day of ,20 . I I _ ,g 1 from the Northwest corner of said Tract,to a point on the Easterly line of said Tract,distant 585 feet Southerly,as 500.00 measured along said Easterly line from the Northeast corner of said Tract,except the Westerly 500 feet of the 535.49 I 48"E 483.50 . above described property,Section 5,Township 117,Range 21. i Marcus t Hampton,Licensed Land Surveyor, N89'S9 / o S? / 1157.11 ' I 1 r_____________________________________________,,r/ AND t 30.15 Minnesota License No.47481 1 453.35 i 1p o Ja 1O) I I All of the following described Tract:The Westerly 500 feet of the following described tract of property,to-wit: 1 ( I That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter lying West of the East 10 acres thereof and STATE OF MINNESOTA ` • I sv G ! I I ulI •" Southedy of a line drawn from a point on the Westerly line of said Tract distant 588 feet Southerly from the COUNTY OF •` yf j I I I Northwest corner[hereof,(as measured along said Westerly line from the Northwest corner of said Tract,)to a The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_by s_' ffi pj I point on the Easterly line of said Tract distant 585 feet Southerly as measured along said Easterly line from the r I i N i I Marcus F.Hampton,a Licensed Land Surveyor. Northeast corner of said Tract,Section 5,Township 117,Range 21, U ( W I m I except that part which lies Easterly of a line drawn from a point in the North line of said property,distant 16.5 ,H g 1 I I ti feet West of the Northeast corner thereof to a point in the East line of said property,distant 204.87 feet South of I P I I the Northeast corner thereof.ffyy I `- Notary Public, County,Minnesota Notary Printed Name =j 1 Z I i _ I My Commission Expires rr77!! I Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as MORRIES GOLDEN VALLEY P.U.D.NO.115,and does hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use forever,the public ways,and does also dedicate the easements as shown on this plat for drainage and utility purposes only. GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA In witness whereof said Wagener Properties LLC,a Minnesota limited liability company,has caused these presents to This plat of MORRIES GOLDEN VALLEY P.U.D.NO.115 was approved and accepted by the City Council of Golden �_: I be signed by its proper officer this_day of .20_ Valley,Minnesota,at a regular meeting thereof held this_day of 20 If applicable,the h i a NI70 sT T-- written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer 1 °54_53•W 131_92 JI 1 I Wagener Properties LLC,a Minnesota limited liability company have been received by the City or the prescribed 30-day period has elapsed without receipt of su S89ch comments and 1 h •3 �-- -- = I recommendations,as provided by Minnesota Statutes,Section 505.03,Subdivision 2. a• I� BLOCK 1 yap� / PI o Ill I SIGNED •a, 1 City Council,Golden Valley,Minnesota �a_ I •' IN h~ / / Pia By: .a5 LU I I STATE OF MINNESOTA BY: Mayor By: Clerk w> 1 I I I I COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged beforeme this day of •20- by RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES,Hennepin County,Minnesota Q I ,as of Wagener Properties LLC,a Z 1r I Minnesota limited liability company,on behalf of the company. I •• Q I I I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20= 2 8 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat,dated this 1 I� day of .20 b f S I N Mark V.Chapin,County Auditor Notary Public, County,Minnesota Notary Printed Name W a aD V I My Commission Expires pl I I I p d$^ By: Deputy I 1 OI I 1 I I 15 IN al y s I SURVEY DIVISION,Hennepin County,Minnesota N F 1 I I I 1 I I W i I I Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 3838.565(1969),this plat has been approved this day of I I 20-. I I H 30 is H I I I T 5 I ,ol 1 152 78 /o ` .. s BY 14 County Surveyor . -------_342_42---------------J L-------•----- of O DENOTES ARKS H YLICEN E IRON MONUMENT tY y .. •o e c o � - - _ - - - SET AND MARKED BY LICENSE N0.47481,UNLESS 4 j I OTHERWISE NOTED. S89'59'19'E 495.20 u N.LINE EASEMENT PER DOC.NO.562329 - I • DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT FOUND, By: i I UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. LL NORTH DENOTES SECTION CORNER MONUMENT. REGISTRAR OF TITLES,Hennepin County,Minnesota INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO.394 2 I I 0 50 100 (HENNEPIN COUNTY MONUMENT FOUND) 1 I hereby certify that the within plat of MORRIES GOLDEN VALLEY P.U.D.N0.115 was filed in this office this \ i -HIGHWAY EASEMENT PER DOC.NO.562329' i f I SCALE IN FEET THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4, day of .20_at_o'clock_.M. 1 ___ • i _ iI I rSECTION 5,TWP.1 17,RGE.21,IS ASSUMED TO HAVE E A of BEARING OF SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 28 Martin McCormick Registrar of Titles SECONDS EAST. r 1 By. ,Deputy i r I I DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: ' IHIGHWAY EASEMENT (NOT TO SCALE)I I i h g PER DOC.N0.155672' hQ 1$ry � r 1 1 I Nly I I 1 Ir `1 1 I~6 - 1J9S5_4 TT 50.E ._ _4257 I 57289 7617J5��/��-�--(�) r10 I I [10 e SH9`5Y2. �` - 371.35 ';SB9S71BfV - -1----JC'----L- S89°57'28'E 542.57 s-S UNE OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE o,e NW 1/4 SEC.5.TMP.117.RGE 21 CENTER SEG 5.TWP.117.RGE 21•/ Zqr� E 1/4 CORNER.SEG 5.1 RGE 21 W 1/4 CORNER,SEG 5,TMP.117.RGE 21 ,v N TMP.117. BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH,UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED,AND ADJOINING LOT LINES,AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH,UNLESS OTHERWISE MFRA, INC. S 1/4 CORNER,SEC.5.TWP.117,RGE 21 INDICATED,AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES,AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. ENGINEERING,PLANNING AND LAND SURVEYING City go 1 d e nlV.� MEMORANDUM valley Park and Recreation Department 763-512-23451763-512-2344(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. G. Golden Valley Teen Committee Member Appointment Prepared By Carrie Anderson, Recreation Supervisor Brian Erickson, Recreation Supervisor Rick Birno, Director of Parks & Recreation Summary Ten applications were submitted for the nine member newly created Golden Valley Teen Committee. Applications were review by the Open Space and Recreation Commission and the following nine candidates are recommended to the City Council for appointment including one alternate. Jack Knudson Shivani Nookala Sarah Carlson Owen Hoeft Stella Haberman Sam Buttress Melanie Blazer Brittany Blazer Hannah Segalbaum Olivia Behn —Recommended by Open Space and Recreation Commission to the committee as a non-voting member attending all meetings and activities. Staff is requesting the City Council approve the Teen Committee members to begin a one year term beginning September 2014 and continuing through May 2015. Recommended Action Motion to authorize the appointment of the Golden Valley Teen Committee members as presented. C1ty 0 goldcn MEMORANDUM valley Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3, H. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary As per City Code Section 10.83, Subd. 2 I. "No person shall possess, display, consume or use alcoholic beverages on any City park property, unless permission is granted by the Council." As part of the application process for a Facilities Use Permit to use the large and small picnic shelters at Brookview Park the applicant has the option to pay an additional $25 to be able to serve beer and/or wine. Attached is a list of the individuals and/or organizations who have requested that option. Attachments • Beer and/or wine request list (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. BEER AND/OR WINE REQUEST LIST INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION CC DATE DATE TIME SHELTER APPROVED Carol Curme 07-16 5 pm - 10 pm small 07-15-14 Martha Ramirez 07-20 5 pm - 10 pm small 07-15-14 Alfreda Kpokai 07-20 5 pm - 10 pm large 07-15-14 Karen Gureghian-RWL Water 08-12 5 pm - 10 pm large 07-15-14 Kim Fette-Covidien 08-15 11 am -4 pm large 07-15-14 Karen Rosch 08-16 11 am -4 pm small 07-15-14 Christopher Kamara 08-31 5 pm - 10 pm small 07-15-14 John Fetzer 09-12 5 pm - 10 pm large 07-15-14 Nga Allison 09-14 11 am —4 pm large 07-15-14 city of go i a c nl MEMORANDUM valley Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. I. Second Consideration of Water Fee on City Utility Bill for Emergency Water Supply Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary On January 9, the three cities of Golden Valley, Crystal and New Hope agreed upon the decision to direct staff of the three cities to go ahead with construction of wells near the Joint Water Commission's reservoirs (1 in Golden Valley and 2 in Crystal) and to restore a fourth well that exists in New Hope. By this action, the cities would have a much needed emergency water supply system. In order for the Water and Sewer Utility Fund to pay for the emergency water supply an additional water fee of 20 cents per 1000 gallons would be added to all City utility bills after October 1, 2014. This would be designated to fund the Emergency Water Supply and show as a separate line item on the utility bill called Emergency Water Supply. The collection of this fee will pay the annual payment for the internal loan from the Storm Utility Fund from the Water and Sewer Utility Fund. Council reviewed the rate increase and funding at the Council Manager Meeting on June 10. The first consideration of this fee was heard at the July 1 Council Meeting. An article about the financing will be in the upcoming City News. Attachments • Ordinance#520, Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule for City Utility Bill Water Fee for Emergency Water Supply (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt on Second Consideration, Ordinance #520, Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule for City Utility Bill Water Fee for Emergency Water Supply. ORDINANCE NO. 520, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule City Utility Bill Water Fee for Emergency Water Supply The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. The Master Fee Schedule in Chapter 25 of the City Code is hereby amended effective October 1, 2014, by adding the following: Emergency Water Supply Based on 1,000 Gallons of Water $ .20/1,000 Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 15th day of July, 2014. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A Luedke Kristine A Luedke, City Clerk city a goldenl*v�vr MEMORANDUM valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3989/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. J. Second Consideration Ordinance#521, Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Summary In July 2011, when the State of Minnesota was in the midst of a shutdown, the City entered into a consulting service agreement for electrical permits and inspections, which were previously contracted with the State. In order to contract the service with a consultant, the City amended its Code at that time and included a sunset (Subdvision 8), in which Section 4.07 would be revoked once the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry was funded for the 2011 fiscal year. The proposed amendment would amend Section 4.07 by rescinding Subdivision 8. Sunset,to allow the City flexibility in using contracted services for electrical permits and inspections without being required to contract those services with the State of Minnesota. Subdivision 7. Violations and Penalties, is being rescinded because it is already covered by Section 4.99. Ratifying and Readopting the remainder of Section 4.07 will adopt the revisions to the State Statutes that have been passed by the Legislature since the City originally adopted Section 4.07 in 2011. The Council considered and passed the first consideration of this amendment at the July 1, 2014 City Council Meeting. Attachment • City Code 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections, underlined/overstruck version (1 page) • Ordinance#521, Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt on Second Consideration, Ordinance #521, Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections. § 4.07 Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections Subdivision 1. Purpose The purpose of this amendment is to establish an electrical inspections program in the City that is administered and enforced by the City. Subdivision 2. Authority to Inspect The City hereby provides for the inspection of all electrical installations, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 3268.36, subd. 6. Subdivision 3. Adopted by Reference The Minnesota Electrical Act, as adopted by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 326B, Sections 326B.31 to 3266.399,_. The Minneseta EleetFieal Aet is hereby incorporated into this Section as if fully set out herein. The Minnesota State Building Code incorporates by reference the National Electrical Code pursuant to Minnesota Rule 1315.0200. All such codes incorporated herein by reference constitute the electrical code of the City. Subdivision 4. Compliance All electrical installations shall comply with the requirements of the electrical code of the City and this Section. Subdivision S. Permits and Fees The issuance of permits and the collection of fees shall be as authorized in Minnesota Statutes section 326B.37. Any inspection or handling fees will be payable to the City. Subdivision 6. Notice and Appeal All notices of violations and orders issued under this Section shall be in conformance with Minnesota Statutes section 326B.36, subd. 4. Subdivision 7. Vueatoons and Penaftmes A vmelat'ien of the Minnesota EleetFoeal Aet fis a Fnisdemeaner-. This Seetien shall be Fin, Source: Ordinance No. 465, 2nd Series Effective Date: 07-30-11 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 521, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending, Ratifying and Readopting Section 4.07: Electrical Regulations and Inspections The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. The City Code is hereby amended in Section 4.07 of Chapter 4 by changing Subdivision 3 to read as follows: Subdivision 3. Adopted by Reference The Minnesota Electrical Act, as adopted by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry pursuant to Minnesota Statute Chapter 3268, Section 3268.31 to 3268.399, is hereby incorporated into this Section as if fully set out herein. The Minnesota State Building Code incorporates by reference the National Electrical Code pursuant to Minnesota Rule 1315.0200. All such codes incorporated herein by reference constitute the electrical code of the City. Section 2. The City Code is hereby amended in Section 4.07 of Chapter 4 by deleting Subdivisions 7 and 8 in their entirety. Section 3. The City Code is hereby amended in Chapter 4 by ratifying and readopting Section 4.07. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provision and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 4.99 entitled "Violation is a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as through repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council this 15th day of July, 2014. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/ Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city 0 goldcnlVjv�vr MEMORANDUM va,..,L-Iey Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. K. Authorization to Sign Amendment to Agreement No A101049 with Hennepin County for Assessing Services Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Hennepin County has been providing assessing services to the City for over the last 39 years. They have consistently performed these services in a professional and efficient manner and at a cost that has been significantly lower than what the City would have paid to operate its own assessing department. Staff is recommending extending the term of Agreement No A101049 through July 31, 2016. Attachments • First Amendment to Agreement No. A101049 (3 pages) • Original Agreement No. A101049 approved July 6, 2010 (11 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the First Amendment to Agreement No. A101049 with Hennepin County to extend Assessing Services through July 31, 2016. FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. A101049 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY". WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY entered into Contract No. A101049 whereby the COUNTY agreed to provide assessment services; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms thereof, the parties hereby agree to extend the term of the Agreement through July 31, 2016. IT IS HEREBY AGREED that Contract No. A101049 between the herein-named parties is hereby amended in accordance with the provisions set forth below: 1. The first sentence of Section 1 of the original contract shall be amended to read: "The COUNTY shall perform the 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 property assessment for the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY in accordance with property assessment procedures and practices established and observed by the COUNTY, the validity and reasonableness of which are hereby acknowledged and approved by the CITY." The language in the remainder of Section 1, after said first sentence, remains the same. 2. Section 11 of the original contract shall be amended to read: "This Agreement shall commence on August 1, 2010, and shall terminate on July 31, 2016. Either party may terminate this Agreement for "just cause" as determined by the Commissioner of Revenue after hearing for such a determination is held by the Commissioner of Revenue and which has been attended by representatives of COUNTY and CITY or which said representatives had a reasonable opportunity to attend, provided that after such determination, any party desiring to cancel this Agreement may do so by giving the other party no less than 120 days' written notice. If the CITY should cancel this Agreement, as above provided, before the completion of the then current property assessment by the COUNTY, the CITY agrees to defend and hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any liability that might ensue as a result of the non-completion of a property tax assessment." Except as hereinabove amended, the terms, conditions and provisions of A101049 are hereby affirmed and shall remain in full force and effect as set forth. The remainder of this page is blank. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf, this day of , 2014. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Reviewed by the County STATE OF MINNESOTA Attorney's Office By: Chair of Its County Board Date: ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of County Board Date: By: Assistant/County Administrator Date: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: Its: And: Its: Contract No. A101049 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "CITY"; WHEREAS, said CITY lies wholly within the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN and constitutes a separate assessment district; and WHEREAS, under such circumstances, the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.072 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 permit the County Assessor to provide for the assessment of property; and WHEREAS, said CITY desires the COUNTY to perform certain assessments on behalf of said CITY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY is willing to cooperate with said CITY by completing the assessment in a proper manner; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed as follows: 1. The COUNTY shall perform the 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 property assessment for the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY in accordance with property assessment procedures and practices established and observed by the COUNTY, the validity and reasonableness of which are hereby acknowledged and approved by the CITY. Any such practices and procedures may be changed from time to time, by the COUNTY in its sole judgment, when good and efficient assessment procedures so require. The property assessment by the COUNTY shall be composed of those assessment services which are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, provided that the time frames set forth therein shall be considered to be approximate only. 2. All information, records, data, reports, etc. necessary to allow the COUNTY to carry out its herein responsibilities shall be furnished to the COUNTY without charge by the CITY, and the CITY agrees to cooperate in good faith with the COUNTY in carrying out the work under this Agreement. 3. The CITY agrees to furnish, without charge, office space needed by the COUNTY at appropriate places in the CITY's offices. The keys thereto shall be provided to the COUNTY. The CITY assures that such areas shall not be unattended, during or after work of any kind by or on behalf of the CITY, in any area occupied by the COUNTY as provided herein, or if unattended, the CITY shall make certain that such areas are locked and secured. Such office space shall be sufficient in size to accommodate reasonably three (3) appraisers and any furniture placed therein. The office space shall be available for the COUNTY's use at any and all times during the CITY's business hours, and during all such hours the COUNTY shall be provided with levels of heat, air conditioning and ventilation as are appropriate for the seasons. 4. The CITY also agrees to provide appropriate desk and office furniture as necessary, clerical and secretarial support necessary and reasonable for the carrying out of the work herein, necessary office supplies and equipment, copying machines and fax machines and their respective supplies, and telephone service to the COUNTY, all without charge to the COUNTY. (2) 5. It shall be the responsibility of the CITY to have available at the CITY's offices each CITY working day a person who has the knowledge and skill to be able to answer routine questions pertaining to homesteads and property assessment matters and to receive, evaluate and organize homestead applications. It shall also be the responsibility of the CITY to promptly refer any homestead application which needs investigation to the COUNTY. 6. In accordance with Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall be excluded from full employment rights or participation in or the benefits of any program, service or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, public assistance status, ex-offender status or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable Federal or State laws, rules and regulations against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination. 7. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of joint venturers or co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the CITY as the agent, representative or employee of the COUNTY for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Any and all personnel of CITY or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any activity under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the COUNTY and shall not be considered employees of the COUNTY and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of (3) employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the CITY, its officers, agents, CITY or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the COUNTY, and CITY shall defend, indemnify and hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the COUNTY, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Re-employment Compensation, disability, severance pay and retirement benefits. 8. CITY agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the COUNTY, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any and all liability (statutory or otherwise) claims, suits, damages, judgments, interest, costs or expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees, witness fees and disbursements incurred in the defense thereof) resulting form or caused by any act or omission of the CITY, its officers, agents, contractors, employees or duly authorized volunteers in the performance of the responsibilities provided by this Agreement. 9. The COUNTY shall endeavor to perform all services called for herein in an efficient manner. The sole and exclusive remedy for any breach of this Agreement by the COUNTY and for COUNTY's liability of any kind whatsoever, including but not limited to liability arising out of, resulting from or in any manner related to contract, tort, warranty, statute or otherwise, shall be limited to correcting diligently any deficiency in said services as is reasonably possible under the pertinent circumstances. (4) 10. Neither party hereto shall be deemed to be in default of any provision of this Agreement, or for delay or failure in performance, resulting from causes beyond the reasonable control of such party, which causes shall include, but are not limited to, acts of God, labor disputes, acts of civil or military authority, fire, civil disturbance, changes in laws, ordinances or regulations which materially affect the provisions hereof, or any other causes beyond the parties' reasonable control. 11. This Agreement shall commence on August 1, 2010, and shall terminate on July 31, 2014. Either party may initiate an extension of this Agreement for a term of four (4) years by giving the other written notice of its intent to so extend no less than 150 days prior to the termination of this Agreement. If the party who receives said notice of intent to extend gives written notice to the other party of its desire not to extend within 110 days prior to termination of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate on July 31, 2014. Nothing herein shall preclude the parties, prior to the end of this Agreement, from agreeing to extend this contract for a term of four (4) years. Any extended term hereof shall be on the same terms and conditions set forth herein and shall commence on August 1, 2014. Either party may terminate this Agreement for"just cause" as determined by the Commissioner of Revenue after hearing for such a determination is held by the Commissioner of Revenue and which has been attended by representatives of COUNTY and CITY or which said representatives had a reasonable opportunity to attend, provided that after such determination, any party desiring to cancel this Agreement may do so by giving the other party no less than 120 days' written notice. If the CITY should cancel this Agreement, as above provided, before the completion of the then current property assessment by the COUNTY, the (5) CITY agrees to defend and hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any liability that might ensue as a result of the non- completion of a property tax assessment. For the purpose of this Agreement, the term "just cause" shall mean the failure of any party hereto reasonably to perform a material responsibility arising hereunder. 12.A. In consideration of said assessment services, the CITY agrees to pay the COUNTY the sum of One Hundred Ninety-five Thousand Dollars ($195,000) for each assessment, provided that any payment for the current year's assessment may be increased or decreased by that amount which exceeds or is less than the COUNTY's estimated cost of appraising new construction and new parcels for the current year's assessment. The amount of any increase or decrease shall be specified in the billing for the current year's assessment. Any bill from the COUNTY for the current year's assessment which is received by the CITY before August 18 of the current year shall be due on September 7 of said year, provided that the CITY may elect to pay said bill before said date. Any said bill received by the CITY after August 18 shall be due no later than twenty-one (21) days after the CITY's receipt thereof. 12.13. Regarding each assessment, in addition to being subject to adjustment in the above manner, said assessment cost of$195,000.00 may also be increased by the COUNTY if: (1) The COUNTY determines that any cost to the COUNTY in carrying out any aspect of this Agreement has increased, including but not limited to the following types of costs: new construction and new parcel appraisals, gasoline, postage, supplies, labor (including fringe benefits) and other types of costs, whether similar or dissimilar; and/or (6) 2) The COUNTY reasonably determines that other costs should be included in the costs of assessment work. If the COUNTY desires to increase the assessment cost pursuant to this paragraph 12(B), it shall give written notice thereof by June 15 of any year and such increase shall apply to the assessment for the calendar year next following the current calendar year. Any such notification shall specifically set forth the amount of any new construction and new parcel appraisal charges. Notwithstanding any provisions herein to the contrary, if any such increase, exclusive of any charge for the estimated costs of new construction and new parcel appraisals, exceeds ten (10%) percent of the amount charged for the assessment for the then current calendar year, exclusive of any charge for the estimated costs of new construction and new parcel appraisals, the CITY may cancel this Agreement by giving to the COUNTY written notice thereof, provided that said cancellation notice must be received by the COUNTY not later than July 24 of the then current calendar year and said cancellation shall be effective no earlier than five (5) days after the receipt of said notice by the COUNTY and not later than July 31 of said current calendar year. Supportive records of the cost increase will be open to inspection by the CITY at such times as are mutually agreed upon by the COUNTY and CITY. Failure of the COUNTY to give the CITY a price-change notice by June 15 shall not preclude the COUNTY from giving CITY such notice after said date but prior to September 1 of any year, provided that if such price increase exceeds said ten (10%) - all as above set forth -the CITY may cancel this Agreement if the COUNTY receives notice thereof not later than thirty-nine (39) days from the date of receipt by the CITY of any said late price-change notice, provided further that any such cancellation shall be effective not earlier than five (5) days after COUNTY's receipt of said cancellation (7) notice and not later than forty-six (46) days after the CITY's receipt of any said price- increase notice. Payment by the CITY shall be due no later than twenty-one (21) days after receipt by the CITY of billing from the COUNTY for the herein assessment services, provided that said payment shall be due no earlier than September 7 of each year. 13. Any notice or demand, which may or must be given or made by a party hereto, under the terms of this Agreement or any statute or ordinance, shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party addressed as follows: TO CITY: Mayor, City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 TO COUNTY: Hennepin County Administrator 2300A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 copies to: County Assessor Hennepin County 2103A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Assistant County Assessor Hennepin County 2103A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Any party may designate a different addressee or address at any time by giving written notice thereof as above provided. Any notice, if mailed, properly addressed, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, shall be deemed dispatched on the registered date or that stamped on the certified mail receipt and shall be deemed received within the second business day thereafter or when it is actually received, whichever is sooner. Any notice delivered by hand shall be deemed received upon actual delivery. (8) 14. It is expressly understood that the obligations of the CITY under Paragraphs 7, 8, 11, and 12 hereof and the obligations of the CITY which, by their sense and context, are intended to survive the performance thereof by the CITY, shall so survive the completion of performance, termination or cancellation of this Agreement. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank.] (9) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf, this day of , 2010. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA Reviewed by the County: By: Attorney's Office Chair of the County Board And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Assistant County Attorney Date: ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Date: July 7, 2010 By: Its Mayor And: Its City Manager City organized under: Statutory Option A X Option B Charter (10) Contract No. A101049 EXHIBIT A CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY During the contract term, the County shall: 1. Physically inspect and revalue 20% of the real property, as required by law. 2. Physically inspect and value all new construction, additions and renovation. 3. Conduct valuation reviews prior to Board of Review- approximate dates: March through May 15. 4. Attend Board of Review. Per Board request, make all necessary review appraisals. Approximate dates: April 1 - May 31 . 5. Keep updated property record files - current values, homestead and classification data. 6. Print, mail and post valuation notices and homestead cards. 7. Respond to taxpayers regarding assessment or appraisal problems or inquiries periodically. 8. Make divisions and combinations periodically. 9. Administer the abatement process pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 375.192 (2000). 10. Make appraisals, defend and/or negotiate all Tax Court cases. 11. Adjust estimated market values on those properties not physically inspected as needed as per sales analysis. (11) city 0 golden MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 3. L. Approval of Plat - Olson Tralee Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary At the July 1, 2014, City Council meeting, the Council held a public hearing on the Preliminary Plat for the minor subdivision of Olson Tralee (125 Cutacross Road). After the hearing, the Council approved the Preliminary Plat which will allow two new developable lots. The Final Plat of Olson Tralee has now been presented to the City. Staff has reviewed the Final Plat and finds it consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat and the requirements of the City Code. Attachments • Resolution for Approval of Plat- Olson Tralee (1 page) • Final Plat of Olson Tralee (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat- Olson Tralee. Resolution 14-58 July 15, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT - OLSON TRALEE WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, pursuant to due notice, has heretofore conducted a public hearing on the proposed plat to be known as Olson Tralee covering the following described tracts of land: Lot 4, Block 5, "Tralee" WHEREAS, all persons present were given the opportunity to be heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, and the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized and instructed to sign the original of said plat and to do all other things necessary and proper in the premises. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. R.T. DOC. NO. OLSON TRALEE KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:That Roberta A.O.Knaeble as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lois A.Olson,desceased,fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin,State of Minnesota to wit: Lot 4,Block 5,"Tralee". \ Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as OLSON TRALEE and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the drainage and utility easements as created by this plat. \ In witness whereof said Roberta A.O.Knaeble as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lois A.Olson,desceased,has hereunto set her hand this_day of '2014. 6� \ ESTATE OF LOIS A.OLSON,DESCEASED x,♦1 By ,its Personal Representative \ ' Roberta A.0.Knaeble \ ; l STATE OF �K•c�♦ COUNTY OF This Instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of ,2014,by Roberta A.0.Knaeble,Personal Representative of the the Estate of Lois A.Olson,desceased,on behalf of the estate. Notary Printed Name Notary Public, / \ My Commission Expires I,Thomas J.Adam do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision;that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of • � / \ s Os Minnesota;that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey;that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat;that all monuments depicted on this plat have been,or will be correctly set within one year;that all water boundaries and wet lands,as defined In Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01,Subd.3,as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat;and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. / 'e Dated this day of ,2014. Thomas J.Adam,Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No.43414 1 O STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA �♦)1 / i/ This Instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of ,2014,by Thomas J.Adam. / ` O i i \\ ice/ \ N / Notary Printed Name Notary Public,Minnesota My Commission Expires January 31,2015 01� = CITY COUNCIL,CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA \ This plat of OLSON TRALEE was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley,Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof held this i \\ �S day of ,2014. If applicable,the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been received by the City or the prescribed 30-day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations,as i I ti_ r-,, i �� ' \\ �%,♦ c+, provided by Minnesota Statutes,Section 505.03,Subdivision 2. City Council,City of Golden Valley,Minnesota L 1 BY Mayor BY Clerk �O� I 1 _ \\ "♦'" 1 1 V , `Z I 1 �// i♦,i \ iii Ly 1 . I 1 ; 1 .e o - p m ♦ ' 46.45 . --- 169.]2 '----------------- ` � 1- -`1 0�57'NI 1RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES,Hennepin County,Minnesota 236.17 I 1 I hereby certify that the taxes payable in 2014 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat,dated this day of ,2014. �i S89 45 39 W (236.00'TRALEE) 1 ---The south line of Lot 4,Block 5,-rRALEE" I I Mark V.Chapin,County Auditor By: ,Deputy I60 SURVEY DIVISION,Hennepin County,Minnesota I Pursuant to MN.STAT.Section 383B.565(1969),this plat has been approved this_day of ,2014. County Surveyor BY: Drainage and Utility Easements are shown Nthus: I6 61 I I REGISTRAR OF TITLES,Hennepin County,Minnesota The south Zine of Lot 4,Block 5,"TRALEE",has a bearing of 589°45'39"W. I hereby certify that the within plat of OLSON TRALEE was filed in this office this day of ,2014,at o'clock .M. 6 6 (XXX.XX) Denotes dimension from the plat — ------ of"TRALEE" _ Martin McCormick,Registrar of Titles By: ,Deputy • Denotes iron monument found 0 Denotes 1/2 Inch by 14 Inch iron monument set Being 6 feet in width and adjoining side lot 0 10 20 40 60 and marked by Minnesota License No.43414 lines and being 10 feet in width and adoining block lines. Scale in Feet Rehder and Associates, Inc. Cit � 0 golden !'-V' M E M 0 R A N D U M "W "rle% "W Ir V ial e Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 4. A. Public Hearing- Ordinance #523 -Amending Section 11.03 Definitions, and Section 11.21, Subd. 6, Buildable Lots, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), to Modify Definition of Lot Width Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary At the May 28, 2014, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal public hearing to discuss an inconsistency between the Zoning and Subdivision Codes with respect to lot width. Additional discussion was held at the June 23, 2014, Planning Commission meeting. After the hearing, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend modifying the definition of lot width in the Definition section of the Zoning Code as well as the definition of lot width in the Single Family Zoning District (R-1) section. Staff presented evidence to the Planning Commission that an omission when portions of the R-1 Zoning District section were rewritten in 2004 resulted in the inconsistency. Though Staff has been consistently applying the measurement of lot width as "the width at the minimum front yard setback" since 1960, the inconsistency in language between the Zoning and Subdivision Codes has recently raised questions with respect to subdivision applications and should be corrected. Attachments • May 28, 2014, Planning Commission Minutes (5 pages) • Unapproved June 23, 2014, Planning Commission Minutes (3 pages) • Underlined/Overstruck Pages of Zoning Code (2 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission dated May 28, 2014 (3 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission dated June 23, 2014 (4 pages) • Ordinance No. 523 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance #523, Amending Section 11.03 Definitions, and Section 11.21, Subd. 6, Buildable Lots, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), to Modify Definition of Lot Width. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 28, 2014 Page 8 LOVED by Waldhauser, s onded by Baker and motion carried unanimously to recdd denial of the pr posed PUD plan b he access and safety issues were not ade'qustQ,1v addre ed and be "of the impact this development would have on future developmen two-,A.q ing lots. Segelbaum asked that the motion be amended to add that the pr an compromises many different City Code requirements, flag to in one exa�m '"IQaldhauser said she does not want to add that language. a motion ecause she appreciates that it was brought to the Planning Commis as a PUD and he would expect deviations from City Code requirements UD. 5. Informal Public Hearing —Zoning Code Text Amendment— Definition of Lot Width and Lot Depth —ZO00-94 Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: To consider amending the definition of Lot Width and Lot Depth in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. Zimmerman explained that staff received an application for a subdivision and a neighbor pointed out that there is an inconsistency in how lot width and lot depth is determined in the Zoning Code versus the Subdivision Code. He stated that staff is now looking for direction on how to interpret and apply the language. He stated that the Zoning Code defines lot depth as the mean (average) depth between front and rear lot lines and lot width as the mean (average) width measured at right angles to the mean depth. The Subdivision code defines lot depth as the shortest distance between the front and rear lot lines measured at right angles to the street right of way and lot width as the minimum distance between side lot lines measured at right angles to lot depth at the minimum building setback line. He discussed several other cities' requirements and showed several examples of various lot shapes and how width and depth are calculated. He stated that the options are to: 1.) keep the Zoning and Subdivision Codes unchanged (new lots must meet minimum width at front yard setback and maintain the minimum average width throughout the lot). 2.) Modify the Subdivision Code to define width as average width throughout the lot (to match Zoning Code). 3.) Modify the Zoning Code to define width as width at front yard setback (to match Subdivision Code) or 4.) Other options the Planning Commission would like to see. He stated that staff is suggesting, based on past precedent, ease of interpretation and administration, and conformity with neighboring communities, that the definition of lot width within the Zoning Code be revised to define lot width as the width of the lot at the front yard setback line to be consistent with the Subdivision Code. Segelbaum wanted to clarify that staff is not recommending the elimination of lot width requirements; they are recommending that the Zoning Code be revised to be the same as the Subdivision Code which requires 80 feet of width as measured at the front setback line. Zimmerman said yes, that is staff's recommendation. Segelbaum stated that this is Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 28, 2014 Page 9 the way the City has been determining lot width for a long time and won't make any lots become non-conforming. Baker stated that there is a Zoning Code and Subdivision Code for a reason and asked Zimmerman to compare and contrast the two. Zimmerman explained that the Zoning Code deals with setbacks and the Subdivision Code deals with the creation of new lots. Cera opened the public hearing. Mary Jane Pappas, 20 Ardmore Drive, said she did not understand that this discussion was to clarify the definitions in the City Code. She thought it was to discuss eliminating lot width requirements. She said there is more to the "buildability" of a property such as overall square footage and the terrain. She said she gets freaked out when the word subdivision is used because she has seen some subdivisions that she doesn't get, and as a neighbor, she wants to know how the subdivision on Glenwood was allowed to happen. She said she wants the integrity of her neighborhood maintained and that this isn't a money making operation, or maybe it is, and if so that should be said. She said she doesn't want every single lot to have two or more houses on it. Peter Knaeble, 6001 Glenwood Avenue, said he concurs with staff's recommendation. He said he has been doing infill developments in Golden Valley and in several other cities and he is encouraged by people wanting to build houses to look for properties that are "close-in." He said he sees this issue more as a housekeeping item than a big change in the zoning and subdivision ordinances. He said the requirements have been consistently applied for 27 years and in his experience for the last 10 to 12 years. He said he thinks it would be grossly unfair to try and change the definitions now, especially with two or three proposals pending. Ralph Jacobson, 516 Parkview Terrace, said he has watched his neighborhood dramatically change over something that looks to him to be arbitrary and not very good practice. He said this is a very important topic that warrants greater discussion. He said his neighborhood is very concerned about the travesty that is happening and how the things that attracted them to Golden Valley are slowly being eroded. He said he thinks there are very difficult decisions to be made with a little more seriousness and a little more consistency. Harry Pulver, 105 Meadow Lane North, said he would like to concur with what others have said. He said there seems to be an explosion of development in eastern Golden Valley. He said he understands that people can divide their lots if they'd like and that there is great demand in Golden Valley but he gets concerned when comparisons are made between Golden Valley and St. Louis Park and New Hope because they are very different communities. Richard Hockney, Attorney representing the Knaeble family, said he has been working with Peter Knaeble for approximately 25 years and has made hundreds of appearances in dozens of communities throughout the area. He said he appreciates the effort that staff has made in looking at neighboring communities to see what their ordinances say on this Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 28, 2014 Page 10 subject. He said the Golden Valley's ordinances are consistent with many other cities that measure the width of a lot at the front yard setback line and that standard is overwhelmingly the standard used. David Knaeble, 221 Sunnyridge Lane, said he is in favor of the proposed Zoning code amendment for a number of reasons. He said Golden Valley is a desirable city to live in and the proposed text amendment is just a formal change that doesn't impact or change the status Golden Valley has as being a great City to live in. He said the proposed amendment ensures that the Code is aligned with a development strategy and it clarifies the Code for the City and for residents. He said the proposed amendment supports what has been used to guide development in the past, and how it should guide development into the future. The Code has been used consistently for over 20 years and the proposed amendment does not represent any significant change to the City's intent. He said he and his wife are landowners in Golden Valley and this amendment change directly impacts their ability to use their land in a manner they choose. He said their property is large enough to divide into two separate parcels based on the City's current subdivision and zoning regulations. The amendment to the Zoning code would allow him to subdivide his property without the need to remove the existing home or apply for a variance to allow the existing home to stay. He said if this amendment is not approved there are many other property owners in the City who will lose their right to subdivide their property if they so choose, so he is in favor of the proposed amendment. Pam Lott, 220 Sunnyridge Lane, said she was under the impression that the purpose of zoning is to keep people from inappropriately "shoe horning" houses in to areas where they do not fit and any change that makes development that much easier will have an oversized impact on her immediate neighborhood. She said she believes the Tyrol Hills neighborhood is one of the finest parts of Golden Valley so she would hate to see the one really unique area being subdivided into Brooklyn Center, and that is what staff seems to want to do with smaller and smaller lots and more density. She said higher density is not necessarily the highest and best use. Perry Thom, 320 Louisiana Avenue North, said he appreciates the effort to combine the two definitions and he feels for the folks who are concerned about high density in their neighborhood. He cautioned them to think about high density between single family homes and multi-family homes which may fit the criteria of an individual home, and would be less desirable than a single family home on a slightly modified lot. Mary Jane Pappas, 20 Ardmore Drive, said the definition of density is all relative. If the common lots are half an acre, putting two houses on half an acre is high density from her perspective. She said the landscape, animals and trees have to be considered as well. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Cera closed the public hearing. Cera clarified that the proposed Zoning code text amendment will just make the current Subdivision code and Zoning code language match each other. There will not be any impact on density and it won't change how anything is done regarding the subdivision of property. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 28, 2014 Page 11 Baker said this may be an opportunity to visit and broaden the issue. He said the Planning Commission's action could be to ask staff to give them more options on how to calculate lot width and depth. He stated that if they go with staffs first option, subdivisions would slow down. Grimes noted that every neighborhood has the option of putting covenants on their properties to not allow for subdividing. Waldhauser stated the City could also be carved up into different zoning districts with different requirements. Segelbaum stated that there is more than just this one requirement when considering subdivisions. Zimmerman agreed that there are many more requirements in the Zoning code and the Subdivision code that need to be met in order to subdivide a property. Segelbaum questioned if Golden Valley is encouraging subdividing. Grimes stated that Golden Valley is almost 100% developed so most new development is going to be through the tear-down process and subdividing larger lots. Segelbaum asked about the impact on development if the Zoning code text amendment is adopted as recommended by staff. Zimmerman stated that if applicants have to meet both the Zoning code requirements and the Subdivision code requirements, as they are currently written, there will be a small subset that won't be able to divide their property. Segelbaum asked if the proposed Zoning code text change is made, if the requirements would be the same as they were a month ago, and the required lot width wouldn't be expanding or contracting, it would be the same as it has been for many years. Zimmerman said that is correct. Segelbaum asked if the idea is to create more of a "front yard" community. Waldhauser said she thinks most people would rather have a larger back yard. Grimes stated that generally a 35-foot front yard setback is slightly larger than other communities. Cera asked when the 10,000 square foot lot size requirement went into effect. Grimes said that in the 1970s the minimum lot size was 12,500 square feet. That requirement was lowered to 10,000 square feet to increase affordability and encourage people to stay in Golden Valley. Baker said he is not buying that it is difficult for staff to implement an average lot width requirement. Zimmerman said it is possible, and wouldn't be insurmountable, but it would be more difficult. Baker questioned if the information regarding other cities requirements was comparable to Golden Valley's single family zoning district. Zimmerman explained that the width requirement is located in the definition section of the Zoning code and applies to all zoning districts, not just the Single Family zoning district. Waldhauser said she doesn't like the Subdivision code definition even though it is what the City has used for 27 years, and it is the common definition. She said it works great when most of the Lots are rectangular. She said she appreciates the difficulty of measuring the averages, and thought maybe requiring that a lot maintain a certain width for half of the depth or something like that might work. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 28, 2014 Page 12 Baker said he would like this item sent back to staff for more analysis. He said he is struck that a standard based on the width of the front may have made sense in the past, but he is not sure that applies today. He said that Tyrol has very unique characteristics and the rate of infill there is quite dramatic, and he wants to moderate that trend. Segelbaum said this is a sensitive topic, and he understands the neighbors' concerns about over-development, but he would prefer to go with the staff's recommendation and maintain the status quo in how the width of a lot is measured, and maybe examine it the future. Cera said there are several pending developments waiting for resolution on this item. He said making the two different definitions match won't change anything regarding how lot width has been measured for many years. He also agreed that the Planning Commission might want to study the issue in a broad context in the future. Baker suggested that subdivision applicants be required to follow both definitions for the next month, and then staff can report back on how it is going. Cera said there is an obligation to address the applications that are pending. Grimes suggested bringing this item back to Planning Commission next month when the full Commission is present. MOVED by Baker, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried 3 to 1 to table this item to the June 23, 2014, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioners Baker, Cera and Waldhauser voted yes. Commissioner Segelbaum voted no. --Short Recess-- 6. Reports on Meetings f the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zo ng Appeals and other Meetings No report ere given. 7. Other Bu ess • Election of 11 icers nd BZA ' ison This item was tabled to the Planning Commission meeting. Segelbaum suggested the Commission nsider rotating their attendance to the BZA meetings instead of having one Iml io' r be the designated Liaison. • Counci , iaison Rep rt Council Me . er Snope updat d the Commis ners on the May 20, 2014, City Council meeting. a stated that the C uncil approved t subdivision request at 400 Decatur Aven North. The Council al approved a resolution supporting J-HAP's TIF ap cation. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 9 OVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Kluc ka and motion carried 4 to 2 to approve the min subdivision subject to the following fi ings and conditions. Commissioners Baker and Ce voted no. Findinqs: 1. Both lots of th roposed subdivision met the requirements of the R,- tingle Family Zoning District. 2. The City Engineer fin that the lots ar buildable. 3. The addition of the new s will not pla an undue strain°�o City utility systems. 4. The drainage and utility eas ents sh n on the p,rRl''minary plat are acceptable. Conditions: 1. The City Attorney will determine if a ti . FY view is necessaryprior to approval of the final plat. 2. A park dedication fee of $2,93 all b' : paid ~' ore final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memo- dum, data d March 014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City - rmits shall be obt fined prior to the de lopment of the new lots. Cera said he v d against this proposal ecause he doesn't now if ' _subdivision will adversely i act the neighbors, becaus of a precedent issue and that t _' I'snot a reason a design for a lot. He said it wi encourage more gerrymanderingtdone in the futur . He added that he has no proble at all with subdividing property in areas when the h se fits, but he doesn't want to sque , e houses in just because they can. 3. Continued Discussion Regarding Lot Width and Lot Depth Zimmerman reminded the Commission that they discussed this item at their May 28, 2014, meeting. He said there are two main issues, the first is the differences in definitions of lot width and lot depth between the Zoning Code and the Subdivision Code and the second is the concern regarding "irregular" lots. Zimmerman explained that the Zoning Code defines lot depth as the mean depth between the front and rear lot lines, and the lot width as the mean width measured at right angles to the mean depth. Also, the Zoning Code, in all of the residential zoning districts except for the Single Family R-1 zoning district, measures the lot width at the front setback line. Zimmerman explained that the Subdivision Code defines lot depth as the shortest distance between front and rear lot lines measured at right angles to the street right-of- way, and the lot width as the minimum distance between the side lot lines measured at right angles to the lot depth at the minimum building setback line. Zimmerman stated that when he reviewed the history of the definitions in the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code he realized that as far back as 1960, the definitions in both codes included language stating that the width of the lot is measured at the minimum Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 10 front yard setback. He discovered that in 2004, the phrase "at the minimum front yard setback" was inadvertently struck from the Zoning Code when an unrelated ordinance was approved. Zimmerman said that based on past precedent, ease of interpretation and administration, conformity with neighboring communities, and review of homes built under the current application of lot width as defined by the Subdivision Code, Staff suggests a revision of the definition of lot width within the Zoning Code in order to continue to review subdivision requests in a consistent manner. The specific changes in the Zoning Code would be as follows: The definition of width would be "The minimum required horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at right angles to the lot depth at the minimum front yard setback line." The language regarding buildable lots would be amended to read as follows: "...In the R-1 zoning district a platted lot of a minimum area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet and a minimum width of eighty (80) feet at the front setback line shall be required for one (1) single family dwelling," and the definition of lot depth would be clarified to read as follows: "The mean horizontal distance between the front (street) line and the rear lot line measured at a ninety (900) degree angle from the street right-of-way. Zimmerman discussed several other possible requirements that could be considered in order to regulate the width and/or shape of proposed lots in subdivisions including: requiring the lot width to be maintained for a certain percentage of the lot depth, portions of lot width less than the minimum required width would not count towards the total required lot area, finding the depth by measuring from the front midpoint to the rear midpoint. At the midpoint of the depth a minimum lot width must be met, or requiring an irregular lot test where the formula P2/A = X is used to determine if a lot is "too irregular." Segelbaum said he would like the City to be able to have some certainty when reviewing subdivision requests, and questioned if new software is needed. Waldhauser said she is comfortable with developers providing the information and calculations. Baker said he would like to know how many subdivision requests the City receives per year, and the costs involved, including staff time. Segelbaum referred to the "irregular lot" test and said he is concerned that the focus will just be about not allowing irregularly shaped lots. Cera said the "irregular lot" test could just be one more consideration in the process. Zimmerman showed the Commissioners a map of lots in the Tyrol area that could possibly be subdivided. Cera noted that all of the lots have homes on them. Segelbaum asked if the lots shown on the map would meet the mean width test. Zimmerman said it would depend on how lot lines were drawn. Kluchka questioned how many of the lots shown on the map would not be able to subdivide even if small changes are made. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 11 Cera said he thinks a combination of the requirements that Zimmerman suggested might work to eliminate irregular lot shapes. Waldhauser questioned if irregular lot shapes is an issue. Cera said that requiring an average lot width negatively impacted the lot they discussed earlier, and that he is hearing a consensus among the Planning Commission to make the lot width definition in the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code match, but to also research ways to address the problem with irregular lots. Boudreau-Landis asked if a formula of some sort would supersede the existing conditions for approval or denial in the Subdivision Code. Segelbaum said he thinks a formula would be in the Zoning Code, not the Subdivision Code.Cera questioned if any of the requirements are state statutes. Waldhauser said she would be in favor of keeping the language in both codes requiring lots to be 80 feet in width at the front setback, and requiring that that width be kept for 50% of the depth of the lot. MOVED by Cera, and seconded by Waldhauser to recommend approval to amend the Zoning Code to state that a minimum width of eighty (80) feet at the front setback line shall be required. Also, staff will research additional opportunities to address irregularly shaped lots. Segelbaum asked if the motion should also include staff's recommendation regarding lot depth. Cera agreed to add language to the motion stating that the average depth should be measured perpendicular to the street right-of-way line. Segelbaum said he would like to see examples of Golden Valley properties. Kluchka said he would like to see some historical examples. Baker said he would like to see further research regarding lot depth. Kluchka clarified that the motion is to recommend approval to amend the Zoning Code to state that a minimum width of eighty (80) feet be required at the front setback line, and to have staff bring back language defining average lot depth, and to do additional research on lot width and irregularly shaped lots. The vote was unanimous. --Short Recess-- 4. ports ka_ eet�iingo. ousing and Redevelopment Authority, City Co cil, g Appeals and other Meetings Kluchka reportcommunity centers that the Community Center Task Force took th §11.03 53. Lot: For zoning purposes a lot is a parcel of land intended for occupancy by one (1) principal structure and any accessory structures and of at least sufficient size to meet minimum zoning requirements for use, coverage and area, and to provide such yards and other open spaces as are required by this Code. Such lot shall have frontage on an improved public street and consist of a single lot of record or a parcel of land that has been historically described by metes and bounds. No division or combination of lots shall be permitted that fails to result in all lots conforming to this Code. Where City approval was obtained before the effective date of this amendment (October 3, 1991) of a combination of more than one (1) lot or parcel, the combination shall be considered one (1) lot for purposes of this definition, except that: A. If a principal structure is situated on two (2) or more lots, but is located on and meets all zoning requirements for one (1) or more, but not all, of the lots, the lot or lots not required for the structure may be treated as separate lots if they met all other requirements of the City Code at the time of their creation. B. If a principal structure is situated on two (2) or more lots and additional land is acquired so that the structure may be expanded, all of the lots must be replatted to conform to this Code. C. If a principal structure is situated on two (2) or more lots and additional land is not necessary for a proposed expansion of the structure, replatting will not be required. Source: Ordinance No. 73, 2nd Series Effective Date: 10-3-91 54. Lot Frontage: The front of a lot shall be construed to be the portion nearest the street. For the purpose of determining yard requirements on corner lots and through lots, all sides of a lot adjacent to streets shall be considered frontage, and yards shall be provided as indicated under "Yards" in this Section. 55. Lot Lines: The lines bounding a lot. 56. Lot Measurements: A. Depth: The mean horizontal distance between the front (street) line and the rear lot line. B. Width: degFees) te its mean depth. The minimum required horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth, at the minimum front yard setback line. Golden Valley City Code Page 9 of 17 § 11.21 structures are located in a conforming location on the lot. (See Subdivision 11.) B. Home occupations, as regulated by this Section. C. Home day care facilities licensed by the State of Minnesota serving twelve (12) or fewer persons. Subdivision 5. Conditional Uses A. Residential facilities serving from seven (7) to twenty-five (25) persons. B. Group foster family homes. Subdivision 6. Buildable Lots No dwelling or accessory structure shall be erected for use or occupancy as a residential dwelling on any tract of unplatted land which does not conform with the requirements of this Section, except on those lots located within an approved plat. In the R-1 zoning district a platted lot of a minimum area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet and a minimum width of eighty (80) feet at the front setback line shall be required for one (1) single family dwelling. Subdivision 7. Corner Visibility All structures in the R-1 Zoning District shall meet the requirements of the corner visibility requirements in Chapter 7 of the City Code. Subdivision S. Easements No structures in the R-1 Zoning District shall be located in dedicated public easements. Subdivision 9. Building Lot Coverage No lot or parcel in the R-1 Zoning District shall have a lot coverage of more than thirty percent (30%) for a lot or parcel over ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area, thirty-five percent (35%) for a lot or parcel between five thousand (5,000) square feet and nine thousand nine hundred ninety nine (9,999) square feet in area and forty percent (40%) for a lot or parcel less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in area. This requirement excludes swimming pools. Source: Ordinance No. 292, 2nd Series Effective Date: 3-12-04 *Subdivision 10. Impervious Surface Total impervious surface on any lot or parcel shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the lot or parcel area. Source: Ordinance No. 382, 2nd Series Effective Date: 3-28-08 Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 10 City 0 golden MEMORANDUM valley �'�T PlgDep 1 annin artment - 763-593 8095/763-593-8109 8109(fax) Date: May 28, 2014 To: Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Subject: Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments—Definitions of Lot Width and Lot Depth Background The City Council has directed Staff to bring to the attention of the Planning Commission inconsistencies between the Zoning Code (Chapter 11) and the Subdivision Code (Chapter 12) in their respective definitions of Lot Width and Lot Depth. A recent application for subdivision raised the issue and Staff has performed research to understand the nature of the problem and how it came about. In the Zoning Code, Lot Width is defined as: "The width of a lot is its own mean width measured at right angles (90 degrees)to its mean depth." In the Subdivision Code, Lot Width is defined as: "The minimum required horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at right angles to the lot depth, at the minimum building setback line in the Residential and R-2 zoning district, or the front property line in the Business and Professional Office or Terminal Warehouse Zoning Districts." The difference here is that under the Zoning Code the width is defined as an average measured along the entire depth of the lot. The Subdivision Code only looks at the width at the front yard setback line. It is possible,then,to have a proposed residential lot that meets the minimum width at the front yard setback (the Subdivision definition) but narrows enough so that the average width (the Zoning definition) is less than the minimum required. The Lot Width definition in the Zoning Code seems to be unchanged dating back to 1938. The Subdivision Code was adopted in 1987 and revised in 1989. From what Staff can determine, subdivision review in Golden Valley seems to have used the lot width definition from the Subdivision Code exclusively ever since the code was introduced. A study of the zoning and subdivision codes of seven surrounding communities reveal that all seven use lot width definitions—with minor variations—that are based on the width at the front yard setback line rather than the average width along the entire depth of the lot. This is consistent with Golden Valley's Subdivision Code but not its Zoning Code. In addition, the Zoning Code text specifically defines the width necessary to have a buildable lot as the lot width at the front setback line (consistent with the Subdivision Code definition) for the R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts. Only the R-1 zoning district uses language that is more ambiguous ("a minimum width of eighty feet shall be required"). This forces the use of the more general definition of lot width from Section 11.03 (the Definitions section) which uses the average width as outlined above. Most lots being reviewed for subdivision meet both lot width definitions. A few, however, meet only the definition of the Subdivision Code. These are typically "inverse pie" lots—where there is a large amount of frontage but they narrow as they move to the back of the lot—or irregularly shaped lots that are narrower than 80 feet for a significant portion of their depth. Current Issues Staff have been advised by the City Attorney that lots currently under review for subdivision must meet the definitions of lot width in both the Subdivision Code and the Zoning Code. This not only reduces the number of lots in the City that are eligible to be subdivided, but using the average width definition creates difficulties for Staff in calculating the true lot width for non-rectangular lots. This information is often requested daily when helping builders or homeowners determine side yard setbacks, which are dependent upon the lot width. A related issue is that the definition of Lot Depth is inconsistent between the two codes in a similar fashion. In the Zoning Code, Lot Depth is defined as: "The mean horizontal distance between the front (street) line and the rear lot line." In the Subdivision Code, Lot Depth is defined as: "The shortest horizontal distance between the front line and the rear line measured at a ninety (90°) degree angle from the street right-of-way." As lot width is measured in relation to lot depth, it is important to also resolve this inconsistency. Recommendation Faced with the above,there are at least three options for dealing with the situation: 1. Keep Zoning and Subdivision Codes unchanged, in which case new lots must meet the minimum width at the front yard setback and maintain the minimum average width throughout the lot. 2. Modify the Subdivision Code to define width as the average width throughout the lot (to match the Zoning Code). 3. Modify the Zoning Code to define width as the width at the front yard setback line (to match the Subdivision Code). Based on past precedent, the ease of interpretation and administration, conformity with neighboring communities, and a review of homes built under the current application of lot width as defined by the Subdivision Code, Staff recommends a revision of the definition of lot width within the Zoning Code in order to continue to review subdivision requests in a consistent manner. Attachments Draft text amendment with underlined-overstruck language (1 page) PowerPoint presentation given to City Council on May 13, 2014 (13 pages) City e' ," W MEMORANDUM go 1 d valley Plannin De artment 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: June 23, 2014 To: Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Subject: Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments–Definitions of Lot Width and Lot Depth Background At the May 28 Planning Commission meeting, Staff discussed with the Commission inconsistencies between the Zoning Code and the Subdivision Code with respect to the definitions of lot width and lot depth. At the conclusion of the meeting, Staff was asked to do additional research regarding potential variations to the proposed zoning text amendments. Two main concerns have been raised as the issue has been explored. The first is the specific inconsistency between the language in the definitions of lot width and lot depth. While Staff still recommends modifying the language of the Zoning Code, there are a few requirements that could be added to strengthen the criteria for approving a subdivision. Second,the City Council and the Planning Commission have both expressed some concern regarding the creation of lots that deviate to far from what might be considered a "regular" shaped lot. Staff has found a potential litmus test that has been utilized by communities in Massachusetts that could be used to limit the creation of"irregular" lots. Current Issues Of immediate concern to Staff are the two different definitions of lot width found in the City Code. While the definition of lot width found in the Subdivision Code measures the width at the front yard setback, the definition found in the Zoning Code measures the mean width of the lot. In some cases this is easy to calculate, but in other cases—especially with more irregularly shaped lots—the calculations are more complex. Regardless of which definition is used, a key point in the interpretation of lot width is that the orientation of the lot depth must be defined first (lot width is measured at right angles to the lot depth). Lot depth is typically oriented perpendicular to the street right-of-way, but there is no provision made for cases in which the street curves. Staff believes that drawing a line that connects the front corners of a lot is the best proxy for a line parallel to the street right-of-way. Once this line is established, the orientation of the lot width measurements will be parallel to it. Using the Subdivision Code definition of lot width, the official width is the distance between the side lot lines at the front yard setback (35 feet in R-1 and R-2 districts and 25 feet in R-3 and R-4 districts). Using the Zoning Code definition,the width must be taken at every point along the depth of the lot and averaged. Not only is this a more complicated measurement to calculate, but it is not consistent with how lot width has been applied throughout the rest of the Zoning Code. In each residential section of the Zoning Code (R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4), lot width is used in two ways. First, it is referenced in the requirements for determining if a lot is buildable (a minimum width is necessary). Second, it is used to determine the side yard setbacks in each residential zoning district. In the R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts, lot width is specifically defined as being measured at the minimum required front setback line for both determining if a lot is buildable and determining the side yard setbacks. In the R-1 zoning district,the side yard setback is specifically defined as being measured at the minimum required front setback line. It is only within the section on Buildable Lots for the R-1 zoning district that lot width is left undefined and the more general definition in Section 11.03 comes into play (mean width). Further research into previous Zoning Codes shows that although the original definition of lot width used mean width, the 1960 recodification of the code began using width "at the minimum front yard setback" for all Residential and Open Development districts. The 1988 recodification preserved this language when it created what would become the R-3 and R-4 districts. At some point after 1988,the specific front yard setback language was lost in a portion of the R-1 section of code but retained in all of the other sections.This omission, coupled with the original, general, definition of lot width as mean width, is what presents the problem today. Although Staff feels changing the lot width definition in the Zoning Code to match that in the Subdivision Code would solve the problem,the Planning Commission has asked for some possible variations that would go beyond simply codifying the way lot width has been applied in the past. One option is to set lot width as the width at the front yard setback, but require this width be maintained continuously for a certain percentage of the lot depth. This would allow for some variation in the shape of the lot but would ensure that a targeted area would have enough width to comfortably construct a home. A second potential option was found in a zoning code in Virginia which allows lots to have portions that are narrower than the required lot width, but these portions are not counted towards the required minimum lot area when evaluating a potential subdivision. As pointed out in the option above, this would allow for some portions of a lot to narrow while still requiring a majority of the lot to meet the minimum width requirement. Because the narrower portions would not count towards the minimum lot area, in these cases this option would, in effect, create slightly larger lots when subdivision occurred. Finally, a third option from a community in California uses the following lot width and lot depth definitions: Lot depth is measured along a straight line drawn from the midpoint of the front property line of the lot to the midpoint of the rear property line or to the most distant point on any other lot line where there is no rear lot line. Lot width is the horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth at a point midway between the front and rear lot lines. This option ensures there is sufficient width across the middle of the lot, but does allow for potentially significant narrowing at either the front or the rear of a lot. If this option were to be pursued, Staff would recommend using it in conjunction with a required minimum lot width at the front setback line. Any of these three potential variations could be generally consistent with how minimum lot width has been interpreted over the past 24 years (which is based on the lot width definition from the Subdivision Code), but would also ensure some additional width or area would be required to be maintained as part of the subdivision. Additional Considerations Addressing the stated concern over "irregular" lots, Staff found a formula that is applied in a handful of communities in Massachusetts that mathematically evaluates a proposed lot for its level of irregularity prior to examining the minimum lot width and lot area requirements. Under this evaluation, the following formula is used: PZ/A =x where P is the proposed lot perimeter and A is the proposed lot area. If the result is 22.0 or greater for any proposed lot, the proposed subdivision is not allowed. If the result is less than 22.0,the proposed lots are then evaluated further to see if they meet the other subdivision requirements. Using this formula, a perfectly square lot would have a result of 16. A rectangular lot with a 2:1 ratio in length to width would have a result of 18.The more irregular the shape of a lot becomes, the higher the associated output number. Recommendation Based on past precedent, the ease of interpretation and administration, conformity with neighboring communities, and a review of homes built under the current application of lot width as defined by the Subdivision Code, Staff recommends a revision of the definition of lot width within the Zoning Code in order to continue to review subdivision requests in a consistent manner. If any additional variations to the subdivision requirements are desired by the Planning Commission, Staff requests direction as to the specific language and values to be included in any proposed text amendments. In addition, consideration of the inclusion of an "Irregular Lot Test" in the Subdivision Code should include a recommendation as to the threshold level at which a lot is considered too irregular to be approved. Attachments Draft Zoning Code text amendment with underlined-overstruck language (2 pages) Memo from Planning Commission meeting of May 28, 2014 (3 pages) PowerPoint from Council/Manager meeting of May 13, 2014 (13 pages) ORDINANCE NO. 523, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending Sections 11.03, Definition 56(B) and 11.21, Subdivision 6 Regarding Lot Width Definition The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Section 11.03 entitled "Definitions" is amended by changing definition number 56 (B) to read as follows: B. Width: The minimum required horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth, at the minimum front yard setback line. Section 2. City Code Section 11.21 entitled Single Family Zoning District (R-1) is amended by changing the second sentence in Subdivision 6. Buildable Lots to reads as follows: "...a minimum width of eighty (80) feet at the front setback line shall be required for one (1) single family dwelling." Section 5. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 6. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 15th day of July, 2014. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/ Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk ^ ty 0 �� m �� N � � ��goldenl!�vr �� p� �'� �� , �� J� �� I�� ey Planning D ep @Urtment 763-593-809G/7$3-593-8109(fax) ��8��~�� K�� ~�� ~~~~~'~'~-~. ~~~ Summary For . .~~~..~.. Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15^ 2014 Agenda Item 4. B. Public Hearing- Preliminary Plat Approval - Kate's Woods - 221 Sunnyridge Lane Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary At the June 23, 2014, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted to recommend approval of a minor subdivision of the property located at 221 Sunnyridge Lane (Kate's Woods). The proposal would create two lots from the existing lot, each meeting the necessary lot area and lot width requirements as outlined in Chapter 12 of the City Code. The existing home would remain. Attachments w Location Map (1page) • Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated June 33, JO14 /9pages) w Memo tothe Planning Commission dated June 33, 3O14 (3pages) w K4erno from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, dated March 17, 3014 (2 pages) • Lot Width and Lot Depth Calculations (4pages) ~ Site Plans (4pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Kate's Woods, 221 Sunnyridge Lane, subject to the following conditions: I. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 2. A park dedication fee of$2,930 shall be paid before final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated March 17, 2014` shall become part ofthis approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. 4(10 ` 32 S r�" _ � 315 324 c� 4309, G BeVetiyAve " aJ, t » x-' 'r 4301, i A221 320— 320 31 6 3 a S o` 4215 4205412741214117 4113 315 316 311 a, 321 C ,: a 332# 312 307 C X308 309 » 301 300 4216' 4212 4200 4124 4112tr 303 4016 303 300 3910 243 Subject Property: 235 221 Sunnyridge Ln Poplar Dr 250 4215' rw 227 4125 735 234 3901 222 219m 220 221 _ x 200 X215 220, 221 ---- ., z v 209 211c \ :. '4 1 7,1,,E 219 0 707 fff 214 166 `. / 212 200 S[ ' 127VT 1 205 i11� 210, 2A 165 ,201 y/p[Je Ctt c F 185 204 206 208 ems+ 145 115 172' 101 4140 120 4007 4004 :. i 1e00 3 .. ��4120 925 a 3ar.. r ` 4135 4020 4010 3008; �ti, 25 24 Vh 105 ° 4006 -1;011 .,,4125. ,�� \ Raanokr G#r 20 4240 4023' 4015 4011 4009 4013 �. 4270 17 1 =.< Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 ular meeting of the Planning Co ission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Coun hambers, 7800 Golden Vall Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, June 23, Chair Kluchka called a meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were ning Com issioners Baker, _ amu-Landis, Cera, Kluchka, Segelbaum and Waldhaus Iso resent wa. munity Development Director Mark Grimes, City Planner Jason Zim m Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minute May 28 , 4, Regular P nning Commissio'' eting MO by Cera, seconded by aker and motion carried unani ously to approve the ay 28, 2014, minutes as sub itted. 2. Continued Item — Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 221 Sunnyridge Lane — Kate's Woods SU08-11 Applicant: David Knaeble Addresses: 221 Sunnyridge Lane Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single family residential lot into two new single family residential lots. Zimmerman reminded the Commissioners that this item was tabled at the March 24 Planning Commission meeting because it was discovered that the language regarding lot width in the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code did not match. Since then, the applicant has revised his plans to meet the requirements of both codes. He explained that the applicant is proposing to divide his property into two separate lots. The existing home would remain and a new home would be built on the proposed lot to the north. Both lots will have 80 feet of width at the front yard setback line per the Zoning Code requirements and 80 feet of mean lot width per the Subdivision Code requirements. Lot 1 would be 10,467 square feet in size with a mean width of 109.8 feet and Lot 2 would be 11,038 square feet in size with a mean lot width of 84.2 feet. He stated that he was contacted about some concerns regarding water run-off and stated that those types of issues will be addressed when there are specific building and grading plans submitted for review. He added that he met with some of the neighbors in the area and they expressed concern about tree preservation and the orientation of the proposed new house. He stated that because the proposed subdivision meets the requirements outlined in the City Code, staff is recommending approval. Kluchka asked if there are private covenants on this property. Zimmerman said no. Segelbaum referred to Section 12.50 of the Subdivision Code regarding conditions for approval or denial and asked if this request meets these conditions. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 2 Zimmerman stated that all of the requirements have been met. However, there is some concern by the neighbors that the second point in that section regarding the lot being buildable due to excessive wetness is not being met. Cera asked if there can be conditions placed on the Commission's recommendation. Zimmerman stated that conditions can be attached on non-residential property; however, it is less clear if conditions can be placed on residential property. Kluchka stated that many of the issues are addressed during the building permit process. Kluchka asked if there is anything leading staff to believe that there is a problem with water on this property. Zimmerman stated this proposal might help make the water situation better than the existing conditions. Baker asked Zimmerman if he did the width calculations. Zimmerman said he understands conceptually how the calculations were done, but suggested that the applicant could more clearly address the specifics. Baker referred to Section 12.50, Subdivision 3(G) which states that subdivisions may be denied if they adversely affect adjacent land uses. Zimmerman explained that that language only applies to nonresidential property. Boudreau-Landis asked if the current property owner subdivided the property to create the current 207 Sunnyridge Lane property. Zimmerman said no. David Knaeble, Applicant, stated that the Minor Subdivision he is proposing meets all of the City's requirements and that the Planning and Engineering staff is recommending approval. He stated that the median lot size;on this street is 10,200 square feet and that approximately 70% of the lots are less than 11,000 square feet in size, so what he is proposing will fit in nicely with this part of the neighborhood. He stated that they will be removing 24% of the trees on the property which is fewer trees than the 40% allowed by City ordinance. He stated that they will be reducing the water run-off to the adjoining property to the north and making the existing situation better. He stated that he did not do the original subdivision of this property, but he bought his house knowing he could split it in the future. He said he preferred the original plans he submitted, but that this proposed layout will also work and he is open to suggestions. He added that he grew up in this area and has lived here most of his life and wants his kids to grow up here too. Baker asked Knaeble if he currently occupies the existing house. Knaeble said yes. Segelbaum asked Knaeble to explain the handouts he gave to the Commissioners. Knaeble explained that one of the maps illustrates several other subdivisions done in the area in the past and that what he is proposing doesn't break from what has been done in the past and won't drastically impact the neighborhood. He referred to the other maps he handed out and discussed the distances between the houses. Between his existing home and the home to the south there is 28 feet, between his existing home and the proposed new house to the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 3 north there will be 33 feet and between the proposed new home to the existing home to the north there will be 66 feet. Cera asked about the dimension of the narrowest point of proposed new lot. Knaeble said it is 65 feet at that point. Baker referred to the lot width calculations and asked Knaeble to help him understand those calculations. Knaeble stated that width can be a length weighted average or an area weighted average. He said he felt an area weighted average is a better way to review the property because it is closer to the true width. Waldhauser asked Knaeble if he would prefer not to have so much frontage and the severe angles that are necessary to make the lot meet the width requirements. Knaeble said he doesn't have a preference. Kluchka opened the public hearing. Angelique Struyk, 235 Sunnyridge Lane, said there is a vision of low density for this area and she proposes that by making these smaller and smaller lots we're getting away from that vision. She said David Knaeble mentioned that the lots in this area range between 10,000 and 11,000 square feet, but he is only looking at one street when the actual block has lots that are at least twice that size and there is one lot that is three times that size that she fears will be subdivided in the future. She said she is not happy that the width of the lot where the actual house is being proposed to be built is only 62 or 63 feet wide. She said there has been a lot of fine tuning and manipulation to try to make this an 80-foot wide lot and she doesn't think the Code was designed for this and there needs to be a way for the Planning Commission to say this is ridiculous. She said the Code that we have allows for reasonable development and that this proposal may meet the requirements as it stands, but it is not responsible. She referred to the discussion about this proposal making their drainage better and said her sump pump runs all the time because they have the lowest property on the block and they have run-off from three or more adjoining properties. Putting a new house and a driveway will add more impermeable surface, and water runs downhill to her property. She said she has not had any water in her basement in the 10 or 11 years she has lived in her house and she wants some assurance from the City Engineer, in a concrete form, that she will not be adversely impacted by the building on this property, because she can guarantee they will have more run off and that does not make her happy. She said this property is a very heavily forested piece of land with a lot of tamarack trees and mature trees and the plans she reviewed said they will be removing approximately 40 trees just where the driveway and house would go. She referred to the tree preservation requirements and asked where any required new trees would even fit on this lot. She discussed the erosion potential when the existing trees with their root systems are taken away and added that there is a severe slope on the property, contrary to what staff has said. She said she doesn't know where kids are going to play on this proposed new lot so the vision the applicant has of raising a family in this new house isn't going to work. She said the applicant is probably not going to live in the proposed new house in the future, and there is going to be erosion issues and foundation damage and she is going to be left to look at it from her Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 4 back yard. She added that the proposed new house will also be perched above her, and overlooking her house. Joanie Clausen, 2516 Lee Avenue North, said she is coming before the Planning Commission with great concern as a citizen of Golden Valley. She asked if the City is just going allow houses to be put wherever they can find a spot. She said this proposal may, on paper, look like it will fit fine, but you have to look at the terrain. She said Mr. Knaeble lives up on a hill and the water is not going to run up to his house, it is going to affect the neighbor down below and she feels the City needs to protect that neighbor that already takes the water run- off from two other neighbors. She said she is concerned about the person that buys the new house in this wet area, and about creating problems for existing home owners in the area as well because they have had drainageproblems. She said when the trees and roots are taken off of the huge hill there will be problems.She said it might meet the lot requirements, but we owe it to the current property owners and the neighborhood, because the whole look of the neighborhood is changing. She asked the Planning Commission to seriously consider not approving this proposal. Tammy Pulver, 105 Meadow Lane North, said nobody likes change. She asked why there is an 80-foot lot width requirement, how narrow is too narrow and what shape of lot can be built on. She said it might be premature to talk about this proposal before the upcoming lot width and depth discussion. She said this proposed lot is too narrow and the City should make a commitment to put in any needed drainage. John Wetzel, 120 Meadow Lane North,said it is his understanding that the applicant is going to build a new house and sell the existing house. He said he is concerned about 24% of the trees being removed. He said he pays a lot of taxes and questioned if the taxes will be divided between the two new property owners. He asked what percentage of the properties are land and what percentage is structure because many of them bought their properties because of the lot size, the convenience and the schools and they are going to lose a lot because of this proposal. Mark Dietz, 207 Sunnyridge Lane, said the house behind his had a lot of water in their back yard, so they,got a pump and started to drain all of the water toward Angelique and Damon Struyk's house and flooded their shed so they had to stop. He said when he purchased his property he re-designed his house three times in order to maintain the trees, and he is concerned about the integrity of the neighborhood. He said there are beautiful 50-60 year old trees and the City really needs to consider what they are doing to their neighborhood. Jim Kuzzy, 4125 Poplar Drive, said he questions the calculations regarding the lot size. He said it seems that maybe the tail is wagging the dog because the developer is coming up with the numbers, and the City is struggling to figure out how the developer came up with his calculations. He said he doubts that an hourglass shaped lot is what the Code writers had in mind when they put the Code together. He asked that the numbers be re-calculated by the City, not the developer. He said his lot is large in size and he pays a lot in taxes and is disappointed to see the gradual deterioration of the neighborhood, and this is not the quality of neighborhood he bought into 23 years ago. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 5 Eva Jensen, 4010 Roanoke Circle, said she bought in Tyrol because she values the environment which is reinforced and sustained by the lot size. She said she is very concerned about this proposed development because they are a buffer of the park and their neighborhood creates a dark zone, and dark skies. She said the proposal might work to the letter of the law, but she is concerned about the manipulation of the numbers regarding lot sizes in Tyrol. She stated that the average lot size is 17,000 square feet when the smaller lots in North Tyrol are included. She said she is also concerned that the developer is in the position of dictating the numbers. Bob Lang, 401 Meadow Lane North, said he is concerned about the one size fits all subdivisions he's been seeing especially since the Meadow Lane and Glenwood site was broken up into four lots. He said it has only been recently that he's seen it taken to this degree and he doesn't think one does fit all. He said the City needs to take a step back and not just say yes to subdivisions just because the property can be subdivided. Pam Lott, 220 Sunnyridge Lane, said her issues aren't personal and the proposal won't affect her home per se. She said loves Golden Valley and wants to keep it pastoral. She asked the Planning Commissioners if they have ever seen a lot shape designed the way this one is on purpose, or if there is any reason for the proposed lot to be shaped this way other than to manipulate the City. She said when Sunnyridge Circle was developed the City assured everybody there would be no problem with water drainage and they were wrong because everybody has more water problems than they did before. She asked the Planning Commission to consider if they want Golden Valley to be like Brooklyn Center or Edina and if they want large lots with impressive homes or a neighborhood full of"ticky-tack." Gary Rowland, 4541 Westwood Lane, said Tyrol is really an extension of Wirth Park by design and no two houses were built at the same elevation. He said they have a neighborhood association that is excited to work with the Planning Commission to make sure the Wirth/Tyrol area is protected. He said that South Tyrol has not protected its area and the houses are right on top of each other. He added that he is also concerned about the "magic math" being applied.. John Wetzel, 120 Meadow Lane North, asked the Planning Commission to share the requirements listed in the Subdivision Code regarding conditions for approval or denial so he can determine how relevant or not they may be. Peter Knaeble, 6001 Glenwood Avenue, said he has heard several people talk about the deterioration of the neighborhood which he takes umbrage to and thinks is a little over- exaggerated. He said this is a unique neighborhood, and adding a single lot, after a number of past developments, is not going to deteriorate the entire neighborhood, the area will remain unique. He stated that there was no manipulation of the lot measurements and added that the applicant is required, as part of the application process, to do the calculations for the City's review. Henry Pulver, 105 Meadow Lane North, said there has been an explosion of development in their area. He said a standard lot size might work great for the majority of Golden Valley, but Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 6 if North Tyrol is carved into pieces there are going to be some crazy looking lots, and a lot of unhappy neighbors. He told the Commissioners to drive by the Meadow Lane and Glenwood site and see what they think about that development. He said it looked good on paper and fit the requirements of the Code, but he thinks it looks odd and doesn't fit in with, or improve, the neighborhood. He said he knows staff is trying to expedite the developers concerns, but asked that the Planning Commission take into consideration the neighbor's concerns, and what these changes will do to North Tyrol. Mark Dietz, 207 Sunnyridge Lane, referred to the developers looking back in time as to how things were subdivided, but it is nothing like how they are being subdivided in the neighborhood right now. He questioned if it is not the responsibility of the City to protect Damon and Angelique Struyk, and their view, and their million dollar house and asked if there is any responsibility to protect the people that pay taxes. Todd Ereth, 240 Meadow Lane North, said he was the last to subdivide a one acre lot into two lots, not little pieces of land. He said when he first moved into to his house the drainage issue was so bad he had to call mosquito control. He said the run-off exists, and there are health and safety issues, and they are losing so much of what makes Golden Valley a wonderful place to live. Matt Pavek, 510 Cloverleaf Drive, said when people come forth with a subdivision request that meets all of the Code requirements it should be approved. Those are the laws and rules, and everyone lives under the same rules.He said one person getting a group of neighbors together to bash on the person who is trying to subdivide their property is not in the spirit of the ordinances either. He referred to the comments about trees being removed and said that no one, including developers, wants to cut trees down, and he can guarantee that every other home in the area had to remove tress in order to build their houses too. He said that it is not accurate to say that the character of the neighborhood will be ruined by cutting down a couple of trees in order to build one new home. He referred to the slope and drainage of the subject property, and said the City Engineer is an expert who can be trusted more than an amateur who doesn't really understand how things drain. He said he heard David Knaeble state that the drainage will be better after the subdivision because it will be engineered to divert water away from the low spot. He said he can't say the problems will be solved, but he won't be allowed to make it worse. He referred to the shape of the proposed new lot and noted that it looks weird in part, because of the new lot width definition it is required to meet, and the fact that the existing house is there. He said he doesn't think the shape of the lot is relevant or will affect the way people live on their property. He referred to the question that was asked about being like Edina or being like Brooklyn Center, and said he would rather be like Golden Valley. Edina has more has more lot splits and reconstruction right now than any other City in the state, and Brooklyn Center is not getting million dollar homes built. He said the overarching theme is that Tyrol is being ruined by subdivisions which he would agree with if all of the lots could be split. The reality is that there are only a few lots left that can be subdivided under the current rules, so if the concern is that the neighborhood is going to be ruined over a few new lots, in a neighborhood of hundreds of lots, it just doesn't make sense. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 7 Tammy Pulver, 105 Meadow Lane North, said she taken aback by the disrespect, labeling and stereotyping of her neighbors. She said she is not here to bash anybody, and the issue is not just this one lot, it is about what will happen to all the subsequent lots if we don't have standards that the City is making sure developers are following. She said she hopes all developers will want to leave a legacy that protects the heart and soul of Golden Valley. Bob Lang, 401 Meadow Lane North, said that the comment that there are just a couple of lots left in Tyrol that are able to be subdivided is wrong, there are about 35 lots that meet the criteria to shoe-horn in a 10,000 square foot lot. Angelique Struyk, 235 Sunnyridge Lane, referred to the back corner of the proposed new garage and asked the Planning Commission to look closely at the dimensions of that garage and whether or not it meets the rear yard setback requirements. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Kluchka asked if there are any guarantees or accountability if the drainage does get worse. Zimmerman referred to the City Engineer's memo and explained that it is difficult to give guarantees at this point because the applicant hasn't submitted a grading plan, and won't until the building permit process. Grimes reiterated that the applicant will be required to submit a grading and erosion control plan, and the City will not allow drainage to negatively impact the neighboring property. He added that the City' systems are also not designed to the recent levels of rain we've received. Kluchka asked what guarantees, or recourse the neighbors have if the drainage doesn't work. Grimes explained that the plans are done by licensed, registered, professional engineers and surveyors, and that the City Engineer will require modifications if necessary. Kluchka said it is not the Planning Commission's purview to evaluate drainage plans. Baker asked if this is just the way it has always been done, or is this the right way to it. He stated that there is no public opportunity to comment at the decision making point. Kluchka noted that not every property owner needs to come before the Planning Commission and Council with their proposal, but everyone does have to do a drainage plan. Baker said maybe those neighbors aren't as savvy as these neighbors, and said the larger question is if the Planning Commission should look for ways to slow down development. Kluchka said that would be a Council decision. Waldhauser agreed that it would be more appropriate to discuss that at a different meeting. Cera added that the Planning Commission has in the past recommended rain gardens and things to help mitigate drainage issues. Grimes stated that many subdivisions are almost administrative as long as they meet the requirements in City Code. He added that everyone is protected by the same codes. Kluchka referred to the comments about tree removal and stated that a tree preservation plan will be required. Baker stated that he heard a lot about tamarack trees on the property but he didn't see any tamarack trees on the plans, so he is wondering about the legitimacy of the plans submitted. Zimmerman said a tree preservation plan will be required during the building permit process. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 8 Kluchka referred to the question about why lots are required to be 80 feet in width. Grimes said the 80-foot width requirement takes into account the building area, and the setback areas. Kluchka referred to the question regarding if the applicant will build, and sell the proposed new home, or if he will live in it and said that is not the Planning Commission purview. Kluchka stated that regarding property taxes, they are based on an overall value determined by Hennepin County. Grimes added that there is a land value and home value. Kluchka asked who provides the lot dimensions. Zimmerman stated that the applicant is required to provide the calculations, and based on his estimates and reviews what the applicant submitted makes sense. Baker asked if it is really correct that the applicant is required to provide the numbers, or if the City just delegates that the applicant because it's convenient. Grimes stated that applicants are required to show the City that they meet the Code requirements. Waldhauser referred to the rear yard setback requirements and asked if 20% of the lot depth is required across the entire lot. She also asked if the garage on the proposed new home meets the rear yard setback requirement. Zimmerman explained that the applicant's initial application showed the 20% measurement taken at every depth, however the Zoning Code says it should be a consistent number across the lot and this revised plan does show it that way. Baker said an important question to answer is if just because a lot can be subdivided if the City should say yes. Segelbaum stated that the Planning Commission is the finder of fact and to determine if those facts meet what the law requires as dictated by the City's ordinances, as interpreted by the courts, and the City Attorney. Baker asked if there is a question of reasonableness involved. Segelbaum said if the ordinance language says "within reason" then there are judgment calls. Baker said he doesn't like the proposal, but he doesn't find that he has any license to deny it. Cera said this proposal is sort of a gerrymandered lot whereas most other subdivisions have a more reasonable shape. Waldhauser said the doesn't personally like the shape of the proposed new lot, but agreed that part of the reason it is oddly shaped is because the discovery was made of the inconsistencies between the Zoning Code and the Subdivision Code. She said the applicant would like to move forward, and he has come up with a proposal that meets the law in spite of their reservations about it. She said that issues needs to be considered neighborhood-wide or city-wide, not lot by lot, but the City is constrained by what can be approved, and the Planning Commission can't change the code at this meeting. Baker said this one lot stands out as being uniquely weird, and he proposes that this is the last one they approve. Waldhauser stated that the applicant isn't asking to do anything that isn't allowed. Segelbaum agreed, and added that the neighbors can create their own covenants around subdivisions or get organized and suggest an overlay district of some sort. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 23, 2014 Page 9 MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried 4 to 2 to approve the minor subdivision subject to the following findings and conditions. Commissioners Baker and Cera voted no. Findings: 1. Both lots of the proposed subdivision meet the requirements of the R-1 Single Family Zoning District. 2. The City Engineer finds that the lots are buildable. 3. The addition of the new lots will not place an undue strain on City utility systems. 4. The drainage and utility easements shown on the preliminary plat are acceptable. Conditions: 1. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 2. A park dedication fee of$2,930 shall be paid before final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated March 17, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. Cera said he voted against this proposal because he doesn't know if this subdivision will adversely impact the neighbors, because of a precedent issue and that this is not a reasonable design for a lot. He said it will encourage more gerrymandering to be done in the future. He added that he has no problem at all with subdividing property in areas when the house fits, but he doesn't want to squeeze houses in just because they can. Continued Discussion Rearding Lot Width and Lot Depth Zimm man reminded the Commi ion that they discussed this item at their May 28, 2014, m ting. He said there are o main issues, the first is the differences in definitions of width and lot dept between the Zoning Code aV the Subdivision Code and the cond is the concei n regarding "irregular" lot Zimmerman explain that the Zor ing Code def' lot depth as the mean depth between the front and ar lot line and th width as the mean width measured at right angles to the mean pth. AI oning Code, in all of the residential zoning districts except for the Sing a R-1 zoning district, measures the lot width at the front setback line. Zimmerman explain that the Su sion Code defines lot depth as the shortest distance betwe ront and rear lot line ':, easured at right angles to the street right-of- way, and th t width as the mini I m dis nce between the side lot lines measured at right angl to the lot depth at the inimum ilding setback line. Zimmerman stated that when he re ewed the hist of the definitions in the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code he real ed that as far bac s 1960, the definitions in both codes included language stating that the width of the lot is easured at the minimum city of olden MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095 763-5938109(fax) ,. Wa'e'e Date: June 23, 2014 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Plat for Minor Subdivision of 221 Sunnyridge Lane—David Knaeble, Applicant Summary of Request David Knaeble is proposing to subdivide the property located at 221 Sunnyridge Lane into two separate lots. The existing house at 221 Sunnyridge Lane would remain and the northern portion of the lot would be developed separately. City Code requires that each new lot be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. Lot 1 to the south, containing the existing home, would be 10,467 square feet and the new lot to the north, Lot 2, would be 11,038 square feet. City Code also requires that each lot have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage at the front yard setback and 80 feet of mean lot width. Lot 1 to the south and Lot 2 to the north would have 119.1 feet and 84.8 feet of frontage measured at the 35 foot setback respectively. Lot 1 would have a mean width of 109.8 feet and Lot 2 would have a mean width of 84.2 feet. The dimensions of the new north lot would provide a sufficient building envelope for development and the existing house on the south lot conforms to the new building envelope of the proposed subdivision. Qualification as a Minor Subdivision The proposed subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision because the property located at 221 Sunnyridge Lane is an existing platted lot of record, the proposed subdivision will produce fewer than four lots, and it will not create need for public improvements (such as street construction). The applicant has submitted the required information to the City that allows for the subdivision to be evaluated as a minor subdivision. Staff Review of Minor Subdivision Staff has evaluated the proposed lot subdivision request as a minor subdivision. As previously indicated, the proposed subdivision would create two lots in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. The Applicant has submitted a survey of the existing lot prior to the proposed subdivision, as well as a preliminary plat displaying the two lots after the subdivision. The documents show the existing home will be kept. These documents provide the City with the necessary information to evaluate the proposed minor subdivision. City Engineer Jeff Oliver has submitted a memorandum dated March 17, 2014, regarding recommendations from the Public Works Department concerning this request. Since his review, revisions have been made to the preliminary plat; however, Mr. Oliver has stated that the changes are minor do not necessitate a second review. Requirements set forth in Mr. Oliver's memo are to be included in the recommended action of this subdivision. Qualification Governing Approval as a Minor Subdivision According to Section 12.50 of the City's Subdivision Regulations,the following are the regulations governing approval of minor subdivisions with staff comments related to this request: 1. Minor subdivisions shall be denied if the proposed lots do not meet the requirements of the appropriate zoning district. Both lots of the proposed subdivision meet the requirements of the R-1 Single Family Zoning District. 2. A minor subdivision may be denied if the City Engineer determines that the lots are not buildable.The City Engineer finds that the lots are buildable. 3. A minor subdivision may be denied if there are no sewer and water connections available or if it is determined by the City Engineer that an undue strain will be placed on City utility systems by the addition of the new lots.The addition of the new lots will not place an undue strain on City utility systems. 4. Approval of the minor subdivision may require the granting of certain easements to the City. The drainage and utility easements shown on the preliminary plat are acceptable. 5. If public agencies other than the City have jurisdiction of the streets adjacent to the minor subdivision,the agencies will be given the opportunities to comment. No other public agencies have jurisdiction over the streets adjacent to the site. 6. The City may ask for review of title if required by the City Attorney for dedication of certain easements. The City Attorney will determine if such a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 7. The minor subdivision may be subject to park dedication requirements. A park dedication fee of $2,930 (2%of estimated land market value with credit for one existing unit) shall be paid by the applicant prior to final plat approval. Recommended Action The Planning Department recommends approval of the proposed minor subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 2. A park dedication fee of$2,930 shall be paid before final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated March 17, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. Attachments: Location Map (1 page) Memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver dated March 17, 2014 (2 pages) Lot width and lot depth calculations (4 pages) Site Plans (4 pages) G1fy r Chi n MEMORANDUM lle Public Works Department artment P 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Date: March 17, 2014 To: Mark Grimes, Director of Community Development From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer 4f Joe Fox, EIT, Water Resources Engineer Subject: Minor Subdivision — Kate's Woods—221 Sunnyridge Lane Public Works Staff has reviewed the application for a minor subdivision to be named Kate's Woods. The subdivision is located at 221 Sunnyridge Lane. Preliminary Plat and Site Plan The proposed subdivision includes dividing the existing single-family parcel into two single-family lots with frontage on Sunnyridge Lane. The existing house will remain. The Developer will be required to obtain a City of Golden Valley Right-of-Way Management Permit for the installation of the driveway apron onto Sunnyridge Lane for the new home. Utilities The Developer has proposed the installation of sewer and water services for the new house. A City of Golden Valley Right-of-Way Management Permit, along with Sewer and Water Permits, will be required for the installation of these utilities. The parcel being subdivided was platted with drainage and utility easements which must be vacated. The Developer must submit an Easement Vacation Application. The preliminary plat for the current proposed subdivision shows six-foot drainage and utility easements along the sides of the new parcels and ten-foot drainage and utility easements along the front and back of the new parcels. These easements are acceptable as drawn. The existing home at 221 Sunnyridge Lane is compliant with the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance. Stormwater Management The proposed subdivision is within the Wirth Lake sub-watershed of the Bassett Creek Watershed. This project does not meet the threshold for review by the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC). G:\Developments-Private\Kate's Woods-221 Sunnyridge Ln\Memo_PW_MinorSubd.docx The Developer will be required to obtain City of Golden Valley Stormwater Management Permits for each new lot. At the time of permit application, Grading and Erosion Control Plans that meet City standards must be submitted. Tree Preservation This development is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. Because each lot will be custom-graded at the time of home construction, the project will be considered a single-lot development, in which a separate Tree Preservation Permit will be required for each lot. The Developer has submitted a Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan which will assist in the review of each permit application. Recommendation Based upon a review of the materials submitted by the Developer and appropriate City ordinances and standards, Public Works staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision for Kate's Woods. Approval is subject to the Developer obtaining the required permits and the new home becoming compliant with the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter. C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Mark Kuhnly, Fire Chief John Crelly, Deputy Fire Chief Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor and City Forester Jerry Frevel, Interim Building Official Lot Width Calculations Y-!"= Wi X A i 221 Sunnyridge Lane WAVE= n E�=1 A[ Lot 1 WAVE= 109.8 FT Lot 2 WAVE= 84.2 FT Lot 1 Lot 2 L# WIDTH[FT] AREA[SF] W X A L# WIDTH[FT] AREA[SF] W X A 1 100.0 500.1 50010.0 1 87.2 436.2 38054.1 2 104.4 521.9 54475.9 2 84.8 424.2 35980.6 3 108.8 543.8 59132.8 3 82.4 412.1 33965.3 4 110.1 550.4 60588.0 4 80.0 400.1 32008.0 5 110.21 551.2 60753.3 51 77.6 388.0 30108.8 6 110.4 551.9 60918.7 6 75.2 376.0 28267.7 7 110.5 552.6 61073.4 7 72.8 363.9 26484.6 8 110.7 553.4 61239.2 8 70.4 351.9 24759.7 9 110.8 554.1 61405.4 9 68.0 339.8 23092.8 10 111.0 554.81 61560.6 10 65.8 329.0 21648.2 11 111.1 555.6 61727.2 11 64.2 321.0 20601.8 12 111.3 556.3 61893.9 12 62.6 313.0 19587.5 13 111.4 557.0 62049.8 13 61.0 304.9 18592.8 14 111.6 557.8 62217.0 14 61.6 308.2 18991.3 15 111.71 558.5 62384.5 15 63.6 318.0 20224.8 161 111.81 559.21 62540.9 16 65.6 327.9 21503.7 17 67.5 337.7 22808.3 18 75.7 378.4 28637.3 19 84.3 421.7 35566.2 20 93.0 465.0 43245.0 21 101.7 508.3 51673.8 22 110.3 551.6 60852.5 23 119.0 594.9 70781.2 24 127.6 638.2 81459.8 ` N � y M O 1 ' a c} WIDTH I ti �' �J rte► W,x A; LOT 1 LOT 2 Wat�a ^ �L=rAi WAVE = 109.8 FT WAvc = 84.2 FT 221 SUNNYRIDGE LANE LOT WIDTH EXHIBIT 6/16/14 NORTH 0 50' 100' 150' Lot Depth Calculations n Di x Ai 221 Sunnyridge Lane Davy= n �i=1 Ai Lot 1 DAVE= 99.0 FT Lot 2 DAVE= 132.8 FT Lot 1 Lot 2 L# DEPTH[FT] AREA[SF] D X A L# DEPTH[FT] AREA[SF] D X A 1 104.9 524.7 55062.0 1 140.9 704.6 99292.2 2 105.3 526.6 55451.0 2 140.7 703.3 98926.2 3 105.3 526.5 55429.9 3 140.2 700.8 98210.1 4 105.1 525.4 55198.5 4 138.4 692.2 95814.3 5 104.7 523.31 54758.1 51 135.2 676.2 91435.8 6 104.0 520.2 54121.6 6 132.0 660.2 87159.6 7 103.2 516.2 53292.5 7 128.8 644.1 82973.0 8 102.2 511.2 52265.1 8 125.6 628.1 78901.9 9 101.1 505.3 51055.5 9 122.4 612.1 74933.3 10 99.7 498.3 49660.6 10 119.2 596.1 71067.0 11 98.1 490.41 48098.4 12 96.3 481.5 46368.5 13 94.3 471.6 44481.3 14 92.1 460.7 42448.9 15 89.1 445.7 39720.8 161 85.9 429.3 36851.1 17 82.3 411.7 33899.4 N y s s � FA DEPTH LINES 4' Li — Loo �. V/ - 3 PTH I r , �a�es by /�y Y c� hJ2� rte. _ � xA DAVE _ i—� t i i= ED?Aw ! LOT 2 1�i 9.0 FT I DAvc = 132.8 JFT 221 SUNNYRIDGE LANE LOT DEPTH EXHIBIT 6/16/14 NORTH 0 50' 100' 150' I \ � LEMML N $ B-5 DENOTES SOIL BORING Lo Ln n ------- DENOTES SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMIT Ln �\"O —i 056- - DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS m m \p \ �> 1>�»— DENOTES TORMSEWER —056— DENOTES PROPOSED ONTOURS a c LL i' 4v 1 /,' I + \"b DENOTES SANITARY SEWER OJCIJy�jh // I / W! 8 NOl \; 2$�\ / �e,o5e.z DENOTES EMS DENOTES NGAISPOT ELEVATION 3 a 0 II 83� \ \\ �k� \ \\ Jco C'O� 1056.0 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION a a EW«loMQ DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ELEVATION d u�i `r� 0 � n it omr lkw / 1 0 m \/ \ SV R-1 RESIDENTIAL 20NING STANDARD& MIN. 10,000 SF LOTS \ \\ 4 ow�„ \ \ 80' LOT WIDTH (MEAS. AT 35' FSB) 35' FRONT SETBACK (OPEN PORCH 30' FSB) 20% REAR SETBACK \ \ 12.5' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS(100' AT FSB> (SEE HT. RULES) I �� \ \ 15' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS>100' AT FSB) (SEE HT. RULES) \ i \�o•1e.Qa. gyp, \ \ // MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 28' UH850 / MAX. STRAIGHT WALL 32' (THEN 2' SHIFT FOR B') ?S)MA58/W97 EAVES CAN PROJECT MAX, 2.5' INTO SETBACKS 1 \ \ \ DRIVEWAY 3' SSBI MAX. 40% COVERAGE IN FRONT YARD 645 42 5 `1r` 76'Pir N•Rr 48 aoK 20 it�3/----------848---- \ \ \ 1 rr ft.a.F- --_ _ SHEET INDEXkk a"°°"� — --x848-, _ O'° \< - 8 - SHEET DESCRIPTION ' �————— _-- ® _ \\ \ 1COVER SHEET /a EX ISTING CONDITIONS PLAN lra — -----852— o1B f— _____ w2. PRELIMINARY PLAT ON86.ad. 025 PRELIMINARY GRADING/UTILITY PLANsa 44 &X . Ofryn �Q __gg2_ O lEsifivEDy. P,�4. PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN sa,0 a3 � :_aararn v u-A 9D.d TW ®y 1ran O CVL ENGINEER � _ SILMNIEVOR 'a\ o Q� PETER KNAEBLE, PE DAVID CROOK, RLS --8-581O \ DEMARS—GABRIEL SURVEYING \ — Oat 1r or.'� „ o�.� 1 ry TERRA ENGINEERING INC. +� 16 6875 WASHINGTON AVE. SO., 209 ��°^ \ 1 Y 6001 GLENWOOD AVE. # \ \ sw 6— ` 1 Y� \ \ / 1 p MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55422 EDINA, MN 55439 Cab 0y� �/ 8 e I \ \\ \\ \ / 1 763-593-9325 763-559-0908 no z \ \ 10 / 85 12' /Iy ofdlr\ 04 I\/ 1 peterknoebleOgmaii.com decOgwestoffice.net a E� $ \ / GAR. ,d10, grad. Il , 'sat$ �� \ / /( f)oor=656.90 1r v a I Ti� co \ / ct —co o i I g a� 1r '= �,\\ \II \+ m i � 1 SITE ADDRESS: 221 SUNNYRIDGE LN., GOLDEN VALLEY, MN #221 /\\\ EMSTING E STING SITE AREA: 21,505 SF HOUSEOm / Q EXISTING ZONING: R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Z \yy V \ 1st floor=663.00 ,r w„ o / / \ 6smt. -85675 f0 + s�/ % % LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1, BLOCK 1, KUCZEK ADDITION a / /� \ �41�1/ / A ABSTRACT PROPERTY N Z 72 Z 2E man �� / / F_ >- ++ I 10,159 +�F 10 /25SS>, � sX O» \\\ sorb c� vj W T Q cn > F �O N W E U W Y C9 II II III OJ^ II' I'll III cryo �Jry� S2/17/14 VJ 15 o Is ao vAnarrla WAMNO SCALE IN FEET 13-111 THE E LOCATIONS EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE smrr ma MINOR IVISION WAY ONLY. THE EXX CAVATING CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATIONOF ESUB� ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. THE CONTRACTOR AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. r i`lili ILr N O ij� B-5 DENOTES SOIL BORING v 04 DENOTES SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMIT Lo co DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS m to —1056— DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS d x DENOTES STORM SEWER ¢ c LL DENOTES SANITARY SEWER DENOTES WATERMAIN o C4 O ADS x1056.23 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION 3 m `r te (ij X 1056.0 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION W rn EOF♦'��Q DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ELEVATION o c ro � itV w .° O GV R-1 RESIDENTIAL ZONING STANDARDS, MIN. 10,000 SF LOTS ^ 80' LOT WIDTH (MEAS. AT 35' FSB> 35' FRONT SETBACK (OPEN PORCH 30' FSB) 20% REAR SETBACK 12.5' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS<100' AT FSB) (SEE HT. RULES) 15' SIDE SETBACK CLOTS>100' AT FSB> (SEE HT, RULES) MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 28' 0 MAX. STRAIGHT WALL 32' (THEN 2' SHIFT FOR 8') EAVES CAN PROJECT MAX. 2.5' INTO SETBACKS DRIVEWAY 3' SSB) MAX. 40% COVERAGE IN FRONT YARD b / /•' \ S c // /• \`sem �\ �,,� S / � N Lt 11,P38 SF j 0,/ / `. 1 11 mwN Mw.. �/ / • ararco p-m I -^ r"I C LN0 GAR. �g€ noor=858.90 \ / / k be o�� m ON r\ Q/ i` EXISTING I HOUSE \/ 10,467 IF lot floor-863.00 Bsmt -856.75 Z NCL 8 W >- Q 10,159 SF S F Q- S N a Z N Z W v QX E d Y C9 � JPO O ^ �� 0� BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHY AND IZZ ry0 J [y^ TREE SURVEY BY S sN (� 1 DEMARS-GABRIEL LAND 2/17/14 SURVEYORS. 15 0 15 30 PRaArr ra 1111 WAMING SCALE IN FEET 3— THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE MEET AG WAY ONLY. THE EXCAVATING CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. THE CONTRACTOR AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. r 1 / Ni \ 2\\ ' 08-5 DENOTES SOIL BORING v C', I \,^,�62 5 N\n ------- DENOTES SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMIT N M O -1\"o - -1056- - DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS m m <n -1056- DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS c m r DENOTES STORM SEWER a c LL >�>� DENOTES SANITARY SEWER �S00t \ 3V\ a 1056.— DENOTES EXISTING DENOTES ISPOT ELEVATION a M , F 836 \ \ �� X 1056.0 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION m I )I(� \ \\ \,\ \ \\ O�AVL EW♦,WL0 DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ELEVATION o G '844-- o g r GV R-1 REc_IDENTIAL 7ONING STANDARDSi S&W MIN. 10,000 SF LOTS \ \\ SER CES 80' LOT WIDTH (MEAS. AT 35' FSB) 44-� \ 35' FRONT SETBACK (OPEN PORCH 30' FSB) \ \ 20% REAR SETBACK y s 12.5' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS<100' AT FSB) (SEE HT. RULES) \ '-Al �� \ \ 15' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS>100' AT FSB> (SEE HT. RULES) +� �� \\ \ MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 28' `\ \ MH850 / MAX. STRAIGHT WALL 32' (THEN 2' SHIFT FOR 81) 7\ �\ 0 615 56/843 97 EAVES CAN PROJECT MAX. 2.5' INTO SETBACKS \O \ \\ \ DRIVEWAY 3' SSB/ MAX. 40% COVERAGE IN FRONT YARD -846--- �� -- 55�• ,--- �_ � X66 \ / 848 ' \ \ NEW LOT TO BE CUSTOM GRADED ,,, '� / -- ,.• 300_ i� � 850.0 - --848-- \^ 848 - 'r �e es2o ,. �� - \\ \ AND CLEARED BY BUILDER. 15T�8s3.5----85 ' - t----- - ------852- \ KSIGNO P.x m4bw MAL o21 x tz aA flow-858`W.90 ! I TI o d a sb 4D 9 i EXISTING i Z HOUSE /�` \ , % 1st Floor= B63.00 . !'h p / I /Q ft -856.75 0 % 'Q\ l r. OZ \ 6�0 \\ / \ wwcs / /4+96 / g N sem. I / �� > 11 6069 agti /�� ;I / / \��/ v N Z= N W / O wz Y0 W E a Q 11 IIII III ZoJO 1/ / BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHY AND ry 1 // / J �^ TREE SURVEY BY SDEMARS-GAA+ SURVEYORS BRIEL LAND 2/17/14 I \ 15 0 15 30 PRa-E'cT Aia WAMI SCALE IN FEET 3-1 THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE y,E.Er WAY ONLY. THE EXCAVATING CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTIUTIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. THE CONTRACTOR AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. =5 _- DENOTES SOIL BORING v N - h N\ n DENOTES SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMIT Ln — —t 056- - DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS : m m Io , �\ —1055— DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS c ~ DENOTES STORM SEWER c >�>� DENOTES SANITARY SEWER LL OJ�A� I W 508 885NO1 \�' \\ —B 1056 DENOTES EXISTINGDENOTE �SPOT ELEVATION 3 "- t� I 8j6• \\\ \ X 1056.0 DENOTES PROSED SPOT ELEVATION m (j Aj EOF4plo .o DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ELEVATION d Lcb O �ci \ .r o m \ \i MI LO co t.- Q 1r a.fMe \ \ �� \\ \ R-1 RESIDENTIAL ZONING STANDARDS \ MIN. 10,000 SF LOTS it imp+,/ \\ \ 80' LOT WIDTH (MEAS. AT 35' FSB) \ 35' FRONT SETBACK (OPEN PORCH 30' FSB) 20% REAR SETBACKS 12.5' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS<100' AT FSB) (SEE HT. RULES) 15' SIDE SETBACK (LOTS>100' AT FSB) (SEE HT. RULES) wow �`\ \\ MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 28' A#HMAX. STRAIGHT WALL 32' (THEN 2' SHIFT FOR 8') m X97 EAVES CAN PROJECT MAX. 2.5' INTO SETBACKS DRIVEWAY 3' SSBf MAX. 40% COVERAGE IN FRONT YARD O 11in 0 Irr- e� s \ 48u u jv / \ \ tr FF. fe•ft. r Pk. J6 f FIw tr Nro Wr 1 049 a.m. \\\ \\ tY fr�OO +0„ \\ NEW LOT TO BE CUSTOM GRADED 11 k ` ® \\ AND CLEARED BY BUILDER. 4-1 am msr ae /// 1rm rfr tfr llMtlnY Ore\ w O" u 0 059 fre..m. / OYS Orr if \ \ 1 I pux am adv 60 .0 1Y'AM lr AM "0 / 0 / AN f1'A.mN fr aw mr le, irs" O62 e..A. D IV BMWN NAL. 13 DECKED P..AX r14 0; ®i-ir,w r� O� 2.1a � a.e n..0 tr a. \\\ \\ 65le jO 12 01 Or? Ir amw uO ,1 1OrIi 0 e v 12' 9 04 .D A g fborG58.90 fr '0 r fo'aa i ' Sb'g3 rc 4 1,32 '3 13 670aY* . 12. BOr `'fo3 i ' S9bg I CLQ o 2 I I orb E�S Y m 0I _e�.tWvf O ry� fr aw G&fI 10221I EXISTING II HOUSE r nOle / tet now-W100 if ow, /Q Bsmt. -856.75 r*m 71 r Yoac. �, Z n aka o f h W g GJ wafer 9s, 't° % / N a 75 ,+91f 074 son. .4c l / N z N w 3r Tm 0 /' O �� <o / w E a 0. Y C9 BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHY AND TREE SURVEY BY S VA IE DEMARS-GABRIEL LAND 2/17/14 (25/ SURVEYORS. 1H8,�] 15 0 15 30 PaoAU AG 3�' / WAMIyn SCALE IN FEET THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE yy�T WAY ONLY. THE EXCAVATING CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF AC ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. THE CONTRACTOR AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. city 0 f golden MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) . ?,F1dQ�0igiii�0i 9 r ! .. ii N➢til(( � �I';`�?'�.,':' ..^a,iiwaa":"`'".°' ,*„ .. „u Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 "60 Days" Deadline: June 24, 2014 "60 Days" Extension: August 23, 2014 Agenda Item 4. C. Public Hearing- Ordinance#524- Final Design Plan Approval -Tennant Company PUD #114- Tennant Company, Applicant Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary Tennant Company is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit for the consolidation of its multiple parcels into one cohesive development site which would allow for the construction of pedestrian walkways that would connect various buildings and parking areas. While Tennant Company is anticipating future development in the form of a three story 45,000 square foot office building and has shown concept plans that locate the building and associated parking on the site, any future construction phases would require a full PUD amendment. At that point, details related to location, height, materials, landscaping, and parking would all be addressed. Key Fire Department and Public Works concerns related to fire lanes, fire hydrant location, water supply, stormwater management, and sanitary sewer were addressed during the PUD application process. These items are included in the conditions for approval. City Code establishes standards for PUDs, which are laid out in the staff report to the Planning Commission. In addition, City Code establishes findings that must be made by the City when creating a PUD. These findings are included in the City Council's recommended action. The Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 6(Q): 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. And Staff recommends approval of the Final Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans dated April 25, 2014 prepared by LHB submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated July 9, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 23, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 5. The implementation of the fire access restriping shall be completed by November 1, 2014. 6. The Applicant shall implement the three Priority 1 items in the Fire Protection Plan by November 1, 2014. 7. The Applicant shall implement the three Priority 2 items in the Fire Protection Plan by November 1, 2015. The Applicant must submit a financial security as a guarantee the work will be completed on time. 8. The Applicant shall construct surface filtration (rain gardens) as part of the walkway construction authorized under the Final PUD Plan. 9. The Applicant shall install a stormwater filtration chamber within three years of the execution date of the Final PUD Plan. The Applicant must submit a financial security as a guarantee the work will be completed on time. 10. The sanitary service for the buildings located at 5738 and 5808 Olson Memorial Highway must be brought into compliance by November 1, 2014, or the Applicant must enter into an 1/1 Deposit Agreement for the repairs prior to approval of the PUD Permit and Development Agreement. 11. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 114" in its title. 12. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 13. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Applicant's Narrative (6 pages) • Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated June 9, 2014 (4 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission dated May 28, 2014 (5 pages) • Memo from Public Works Department dated May 23, 2014 (7 pages) • Memo from Fire Department dated May 19, 2014 (2 pages) • Memo from Fire Department date July 9, 2014 (1 page) • Tennant Campus Final PUD Fire Protection Timeline dated July 3, 2014 (2 pages) • Site Plans dated April 25, 2014 (34 pages) • Ordinance #524, Approval of Final Plan of Development, Tennant Company P.U.D. No. 114, Tennant Company, Applicant (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance #524, Approval of Final Plan of Development, Tennant Company P.U.D. #114, Tennant Company, Applicant. E Subject Properties Hwy tz3ra�t� �w�}" tx �"` �• _ t�3 3 � r i s i i State Hwy No 55 State Flay No 5.5 Olson Memorial tiwy turners ti. �J Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Overview By submitting an application for Planned Unit Development to the City of Golden Valley,Tennant Company intends to reinforce its presence in the community for the long term. It's"One Campus" vision aims to incrementally coalesce dispersed headquarters activities in a single location, creating efficiencies and more effective working relationships among the company's various corporate units. The plans submitted as a part of this application are not set to a specific development schedule. Rather, the plans demonstrate incremental steps toward the "One Campus" vision with phased implementation of campus connector walkways, site improvements for fire suppression and water systems, and stormwater management systems that builds the foundation for the future development of a 45,000 square foot office building and supporting infrastructure. Campus Connectors(walkways& stairs) provide critical foot traffic connections between 701 Lilac Drive (Main facility)and 5612 (Service/Showroom)and 5738(IT/Solutions Center) Olson Memorial Hwy. Parking lot re-configuration and new water system improvements achieve compliance with GVFD fire suppression and access requirements.The new stormwater management system stores and filters runoff from a significant portion of the existing campus parking lot and surrounding landscape improving both stormwater quality and runoff rates on site. The new building would house new office space, complementing the existing manufacturing and office facility(Plant One), the Solutions Center,Service/training Center, and the nearby Innovations Center(located at 815 Zane Avenue). The proposed PUD is accomplished on lands owned by Tennant Company. No acquisitions are required to implement any aspect of this proposal and no properties will be sold or otherwise released by the company as a part of this proposal.As the company's contiguous holdings are combined, opportunities for efficiency in site development and function are created and patterns that perpetuate Tennant's presence on the site are affirmed. The proposed PUD aligns with the city's plans for the general area.Tennant Company occupies a prime corporate site benefitting from access from two major arterials and a location proximate to the region's major city.An expansion of the current use resonates with the city's goal of protecting its existing job base and its policy of assisting major employers, like Tennant, to expand in the community. Importantly, this expansion can be accommodated without intrusion upon the community's residential uses. Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Page 2 Phased Development While a significant piece of Tennant's proposed improvements include the eventual creation of the new office facility, key elements of this proposal consider supporting functions of parking,fire suppression and access, stormwater management, and campus connections facilitating employee movement between facilities.These improvements are proposed as "Phase Development" and subject to the schedule and requirements as identified in the"Terms and Conditions" agreement of the Final PUD. On a more basic level,this application is the first step in creating more deliberate internal connections among the existing uses on the Tennant Campus. Current operations require some employees to move between various buildings, most often using their personal vehicles. Current city ordinances prohibit these connections.With a PUD, connections like the existing link between Plant One and the Innovations Center can be legally created to facilitate internal employee trips, largely eliminating the frequent or occasional trips employees make between buildings on the Tennant Campus. In the short term new campus connectors are planned to provide safe walkways and stairs between campus facilities, a significant safety and employee health improvement. Proposed Phased Development Summary 1. Fire Lane: Revisions to the existing parking lot at 701 Lilac Dr.to create a continuous fire lane along the south side of the main Tennant facility(Summer 2014). 2. Campus Connectors:Two walkways will be constructed allowing for pedestrian circulation between 701 Lilac Drive, 5612 Olson Memorial Hwy, and 5738 Olson Memorial Hwy.Walkways will consist of concrete sidewalks and stairs (Summer 2014). 3. Water system improvements for fire suppression:Tennant has provided a Fire Protection Evaluation with recommendations for improvements to the exterior water system and fire suppression facilities for the existing Tennant facilities. Improvements are to be confirmed with the GVFD and will become part of the terms and conditions agreement for the Final PUD approval (Timeline TBD). 4. Stormwater Management Improvements: Per Golden Valley Public Works request as outlined in the Preliminary PUD approval,Tennant has provided a stormwater management system to be implemented into the existing campus facilities.The proposed system design and performance has been confirmed with the Golden Valley Public Works and will become part of the terms and conditions agreement for the Final PUD Approval (Timeline TBD). Future Development: New Office Complex Building: Future Development Tennant's primary goal in establishing a "One Campus"vision is the integration of several corporate units onto a single site. A new building planned with an understanding of the company's projected growth will result in 45,000 square feet of new corporate headquarters use. Flexibility to respond to Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Page 3 conditions that remain variable in a competitive marketplace is an important feature of this proposal. The plans demonstrate the building improvements at three stories and 45,000 square feet.The massing of the building,as reflected in both height and footprint, can be reasonably accommodated on the site and provide efficiencies in a layout based on the company's internal organization strategies.At three stories,the building exceeds the city's ordinance limitations for height; if, at the time the building is implemented, the company recognizes the need to create four stories, the same limitation would apply. As a part of its request for approval of a PUD,Tennant desires the city to establish the height limitations at four stories or height in feet to be determined. Importantly, there are no nearby uses that would be overwhelmed or overshadowed by a building of this height. Few residential structures exist in the immediate vicinity of the proposed building and major transportation corridors provide significant separation from more dense residential uses. Additionally,the building design and location within the site will help promote the health, safety and general welfare of the users by encouraging mobility for employees through the system of exterior walkways and connecting buildings.The location of the building within the site also works with the existing slopes,serving as a retaining wall and enabling employees and visitors to enter the building through two main entrances—one at the level of the south parking lot and service center, and one at the level of the north parking lot and manufacturing facility. While the company has long occupied structures of a utilitarian nature and aggregated additional structures of a similar character as a part of their campus,this building establishes a signature for Tennant Company and clearly becomes the centerpiece of the campus.The building brings together functions aligned with corporate needs, a position on the site that establishes it as the hub of campus activities, and aesthetics that reflect corporate identity. The material palette of pre-finished insulated metal panels, prefinished aluminum window wall systems, and stone veneers balances energy efficiency with the programmatic requirements of an office building as well as indoor environmental quality benefits such as daylighting.This material palette also creates a strong aesthetic identity to showcase the campus both to visitors and travelers on Highway 100 and Olson Memorial Highway. Traffic studies conducted in 2009 explored the impacts of much more significant development on the Tennant Campus and found that no undue burden would result on the city's streets.Those studies recognized the city's planned evolution of uses along the Douglas Drive corridor as well as typical background growth in traffic. Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Page 4 Parking: Future Development While Tennant understands parking formulas required by city ordinances, it prefers to pursue parking that more directly meets demand without over-building parking and creating unneeded hard surfaces. The company has projected employee populations over the next 10 years and has determined a need for 705 stalls assuming the development of the 45,000 sq.ft. office facility.This numbers of stalls is derived according to the following: Employees present during the largest shift 493 spaces Plus 30% parking spaces required for shift turnover(95*.30) +29 spaces Plus"Proof-of-Parking"from Innovations Center +36 spaces Plus Prop.45,000 sf office bldg: 271 sf/employee (Exist.Tennant Rate) + 166 spaces Less Alternative transportation users (3%) - 19 spaces Total employee population calculated demand 705 spaces With confidence in this calculation and recognizing that it controls the employee population,Tennant proposes to use a "proof-of-parking" solution that: • allows for a well-considered number of parking spaces to be created to satisfy known parking demand; • minimizes site disruption and the creation of potentially unused parking spaces and expanses of pavement and associated stormwater facilities; and • establishes a method for creating additional parking on the campus should it become evident that the proposed parking supply fails to meet demand. Parking to meet the "proof-of-parking" uses the city's standards for parking based on the uses present on the site.The total ordinance-based required parking quantity of 905 spaces is based on: 226,203 square feet of manufacturing use at 1 space per 500 square feet 452 spaces 71,932 square feet of warehouse use at 1 space per 3,000 square feet 24 spaces 68,157 square feet of office use at 1 space per 250 square feet 271 spaces Proof-of-Parking from 815 Zane 36 spaces Proposed 45,000 sf Office Building 180 spaces Less alternative transportation users (3%) - 19 spaces Total ordinance-based parking required 944 spaces Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Page 5 The "proof-of-parking"solution requires that the difference of 239 spaces (944 spaces resulting from the ordinance requirements less the parking provided based on an employee population calculation- 705) be established as a part of the PUD. Stormwater: Future Development As the site evolved from its original condition, improvements were made without consideration of stormwater management. In fact, most of the requirements for accommodating stormwater did not exist when the majority of the existing improvements were created. Still,Tennant understands that today's requirements are far more stringent that those of the past and recognizes that runoff from this site is tributary to Sweeney Lake,which was classified as an impaired water by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in 2011. It is Tennant's intention to meet all requirements of the new development relative to stormwater management. The patterns of the site and existing development do not lend themselves to an easily implemented solution.There are not large, open, low areas of the site where stormwater could be ready captured, retained, and treated.Tennant proposes a solution using the same technology applied when it improved the parking and drive areas at its Innovation Center. Large below-grade pipe galleries and sand filters will collect runoff, affording opportunities for enhancing runoff water quality and discharge rates. Tennant,to the extent possible,will implement best management practices that not only meet the management requirements but, also serve as a community steward by showing use of pervious pavement, rain gardens, and other BMP's that can serve as an example to the larger community. Landscape: Future Development The landscape of the site varies considerably, with a groomed landscape around existing buildings and more wild areas occupying unused portions of the site.The proposed improvements will extend the qualities of a more designed landscape to areas around the new building.The tended nature of this landscape offers a stronger reflection of Tennant's activities, but those improvements more directly consider long term sustainability and create spaces that engage the company's employees and visitors. While features of the existing landscape will be disturbed in areas near the new building and parking area, a new landscape will be established that resonates with notions of a new suburban corporate environment; where visibility,sustainability, longevity, and safety are critical features. By continuing strategies shown in the 815 Zane site renovation, the use of native prairie plantings serves as habitat and stormwater management. Placement of the new building and parking reflects logic in site planning that also results in zones of a more wild landscape at the west end of the campus that are protected from development.The design limits sod areas to locations approximate to the building development while converting much of the existing turf area to a native prairie environment. Tennant Company Narrative supporting an application for Planned Unit Development Submitted to the City of Golden Valley 25 April 2014 Page 6 Sign Design Guidelines Proposed signage will follow the standards currently implemented by Tennant Companies. Current signs (815 Zane Example)consist of natural rock,architectural steel and internally light sign panels.All signs include foundation plantings.Approximate dimensions are 6' height, 3' width, and 12' length. Maintenance of Facilities Prior to future PUD amendments and permitting for construction, plans that address maintenance of the facilities within the Tennant Campus will be provided per City requirements. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 9, 2014 A regular meeting of the Planning Corrimission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, ' Chambers, 7800 Golden Van Road, Golden Valley,_,Mmyresota, on Monday, June 9, Chair Kluchka called th meeting to order,,at pm. Those present were ing Commi ioners Baker, Cera, Kluchka, Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present Comm nity Development Director Mark Grimes, City Planner Jason Zimmerman an m_ i strative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Boudreau-Landis was absent. r 1. Approval of Minutes May 1 ;-2014, Joint Planning C mmission, Environ tal Commission and Open Spee and Recreation Commis ion Meeting My D by Baker, seconded by Cera nd motion carried unanimously to a rove the 15, 2014, minutes as submitted. ommissioner Cera abstained from voting. 2. Continued Item — Informal Public Hearing — Final PUD Plan — Tennant Company— 701 Lilac Drive North — PU-114 Applicant: Tennant Company Address: 701 Lilac Drive North Purpose: To allow for the consolidation of multiple properties into one parcel to enable inter-campus connections. Commissioner Segelbaum.recused himself from this discussion. Zimmerman stated that Tennant is seeking approval of their Final PUD plan which would allow them to'consolidate multiple parcels into one development site and establish inter- campus connections. He stated that Tennant has created a master plan for its facility and that this current phase of the plan seeks to create pedestrian and roadway connections within the site. He added that Tennant has no immediate plans to construct new buildings,;but they envision a three story, 45,000 square foot, office building in the future. Any future plans would also require City review and an amendment to their PUD. Zimmerman discussed the Fire Department and Public Works Department concerns during the Preliminary PUD process. He stated that Tennant has agreed to implement an approved Fire Access Plan by July 1. Also, prior to Final PUD Plan approval, they will provide a timeline for phased implementation of a Fire Protection Plan, install rain gardens as part of the walkway construction, install an underground stormwater filtration chamber within three years, demolish the vacant building located on Parcel 5 and remove the sanitary sewer up to the main. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 9, 2014 Page 2 Kluchka asked if all of the issues have been addressed or have timeline for when they will be addressed. Zimmerman said yes and added that the intent is to have any outstanding issues finalized by July 1. Waldhauser asked about the height limit for this property. Zimmerman noted that the height limit is 45 feet and that the applicant's future plans indicate a three story building which would not be allowed in this zoning district, however, since this is a PUD the future building proposal will need to come back to the City for a PUD amendment and the height of the building would be considered at that time. Cera questioned the status of the homes that form an island in the middle of this proposal. Zimmerman said he is not sure about the status of the homes. Baker asked if the proposed walkways and stairs would be enclosed. Zimmerman said no, and explained that the proposed sidewalks are not allowed to be built across property lines, which is one of issues leading them to do one master plan for their campus. CJ Fernandez, representing the Applicant, referred to a site,,plan and discussed the two main sidewalk/stairway connections they are proposing. He;explained that Tennant's office addition proposal was put on hold in.2008, but the need for the sidewalk connections is the impetus for applying for a PUD noW5 He added that they will be doing several other constructions projects as well, per the conditions of approval in the staff reports, including fire lane access, re-striping of some of the parking stalls, new signage, a water main extension, a stormwater treatment system, and a few other projects. However, they will not be able to get them done by the July 1, 2014, deadline they were given and they would like additional time to address these issues. He said Tennant is agreeable to escrowing money for the work. Waldhauser asked if the access points to the buildings will be accessible to all employees. Larry Spears, Tennant Company, said all of their buildings are accessible. Fernandez added that the sidewalks themselves will not be accessible because of the grade and steep slopes. Waldhauser asked Spears if he thinks their employees will walk to each building rather than drive. Spears said that is the intent and expectation. He added that the'proposed sidewalks are being added for safety as well, so employees won't have to walk on the street. Baker asked how many parking spaces will be lost as a result of the changes to the fire lane. Fernandez said approximately 35 spaces will be lost. Kluchka asked how that will affect their capacity. Fernandez said they currently have extra spaces, but losing 35 of them will "max them out." Baker said they will have to consider parking when they do the next phase of their development. Fernandez agreed. Cera asked for an update about the single family homes that are surrounded by Tennant's properties. Spears said they don't have any intent to purchase any of the homes. Baker asked if the homes interfere with their "one campus" plans. Spears said Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 9, 2014 Page 3 no, the homes have been there for a long time and they are not an issue from their perspective. Michael Garant, 5540 Lindsay Street, said Tennant is metal stamping and dropping metal which echoes through the neighborhood beginning at 7:00 and lasting until 10:00 or midnight every day except on Saturday and Sunday. Zimmerman said he would follow-up regarding the complaint about noise. Kluchka said it is very relevant to the Planning Commission if Tennant is not following the City's noise ordinance. Randy Anderson, 5645 Lindsay Street, said Tennant has always been a very respectful company. He said he has heard noise too, but it is no different than a train going'by and it is not as distracting as the previous speaker stated. He said their property is clean and looks great and he is supportive of Tennant's request. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Cera stated that Tennant is not proposing to build anything at this point; they are just consolidating their properties into one parcel which makes sense and he is in favor of the proposal. Baker agreed. Waldhauser asked when this proposal will go to the Bassett Creek Watershed Commission for their review. Zimmerman said Tennant has been working closely with the Public Works Department. He stated that their development will be a phased approach and the timing will be worked out. Waldhauser said she wants to make sure the proposal gets to the Bassett Creek Watershed Commission and asked if staff will know the timing before this proposal,goes to the`City Council for review. Zimmerman said yes. Kluchka said he thinks this proposal lines up with what a PUD should be. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval subject to the following findings and conditions: Findings, 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 9, 2014 Page 4 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions 1. The plans dated April 25, 2014 prepared by LHB submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 23, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. The implementation of the fire access restriping shall be completed priorto Final PUD Plan approval. 5. The Applicant shall work with the Fire Department to reach an agreement regarding the timing for implementation of the Fire Protection Plan prior to approval of the Final PUD Plan. 6. The Applicant shall construct surface filtration (rain gardens) as part of the walkway construction authorized under the Final PUD Plan. 7. The Applicant shall install a stormwater filtration chamber within three years of the execution date of the Final PUD Plan. 8. The Applicant shall demolish the vacant building located on Parcel 5 and shall remove the sanitary sewer up to,the main prior to.,approval of the Final PUD Plan. 9. The Applicant shall submit a revised parking plan that meets accessibility requirements with respect to the number and location of handicapped parking spaces to the satisfaction of the City's Building Official prior to approval of the Final PUD Plan. 10.The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 114" in its title. 11.All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 12.This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 3. Inforrpal Public Hearin — Subdivision — 1001 Lilac Drive North — Golden Iley Homes ; SU12-1 Applic Max Zela n Addresses: ac rive North Purpo To recon f ure existing property which would allow for the construc n of two w twin homes and one new single family home. cityf go 1 d e nl*. MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: May 28, 2014 To: Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Subject: Informal Public Hearing—Final PUD Plan for Tennant Company PUD No. 114- 701 Lilac Drive North—Tennant Company, Applicant Background Tennant Company is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit for the consolidation of its multiple parcels into one cohesive development site. The site, located near the northwest corner of the Highway 100/Highway 55 intersection, is Tennant Company's North American headquarters. During the past two decades, Tennant Company has been acquiring various properties adjacent to its primary building at 701 North Lilac Drive. Officials from Tennant Company have met with City staff in the past to discuss ways in which the multiple properties could function as one cohesive campus. Tennant Company spent the past several years working to create a master plan for its site. Summary of Proposal The "One Campus" plan, which was developed by Tennant Company, looks at ways to accommodate future development on the site while addressing immediate needs of the corporation.The proposed PUD would allow the Applicant to consolidate the various parcels into one and would allow for the construction of pedestrian walkways that would connect various buildings and parking areas throughout the site. While Tennant Company is anticipating future development in the form of a three story 45,000 square foot office building and has shown concept plans that locate the building and associated parking on the site, any future construction phases would require a full PUD amendment. At that point details related to location, height, materials, landscaping, and parking would all be addressed. _ - .,2a 1,01 ri 1110 in, Mo awo SW � .5.0 w. 4, '1`1 1n+ ,zzr., �zw za e. 200 ,zo, '2U^ m (1100M, 1, <. 1190 1111 10' 859'9 y.p� y,� n .1i - i L,:„/0 112, 5+p „oB sm0 •,00 n0, Tt cttand F ;, Imo ,09, 1Wa ,W. oil ;1. ,090 'on ,f+; r� O n4- _... _. .-- � , •.azo ,00+ 0 B91 �t. V386,2 1 � - R m al ( c 10: e,a 1\ 1 / e,a Air az9 ooac � sea{ e21VN . V4 e04 seoe B2oa 'tt �. g «,r _`O{s©R A9etriOt Bal Wy H i3 �'_ Hwy SE, �v:,,,, �'�—..—•_":..._._.�e,>s --'--5`�rvni$1�' ,' ., ontse0, szoa sx, 1.�'' s o 1131 � Wos 140, m+s ms soa /, ro 8129 sos F B aao so0 t s9s s9a a4e '3p'�• .• .36 41B 529 2• 305 1! eros 424 _ � t a � ,,, � 9' 'e,•,1 s. PUD 114 - Site Map Land Use and Zoning Considerations The affected properties are guided for long-term Industrial development in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The properties that will be consolidated into the Planned Unit Development are zoned Industrial, Light Industrial, Business and Professional Offices, and Single Family (R-1) Residential. All zoning designations, with the exception of the property zoned Single Family (R-1) Residential, are consistent with the General Land Use Plan Map. Properties will have to be rezoned as new uses come to the site. Public Works and Fire Safety Considerations As is standard practice for development proposals, plans for Tennant Company were reviewed by the City's Public Works Department. The Public Works Department reviewed the proposal to ensure the site can be adequately served by public utilities and that traffic issues are resolved. A memorandum from the Public Works Department is attached. The Fire Department reviewed this proposal to ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access is achieved on the site. In addition, the Fire Department ensures that the buildings are equipped with fire protection systems. The Fire Department's memorandum is attached, and is incorporated with the conditions of PUD approval. Key items were included in the conditions for approval for the Preliminary PUD Plan and negotiated with Tennant Company prior to the current Final PUD Plan application. Specifically: 1. A plan for fire access along the south side of the main building was submitted and approved by the Fire Department. Implementation of the plan must be completed by July 1 and prior to Final PUD Plan approval. 2. A Fire Protection Plan was prepared by a consultant and submitted and approved by the Fire Department. A timeline for phased implementation of the plan will be agreed upon prior to Final PUD Plan approval and will be included as a condition. 3. Surface filtration (rain gardens) will be implemented as part of the walkway construction authorized under the Final PUD Plan. Installation of a stormwater filtration chamber will take place within three years of the execution date of the Final PUD Plan and will be included as a condition. 4. The vacant building located on Parcel 5 will be demolished and the sanitary sewer removed up to the main by July 1 and prior to Final PUD Plan approval. Justification for Consideration as a PUD Section 11.55 of City Code states that the PUD process is an optional method of regulating land use in order to permit flexibility in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements and number of buildings on a lot. Staff has determined that this application qualifies as a PUD because it achieves the following standards established in City Code: • Achieves a high quality of site planning, design, landscaping, and building materials which are compatible with the existing and planned land uses. • Encourages preservation and protection of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features including steep slopes,trees, scenic views, water ways, wetlands and lakes. • Encourages creativity and flexibility in land development. • Encourage efficient and effective use of land, open space, streets, utilities and other public facilities. • Allow mixing land uses and assembly and development of land to form larger parcels. • Encourage development in transitional areas which achieve compatibility with all adjacent and nearby land uses. • Achieve development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Achieve development consistent with the City's redevelopment plans and goals. In order to be approved as a PUD, the City must be able to make findings which are specifically described in City Code. These findings are incorporated into staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Final Plan for Tennant Company PUD No. 114, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. Efficient— Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. General Health.The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. And subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans dated April 25, 2014 prepared by LHB submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 23, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. The implementation of the fire access restriping shall be completed prior to Final PUD Plan approval. 5. The Applicant shall work with the Fire Department to reach an agreement regarding the timing for implementation of the Fire Protection Plan prior to approval of the Final PUD Plan. 6. The Applicant shall construct surface filtration (rain gardens) as part of the walkway construction authorized under the Final PUD Plan. 7. The Applicant shall install a stormwater filtration chamber within three years of the execution date of the Final PUD Plan. 8. The Applicant shall demolish the vacant building located on Parcel 5 and shall remove the sanitary sewer up to the main prior to approval of the Final PUD Plan. 9. The Applicant shall submit a revised parking plan that meets accessibility requirements with respect to the number and location of handicapped parking spaces to the satisfaction of the City's Building Official prior to approval of the Final PUD Plan. 10. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 114" in its title. 11. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 12. This approval is subject to all other state,federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Applicant Narrative (6 pages) Memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014 (2 pages) Memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 23, 2014 (7pages) Site Plans (34 pages) city0f 1deni",4* �LW� �� N�N �� 0�� D��K�� ~� �� / �� valley y P~�bl~c Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(Kax) Date: May 23, 3014 To: 08arkGrimes, Community Development Director From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer IL Eric Eckman, Public VVorksSp��a|ist « Joe Fox, E|l[ Water Resources Engineer Subject: Final PUO Review—Tennant Company Public Works staff has reviewed the Final Plans submitted by Tennant Company for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) located north of Trunk Highway 55, west of Trunk Highway 100, and east ofZane Avenue North. The proposed PUD consolidates ten parcels currently owned by Tennant into single, corporate campus property. While the proposed PUO includes a future office building expansion and new parking lots,there are no immediate plans to construct these facilities. The primary intent ofthe proposed PUD isto allow Tennant tmconstruct improvements across existing property lines tofacilitate near-term use mfthe site asasingle campus. Tennant's current long-term plans for the PUD include a 45,000-squarg-fQot office building and a new parking lot with 177 stalls, within this new "One Campus" vision. This memorandum discusses issues identified during Public Works review that must be addressed prior tothe consideration of final plat approval.The review is based on the plans submitted to the City on April 25, 3014. PreliminarV Plat Zane Avenue, which borders the proposed PUD on the west, is classified as a collector street inthe Comprehensive Transportation Plan, and iscurrently located within a 25-foot wide Roadway and Utility Easement. There is a similar 25-foot wide easement on the western half of Zane Avenue, with a total easement of5Ofeet. As outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance, collector streets require a rnininnunn right-of-way width of7Ofeet. Therefore, the existing 25-foot wide easement must be vacated and a 35-foot wide street right-of-way must be dedicated on the final plat. s.\oma/vnment, ,,/.a,enenno", mzLilac or\7mzLilac o, One mrnvuspmnwooReview o521m.uvo Tennant has included an exhibit titled "PUD Properties" as part of its PUD submittal. The parcels identified on this exhibit include Parcel 6. The Tract E portion of Parcel 6 is a 60-foot wide parcel that is entirely covered by easements that run in favor of the City, including a Sanitary Sewer Easement, a Drainage and Utility Easement and a Right-of-Way Easement. The Right-of-Way Easement includes the provision that, if the City discontinues its use of the parcel for street right- of-way purposes,the use and occupancy of the property will revert to Tennant, which dedicated the easements to the City. Because there are still two privately-owned homes on the portion of Olson Memorial Highway within Parcel 6, the use of the property as right-of-way must continue and the property should be excluded from the final plat with the easements also remaining in place. Should Tennant purchase the two homes on this street in the future, the street and the parcels can be incorporated into the PUD and the easements can be vacated at the time of platting. There are existing Sanitary Sewer Easements across the southern portions of Parcels 9, 10, and 11, as identified on the "PUD Properties" exhibit. These easements run in favor of Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), which owns and operates two sanitary sewer forcemains within the right-of-way for Olson Memorial Highway frontage road. The PUD has been reviewed by the MCES for potential impacts to its facilities and easements. MCES had the following comments: 1. Trees and shrubs may not be planted over the top of MCES forcemains. 2. MCES does not allow gravity connections to its forcemains. There are also permanent Wall Maintenance Easements on the eastern property line of the Tennant property that run in favor of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The PUD Plans must be reviewed by MnDOT for potential impacts to the retaining walls, the need for additional right-of-way, and impacts to easements. The final plat must include Drainage and Utility Easements that are consistent with City Code on all property lines within the PUD. Site Plan As discussed earlier in this review, the proposed PUD includes a long-term build-out of the site for the expansion of Tennant's corporate headquarters. These long-term plans include construction of a three-story, 45,000-square-foot office building that will be connected to the north end of the existing building at 5612 Olson Memorial Highway. The plans also include sidewalk connections to existing Tennant buildings and a new bituminous parking lot. The primary accesses to the Tennant site include a driveway into the existing offices and production facilities from Lilac Drive on the east side of the site, and from Zane Avenue on the west. There are individual driveway access points for the properties located at 5612 and 5738 Olson Memorial Highway. G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\finaftl)Review 052114.docx The proposed long-range plan for the site includes maintaining the Lilac Drive and Zane Avenue access points, as well as retaining the driveways to the separate buildings at 5612 and 5738 Olson Memorial Highway. The introduction of two new driveway openings onto Olson Memorial frontage road, in close proximity to the existing driveways and the street segment on Parcel 6 discussed earlier, increases the number of conflict points for turning vehicles, which greatly increases the potential for motor vehicle crashes. Therefore, Tennant's engineer should review the proposed driveway locations and the possibility of providing connections to adjacent parking lots within the Tennant property, in order to reduce the number of driveways onto the frontage road. A more detailed long-range access plan must be submitted to the City before the Final PUD is approved by City Council. Traffic Impacts In 2010, Tennant prepared a traffic study based on a Campus Development Plan that included two additions with a total of approximately 237,200 square feet of office space on site. This study determined that, after build-out, a total of 250 trips in the morning and evening peak hours would be generated. Furthermore,the study examined three primary intersections that these trips would be routed through: Douglas Drive and the Olson Memorial frontage road; Lilac Drive and Duluth Street; and Golden Valley Road and Zane Avenue. Based upon this analysis, it was determined that adequate capacity existed in these intersections and that there would not be a decrease in the level of service at any of these locations. This study analyzed the existing intersections without consideration of the upgrades included with the Douglas Drive reconstruction project. The total office space considered in the Tennant study was approximately 192,200 square feet larger than the current proposal. Based upon the Tennant study, and the traffic analysis performed as part of the preliminary design for Douglas Drive, it is staff's opinion that the traffic generated by the present PUD proposal will not have a negative impact on these intersections, or the intersection of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road. Utility Plan The existing Tennant buildings within the proposed PUD are currently served with City sanitary sewer and water and there is adequate capacity within these City systems to provide service to the future office building. There is an existing water line extending into the Tennant property from Lilac Drive that provides fire protection and potable water to the property. This watermain is owned and maintained by Tennant. In order to ensure adequate supply for fire suppression, Tennant's engineer has identified the extension of this watermain to the west to connect to the existing City watermain within Zane Avenue as part of its phased development plan. Additional hydrants will also be provided as recommended by the Fire Department. As a condition of its approval of the Final PUD,the City is requiring that Tennant complete the watermain extension by November 1, 2014. A financial security must be submitted as a guarantee that the watermain work will occur by this date. G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\Finaftl)Review 052114.docx In order to ensure that adequate domestic and fire suppression water service can continue to be provided to the Tennant property, a Utility Maintenance Agreement will be required as part of this PUD. Tennant will own and maintain all mains and hydrants within the PUD. Determination of ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the watermain within Olson Memorial (Parcel 6, Tract E) will be discussed with Tennant as the site develops, and will be amended into the maintenance agreement, when applicable. The buildings within the proposed PUD are subject to the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance. All buildings within the PUD have been inspected by the City. Results are as follows: • The building at 701 Lilac Drive is in the process of obtaining its Certificate of Compliance. • The service for the building at 5738 Olson Memorial Highway is in need of repairs. The repairs must be made and the property must achieve compliance before the Final PUD is considered by City Council, otherwise Tennant must enter into an 1/1 Deposit Agreement for the repairs. • The sewer service for the house at 5808 Olson Memorial Highway is not compliant. Tennant will demolish the house and remove this sewer service by July 1, 2014 as a condition of Final PUD approval. Stormwater Management The proposed PUD is located within the Sweeney Lake sub-watershed of the Bassett Creek watershed and is therefore subject to the review and comment of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) for its water quality and rate control requirements. Because Sweeney Lake is listed as an impaired water by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the plans will also be reviewed for compliance with the approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Implementation Plan for the lake. As Tennant has acquired properties that are included in the proposed PUD, they have been making improvements to these properties that have included land-disturbing activities. As stand- alone projects these improvements have not required compliance with the BCWMC water quality policy. However, when considered as cumulative campus improvements, these projects have increased the total impervious surface on the campus by approximately 1,840 square feet. In addition,the total land disturbance over the campus is in excess of one acre, which is enough to trigger water quality improvements. In order to address the water quality issues in Sweeney Lake and the Bassett Creek watershed, Tennant has agreed to work with the City and the BCWMC to incorporate water quality improvements as redevelopment occurs. The water quality improvements shown in the PUD Plans will be implemented as redevelopment occurs on site, with the overall goal of providing water quality treatment for the entire corporate campus as expansion occurs. The stormwater improvements included in the PUD will be required to comply with the BCWMC, City, and other applicable water quality standards in effect at the time of implementation. Because there will likely be a delay between approval of this proposed PUD and the actual construction of the long-range improvements on site, the PUD will not be submitted to the G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\Finaftl)Review 052114.docx BCWMC for review at this time. However, approval of the campus-wide plan will be required at the time the office building, parking lot, or any other improvements are undertaken that disturb one-half acre or more of land, or adds more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface, and submittal of the Stormwater Management Plans to the BCWMC will also be required. Implementation of the water quality and rate control requirements will be required,following BCWMC review. Tennant's preliminary, long-range plans call for underground stormwater storage with sand filtration in three areas of the campus, as well as one proposed pond. These Best Management Practices (BMPs) will provide nutrient and sediment removal for the parking lots, driveways, and roof areas. The entire stormwater management system within the PUD will be owned and maintained by Tennant and Stormwater Maintenance Agreements will be required at the time of implementation of the BMPs. As part of its Final PUD Plan submittal,Tennant has provided a phased development plan that includes the following stormwater improvements: • In 2014, Tennant proposes to construct two campus connectors (walkways) between the 701 Lilac building and its facilities located on Olson Memorial Highway. Rain gardens will be constructed as part of this project to provide water quality treatment. • As a condition of the Final PUD approval, Tennant has agreed to construct Filtration Area 1. Filtration Area 1 is an underground sand filtration and storage system located on the 701 Lilac Drive campus. This filtration system must be constructed within three years of approval of the Final PUD, independent of whether or not there is future expansion or new construction. A financial security must be submitted as a guarantee that the filtration system will be constructed within this timeframe. Because the site being developed is larger than one acre,the Developer's contractor must obtain an MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit. A copy of this permit must be submitted to the Public Works Department after it is obtained. The MPCA adopted new standards for this permit on August 1, 2013,that includes volume control. Therefore, the plans must comply with this standard or the MPCA standards that are in effect, at the time of site improvements, as discussed above. The outlet from Filtration Area 3 (at the southern edge of the project)flows into MnDOT storm sewer along the Olson Memorial frontage road. Therefore, the plans will need to be forwarded to MnDOT for its review, comment, and permitting. If a MnDOT permit is required, a copy of the permit (once obtained) must be provided to the Public Works Department for its files. This PUD is also subject to the City's Stormwater Management Ordinance. City approval of the Stormwater Management Plans must be completed, prior to forwarding the plans to the BCWMC for its review. Additionally, approval by the BCWMC will be required, prior to issuance of a Storm- water Management Permit by the City. G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\FinaIPUD Review 052114.docx The Developer will be required to enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City for the proposed underground storage and filtration system and any other stormwater infrastructure. Tree Preservation and Landscape Plan The proposed PUD is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance and Tree Preservation Permits will be required as development occurs. The plans submitted for review include a Tree Inventory and Landscaping Plan. However, an inventory for the entire site must be submitted, including a tabular inventory with identification numbers, tree species, and size. Based upon the ordinance, the determination of tree replacement and/or mitigation must be determined before the Final PUD is considered by City Council, based upon the inventory of the entire campus. Summary and Recommendations Public Works staff recommends approval of the Final Plans for Tennant Company Planned Unit Development, subject to the comments contained in this review, which are summarized here: 1. Dedication of additional right-of-way for Zane Avenue, as discussed in this review. 2. The final plat must include Drainage and Utility Easements that are consistent with City Code on all property lines within the PUD. 3. Extension of watermain to connect to the existing watermain within Zane Avenue, as discussed within this review. 4. A detailed long-range access plan showing consolidation of existing and proposed driveways must be submitted to the City before the Final PUD is approved by City Council. 5. Tennant must enter into Utility and Stormwater Facility Maintenance Agreements, as discussed in this review. 6. All existing and proposed buildings within the PUD become compliant with the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance, as discussed in this memo. 7. Tennant must implement its phased development plan for Stormwater improvements for the campus walkways and Filtration Area 1, as discussed in this review. 8. Tennant must provide water quality Best Management Practices for the entire campus, based upon standards in place at the time of development, as implementation of the PUD occurs. 9. Tennant must submit the tabular tree inventory for the entire site, and the tree replacement and/or mitigation must be determined, before the Final PUD is considered by City Council, as discussed in this review. 10. The plans are subject to the review and comments of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission. 11. Subject to compliance with the City's Stormwater Management, Right-of-Way Management, and Tree Preservation Ordinance. 12. Subject to the review and comments of the City Attorney, City Planner, Fire Chief, and other City staff. G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\FinalPLID Review 052114.docx Please feel free to contact the Public Works Department if you have questions regarding this memorandum. C: Tom Burt, City Manager Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Mitch Hoeft, PE, Utilities Engineer Mark Ray, PE, Street Maintenance Supervisor Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor and City Forester Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor John Crelly, Fire Chief Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Jerry Frevel, Building Official Sue Virnig, Finance Director G:\Developments-Private\Tennant-701 Lilac Dr\701 Lilac Dr-One Campus\FinalPLID Review 052114.docx # : go 1d' e* n valley Fire Department 763-593-8079 j 763-593-8098 (fax) Date: May 19, 2014 To: Mark Grimes, Community Development Director From: John Crelly, Fire Chief Subject: Final PUD for Tennant's "One Campus" The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the information submitted for the Final PUD application ofTennant's "One Campus". We have also reviewed information from LHB Corporation regarding the fire protection report dated April 24, 2014. Staff has met with Tennant Company and the Fire Protection Engineer with LHB Corporation to review this report. From that meeting a revised fire protection report has been submitted and reviewed. This report addresses concerns that were noted by staff during the preliminary PUD process dating back to October 2013. The Final PUD information addresses the four points that Tennant Company acknowledges in a memo to Jason Zimmerman dated April 7, 2014. Of the four points, two are directly related to fire code issues that the fire department had identified and needed addressed. The first fire code issue involves drive access to the building. The applicant has submitted a plan showing how the parking lot on the south side of the building will be striped to provide proper fire department drive access (drawing PD 2.0). This plan is agreeable and needs to be implemented and completed by July 1, 2014. The second code issue involved having a Fire Protection Engineer review the site conditions related to fire protection of the facility and access to the other sides of the building. The initial report was received on April 24, 2014. Staff met with Tennant Company and LHB Corporation to review the report. A revised report has since been submitted on May 16, 2014 (see attached). In discussion with Larry Spears, he acknowledges this report and the need to move forward with design and implementation. Internally, Tennant Company is reviewing the report, the costs associated with these items, and the possible time line for completing these items. To date, Tennant Company has met the two (2) terms and conditions that have been discussed to date. Moving forward, we will work with Tennant Company to identify dates of completion for the correction of fire code violations (deficiencies) that exist and are addressed in the fire protection report dated May 16, 2014. This process needs to be completed by July 1, 2014. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065 or by e-mail, %crelly@goldenvalleymn.gov V e i-I valley Fire Department 763-593-8079/ 763-593-8098 (fax) Date: July 9, 2014 To: Mark Grimes, Community Development Director From: John Crelly, Fire Chief Subject: Final PUD for Tennant's "One Campus" The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the information submitted by LHB Corporation regarding the fire protection report dated July 3, 2014 for the Tennant Company. This report indicates the proposed timeline for the implementation of six fire protection elements to bring the building and the site up to meeting the minimum requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code (MSFC). As you are aware, the process to address these issues began October 2013 with the initial review of the preliminary PUD for Tennant's "One Campus". This current report is the culmination of several meetings with staff from Tennant Corporation and a consulting Fire Protection Engineer with LHB Corporation. The fire protection report dated July 3, 2014 is the first proposed timeline as to when each of the six fire protection elements will be completed. Overall, I find the proposed timeline agreeable with ONE EXCEPTION. Under Priority 2, Item 5 needs to be moved up under the Priority 1 items. The current fire hydrants are configured with two 2 % inch hose connections which greatly reduces the water flow from the hydrant. By changing out the hydrant bonnet (top)to one that is configured with a large steamer connection and two 2 % inch connections (City Specifications) the hydrant will be configured for large volume flows. Please note, that until all of these corrections are completed, the building and site falls short of meeting requirement of the MSFC and these deficient six elements have a direct and negative impact on our ability to help protect Tennant Company during a fire emergency. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065 or by e-mail, icrel ly@goldenvalleymn.gov PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. LHBcorP.som Memorandum DATE: July 3,2014 TO: John Crelly Golden Valley Fire Chief FROM: David Toshio Williams,FPE Melissa White,PE LHB RE: Tennant Campus Final PUD Fire Protection Timeline Proposed Timeline for implementing the six recommendations provided in the Fire Protection Evaluation dated May 16,2014: Priority 1—Implemented by November 1,2014 Item 1: North Canopy Sprinkler Provide dry pipe fire sprinkler coverage to the area under the canopy on the north side of the complex. Currently, the duct collectors under this canopy are protected,but not the remainder of the canopy. This puts the "fully sprinklered building" designation into question as combustible wood pallets were noted being stored under this area in April. Additionally, this canopy covers the limited access route to the north of the facility increasing the importance of proper fire protection of the structure. Item 4: South Fire Department Access Provide fire department access along the entire south side of Plant 1 701 Lilac Drive with signage and striping. Priority 2—Implemented by November 1, 2015 Item 2: NE Fire Hydrant and Fire Department Access Provide an additional fire hydrant in the NE corner of the property along with a fire department apparatus road. This hydrant and access would improve access to the north side of the facility,including the test track area. Due to the limited space and location of this access point, a reinforced turf road, such as "grass pave" or some other paver based system is recommended. Most likely this would be a private fire hydrant. Item 3: NW Fire Hydrant Provide an additional hydrant in the NW area of the property to reduce hose laying in that area. That hydrant would be possibly located just south of the entrance drive to the loading area within the fence where it could provide good access to the west side of the building, while being protected from the heavy truck movements in this area 21 Wes'Supenor Street,Suitor 500 i Duluth,MN 55802 1 218,727.8,146 70 i Washinp.,ton AvzanLie North,Suite 200 i Minneapolis,MN 55=101 1 612.338.2029 Tennant Campus Final PUD Fire Protection Timeline July 3,2014 Page 2 Item 5: Replace Private Fire Hydrants Replace the existing non-compliant private fire hydrants with hydrants conforming to the city standards to allow proper connection of pumper equipment. Item 6: Loop Watermain Rearrange the existing private fire main system to create a looped system with the possibility of municipal water service from two directions.The existing 10 inch private main would be extended to the west and connected to the municipal water main with an additional valve. Some logical arrangement of private PIVs would assist in water supply integrity. It may make sense to consider relocating the"last"city hydrant or designate it as private to allow proper connection to the recommended NE private hydrant. Additional private hydrants located on the private fire main extension could be provided easily. Two options to provide pumper FD connection capability are possible. a) The preferred option is to remove existing water valve manhole and yard FD connection and provide FD connections on the building at the primary fire protection sprinkler header locations. The arrangement of existing water system check valves would be modified for proper operation and protection of the domestic water system. b) The less preferred option is to upgrade the existing yard FD connection to a 5 inch Storz connector and provide an additional check valve pit at the loop connection to the city main.The reduction in loop flow will increase the possibility of line freeze up in the winter. M:\13Proj\130125\300 Communication\303 Memos\130125MO070214 Tennant Campus Final PUD Fire Protection Timeline.docx TENNANT COMPANY CAMPUS SHEET INDEX FINAL PUD PLAN INFORMATION GENERAL TOTAL AREA: 26.1 ACRES —• GOO COVER SHEET PERFORMANCE G1.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION INDUSTRIAL/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ,+F f'E i DESIGN. —_ J SURVEY IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE LHBcorp.com 1 OF 4 BUILDINGS: 375,182 SQ.FT. 701 WesNnglmAve.N,Ste 2D0I L1mlee*s,MN 554011612.3382D29 I — — PAVING AND OTHER IMPERVIOUS: 405,382 SQFT. 3 OF 4 TOTAL780,564 SQ.FT.117.92 ACRES 40F4 PERVIOUS COVERAGE — PHASED DEVELOPMENT NATURAL AREAS. 90,953 SQ.FT. PD1.0 PHASED DEVELOPMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE AREAS: 263,912 SQ.FT. — PD2.0 FIRE LANE ACCESS INFILTRATION POND: 1,485 SQ.FT. PD3.0-3.7 CAMPUS CONNECTORS TOTAL 356,350 SQ.FT./8.18 ACRES I PD4.0 WATER SYSTEM PD5.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EXISTING BUILDINGS: 4 11114 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL PROPOSED STRUCTURE(S): 1 C 3 1-1.0 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3 STORY 45,000 SQ.FT. L1.1 FD SITE PLAN I L1.2 FD SITE PLAN ENLARGED L2.0 FD LAYOUT PLAN L2.1 FD LAYOUT PLAN ENLARGED L3.0 FD TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN > L4.0 FD PLANTING PLAN — L4.1 FD PLANTING PLAN ENLARGED CLIENT: CIVIL FD GRADING PLAN _ TENNANT COMPANY C3.1 FD UTILITY PLAN C5.1 FD STANDARD DETAILS C5.2 FD STANDARD DETAILS 7-1 } _ x rT r ARCHITECTURAL frs F A2.0 FD BUILDING PLANS _Ij.. A3.0 FD BUILDING ELEVATIONS 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE I f. �- ELECTRICAL GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 ' E1.0 FD ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 111 I THIS so PAE APPE�tlCzt? FUILs-sHEET6. I_J r) / --— 9 1 4253014_ FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DATE REVISION 1 — — —1— — 1 Y r r VICINITY MAP � s _ psi L-1-4b COPYRIGHT 20I4 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHFS RESERVED. PROJECT NAME: -' s CAMPUS PUD s � 3 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN DRAWING TITLE: COVER SHEET FILE ..11301251800 Dtwigs1G1130125 OD.O COVERAV DRAWN Sr. BMD CIECKEDD BY: CJF DDRAWINNGG NU:�,26 G0.0 E-. U.LJ. V U. y J PRELIMINARY PLAT INFORMATION: COMPANY CAMPUS 2. OWNER TENNA T COMPANIES 3. SURVEVOR/PLAT DESIGNER:SUNDE LAND SURVEYING , LLC 4. EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS(3):INDUSTRIAL, PERFORMANCE —_— LIGHT INDUSTRIAL,BUSINESS 8 PROFESSIONAL OFFICE DRIVEN' VEE' _ 5. TOTAL APPROX.ACREAGE:26.1 ACRES --Bc- DESIGN. CH/CgOO �— LHBcory.com 589 OS"45'E JJ5 75 _ /�Org7- -� _ H�'YESTE /�/ Q _� 701 Waehinptm Ave.N,5�2W I ASmeepofs,IRJ 551011611.3382029 (FKA M)NNESOTq �"• !7q/ NOTES: —zs—zs _ _ _ _ _ _� ; i�— _ R'ESTERN �190gp 1. SURVEY PREPARED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING RAILWAY COMPANY PARCEL 211 LLC,PLEASE CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL :N81 y2 X44". INFORMATION. 1004,42 1 — � ! _ LOCATION OF PUD: PARCEL 1 PRCEL 3 PARCEL 4 16 0 58855 SI..E PRCEL 5 PRCEL 7 6 ✓ I Ln 19.68 PRCELS t O "I O FARCE 9 PAR CEL 10 p— PARI II 1 ~ _ �, CONCRETE B CCK BU/(O,NC_ T4111- B>S ZANE AIgNUE T4111 T CC'-RANY 1 CIL I oI PARCEL 1 z N 0 'g CLIENT: 2 1 6Fog 13 N� TENNANT COMPANY o W Q 101 NORTH LILAC DRIVE tTZI naep GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 S 1 Q ss'76'y C BRC.= C.=57 47 THIS SOGAiff A`--H- I?x 1R' FALL Siff SHEETS. 1 N W L=S74B "0'�eocso>ce oo`c"' ;Jp R=787.40 W _ 4=4.10'58" -1,001 ? � PARCEL 4 N892554"W9'4.. - — --- TRACT A I 42� Q , — 136.28 � 1 , I 1 , ,o � � , I 4.25-2314 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DATE REVISION J YV4� QI o TRAcr e o n � ' I 9 Q PUD PARCELS � TRACT ^�e��: \�P 1 �EI 3 6 ¢e a3e t 1 I 1 I ' N897J748"W �,>„ I I „o. n --ow /. COPYRIGHT 20148Y LK INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. \- TRACT D 1 9 ,sero°°` PROJECT NAME: u 5 CAMPUS PUD oo "i =47W 196.28 !W L1 N Q, Qry '( 739.00 r cl - - GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 3 �O p 1 N89 27'04"'W s %'•, 3 ^n 3 Q 3 'SEE DETAIL A N .g I DRAWING TITLE: N PUD PROPERTIES 2 (OL SON o MEMORIAL HIGHWAY) o STATE HIGHWAY o NO. 55 -" (142.12)b1EAS) O (140.71 MEAS) - N8927'04'W 279.00 1 N8927'04"W N8927'04"W FILE: ..113012SB D—kgs1G1130125_GI_IXCOND.dp DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKED BY: CJF 0 40' 80' I60' pROJ.NO: 1 DRAWING N0: 125 G1A 0 DESCRIPTIONS OF PROPERTY SURVEYED PARCEL 10 CERTIFICATE OF LE TIT PARCEL 1 r`° 7}esJ° CERTIFICATE OF TITLE That part of Government Lots 2 antl 3 of Section 33.Township 118 North.Range 21 West.Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: CERTIFICATE NUMBER 1046120 Beginning of a point on the center line of Trunk Highway No 55 distant 756.78 feet East.long said center line from the West line of said Ran a 21 'n North of a line describetl as be at t n the West line of said Govemment Government Lot 3:thence East along said center line 105 feet:thence North parallel to the West line of said Govemment Lot 3,a distance of That port of Gave eft Lot 2,Section 33,Township 8, g Y'9 ginning .pain o 1'2.14 feet,which point Is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No 13280: thence continuing North parallel to the Well Lot 2 distant 674.6 feet North along said Well Ilne and its extension from the center Ilne of Slate Trunk Highway No.55,which point is marked by a Judicial line of said Government Lols 2 and 3 a distance of 48578 feet,which point is marked by o judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Cos.No. Landmark;thence East parallel to said center line 143 Leet,which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark;thence South p...1171 to said West line 16.2 feel t.the 13026;thence continuing North parallel to the Well line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 12.8 feet,which point is marked by a judicial Northwest co of Tract A,Registered Land Survey Na. I,which point, marked by a Judicial Landmark:thence East porollel to said center line 136.28 feet to l.halmork set pursuant to Torrens Case No.13026; thence Westerly 105 feet to a point 671.19 feet North of said center line along o line running the Northeast< of Tract A,Registeretl Lontl Survey No. I,which point is marketl by a Judicial Lantlmark; thence East porollel to said center line 60 feet to from the point of beginning and parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3,which point is marked by a judicial landmark set the Northeast c of Tract E.Registeretl Lord Survey No,. 11,which point is marketl by a Jutlicial Landmark;thence Evstedy 278.5 feet to a point.58.54 feet Pursuant to Torrens Case No.13026; thence South parallel to the Well line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 13.02 feet to a point North of saitl center line along o Ilne ru ning parallel to said West line,which point is marked by a Judicial Lantlmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No.9001: 658,17 Leet North of said center line along o line ru ning from the point of beginning and parallel to the Well line of saitl Government Lols J Fr-Easterly I}9 feet to.point 6581]feet North of said center line along o line ru ning parallel to said West line,which paint is marked by o Judicial and 2,which point Is marked by.judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Na.9001;thence continuing South parallel to the Well line of Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No.9001; thence North parallel to said West line 13.02 feet too Point 671.19 feet North of saitl center line along aline aid C.-rimeht Lots 2 rid 3 to v point 165.02 feel North of said center line along a line running from the point of beginning antl parallel to ning parallel to said West line,which paint Is marked by o Judici.l Landmark;thence E.st 1 105 feet to a point 670.72 feel North of said center line along a the West line of said Government Lot 3,which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Lose No.9001; thence continuing line ru ning porollel to said West line,which point ie marked by o Judiciof Landmark;thence South parallel to saitl Well line 12.8 feet to a point 657.92 feet North South to the point of beginning: of said center line along aline runnirq parallel to said West line,which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark: thence Easterly 174 feel to a point 657.79 feet North of saitl center line along aline'u-r,porollel to said Well line,which point is marketl by a Judicial Landmark;thence North parallel to saitl Well line 24.21 except that part thereof which lies between!wo lines run parallel with antl distant 150 feel and 160 feet Northwesterly of Line f described below. feet to a point 682 feet North of said enter line along o line....ing parallel to said West line,which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark;thence East along a line which mit-Ct.that East I'me of said Govemment Lot 2 distant 582 feet North along said East line and its extension from the center line of Stale Trunk Line I. From a point on the West line of Section 19,Township 29 North.Range 24 West,distant 75].6(eel Nath of the Wesl Quarter car er Highway No.55 to a point 33 feel West along said line from the said East line,which point ie marked by a Judicial Landmark;thence continuing Evsl along said thereof,run Easterly at right angles to said Well section line for 46 feet to the point of beginning of Line to be described:thence deflect nto line 33 feel to the East line of said Government Lot 2 and lying South of a line described as beginning of a point on the West Ilne of said Govemment Lot 2 the right at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00...hall for 235.6 feel; thence tleflect to the right at an angle of 44 degrees 39 minutes distant 272.35 feet South of the Northwest comer thereof,which point is marketl by.Judicial Landmark;thence East,along o line which irt...-te the Fall line 00 sec.tls for 500 feet;thence tleflect to the right o a degrees m hetes 50 secontls c roe(delta angle 46 degrees 04 Too-00 of said Government Lot 2 at a point 272.35 feel South of the Northeast c cher thereof,to o point 1080 feel West of said East line.which point is marked by a seconds)for 411.41 telt and there terminating; Judicial Landmark;thence Southeasterly to a point on the Fall line of laid Government Lot 2 distort 422.35 feet South of the Northeast c er thereof,which point is marked by a Judicial Lantlmark placed at the intersection of said last described line with a line drawn parallel to and 33 feet West.�meosured at right angles,from said East line, Except Mal part of the above-described land shown as Parcel 2098 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No.27-104. PARCEL II PARCEL 2 CERnF1cn TE of,TLE rRTIFICATE NUMBER 1209043 CERTIFICATE OF TITLE That part of Govemment Lots 2 and 3,Section 33,Township 118.Range 21,described as beginning at a point ao the center line of State Trunk KRTIEICATE NUMBER 1002777 Highway No 55,dist.hl 861.78 feet East along said center line from the West Jr.of said Government Lot 3;thence East along said center Ithe The North 100 feet of the following described premises That part of Gavernmenl Loll 2 and J,Section 33,Township 118,Range 21 described as beginning al the 174 feet;thence North Parallel to the Well 1'me of said Government Lots 3 and 2,a distance of 657.79 feel,which point is marked by a intersection of the West Ilne of said Government Lot 3 with the centerline of State Trunk Highway No 55:thence North along the West line of saitl Government Judicial Lantlmark s<t pursuant to Torrens Case 11a 13026:thence Westerly 174 feet era point dard557 feet North of said center line along o Lots 3 oral 2 a distance of fi74.6 feet,which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Cose Ne. 1302fi;thence ball parallel to said center line running/ram the point of begin,Nq and parallel to the West line I[ said Govemment Lols 3 antl 2,which point is marked di a Judiciof line 143 feet,which point is 674.6 f by a Judicial Landmark set pursu.hl.1 Torrens Case No. 13026:thence South Parallel 21 the West line of said Government Lot Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Cose No. 13026;thence South parallel to the Well line of saitl Government Lols 2 and 3 a distance of 2.a distance of 16.2 Leel to the No we corn r of Tract A.Registered Land Survey No. which paint is marked by o Jutlicial Lantlmark set pursuant to Torrens 485.78 feet,which point Is marked by a Judicial Lantlmark set pursuant to Tonens Case No. 13280;thence South along saitl parallel line to the Case No.13026 Men f.co U_ing South parallel to the West line of saitl Government Lots 2 antl 3 to the said center line: thence West along saitl center line 143 point of beginning,according to the Government Survey thereof. feet to the paint of beginning. PARCEL 3 -party ie located ih H,,r.pih e.ahty.Minnesota CERTIFICATE OF TITLE CFR TIFICATE NUMBER 1001498 TITLE COMMITMENT That part of Government Lats 2 antl 3 Section 33,Township 118,Range 21,describetl as beginning at the--intersection of the Well Ilne of said Government lot 3. This s rvey w s prepared without the bereft of c eft title work. Easements,oppurtecarceos,and encumbrances may erist roan raill-to those with the centerline of State Trunk Highway No.55; thence North along the We Line of said Government Lots 3 and 2 a distance of 674.6 feet,which point is shaven uhe...o This survey is subject to revision upon receipt of a current title insurer e c mmitment o attorney's title.pin' marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Cose No. 13026;thence Evst parallel to said center line 143 feet,which point is marked by a Judicial Lantlmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No 13026; thence South parallel to the West Line of said Government Lot 2,a distance of 16.2 feet to the Northwest 01 Tract A,Registered Land 5urvey No.11,which point Is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Tonens Case No. 13026:thence continuing South parallel to the West Line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 to the said center line;thence Well along said center line 143 feet to the point of beginning except the North 100 feet thereof,occordirg to the Government Survey thereof. PARCEL 4 CERr1F1CATE OF TITLE GENERAL NOTES �ERTAT, TIMBER IG83532 I.) Survey coordinate and bearing basis:Hennepin County coordinate system NAD 83(1986 aayuslment) Tract A,Registered Land Survey No. 11,Hennepin County,Minnesota PARCEL 5 CERTIFICATE OF TITLE UTILITY NOTES CERTIFICATE NUMBER 98 11584 I.) Utility information from plans and markings was combined wllh observed-de-of utilities to vl develop a of the underground utilities shown hereon. However,lacking a cavalion,the a act Tract D.Registered Lord Survey No. 11,Hennepin County.Minnesota, location ofurld.,gr-d features cannot be accurately,completely and reliably depicted Where additional ar more detailed information ie required,--tion may be necessary PARCEL 6 2) other ardlrg...rd u66bee of which w.ore--a may ext,t. Verify all arum..cranial to aohso-anior or ae.igh. CERTIFICATE OF TITLE CERTIFICATE NUMBER 242157 3.) Some underground utility l.c.tions ore shown as marked onsite by those utility companies whose locators responded to our Gopher Slate One Call,ticket number 131303109. VICINI TY MAP Tract E.Registered Lord Survey No.11.County of Hennepin. 4.) Contact GOPHER STATE ONE CALL at 651-454-0002(800-252-1166)/or precise onsite loc.fi.n of utilities prior to any excavation. PARCEL 7 WARRANTY DEED AREA Na SCALE DO.w NT N%ER 89 3 38 That part of Govemment Lots Two(2)and Three(3),Secilon Thirty-three(33),Township One Hundred Eighteen(118),Barge Twenty-one(21),described os Gross Area = 1,307,024 square feet or 30.005 acres SATE et Area 1,229,514 square feet or 28.225 a cr follows: - es N Commencing at a point In the centerline of Gounty Road 6th Avenue North,339.28 feet East from the West lire of Government Lot 3'.thence E.st along the (Less Hwy.No.55 .merlin.of said road, 139.25 feet;thence North parallel with the West line of Government Loll 2 and 3 o dill.,ce o/658.61 feet;thence West 139.25 feet; and Zone Ave.N.) MT thence South to beginning. Hennepin County,Mihnesata7 (Abstract Property) PARCEL 8 CERTIFICATE OF TITLE CCRTIFICATE NUMBER 551798 FIFN('H MARKS (SM)-N.G V D 1929 DATUM The North 300 feet of the following described property,to-wit: That part o1 Gavemment Lots 2 and 3.Section 33,Township 118,Range 21,describetl as beginning ata point in the center line of 6th Avenue North,617.78 feet To of to nut of 1st fire h l ..th of railroad tracks,west side East along said line from the West line of said Government Lot 3,thence East along said center I'me a distance of 139 feet,thence North.tong aline parallel ) p p ydron s with the West fine of said Government Lots 2 and 3,a distort.of 165.02 feet to the point of intersection of said line with the Northerly line of State Highway EI Zone Ave.8 No.55 which point is marked by o judicial landmark anal is the actual point of beginning of the lard about to be described; thence continuing Norin along sold Elevation=882.88 feet poral lel line a distance of 493.15 feet to a point marketl by judicial landmark,thence West o distance of 139 Leel to a point in a line parallel to the West line of west side said Lots 2 antl 3 which point is-ed by a Nal tial landmark antl is I...led 658.54 Leet North along said line from the center fine of said 6th Avenue North, 2.) Top of lop nut of 2nd fire hydrant south of railroad tracks, thence South along said parallel line a tllat.nce of 493.54 feet to the point of intersection with saitl porollel line with the North line of said State Highway,which of Zane Ave.N. Point is marked by a judicial landma rM,thence East a1ah9 the North line of saitl highway 139 feet,more or less,to the actual point of beglnnirg. Elevation=893.60 feet 3.) Top of top rut of 3,d fire hydrant south of railroad tracks, all side I hereby cerbfy that this survey,plan,or report was of Zane Ave.N. prepared by me or under my direct supervision and PARCEL 9 Elevation=903.50 feet that 1 a .daly uan,ed Lard S,-,orander Me lows of the State of Minre..t.. CERTIFICATE OF TITLE 4.) Top of top nut of fire hydrahl in NW quadrant of Zane Ave.N.antl CFRTIFI AT NUMB R 729519 Hwy.No.55 frontage road. Dated this 4th day of Jone,2013 That part of Gavemment L.ls 2 and},Section 33,TownsM1ip I8,Range 21,described as beginning at a point in the center line of 6th Avenue North,617.]8 feet Elevation=911.26 fee[ East along said line from the West line of said Government Lot 3,thence East along said center line o distance .f 139 feet,thence North along a line porollel n SUNDE LAN-SURVEYI LLC.r with the West line of said Govemment Lots 2 and 3,a dill.,,,of 165.02 feel to the point of intersection of soil line with the Northerly r e of State Highway 5.) Top of top nut of Ill fire hydrant east of Zane Ave N.o north side _ 1(T/Lw�nL _ No.55,which point is mocked by judicial landmark and is the actual point of beginning of the land about to be described;thence continuing North along said of Hwy.Na.55 frontage road. parallel I'me a distance of 493.15 feel to a point marked by Ndlcial landmark,thence Well o dill lace of 139 feel to a point in a line parallel to the West line of Elevallon-915.57 Leet y Mark 5 Hanson.P.L.S. Minn.Lic No. 15480 said Lots 2 and 3 which point is marked by a judicial landmark and is located 658.54 feet North along said line from the center line of saitl 6th Avenue North, thence South.tang said parallel line o dill....of 493.54 feet to the po'Inl of intersection with said parallel line with the North line of said State Highway,which 6.) Top of top nut of fire hydrant o north side of Hwy.No.55 frontage point is marketl by Ndicill landmark,thence Fall along the North line of saitl M1ighw1y 139 feet,more or less,to the actual point o/beginning,except the North road and 50 feet 2 west of westhentronce to bltlg no.5612. 300 feet thereof. Elevation=09].62 feet 7.) Top of lop nut of Ill fire hydrant south of east entrance into Tennant site o west side of Lilac Or- El...ti- riveElevation=892.34 feet B.) Top of top nut of fire hydrant 350% mco feet west of SE'ly ost rner of Tennant bldg.and in the center of a curb Island Elevation=887.23 feel BOUNDARY,L OCA7M,70POGRAPHIC 9.) Top of top nut of fire hydrant 130-,-feet north of bldg no.5804 at 8/ld UMIMSUR✓EYFOR Me.hal of the road. TENNANTCOMPANY P Elevation 910.01 feet 8157ANEAVENUENORTIL GOLDEN VALLEY,MJV 55SUNDE° _sal e, eo °wlm.,°r°=.,.� LAND SUYY6YING - ss y. n i �eba,pos-ra>--� ew/vp:ss.%e 4 m,.��I.eaar3sez t-a.:aoasfa>cap ew4af r�,f,1 s+«c tot 4 E ET — � P2 .a 9.8r E, E W$o - j7Z 3 k o om CipCi II II €'on k 8��0 rl 3NIl w� '?e ---tczitl -- ----°—L----- _ I2"tl'elln0030 t0, — �1 -- 9B"Z 203,90, 00515+3 3 _ °y W 113"1116 3NI,Z1— 11 Z'336 yv iL� y ,tl/„4 \ -6t ilC-- - SC 2CL M.90,i I,00N I, I I { I AN-A-kM!�-/-.31.b1S'...._ _' t� \ - � i\ ) s Of,i04106_ __l.. ✓`. lk I t o99oat tl'o1ory a33 —ice' __ \ 1 I a”. I g bNYN31tlNYH3,lYM1N3N+Wa3ee �m CZI lvl g@ 8 n € (O1 0yM3LN3 ryb \ 2' ani S' I rb W •hr m b lko I Q bo LH-o11vu � IF I eo+iN io.vMl�fnm I 'I .( _ ----- 60,, t� W 8 2:a k 1 f f • I 1 ;' 1 08't8F M„60,6Z,OOS-- 8L'ZLZ 3„LS;(/,OOS 1f — — �,. o L 9 • I cis' i 1,! tr is�3°s`�s9i jO I t .Fs � � (s(v3rv061 B97 � .. �' � \ •�\ 0 n a 1 I Z �I 1 c3t3a 6<t9) -eci530,L[I) ^ Q.. f — (sv3ry Y Ls9) a t 9' ZG 0L9> U''v- 31 t C (s3ry 19OC9) 8. gR.1 N C ,-6:44 $Z ) O a I ...f _ §: r Silo I f I J (.3a (s+3 Lh'S8£ 3„0,1,61 OON ZZ'801 `- RV t Q � I 3 M„LS,lit 00N it m Ino V i it r I 9f,99F MN Y6,re.OOS _ 9£Fl . ,LS 1: ,� �� \ � t -� I Imo•. �Q 3 Fgill oN L \ I o e 3 00,00e M /e f �� 9 7�7dt4d N �o - N � 9 .....-. 00 Z'3 Z/X00 /i N L p � � = J ,� I f a•� ' 0 'OOZ1M„Z/,9/,OOSn a„ J No'otl 00'00- 70"'0.. 1 3„Z/,9/>OON J j u N aN 16 o a I --� m t / x� I I s,tl 30 3N aH Bn ksm f r _ -._ .__ �'/ 1N3rvNVN09010 NlilSlx Oa n s' a 3. 9.ao `2 �j_A�'y�j �_ —1]5309 ).. -... ....�-.. 'tl (s+3H OOZ[Z) 3 YCi.00N; n n �yp�ry• IN�V(53W Ib5Z1 -N yL (5+3W CZSL9) I ry-�__ 2 ttt wa a3a. W3sY3+l,In a+1vMo+oe ZS'L40/ 3 DY FZ OON - ^^/6T'LZ M„ S,//,OON n0`J O, ` Il 101 1N3rvNa3n00 Z tl1N3rvNtl3 30 3Nl 153M � \ I !D N06N31Xy3"A 5 I I I I I I I i I I I J I I I ! ff'dk I ' I ! �J I b6n B I H d 001 ON.A VMHJI 3L 1S i� a s 3Y 3Y $Y 3Y 3Y 3Y "sY se 3Y 3 I... _ 'i �J [►�P V7 . .� a I $ $ $ 3 F a� 'f" "0"3Y "sY �£:/ s'•$�`eY 's^ .,I°e. :� o�r g�y� '�j�I � r lee- ? I . I II-li .� f• ® \ � ��i� �/ a 5" °®i1u, a I _ I \ I (O ilI Ff . dl111 % o 00 00000000000000 qz E. ti o°E ° °€o =E> I(y�`rr sl I I I CID_ EEE'a - �iRW II 1, I \ ti i£ y iYl le \I,.1 II 00000000000000000000000000000000000000 W `V ` £ I.I o0oonaaa Ra6rcrcttrcNv<i��t�n v�imrru-r>j>j»>333 �o ` III I Bff \ so I £ l £ E- ;£E E K I ®� ' $ III I $I @^ .✓/s.zF. 3 I s 3 „ I E g II �$ „ .a�'F sY s i l od v 4CCCd 61 „ I ill 3 F \ 000000000000000000000 00000 000c£ino s 3 i sj$ II ° «<mmmm�u�u�u�00wwLLLL.°�° n uw� I6 III• s 1 - "s ^ / ! / 3 9c° s.i? - I1 'III �I � � � ;;, �� g "s$ � � II/ II r� � a g �n • �� I �' /%' — � o a I � "sl a (( ��ffiII s \"d , � a� .e � „�^oa� �a��,____`'• � IIS /y " o - s� II JI 'I „3 — �/1?•/ /i i°" �ynw a. � '� ;l y \ I III .X / Icl 1� 0 0 0 o NI ohm '�fr Ile Ec i I U 8 s,3 >e'i .w'{" Y 3/bV�i11+��j? Yavvz �nowrvni,p .. "aY SY :� :K,i. UN �- L: °Y $Y SY 8: „Y 8Y Y �' ' I 11 r I � _ _ _ _ -- _ _• — .—� 1v i _ ,I -. r — — —.s,/ — --==�— %;w — T � — — — — — w,o— �.,,.a —. I —..,-, —.— — — —M— INE — — — L 'tee \ /�• J. MATCH LINE -%"o f e ,•,® wry: Js �/ 1 / s e if, d � = \ , � / r _ \ P " i /j; � —� �M �' _ j y / 1 „ \ °� '�. SII r; �a\\ \\ _ \ a ,•, / a \ 'k; � //�, �.,. °'"ar f "° �,4 1 l .( _ \ � r \arc 1 well P +c „� .; •.e�: ` _ 011zl, ''S 4q e'w� •T�i"� see•a,, .(ny ea I / ' niwe �•} �g ,� wek ,�' l i \ � l�f. � �� '• �,�, «�, j � � III $1'�!/ j y` �� ,°, ./ a � .,,, T we 30 air ro+<r —��,.� ,•pl w• ./� . �,° w.. a, I I ,•..I I�wP=\ I I .,e,, .,,, � � �, ------- I� a � d°�I I 1I� \ �� 'lla'm//f �9"j�1 1 XPi fdI$ I I I °` I `", g.G, Win., . ol asJ o I..e J,. q //�,/ ua71- / J {'a1 I s / e ., wells. lells n. ,aa \ 1 re ,I o IPo •�� ;•�, \ I a m °�� I� �.� 1,4 � .woe w� ° �� e y m� si will aur I„awl ,.7 ` ' .• °�vn<� '-- "°'%.. ° ,�< I .,1,:',a�"-J-% ,° r, /,r Y ..•.a \\. .. -a- war „ /° .». %.R�' �R✓ , ...�a,, ,< eS , a za aay / we., o ,s'--”` 'w'°" +�. w.a- G.,rn ""w°J�_'% /z 'fir�.,, ,p,,." �, ,. °,:f�f�"" `C ,< as w, o, °g. $ <$, 9,j ,,6, 'sy°4e -�•e° 5° ._ sas w. „IT see t. „ (OLSON MEMOR/AL H/GHWA Y) STA TE H/GHWA Y NO, 55 LEGEND C Denotes it'monument set marked MB Denotes all box ARB Denotes Arborvitae with P.L SoNo. 15480 MC Denotes metol co r BAS Denotes Basswood tree MH Denotes manhole v° BIR Denotes Birch tree BENCH MARKS (8M)—N G V D 1929 DATUM • Denotes found i,on monument DD D<rate,overhead door BLCH Denotes Bm<k cn<rry tree OHC Denotes overhead c cation line 30X Denotes Boxelder tree 1.) Top of top nut of Ist fire hydrant sou lh of railroad tracks,west side AC Denotes air conditioner CHE Denotes overhead electricnline CATH Denotes Northern Catalpa tree AGP Denotes above ground pipe(,) DHU Denotes overhead utility line CED Denotes Cedar tree of Zane Ave.N. AIS Denotes advertisement/information sign PEP Denotes polyethylene pipe COT Denotes Cottonwood tree Elevation=882.88 feet PIV Denotes post indicator valve CRAB Denotes Crabapple tree BE Denotes building entrance 2.) Top of top nut of 2nd fire hydrant south of railroad tracks,west side BH Denotes bee ave catch basic PKS Denates parking sign EVG Denotes evergreen tree BTC Denotes top f bituminous ed, PP Denotes power pole HACK Denotes Hackberry tree If Zane Ave.N. BTL Denotes beaver tail curb PPLP Deno les power and light pole LOC Denotes Locust tree Elevation=893.60 feet CB Denotes catch basin PPV Denotes power ,th underground utility MPL Denotes Maple tree CBOX Denotes control box PVC Denotes polyVry hloride pipe POP Denates Poplar tree 3.) Top of top nut of Yet fire hydrant south of railroad tracks,west side CBX Deno les c m cation box RCP Denotes reinforced c Hafts pipe PINR Denotes Red Pine tree of Zane Ave.N. CIP Denotes castnir'o' RD Denotes roof drain PIN. Denotes White Plne tree Elevation=903.50 feet COL Denotes building ncolupmn RIPR Denotes rip rap _ 5 C Denotes Cdor.dd Blue Spruce tree 4.) Top of top nut of fire hydrant in NW quadrant of Zane Ave.N.and CS Denotes cuarb stop RRCL Denotes railroad..... light SPCG Denotes Coloratla Green Spruce tree CST Denotes c ncrete step SAN Denotes sanitary manhole SPR Denotes 5pruce hee /V Hwy.No.55 ironloge road. DG Denotes drain grate SAN S Denotes sanitary sewer TR Denotes deciduous tree 1 I Elevation=911.26 feet pIP Denotes ductile it n pipe SMH Denotes storm manhole WL Denotes Willow tree EM Denotes electric meter ST 8 Denotes storm sewer WLNT Denotes Walnut tree Doled this 4th day of June,2013 5.) TOP or lop nut of let fire hydrant east of Zane Ave N.on north lid, EO Denotes electric outlet STC Denotes top of surmoutabie curb STCO Denotes storm cleanout ,( If Hwy,N. 55 frontage road FH Denotes fire hookup Certified by �1 9 Elevation=915.5]feel FOL Denotes fiber optic line TB Denotes telephone box Mark S.Hanson,P.LS. Minn.Lib.No. 15480 6 To of to nut of lire hydrant north side of Hw.No.55 franta FP Denotes}lag pole TC Denotes top of concrete curb ,) p p ydran o y 9e G Denotes gutter TCS Denotes traffic control sign oad and 50 feet'/-west of west n entrance to bldg na.5612. GM Denotes gas meter TRANS Denotes transformer Elevation=89].62 feet fP Denotes guard post UDP Denotes underground tlammain unPc E GRDL Denotes ground light UGC Denotes undergrountl alien line ].j Top o/lop nut of 1st fire hydrant sou lh of east entrance info GRIL Denotes guard rail UGE Denotes underground electric line dw0 Tennant site on west side of Lilac Drive. GW Denotes guy wire UGG Denates undergrountl gas - Elevation=892.34 feel HCBP Denotes handicap doe,push button UGT Denotes undergrountl telephone line orner HCR Denotes handicap romp VP Denotes vent pipe �BOI/IVOARY,LOCA TM,TOPOGR4PN/C s.) Tap ar tap net ar rre nymanl 3spz reel west or sE'ly mo,t° HCs Denote°naneaap sign VCR Denote,"rifled°lay pipe AW LM ITYSURVEYFOR.• If Tennant bid and in the enter of a curb island HH D°nate,nand Hale w Denat<,w ter fine TENAIWCOMPANY $ g HHC Denotes commu i<ation manhole WMH Denotes water man M1°le Ele,olion=ae].23 feet HHE Denotes ele,tri,hard hole Wv Denotes Ovate,v°Ive B157ANEAVENUfNORTH,GOLDEN VALLEY,MN g 9.) Top o1 top nut of fire hydrant 130'/-feet north of bldg no 5804 at HYD Denotes fire hydrant ��SUNDE° k the end of the rood. INV Denotes structure invert 40 0 20 40 sit-e1r.l.”r a�5�wlI' wi,.ue Eievotion=910.01 feet LD Denotes loading dock °6O LP Denates light pole �D,S4• ss li p'o szs7 SCALE IN FEET :951/i4 006M4/20Y'S,rs 1909 9< N°nJJ m9/zxool.ey�/ c 4014 PERFORMANCE DR_ - NB f t , LI ryam lSIGN. i ' ... 701 Wes xgmn Ave,N Ste 2110 I Mmapolls,MN SWI 1612.3302D29 a.Fac ------------------ �— - -. 11 - _ .- _... .........._-_. 1^ - -- w . I 1 a TENNANT COMPANY o ... JIB I,•� FIRE LANE ACCESS � � ti PD2.0701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE L 1 I ' STORMWATER MANAGEMENT I y) J GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 THIS SQUARE 1?%,R' FULL SIZE SHEE TS. .. WATER SYSTEM - PD4.0 - _ � 1 _ — _ i �._. C's i I _.,..... .. - -." .. "... - . -, .. ._-. ' , 1 425@014 FI NA PUD SUBMI A L NO DATE REVISION PUS CONNECTOR WATER SYSTEM PD0 I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, sp cificaPD3.0-PD37 _ -` tion or report was prepared by me or under __( my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. TYPED OR PRINTED NAM � RE: Y!./�/V E:MELISSA M.WH ITE CAMPUS CONNECTOR I P03.0-PD3.7 DATE:4/25/2014 REG.N0.:46192 l l I I t COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECT NAME: I3 __ , CAMP US PUD II f a I GOLDEN VALLEY,MN „ DRAWING TrU: PHASED DEVELOPMENT i L_ --� _ DIAGRAM FILE ..113012MM DpewFpeCCAIM4,130125.PD 1.0 F—D..bp,.M Disp.,dn DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKED BY: CJF 0 30' 60' 120 DRAWNGNO:Wi25 P D 1.O IC PERFORMANCE 'DPP U DESIGN. LHBcorp.com 701 Waftgbn Ave.N,file 2001 MnneepMa,MN 654011612.3382029 �1 — NO PARKING CLIENT: FIRE LANE(TVP.,@100.O.C.) ' PROPOSED FIRE LANE TENNANT COMPANY PAINTED STRIPING(TVP.) - - y'F_ 24,x" a 135•_6" _ GO NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 Sara, n� r sr-z• O _'_ 17•_77. _ - -------- THIS SQUARE AP x1 FULL SIZE SHEETS. o e "�Ld — --— Z3 CZZ722 �# - = --- — — 121 3 W t._ -. _ ' I - � REMOVE 8 REPLACE CURB -- TO MAINTAIN 24'DRIVE ISLE • --. "' - - .- -. ..: AT TIME OF ROTOMOLO - —_ - E � 4 PSUBMITTAL NO DATEREVISION _ _.-_ -_ _ I HEREBY CERTIFY that the c n, spe Ihca _ tion or report was prepared by me or under ,� _ - - �p my directsupervision and that I am a duly ---- LicensedProfessional Engineer under the I _. Z9 lows of-�� f Min a. - the State o nesoi SIGNATURE: TYPED OR PRINTED NAME:MELISSA M.WHITE b _--- - " DATE:4/25/2014 REG.N0.:46192 COPYRIGHT2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECTNAME: CAMPUS PUD X33 5 �u5 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN DRAWING TTRE: PHASED DEVELOPMENT FIRE LANE ACCESS RLE: ..1130175160DDr**ClE"bW 130125AD2AF.U.,w9 DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKEDBY: CJF 0 20' 40' 80' PROJ.NO: 130125 DRAWp D 2 0 DRAWING W. TENNANT COMPANY CAMPUS SHEET INDEX GENERAL w PD3.0 COVER SHEET PERFORMANCE PD3.1 SITE KEY PLAN -. rp om IGH. -- PD3u B.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS eco .c ^�+. PD3A SITE AND LAYOUT EROSION�, '1_ .: ti.£ -} , •3 CONTROL PLAN 701shilglon l WeAve.N,ft2001 Mhapdis,neMN 554011612.3381029 PD3.5 GRADING,SEEDING,AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL PLAN — PD3 6 ADD ALTERNATE ONE.SNO T CIRCUIT PLAN WMEL PD3.7 DETAILS -- jj PARCEL 1 t 't ti - ti NANT COMPANY 1 - TEN 4\~ 1 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE PAJCaGOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55412 r, THIS SQUARE AP 1QM1R' FULL SITE SHEETS. 111 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SUBMnTAL I NO DATE REVISION VICINITYMAP IHEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifics— _ tion or report was prepared by me or under # my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the J laws of the State of in sots. r _ SIGNATURE ll"" = oo TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 S COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECT NAME: TENNANT COMPANY CAMPUS PUD SITE LOCATION LSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY 1 394 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 1394 DRAWING TITLE: 194 194 PHASED DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS CONNECTORS 0 COVER SHEET 0 3 FILE: ..1130126M D.*ga CE*I iWI30125PD 3.0 Camp.C.-ft.dq DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKED BY: CJF NO. 130125 PD3.0 �. PERFORMANCE 4HB`IVEI E D SIGN L ry co .com 1 .. 701 Weshirl M An.N.Ste 2001 BBmeePoh,MN 5540116123382029 .. :. - - _... (' CLIENT: » �� _ - -� _ k . TENNANT COMPANY - _.. - _ PD3.3 vPD 3.3 --- - _ - 2 1 ------ 1,, PD3.4 - 4 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE . JJJJJJ' € GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 ff .J.__:— .. PD3.5 _ h THIS SQUARE AP 112•a 717 FULL SIZE SHEETS. PROPOSED CAMPUS _ WALKWAY •. i _ CONNECTOR WALKWAYCONNECTORµ AND STAIR •�� - # AND STAIR rY' ry PROPOSED CAMPUS 1 -._- _ 14- I26b AL201 FINPUOStreMrrra No DATEREVISION -- HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, speclf _ � tion or repot was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly t Licensed Landscape Architect under the - 7 f lows of the State of in solo. SIGNATURE: GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES TYPED OR PRINTED NAd-CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 _ - 4 1. ALLWORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUNS AND REQUIREMENTS REG.NO.: 45414 I z,; i:.... - - OF THE DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS c.1. 4 2. AND FEDERAL AGENCIES. OTHER ASSOCIATED FEES REQUIRED BY LOCAL,STATE PRCOPYRIGHT�E4 BY OJECT 3. LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. MECHAr1ICAL,ALL ��DERMrrTRuciuRUAND ARcnrrECTuaALELEMF�.NTsSHOWN ON THE CML PUNS ARE FOR INFORMATION ONLY.REFER TO THE APPROPRIATE CAMPUS PUD 1 " , DISCIPLINE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS OF THESE ITEMS. 4. ALL EXISTING SITE INFORMATION WAS TAKEN FROM A SURVEY BY SONDE LAND } SURVEYING,U-C, •. ` . - - _ P;- FDEY,MN,W24-M3,VEPJFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS INCLUUDNOTIFY1NGOCATONOUNERGROUNDUTLITIESORO�OP �E THE SCOPE OF THIS CONTRACT. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT FROM DAMAGE ALL EXISTING FEATURES DESIGNATED GOLDEN VALLEY,MN TO REMAIN.ANY FEATURES DAMAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REPAIRED BY J 1 THE CONTRACTOR AT NO COST TO THE OWNER __ DPHASE � � � - :,` � � 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERApNE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING -t I K -�:, UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK,AND AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE I FOR ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.UTILIZE THE ONE CALL EXCAVATION r , NOTICE SYSTEMDF•GDPHERONECAWCALL1-BDD.25211� CAMPUS CONNO ORS 7 CONSTRUCTION STAKING SEE THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL 6PECIFlCARDNBFOR REQUIREMENTS. SITE KEY PLAN B. THE LAYOUT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALLVERIFY THE LAYOUT LOCATION WITH SITE INTERFACES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO UTILITIES,SIDEWALKS.EXISTING GRADES,AND PROPOSED GRADES.THE CONTRACTOR L FIELD VERIFY ALL .... . _ ." s ...,. DIMENSIONS PRIOR EXECUTING THE PUNWORK.NOTIFY THE PROJECT MANAGER IF FDRAWN B00 IL1 l3D12 Ea�Wl30125PD 3.0 Cmpls Cmnec d-9 FIELD CO Y. END 0 30' 60' 120' S. ALL DEBRIS AND REFUSE RESULTING FROM CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE CHECKED BY: Cf .. HAULED OFFSITE AND DISPOSED OF PROPERLYAT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE. PN'IND''N130125 PD3.1 _ 889.0 888.6 886; X86 7 887.0 PERFORMANCE �r}�QQ vr.4 E,`d DESIGN. ' C�U.7 t :=_::[:•.._. -. LHBwrP.com _. 887,3 897-2701 Washlrgtm Ave.N,Ste 2001 MnnaoiIi,AIN 55401161233820 f887.z 10.0 889.7 889.5 -- 889.3 �� - � = 8.87 4 887 7 887.7 888.9 887 6 88-9- 887.9 88 0 -' 891 .0 889.5 889.3 889.2 889.1„ PPLP OH€ GW- PPtP � - - 388.7 9 8 58.x` - - - -P K . 888.6 888.6 } x,._.. 887.2 - 8T 886.3 - - - CB TE 886.0 _' __ - -`..,,898.1 ' ,I 889.78g6�77 8.99.3 j 894.8- NNANT COMPANY j Ln 1 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE 5 L `0094,9 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 Lg 888:8 - \ F 8€ ,.837.6 8 5 THIS SQUARE 1?■1n Fuus�SHEETS. 1 ` �9 , 899,6 � -97-:4 - f 894.9 ---- --- 894.4�j 89 7.5 ,�- 899.8 - - 897,8 ', .- _. - - - 8 9 5 1 8 1 4152014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL l REVISION O H E Ln No DATE EB CERTIFY t t - � I HEREBY R Y thD his plan spenficD � tion or report was prepared by me or under _. y --. m direct supervision and that I am o duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the ' - >0 laws of the State of in sola 899.5 898,6 899.5 SIGNATURE:lJ _. TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ 898.9 _a-, �'� �� DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 PPtP = Q _ - 1, _ __. __..... _' _l�.-9� ^ ....._. � - �� COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LkB.INC.ALL RIGMiS RESERVED. 899.0 899.1 899,0 899.0 PROJECT NAME: 1 889 1 _ -- 8 _ CAMPUS PUD 899..1.- _. 899.1- _a�_�_ 894,4: 84 185- _�.. -- 899:1 899_ 94.7 894.5 - 894.4 894.5 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN �.,. .__...._-._. ....__..... .._...._._._. ___.__ ._._._____.- .....__ ..J oo - DRAwHGTITIE: .g PHASED DEVELOPMENT 894.-1 8 9 9.9 __._ . ____ 89 / ,6: CAMPUS CONNECTORS .6 900.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS Q r 0 5' 10' 20' o s 10• zD• CONNECTOR A EXISTING CONDITIONS CONNECTOR B EXISTING CONDITIONS -19 1 Scale:1"=10'-0" Scale:V=10'-0" FILE: ..113012%MDmwkVgLEd#,WI30125.PD3.00aips=a.'I NOTES: DRAWN BY: BMD 1. SURVEY PREPARED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING CHECKED BY: OF LLC,PLEASE CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL PROD.NO: 130125 D� INFORMATION. DRAWING N0: ■ --- LEGEND I� REMOVE TREE PERFORMANCE SAWCUT AND REMOVE 2'OF SILT FENCE DESIGN. EXISTING BITUMINOUS AS NEEDED LHBcorp.mm FOR CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SAWCUT AND REMOVE 701 Washirigtm Ave,N,Ste 200 1 Miumpolis,MN 55101 1612 3381029 2 OF EXISTING CURB - /✓ TREE PROTECTION AND GUTTER SAWCUT AND REMOVE 2' EXISTING _ '� — BITUMINOUS ' REMOVAL NOTES SAW CUT AND REMOVE EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER "=' -° per 1. UTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCING OR BARRIERS TO SECURE THE BUILDING SITE FOR PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY AS REQUIRED. 2. REMOVE TOPSOIL WITHIN LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION STOCKPILE N SITE FOR USE ._ .. .. a OR SIDEWALK,COORDINATE REMOVAL OF ANY EXCESS TOPSOIL WITH OWNER L - - 3. RECOMMUNICATION AND UTILITY SERVICES TO ALL BUILDINGS WH MAIN OPERATIONAL COORDINATE OUTAGES WITH OWNER AND THE CITY OF < GOLDEN VALLEY. .. - -. h57 BOX COORDINATE WITH OWNER ANY MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT TO BE \ 4. SALVAGED. 5 TNG FEATURES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS THAT HAVE NOT --. ALL EXISTING MUST BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF PROPERLY, OFFSnE,BY THE CONTRACTOR AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE. CRAB ALREADY BEEN REMOVED — — 1 S. CONIRAJCTOR SHALL REMOVE RRELOCATE ALL ITEMS CESSARYTOI ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WHETHERS SPECIFICALLY CALLED CLIENT: OUT BY NOTE OR NOT cS °/ i TENNANT COMPANY 7. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN TREE DRPUNESSHALL BEPERFORMED BYHAND.ALL / \ O]" C B ROOTS TO BE CUT BY SAW,CUTTING ROOTS WITH EXCAVATION MACHINERY IS NOT 1 1 / ALLOWED.(DOESNOTAPPLY TO BOOff1DE% EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. ESTABLISH EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION 701 O 8„ OX - \\ i _ // AND MAINTANDURING THE ENTIRE LENGTH OFCONSTRUCRONAREAS WHICH ARE GOLDEN ALL Y,MINNE SUBJECT TO SEVERE EROSION AND OFFSITE AREAS WHICH ARE ESPECIALLY GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 _ _ VULNERABLE TO DAMAGE FROM EROSION ANDIOR SEDIMENTATION ARE TO BE y I _ o I �� - IDENTIFIED AND RECEIVE ADDITIONAL EROSION COMM MEASURES AS DIRECTED O / BYTHE CONTRACTING OFFICER(OR OWNER'S CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTIONREPRESENTATIVE). BOX., O\7 O \ _ - (-:7 �/ 2. AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION, ION,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL CRUSHED THIS SQUARE 172177 FULL SIZE SHEETS. STONE STABILIZED ENTRAE AND EXIT DRIVE(S)TO REDUCE THE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROADS.TO BE DETERMINED IF APPLICABLE. O BLCH 3. COORDINATETHE SIZE OF THE AREA TO BE EXPOSED ATT ANY ONE TIMEANDMDNIMIZE THE P9� / MINIMIZE ,OX 0 SCOMPLETED. AREAS AB SOON AB POSSBLEAFTER C BE EOF CONSTRUCTION I bb _ EXPOSURE.MASS CLEARING AND GRADING OF THE ENTIRE SITE SHOULD I AVOIDED.RESTABILIZE DISTURBED d. MAINTAIN TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES UNTIL PERMANENT FACILITIES — ARE CONSTRUCTED AND FINAL STABILIZATION HAS OCCURRED. '. GX // - i _. 1 4252016 5. PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON ALL CNSTRUCTION AREAS FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL S. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECTALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED CATCH BASINS WITHIN ED DATE REVISION ' ' I CONSTRUCTION LIMITS AND ASSHOWN. I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica- 1 ° ,. X I I 7. ALL SILT FENCES SHOWN ARE PROVIDED ASAGUIDE TOTHE CONTRACTOR ASA tion or report was prepared by me or under I _ MINIMUM LEVEL OF PROTECTION AGAINST EROSION RUNOFF.CONTRACTOR SHALL my direct supervision and that I am a duly ADD,ADJUST,AND MAINTAIN SILT FENCE AND/OR SILT DIKES AS NEEDED TO '- _--- -. PROTECT FROM EXCESS EROSION AND SEDIMENT RUNOFF FROM THE SITE. Licensed Landscape Architect Under the laws of the State of in sofa. if BOX ',_. - B. THE CONTRACTOR MUST COMPLYWITHALL NOISE AND DUST CONTROL ��.` FIELD VERIFY EXCAVATION WITHIN OAK GRIP 0. ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY. SIGNATURE:lP"'" O --. AK LINE WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.IF TREE REQUIRES TO BE REMOVED,CONTRACTOR S. CONTROL LANDSCAPE EMIB DRAWINGS FOR PERMANENT VEGETATION AND EROSION TYPED OR PRINTED NAW.CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ \o SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE. O I )Z2OX - - 9 �SH CONTROL REQUIREIAENTS. DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 P COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 0 7,. BOX p 10' OX 0 PROJECT NAME: CAMPUS PUD vI SAWCUT AND REMOVE 2'OF EXISTING CURB _. AND GUTTER AS NEEDED. _. _.._..._.. I ..__..._.__ SAWCUT AND REMOVE 2-OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS AS NEEDED ---._.--, - / FOR CONSTRUCTION GOLDEN VALLEY,MN �` / .._. _. ..._.. _.__..._... ._...._.._.__....- EXISTING BITUMINOUS REMOVE 2'OF DRAWNGITTLE. _ AS NEEDED PHASED DEVELOPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION CAMPUS CONNECTORS - " DEMOLITION&EROSION CONTROL PLAN RLE: ..113012UMDe.igplflEdi M130125PO3.00.V.ConneoyxsdAl \ -_ 0 5' 10' 20' 0 5' 10' 20' DRAWNBY: BMD CJF CONNECTOR A PLAN CONNECTOR B PLAN OJNNO:OB+30125 1 Scale:1"=10'-0" � Scale.-1"=10'-0" DRAWNGNa PD13 i LEGEND CONSTRUCTION LIMITS 79`5' PERFORMANCE w z'-o "R:V;LV DESIGN. ? 3'-0 3'-0^ lMBcorp.conl SITE/LAYOUT NOTES 7plWashhgbnAn.N,Ste 2001AGnneepds,MIN 5840118123382029 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT ALL PAVEMENTS TO CONFORM WITH THE o I N:171223.60 o CORRECT LINES AND FINISHED GRADES AS INDICATED ON THE PUNS.NO PONDING E:507654.77 - ^ W171235.20 ..__._.. : __._._._... .._. ._._..-. ...._ OF WATER WILL BE ALLOWED. "- E:508312.17 - P.O.B. .. I 3,-0" _. `�_ � -- REPLACE BITUMINOUS 2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCTALL PAVEMENTS TO MATCH EXISTING I PAVING PAVEMENT GRADES AT 11E4N POINTS, I 5-0' �§ P O.B. _ 1 0 i N171230.53 ' m,,. t_. PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN CURB 3. SAW ALL CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION JOINTS,CLEAN THEM OF DEBRIS,BLOW THEM -- --- - 19'-11'U ... - AMPS PER MNDOT STANDARD DRY AND IMMEDIATELY SEAL WITH JOINT SEALANT. ..._ _ .... ._. I 08291 85 5 _._ .. REPLACE BITUMINOUS._ .� .. — .- a I ! PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN CURB - _iq PLAN SHEET 5 297 250 SHEETS 1 _THROUGH 5 DATED APRIL 10 20 RAMPS PER MNDO7 STANDARD '- -_ _._ .\ _ ^ I _ .1 --- / 3_..._ _ __. JKk F [ PLAN SHEET 5-297.250 SHEETS 1 'I I THROUGH 5,DATED APRIL 10, - I' _ , 03, 2013 44I > ....,.. z STEPS SHALL BE 6" _ RISE WITH 15"TREAD (TYP.) 9 ¢ ` 1 T- -- V, ^— - PAINTED STEEL / n ..'I RAILING H I i R81'.6^ CONCRETE.-. _ .s �^o CLIENT: WALKWAY(TYP) - 6" DRESSER TRAP I. ROCK RI TENNANT COMPANYK RIP RAP ; / � � \\ }} 3I CONCRETE STAIR(TYP.) 116 3" / .... I -•. / D3. / ROCOKISER TRAP RIP CONCRETE 2 y ( I WALKWAY(TYP) _ 101 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 ' g g•'%' PAINTED STEEL , THIS SQUARE AP Al FULL SIZE SHEETS. m / RAILING .._. 1a^ rr a 1 ..4-I5a11 FINAL PIA SUBMITTAL O1' I Yy _ \\� Z t _ NO DATE REVISION 3 N:171145,494 HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, speciiica- w 4-0 _ I E 508297,66 2 tion or report was prepared by me or under ^Ikuly -I 03 D3• - Licenlrect sed Landscape Aervision rchitect under that I am a the / CONCRETE STAIR ' N I', - laws of the Stateofof 10 Sot O. (TVP) ti _ SIGNATURE:Cf TYPED I' r TYPED OR PRINTED NAI :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ Z DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 iu s k IN 171105.21 � ' ''��'% � - COPYRIGHT 2014 BY WB,W.All RIGHTS RESERVED. E:507655.85 1I E STAIR WITH PROJECT NAME' CONCRETE PAINTED ST EEL RAILING CAMPUSPUD _ PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS PER MNDOT STANDARD _._ .._ , -- _ PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN T STANDARD LAN SHEET 5297.250 SHEETS 1 BHROIEXIST. EX STDATED APRIL 10,.CURB DEMO WAS __.._._. .,_j < - RA PERM ATE RD I REQUIRED,REPLACE CONC.CURB "' I P.O.B. LAN SHEET 5-297.250 SHEETS 1 10 .. d� / / SHEET 5,DATED APRIL 10,2013 THROUGH j \ / N.171092.29 6'-0° 12-11GOLDEN VALLEY,MN REPLACE BITUMINOUS E:508301.48 N'17109277 PAVING _...... ..._....__ E:50832044 DRAWINGTMr: o REPLACE PHASED DEVELOPMENT PAVING CAMPUS CONNECTORS SITE AND LAYOUT PLAN - FILE .,11301251&M DmAii8a1C1FB0a1130125PD 3.0 Campo Curetlaa.dwg 0 5' 10' 20' 0 5' 10' 20' ORAWNBY; BMD CJF CONNECTOR A PLAN CHECKED 1 2 CONNECTOR B PLAN DRAWING NO: PD3.4 1 Scale:V=10'-0" Scale:1"=10'-0" -_---- LEGEND I� -' 3'CURB TAPER , Y OVER MATCH EXISTING O CONSTRUCTION LIMITS FLOW (APPROX 886.70 3'CURB TAPER PERFORMANCE - S CURB TAPER D,_({1 r(y _ 1 ' WOODLAND EDGE SEED MIX t'sDESIGN. 3OVER FLOW T CURB TAPER LHBcorp com EROSION CONTROL BLANK N D 701 WBIIIINan Ave.N,Ste 2061 Mlmleapol,MN 54011612.3382029 ETM OT MATCH EXISTING(APPROXNURSERY;SEEDING RATE-869.1) _._ ' 88675., =. DETENTION BASIN SEED MIX(PRAIRIE L1BS°/ACRE OR 204 SEED SO FT.)OR5 I _ 1 ' 8685.0886.25 5 - EQUIVALENT _. 887 - NOTES -, -_�- „_, - -_ - : -- -- In, x.20 SB BB 1. TOTAL PROJECT DISTURBED AREA 6,520 SQ FT 7 8 -- - I 887 -' - DISTURBED AREAS SHALL RECEIVE TOPSOIL AT 4 DEPTH .. __ J `` 2. ALL DIS RB " I 1.866 -' 888 -- -- \: 8gs -/-889 GRADING NOTES }. , 0_, _89 - "$ TIONS UNLESS 892 9 OTHERWISE OED THE ICONTRACTC R SHALL MAKE APPROPRIATE 0 t1 L - 1 892�, B91 891.3 �.-__ DEDUCTIONS FOR VARYING SURFACES TO DETERMINE SU13GRADE �� -' �' _ ^' ELEVATIONS.SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG THE CURBLINE REPRESENT 8g3, _ ti - THE FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 894 / 893 2 PROPOSED STRUCTURE ACCESS COVERS SHALL BE BY THE �� 2Y.�-- - Bab I - - ,\ "s96R. f - - �.., 8g4.. _. 3. GRADING ACD V TD FINISHED BLOCKS TRAFFIC RAFFIC S SUBJECTOTO APPROVAL _ 894 9 ,- - _ _ BY THE CITY. - -Raimo 9511 _ CLIENT: 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL STOP WORK AND NOTIFY THE OWNER I, ( _ IMMEDIATELY IF CONTAMINANTS ARE SUSPECTED IN THE SOIL. RIPRAP TY P N SSB 898 TENNANT COMPANY DTR 6" 12 - .- / 896 5. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AT ALL TIMES WITHIN THE { I CONSTRUCTION AREA.DO NOT ALLOW WATER TO POND IN 1 INV.857.25 - EXCAVATION AREAS AND MAINTAIN ALL EXISTING DRAINAGE !, 889.75 - 12"HDPE,15'-6" 4.8%W/FES I 59561 - - 69j \ PATTERNS. 890.0 ` 6. MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON CURB IN CURB ISLANDS. v +' - BOTH SIDES R2PTVP DRESSER TRAP d�9 I E / 696 7. ALL GRADES WITHIN THE LANDSCAPED AREA SHALL NOT EXCEED 3 77s r / I -' HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL AND HAVE A MINIMUM GRADE OF 2% 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED_ GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 ' "`' _ \ - _ ,. _ 8 ALL CONCRE EEPA EM NTSD5%MINIMUM,FOLLOWS: GOLDEN 89006 tJ _ B.2.CO NC RETE CURB B GUTTER:0.5%MINIMUM /'-899 1 8.3.ASPHALT PAVEMENT:1.2%MINIMUM,5%MAXIMUM 7HS SQUARE AP 11lx1R FL41 512E SHEETS.890 89 868!592.06 ss1' ,/ DISTURBED AREA w UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1I 3,310 SO FT ---'E'-./ - 1. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND SERVICE LINES SHALL BE KEPT IN 892.2 e9?9.5 - I EOTHERWISE EDCONSTRUCTION PROJECT, UNLESSAUTHORIZED BY THE OWNER. _--- ------ _ - 5 I 2. REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ENGINEER.RECONNECT ALL - __ 1 'H.P. 99. DISTURBED AREA: _ _- " STEPS SHALL BE 6" � � - I SERVICES NOT MARKED FOR REMOVAL OR AS DIRECTED BY THE - ._ _.. RISE WITH 15"TREAD .-_. _ __-�.._ 3,209 SO FT OWNER. (TYP') 1 42201/ FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL _ SJ5.26 3. REPAIR OF DAMAGED UTILITIES SHALL BE REPORTED THROUGH THE I - _ OWNER NO DATE REVISION 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL IDENTIFY,FIELD VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL --- , I 2% ' EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSINGS IN THE FIELD.REPORT I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, speciflcO- I Ip 895.52 - CONFLICTS REQUIRING REDESIGN TO THE OWNER. tion or report was prepared by me or under 1 my direct supervision and that I am a duly ' STORM SEWER Licensed Landscape Architect under the m I -.--l-1.111- ! ' ' � - 1. STORM PIPE SHALL BE HDPE WHERE INDICATED ON THESE PLANS. laws of the State of In sots. _ - SEE PLAN FOR SIZE INFORMATION.CONTRACTOR HAS THE OPTION TO �_r�AJ� USE RCP FOR STORM SEWER PROVIDED THE MINIMUM SIZE USED IS l.�Y SIGNATURE: 12UO J, ' 1 - - 2. SUBDRAINAGE PIPING SHALL BE POLYETHYLENE. TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 B99 899 _. COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. f L ` 898.02 ' 696 .898 .._._ PROJECT NAME: _ US PUD - 89r 1 _ -,� CAMP \ \ f899 / B91 'l f RAINGARDEN SOIL SPECIFICATION: H.P.90025 essUNIFORM 50-70%SELECT G RANULAR MATERIAL,10-25%AGED LEAF COMPOST 10% 2. TOPSOIL 3 MINIMUM IN-PLACE INFILTRATION ON RATE IS 10 INCH/HOUR �4 MATCH EXISTING `'- ,, -'-- j 895 _ 4 THIS SOIL MUST BEFREEOF THE FOLLOWING:BERMUDA GRASS,QUACKGRASS,JOHNSON _.� -' -� - �. - GRASS,MUGWORT,NUTSEDGE,POISON IW,CANADIAN THISTLE,TEARTHUB,AND OTHER (APPROX-900.0) 894.52 �: NOXIOUSWEEDS MATCH EXISTING 5. THIS MATERIAL IS A SPECIALTY MIX GOLDEN VALLEY,MN ----------_..--- (APPROX-894.4) DRAWING m1B: PHASED DEVELOPMENT EROSION CONTROL BLANKET CAMPUS CONNECTORS RAINGARDEN SOIL APPROVED COMPETENT SUBGRADEb0 A /' GRADING,SEEDING,& EROSION CONTROL PLAN RIE _1130125800 pexingslClExh�3iM130125PD 3.0 CempuaCalne�rs.dxy D s 20' 6 5' 10' 20' 3 RAINGARDEN DETAIL DRAWNBY: BMD CHECMCONNECTOR A PLAN 2 CONNECTOR B PLAN Scale:NTS PRDJ.N CS ROJ.N0: 130125 Scale:1"=10'-0" Scale:1"=10'-0" DRAWING NO: pD3 5 i ------- ------ LEGEND CONSTRUCTION LIMITS , PERFORMANCE "P*t et=`DESIGN. SNOWMELT SYSTEM NOTES: ' - 701 Weshirom AYe.N.Ste 2001 Mnneepok,MN 55D11612.3362D29 - - -�� 1. SNOW MELT SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS ARE BASED ON 1277V)SERVICE.THE COMRACTOR ' OVERHEAD POWER � _. SHALL VERIFY MATTE DUSTING;OHP IS WTV)SERVICE AND AN ACCEPTABLE POINT OF LINES - `--_ -' _..... _._. - CONNECTION FOR BOTH SNOW MELT SYSTEMS.IF ISSUES EXIST wIIHITHE POC OR SERVICE I _ THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INFORM THE PROJECT MANAGER DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. .. 2. THE CONTRACTOR IS THE THE .. .._. ' ..1.._.. - .. I SNOWNI TEL SPECIFICATION, STEM SPECIFrATONS,CCOMPONENT SPECIFICATIONS,AND CIRCUIT PUN ARE PROVIOEDASTIE PREFERRED SYSTEM FORINSTNIATION.THE ..-_. _ ._. .._. SYSTEM __ _ CONmACTOR6RESP0N6BLE FOR IDENTIFYING THE FINAL DESIGN,All REQUIREMENB,ALL COMPONENTS,ANDALLWORK NCIDENTALTO THE INSTALLATION OF THE SHALL BE FULLY DESCRIBED IN THEALTER ATE c I _.... OVERHEAD POWER - \ � �_ � _ PROPOSAL BYTNE CONTRACTOSYSTBL THE R LINES ---' __ ._ _ 9. PROJECTER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO ORDERING AND INSTALLATION STEM. TMELECTSYSTEM R�R�B Isl�Al1�SU�BEIR�TE TD o SY��AA�NAc��UDING POC AND .1 .._ .._.... 4 THE INSTALLED SYSTEM SHALL MEET ALL GOVERNING RULES REGULATION CODES AND .. - REQUIREMENTS __.. 5 REFERENCE THE ALTERNATE SPECIFICATION AND COMPONENT SPECIRCATIONSCUT __.. �c ,e3 I e / - SHEETS FOR SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS. - e. ALL JUNCTION BOXES,CONTROL PANELS,AND DISTRIBUTION PANELS,SIALLBE LOCATED IN \ I 4 APPROVAL TOL ORDER OR INSTALLATION. FIELD,IN WALKWAY LOCATIONS NEAR THE STNRAND WAI 7. ALL LAYOUT,DIMENSION,GRADES,TREE PRESERVATION.AND OTHER INFORMATION r� r DESCRIBED N SHEETS LID THROUGH SHEET L5.0 SHALL APPLY TO THE SDALTERNATE. CLIENT TENNANT COMPANY 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 1 �= Y -- THISSQUAREAPPx1 FULL SIZE SHEETS. _ -- -- - FINAL PUD ._ - I I REVISION BU 1 4-252011 869TTK NO DATE 1 I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica- tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and thatI am o duly / _ ! Licensed Landscape Architect under the l 1 I lows of the State of in sofa. I ` f� SIGNATURE:llC -GB V --_ -- \\ TYPED OR PRINTED NAI :CARLOS d FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 REG,NO.: 45414 Z _ COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHS,NO.PLL RIGHTS RESERVED. . J PROJECT NAME: CAMPUS PUD \' \ / GOLDEN VALLEY,MN aDRAWING IM: \= PHASED DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS CONNECTORS ADD ALTERNATE ONE: SUMMARY NOTES: CONNECTOR A(WALKWAY) SUMMARY NOTES:CONNECTOR B(WALKWAY) SNOWMELT CIRCUIT PLAN 1. =777 S.F.®9'SPACING=FSSLF.OF CABLE�20'nANWITALLOWANCE PER gRCUR L =BSG S.F.Or SPACING=910 L.F.OF CABLE♦2SCONDUIrALLOWANCE PER CIRCUIT. 2. STAIRS TN S.F.@TREADS 6=065 TREAD=RE LF.CONDUITALLOWA CEPER CIRCO PER 2. STAIRS -24TREADS®20'PER TREND•4WOF CABLE.29 CONDUITALLOWANCE PER CIRCUITz 14 CIRCUIT 0 5' 10' 20' FILE: ..113018251800DmAillgalClEddM5s11301257D 3.O Cenps ComedaaAAg MD 3. CIRCUITDTAL CIIiCUTB 0 5' 10' 20' 3. SD((6)TOTAL CIRCUITS GRAWNBY: CHECKED BY: CJF CONNECTOR A PLAN CONNECTOR B PLAN PRDJ.NO: 130125 PD3 6 1 Scale:1"=10'-0" L Scale:1"=10'-0" DRAWING NO: is CONCRETE STEPS CONCRETE STEPS, LANDING VARIES,5.0'MIN, (NUMBER VARIES) (NUMBERVARIES) SEE PLAN PERFORMANCE SEE PLAN SEE PLAN slDEwux NOTES. CRIVI-J':DESIGN. HEAVYBROOM LHBcorp.com 17 BR FELT - -PROVIDE SAWCUT OR TOOLED FINISH AND SEALANT I CONTROL JOINTS AT 4'SPACING(TYP.) CONCRETE (TYP.) SIDEWALK 701 Washinglan Ave.N,Ste 21101 Minneapolis,MN 554011612.3382029 %SLOPE PER SURFACE MOUNT PLAN(TYP) 1 (TYP) / HANDRAIL TO / CHEEK WALLS TOPSOILAND SEED 1 V2'OD PIPE RAIL ae CMV PROPOSEDORADE _ 8' ) %SLOPE PPER (fYP.)RS'TYPLz LL! —SII FINISH _ .. AGGREGATE BASE ILAN(TVP) ( .) •. APPROVED COMPETENT SUBGRAOE �17BR FELT - �I��- ANDS CONCRETE SIDEWALK - -_ - - —I —I 1— ) Scale:NTS II tY LONG-170NMETERJ —I — '4 SLOPE PER SMOOTH BAR GREASE ONE 'r PLAN_ T�YP) END,ITO.C.(iYP.) 114'CONTROL JOINT —B'AGGREGATE BASE(CV) 75ITYP) CLIENT: 0.5-RADIUS(TYP.) #4 EPDXY CTENNANT COMPANY 1 a IT1Y DO.C..M(TYP.).) • 20%(TYP) ~_ • T EPDXY COATED 6'(TYP) NOSING BAR(TYP.) $4 EPDXY COATED SECTION VIEW @WO.C.(M.) '' _'• j e CONCRETE WALK CLASS V AGGREGATE BACKFILU CONCRETE STEPS _ BASE (NUMBER VARIES) CONCRETE STEPS SEE PLAN LANDING VARIES (NUMBER VARIES) ADD ALTERNATE,: 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE 5.0'MINIMUM SEE PLAN SEE PLAN q 2"PLOY STYRENE INSULATION(4'X T) GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 - TO RUN WIDTH OF CONIC.PAVING I EXTEND 6"PAST EITHER SIDE; BASE BID' - 2"GRANULAR CLASS V AGGREGATE 12"HOPE CULVERT W/FES THIS SQUARE 17x17 IUU_SRE SHEETS. SELECT GRANULAR,BEDDING >H COMPETENT APPROVED SUBGRADE CHEEK WALLS 12" HDPE CULVERT SECTION Scale:NTS PIPE RAILING OW.) --- - 1 4.252014 FINAL PUO SUBMITTAL PIAN VIEW NO DATE REVISION NOTES 1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE3y43MNDOTMIX I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica- 2. ALL BARS SHALL BE BLACK,EPDXY COATED BARS. tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am o duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of din Qsot0. CONCRETE STEPS SIGNATURE:G�- 1 Scale:NTS TYPED OR PRINTED NAMY.CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 COPYRIGHT2014 BY LMB,NC.ALL RIGHTS FOEWED. PROJECT NOME: CAMPUS PUD GOLDEN VALLEY,MN DRAwNC TITLE: PHASED DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS CONNECTORS DETAILS FILE: _L1301251600ft"VAClEddbb5130125YD31C.MCmmd..Avg DRAWNBY: BMD CHECKEDBY: CJF PROD.NO 130125 P D 3 7 DRAWNG NO � — PERFORMANCE D„:W� DESIGN. LHBcorp.com 701 Weshbglon Ave.N,Sk 20D I Minneapolis,MN 554011612.338.229 I' O EX.FDC - - HYDRANT - I - CLIENT: NEW FDC TENNANT COMPANY `r - COORDINATE pIy LOCATION C ` I 10'FIRE I 1 1�- _ WITH GVFD LL Im 6 ry 4 � 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE `tl NV �\ EWP `- - THIS SQUARE r1 FULLS-SHEETS. r 6 5 . r f 4 »... .. -- ` ., = - - 14.25-2014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY that thispion, specifica— tion orreportwas prepared by or under I me direct supervision and that duly " Licensed Professional Engine r under th i n lamo ne laws of the State of Minnesota. SIGNATURE: /rlY.(A J? ._.. ._X TYPED OR PRINTED NAM PMELISSA M.WHITE DATE:4/25/2014 REG.NO.:46192 - r ? COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. t. T PROJECT NAME US PUD CAMP > euo I / GOLDEN VALLEY,MN DRAWING TREE PHASED DEVELOPMENT -F NOTES WATER SYSTEM 1 � ... KEYNOTES SHOWN ON THIS PIAN ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE NUMBERED ITEMS ADDRESSED IN THE FIRE PROTECTION EVALUATION LETTER. _. t �s bhs1130125PD40 Syatem.dwg FILE: .11 3 0 1 2 518 11D Dnrxi IDEdii' Weler DRAWN BY MRH CHECKEDBY: MJW ---- 0 30' 60' 120' N. PD4.0 f _ PR0.W.1. 130125 .. -, ..— DRAWING tr j i •,��j �� EXISTING TRIBUTARY AREA SUMMARY !X,/j dAREA(SF) TOTAL 119,525 PERFORMANCE IMPERVIOUS 81,331(68%) 1-'R:'Lao DESIGN. I PERVIOUS 38,194(32%) LMBc°rp.com 701 WeshilgbnAre.N,SN 2601 MMreepd'u,0 554011812.338.2029 FILTRATION VOLUME" 16,157CF 'V=(.9p(IMPERVIOUSAREAp(1")'(1712') j/ , jj VOLUME OF CHAMBER SYSTEM BELOW /CONNECTTO / /// j�/� /�� //� jk/ii///��.. i„ 18,OUTLET EXISTING r aE /BU KHe/AD /ABANDONED PIPE _ REPLACE EXISTING CATCH BASIN iB4LF. '=� __ �-sd :*��18OLF / - I i / 1 _ 12'RCP g CONNECT TO �/ D 201 ao So �i 21'RCP ,. - 7_ - Y MANHOLE - - _ �E>usnNG n o IMPROVEMENTS EFIRELANE i -� �_ c� I=1�CP HIGH F�YPA v NEW MANHOLE « c « CONNECT TO ,<( _. T M u " +°-_. ; i w « w I OUTLETSTRUCTUR— « a' p EXISTING PIPE 1 � "o s " , 1 P CLIENT: m y 69 CHAMBER YS STEM MANHOLE WI SUMP ---------- -a j R FILTRATION AREA G TENNANT COMPANY AND SAFL BAFFLE 119,525 SF(2.74 AC) i h 81,331 SF IMPERVIOUS(1.87 AC;68%) J S U R F A C E 11 sir I J,.a --��;E.-...p .~�� `_�''•+ -r--�.�,.� er- RAINGARDEN701_ �._ GOLDEN LILAC e-e _ ------- GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 I,-Ilk 6`111° — — — -� —-- — — — — —'— �--�--_— — -- THIB SQUARE AP ., FUlLS�5HEE7S. - - - I STORY BLOCK BLDG / - - - - - - - � 2a — — — — — — — - — - — — — — - - — i — — — — — — — — p a � FUTURE CAMPUS :.-.. CONNECTOR --- I b / n 1 425201/ FINAL PUD SUBMIfTAI NO DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica- tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly FILTRATION AREA 1 PLAN Licensed Professional Engineer under the NOT TO SCALE laws of the State of Minnesotan/I^ 4'CLEANOUTS(3 TYP.)ON MAIN SIGNATURE: iv W✓"L�.� STORMTECH SC-740 FABRIC WRAPPED STORAGE CHAMBERS TYPED OR PRINTED NAME:MELISSA M.WHITE STORAGE CHAMBER @ 0.00% ,,i DATE:4/25/2014 REG.N0.:46192 CLEAN OUT I-EACH ON 18'HDPE SAND FILTER OVERFLOW COPYRIGHT 2D14 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 6"DRAINTILE IE=878.45 PROJECT NAME: ROCK BED DRAINTILE IE=874.30 2 , �HDPEDRA (> CAMPUS PUD 18"INLET IE=878.50 r� Imo; '050' tl ' 4 t r I c_�I 0 2s I� �iT _ =1 _� GOLDEN VALLEY,MN cs - FILTER SAND — 21'HDPE OUTLET TO WEST FABRIC AROUND - _ ! — 1 DMWINGTI,LE: BIM EN LAYERS IE�74.25 PHASED DEVELOPMENT °? — �' ROCK BED I -- -------- ------------------------------- ---------------------------------- -III=' STORMWATER �> I _ �______ ______ ------------------ MANAGEMENT_____ ________� — TRACERWIRE - - - - - 1-IN MINIMUM 6'HDPE DRAINTILE - - — - BELOW DRAINTILE TRACER WIRE 6 HDPE DRAINTILE 0.00% _ —III= - — — - — — — _ FILE: ..11301251800 DmMngslClF.Woib1130125PD 5.05mmmelxMenpemerLdx9 DRAWN BY: JTC CHECKED BY: MJW SAND ITR PR 139175 DRAWINGMW PD5 0 N0: � 2 NOT TO SCALE , PROPERTY AREA },+ PERFORMANCE I " t fzati DESIGN. TOTAL SITE AREA:26.1 ACRES /1 ---_ -' t.•�v `+ > s L1111corp.com PARKING ANALYSIS _ 1 —- - `^ 4 701 Wluhnglon iAw;.N,Ste 2001 NIOKlecpdv,MN 55401 j 612.336.2089 4` ,bur PARKING REQUIREMENTS: — " �r OFFICE.t PER 250 SQ,FT OF GROSS FLOOR AREA WAREHOUSE/STORAGE 1 PER 3000 SO FT OF GROSS FLOOR AREA MANUFACTURING 1 PER 500 SO FT OF GROSS FLOOR AREA ,I SALES SHOWROOM(VEHICLES/MACHINERV)1 PER 1000 SQ FT OF GROSS ! FLOOR AREA 1•,t x .. EXISTING PARKING ANALYSIS _ « 701 LILAC DRIVE:PARCEL ONE I - -SO FT METHOD - -MANUFACTURING 209.809 SQ FT:419 STALLS -OFFICE 52,260 SQ FT:209 STALLS II WAREHOUSE 67,507 SQ FT:22 STALLS !y, -PROOF OF PARKING FOR 615 ZANE:36 STALLS TOTAL RE�UIRED:686 STALLS TOTAL EXISTING:514 STALLS - TOTAL BALANCE:-172STALLS -EMPLOYEE COUNT METHOD(2023 PROJECTION) -LARGEST SHIFT(1)=493 -(PLUS)30%SPACE FOR 2ND LARGEST SHIFT=29 E: -PLUS 815 LANE PROOF OF PARKING:36 -'� CUA; TOTAL REQUIRED:558 --- <:� - - I ALEXISTING.5,4 BALANCE:.44d TENNANT COMPANY BALANCE: 5738 OLSON MEMMORWL HWY.:PARCEL SEVEN -SQ FT METHOD' ; -OFFICE 15.877 SO FT=63 STALL REQUIRED + TOTAL REQUIRED:63 STALLS I' TOTAL EXISTING 78 STALLS I j - BALANCE:-15 STALLS -EMPLOYEE METHOD(2023 PROJECTION) ( I - ■j -R -28 EMPLOYEES I ! - - I '~ 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE TOTAL REQUIRED:28 STALLSI - TOTAL EXISTING76 SALLS �I ' - - ` + �.; GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 BALANCE:+50 STALLS - -.a 5612 OLSON MEMORIAL HWY.:PARCEL ELEVEN I� ' _ -- ._ SQ FT METHOD' (TD dD - •. WAREHOUSE.4,425 SQ FT=2 STALLS "' - TIOS SQUARE 17z11T FULL SIZF SHEETS MANUFACTURING:16.394 SQ FT=32 STALLS _ STALLS REQUIRED:34 _ - EXISTING STALLS:40 ^^ �. - - .. zsa stems - '+a snuffs ,. BALANCE:+6 STALLS __ ! -EMPLOYEE METHOD:(2023 PROJECTION) • �� "" ---' - I ^- .. -EMPLOYEES.11 -TRAINING GROUP MAXIMUM:B - -TOTAL REQUIRED.19 STALLS ' --- - -TOTAL EXISTING:40 STALLS -BALANCE:+21 I 1�'"� - •.,.: -, .. — _ 1 425-2014 FINAL PUD BIRMnTA1-- TOTAL NET EXISTING PARKING: 701+5738+5612 I -SQ FT METHOD. NO DATEON STALLS REQUIRED:783 EXISTING STALLS:832 I j i I �! 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that this Ian, s ecifico- BALANCE:-151 P P -EMPLOYEE METHOD:(2023 PROJECTION) <I (- 1 --, ' ) ( tion Or report was prepared by me or under -TOTAL REQUIRED:605 STALLS ! ( FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IROJECT BOUNDARY 1 Y P Y -TOTAL EXQUING632STAALL --h 1 m direct supervision and that I am a dui Licensed Landscape Architect under the -BALANCE:+27(surplus) I INS — — — .` �I r--/ i laws of the State of in sots. 'PARCEL TWO,THREE,FOUR,FIVE,EIGHT,NINE,TEN:NO CURRENT USE 1 -- ---3 -' -""T' 'PARCEL SIX:NOT IN TENNANT OWNERSHIP OR IN THE PUD PROPOSALs`\ J SIGNATURE TYPED OR PRINTED NA PARKING REQUIREMENTS:PROPOSED PUD r :CARLOS d FERNANOEZ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT: I I ' - - I' T DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 PROPOSED OFFICE:45,000 SQ FT 1 STALL PER 250 SQ FT=180 STALLS I _.. ...... _.. ..._ --_ - TOTALREQUIRED:EXISTING+PROPOSED COPYRIGHT 20,4BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. SO FT METHOD '- -TOTAL REQUIRED:783+180=963 STALLS -TOTAL PROVIDED IN PLANS:678 STALLS PROJEC7NANE: REDUCTION FOR RANSIT AND -REMOVE PARKING 38 STALLS CARPOOL 3%OF SHIFT 1=79 ..__4 r% TOTAL BALANCE:-228 ( I I '�, -- - - H - f f CAMPUS PUD EMPLOYEE METHODI2023 PROJECTION) tJ s I •` �..— - �. I f �. I _ -I ( f., -TOTAL REQUIRED'605+166=771 STALLS I f' -TOTAL PROVIDED IN PLANS 678 STALLS ` -REDUCTION FOR TRANSIT AND CARPOOL 3%OF SHIFT i=19 -RE MOVE PARKING ISLANDS.38 STALLS I ( i( �, _ _„__ ' I I i / _o- TOTAL BALANCE:J6 STALLS' -- If - I /y /� y 'ACHIEVABLE WITH DESIGN REVISIONS AND THROUGH FIRST SHIFT 6 I I ]_.� 'I p ., -- -r GOLDEN E.1+MN 2ND SHIFT ANALYSIS. VALL +✓ V.. DRAWING TIME: _ ® z, ,, _401 . ; r _ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ED PUD CAMPUS DIAGRAM ' FILE ..1,3012s600Drun1130125-usREary DRAWN BY. BND CHECKED Sr. CJF 0 35' 70' 140' PROJ.NO. 130125 ,O < S;:L/'�.7'I•Y'Ye�Fti y�. V: .�`:i DRAWING NO: I ' CONSTRUCTION LIMITS FOR r� FUTURE 3 STORY BUILDING , DEVELOPMENT s°CONCRETE ENTRv 1 I t PERFORMANCE =.iv'U DESIGN. 9'0 SILO ON CONCRETE PAD WI (8)8"STEEL PIPE BOLLARDS I + LHBcorp.com 1 f 4"CONCRETE WALK(TYP) i �• 701 Washingtm Ave.N,Ste 2001 pTemeepda,MN 5540116123362029 ' 6"CONCRETE SERVICE DRIVE I � PAINTED CROSSWALK(TYP) I 't r .: EXISTING ENTRY -! 4"CONCRETE PAVING(TYP.) 1 i I - BITUMINOUS DROP-OFF AREA - - _ - BITUMINOUS PAVING I f c T 8618 CONC URB 8 GUTTER r - - „ m , 'SEE ENLARGED PLAN L1.1--------------1 - _ ...-, 1 ------ CLIENT., -- _ i TENNANT COMPANY BED 1 - I 4 CONCRETE WALK(TYP) TYP • I � � GRANITE RETAINING WALL I 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE • i 4"CONCRETE ENTRY PLAZA GOLDEN VALLEY,,MINNESOTA 55422 — — — — • GRANITE SEAT WALL(TYP) FILTRATION POND '^•^ THS SQUARE AP 1n.1n FULL sIZEsHES. PROPOSED 3 STORY 45,000 SF BUILDING WITH ANNEX CONNECTION TO EXISTING BUILDING.SEEARCHITECTURE PLAN - ------_---- --- 1 1 .._. ....._..,....�:....—� ...,....,. G PLA GRANITE WALLS& NTER _ — GRANITE SEATWALL(TYP) — 1 • r I - I t __ I BITUMINOUS DROP-OFF AREA LANDSCAPE BED(TYP) 1 1-,-- L� 6"CONCRETE ENTRY 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL _ LANDSCAPE ISLANDS - • - _ NO DATE REVISION I t 1 1 t r p1 CONCRETE STAIR TYP I HEREBY CERTIFY that this Ian, specifica— tion b I ........ _.- ... -f,. tion or report was prepared by me or under I I my direct supervision and that I am a duly C.I.P.CONCRETE R ALL under the RETAINING laws not 0. 4"CONCRETE PAVING(TYP)W Landscape Architect 1 SIGNATURE:j State Ot In SOt BITUMINOUS PAVING(TVP) TYPED OR PRINTED NAL :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ { 1 — i - .•_ — 1_ - _ DATE:4-25-2014 REO.NO.: 45414 - CONC.CURB 8 GUTTER TVP F COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LJIB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. f — - - PROJECTNAME: 4 1 = CAMPUS PUD I I I 41 I - _ ..... _ I a •,.{ ------------ GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 1 [7L1 1 _ CD DRAWING 1112: FUTURE DE ,-„� � ,I- • ... O VELOPMENT - - - - -� SITE PLAN MONUMENT SIGN ......,_. P 1 _..®...._.. _ _�....P._J_. �..._..�.., FILE ..1130129EDawlgIA(130125L1_SITE IMg LDHAWNBY BIAD CHECKm BY: CS 0 25' 50' 100' PROJ.W. 130125 , DRAWING NO: Ll • I� • PERFORMANCE — •° DRIVEN DESIGN. — LHB ry om _ • ° T _- -._.. 1 _. �• — — — _- 701 WB5hhgb1l Awe.N,Ste 2811 M3nelpdh,NM 551011812.338.7029 I} • - __. __ _ - 1 - 1 _ t , r . 1 1 • I _ I ' 1 -- -- CLIENT: I 1 TENNANT COMPANY � I I 1 _ _ 1 - _ ° • I I , I LED BOLLARD LIGHT TP.; - GRANITE 11 RETAINING WALL 1 RECESSED LED WALL LIGHT .. . LANDSCAPE BED TYR 1 1 - ! SOD AREAS 1 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE 1 _ GRANITE SEAT WALL TYP.1 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 4•CONC.WALK TYP. ' THIS SMIARE 17x17 FAL512E SLEETS. BUIERIOR TO EXTERIOR LDING TERRACE 1 • I - 3•GONG.RISBON EDGE.PROVIDE T TAPER 1 • I --- ___ TO MEET 8618 CONC;CURB 6 GUTTER. - I - 6"CONC.SERVICE DRIVE 1 I 4"CONC.WALKWAY TO SOLUTION CENTER FACILITY. , -- STORM WATER FILTRATION BASIN � - I 1 4252014 ANAL PUD SUM.IITTAL • I STAIRWAY TO EXTERIOR BUILDING TERRACE 1 NO DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifics- . STAIRWAY TO EXTERIOR BUILDING TERRACE tion or report was prepared by me or under • "• ----____i 1'TVPmy direct supervision and that I am a duly LANDSCAPE PLANTING BEDS . -"" _ Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of m sota. O LED WALL UIS 11I *LTVP_ Q�� CONCRETE STAIRWAY TO LOWER CAMPUS SIGNATURE:Clf - 1 _ 1 • •••• I I I GRANITE SEAT WALLS TVP. I - ..... ... .. _ 6"CONC.WALK � + + �' 1 \� TYPED OR PRINTED NAW.CARL d FERNANDEZ • — �\ 1 -�� — • i' I 1 _ DATE:4-25-2014 REG,NO.: 45414 ' I I BUILDING ANNEX ENTRY 1 • _ DOOR OPERATOR � I -�_.__... 1 \ COPYRIGHT 20148Y LFII,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 1 _ II TRUNCATED DOMES ) \ PROJECT NAME: ----------- 12"CONC.RIBBON EDGE,PROVIDE T TAPER �-- CAMPUS PUD TO MEET 8616 CONC.CURB 8 GUTTER. 1 1 • LED WALL UP LIGHT TVP. 1 - \ 1 COMPANY TENNANT COMPANY GRANITE MONUMENT RETAINING WALL W/COM EMBLEM - : co GOLDEN VALLEY,MN ....._----- .. ` DRAWING TITLE: 1 1 , FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN ENLARGED 1. RLE: A13D12S8 ftAn IIAYAL1026E1 SIIEMg • _.__.__., __.._. .._ _ _____ .� _ _. • + ' _ DRAWN BY. DMD 1 .....___.._.. CHECKEDBr. CJF .. ____� + U PROD.NO: — — 1 � 10' 20' ao 130125 ��.� __._.. .....__....._ �� — — DRAWING NO: i PERFORMANCE ry 0P,E"r<f DESIGN. 1 LHBcotp.cam .�yf 701 Washiglm Ave.N,SW 2001 Minneepdis,MIN 554011612.3382029 1 a 4_ , a � ry. ry- ry _ __ ..�.d,.� R '• zS b. , 9 , I f 50-p i' 1 \ 6-0 - _ . 18-0 - - ----- TYP15, 176,-Jow 0 20•a, 1 TYP Y�r 41'-8, _. -0"7YP.. .._,. - _. _ . -18'-p+ o-, 16'-0" 20 .9_'pIYP 493--7- 24'- 4- ` CLIENT: . _. 46!. o � — TENNANT COMPANY ,.._ 245'-p• 74-0 - 0 1 n- l 22, ! 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE \ 70'_3• 27'," GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 j 24'-0• ' 72 r 1 t THIS SQUARE AP z 1 FULL 311E SHEETS. _ F 1 10'3" _ - I _ 1 445-2014 FIR4 PUD SUBMITTAL NO CATE REVISION • � 1 1 1 8 I HEREBY CERTIFY that this Ion, specifico- tion or report was prepared b me or under 1 my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Aresotat hitec under the SEE L2.1 FOR ENLARGED PLAN laws of the State of in . SIGNATURE: i � J TYPED OR PRINTED NAM CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 18'-0" 18'-0" 18'-0' 181-01, • 24•_0.. 31�_y.. ��,�'� PCROECTNAME: LHB 7: .INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. - = I CAMPUS PUD q I m 1 , ; o GOLDEN VALLEY,MN -- 1 � � ORAwwGTr> 7. -. 26'026FUTURE E DEVELOPMENT - _ LAYOUT PLAN -11Y FILE ..113012SAMDrawinpe M30125L2 LAYOUTAn DRAWNBY: SMD CHECKED Sr. C,6 0 25' 50' 100' PRO.NO 130125 �� O ( f`ff x 3rY a'fr t %'.i I .f i " `i1�i }moi 4.J x{< DRAWING NO: --- o PERFORMANCE . _,.. !:=F1Vv','.DESIGN. ... .. . .. LH11corp.com - - _ - - - - - 7D1 Wwhingtm Ave.N,Ste 2001 Wm eepdis,MN 664D11612.3362029 _ ' ! ------------ 161.0- 1114 1 ILU III ! _ 1 ' ! 41'-4° ' CLIENT: 'q•-0. -018 -0' 2, TENNANT COMPANY ' o 14'-0• Ip 4 -- m - 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE m Q ' GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 I I I I I TNI9 SQUARE AP 17:17 FULL SQE SHEETS. o i _ I I q•-p.. 2--a. -g. I 13,-0, '4'-10^ � ' 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DAZE —REVISION ' o o I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica- ry o a N v C I 22.-0• ' tion or report was prepared by me or under Z6'-p^ my direct supervision and that I am a duly 36'-3• Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of in sola. 0 0 0 _ SIGNATU TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDE2 6'-0• f- o ' DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 . 2.-0, COPYRIGHT 2014 BY LHB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECT NAME: 4 1 �A ^ y i \� CAMPUS PUD ,- `. ' .�13_10• i6'-g• 1 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN ' oRaYANG TrnJ:: FUTURE DEVELOPMENT DIMENSION LINE LAYOUT PLAN ENLARGED ' FILE ..11301261800 Dmw.OLAX130125- tAYOUTA g ! ' DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKED BY, cJF ! ! 1 0 10' 20' 40 �� PRa.NO: 13086 DRAWING NO: ■ TREE REPLACEMENT LIST (FIGURE A) r TIEEMA6iB ,REESPEaE FE32E 71 HACKE ARY Is, 143 CRABAPPLE 12' 12 am 1r 7 ' BAX43FMw r 73 OAK 1T PERFORMANCE 3 BUICKC®WY r 75 aM 71. E j;;;EN DESIGN. 3 NACKa19W1' r Ts aNc M• - t _r 4 Ow t7 76 OAK I/• LHBcorp.com c f 5 BOXELDER Ir 77 OAK 21' f. 6 BOEIDER IS 71 BIAGCHERRY 17 701 W66hinp m Ave.N,Ste 2001 Mirrapds,MN 564011612.336.2049 a F 7 BM DER Ir 79 OAK 1r BIAGOJ,ERRY 1r so OAK 1r 9 BIAGCH9Urf r B1 OAK it 10 BOELDER 1S e2 ORI( 7F j _ - - 71 BO3ELDBA Is e3 OAR IT _ j 7 - 12 Baum IF M ONE IF - _ 13 BIACK416W'/ 17 e5 GK 1S . 1 / 66 OAK 1T 16 BOIEIDER 17� e7 BLACNCHERRY ELM 6 `. 16 91ACKOIE7M' M ,....� - _ 17 ASN IF IS ELM IF r IsIT A BLACKOHERAY r 02 AOS 19 BILACKCHERRY IT al ASH r rASH r +ra j '. 21 BL=CHEFRY r 93 POPLAR 14• ' (SZ, -., -_ - 1 22 NAO(CHEINY r 94 ABN r r 95 WXEDEII 1IT T kONH 23 BIADKa6wr 25 SLAC ASH r 96 POPLAR w-� 25 ASH Ir W POPLAR 1T 26 ABM 17 M POPLAR 77 _.. n eLAacale4Rr 1r 9e POPLAR 17 1 ae 4MAE r tm PORN 1T 29 BIAGCHERRI' -- ..._. .. r 107 ASH IV ----- . _ 30 BVCKCHERiY r 1D2 am 6S ,. .. • 31 BLACKOORRY r 103 ELM N' _.. 32 CRABAPPLE ,r 1M WALNUT P/• CLIENT: 33 BIAO(CN94RY t7 I05 BLAGLXERRY r TENNANT COMPANY f _ 34 MALE ,T 106 OUBAPNE r _ - m NAGDL,e4Rr r 1m CRABAPPLE r E BIAOICNDIRY r ,M CRAB.PPLE r .. 37 EUI 1S ,M CRABAPRE r -. 36 COTTONWOOD IF 110 WALNUT 21' 3 COTTOWNCO 1S 117 ASH 1P /0 ASH tr 112 WNNUT IF -.. - .'oa. ,_ _- •.•. •• p. _. 11 COTTONWOOD 1r '13 BUCKCIkRRY tr 42 BNEIDER 1T 14 MARE 27 43 COTTOMMODD 2P 119 BOIELDBI 37 u aDT7aNwaaD T 1,6 MARE 1r 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE „�°. p• _ fAe w_ z 7 45 COTTONWOOD IT 117 SPRUCE ,S « COTTONWOOD I7 116 N4%E 2r �,°, I (��y[y}}�. _ ,6 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 Kb .'x`° f 47 COTTONWOOD 13' 119 ASH IT H "}, x4e BOIEIDER ' 120 GTALUPA IF cx4' j _!O• -_ f I I 49 swam 1r 121 GTALWA 2r `Jp� so ELM tr 122 GTK1rA 2B' THIS SQUARE AP 17x18 FULL SIZE SHEETS. 51 COTTONWOOD 33' 123 COTTONWOOD 17 Txa e �4 v« ,s- Ax vco. z e��•""`�•-.k,.,� 63 COTTONWOOD 3S 125 X/,OLMMY N rp. „°sX`' 0.��,4y�'"'• •...._y„ SS BOIELM is ,26 ELM 3z c _ f 51 ELM IF 126 ON N 555 ASH 8 ASH 1r 121 COTTONWOOD 121 POFLAR IF ------ ------- 57 BOXEWER IS• ,29 POPLAR tr:,mT _ BOXELDER Is, 130 BOXELDER IT 131 POPLAR I OAK Zr 132 CEDAR 2r I 61 BOELDEi ,r 133 ASH 1t 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL-- iw rA wXEtDFR 21' 131 ASH 12' 63 OAK 1r 135 ASH 7r NO DATE REVISION 64 OAT( 14, 136 ASH it r I, 65 GK 2r s7 ASN IT I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifico- i 66 OAR 17 136 ASH iC tion or report was prepared by me or under n OAK M 39 ASN 4 m direct supervision and that I am a duly 6e aAx ar 149 Asx 1r Y P Y 69 1 aN r 141 AS 2r Licensed Landscape Architect under the m IAOE964Y 27 142 ASH s lows of the State of in sots. SIGNATURE:lJ TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ TREE REPLACEMENT QUANTITY REQUIREMENT CHART I / 1 - 1 I (:. I r 1[•ATION FORM 13-STEPS) SHOW THIS FORM ON PLAN DA - - EG.N !i EA14TRW;S .I Y-SPEGMEN TREES STW 0.T REFLACEMENT REOUAAEMMI Sx O an b F N E pA x n L — — coPmlaHr2m4 PROJECTNAME:� HDyoieEBEER__ _' --tsw _ c'•�T�.°�,_a tau �'c_Tw_ .. . _ 2 15_Ar CAMPUS PUD Qvooas 221 X IBTi z4'mcmHn 44 _ 12. - 4 6 YNpvlbn--fobl -TOTAL _-___ _-, TOTAL __ ,Q -- - ....- - - Atle ml�pBLnn nMtDe«la Spilt IWOONaMx ,orALREPLA�EM T$ 3� __— GOLDEN VALLEY,MN OATEGOR d rA' JRl ar CAIE(�JRY �� _ 'I --, �. '' ! At6-' - OxmeOUOVOIaM: yanlnpMers altrosx xa�Y,adv Ixi:w cB1AP°rW DRAWING TI xP T LEGEND "tori— :Ai�h�123% .�.tiGrew+v.e arovei wem�n mtiopp ;� . .� _- —_ -.-- RE'. FUTURE DEVELOPMEN A X REMOVE TREE IYW6aN0,_-__- TREE REPLACEMENT � -,.- ___. alm4wuxryWOOLAxms oM SITE _SCVcrdCwPr�FlQrw PROTECT TREE o._b�om,erlOerol°Ped ALLOWASLEREMOVK(ZO%d990%) SOFT 11wbFpuws,«.K„�P,.M7P.�.ra .l.r�. PLAN _._-\. r �R sx3NFCANr wooaA,ms REMov€D -s�cr x.:e.t0.,,.IOPOn (� se sY.+.Ar°�o6�^'�L_ -_ .- ...., ...t ,s_.-^.^•' ..'� �...._AREA TO E SOFT 01-ME 125 ANO PLACE TREE9 AS FOLLOWES. ..... ...... ....,.�._., ..- _ 21 wM_,_ 15600' •6160-.a.-_ « ----- ---- FILE: ..11301251600 D1ewingxBA11901T5L3 TREE REPLCMNT.dAg DRAWNBY: OMD — CHECKED BY: CJF 0 25' 50' 100' LIO PROJ.NO: 130125 3 DRA'MNG N0: k• J '."K -.-. fryer} .�. 14 PERFORMANCE � r<RVfPt DESIGN. LHBcorp.com 701 Washegtm Aix.N,Ste 20D I Mi�pdu,MN 554011612.338.2029 - I s u a. I a Il _I �t CLIENT: r� TENNANT COMPANY I - r 1 - t � • - -_ ( J[�) i �C! C3 : . , - W 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE Ii -- ... ,\ - � o GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 , THS SQUARE APP x1 FULLSRE SHEETS77 . — r ( _,\) _ - I 1 ! t 1 4-252814 FINAL PUD SUBMITiQ .— .. NO DATE REVISION 00"I Yr � >� I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan speatica t tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly t 1 R Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of00 QD in sofa. o-: , ,'. '4__ -. .•� - /r•.� SIGNATURE /I II _ // TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS d FERNANOEZ Y� 1 - -- ,' �f DATE:4-25-2014 REG.NO.: 45414 ODr, COPYRIGHT 2D1/BY LHB,INC.All RIGHTS RESERVED. .,i 11_ r� 1 , PROJECT NAME: ..1. ._� Q, f �, _ �� . _ � •,�, �... US PUD � � �, I .�. .. .-_.- _. ._ _. .. _ Q .� �. CAMP 0 z I ( t GOLDEN VALLEY,MN rte—- / DRAWING TITLE: \ / FUTURE DEVELOPMENT LEGEND DETENTION BASIN SEED MIX @ 13 LBS/ACRE BY PRAIRIE � _ '- - �=- ----• "` - "� MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT � PRESERVATION RVATION PLAN SHORT GRASS ECHINACEA SEED MIX Q 9.35 LBS/ACRE BY �.----'y- ^ PRAIRIE MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT EXISTING FORESTED AREAS,TO BE MAINTAINED TO PROMOTE HARDWOOD FOREST,BUCKTHORN REMOVAL AREA,HARDWOOD TREE PLANTING,AND NATIVE WOODLAND FORB SEEDING AREAS. -.r.' i i'J1�.,< 1'f�Y:V(?-... FILE: ..11301251600 LLA113pt25-L4 MNTING.hg soo DRAWN BY: BMD CHECKED BY: CJF 0 35' 70' 140' DRA NO' 30 ,25 LU is PERFORMANCE 1 ORWEN DESIGN. I I LHBcorp.com i 701 WesMgbn Ave.N,Ste 2DD I MInneapd1s,MN 5RD11612.3362029 FTI UP { t 3 4 1 ; - GT MS l " % AF 4 3 MS $ i tl AF: TO ti _ TO 10 up n.. LAJI SAF _. ; -,, 18 CLIENT: --- - _ iAF -- __ _ - _ _ - _ NT COMPANY 11 TENNA - _- 13 2 _ - _ - _ - _ — _ TA_ If GT GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 - 5 TI05 SQUARE AP 1?x12 FULLs�5I9:ET5. T TA 10 UP PLANT SCHEDULE --- 31 - TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME I COMMON NAME CONT ' r— SEE SHEET L4.1 FOR ENLARGED PUNTING PLAN I 1 475201! FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL AF 43 Acer freemanii'Autumn Blaze'/Autumn Blaze Maple 3"BB _ - NO DATE REVISION Y - - r I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan sp c' ca 1 \ I E R o i e Iii GT 18 Gleditsia triacanthos var.inermis'Impcole'/Imperial Honey Locust 3"BB tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Architect Licensed Landscape MS 6 Malus x-Spring Snow-/Spring Snow Crab Apple 3"BE the State of in sot I - lows of o under the TA 27 Tilia americana-Boulevard-/Boulevard Linden 3"BB - -- ( sIGNATu t TYPED OR PRINTED NA UP 91 Ulmus parvrfolia'frontier'/Frontier Elm 3.,BE - 1 _ II f. - t :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ TA _ DA 4-25-2014 EG.N I SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL NAME/COMMON NAME SIZE TO 24 Thuja occidentalis'Techny'/Techny Arborvitae #10 Cont. 4 COPYWGHr201e BYLHB,INC.ALLRIGNBRESERVED. SV 12 Syringe vulgaris'Wonderblue'/Wonderblue Lilac #10 CONT. t ' .. .. __ .. �.. I I I PROJECT NAME: AG 3 Amelanchierx grandiflora'Autumn Brilliance-/'Autumn Brilliance-Serviceberry B'CLUMP CAMPUS PUD _ l BG 36 Buxus'Glencoe'Chicagoland Green Boxwood 24"BB '" CS / I CS 27 Cornus sericea'Bailadeline'/Firedance Dogwood #5 CONT. TA t.—., l 27 - -` " GT PEREN. QTY BOTANICAL NAME/COMMON NAME SIZE - I 9GOLDEN VALLEY,MN CA 172 Calamagrostis x acutiflora'Karl Foerster'/Karl Foerster Grass #1 CONT. - TA TA �fti -- — DITAwWCTrnE HB 29 Hemerocallis 'Blueberry Candy'/Blueberry Candy Daylilly #1 CONT. 1 ! FUTURE DEVELOPMENT HS 28 Hemerocallis 'Stella Supreme'/Stella Supreme Daylilly #1 CONT. PLANTING PLAN L a _ HH 75 Hosta'Hadspen Blue'/Hadspen Blue Hosta #1 CONT. i TOTAL TREE QUANTITIES 13fi LEGEND EXISTING FORESTED AREAS.TO BE MAINTAINED DETENTION BASIN SEED MIX 13 LBS/ACRE BY PRAIRIE ' .. nps 11301 _ NG drq � � TO PROMOTE HARDWOOD FOREST,BUCKTHORN �- ^ � � � �; MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT REMrDVPI.AREA,HARDWOOD TREE PLANTING RLE 113017BMD Dmn LLA 25U%ArlTl SHORT GRASS ECHINACEA SEED MIX C 9.35 LBS/ACRE BV lM1Ha�NAT!`W'E WOODLAND FCtB SEEDING AREAS. _ s PRAIRIE MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT _ �„ DIECId:D Y:BMD � :�, 0 25' S0' 100' • \ �.. /. DRAWHG Bo 90125E o N: L . 60D • 1 __ 1 • PERFORMANCE _- Cts+.' ','DESIGN. .. I _ UAScorp.com 701 Waahin pl Ave.N,Ste 2001 Mwupdis,VA 554011812338.2029 _ _-_ ----1_ -, ------------ 'i 1 _ 1 1 •. , -- - _.. - _-.. - 1 1 • - - _ ->. 1 1 r CLIENT: 1 ,< TENNANT COMPANY I ,_ 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE J JJ JJJ GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 J 1 JJJJJJJJ JJJ I THUS SQUARE AP 1R'x17 FULL SRE SHEETS. 1 JJJJJJJJJ. I -- _ JJJ JJJJ) HB --- I JJJJJJJJJ ; -----____ F. JJJJJ -J -j JJJ JJJJ 29 .. •. J JJ JJJ ...... JJJ JJJJ JJJJ JJ��JJJ .. i SV JJJJ-J .: 1 a25201a FINAL PUD I , suBNlnu • ' ` BG TO NO DATE - REVISION 1 ; I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifics- -. 24 3 i- -- I tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision ndhaIamaduly - Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of a. I I SIGNATUREinrBsoi 1 ` HH + + TYPED OR PRINTED NA :CARLOS J.FERNANDEZ 1 ,.. ... • ., I � DATE:4-25-2014 REC,NO.: 45414 55 HS I COPYRIGHT 2D14 BY LNB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. UP ,.\ PROJECT NAME: . ... _, 1 � _ • CA 31 CAMPUS PUD _... DRAWING TITLE: CA- _.__ _ + = FUTURE DEVELOPMENT + PLANTING PLAN ENLARGED NOTE: + 1.SEE L4.0 FOR PLANT PROJECT PLANT SCHEDULE CA - LEGEND 89...... _ + DETENTION BASIN SEED MIX @ 13 LBS/ACRE BY PRAIRIE - - "' - _-- -'---' • + _ - FILE: ..11301E1fi00 daMngaLLA11301751d PlAN11NG.Avp MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT DRAWN BY: END SHORT GRASS ECHINACEA SEED MIX @ 9.35 LBS/ACRE BY - -a>♦--- - -- + CHECKED BY: CJF PRAIRIE MOON NURSERY OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT 0 10' 20' 40' PROU.NO:SOD �_.� + - DRAWING NO: �,� O ._._. _._-...._._ ._.. .. + PERFORMANCE jnl 't;DESIGN. I LHBcorp.com 701 WasheplalAve.N,Ste 200 Mmneapdis,MN 55401 1 612.3381029 EXISTING BUILDING I AtP 662.80.._ �. LP 661.80 684.00 - - - -MAT MATCH EX. CLIENT: 689.3 TENNANT COMPANY 1 686.30 *- 686.65 nF 888.00 WLT.807.50 < - 587 —� . BP 887.50 ^.. _ 701 NORTH LILAC VE ,_ GOLDEN VALLEY,M NI NESOTA 55422 B90 J - OPOSED BUILDING. TW B89Op THIS SQUARE AP 17217 FULL SDE SHEETS. 1 BS 892.50 FI TLEVEL ELEV=4P1.00 SW 894.00• 0.91 984.88 L RLEVELELEV=888.OD . - -— TS889. F� 1 � 90115 "BAS 899.38 _., 896.78 TW 903.50 W _ 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL BW 895. NO DATE REVISION _—_— sem, I T fi I' 1 6ss.50 ��• iao 1 SODAS 1 .SSHP ��1 0 `'Oa�Z 1�� 0 900.88 I 1 x I � 9 .88 e, 1 COPYRIGHT 2014 BY UB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 1 '+ ❑ 1 II 1 - PROJECTMIME: - CAMPUS PUD 1 1 _ GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 1 ; I 898.65 ORAW1NGTmE: 698.95 _ � ...�'-- � � t. FUTURE DEVELOMENT 1 GRADING PLAN 7 05 r I - MATCH IX FILE' ..1190129SW OnnWnps1C1190725-M1tlMing Plan.dwp MATCH EX I DRAWN BY: BIJD j 0 25' 50' 100' PROJ.NO: 130125 DRAWING N0: c I■o 1 PERFORMANCE I;RI'VEN DESIGN. I LHBcorp.com 701 Watiro n Ave.N.Ste 200 MiNle OoL MN 55401 1612 3362029 1 1 LEGEND: I -I- WATER AWN J -•-",,, -»- STORM SEWER ✓ 1 ->- SANITARY SEWER DRAINME _ Ijj jAi _. CS01A - ....' HYDRANT OUTFLOW :-.... - BN=878.45 CgpIB j , �i CATCH BASIN POINT 1 PoM=83.00 _ _.INV-878.40 _- 1 STORM MANHOLE ,TIE INTO EXISTING CB _ - INV-97a.5D !. - ,iSLF - --_ + � - _- _� DG GATE VALE -�8'RCP®0.5X yc< 15 RCP@0.5X �� 10LF-,7 RCP�1.0%... ® ,DIF-18'RCP THRUST BLOCK 0.5% < -- Iy «- CBU "R-cp�� - --- CB05 «�(<« RIM-0.12 17 .11� S2p5% -�__ -___ SANITARY MANHOLE RIM=SM45 « INV M)*n.82 _ __ INV�7478 IWASp877.82 � � ��- � CLIENT: ,I FILTRATION AREA I. 21IF-IS'RCP@0.5% CB01A wC Mm _ CBUIBM14=8 RV=878.,5 TENNANT COMPANY RIN14NA3 _T WV47.71 INV�78.81 INV(NW)-W.71 O1W8,8.71 I MHOS _ PRETREATMENT STRUCTURE I �- NM'-889.75 1 INV(E,Wj=BB1.75 - --_ - INV(S)-a.. NV NST Film TO BSBSp - - =T '-r PVC --- j 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE -� 26LF-1rRCP Q1 j 0 ' FlLTRanoNAREA4 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 I RIV-887.50 I _ I r- RMh-889.80 I SURFACE FILTRATION PROPOSED BUILDING RN(S1=85.90 I Y FIRST LEVEL ELEV-W.00 6 , INV ® j LOWER LEVEL ELEV4B9.00 � THIS SOUARE 17x12 FULL SITE SHEETS. MkeB13 1I I 9 eI BUILDING CONNECTION J e saF 1rROP®o x R�ir7 J I ^ 1 - - - - c9Dee INV n ! - 1 K .78 &M I 30LF-tr RCP®05%+ I CBO 'irRCyMO I AA \�� 31LF-1r RCPG0.5% 1 4252014 FINAL PUD SLIBAIITTAL PoM=898.80 57LF-12'RCP®0.5% I INV�3.17 NO DATE REVISION IM MH08 < 1 IVn J , C a3o 1 RNV�88. FILTRATION AREA 2. MHti ' C813 36 I I , CH4MBFR SYSTEM RIM=900.00 PoM-599.08 INV X."1.74 ' 1 I 9INVISE�9.19 PRETREATMENT STRUCTURE RIM28BB.00g� Vct ` 0 By asz.ro I I 1 1 FORGO ��4 SANITARY MANHOLE RIM 119B.33 I - - - ' COPYRIGHT 20,4 BY LI®,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECT NAME: 1 'I CAMPUS PUD .. MH14 -v 1 MH16 cell ♦♦ GOLDEN VALLEY,MN I PoM�BTAll PRETREATMENT STRUCTURE PoM=1107.35 INV-�91.88 v /`�1 „INV=2.41' C811B - 18 F•,r RCP®o.sx I oRAwBICTmE: PoM=897.35 �-1BOLF-1r RCP®o.sx� ♦ - � LF 12'RCP 03% � FUTURE DEVELOPMENT « CBI5B.05 UTILITY PLAN CB17A a ( -�XIV�829 •� NV=0.95 NV�K,A7 ,V, FI ILTRATION ARFi13. i 72 CHAMBER SYSTEM CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY .. - ...TIE INTO EXISTING MH F WITH WYE BIV=881AD2FILE: ..11 3 0 1 2518 0 0 OrvwingslC1130125q.1-UNAy Plen.dwg - INV491.1 - OUTFLOW - AND TAPPING SLEEVE DRAWN JTC '. AND VALVE CIECIIa:O BY: MJW POINT 0 25' 50' 100' DRAWING90125 c2,0 PERFORMANCE r I, DRIVEI`,DESIGN. A :I�I III= A LHBwrp.com 701 Wwh4tDn Ave.N,Ste 21101 Mromplls,MN 554011612.3382029 � 1111 'Ii1�I II' PLAN-80•BEND CRETE kL -I -� CON NCONTACT II b ...I. FELT � TRAFRC RATED CAST IRON FRAME AND UD. 1` UTILITY TRENCH NEENAH FOUNDMYR-75140R APPROVED `\ _ WITH THIS QUADRANT = BAC#TILL/S SPECIFIED EOUNALENT.PROVIDE 3318'DIAANCNOR RODS. `� 1=1 OF PIPE(MIN.) LID SHALL BE MARKED WITH AN'S' III= BEDDING MATERIAL FINISH GROUND PROVIDE ISIXATION JOINT AROUND CONCRLZE A PAD IN IN CONCRETE PAwNCa51DEWALK PLANd6'BEND SECTION AA T?r INITIAL BACKFILL B ffi45* SHAPE TRENCH TO BEND OR 2218° !q'BENDS TEES R ''rMATCH BELL SECTIONBRANCH SIZE B B D B D 120' 120' CLIENT: 18'x18518'CONCRETE PAD CENTEREDAROUNDLID.CONCRETESHALLCONFORM RISER ,'� TENNANT COMPANY TOIMDOTSPEC.3105 ' 1'-0' ' ' ° ' ' '' ' BAND CUSHIONNOTE: 1T 14' 0' 74r 73' 7-7 74' PIPE BEDDING PLACE C EANOUTS EVERY 100 INCLUDING THE VERTICAL DISTANCE A ROC(TRENCH BLOCgNG NOTES: 45'BEND 1. DIMENSIONS IN TABLE ARE BASED ON A WATER NORMAL TRENCH PRESSURE OF 150 PSI AND AN EARTH RESISTANCE DRAINPIPE WYE OF 2 TONS PER so.FOOT. 701 NORTH(LILAC DRIVE 2.3. CONCRETE SHALL BE GRADEBNG To BE SET AGAINST USPEC246EDBOIL 1.DNENSIONS:1. BMMAXII� TH-O.D.PIPE-26' GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 FLOW_ CONCRETE SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH MECHANICAL JOINTS. CLEANOUT 2 THRUST BLOC FOR WATER MAINS R NCH S TIONS FOR D.I. PI R PVC WATER MAINS THIS SQUARE AP 7.1x FULL SRESHEETS. NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE 3 NOT TO SCALE LMR OF EXCAVATION REINFORCING EACH WAY AS REQUIRED FOR -- _----- SEE TABLE FOR SPACING TAPPING MACHINE ALTERNATE COVERS 1 4.25.2D14 FINAL PUD SUBMTTAL FINISH GRADE MANHOLE:NEEN4H R-1683 A B C D K _-_ NO DATE _.--REVISION AREA INLET:NEENAH R-2535 OR PAVEMENT 4B' S'-_ EXISTING PIPE DDRB INLET:NFFNNAX R-3075 — HEREBY CERTIFY that this Ian, s ecifica- ___ � ; - -- sD• ; 6' 7e• a 8'� NEw PIPE P P T— 7r r sr e 7 - tion or report was prepared by me or under NG - my direct supervision and that I am D duly GROuT -SEAT FRAME IN I' r 64' B• lair 6 e' Licensed Professional Engineer under the MORTAR SETTING BEDENT RINGS ...- - laws of the State of Minnesota. 2 10 to120' 11' 118' 17 11' DIELECTRIC FITTING $IGNATURE: .d'/J/'L/CENTBC CONCRETE CONE --- NEWTAPPING SLEEVE E JUNCTION SME MANHOLE OTWN FORA>7T < _ __ _ - _ _ __ TYPED OR PRINTED NAME.MELISSA M.WHITE E FlATCOVERFORHT T 1-1R'CR A BASEREINF. 1 COVER REINF. DATE.4/25/2014 REG.N0..46192 STEPS NEENAH R4980 EA ORAPPROVED EQUALBASE SLAB 60' 'M�iT 1p(36PLAN VIEW COPYRIGHT2011 BY 1H5,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. RISER SECTION IT I9�12' I 1K1Q8'(H=1.0'fi.0') IM@.B' ! 11304' PROJECT NAMEiM' 1M♦3 B' (3481' REINFORCING EACH WAY CAM P U P U D SEE TABLE FOR SPACING lorEN I4®10' I3 4' LIMIT OF EXCAVATION A B (2)EXTRA BAR IN 120' Y4Q8' I3@4' Ili I BOTTOM NEW VALVE CAST N PLACE OR PRECAST �.-t- I-4- GENERAL NOTES: CONCRETE NEW PIPE BE SLABTABLE ! BOTTOM BARN BLOCgNG I REINFORCEMENT. FOR - BOTTOM MANHOLES SHALL BE MANUFACTURED N ACCORDANCE WITH O REINFORCEMENT. I ASTM G78. - r K ''I MAXIMUM FILL OVER COVER u CONCRETE GOLDEN VALLEY,MN T PIPE OPENINGS SHALL BE OVERSIZED FOR PLACEMENT AND SUPPORT -- FIELD GROUTED TO PLAN INVERT ELEVATIONS. _^ I DRAWING TIRE: POURED INVERT -- PRECAST SECTIONS TO BE SEALED WITH ARUBBER GASIFY W4 DIAMETER __--. -_---- '-. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ABOVE FLOW LINE ! JOINT. y D t 1-1Q'CLR LO CONCRETE SECTIONS DESIGNED FOR AASHTOHB20 STANDARD DETAILS LOADING. SECTIONAL VIEW STANDARD MANHOLE SECTION' COVER STEPS TO BE PLACED ATA MAXIMUM I6'SPACING CONFORMING TO ASTM C-479 AND OSHA REQUIREMENTS. DEPTH TO FIRST STEP SHALL NOT EXCEED 24'. 4 PR CAT ATCH AS?N AN MANN E 5 TAPPING A roLN GSLEEVE AND VALVE FILE: ..`13D12MDravAnO`Ct30125D5'-DOWIsAn NOTDRAWN BY: JTC NOT TO SCALE CHECKED Hr. MJW C3.� PROD.N0: 13N2525 DRAWING NO: PERFORMANCE NOW PAVED AREAS PAVED AREAS DRI f'DESIGN. TOPSOIL&VEGETATION RESTORATION, LHBcorp.com SEE PIAN(TYP.) —FINISH GRADE 701 WashYlplm Ave.N,Ste 2001 MinneapNis,MN 554011612.3362029 PAVEMENT,OR CONCRETE W &DETAILS. RACK UTILITY TRENCH BAgff / ILL(TYP.) S o— INITIAL BACWILL QYP.) PIPE - a, PIPE BEDDING (TYP.) 1' CLIENT: 1 SQIL TRENCH ALL SEWER PIPE TENNANT COMPANY NOT TO SCALE 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 THIS SQUARE AP 17t1IC FALL SIZE SHEETS. 1 482014 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan, specifica— CB tion or report was prepared by me or under 4'CLEAN(OUT 3 TYP.)ON MAIN RIMI PLAN my direct supervision and that I am a duly STORMTECH SC-740 STORAGE CHAMBER @ 0.00% un STORAGE CHAMBERS Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the ��State of Minnesota. STORMTECHSGHDPE SAND FILTER OVERFLOW 740 STORAGE SIGNATURE: /7ipLIXA1_ Uht CLEAN OUT 1-EACH ON TYPED OR PRINTED NAME:MELISSA M.WHITE 6 DRAINTILE IE SEE PLAN 5.50' ROCK BED DATE:4/25/2014 REG.NO.:46192 6'HDPE DRAINTILE IE=SEE PLAN(2) r. -.�,i� e,.��',11 �,. ,> ;� _ _ _ __ - � COPYRIGHT 20148Y 1HB,INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. IE=SEE PLAN PROJECT NAME: � i li l CAMPUS PUD .0.50, 777 FILTERSAND FABRIC AROUND II HDPE OUTLET TO EAST OUTSIDE AND IN _ III—J - IE=SEE PLAN BETWEEN LAYERS - GOLDEN VALLEY MN ROCK BED — ---------------------------------- DRAWING— �� FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRACER WIRE STANDARD DETAILS 1-IN MINIMUM BELOW DRAM I I LE 6"HDPE DRAINTILE TRACER WIRE 6'HDPE DRAINTILE 0.00% — __ SAND FILT R FILE .'13012=daaa*0130125-052-0Ned&"" 2 NOT TO SCALE DRAWN BY: JTC CHECKED BY: MJw ��Na, 26 Oil OFFICE OFFICE OPEN OFFICES PERFORMANCE Di_Ov I N DESIGN. OFFICE OFFICE FERE C T T ®O® 7D1AvaKBY 7001 MfwepW,MIN SI01i812.938.10� C NFEREN ■OFFICE STORAGE T T OFFICE■ BREAK RECEPTION ROM ET G ET G ® J.C. OFFICE OFFICE OPEN OFL ONFORMA�FI F OFFICE MEETIN OffICE 3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN OFFICE OFFICE CuENT. OPE IDES TENNANT COMPANY OFFICE OFFICE C STORA"Je T T O® ■OFFICE -------- T T RECE OFFICE■ 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE REAK EA y00M Me G C NFEREN ® ®��® GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA55471 �] J.C. OFFICE OFFICE TMSa11AtE 17x17 NFULL S�BFEETB. OPE ICES OFFICE NFORMAL ,,OFFICE MEETIN ■ 2 5 BCOND FLOOR PLAN 1 4-25-M FINALPimBUBMITTAL I -----------, ND DAZE WMKIN UP ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ tion or HEREBY CERTIFY was Prepared that this by me orr under ecifica- DELIVERY VERANDA my direct hit and that I am duly 1 � Licensed ArcArchitecec t under the laws of -----------' 130=0130=0 the State of Minnesota. O O OIL T TO 0 TYPED OR MINTED NAME:Ft&=Cwrmg STORAGE STORAGE O 9F ■ ■ SHOWROOM SHOWROOM OB Y ® ■ �� + & ' UNEXCAVATED AND ILET HANDLING J� TO COPYIN f7D14ByD{B.N , C.ALLNGWS ® J.C. O OO �0 0 0 ® �f How NAI, SERVICE 0 ®®® ®® CAMPUS PUD TOILE OILET AREA VERANDA E m 11111 ___1 I GOLDEN VALLEY,MN I rAuwex;TRIE ANNEX 1 BUILDING PLANS 1 1 1 1 1 EXISTING SERVICE 1 _J BUILDING FILE: .113012NM DielAngiAWW hW B"130MGTT8 A'-dLft DRAWMBY:RJA 06DDD BY'RBC LOWER LEVEL PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN PRDJ Na. 13013 A2.0 �■O DPAWMNa PERFORMANCE DESIGN. Llikmp.e 701 WWegtm Ari K 3112001 AwORM 49NS5401 1612.9951029 MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE _. . MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE PARAPET-52'0" PREFINISHED INSULATED METAL PARAPET-52'0• CCEAt ... .. _. _. _. ._. PANELS PREFINISHED INSULATED ROOF-48'0• ROOF-48'0' METALPANELS I I I - - SUNSCREENS SUNSCREENS 3RD-34'0' . 3RD-34'0' PREFINISHED ALUMINUM PREFINISHED ALUMINUM WINDOW WALL WINDOW WALL SYSTEM SYSTEM 2ND-20'0" PREFINISHED ALUMINUM EXISTING BUILDING WINDOW WALL SYSTEM EXISTING BUILDING x 1 STONE VENEER STONEVENEER ITZET—RETAININGWALL GLASS RAILING Q1pR, 1ST-0'0" ]M I 1ST'0' i I I � I LOWER LEVEL TENNANT COMPANY I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 4 EAST EPEVATION SOUTHP LEVATION 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 TNN SQUAW—B- QUARE 1?x17 F'ULSnOEET3. 1 4-25-2014 FINALPUDSUNIITAL ND DATE FMION I HEREBY CERTIFY that this plan,specifica— tion or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the lows of the State of Minnesota. S=AIUE; MECHANICAL MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE _ ® PENTHOUSE IYPED OR PRINTED NNE RS1n Co—d PREFINISHED DATE 4r1N014 REG N0.'1!790 PARAPET-52'0' PARAPET-570' INSULATED METAL PREFINISHED INSULATED ROOF-48'0' METAL PANELS ROOF-48'0' PANELS SUNSCREENS SUNSCREENS COPYRIGIa10fIBYLHR,SG ALLRNRIIS . PROECf NATE 3RD-34'0' PREFINISHED ALUMINUM 3RD-34'0' PREFINISHED CAMPUS PUD WINDOW WALL SYSTEM ALUMINUM _. .... _ - WINDOWWALL SYSTEM 2ND-20'0' _.. _. _... _.. .. 2ND-20'0' STONE VENEER xxAx' EXISTING BUILDING GOLDEN VALLEY,MN GLASS RAIUNG DRAWNDTmE. 1ST-°'0' STONE VENEER OVERHEAD DOOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR STAIRCASE EMERGENCY EXIT RETAINING WALL LOWER LEVEL LOWER-(15'0') LOWER-15'0' L� 3 WEST ELEVATION � NORTFpELEVATION FRE: ..1190129A00 haNrypN\9®IdIUp�Boel19o18GTle Nrhdlq DRANway.RJA a*QWef'RD C OR""No. A3.0 PERFORMANCE URIVU, DESIGN. LHEIcorp.com 701 VINMOM Ave.N,Ste 2001 Wwwa*js,WIN 55401 1612338.2029 mW—ft-6 CLIENT: TENNANT COMPANY 701 NORTH LILAC DRIVE c GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 55422 To SQUARE APPE-E]IN FULLAWE SHEETS. 1 45=4 FINAL PUD SUBMITTAL NO DATE REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY that this pion, specifica- tion or report was prepared by me or under , I: my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the P3 lows of the State of Minnesota. SIGNATURE: TYPED OR PRINTED NAME AWAM NICHOLS DANE 04/24/2014 REG.NO.;49664 GENERAL SHEET NOTES COPYRIGHT 2D14 BY LHIL INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 1. SITE LIGHTING DESCH SHALL COMPLY KITH REQUIREMENTS OF 2011 NFPA 70(NATIONAL ELECTRICAL PROXCT NAME: CODE).20`12 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE(IECC),AND GOLDEN VALLEY CITY CODE SECTION I[1,1,1.1,1 11-:77 CAMPUS PUD 11.71 OUTDOOR LIGHTING. 2. SITE LIGHTING DESGN SHALL COMPLY WTH RECOMMENDA71ONS OF THE ILLUMINATION ENGINEERING SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA(JESNA)LIGHTING HANDBOOK 10TH EDITION. AREA LIGHTING CALULATION NOTES 3. UNDERGROUND CONDUIT SERVING LIGHTING CIRCUITS FRICINTA GE t9OAL9 SHALL BE MINIMUM 1'SCHEDULE 40 PVC WITH A GOLDEN VALLEY,IVIN 1. ALL LIGHTING CALCULATIONS PERFORMED USING LIGHTING MINIMUM 1B,COVER. ANALYISTS AG13Z VERSION 2.22. DRAWING TINE: I LIGHT LOSS FACTOR OF 0.8 APPLIED TO LED LUMINAIRES FOR MODEUNG PURPOSES. ELECTRICAL SHEET LEGEND ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN (OLSON MEMORIAL HIGHWA Y) STA TE HIC&I-1WA Y NO. 55 a TYPE A2 LUMINAIRES MODELED BASED ON 0 MCGRAW-EDISON GALLEON LED SERIES LUMNARE, NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE TRANSFORMER CATALOG NUMBER GLEON-AA-04-LIED-EI-11 IIA2 FULL-CUTOFF LED AREA LUMINAIRE ON W POLE TYPE 2 4. TYPE A4 LUMINARIES MODELED BASED ON DISIRSUTION. MCGRAW-EDISON GALLEON LED SERIES LUMNAIRE, CAT"NUMBER GLEON-AA-04-LED-E7-T4. IMFU1JL-CUTOFF LED AREA LUMINAIRE ON 30'POLE TYPE 4 DISTRIBUTION. 5. TYPE AS LUMINAIRES MODELED BASED ON MCGRAW-EDISDIN GALLEON LED SERIES UUMINAIRE. IIA5 FULL-CUTOFF LED AREA LUMINAIRE ON 30'POLL TYPE 5 • CATALOG NUMBER GLEON-AA-04-LED-El-SWQ. WIDE DISTRIBUTION. FILE: ..1130126=Dm%inps1E1l3Oi25EiDPJEW.6n DRAWN BY. VISIN CHIFCM BY:WSN PRW.NO: 130125 MWING0. EIA ORDINANCE NO. 524, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Approval of Final Plan of Development Tennant Company P.U.D. No. 114 Tennant Company, Applicant The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" is amended in Section 11.10, Subd. 2, and Section 11.55, by approving the Final Plan of Development for Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) 114, thereby allowing the applicant to consolidate its multiple properties into one parcel to enable inter-campus connections. This PUD is subject to all of the terms of the permit to be issued including, but not limited to the following specific conditions: 1. The plans dated April 25, 2014 prepared by LHB submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated July 9, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Public Works Department to Mark Grimes, Community Development Director, dated May 23, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 5. The implementation of the fire access restriping shall be completed by November 1, 2014. 6. The Applicant shall implement the three Priority 1 items in the Fire Protection Plan by November 1, 2014. 7. The Applicant shall implement the three Priority 2 items in the Fire Protection Plan by November 1, 2015. The Applicant must submit a financial security as a guarantee the work will be completed on time. 8. The Applicant shall construct surface filtration (rain gardens) as part of the walkway construction authorized under the Final PUD Plan. 9. The Applicant shall install a stormwater filtration chamber within three years of the execution date of the Final PUD Plan. The Applicant must submit a financial security as a guarantee the work will be completed on time. 10.The sanitary service for the buildings located at 5738 and 5808 Olson Memorial Highway must be brought into compliance by November 1, 2014, or the Applicant must enter into an 1/1 Deposit Agreement for the repairs prior to approval of the PUD Permit and Development Agreement. 11.The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 114" in its title. 12.All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 13.This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Ordinance No. 524 -2- In addition the Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 6(Q): 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Section 2. The tract of land affected by this ordinance is legally described as follows: Parcel 1: That part of Government Lot 2, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, lying North of a line described as beginning at a point on the West line of said Government Lot 2 distant 674.6 feet North along said West line and its extension from the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 55, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence East parallel to said center line 143 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South parallel to said West line 16.2 feet to the Northwest corner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence East parallel to said center line 136.28 feet to the Northeast corner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence East parallel to said center line 60 feet to the Northeast corner of Tract E, Registered Land Survey No. 11, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence Easterly 278.5 feet to a point 658.54 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 9001; thence Easterly 139 feet to a point 658.17 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Cast No. 9001; thence North parallel to said West line 13.02 feet to a point 671.19 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence Easterly 105 feet to a point 670.72 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South parallel to said West line 12.8 feet to a point 657.92 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence Easterly 174 feet to a point 657.79 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North parallel to said West line 24.21 feet to a point 682 feet North of said center line along a line running parallel to said West line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; Ordinance No. 524 -3- thence East along a line which intersects that East line of said Government Lot 2 distant 682 feet North along said East line and its extension from the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 55 to a point 33 feet West along said line from the said East line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence continuing East along said line 33 feet to the East line of said Government Lot 2 and lying South of a line described as beginning at a point on the West line of said Government Lot 2 distant 272.35 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence East, along a line which intersects the East line of said Government Lot 2 at a point 272.35 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof, to a point 1080 feet West of said East line, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence Southeasterly to a point on the East line of said Government Lot 2 distant 422.35 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark placed at the intersection of said last descried line with a line drawn parallel to ant 33 feet West, measured at right angles from said East line, Except that part of the above-described land shown as Parcel 2096 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-104. Parcel 2: The North 100 feet of the following described premises: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21 described as beginning at the intersection of the West line of said Government Lot 3 with the centerline of State Trunk Highway No. 55; thence North along the West line of said Government Lots 3 and 2 a distance of 674.6 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026: thence East parallel to said centerline 143 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026: thence South parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 16.2 feet to the Northwest corner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11 which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence continuing South parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 to the said center line; thence West along said center line 143 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 3: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3 Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, described as beginning at the intersection of the West line of said Government Lot 3, with the centerline of State Trunk Highway No. 55; thence North along the West Line of said Government Lots 3 and 2 a distance of 674.6 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence East parallel to said center line 143 feet, which pint is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence South parallel to the West Line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 16.2 feet to the Northwest corner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence continuing South parallel to the West Line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 to the said center line; thence West along said center line 143 feet to the point of beginning except the North 100 feet thereof, according to the Government Survey thereof. Parcel 4: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 11, Hennepin County, Minnesota Parcel 5: Tract D, Registered Land Survey No. 11, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Ordinance No. 524 -4- Parcel 6: Tract E, Registered Land Survey No. 11, County of Hennepin. Parcel 7: That part of Government Lots Two (2) and Three (3), Section Thirty-three (33), Township One Hundred Eighteen (118), Range Twenty-one (21). Described as follows: Commencing at a point in the centerline of County Road 6th Avenue North, 339.28 feet East from the West line of Government Lot 3, thence East along the centerline of said road, 139.25 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of Government Lots 2 and 3 a distance of 658.61 feet; thence West 139.25 feet; thence South to beginning. Parcel 8: The North 300 feet of the following described property, to-wit: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, described as beginning at a point in the center line of 6th Avenue North, 617.78 feet East along said line from the West line of said Government Lot 3, thence East along said center line a distance of 139 feet, thence North along a line parallel with the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3, a distance of 165.02 feet to the point of intersection of said line with a Northerly line of State Highway No. 55 which point is marked by a judicial landmark and is the actual point of beginning of the land about to be described; thence continuing North along said parallel line a distance of 493.15 feet to a point marked by judicial landmark, thence West a distance of 139 feet to a point in the line parallel to the West line of said Lots 2 and 3 which point is marked by a judicial landmark and is located 658.54 feet North along said line from the center line of said 6th Avenue North, thence South along said parallel line a distance of 493.54 feet to the point of intersection with said parallel line with the North line of said State Highway, which point is marked by a judicial landmark, thence East along the North line of said highway 139 feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning. Parcel 9: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, described as beginning at a point in the center line of 6th Avenue North, 617.78 feet East along said line from the West line of said Government Lot 3, thence East along said center line a distance of 139 feet, thence North along a line parallel with the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3, a distance of 165.02 feet to the point of intersection of said line with the Northerly line of State Highway No. 55, which point is marked by judicial landmark and is the actual point of beginning of the land about to be described; thence continuing North along said parallel line a distance of 493.15 feet to a point marked by judicial landmark, thence West a distance of 139 feet to a point in a line parallel to the West line of said Lots 2 and 3 which point is marked by a judicial landmark and is located 658.54 feet North along said line from the center line of said 6th Avenue North, thence South along said parallel line a distance of 493.54 feet to the point of intersection with said parallel line with the North line of said State Highway, which point is marked by judicial landmark, thence East along the North line of said highway 139 feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning, except the North 300 feet thereof. Parcel 10: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3 of Section 33, Township 118, North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the center line of Trunk Highway No. 55 distant 756.78 feet East along said center line from the West line of said Government Lot 3; thence East along said center Ordinance No. 524 -5- line 105 feet; thence North parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 3, a distance of 172.14 feet, which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13280; thence continuing North parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 a distance of 485.78 feet, which pint is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence continuing North parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 12.8 feet, which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence Westerly 105 feet to a point 671.19 feet North of said center line along a line running from the point of beginning and parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3, which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence South parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 13.02 feet to a point 658.17 feet North of said center line along a line running from the point of beginning and parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 3 and 2, which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 9001; thence continuing South parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 to a point 165.02 feet North of said center line along a line running from the point of beginning and parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 3, which point is marked by a judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 9001; thence continuing South to the point of beginning: except that part thereof which lies between two lines run parallel with and distant 150 feet and 160 feet Northwesterly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. From a point on the West line of Section 19, Township 29 North, Range 24 West, distant 757.6 feet North of the West Quarter corner thereof, run Easterly at right angles to said West section line for 46 feet to the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence deflect to the right at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 235.6 feet; thence deflect to the right at an angle of 44 degrees 39 minutes 00 seconds for 500 feet; thence deflect to the right on a 11 degrees 11 minutes 50 seconds curve (delta angle 46 degrees 04 minutes 00 seconds ) for 411.41 feet and there terminating Parcel 11: That part of Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 33, Township 118, Range 21, described as beginning at a point on the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 55, distant 861.78 feet East along said center line from the West line of said Government Lot 3; thence East along said center line 174 feet; thence North Parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 3 and 2, a distance of 657.79 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence Westerly 1744 feet to a point 657.92 feet North of said center line along a line running from the point of beginning and parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 3 and 2, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 13026; thence South parallel to the West line of said Government Lots 2 and 3 a distance of 485.78 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrents Case No. 13280; thence South along said parallel line to the point of beginning, according to the Government Survey thereof. Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Ordinance No. 524 -6- Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 15th day of July, 2014. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A Luedke, City Clerk Cit0 g Id- o en!k. MEMORANDUM valley City Administration Council 763-593-8003/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 6. A. First Consideration of Ordinance Amendment - City Code Sections 2.30- 2.36 - City Departments Prepared By Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Summary As discussed at the July 8 Council/Manager meeting, the City Code does not reflect the current or most recent organizational structures. Some examples: Section 2.32 establishes a Public Safety Department with a Director of Public Safety as its Department Head. The City has not had a Public Safety Department since 2007. This Section also states that the Director of Public Safety appoints the Fire Chief, which is the responsibility of the City Manager. In addition, previous Public Safety Department responsibilities have included the Inspections Department and Building Maintenance function, neither of which is included as responsibilities listed in this Section of the Code. Section 2.33 establishes an Administrative Services Department with a Director of Administrative Services as its Department Head. Since 1991, the Department Head for the Administrative Services Department has been the Finance Director. Because City Code Section 2.30 gives the City Manager authority to adopt, amend and revise a Table of Organization and define lines of responsibility and authority, both the City Attorney and Consulting Attorney have advised rescinding City Code Sections 2.31 - 2.36 (inclusive) to alleviate any future discrepancies between the actual organizational structure and the City Code. In addition, there was some confusion as to the interpretation of the language "by resolution" in Section 2.30, Subdivision 3 of the City Code. Both the City Attorney and Consulting Attorney advised that this language refers to the City Manager's resolution. In order to alleviate any future confusion, the Attorneys suggested amending Section 2.30 to make the language more clear. At the Council/Manager meeting, Council directed staff to bring forward an ordinance amendment where the City Council may pass a resolution establishing City Departments in consultation with the City Manager. Lastly, throughout the entire City Code, there are specific names of departments, titles of department heads and other positions that are referenced. Because the entire City Code is not routinely updated in the event that a position title or department within the organization is changed, staff suggests changing these specific references in the City Code to "...the City Manager or his/her designee." Attachments • City Code Sections 2.30 - 2.36 (7 pages) • Ordinance No. 525, 2nd Series, An Ordinance Amendment Relating to the Departments of the City (1 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 525, 2nd Series, An Ordinance Amending Sections of City Code relating to the Departments of the City on first consideration. § 2.30 Section 2.30: Departments Generally Subdivision 1. Control All Departments of the City are under the overall control of the City Manager. Heads of all Departments are responsible to the City Manager and subject to his supervision and direction. Subdivision 2. Appointment All Department Heads and employees shall be appointed by the City Manager. All appointments shall be for an indeterminate term and subject to any applicable Civil Service Regulations in effect in the City. Subdivision 3. Table of Organization and Lines of Responsibility The City Manager may by resolution adopt, amend, and from time to time revise, a Table of Organization and define lines of responsibility and authority for the efficient governmental organization of the City. Subdivision 4. Budgetary Information The Heads of all Departments shall, prior to August 1 in each year, file with the City Manager the projected financial needs of his Department for the ensuing year. Such projections shall include information as to maintenance and operation of equipment, new equipment, personnel, and such other information as may be requested by the City Manager. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.31 Section 2.31: Public Works Department A Public Works Department is hereby established. The Head of such Department shall be the Director of Public Works. The City streets, utilities, engineering, park maintenance and shops shall be under the direct supervision of the Director and the Director shall be responsible for and have custody of all property of such Department. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.32 Section 2.32: Public Safety Department A Public Safety Department is hereby established. The Head of this Department shall be the Director of Public Safety. The Department shall consist of a Police Division, a Fire Division and an Emergency Management Division. The Police Division shall be responsible for the public peace and good order, the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders and the enforcement of all laws. The Fire Division shall be responsible for the prevention and removal of fire hazards, fire fighting and other emergency services. The Director of Public Safety shall designate a member of the Fire Division as Fire Chief. Members of the Police Division shall have the powers and authority of police or peace officers generally. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.33 Section 2.33: Administrative Services Department An Administrative Services Department is hereby established. The Head of this Department shall be the Director of Administrative Services. The Department shall be responsible for all administrative services, including Accounting, Data Processing, Financial Management, Deputy Registrar and Elections. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.34 Section 2.34.: Parks and Recreation Department A Parks and Recreation Department is hereby established. The Head of this Department shall be the Director of Parks and Recreation. All park and recreational activities shall be under the direct supervision of the Director and the Director shall be responsible for and have custody of all property of such Department. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.35 Section 2.35: Inspections Department An Inspections Department is hereby established. The Head of this Department shall be the Chief of Fire and Inspections. All building and fire inspections, and community health services shall be under the direct supervision of the Chief. Source: Ordinance No. 179, 2nd Series Effective Date: 6-11-98 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 § 2.36 Section 2.36: Planning and Development Department A Planning and Development Department is hereby established. The Head of this Department shall be the Director of Planning and Development. It is the duty of the Director to work with the Planning Commission in an advisory capacity and on a continuing basis to make suggestions as to future changes in the development of the City, and handles zoning matters, including providing staff to the Board of Zoning Appeals for zoning variances. Source: Ordinance No. 179, 2nd Series Effective Date: 6-11-98 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 525, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS OF CITY CODE RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is a Statutory "Plan B" city under Minnesota law, vesting all administrative authority and responsibility in a City Manager; WHEREAS, all Departments of the City are under the overall control of the City Manager, who has the authority to adopt, amend and from time to time revise the organization of City Departments; WHEREAS, the Golden Valley City Code sets forth a specific administrative and Department structure in Sections 2.31-2.36 that the City Manager may wish to change from time to time to ensure the efficient organization of the City in accordance with the changing needs, strategic plans, and current policies of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. Sections 2.31 through 2.36, inclusive, of the Golden Valley City Code are hereby rescinded in their entirety and are of no further force and effect. Section 2. Section 2.30, Subdivision 3 of the Golden Valley City Code is changed to read as follows (struck text deleted; underlined text added).- Table dded):Table of Organization and LinesAreas of Responsibility The City Manayer--Council may by resolution adept establish, amend, and from time to time revise he Departments of the City, in consultation with the City Manager.and The City Manager shall define lines-areas of responsibility and lines of authority for each Department, all towards the efficient organization and operation of the City. Section 3. References in the Golden Valley City Code to specific Departments of the City, and to titles of Heads of Departments and other City officials, are changed to.- ..."the City Manager or his/her designee". Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of August, 2014. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/ Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city o golden*.*.ArMEM0RANDUM Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 6. B. Proposed Revisions to City Code, Section 9.07, Parking During Snow Plowing and Removal, First Consideration Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Mark Ray, PE, Street Maintenance Supervisor Summary At the May 13, 2014 Council/Manager meeting, the City Council directed staff to develop a City-wide parking restriction on public streets and alleys during the winter. The proposed restriction was discussed at the July 8, 2014 Council/Manager meeting. The proposed revisions to Golden Valley City Code, Chapter 9, Parking Regulations, Section 9.07, Parking During Snow Plowing and Removal, clarify existing parking restrictions and implement the new City-wide restriction from November 1 through March 31. Clarifications were made in the section title to better reflect the seasonal provisions of the proposed code. The clarification in Subdivision 1 addresses the fact that City Public Works crews may plow a street or alley multiple times during a large snow event. Even though the street or alley may have been plowed, continuing snow accumulation can result in the need to continue parking restrictions until crews are able to make the final pass once the snow event has concluded. Subdivision 3 is the new subdivision which will restrict public street and alley parking from November 1 through March 31 from 12:00 midnight until 6 a.m. daily. Staff does anticipate that special circumstances will result in requests for temporary exemptions to the restrictions. These requests will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and reasonable temporary accommodations made where appropriate. Attachments • Section 9.07 Parking During Snow Plowing and Removal, redline version (1 page) • Ordinance No. 526, 2nd Series, An Ordinance Amending the City Code,Amending Section 9.07, Winter Parking Regulations (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 526, 2nd Series, An Ordinance Amending the City Code, Amending Section 9.07, Winter Parking Regulations on first consideration. § 9.07 Section 9.07: "Winter Parking Regulations Subdivision 1. Snow Plowing Emergencv After a snowfall of at least two (2) inches, parking is prohibited on any public street or alley;_ of -Pparking may not resume on any such street or alley until Ln -, snow has -ne>r' accum,,1ptin, I the same street or alley has been plowed and--with the snow removed to the curb line )r edge of the street or aIle, . Subdivision 2. Snow Removal and Hauling The City Manager or his/her designee is hereby authorized to post "No Parking" signs for snow removal along streets where snow removal operations will require the use of the entire width of the street by snow plowing and removing equipment. Such signs shall be posted at frequent intervals at least four (4) hours prior to the time when snow removal commences on the street so posted, and such signs shall be removed promptly after completion of the snow removal operation. Snow removal shall be done on any street so posted as soon as possible following a lapse of four (4) hours after posting the signs. It is unlawful for any person to park any vehicle, or leave any vehicle which was parked at the time of posting for a period of more than two (2) hours thereafter, in any block on any street so posted during the time the said signs are posted thereon, and it is also unlawful for any person other than an authorized representative of the City to remove said signs. Subdivision 3. Public Street and Alley Parking Restrictions Parking is prohibited on any public street or alley from November1 through March 31 from 12:00 midnight until 6:00 a.m. daily_. Source: City Code Effective Date: 6-30-88 Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 526, 2 ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending Section 9.07, Winter Parking Regulations The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Section 9.07 is hereby amended by restating the title of Section 9.07 in its entirety as follows: Section 9.07 Winter Parking Regulations Section 2. City Code Section 9.07, subd. 1 is hereby amended by restating the title of Subdivision 1 in its entirety as follows: Section 9.07 Subdivision 1 Snow Emergency Section 3. City Code Section 9.07, subd. 1 is hereby amended by restating Subdivision 1 in its entirety as follows: Subdivision 1. After a snowfall of at least two (2) inches, parking is prohibited on any public street or alley. Parking may not resume on any such street or alley until the snow has stopped accumulating and the same street or alley has been plowed with the snow removed to the curb line or edge of the street or alley. Section 4. City Code Section 9.07, subd. 2 is hereby amended by deleting the words "City Engineer or Public Works Director" and replacing them with "City Manager or his/her designee". Section 5. City Code Section 9.07, subd. 3 is hereby added stating as follows Subdivision 3. Public Street and Alley Parking Restrictions. Parking is prohibited on any public street or alley from November 1 through March 31 from 12:00 midnight until 6:00 a.m. daily. Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of August, 2014. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk City 0 �_��A o,-o1dcn , ,'4e' MEMORANDUM Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 6. C. Resolution Authorizing Interfund Loan from the Storm Utility Fund to the Water and Sewer Fund to Help Finance the Emergency Water Supply Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary The City of Golden Valley is a member of the Joint Water Commission (JWC) with the cities of Crystal and New Hope. All three cities share in the water distribution system and buy water from the City of Minneapolis. On January 21, 2014, the City Council passed a resolution ordering construction of an Emergency Water Supply that includes three new wells and rehabilitation of an existing well in New Hope. All work will be bid by the JWC and financed by each city based on water consumption. Golden Valley's share of the project is around 43% of 4 million or$1,720,000. An interfund loan will be made to the Water and Sewer Fund from the Storm Utility Fund for $1,720,000. The term will be 10 years at 2.6%. The rate is interest is the same as a 10 year bond. Payments will be made each October. The Water and Sewer Fund will collect 20 cents on each 1000 gallons of water consumed and will show as a separate line item on the bill. It is estimated that this charge will collect $183,600 per year. The charge will stay on the bill until the total amount of the loan is collected from the fee. Attachments • Resolution Authorizing Interfund Loan from the Storm Utility Fund to the Water and Sewer Fund to help Finance the Emergency Water Supply (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution 14-XX Authorizing Interfund Loan from the Storm Utility Fund to the Water and Sewer Fund to help Finance the Emergency Water Supply. Resolution 14-59 July 15, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERFUND LOAN FROM STORM SEWER UTILITY FUND TO WATER AND SEWER FUND FOR EMERGENCY WATER SUPPLY WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is a member of a joint powers entity called the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission (JWC), initiated in 1963; and WHEREAS, the City Council attended tri-City meetings on May 7, 2012, May 23, 2013 and January 9, 2014 work sessions to review the feasibility study for an Emergency Water Supply; and, WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 14-7 Ordering Construction of Emergency Water Supply on January 21, 2014; and, WHEREAS, financing of the Emergency Water Supply will be made by the Water and Sewer Fund with an interfund loan from the Storm Water Fund; and WHEREAS, a rate of 20 cents per thousand gallons of water used will charged to fund the Emergency Water Supply and noted as a separate charge called Emergency Water Supply; and WHEREAS, the Emergency Water Supply will be funded by the cities of Golden Valley, Crystal and New Hope serving as the Joint Water Commission; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Golden Valley has approved the loan for improvements in section 1; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley as follows: 1. The Storm Water Fund shall receive payments with 2.6% interest from the Water and Sewer Utility Fund. The payments are due by October 31 in each year below: Date Principal Interest Total 10/31/2014 $172,000 44,720 216,720 10/31/2015 172,000 40,248 212,248 10/31/2016 172,000 35,776 207,776 10/31/2017 172,000 31,304 203,304 10/31/2018 172,000 26,832 198,832 10/31/2020 172,000 22,360 194,360 10/31/2021 172,000 17,888 189,888 10/31/2022 172,000 13,416 185,416 10/31/2023 172,000 8,944 180,944 10/31/2024 172,000 4,472 176,472 TOTAL $1,720,000 $245,960 $1,965,600 Resolution No. 14-59 July 15, 2014 2. The Water and Sewer Fund will be responsible to make payment for their share of Emergency Water Supply to the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission from the loan from the Storm Sewer Fund. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. City t) J �d golden MEMORANDUM valleyPlanning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting July 15, 2014 Agenda Item 6. D. Bottineau Transitway Update Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, City Planner Summary The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the station area planning efforts met for the second time at the end of June and were presented with an analysis of the existing conditions surrounding the first four proposed Bottineau stations. This included a snapshot of the 10 minute walkshed as well as an inventory of the existing and planned transit routes, streets and highways, sidewalks and bikeways, amenities and destinations, existing pedestrian and bicycle barriers, existing land use, and redevelopment investigation areas. It also began to outline areas for future investigation. Hennepin County is soliciting input to their Bike/Walk Audit to help them examine how people might get to and from the stations. A link to their information is provided on our website. Station Area Work Groups - made up of members of the Golden Valley Planning Advisory Committee and Minneapolis representatives -will receive an orientation to the station area planning process at a meeting on Wednesday, July 16, at the Theodore Wirth Chalet. An open house is being scheduled for the week of August 11 to give the broader community a chance to see the products of the Inventory and Analysis phase of the planning process. Once a firm date and location have been chosen, this information will be advertised through the City website and Facebook page. Recommended Action Receive and file Bottineau Transitway Update.