The URL can be used to link to this page

12-16-14 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber December 16, 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 C. Winter Recreation: Fat Tire Biking at Brookview 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 - December 2, 2014 3-8 B. Approval of Check Register 1. City 9 2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority 10 C. Licenses: 1. General Business Licenses 11-12 2. City Gambling Licenses 13 3. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Northwest 14-16 Suburban Chapter of Pheasants Forever 4. Fireworks Permit - Sweeney Lake Homeowner's Association 17-19 * 5. Massage Facility License Renewal - ME Golden Valley, LLC d/b/a Massage Envy Spa * 6. Massage Facility License Renewal - Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Human Rights Commission - October 23, 2014 20-23 2, Human Services Fund - October 13, 2014 24-25 3. Environmental Commission - October 27, 2014 26-27 4. Envision Connection Project Board of Directors - August 28, 2014 28-30 5. Basset Creek Watershed Management Commission Workshop - October 8, 2014 31-33 E. Amendments to 2014 General Fund Budget 14-97 34-36 F. Bids and Quotes 1. Meter Changeout Program Transmitters 37-38 2. 2015-2016 Tree Trimming and Removal Project 39-40 3. Briarwood Nature Area Water Quality Improvement Project 41-43 4. 800 MHZ Portable Radios - Fire Department 44 5. 800 MHZ Portable Radios - Police Department 45 3. CONSENT AGENDA - CONTINUED G. Emails, Letters and/or Petitions: 1. Letter from Carolyn Kaehr Regarding Resignation from Human Services Fund 46 2. Emails and Letters Regarding METRO Blue Line Extension 47-51 H. Authorization to Sign Revised Amendment to the Hennepin County Violent Offender 52-55 Task Force 2014 Co-Operative Agreement 1. Approval of 2015 General Wages and Salaries for Non-union Personnel 14-98 56-59 J. Approval of 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program 14-99 60-63 K. Approval of Plat - Hanson Wood Shores 14-100 64-66 L. Authorization to Sign Agreement with Hennepin County for Sentence to Serve 67-74 Program M. Authorization to Sign Contract Extension with North American Cleaning Service 75-77 N. Water Quality Improvements Project in Twin Lake: 78-89 1. Authorization to Sign Cooperative Agreement with Bassett Creek Watershed Commission 2. Authorization to Sign Agreement for Professional Services - Barr Engineering Co. O. Receipt of November 2014 Financial Reports 90-98 P. Appointment of Commissioner and Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek 99-100 Watershed Management Commission, and Technical Advisory Committee 14-101 Q. Authorization to Sign Amendment with Patchin, Messner, Dodd and Brumm for 101-104 Additional Douglas Drive Appraisal Services R. Authorization to Sign Towing Contract with North Suburban Towing for Vehicle 105-111 Impound S. Acceptance of Donations for Ongoing Programs and Other Miscellaneous Donations 112-117 14-102 T. Authorization to Sign Engagement Letter with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski 118-126 Radosevich, & Co. for Audit Services U. Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments 2014 City-Wide 127-129 Sewer Repairs 14-103 V. Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments 2014 Driveways 130-132 14-104 W. Authorization to Amend 2013 Community Development Block Grant Agreement with 133-137 Hennepin County and Jewish Housing and Programming (J-HAP) 14-105 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Brunswick Estates - 108 Brunswick Avenue North 138-159 B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Paisley Fields - 250 Paisley Lane 160-190 C. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan No. 121 - Central Park West - SW Quadrant of 1-394 & Hwy 100 191-270 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. METRO Blue Line Extension Update 271 B. Announcements of Meetings C. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT * Added at Council Meeting UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA December 2, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 1A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Harris, Council Members Fonnest, Clausen, Schmidgall and Snope. 1B. Pledge of Allegiance 1C. Receipt of Human Services Fund 2015 Allocation Report Andrew Wold, Chair, Human Services Fund, reviewed the funding report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to receive and file the 2015 Allocation Report and approve notifying the ten agencies of their 2015 allocation amount with the following designations and the motion carried unanimously. Canvas Health/Crisis Connection: Funds to be used to continue crisis phone support. Dinner At Your Door, Funds to be used to supplement clients unable to afford delivery and subsidize meal costs. PRISM: Funds to be used to provide emergency and support services for Golden Valley residents. Second Harvest Heartland. Funds to be used to provide emergency and support service for Golden Valley residents. Senior Community Services HOME: Funds to be used for sliding fee scale to assist low- income Golden Valley seniors. Senior Community Services Outreach: Funds to be used for in-home service coordination and counseling to residents. Sojourner Project: Funds to be used to support Sojourner Project's Shelter and Community Legal Advocacy Program for residents. The Bridge for Youth: Funds to be used for "Project Cab" to provide emergency transportation to youth in crisis. TreeHouse: Funds to be used to offset the cost of transporting teens to the TreeHouse facility in New Hope and St. Louis Park. YMCA - New Hope: Funds to be used to provide scholarships for memberships and programs for residents. 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA MOTION made by Mayor Harris, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to amend the agenda of December 2, 2014, as revised: 3A1-replacement of pages of the November 5, 2014, City Council Minutes and the motion carried unanimously. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to approve the amended agenda of December 2, 2014, and the motion carried unanimously. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to approve the consent agenda of December 2, 2014, as revised: 3A1-replacement of pages of the November 5, 2014, City Council Minutes and removal of item: 3C2 Approve Solicitor's License Envinsulate LLC and the motion carried unanimously. Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- December 2, 2014 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA- continued 3A1. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting - November 5, 2014. 3A2. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting - November 18, 2014. 31131. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 31132. Approve Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. .3C1. Approve Solicitor's License for Back Four LTD. 3C2z�ve-SO"GitOF'SL Genocrrse foF EnVinS..Iate I 1 G 3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows: 1. Planning Commission - November 10, 2014 2. Environmental Commission - September 22, 2014 3E. Accept for filing Emails and Letters regarding METRO Blue Line Extension. 3F. Adopt Second Consideration of Ordinance #534 - Establishing 2015 Master Fee Schedule. 3G. Adopt Resolution 14-90 Reappointment of the City Manager as City of Golden Valley Representative on the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission. 3H. Adopt Resolution 14-91 Adoption of 2015-2016 Budget for Enterprise, Special Revenue and Internal Services Funds. 31. Adopt Resolution 14-92 Approval of Plat - Sunnyridge Woods. 3J. Receive and file the October 2014 Financial Reports. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3C2. Approve Solicitor's License for Envinsulate LLC. Assistant City Manager Knauss answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the Solicitor's License for Envinsulate, L.L.C. and the motion carried unanimously. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 - 1801 Noble Drive - The Lecy Group, Applicant Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Mr. Matt Pavek of Civic Site Group, Engineer on the project, showed a rendering of the project. He stated the applicant agrees with staff and the Planning Commission's conditions and recommendations. He referred to two other recent developments in the area and showed a table that compared hard cover, shoreline buffer and the water quality and stated their project is the best of the three. He said the snow removal plan would include a snow storage area. He explained how the driveway relates to the proposed utility plan and how the process for implementation may work for the property. Ms. Ruth Lecy, The Lecy Group, Applicant, provided background on the home that was previously on the property and the reasons for its removal. She stated their company's goal was to protect and enhance the neighborhood around Sweeney Lake. She stated they plan for minimal tree removal and that each of the three homes would be custom built to the lot. She provided background on the Lecy Brothers Homes Company and showed similar projects with their unique features that Lecy has built in the area. She stated she and her husband, Roy, plan to live in one of the new homes. Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- December 2, 2014 4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods - continued Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was much Council discussion regarding the Preliminary PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods located at 1801 Noble Drive. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to approve the Preliminary Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 subject to the following conditions with an amendment to number four and the addition of number nine upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Schmidgall, Snope and Fonnest and the following voted against: Clausen and the motion carried. 1. The revised plans prepared and submitted by Civil Site Group, dated 10/15/14, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 3, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 5, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private street shared driveway, except as provided through previously existing easements. 5. Prior to Final Plan approval, the Applicant shall show, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division, that the snow storage area and the infiltration basin area do not overlap. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 7. The City Attorney shall determine if a park dedication fee is required for this project prior to Final Plan approval. 8. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 9. The Developer shall create a Homeowners Association that will provide for snow removal, driveway maintenance, and other common issues related to the shared driveway. In addition the Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 5(E): 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. The Applicant has worked to accommodate the unique characteristics of the site, including the lack of adequate frontage on an improved public street for the three single family lots and the reliance on a narrow shared driveway for access. While this situation is less than ideal, the efforts of the Applicant have resulted in a Preliminary PUD Plan that sufficiently addresses the many challenging aspects present. 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. Much of the site's wooded areas are left undisturbed and a conservation easement will be established along the shoreline of Sweeney Lake to protect the slope, trees, vegetation, and natural habitat. 3. Efficient and Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. The size of each of the three proposed single family lots-well over the minimum area required-is consistent with the surrounding residential Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- December 2, 2014 4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods - continued uses and the amount of impervious (hard cover) surface is well below the maximum allowed. 4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. The use of this property for single family homes is compatible with the neighboring properties and the density being proposed is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 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. Under the current proposal, the amount of frontage on Noble Drive has been determined to be adequate to serve the development. In addition, the proposed private street has been evaluated and found to be acceptable in place of the public street typically required. 4B. Public Hearing - Amendment to General Land Use Plan Map - Re-designating 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2485 Rhode Island North from Commercial to High Density Residential and 2430 Winnetka Avenue North from Light Industrial to High Density Residential Resolution 14-93 Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. City Attorney Barnard answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan's General Land Use Plan Map. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Resolution 14-93 for Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan's General Land Use Plan Map Re-designating the Properties at 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2485 Rhode Island North from Commercial to High Density Residential and 2430 Winnetka Avenue North from Light Industrial to High Density Residential and the motion carried unanimously. 4C. Public Hearing - Adoption of 2014 Property Tax Levy Payable 2015 and 2015- 2016 General Fund Budget Resolutions 14-94 and 14-95 Finance Director Virnig presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. Mr. Eduard Budilovskiy, 2121 Toledo Avenue North, stated he disagreed with the numbers from the presentation and said his property taxes have increased by 108% since 1990. He referred to his current tax statement and explained the breakdown of the way his taxes were listed. He added that his street does not have a street sign. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the adoption of 2014 Property Tax Levy Payable 2015 and the 2015-2016 General Fund Budget. Unofficial City Council Minutes -5- December 2, 2014 4C. Public Hearing - Adoption of 2014 Property Tax Levy Payable - continued MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Resolution 14-94 adopting the 2014 Property Tax Levies for Taxes Payable 2015 and the motion carried unanimously. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Resolution 14-95 adopting the 2015 Budget of the General Fund Budget and the motion carried unanimously. 4D. Public Hearing - Adopting Modification No. 2 Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing (Renewal and Renovation) District within Highway 55 West Redevelopment Project Area (Highway 55 TIF Renewal and Redevelopment Project) Resolution 14-96 Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding adopting the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Tax Increment Financing District within the Highway 55 West Redevelopment Project Area. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to adopt Resolution 14-96 Adopting Modification No. 2, Tax Increment Financing Plan for Highway 55 West Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 (Renewal and Renovation) upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Fonnest, Schmidgall and Snope and the following voted against: Clausen and the motion carried. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6A. Announcement of Meetings Some Council Members may attend the Bottineau Station Area Planning Committee Meeting on December 4, 2014, at 6 pm. The next Council/Manager meeting will be held on December 9, 2014, at 6:30 pm. Some Council Members may attend the Community Listening Session for the Golden Valley Subdivision Moratorium Study on December 11, 2014, at 6:30 pm. A Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting regarding the Golden Valley Subdivision Moratorium Study will be held on December 15, 2014, at 6:30 pm. The next City Council meeting will be held on December 16, 2014, at 6:30 pm. Some Council Members may attend the Met Council Bottineau Blue Line meeting on December 17, 2014, at 12:30 pm. The Human Rights Commission meeting will be held on December 18, 2014, at 6:30 pm. Some Council Members may attend a holiday party at the home of Council Member Clausen on December 16, 2014, at 6 pm. Unofficial City Council Minutes -6- December 2, 2014 6B. Mayor and Council Communication The Mayor stated he had received a letter from a resident expressing appreciation for their new street which was part of the pavement management program. The Mayor and Council Member also received a letter from a resident complimenting city staff for alerting her to water that had bubbled up in the street by her residence. Mayor Harris will appear on Northwest Television Channel 12 on Wednesday, December 3, 2014, 7. Adjournment MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Fonnest, and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 pm. Shepard Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city ol MEMORANDUM 0 C, t 11*v valley Finance Department 763-593-80131763-593-8109(fax) -,V ",F WE —RRw Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. B. 1. 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 0 Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. , q I waw, "itv () x-x golden , MEMORANDUM Va ley Finance Department 763-593-8013 l 763-593-8109(fax) wytah N �l -1,171 Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. City Ojgoldentltl�e' valley Inspections Department 763-593-8090/763-593-3997 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. General Business Licenses Prepared By Shannon Dietrich, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, some businesses are required to be licensed by the City. Listed below are the license number, applicant name and address, license type and fee of those who have submitted an application for approval. #6768 Down in the Valley, Inc Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 8020 Olson Memorial Highway #6765 Feist Automotive Group Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Feist Automotive 1875 Lilac Drive N #6775 Freddie Petroleum Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Amstar Gas Station 9405 Medicine Lake Road #6761 Golden Valley Country Club Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 7001 Golden Valley Road #6758 Golden Valley Liquor Barrel, Inc Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 7890 Olson Memorial Highway #6764 Holiday Stationstores, Inc Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 7925 Wayzata Boulevard #6766 KKS Inc- Potpourri Gifts Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 5500 Wayzata Boulevard #6772 Linn Retail Centers, Inc Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 GV Holiday Store#3520 600 Boone Avenue #6762 Northern tier Retail LLC Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Superamerica #4443 1930 Douglas Drive #6763 Northern tier Retail LLC Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Superamerica #4497 6955 Market Street #6759 RZMP Corporation Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Schuller's Tavern 7345 Country Club Drive #7659 San Antonio Farms LLC Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a MGM Liquor Warehouse 7702 Olson Memorial Highway #6760 Scoreboard, Incorporated Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a JJ's Clubhouse 6400 Wayzata Boulevard #6769 Walgreen Company Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Walgreen's#430 5659 Duluth Street #6771 Walgreen Company Cigarettes/Tobacco $ 275.00 d/b/a Walgreen's#13841 2500 Winnetka Avenue Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff. cit, t MEMORANDUM valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) "IT PRO Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. City Gambling Licenses Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary Listed below are the organizations that are renewing their gambling license. Chester Bird American Legion Post#523 Chester Bird American Legion Post #523 200 Lilac Drive North 200 Lilac Drive North Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Golden Valley VFW Post#7051 Golden Valley VFW Post#7051 7775 Medicine Lake Road 7775 Medicine Lake Road Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Minnesota Youth Athletic Services JJs Clubhouse 1011 Osborne Road 6400 Wayzata Boulevard Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432 Crystal Lions Schullers Tavern P 0 Box 28106 7348 Country Club Drive Crystal, Minnesota 55422 Recommended Action Motion to approve the City gambling licenses as follows: Chester Bird American Legion Post#523; Golden Valley VFW Post#7051, Minnesota Youth Athletic Services and Crystal Lions. Lel ,r t o-0 ti , 11 MEMORANDUM valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) II 9.;.. Al Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 3. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Northwest Suburban Chapter of Pheasants Forever 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 Northwest Suburban Chapter of Pheasants Forever. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 8/14 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Page 1 of 2 An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: Application fee (nonrefundable) conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days,and If the application is postmarked or received awards less than$50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. 30 days or more before the event,the application If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the Licensing fee is$50; otherwise the fee is$100. Specialist assigned to your county. Organization Information Organization Name: Previous Gambling Permit Number: Northwest Suburban Chapter of Pheasants Forever X-36487 Minnesota Tax ID Number, if any: Federal Employer ID Number(FEIN), if any: Type of Nonprofit Organization (check one): aFraternal Religious Veterans EZI Other Nonprofit Organization Mailing Address: City: State and Zip: County: 10015 Holloway Farms Road Greenfield MN Hennepin Name of Chief Executive Officer(CEO): Daytime Phone: Email: Bruce B hm 763-550-9000 bruceb(c-DquazaMaWt_" 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: Minnesota Secretary of State Business Services Division 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100 St. Paul, MN 55103 Phone: 651-296-2803 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. an 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): Golden Valley Country Club Address (do not use PO box): City or Township: Zip Code: County: Valley7001 Golden 55427 Hennepin Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date of the drawing): February 7 2015 Check each type of gambling activity that your organization will conduct: Bingo* =Paddlewheels* =Pull-Tabs* =Tipboards* Raffle (total value of raffle prizes awarded for the year: $1Z0_DLI d Oa *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.mn.gov/gcb and click on Distributors under the LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-539-1900. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit 8/14 Page 2 of 2 Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment CITY APPROVAL COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises located within city limits located in a township The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. he application is acknowledged with no waiting period. T 5The application is acknowledged with a 30-day waiting he 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 ❑(60 days for a 1st class city). 30 days. The application is denied. he application is denied. Print City Name: &01411-Oh Print County Name: Signatu City P on ISignature of County Personnel:g- 4 1 — Title: Date: 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 Local unit of government must sign, deny an application, per Minn. Statutes, section 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 returned to the Board within 30 days of the event date. Chief Executive Officer's Signature: ''s- Y� - Date: �� y Print Name: BrUCe Behm Requirements Complete a separate application for: Financial report and recordkeeping required. • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days,or A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your • all gambling conducted on one day. permit,or use the online fill-in form available at Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings are www.mn.gov/gcb. conducted on the same day. Within 30 days of the event date, complete and return the Send application with: financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. Your a copy of your proof of nonprofit status,and organization must keep all exempt raffle records and reports for application fee(nonrefundable). If the application is 3-1/2 years(Minn. Statutes,section 349.166,subd. 2(f)). postmarked or received 30 days or more before the event, the application fee is$50; otherwise the fee is$100. Make Questions? check payable to 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 1711 West County Road B,Suite 300 South print, Braille) upon request. Roseville, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: The information requested application. Your organization's name and ment of Public Safety;Attorney General; on this form(and any attachments)will be used address will be public information when received Commissioners of Administration,Minnesota by the Gambling Control Board(Board)to by the Board. All other information provided will Management&Budget,and Revenue; Legislative determine your organization's qualifications to be private data about your organization until the Auditor,national and international gambling be involved in lawful gambling activities in Board issues the permit. When the Board issues regulatory agencies;anyone pursuant to court Minnesota. Your organization has the right to the permit,all information provided will become order;other individuals and agencies specifically refuse to supply the information; however, if public. If the Board does not issue a permit,all authorized by state or federal law to have access your organization refuses to supply this information provided remains private,with the to the information; individuals and agencies for information,the Board may not be able to exception of your organization's name and which law or legal order authorizes a new use or determine your organization's qualifications and, address which will remain public. Private data sharing of information after this notice was as a consequence,may refuse to issue a permit. about your organization are available to Board given;and anyone with your written consent. If your organization supplies the information members,Board staff whose work requires requested,the Board will be able to process the access to the information; Minnesota's Depart- city of gol&n -. .. MEMORANDUM valley Fire Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 4. Fireworks Permit - PC Pyrotechnics Fireworks Company/Sweeney Lake Homeowner's Association Prepared By John Crelly, Fire Chief Summary The Sweeney Lake Homeowner's Association and PC Pyrotechnics Fireworks Company have applied for a permit to discharge aerial fireworks at Sweeney Lake for the New Year's celebration at 12:00 midnight, December 31, 2014. The location of the fireworks display will be on private property, address unassigned, PID 18-029- 24-42-0036). The property owner, Mr. George Wessin, has authorized the discharge of fireworks from his property. The fireworks display will be conducted by PC Pyrotechnics Fireworks Company in accordance with local, state and national requirements. They will also take extra precautions to watch the weather and be prepared to take action to mitigate any potential safety or complaint issues caused by the weather. Attachment • Letter from Amanda Cialkowski, Sweeney Lake Homeowner's Association (1 page) • Letter from George Wessin (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve the fireworks display permit for PC Pyrotechnics Fireworks Company and Sweeney Lake Homeowner's Association. 12rM4 FdlSizaRwder jR I ocember 2.2014 Golden Valley Fire Depi meet John Crelly,Fire Chief Golden Valley Mayor and City Council 7800 Golden Valley Road (;olden Valley,Minnesota 54427 Dear Mr.Ctelly,Honorable Maytw and City Council: 11Ve ate once son requesting permission to hire 1'CPyrotechnics, Inc. to provide a professional display of firc%%v&at midnight on 12!31/14 to celebrate the Ncw Year. After a break of a couple years,this will 1w the 10 year for tic:event. 'Chem+eras k)t_ti of dWapwintment from members and neighbors when we stopped. We an Wping to be able to naive the trsditiwt.The fireworks are completely funded by w4untary contributions by members and Emends from the su umang nmghborhoo . We look foward to continuing what(lass now becom a tradition in Golden Valley and do request permission to shoot the show from George Wessin's lot(PID: 19- 029-24-42-0036;Address Unassigned). He too is excited to continue the tradition and has offered his properly as the launch site again oris yen. Thanks for your help and wee hope you will slop by to enjoy the firewotics. Si l , Cialkowski -Ptt,SWOeney Lake Association 1040 Angelo Drive Golden Valley,MN 55422. Cell:612-599-4711 IM�alAmeil people aaN hc�h�il-static//j grveil mein en zgrNYYMK�IGc Olrr�m i.t iYamFP30GT 791_ZwjWgLA 2b D-0%gQq... 111 1?I31 U FMISizeRa dojpg l [)member 3,2014 Golden Valley Fire Mpartme nt John(-Wily.Fire Chief. (;olden Volley Mayor and City Council 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley,Minnesota 55427 Dear Mr.Crelly,llonorable Mayor and City Council: 13ae Swerney LAc Association is once again planning to provide a professional fireworks display at midnight 12/31114 to celebrate the New Year. For many years the di-play has been launched from our property and has twome a nice tradition for Sweeney lake residents and the:surrounding neighbors, We grant our permission,as we have for many years,to launch the fireworks from our lot(PID: 18- 029-2442-(1036;Address Unassigned). We appreciate c wo e"on of the City of Golden Valley in years past and look forward to cr display to celebrate the 2015 New Year. Si ly j (}eo Wessin Welhnail gomle.w mcshnwl-smcti hsAFgmeil.niwrLm.z*NWMW,c.O/wm iX1t/8ffFPSOG-7 79*nuE$NPY33'8-"72eb1 ZwJldgLA 2b D-Dvgr3q... 1N a valle Police Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 5. Therapeutic Massage Facility License Renewal - ME Golden Valley, LLC d/b/a Massage Envy Spa Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Jim Roberts, Sergeant Summary ME Golden Valley, LLC d/b/a Massage Envy Spa, located at 7704 Olson Memorial Highway has applied for a massage facility license renewal, Documents submitted by the applicant indicate that ME Golden Valley, LLC d/b/a Massage Envy Spa is owned by Kevin Seeger of Plymouth, Minnesota; Eileen Seeger, Grand Forks, North Dakota; and Beth Seeger, Phoenix, Arizona. A background investigation of Mr, Kevin Seeger, Ms. Eileen Seeger, and Ms. Beth Seeger, including record checks been completed, The applicants meet City Code requirements for the issuance of a massage facility license. Recommended Action Motion to approve the issuance of a Therapeutic Massage Facility License renewal for ME Golden Valley, LLC d/b/a Massage Envy Spa, located at 7704 Olson Memorial Highway. City o r MEMORANDUM valley Police Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. C. 6. Therapeutic Massage Facility License Renewal - Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Jim Roberts, Sergeant Summary Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants, located at 1405 North Lilac Drive, Suite 114, has applied for a therapeutic massage facility license renwal. Documents submitted by the applicant indicate that Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants is wholly owned by DeVonne Lynn Reinhardt-Brock of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Ms. Reinhardt-Brock has owned/operated Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants since 1991. A background investigation of Ms. Reinhardt-Brock, including record checks been completed. The applicant meets City Code requirements for the issuance of a massage facility license renewal. Recommended Action Motion to approve the issuance of a therapeutic massage facility license renewal to Artistic Urges LLC d/b/a Artistic Urges Hair Consultants at 1405 North Lilac Drive, Suite 114. MINUTES Human Rights Commission (HRC) City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Council Conference Room October 23, 2014 Commissioners present: Teresa Martin, Chair Adam Buttress Simon Gotlieb (new member) Carla Johnson Payton Perkins Michael Pristash Sue Phelps Commissioners absent: Jonathan Burris, Guest: Andrew Ramlet (new youth member, to be sworn in November 5) Staff: Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant The meeting was convened at 6:30 pm by Chair Martin. Introductions Commissioners and staff introduced themselves. Additions to Aqenda Election of Officers and Discussion of November and December Meeting Dates. Approval of June 24, 2014 and August 26, 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Johnson to approve the June 24, 2014 and August 26, 2014 minutes. Motion carried 7-0. Council Updates No updates were presented. Old Business Election of Vice-Chair Martin asked for any volunteers to serve as Vice-President. Martin nominated Johnson for Vice-Chair. Motion by Chair Martin, second by Commissioner Pristash to elect Commissioner Johnson as Vice-Chair. Motion carried 7-0. Human Rights Commission October 23,2014 Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4 Review of September 11 Day of Service and Remembrance Johnson stated this is the 2nd year of holding the event at Second Harvest Heartland for the evening shift from 6-8 pm. This year there were 11 people who registered and 39 volunteers that participated. The volunteers sorted and packed 4,470 pounds of food to be distributed to local food shelves. The Commission plans to conduct another event in 2015. Martin volunteered to start a scrapbook of events and meetings conducted by the Human Rights Commission (HRC). Review of October 9 "Mental Illness in Adults" HRC Conversations Event and Survey Results A total of 56 people attended the event, including Council Members HRC Members, panelists and staff. The Commission and staff received positive comments from the public about the event. The speaker and panelists were very well-received. Thank you notes were sent to the speaker and panelists. Martin stated that 21 surveys were returned with positive comments. The StarTribune put an article about the event in the metro section. Martin suggested possible appointment in the future of a retired or handicapped person in the future. The Commission discussed holding a Human Rights Commission at Calvary or multi- family facility to get input from residents who are not as able to get to meetings or who have a lack of opportunity to be heard. Some issues discussed were: if a regular meeting was held but nothing specific was on the agenda for discussion how would the public participate; how would a public forum be conducted; what is the benefit of conducting the regular meeting at an off-site facility; suggested a possible program/activity/volunteer opportunity be conducted at an off-site location to solicit information and comments. The Commission will table discussion to the November meeting. Reminder on GV League of Women Voters Plans for "Toward a More Perfect Union: Talking About the Constitution," Equality Event: Thursday, November 20, 2014 at Brookview Community Center The HRC is co-sponsoring the event. The event will run from 7-9 pm. HRC members are requested to come at 6:30 pm to help set-up, greet visitors and help with clean-up after the event. New Business Sweet Potato Comfort Pie The Commission received information about using Sweet Potato Comfort Pie in conjunction with the MILK day event. The Commission discussed possibly making the pies during the event and serving them or distributing them to people in need; reviewed the potential conflicts with promoting the use of a private, for-profit company without giving other companies the opportunity to also participate; suggested that this be used in a different venue such as the Farmer's Market to allow people to contact the business owner directly if they are interested; suggested that organizations that deliver door-to- door meals or faith-based organizations who serve meals may be an alternative; discussed if distributing of the pies meets the HRC goals or if it relates to human rights issues specifically; suggested the owner may want to donate the pies at a MILK day Human Rights Commission October 23, 2014 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4 event; suggested promoting the idea of pies without promoting the company; and make pies as a community event and share the pies at the event. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Phelps to table the discussion with the recommendation that the Chair talk with the Mayor and Rose McGee to discuss the use the pies and suggest other venues for their participation and report back to the HRC. Motion carried 7-0. 2015 Work Plan Knauss reviewed the Work Plan process. The HRC discussed potential themes for 2015 such as: elder abuse, both physical/mental and financial; minority children school expulsions; access to education; gay/lesbian/transgender school issues; teen prostitution; sex-trafficking; intimate partner abuse; co-sponsor senior resource fair with abuse information; teen prostitution play (Blank Slate Theatre, St. Paul) with discussion after; community read book discussion of Crazy Love, by Leslie Morgan Steiner, speaker and round table discussion regarding abuse. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Phelps to approve the 2015 Work Plan theme as abuse. Motion carried 7-0. Motion by Chair Martin, second by Commissioner Johnson to table the 2015 Work Plan detailed discussion to the November meeting. Motion carried 7-0. • Knauss will provide copies of the Human Rights Commission by-laws to members via email. Discussion of November and December Meetinq Dates The HRC discussed meeting dates for November and December. The Commission will determine at the November meeting if a December meeting needs to be held. Motion by Chair Martin, second by Commissioner Pristash to change the meeting time for the November 25 meeting to 6 pm; and change the meeting date from December 23 to December 18 (if needed). Motion carried 7-0. League of MN Human Rights Commissions Annual Meeting Reminder The Annual Meeting will be held on October 25, 2014 from 1-3 pm at the Maplewood Public Library. Martin and Pristash plan on attending. Adjourn Motion by Chair Martin, second by Commissioner Pristash to adjourn the meeting at 8:04 pm. Motion carried 7-0. Follow-up Items: • Martin talk with Mayor Harris and Rose McGee regarding Sweet Potato Comfort Pie. • Knauss provide copies of the Human Rights Commission by-laws to members via email. • HRC to finalize details Abuse topic for 2015. • HRC discuss off-site meeting or event. Human Rights Commission October 23,2014 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4 Teresa Martin, Chair ATTEST: Chantell Knauss, Staff Liaison Approved by HRC: November 25, 2014 Respectfully submitted, Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Human Rights Commission October 23,2014 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4 Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF) Meeting Minutes October 13, 2014 Present: Hilmer Erickson, Kathryn Frommer, Alan Ingber, Craig McDaniels, Jennifer Rudolph, Toots Vodovoz, Peggy Watkins and Andrew Wold. Also present: Vicky Kendell, Covenant Village and Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison Not Attending: Elissa Heilicher, Michael Herring, Carolyn Kaehr, and Connie Sandler. Call to Order: Wold called the meeting to order at 6:20 p.m. Agenda Changes or Additions: Agency presentation times were changed to: 6:25 p.m. Canvas Health 6:45 p.m. Second Harvest 7:05 p.m. YMCA-New Hope September 8 minutes: Erickson moved and Vodovoz seconded the motion to approve the minutes from September 8. The motion passed unanimously. Applications for Funding Agency presentations: Three agencies gave a short presentation at the October 13 meeting: Canvas Health/Crisis Connection: Laura Weber, Crisis Connection Manager, gave members an overview of their agency. Crisis Connection is a non-profit mental health counseling agency providing telephone counseling services, specializing in crisis counseling, intervention and referral through volunteer and paid staff. Programs include: The Crisis Hot Line, The Men's Line, National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, Community Education Program, Teen Education Program, Telephone Counseling. The agency received 900 calls from Golden Valley residents since January 2014. Funding would be used towards training volunteer counselors. Second Harvest: Hannah Baxter and Carla Johnson gave members an overview of their agency. Second Harvest Heartland is a member of Feeding America, a national network of more than 200 food banks. Membership means access to millions of pounds of surplus food and grocery donations from manufacturers and producers throughout the country. The fleet of trucks travels nearly half a million miles a year, picking up food donations and delivering them to local food shelves, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, senior community centers and children's after school programs. They are the warehouse to the food shelves supplying PRISM with 326,055 pounds of food with a shared maintenance cost of$72,452 of which PRISM was assessed $7, 200. Funding would go towards the shared maintenance cost for PRISM. YMCA-New Hope: Devin Hanson and Stephanie Shadick gave members an overview of their agency. The YMCA's mission is to make an impact in the lives of kids and families in your community through your donation. Program components include: Youth Development, Healthy Living, and Social Responsibility. In total, $40,230 in scholarships were given to Golden Valley residents. 555 Golden Valley residents received scholarships for membership averaging $50/month per family for a total of$27,750. 208 residents received scholarships for programs averaging $60 per family per program for a total of$12, 480 in aid received. Funding would go towards scholarships to Golden Valley residents. Funding requests were received from the following agencies: Agency Request Previous grant/year Crisis Nursery $5,000 $3,000/2014 Dinner At Your Door $8,000 $7,500/2014 Canvas Health/Crisis Connection $2,200 $2,000/2014 PRISM $10,000 $10,000/2014 Second Harvest Heartland $3,000 NEW Senior Services HOME $5,000 $5,000/2014 Senior Services Outreach $3,500 $3,500/2014 Sojourner Project $5,000 NEW The Bridge for Youth $4,000 $3,500/2014 TreeHouse $5,000 $3,500/2014 YMCA — New Hope $7,000 $5,000/2013 TOTAL $57,700 $43,000 Members decided to table the requests for funding until the November 10 meeting. Other Business: Golf Classic Review: Fackler reported that the net amount should be known by the November meeting. Brookview charged only for the amount of golfers on the course. Thanks to the Commission members for collecting door prizes and for volunteering at the event. Solicitation Letter. Fackler met with Cheryl Weiler to work on the letter. The goal is to have the letter ready for mailing by November 15tH Adjournment: Rudolph moved to adjourn the meeting, Erickson seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Andrew Wold, GVHSF Chair Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes October 27, 2014 Present: Commissioners Tonia Galonska, Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill, Larry Johnson, Jim Stremel, Debra Yahle; Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist, Veronica Anderson, SEH; and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant Absent: Commissioner Tracy Anderson Call to Order Stremel called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — September 22, 2014 MOVED by Yahle, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 22, 2014 meeting. Natural Resource Management Plan (NRMP) Veronica Anderson reviewed a sample of the Chapter 5 of NRMP (on-file) with commissioners. One suggestion was to clearly distinguish the difference in actual existing conditions vs. conceptual ideas. Next month a draft of the full plan will be presented at a joint meeting with the Open Space and Recreation Commission. The sample will not include all of the pictures that will be in the final version however, the commissioners are encouraged to read the text of the plan with a critical eye; looking for words or phrases that may be too technical or not clear to the average reader. Forty residents have responded to the survey. The survey will remain open until November 7th New Proposals for Greener Practices Staff will prepare the matrix for the November meeting. P_r_og- ram/Project Updates DeCola Ponds Study: Hill suggested that an update on the study be sent to residents in the area. Bottineau Transitway Update: Galonska and Yahle attended the recent meeting. An open house is scheduled for November 121H Community Center Update: Gitelis reported that the recommendations from the architect, for both site options, are not meeting the desired LEED ratings. Council is requesting cost development for both sites. The complete program/project summary is on file. Commission Member Council Reports None. Minutes of the Environmental Commission October 27, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Other Business Eckman reported that the Hennepin County Bike Plan is available for comment until December 5th. The Wirth Park Master Plan is open for comment as well. Adiourn MOVED by Hill, seconded by Yahle, and the motion carried to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm. Lisa Nesbitt Administrative Assistant MINUTES Envision Connection Project Executive Board August 28, 2014 7:30 pm City Hall Council Conference Room Directors Present: Lynn Gitelis (chair), Sharon Glover, Jim Heidelberg, Cindy Inselmann, Helene Johnson, Philip Lund, Dean Penk, Wendy Rubinyi, Marshall Tanick, Blair Tremere Directors Absent: Mike Berger, Mike Schleif, Marshall Tanick, Other: Cheryl Weiler (Staff Liaison) 1. Call to Order Chair Gitelis called the meeting to order at 7:38 pm with a quorum. 2. Approval of Agenda Lund added Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival and moved the approval of the agenda as amended. Heidelberg seconded. Motion carried. 3. Approval of May 15, 2014 Minutes Tremere noted two typos. Heidelberg moved approval of the minutes, Lund seconded, motion carried. 4. Dean Penk Report On Envision and the Golden Valley Community Foundation Penk reported the Golden Valley Community Foundation is very supportive of what the Envision Board has done and is looking to bring forth new ideas, initiatives, etc and expand upon the creativity started by Envision. He said the Foundation invites Bridge Builders and other community organizations to join the Foundation as independent subcommittees. Because the Foundation is a funding organization and not an event planning organization, any group that comes forward must be able to do its own planning. Penk went on to list the Envision activities the Foundation supported in the past as well as other local endeavors, such as the Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival. Penk said he wanted to go on record as an Envision Board member to request that the City continue to support community endeavors, work in partnership with the Foundation, voice City support and City commitment to provide support to the Foundation in partnership with the City. Heidelberg said it seems Penk is asking for the same level of support for the Foundation as the City currently gives to Envision. Penk said one City problem is funding these events. Lund asked if the City has any proprietary right to these events, such as the VISI award. Gitelis provided the opinion that no one legally owns these things, that they are intellectual property, and that no City has tried to take ownership. Lund asked if there was a formal process for transferring rights of these events. Gitelis again provided the opinion that there is no claim by anyone. Lund then asked about public relations; for example, if these events go to the Foundation, then Bridge Builders can no longer use CityNews for publicity. Gitelis and Penk suggested that a partnership could be forged between the Foundation and the City for doing publicity for such Foundation events, and said the Mayor and City Manager are open to the idea. Tremere suggested there is no law that prohibits the City from publishing information about other organizations in the City newsletter and that the City could forge a partnership in which this could happen. He said there needn't be an iron gate. Tremere told the story of the formation of the Community Foundation five years ago. He said the Board crafted a resolution to form a Foundation to either make Envision a 501 c3 or to start another 501 c3. The next two years were spent creating a separate 501 c3 by taking the Golden Valley Community Events Fund 501c3 status. Heidelberg asked if there is an actionable item in this discussion, added he thinks not, and asked to move on. Gitelis said the history is useful and added that most of Envision's functions will move to the Community Foundation. She said that just because you're not a City Commission, you can still be part of continuing this with the Foundation. Lund said the group wouldn't be able to pass the Envision functions to the Foundation, and that the notion of carrying this on as a think tank or anything will not occur in the Foundation. Gitelis said there is nothing in the Foundation bylaws that says it can't include an idea group. Johnson compared the situation to one in her own employer's organization. She suggested the Board specifically list things to be carried over to the Foundation. She said she felt it is key to let people know that the things done by Envision are still viable, and that her action item is to develop a proposal for City Council consideration. Tremere said he agreed with Lund as a practical matter but that he thought no action could be taken tonight. He thought Penk should meet with the City Council, then the Envision Board should regroup and forge a proposal, as it still exists until December. He said he's not comfortable deciding the matter tonight. Tremere then brought up the Lilac Project situation and the recent state defunding of the program because of lack of maintenance and lack of City funding. He pointed out that this is a hard lesson and should be kept in mind. Gitelis said the Lilac Project program needed project management beyond the conceptual level, and added the Foundation should keep that example in mind. Weiler mentioned a point of order, asking if the Foundation is making a request of the City or if the Envision Board is making a recommendation to the City Council. She then explained the process for making a recommendation to the City Council. Heidelberg said that the Board could recommend the City continue certain Envision events. Gitelis said the Board will recommend a process for transitioning these events to the Foundation. Heidelberg said the best the Board could do is to pass a motion. Lund moved that the City continue managing the VISI Award and Valley Volunteer Day programs and allow the Bridge Builders program to move to the Golden Valley Community Foundation. Glover recommended looking carefully at legalities between community foundations and private foundations, which the Board then agreed is not an Envision issue. Heidelberg suggested adding to the motion that the Board recommends the City continue programs in the spirit of Envision. Rubinyi seconded. Motion passed with Tremere abstaining. 5. Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival Lund told Weiler he had an updated list of community organizations that needed signage for the Arts & Music Festival. 6. Envision Board Accomplishments Weiler distributed a list of"Things That Wouldn't Exist Without Envision Golden Valley" (attached) and thanked the Board on behalf of the City for its hard work, creativity, and dedication to the community over the years. She said she had found it very rewarding to have worked on the Envision project since it began 10 years ago. She pointed out that the Envision Board was developed to promote Envision in the community, and now that the spirit of Envision is firmly entrenched, the Board members should look upon their accomplishments with pride. 7. Adjournment Moved by Penk and seconded by Johnson. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:44 pm. Lynn Gitelis, Chair ATTEST: Cheryl Weiler, Staff Liaison Cre6�-' IBCWMC Item 4Ai11 T . 11-19-14 Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission i t Commission Workshop on Next Generation Watershed Management Plan Meeting Minutes 4:04—6:00 p.m. Wednesday October 8,2014 Golden Valley City Hall Attendees: Plan Steering Committee (PSC) Chair Linda Loomis, Commission Chair Jim de Lambert, Commissioner Stacy Hoschka, Commissioner Clint Carlson, Alternate Commissioner Pat Crough, Alternate Commissioner Jane McDonald Black; TAC members Eric Eckman, Chris Long, Lois Eberhart; Administrator Laura Jester, Engineers Karen Chandler and Greg Williams, Steve Christopher (BWSR), Rachel Olmanson (MPCA), Karen Jensen and Emily Resseger (Met Council), Kate Drewry (DNR) 1. Welcome and Introductions Plan Steering Committee Chair Loomis opened the meeting at 4:06 p.m., welcomed the group, and thanked them for their attendance and participation. Introductions were made around the table. 2. Review Progress of Plan Development Administrator Jester gave an overview of progress made to date during previous workshops. She noted that this workshop should be the final workshop prior to the beginning of the 60-day review period which is slated to begin in late November. She reminded the group that only policies highlighted in orange would be discussed at the meeting unless someone "pulled" a different policy for discussion (similar to a consent agenda). 3. Review Draft Education and Outreach Policies#123—161 and Draft Education and Outreach Plan Administrator Jester noted that many of the education policies in the 2004 Plan have been moved to the more detailed Education and Outreach Plan (EOP)which will be included as an Appendix in the watershed plan. She noted that the Commission's education activities could go in many different directions and that sometimes specific activities are a result of the interests and passions of the Commissioners, committee members or volunteers. She reported the EOP would be reviewed annually by the Commission to budget and plan for specific education and outreach activities each year. Policy#123: In the second sentence, the "education and public involvement plan" will be changed to "education and outreach plan." No other policies were discussed. In turning to the draft Education and Outreach Plan (EOP), Mr. Eckman wondered if a formal partnership would be needed if cities wanted to take credit in their MS4 permits for education activities of the Commission. Ms. Olmanson said she would look into that and get back to Administrator Jester. Ms. Drewry noted the EOP seemed very comprehensive. There were no other comments on the draft EOP. 4. Review Draft Administration Policies#162 - 190 Engineer Williams noted that many of these policies were approved in previous policy sections and were moved here. There were no comments on policies with minor revisions from the 2004 plan (noted in green). Discussion ensued regarding the following policies: Policy#166: Ms. Drewry asked for examples of administrative or legal actions the Commission would take if an evaluation of a member city noted it was not complying with the goals and policies of the Plan. Engineer Chandler noted the Commission could consider taking on the permitting role for that city. The group wondered if there were options laid out in the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). Ms. Drewry said she would like to see the options for action identified in another document, if not included in the Plan. Mr. Christopher noted the Commission could withhold cost sharing for a non-implementing city. Administrator Jester reported the language in this policy was taken from the approved Rice Creek Watershed District watershed plan which BWSR used as a good example for an evaluation policy. The group acknowledged that the Commission would not take legal action as a first step but would negotiate and work with the city to become compliant. Policy#169: Ms. Olmanson recommended adding "improves androp tects water quality..." within the second gatekeeper question bullets in this policy. She noted the MPCA is focusing new plans not only on improving or restoring waters but also protecting good water quality. Along those same lines, the group decided to add "approved TMDL and WRAPS" to the end of the third gatekeeper question bullet. (WRAPS, or Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy, is the new way of incorporating a TMDL with a plan for protection.) The group also agreed to remove bullets in the bottom section of the policy that are duplicates of the gatekeeper question bullets. And, the group agreed to add "education opportunities" to the list of examples of multiple Commission goals in the lower bulleted items. There was a discussion about whether the cost/benefit of a project should be used in prioritization process and added to the list of items to consider. Engineer Chandler noted that there is not enough known about the costs of the project and the pollutant removal when the project is added to the CIP. She said these items are calculated during the feasibility study. She noted the Commission has feasibility study criteria that include a calculation of the costs and pollutant removals. 5. Review Draft Recreation, Habitat and Shoreland Management Policies#111 - 122 #111: Ms. Drewry noted that she liked the activity proposed in the policy but that it didn't seem like it belonged in the policy section. There was some discussion. The group agreed to remove "deep and shallow" from the first sentence of the policy and to leave it in the policy section unless a more appropriate place in the Plan is determined. #112: Ms. Drewry wondered if staff looked at the activities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as examples of activities the Commission could consider—particularly monitoring, funding, research, etc. Staff indicated they had reviewed the MCWD policies with regards to aquatic plant management but that the Commission doesn't have the level of funding necessary for those activities. Rather, the Commission is dedicated to collaborating with other entities. "Counties" will be added to the list of examples entities in the first sentence. The group discussed adding the word "support and collaborate" but decided that indicated a funding activity the Commission is unlikely to provide. #87: (from the Stream Restoration and Protection Policy Section) Administrator Jester noted she was asked by committee members at the last Plan Steering Committee meeting to check with Friends of Bassett Creek (FOBC) to better understand their recommendations for Commission policies. She reported she has spoken with the FOBC leader, Dave Stack. He said he would like the Commission to allow for navigation of the creek by canoe or kayak when installing structures or doing projects in or near the creek AND when rehabilitating existing structures. There was some discussion about this. Staff was directed to wordsmith the policy to perhaps use the word "accommodate" or"attempt to accommodate" and bring revised language back to the Commission for review. 6. Discuss Recreation Matrix to Refine Commission's Role in Recreation Administrator Jester presented a large version of the matrix on a display board. The group discussed various areas where the Commission is already performing some activity related to recreation (either directly or in- directly) and where current draft policies indicate future Commission activity. The group discussed some nuances within the matrix, noting the "non-curly leaf pondweed" should be changed to "native vegetation." They agreed to add an "X" (indicating activity) to feasibility studies/studies and BCWMC projects related to boating due to the previous discussion to attempt to allow for canoe/kayak navigability with CIP projects. The group also agreed an "X" belonged in the column for partnering/collaboration for water level management for non-flood control due to the possibility of a temporary water level drawdown to curly leaf pondweed control. Additionally, the group agreed that "streams" should be added to the list of projects with relation to sediment removal. Administrator Jester reported that although Commissioner Welch couldn't attend the meeting, he had emailed his thoughts and recommendations. She reported that Commissioner Welch wrote that "the Commission should be clear in the Plan and with constituents and member cities that while recreational needs and interests must be considered in design of capital projects, recreation as a primary driver for investment of capital resources is better left to partner parks organization and the Commission will not undertake a capital project solely or primarily to provide or enhance recreational opportunities except to the degree improving water quality serves such purposes." Ms. Eberhart indicated that language would make a good policy within the Plan. Ms. Hoschka agreed. There was discussion about whether or not this type of language can or should be added to the CIP project prioritization policy#169. Commission Chair de Lambert noted that he would rather see policies stating what the Commission will do not what the Commission won't do. Commissioner Carlson noted the City of Medicine Lake was looking to improve all conditions in the lake and to continue the goodwill generated by recent meetings between the Medicine Lake mayor and the Golden Valley mayor. He noted such language is unnecessary. Commission Chair de Lambert noted there is definitely consensus that the Commission will not implement recreation-base projects. After further discussion, the group asked staff to consider language that could be added to policy#169 or elsewhere in the Plan noting the Commission's desire to leave recreation-base projects to other entities. 7. Review Draft Implementation Section There was not time in the meeting to discuss this section. Administrator Jester asked if comments on this section could be received via email rather than holding another workshop. Engineer Chandler noted some areas of the section had changed since its inclusion in the workshop meeting packet due to TAC input at their meeting the previous week. Staff agreed to send the revised section out to all Commissioners,TAC and review agencies to receive comments by October 171n 8. Next Steps and Adjourn Administrator Jester noted this was the final workshop scheduled before the 60-day review period and thanked those who participated. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:30 p.m. city O f golden, MEMORANDUM valleY Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. E. Amending the 2014 General Fund Budget Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary When the 2014 General Fund Budget was approved it included an increase for salaries and wages but did not include the market rate adjustments made for certain positions. Attached are the changes that need to be made for those departments that included those adjustments. Attachments • Resolution Amending the 2014 Budget of the General Fund (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Amending the 2014 Budget of the General Fund. Resolution 14-97 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2014 BUDGET OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET WHEREAS, in 2013, staff presented a biennial budget cycle with a proposed 2014 current budget year and a 2015 "in concept" budget proposal; and WHEREAS, this adopted 2014 operating budget resolution with Resolution 13-108 are submitted by the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and other applicable laws in effect on this date; and WHEREAS, this amendment to the 2014 operating budget resolution with accompanying expenditures and revenues for those changes in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and other applicable laws in effect on this date; and WHEREAS, this amendment allocates general fund revenues to those expenditures for each area outlined below; and BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, that the 2014 Amended General Fund Budget are hereby given final approval. DIVISION DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 001 Council (1001.6110) $1,500 003 City Manager (1031.6110) 10,000 003 Communications (1031.6110) 2,000 005 Computer Services (1105.6110) 16,000 015 Inspections (1162.6110) 10,000 035 Physical Development 10,000 037 Streets (1440.6110) 15,000 067 Park Maintenance (1620.6110) 20,000 84 500 Building Permits (1000.4101) AM 500 TOTAL 2014 BUDGET Resolution 14-97 Continued December 16, 2014 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council that the sources of financing the sums appropriated shall be: DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Ad Valorem Taxes $12,358,005 Licenses 210,785 Permits 725,000 Federal Grants 31,205 State Grants 255,390 Charges for Services 1,856,690 Fines and Forfeitures 320,000 Interest on Investments 100,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 227,200 Transfers In 100,000 TOTAL 2014 BUDGET $16,184,275 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council declares its intent to take all necessary actions legally permissible to the submission and approval of the City's budget and property tax levies both proposed and final. 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. city of, goldel"11' . 1 MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. 1. Purchase Galaxy Radio Transmitter Modules for Water Meter Reading System Upgrade Prepared By Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Kelley Janes, Utility Maintenance Supervisor Summary Golden Valley Public Works is in the process of upgrading its water meter reading system to the new Galaxy Fixed Base Meter Reading System. Wireless Galaxy transmitter modules will be installed on every water meter throughout the City. Purchase and installation of the Galaxy radio module is required to read the water meters in the fixed base meter reading system. The Galaxy radio transmitter module upgrades are an integral part of the radio meter reading system. The 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Program, Water and Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Account (W&SS- 063, page 91) has $130,000 budgeted for the purchase of the transmitter modules. Public Works staff has received quotes from Metering and Technology Solutions and National Meter and Automation, Inc. The following table references the costs for purchasing the 2014 phase of the transmitter modules from each supplier. Vendor: Meter Type RTR Cost Quantity Total Model 25 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $190.00 150.00 $28,500.00 Model 35 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $190.00 0 $.00 Model 70 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $190.00 250 $47,500.00 Metering and Model 120 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $198.00 140 $27,720.00 Technology Model 170 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $198.00 100 $19,800.00 Solutions Turbo Series RTR with Galaxy Module $221.00 0 $0 Compound Series (2) RTR (2) Galaxy Modules $398.00 0 $0 TOTAL $123,520.00 Vendor Meter Type RTR Cost Quantity Total Model 25 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $223.25 150 $33,487.00 Model 35 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $223.25 0 $.00 Model 70 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $223.25 250 $55,812.00 National Meter Model 120 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $223.65 140 $31,255.00 and Model 170 Gallon RTR with Galaxy Module $223.65 100 $26,000.00 Automation, Turbo Series RTR with Galaxy Module (1.5"- Inc. 811) $260.00 0 $0 Compound Series (2) RTR (2) Galaxy Modules (2"-6") $467.65 0 $0 TOTAL $146,554.00 Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of the Galaxy radio transmitter modules from Metering and Technology Solutions for a cost of$123,520. 1 ' f D goldel"I MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. 2. Award Contract for 2015-16 Trimming and Removal of Trees on Public Property Prepared By Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor and City Forester Tim Teynor, Assistant City Forester Summary Bids for the 2015-16 Tree Trimming and Removal of Trees and Stumps Project were opened on November 18, 2014. The following bids adjusted for estimated quantities were received: Annual Base Bid Total Over 2 Years Tim's Tree Service $63,940 $127,880 Golden Leaf Tree Service $69,300 $138,600 The 2014-15 Adopted Biennial Budget, Park Maintenance (1646.6440) includes $84,500 identified for annual contractual services related to tree trimming, removal, planting, and mulching. Public Works staff has completed the evaluation of bids and determined that Tim's Tree Service meets the minimum qualifications for the project. Project award was delayed due to Golden Leaf Tree Service challenging the bid outcome. The bid document was forwarded to the City Attorney for review. Based on the General Conditions in the contract manual, the City Attorney agreed with staff's recommendation to award the project to Tim's Tree Service. Attachments • Letter from Allen Barnard, Best & Flanagan LLP, to Tom Burt, dated December 9, 2014 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to authorize a two-year contract with Tim's Tree Service in the amount of$127,880 for trimming and removal of trees on public property. Allen D, Barnard BEST&FLANAGAN LLP Attorney DIRECT 612-341,9715 225 South Sixth Street,Suite 4000 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402 abarnardabestlaw.CORI TEL 612 339,7121 Fax 612.339.5$97 BESTLaW.COM BEST & FLANAGAN December 9, 2014 FOUNDED 1926 VIA D.BARNARD V IA EMAIL JOHN A.BURTON JAMES C.DIRACLES T� Manager THOMAS B.HEFFELFINGER Tom Burt, City Manager DUANE L.PAULSON Valley ROBERT L.MELLER,JR. City of Golden alley CHARLES C.BERQUIST E.JOSEPH LFAVE /800 GoldenValleyC Road GREGORY DASOULE Golden Valley, MN .. 5427 CATHY E.GORLIN PATRICK B.HENNESSY TIMOTHY A,SULLIVAN Re: Project; 2015 - 2T0�1.6 .1_ri�mming Pane�d Rcrrioval of Trees and Stumps THOMAS J.RADIO Pro ect; C it r Pro ect No. 15-03 DANIEL R.W.NELSON J S J DAVID J.ZUBKE STEVEN R.KRUG€R Dear ToiTl PAUL E.KAMINSKI • ROSS C.FORMELL MARY E.SHEAREN BARBARA M.ROSS I have: reviewed the project manual and specifications i.nthe above SARAH E.CRIPPEN matter along with the letter from the attorney for Golden Leaf Tree Service. ROBERT D.MAHER CHRISTOPHER D.JOHNSON DANIEL A.KAPLAN The purpose of an alternate bid is to permit the City to consider LENORA.SCHEFFLER alternatives and choose either one all or nolle: of them. The general AARON A.DEAN J � BRADLEY F.WILLIAMS ��}} conditions at page -S specifically provides as follows: CYNTHIA L.HEGARTY REBECCA A.CHAFFEE DAVID G.SCHELZEL The City reserves the right to award any or all EDWARD P,SHEU alternate bid items, or combination thereof, AMY S.CONNERS in DANIEL L. UD NERS the best interests of the City. JOHN D.SEINER BRIGID M,GOSS JUSTIN P.SHORT It is my understanding that the City }las decided not to go forward WILLIAM R.ASP with the alternate bid. Accordingly, it is appropriate for the Cit to JOHN T.SULLIVAN pp l y JOSEPH J.W.PHELPS determine the lowest responsible bidder based on the base bid, which it has DAVID JOYSLIN done here. The lowest base bid was made by Tim's Tree Service. KERRY C.RAYOMOND Accordingly, the contract may be awarded to Tun's Tree Service: for the: ELIZABETH A.DAHLSTROM ASHLEIGH M.LEITCH Items contained in the base bid. MARIA T.CISNEROS I hope: this is sufficient for your purposes. Please call me with any OF COUNSEL questions. JOHN R.CARROLL ROBERTL-CROSBY RICHARD A.PETERSON Very riily yours, LEONARD M.ADDINGTON l N.WALTER GRAFF SCOTT D.ELLER FRANK VOGL MARINUS W.VAN PUTTEN,JR, Allen D. Barnard ADB/j b 000090/480,%8/20082981 City of *. o d h e' nil. MEMORANDUM a ley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. 3. Award Contract for Briarwood Nature Area Water Quality Improvement Project Prepared By Jeff Oliver, P.E., City Engineer R.J. Kakach, EIT, Engineer Summary The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) recognizes the need for improvements to Bassett Creek and has included a water quality improvement project for the Briarwood Nature Area in its Capital Improvement Program. The contributing subwatershed consists of a 184-acre area, essentially north of Duluth Street and east of T.H. 100 in Golden Valley that receives minimal treatment prior to entering Bassett Creek. BCWMC requested a feasibility report be completed in 2013 to determine the best pretreatment solution. Several options were explored and it was determined the greatest pretreatment removal benefit would occur from a nutrient and sediment removal pond. The proposed pond will be located on the northern end of the Briarwood Nature Area, directly south of Dawnview Terrace. The pond will remove sediment and nutrients prior to discharge into Bassett Creek. BCWMC ordered the project and provided funding in the amount of$259,000 and directed the City to construct the project. Staff worked with the BCWMC to prepare plans and specifications for the water quality project. Bids were solicited for the Briarwood Nature Area Water Quality Improvement Project and were opened on December 2, 2014. The following bids were received: New Look Contracting, Inc. $187,440.75 North Pine Aggregate, Inc. $199,338.25 Sunram Construction $214,990.00 Rachel Contracting, Inc. $229,529.00 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $236,664.00 Blackstone Contractors, LLC $242,791.25 Frattalone Companies, Inc. $260,665.50 Ryan Contracting Co. $263,860.00 Northdale Construction Co., Inc. $269,493.32 Park Construction Company $274,680.50 Funding for the Briarwood Nature Area Water Quality Improvement Project is included in the 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Program (SS-39, page 79) in the amount of$259,000. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to award a contract for the Briarwood Nature Area Water Quality Improvement Project to the lowest responsible bidder, New Look Contracting, Inc., in the amount of$187,440.75. r---__--_--------------------------------e th*ref-------------------94tt,-averr— I Scott Ave N z 2 m m z ¢ Drake Rd �+1 o z y I ° 9Om m N 33rd Ave N Cross Ln J z z „ z Stockman a $ a z Park a 4-611 A-' fn C5 t oNry Ter z Lowry Ter Lowry Ter Gearty Park Iof TrKon�t TrKo m z m Elmdaj• PI 100 K )sr z a z a• oe O e o io a z m = o Culver Rd W Culver Rd I Dawnview,Ter qm� z I O1Nnvle� > m Dona Ln a z a 27th Ave N Briarwood m o z° z z d ..._t 4 Marie Ln W Marie Ln E a i—__—"I ----.----------' pond = o m r- Kentley Ave � `rester Dr g Hampton Rd a Z 2 .4m do m Q a Hampton Rd m Boar- z Nature ° a m G 4 m a �b V m Pon Merribee Dr m n z < V K v c ynnwood Rd V a= 2 N Q �� s•�Cteek Dr C z o; C m Area e > Westbrook Rd _ �� `coeq�eDr Mark F Westmore Way Westbrook 4W Dr tt` •y R!g. ,w2 T V_ F e Kenneth Wayek 2 innaq , o z ` Park > n14' • > ¢ rn z Pond z c t t m m > D v a Ssett a Ao z° Cr ek ¢ ture z " r W i Muth St rea D h Q ��• ° Coun f ogis No O`�•W cow c •��d z Po� Gt��o s z w Sorell Ava H�Cbrooke Q County Rd 66 3 Duluth Ln 'o >nwJan DuN�iFi oil, d '� Vrh.d Port- d 2 f ♦� 6� P Lilac • J C� .0 2 �d z 'R f! U Print Date:9/23/2013 e .j� .� Sources: o�deYl Briarwood/Dawnview Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines(2011). valley Water Quality Project Markhurd for 2-Foot Contours(2008). 0 405 810 1,620 Feet City o Valley Fire Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. 4. Purchase 800 MHZ Portable Radios for the Fire Department Prepared By John Crelly, Fire Chief Summary The 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes $165,500 for the purchase of 36 all- inclusive 800 MHZ portable radios (V & E-127, page 49). The 800 MHZ portable radio purchase will be made under the Minnesota State Contract #40071 through Motorola Solutions, Inc. Motorola has given the City an additional $400 credit for each radio ordered before the end of 2014. The Minnesota State Contract has awarded the following contract for the purchase of the 800 MHZ portable radios: Contract No. Item Vendor Amount 40071 800 MHZ Portable Motorola Solutions, Radios (36) Inc. $ 151,431.75 Total Purchase $ 151,431.75 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the purchase of 36 - 800 MHZ portable radios through Motorola Solutions, Inc. for $ 151,431.75 City of1 111 Akl e ti Id MEMORANDUM C valley Police Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. F. 5. Purchase 800 MHZ Portable Radios for the Police Department Prepared By Jason Sturgis, Commander Summary The 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes $162,800 for the purchase of 40 - 800 MHZ portable radios (V & E-129, page 50). The 800 MHZ portable radio purchase will be made under the Minnesota State Contract #40071 through Motorola Solutions, Inc. Motorola has given the City an additional $400 credit for each radio ordered before the end of 2014. The Minnesota State Contract has awarded the following contract for the purchase of the 800 MHZ portable radios: Contract No. Item Ivenclor Amount 40071 800 MHZ Portable Motorola Solutions, Radios (40) Inc. $139,730.00 Total Purchase $ 139,730.00 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the purchase of 40 - 800 MHZ portable radios through Motorola Solutions, Inc. for $ 139,730.00. �rcrc�m'.:' ? a 9a._:�=a re. :': `l x '.. .\.. ,'". -_�. -. _e... .� + ♦ �.Mai-;.;. 1 Q t0 L3 a ; _ c o j From: Sent:Thursday, December 04, 2014 12:40 PM To:Snope, Andy; Harris, Shep; Clausen, loanie; Fonnest, Larry; Schmidgall, Steve; Zimmerman,Jason Cc: Denise.engen@hennepin.us; andrew.gillett@hennein.us; mike.opat@hennel;nlus; linda.hi ins(@hennepin.us; freiberg@gmail.com; annrest@comcast.net; rep.Iyndoncarlspn@house.mn; seamseanfahey.org; rnnlheim@aol.com; nan-c-ellen@comcast.net; darla pardo@rdale.org Subject: LRT and Golden Valley as we know and love it. Council. What happened between voting to let the tests begin (ugg) and a vote on D1 and D2? I am opposed to D1 for all the factors initially written on the post its in the past 3 years. Why does it seem like a no brainer not to add an LRT or station or round about to us that live in this wildlife refuge area and know each other well because we embraced each other all the years our kids are or were in GV softball league, ( grades 5-12), and we go to school, community and neighborhood events for night out and many of us attend church together at St. Margaret Mary's or other churches? We are connected and trust each other. This overlaps from our Bassett Creek Drive Mary Hills area to our friends all around St. Marg. Marys. We are rooted in this pristine area together loving the solitude and friendships. We and many remodeled our homes. This was so nicely put in a letter from Darla Pardo in the SMM area to the Sunpost.. Please read and take it to your heart. All of this is uniting us and has brought us even closer. We have had the Bald Eagle, and 2 piliated woodpeckers that nest in Mary Hills Area in our yard the past month and we are across the creek a 1/2 block north of the fire station. I told Linda Higgins this and she said you still will. I looked her in the eye and said, the environmental study showed we will have an increase to moderate to severe sound and vibration, (which is not where Eagles roam). I don't want the LRT in D1. I do not want a round about. 1 do not want a station on Golden Valley Road.l don't want development here. It appears this station plan got added so the council can say the LRT benefits GV since there isn't enough population to ride in the area because we can ride the bus to downtown or drive. How did we get to this point? Because North Memorial said no to D2? That is where the population is that could use LRT and has areas that have little life and are redevelopment areas in MPLS for business potential? Everyone,please say no to D1 because of the environmental impact listed in the study, increased sound frequency and vibrations, increased traffic, increased crime, reduced wildlife, reduced endangered species in our part of GV. Say no to development of each of the three plans since this is a single family area and I want it that way. I How is there any trade off worth Natures loss from the Met Council and LRT or ? to add a lightrail in the National Grand Rounds Scenic Area: changing its wonderful florishing floura fauna when Hwy 55 and D2 can use redevelopment and to grow there, what we already have in Mary Hills Nature area and the Scenic grand rounds. This is our Golden Valley. Don't change an area that is florishing... Remember when the council said no to Cub Foods and now we have an enhanced gathering area instead. DO NOT MINIMIZE the Intellegence of Nature and the God given necessity for each of us to embrace it daily. How incredibly strong can you be to change this NOW, stand up for us. Save our families that chose to buy homes and pay taxes and live our lives building families here. Shep be a leader for us that we can trust. Let your voice be heard reflecting us in the area with what you told me months ago," I'll propose hwy 55 there will be development there." What can be more expensive than having us resedents no longer trust you and the council because your actions speak louder than your works. This is not about all of you really. You will all be long gone from your positions when we are all hurt from being disconnected with increased sound fequency and vibrations, increased traffic, increased crime, reduced wildlife, reduced endangered species in our part of Golden Valley. I pray we aren't called to move because the calm safe environment is no longer here... I'd love to remember all of you as the ones that took a stance and saved our area. I have total faith in our residents that as they hear of all this, as we have in the past 3 years of attending meetings, they will bombard you with emails and calls like this so you have what you need to guide, guard and protect our Valley. We mindfully moved from Minneapolis 29 years ago to Bassett Creek Drive, by the fire station, because we love the urban downtown and can go to it rather than live in it. You'd never know it is 2 minutes from us because be have a creek, trees, nature area,deer, fox, birds, turkeys, bald eagles, coyotes, so much more and a wilderness sanctuary in our back yard. I invite you to sit and listen anytime, Please don't take it away from us. Stand for this in Golden Valley. Put the LRT other than in the Scenic Grand Round. I am a 30 year member at unique and amazing St. Margaret Mary's. I am in my 4th year as part of the Council for Mission and Ministry of this faith community. The land is not for sale or use and many of us showed up, mind blown to let you know and we will continue to do so... No development, No Sale, No changes there. Respectfully, Carmen Dmigherty-lleiai, M.S. Trained HealthRHYTHMS and Beat The Odds Drum Facilitator Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor: retired From: MADGE THORSEN Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 2:10 PM To: Zimmerman,Jason; tmarshail_t_«@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us Subject: Golden Valley Station Just adding my voice to the chorus of shock and concern about the so-called "conceptual" plans for the redevelopment of a charming, suburban part of Golden Valley into a rail station and a carved up series of ugly rowhouses and even uglier retail, all in relation to proposed LRT alignment D-l. Equivocate about them as much as the Council may try, these "conceptual" plans evince an intent to encourage the destruction of the character of this community and allow the decimation of Mary I fills and Soehacki parks. Encouraging "residents to get as involved with the process as possible" is all well and good, but it is hard to have much faith in a process that has gone on with mere lip-service to the residents and extensive planning behind closed doors. Goodness knows what the Robbinsdale plans will look like - perhaps we can pave over Grimes Pond and the wetlands for another station. Nonetheless, I hope residents stay involved and fight as hard as the Kenilworth opponents to change these decisions and delay the project at every turn. Then maybe North Minneapolis, already urban and in sore need of development, unlike Golden Valley, would receive the attention and modernization it needs instead of being ignored while we let I3NSF/I_RT eat up what precious little parkland we have. I-lope everyone went and saw the "water project" in Soehacki over the last months and the impact it has had on the park; a mere portent of things to come if D-1 stays in place. Thanks 1br your attention. Madge S. 'Thorsen From: Pardo, Darla , Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 9:33 PM To: arxirew. illett,��?,hc_nn��in�uS; annrest@romcast.net; Snope, Andy; Denise.en en@ enne in.us; Mike Freiberg; Clausen, Joanie; Zimmerman, Jason; Fonnest, Larry; linda.hig ins@hennepin.us; mike._opat a hennein..us; Harris, Shep; Schmidgall, Steve Subject: LRT concerns December 6, 2014 Dear Golden Valley City Council, City Manager, Met Council and Hennepin County Parks Board; While we the people of McNair Manor Coalition concede the necessity of expanding public transit in general and light rail in particular, we see many issues with the proposed plans and process as we move forward. We respectfully request the opportunity to state our strong concerns. We represent some of the residents living within area of the proposed Golden Valley Road Station that would be directly affected by the Golden Valley Road Parking Assessments Strategies document, specifically option 6; on street parking within the surrounding neighborhoods of the proposed LRT station. We are certain our concerns are echoed by most adjacent neighborhood residents. Our York Ave/Zephyr Place locale is a wonderful, older residential neighborhood in which about half the homes feature either single car garages or none at all. With many families having two plus drivers and 2 or more cars per household, parking on the street is already a common occurrence. Ifparking for drivers arriving at the proposed Golden Valley Rd LRT station is not provided in a surface lot or parking structure, drivers will naturally park on those streets adjacent to the station. The "Zephyr Place/York Ave neighborhood consists of one dead end street branching off of another dead end street. "]'here is no through traffic; so there is only one entrance/exit for this neighborhood onto an already busy Golden Valley Rd. This is where children board school buses, residents enter and exit the neighborhood and emergency vehicles arrive to service its citizens. Our dead end neighborhood has no sidewalks, so children and adults must walk on the streets. This is where children learn to ride bikes and play and neighbors greet each other. We are concerned with the possibility of increased parking and traffic affecting the safety, security and livability of our neighborhood. This is a summary of our major concerns; • SAF1. "I'Y - Without sidewalks there will be increased pedestrian traffic in the roadway. If parking is allowed on both sides of our 26 foot wide street, this leaves no room for emergency vehicles to access fire hydrants and homes, particularly in snow months. We would like to reference the Dire Departments documented concerns regarding parking on Florida Ave at the l loneywell play fields. [Golden Valley City Code (section 9.12, section 9.05 Emergency vehicles would have no way to turn around in our cul de sac. Riders wishing to access the L,RT platform would have to crass already busy roads an intersections, which are certain to become busier. Additional unattended vehicles in the neighborhood could lead to increased petty theft and crime. • COST - Increased traffic on our side streets will necessitate more plowing of streets, street maintenance and policing. - A traffic light would most likely be necessary at the "T intersection of Zephyr and Golden Valley Rds to allow safe movement. It is already difficult to see around that curve to either the East or West. • LIVAB ILITY—Garbage, recycling, UPS, USPS etc. trucks will not have clear access. - Residents will struggle backing in and out of driveways. As York Ave is a curved street, this exacerbates the problem. - The city has enacted a `No Overnight Parking' ban on streets from November until April Is'. This may affect LRT parking. - Increased noise from riders returning from late nights and early morning arrivals. - Littering from LRT riders. We take pride in our neighborhood. - Competition from LRT riders for parking and visitors to our homes. - Possible decrease in property values/decreased tax base. - Eliminates the use of front yards and street for socialization; decreased Neighborhood cohesion. - Because this is 2 dead end streets, LRT riders will use private driveways to turn around. • DISTANCE FROM PLATFORM - side streets are not terribly close to the purposed platform and both streets have very steep and slippery (in winter months) hills. This is also true of Golden Valley Rd itself. If you reference the Theodore Wirth Regional Park/Bottineau Transit way Design Forum of February 2013, you will see the drawings on pages 31 - 33 shows a parking structure located in the Wirth triangle with an entrance off of Golden Valley Rd. We would hope that the logic of this plan will be considered the best option if the proposed stop at Golden Valley Rd goes forward. This solves many of the traffic issues that are sure to arise. As for the surrounding residents,we would ask that only permit parking be allowed on side streets. This would also be necessary during the construction process as well. This would go far to allay our worries regarding the expected influx of drivers to the area. Also a concern is trucks and heavy equipment using our side streets that we are still paying a hefty sum to the city for. We would ask that our streets not be used for all of the above stated reasons. Thank you in advance for allowing us a voice, The concerned residents of York/Zephyr area John & Susan Fitze Jennifer& Bill Welsh Tracy Sanzone 1828 York Ave N 3015 Golden Valley Rd 1829 Zephyr Plc Darla & Ricardo Pardo Missy & Dan Anderson Dane Anderson & Greg Salter 1808 York Ave N 3023 Golden Valley Rd 1725 York Ave N Jennifer& Steve Ericson Linda Gallant Colleen & Darrell Brandt 1812 York Ave N 1707 Xerxes Ave N 1721 York Ave N Sue & David Astin Gordon Huser& Dale Wiehle Leatha Hoffman & Robert Agnew 1832 York Ave N 1825 York Ave N 1800 York Ave N Brenda & Kevin Johnson Karen Lehman Jennifer& Keith Severson 1810 Zephyr Plc 1806 Zephyr Plc 1825 Zephyr Plc Andrew Schuler Jennifer Thies & Matt Roed Neal Murray 1821 York Ave N 1850 Zephyr Plc Jerry Lindskog Jean Kidd Melissa& Anthony Johnson 1717 York Ave N 1719 Xerxes Ave N 1814 York Ave N Luedke, Kris Subject: FW: LRT Blue Line Extension From: Amy Overby Date: December 15, 2014 at 09:59:54 CST To: <jclausenngoldenvalleymn.gov>, <lfonnestngoldenvalleymn.gov>, <sschmidgallaa oldenvalleymn.gov>, <asnopengoldenvalleymn.gov>, <sharris(a�goldenvalleymn.g_ov_> Subject: LRT Blue Line Extension Hello, Please reconsider giving municipal consent to an LRT station at Golden Valley Road and Theodore Wirth Parkway. I understand that supporting LRT demonstrates progressive politics and hipster environmentalism, but it doesn't actually benefit residents of Golden Valley, and it puts other residents at a tremendous disadvantage. Residential transit ridership in GV is already low at this location; why the need for more mass transit? One answer to this question has been that the station could support GV businesses, as long as the station plan is enlarged to include additional bussing between the station and local businesses. This will lead to more disruption of the surrounding neighborhood and woodlands. None of you were elected to office by GV businesses; Honeywell and Courage Center did not vote. To dramatically alter a neighborhood's character, appeal, and natural resources in order to accomplish the huge changes necessary to accommodate businesses is unethical. None of you were elected to represent and protect the interest of GV businesses. Yes, the city government is responsible for fiscal management, but I am not aware of an operating deficit that requires the sacrifices you are asking your electorate to make to provide ridership for this station. And, if GV is suffering from financial hardship, there must be other ways to balance the budget without signing on for the administratively popular but impractical solution of an LRT station in GV. Instead of trying to force-feed Golden Valley the municipal flavor-of-the-month -- mass transit and denser housing -- nurture the neighborhoods and qualities that already exist. If the natural beauty around the city is sold for subdivisions and transit, that very beauty will disappear; think of the long-term benefit of maintaining the uniqueness of natural Golden Valley, not short-tern financial gain. Amy Overby t Luedke, Kris Subject: FW: bottineau - parking From: Cynthia Carow Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 10:40 AM To: Clausen, Joanie; Fonnest, Larry; Schmidgall, Steve; Snope, Andy; Harris, Shep Cc: rep.mike.freiberg@house.mn; annrQc senate.mn; Brian Schiebe Subject: Parking at the Golden Valley Station I would like to respond to the discussions on parking at the Golden Valley Road Station. One of the options on the table to is allow on-street parking to allow commuters, not residents,to use the LRT. This option would not work for the neighborhood, not only because we don't want non-resident parking in our area, but there is no space. Neighbors can't even park across from someone's driveway on the street as the home owner would damage the car on the road coming out of their driveway.There is not enough space.The roads are narrow and we don't have sidewalks to accommodate foot traffic, the city does not allow evening parking from November-April, and the LRT travels between the hours we are not suppose to park on the road? Police will be asked to monitor the area more because of the possibility of car break- ins and snow removal guidelines. In addition Golden Valley Road neighborhoods that are being considered for parking don't have a bike lane. One of the visions we have heard is that these stations would be an avenue for bike traffic, where are they going to bike and not get hit by a car? Have any of you tried to cross Theodore Wirth and GV road during Rush Hour on a bike or walking, it is not easy. I understand a parking decision may have to be made. I have viewed a few of the concepts and there is an option that the Park Board presented to have parking on the prairie land on the corner of Theodore Wirth and GV Road. Create a ramp that utilizes this space. I know we live near Minneapolis and the city may want to disregard this neighborhood but reap the benefits of getting a station but do you really want to have Minneapolis's parking issues? There have been many comments that there will be no extra costs associated with the parking besides a parking ramp This is not the case as when more cars are parked there is more crime and how are these are going to monitored is there going to be increase in police force, and how will emergency vehicles access these neighborhoods? I know this is a hard decision to make, but we would like you to consider all the options on the table and that each and everyone of you have been voted in by the residents and you can be voted out. I know there are many bodies involved in this process, but one voice can make a difference and one city can make that difference as well. I encourage you to empower the council to share the voices of its residents. Cindy Carow Jason Zimmerman I Planning Manager I City of Golden Valley 7z;(A_)Gultiot,11Mlk,,; Road I G;oldon ValleY,NIN 55427 'G3.ii SaU jrax) 1763,591.3968(TTY) 1 Luedke, Kris Subject: FW: Golden Valley Road LRT Station parking for commuters From: Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 2:09 PM To: Clausen, Joanie; Fonnest, Larry; Schmidgall, Steve; Snope, Andy; Harris, Shep Subject: Golden Valley Road LRT Station parking for commuters We have heard that there is a proposal to allow on-street parking for Golden Valley Road Station LRT commuters on our residential street, 23`d and York Avenue North. We are against this proposal. We have quiet, safe, residential streets in our neighborhood with very little traffic and we want to keep them that way. If parking is needed for commuters, a parking ramp may need to be built. Thank you for representing the interests of our neighborhood in your decision making process. Sincerely, Dan Lindley and Pat Lindley Hastreiter 2320 York Avenue North Golden Valley, MN 55422 i Luedke, Kris From: Linda Jeske Date: December 16, 2014 at 16:55:49 CST To: "Clausen, Joanie" < "Harris, Shep" < >, Andy Snope < >, <sschmidgal](�oldenvalleymn.gov>, <lfonnestL& oldenvalleymn.gov>, <jzimmerman(ci�.�oldenval leymn.�,oy> Subject: Proposed GV Station LRT Off Street Parking Option Good Afternoon, Several issues regarding the LRT off street parking option proposed by Henn County for LRT riders: I live at 1929 Glenwood Parkway, a quiet, older street, narrow, and without sidewalks. We're one of 6 houses directly across from the Grand Rounds bike/running paths. Anyone who lives on the block will tell you how hard it is to back out of their driveway and not hit a a car parked on the opposite side of the road. One car is a nuisance. A row of 10 or 20 would be a nightmare. Factor in service vans, friends/family or my own cars parked in front of my house, say on a Friday, garbage and recycling day in GV, and there's simply no room to move. Add in snow for 6 months out of the year and it's unrealistic to think more than one car, or school bus or emergency vehicle could travel in either direction. Not to mention the ability of residents to get in and out of their own neighborhood. Many young children as well as adults bike freely on the 4 blocks (Glenwood Parkway, St. Margaret Drive, York, Zenith, Xerxes and Vista) because there's relatively little traffic, it's quiet and safe. My family uses the paths 3 or 4 times a day year round and would not like having to maneuver around parked cars and increased traffic to cross the street. It's not safe for anyone. How would we know if someone who parks here is really riding the LRT or looking to break into homes and cars of residents and/or riders? Summer car break ins have been an issue in GV,just recently on our few blocks. We're an active Neighborhood Watch area who work together to keep the streets safe and would like it to stay that way rather than inviting trouble. Noise is a concern, too. If the LRT (& its train whistle) runs from 5:30am to midnight, we'd hear any number of cars pull in/pull out, doors slam, drivers and passengers talking & car radios, 20 hours out of the day right in front of our houses. No thank you. We moved here for the accessibility to the bike paths, the park like setting and quick access to downtown. It's a great location and a great neighborhood. Our quality of life is as just as important as any other factor the council weighs during station parking area discussions. We love our homes, our front yards, and hope to be a partner in this process. Happy Holidays! Thank you, Linda Jeske, 1929 Glenwood Parkway 1 city o f4"�bb�e MEIViCRANDUM valley Police Department 763-593-8079 1763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. H. Authorization to Sign Amended Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force 2014 Co- Operative Agreement Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Summary The Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force 2014 Co-Operative Agreement signed at the City Council meeting on November 18, 2014, indicated the Oversight Board would acquire liability insurance for the task force. The agreement has been amended to reflect the task force, by action of the Board, will acquire and maintain the insurance. Attachments • Amended Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force 2014 Co-Operative Agreement (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Amended Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force 2014 Co-Operative Agreement. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. A141147 The HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE 2014 CO-OPERATIVE AGREEMENT, executed by Hennepin County, on behalf of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office and the Hennepin County Attorney's Office, the City of Richfield, the City of Brooklyn Park, the City of Brooklyn Center, the City of Golden Valley and the Drug Enforcement Administration (may be referred to herein as the "parties"). IT IS HEREBY AGREED that Agreement No. A141147 between the herein-named parties is hereby amended in accordance with the provisions set forth below: 1. Section 6, Powers and Duties of the Task Force, of the original contract shall be amended by adding a new Section 6.15 which reads as follows: "6.15 Effective October 16, 2014, or as soon thereafter as is possible, the Task Force, by action of the Board, shall acquire and maintain liability coverage for the Task Force through an insurance policy with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) with a limit of at least $1,500,000 per occurrence, under the standard LMCIT liability coverage forms. Alternatively, the Board may elect to obtain such liability coverage from a private commercial insurer, provided such commercial policy or policies contain coverages that are generally equivalent to, and as broad as, those provided under the standard LMCIT coverage forms. If coverage is obtained through a commercial insurer, such policies shall comply with the following requirements: • Each policy shall have a limit of at least $2 million per occurrence. If the policy contains a general aggregate limit, the general aggregate limit shall not be less than $1,500,000. • The CGL insurance shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and contractually-assumed liability. • Each Member, and each Member's officers, employees, and volunteers, shall be named as additional covered parties on each policy for all claims arising from Task Force activities or operations. The Board shall manage the policies acquired under this section, and any matters related thereto, in accordance with law and as needed to ensure sufficient insurance coverages remain in place. The cost for any such policies shall be paid solely from the forfeiture, seizures, fines and other proceeds generated by the Task Force as further described in Section 10." 2. Section 7, Liability, of the original contract shall be amended by adding a new Section 7.05 which reads as follows: 1 "7.05 To the limit and extent that coverage is available by and through any policy of insurance obtained pursuant to Section 6.15 herein, the Task Force shall defend and indemnify its Members, the Task Force Board including but not limited to the Chair, the Directors, the Task Force Commander, peace officers performing hereunder and any Member personnel, including but not limited the Member's officers, employees and volunteers, for any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from Task Force activities or operations and/or decisions of the Task Force Board. Nothing in this agreement shall constitute a waiver of the statutory limits on liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, as a waiver of any immunities or defenses available to the Task Force or any of the Members under law, or as any of the Members accepting liability for the acts or omissions of any of the other Members under Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, subdivision 1a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, this agreement and the activities carried out hereunder shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the Board and the Members that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of determining total liability as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, subdivision 1a." 3. Section 7, Liability, of the original contract shall be amended by adding a new Section 7.07 which reads as follows: "7.07 Except as set forth in Section 6.15 and 7.05, Sections 7.1 through 7.4 shall remain applicable. For clarification and not limitation, Sections 7.1 through 7.4 shall apply in the event (i) any claim is based on an event that pre-dates the coverage offered by the policy of insurance; (ii) based on the nature or circumstances of the claim, the Task Force's policy of insurance does not cover a claim; (iii)the insurer denies a claim for any reason; (iv) a claim exceeds the limits of said policy of insurance; or (v) any other situation or instance not specifically addressed by Section 6.15 and/or 7.05. If there is a conflict between the provisions of Section 6.15 or 7.05 and any provisions of Sections 7.1-7.4, the provisions set forth in Section Sections 6.15 and/or 7.05 shall prevail." Except as hereinabove amended, the terms, conditions and provisions of A141147 shall remain in full force and effect. This Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. A141147 shall be effective upon approval by the authorized Hennepin County Officials. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, caused this Amendment to be executed. (signatures continued on the following page) 2 HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY The Golden Valley City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of 2014. City of Golden Valley By: Its Mayor And by: Its City Manager Approved as to form and legality: Golden Valley City Attorney (signatures continued on the following page) 3 CX t'V o ,gy-0 if c, n MEMORANDUM +C City Administration/Council 763-593-3989/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. I. Approval of 2015 General Wages and Salaries for Non-union Personnel Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Summary Attached is the compensation resolution establishing wages and salaries for all non-union employees for 2015. The resolution proposes a 2.5% general wage increase. The resolution also establishes the City's monthly contribution toward employee benefits in the City's cafeteria plan. There is a $75 per month increase in the benefit contribution by the City for 2015, due to the 10.7% increase in premium costs. As in previous years, there is an additional $20 per month incentive for those employees who successfully participated in the 2014 City Wellness at Work program. Attachments • Resolution Establishing 2015 General Wages and Salaries for Non-union Personnel (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Establishing 2015 General Wages and Salaries for Non-union Personnel. Resolution 14-98 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 2015 GENERAL WAGES AND SALARIES FOR ALL NON-UNION PERSONNEL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley that it hereby adopts the following general wages, salaries and benefits schedule for all non-union personnel for the year 2015, said schedule to commence for work performed by the personnel named herein effective as of January 1, 2015. MANAGEMENT TEAM Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Physical Development Director $113,104 $118,490 $123,876 $129,262 $134,648 Police Chief 111,591 116,905 122,219 127,533 132,847 Fire Chief 108,212 113,365 118,518 123,671 128,824 Finance Director 105,749 110,785 115,821 120,856 125,892 Director of Parks and Recreation 104,059 109,014 113,970 118,925 123,880 Assistant City Manager 102,388 107,264 112,140 117,015 121,891 Communications Manager 71 ,956 75,383 78,809 82,236 85,662 DIVISION HEADS/SUPERVISORS Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 City Engineer 102,388 107,264 112,140 117,015 121,891 Police Commander 90,265 94,563 98,861 103,160 107,458 Public Works Maintenance Manager 87,247 91 ,402 95,557 99,711 103,866 Information Technology Coordinator 86,420 90,535 94,651 98,766 102,881 Building Official 84,769 88,805 92,842 96,878 100,915 Park Supervisor 78,091 81,809 85,528 89,246 92,965 Street Supervisor 78,091 81,809 85,528 89,246 92,965 Utility Supervisor 78,091 81,809 85,528 89,246 92,965 Golf Operations Manager 73,432 76,929 80,425 83,922 87,419 Greens Superintendent 73,432 76,929 80,425 83,922 87,419 Vehicle Maintenance Foreman 67,798 71,027 74,255 77,484 80,712 Planning Manager 67,043 70,235 73,428 76,620 79,813 Deputy Registrar Supervisor 62,635 67,617 68,600 71 ,582 74,565 PROFESSIONAL EXEMPT Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Police Lieutenant 96,611 99,599 Deputy Fire Chief 82,209 86,124 90,039 93,953 97,868 Accounting Coordinator 71,349 74,746 78,144 81,541 84,939 City Clerk 70,992 74,372 77,753 81,133 84,514 Public Works Specialist 65,249 68,356 71 ,463 74,570 77,677 Recreation Supervisor 63,220 66,231 69,241 72,252 75,262 Support Services Coordinator 62,635 65,617 68,600 71 ,583 74,565 Accountant 1 64,176 67,232 70,288 73,344 76,400 Engineer 61,299 64,218 67,137 70,056 72,975 Information Technology Technician 58,341 61,120 63,898 66,676 69,454 Associate Planner/Grant Writer 57,326 60,056 62,785 65,515 68,245 Assistant Golf Operations Manager 54,287 56,872 59,457 62,042 64,627 Assistant Forester 52,348 54,841 57,333 59,826 62,319 Resolution 14-98 - Continued December 16, 2014 EXEMPT CREATIVE PROFESSIONAL Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Graphic Designer/Web Specialist 43,639 45,717 47,795 49,873 51,951 EXEMPT ESTABLISHMENT EMPLOYEES Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Mechanic - Golf Course 46,726 48,951 51 ,176 53,401 55,626 Turf Maintenance Foreman 45,564 47,734 49,904 52,073 54,243 Turf Maintenance Assistant 36,005 37,719 39,434 41 ,148 42,863 NON-EXEMPT Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Engineering Technician III 31.37 32.86 34.35 35.85 37.34 Chief Building Inspector 31.29 32.78 34.27 35.76 37.25 Building Inspector 29.74 31.15 32.57 33.98 35.40 Public Works Inspector 29.74 31 .15 32.57 33.98 35.40 Fire Education Specialist 27.47 28.78 30.08 31.39 32.70 Fire/Property Maintenance Specialist 27.47 28.78 30.08 31.39 32.70 Crew Leader - Maintenance 31.01 GIS Technician 25.17 26.36 27.56 28.76 29.96 Water Resources Technician 25.17 26.36 27.56 28.76 29.96 Public Works Maintenance 22.22 23.58 24.93 26.78 Step C 28.14 Step B 28.69 Step A 29.27 Administrative Assistant 21.91 22.95 23.99 25.04 26.08 Communications Specialist 21.91 22.95 23.99 25.04 26.08 Accounts Receivable/Election Assistant 21.91 22.95 23.99 25.04 26.08 Assessment/Accounts Payable Technician 21.91 22.95 23.99 25.04 26.08 Utility Billing/Accounts Payable Technician 21.91 22.95 23.99 25.04 26.08 Motor Vehicle License Clerk 18.54 19.42 20.30 21.19 22.07 Community Service Officer 18.16 18.52 Office Clerk 17.30 18.12 18.94 19.77 20.59 Receptionist 17.30 18.12 18.94 19.77 20.59 FIRE DEPARTMENT Battalion Chief 19.92 per hour Captain 19.18 per hour Lieutenant 17.78 per hour Firefighter 15.44 per hour Firefighter - Apprentice 13.01 per hour Firefighter in Training 9.77 per hour TEMPORARY PART-TIME AND SEASONAL Minimum Wages 8.00 per hour 9.00 per hour - effective August 1 Maximum Wages 17.03 per hour Resolution 14-98 - Continued December 16, 2014 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The dollar amount of the City's contribution to benefits for employees classified under the categories of Non-exempt, Exempt Establishment, Exempt Creative Professional and Professional Exempt will be $1,202 per month effective January 1, 2015. The City will also pay the cost of group term life IRS maximum non-taxable level and group disability insurance for those employees. 2. The dollar amount of the City's contribution to benefits for employees classified under Management Team and/or Division Head/Supervisor categories who have been appointed in such designated positions prior to May 1, 2011 will be $1,223 per month plus 2% of monthly salary effective January 1, 2015. The City will also pay the cost of group term life IRS maximum non-taxable level and group long-term disability insurance for those employees. 3. Employees who successfully participated in the City wellness program in 2015 will receive an additional $20 per month in the City's contribution towards benefits. 4. Employee service awards are outlined in the Public Purpose Expenditure Policy and shall be considered compensation in accordance with IRS regulations. 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. city 0 ' en- MEMORANDUM -90 valle Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. J. Approval of 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary The 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program was presented to the City Council at the Council/Manager meeting on September 9, October 14, November 12, and December 9, 2014, and was approved by the Planning Commission at their meeting of November 24, 2014. The financing section outlines the appropriate budget for each section. The CIP is located on the City website under htt�www.goldenvageygj 7ov udEe Jindex.php. Attachments • Unapproved Planning Commission Meeting minutes dated November 24, 2014 (2 pages) • Resolution Approving the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program (1 page) • 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program (distributed previously) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Approving the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 A regular meeting of the Planning ommission was held at the Golden Valley GityAall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Iley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, vember 24, 2014, Chair Kluchka.'called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those sent were Planning Com; issioners Baker, Blum; Cera, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbau nd Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate Plan r/Grant Writer Enlaly Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.,' 1. Approval of Minutes' November 10, 2014, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Waldhauser referred to the sixth paragraph 6- n.page four and asked that the sentence be corrected to say there are a group 6f property owners who don't want see the property developed. /dhnreferred to the third pa agraph on page nine and s� sted the word changed to "discourageBaker, seconded by Ce and motion carried unanimously to approve the 0, 2014, minutes with th above noted changes. 2. Presentation of Capital Improvement Program 2015-2019 — Sue Virnig, City Finance Director Sue Virnig, Finance Director, explained that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a 5-year financing planning instrument used to identify needed capital projects and to delineate the financing and timing of associated projects. Because of its relationship with the City's Comprehensive Plan the CIP is reviewed by the Planning Commission annually. Waldhauser referred to the Winnetka Avenue/Highway 55 intersection and Douglas Drive improvements and asked if the CIP anticipates and supports higher density uses, or if the proposed projects would just alleviate the current traffic issues. Virnig explained that the individual projects in the CIP will be reviewed again by the City Council. Baker asked if there is anything in the CIP that raises questions regarding its compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan. Virnig noted that the community center is not listed in the CIP yet. Kluchka questioned how the community center would be accounted for. Virnig said it would be in the building fund, or it would be on its own funding. Segelbaum asked if the Golden Hills TIF district is concluding at the end of this year. Virnig said the TIF district will be decertified this year and that there is a bond payment in February. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 2 Waldhauser referred to the Three Rivers trail system plans and asked how close the items listed in the CIP gets the City to completion of the trail system. Virnig explained that the funding listed in the CIP is for existing trails and that the City would need to review further plans for any new trails. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Segelbaum and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Consideration of Resolution N . 14-01 Finding that Modification No. 2 of the Redevelopment Plan for the Hi hway 55 West Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financi g Plan for Tax Increment Financing (Renewal and Renovation) District No. 1 onform to the General Plan for the envelopment and Redevelopm int of the City, as Amended (Amended 2008 Co\0Jt sive Plan Update) Zimmermaed the Commission at in 2012 a TIF plan was approved for the Highway 5lopment area. At th t time it was anticipated that the Tiburon apartmentould move forward, fut it has not. There is now a new project proposed for that site so the TIF plan needs to be modified to revise the budg nd amend the timeline tdtMake it current with the new Golden Villas proposal, Kluchka asked if anything'else in the TIF plan has changed. Zimmerman said the area of the district has not changed;,but the budget needs have changed. Kluchka asked if the time period of the TIF district has changed. Zimmerman said no, it is still 15 years. Waldhauser asked if there wouldanother modification required if the Golden Villas proposal doesn't move forward. She sked if the budget is entirely dependent on what a developer asks for. Zimmerman said n entirely, there may be some negotiation involved. °. Blum asked if it is correct say that the City is taking on a debt that's underwritten by future tax revenues based on projected values, and using that revenue to improve the land to make it a financially doable project and if part of the incentive to the City is that right now it is not a very well used property. Zimmerman said yes, ultimately the TIF assistance allows a project to take place, that otherwise couldn't' $lum asked if the money comes from the State and County. Virnig said the TIF money comes from the jurisdiction it actually involves. In this case, Hennepin County, School District 270 and City taxes. Baker asked by the Tiburon apartment project failed. Zimmerman said it involved financing; .He explained that the Tiburon developer was not asking, for TIF money, the City was asking for it in order to do necessaryimprovements in the are Bakerasked if it is decided up front how TIF funds will be used. Zimmerman explained t t the TIF plan is for the district and that there is a separate development plan for specific pr erties. Baker said there should be a benefit to the City end he wants to be clear on wh I the City is getting. j Resolution 14-99 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015-2019 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program on November 24, 2014; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program at the September 9, October 14, November 12 and December 9, 2014 Council/Manager meetings; and WHEREAS, financing for projects outlined in the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program will be reviewed each year and provided for by current approved budget or specifically identified in the financing section in this document,- NOW, ocument;NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Golden Valley approves the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program. 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 ame:whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. city of golden valley Planning D epartment 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. K. Approval of Plat - Hanson Wood Shores Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary At the September 2, 2014, City Council meeting, the Council held a public hearing on the Preliminary Plat for the minor subdivision of Hanson Wood Shores (South of Major/Noble Drives and West of Sweeney Lake). After the hearing, the Council approved the Preliminary Plat which will allow two lots. The Final Plat of Hanson Wood Shores 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 City Code. The following fees are due in conjunction with the Final Plat: $12,000- 2006 Deferred Street Assessments $20,800 - Park Dedication $5,000- Financial Security for Establishment of Vegetative Buffer $1,000- Fee to Draft and Record Conservation Easements Attachments • Resolution for Approval of Plat - Hanson Wood Shores (1 page) • Final Plat of Hanson Wood Shores (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat - Hanson Wood Shores. Resolution 14-100 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT - HANSON WOOD SHORES 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 Hanson Wood Shores covering the following described tracts of land: Tract B, except that part of said Tract embraced in Plat of HEATHBROOKE, Registered Land Survey No. 1104, Hennepin County, Minnesota 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. Ij ,\ HANSON WOODS IR.T.DOCNO. � � SHORES i ' f Know all persons by these presents that George S.Wessin and Sue A.Wessin,husband and wife,fee owners of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin,State of Minnesota,to wk: I ' Treat B,except that part of said Tract embraced in plat of HEATHBROOKE,Registered Land Survey No.1104,Hennepin County, FOUND NEW W.CIG AT N IMi Minnesota ooR•MO.10,M24 /) Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as HANSON WOOD SHORES,and do hereby dedicate to the public for public use 4' forever the drainage and utility easements as shown on the plat. In witness whereof said George S.Wessin and Sue A.Wessin,husband and wife,have hereunto set their hands this day of 20_ GEORGE S.WESSIN SUE A.WESSIN /�\ �, COUNT'OF )The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20_,by �j George S.Wessin and Sue A.Wessin,husband and wife. Notary Public, County, Notarys printed name My commission expires ti I,Mark S.Gronbe do hereby ce that this plat was I f:• E X �P rg, y rtify p prepared by me or under my direct supervision;that I am a duly Licensed Land I r C ,) / Surveyor in the State of Minnesota;that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey;that all mathematical data and i I MA"ate 1\ T/ ~j 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. ——_—)\ - i••-i ..... �, arkronberg L's e) nsed Land Surveyorft rveyor and EngineerR8 ,. S82- '1 Minnesota License umber 12755s�.ts .31L>a3. STATE OF j —_-� TNE OF PLAT OFHEATMBROOKE COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this da of ,20_ by Mark S.Gronbe rcJLand Surveyor, Yo Engineer. lot \ F / Notary Public, County, Notarys printed name II \\ a3�� ' My commission expires �1 N °ao'W E 185.06 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA 1 I ,' �» +ia.sf This plat of HANSON WOOD SHORES was approved and accepted by the City Council of Golden Valley,Minnesota,at a regular meeting �.!„I j •./ } ( / / ,y held this day of ,20 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 provided by Minnesota Statutes,Section 505.03,Subd.2. qq « o I I rN CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA EL.EVEVAT MN Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA o I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20_and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat.Dated this day of m I I L $! / / ay MA20 RKV.CHAPIN,HENNEPINCOUNTYAUDITOR By Deputy i I Sir\ SURVEY DIVISION,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA O oaB.`F3co �y aqr Pursuant to MINN.STAT.Sec.383B.565,(1969),this plat has been approved this day of 20_ I I ANO 8 �: 3 of CHRIS F.MAVIS,HENNEPIN COUNTY SURVEYOR By It REGISTRAR OF TITLES,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA N-B pIARTER UNE i I =i / ! ,� I hereby certify that the within plat of HANSON WOOD SHORES was filed in this office this day of ,20_,at OF EEc.leaury \+�� 2 &� / $g ,��' oclock_M. I j ! �e. � MARTIN MCCORMICK,REGISTRAR OF TITLES b E I NiE eo•� /� ...... v BY Deputy wFL N e.EVATMN B 1 JY Drainage and YdiKy eaaemena shown data: 3 ( I I I m i 1 I o Denotes�monument found 50 100 200 I I Mnn.LLk,rkNo.on i12755 set marked by –o------I L----s---- Forpurpoeas of this survey,the Nat-SaM NENN...WAT.1. Nf Sec1ionwe ryes an assumed Being a feet in width,unim og»nMse indioated,and GRONBERG St ASSOCIATES, INC. i DOR.SEC.1i-29-24 SCALE IN FEET ed�0g%gna,and being io ria wk th,and adjoining right away Nme unteaa ogLanwise kxNcsw or,thew�. ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLANNERS Publicgoident4r MEMORANDUM valley r Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. L. Authorize Agreement with Hennepin County for the Sentencing to Service Program Prepared By Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor Mark Ray, PE, Street Maintenance Supervisor Summary Over the years, the Public Works Department has received requests for miscellaneous tasks including weeding, litter pickup, and park cleanup that exceed the Public Works Maintenance Division's available resources. In response to these unmet needs, staff contracted with Hennepin County's Sentencing to Service Program (STS) in 2014. The STS crews exceeded staff's expectations and capabilities on a range of projects. The 2014 projects are listed below: • Weeding and mulching public landscapes • Mulching and leveling playgrounds • Nature trail maintenance • Trimming small trees and shrubs • Edging and line trimming parks • Sod and seed restoration projects • Painting picnic tables, hockey rink boards and signs • Fall cleanup, cutting perennials, etc. • Highway 55 lilac project maintenance • Cleaning and landscape maintenance around stormwater ponds • Litter picking all public grounds and highways • Buckthorn removal projects Based on STS's performance in 2014, staff is recommending that the City continue the working relationship with STS in 2015. Under the new contract, Hennepin County will continue to provide one STS crew full time (5 days a week) to Golden Valley. The primary focus of the STS crews will continue to be on the projects listed above and other environment-related efforts. Staff sees this partnership with STS as being a great value and service to the residents of Golden Valley. The cost to continue this service in 2015 is $90,064, which is the same as the 2014 contract. Attachments • Sentencing to Service Program Services Agreement with the City of Golden Valley (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the agreement with Hennepin County for the Sentencing to Service Program in the amount not to exceed $90,064. Contract No. A142284 SENTENCING TO SERVICE PROGRAM SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY This Agreement is between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA A- 2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 ("COUNTY"), on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections and Rehabilitation, C-2300 Government Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 ("DEPARTMENT"), and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 ("CITY"). WHEREAS, the COUNTY operates the Sentencing to Service Program (STS Program) which offers offenders an opportunity to learn landscape maintenance and other marketable skills; and WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to purchase the services of the STS Program; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY, on behalf of the DEPARTMENT, and the CITY agree as follows: 1. TERM AND COST OF THIS AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be in effect from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the Default and Cancellation provisions of this Agreement. The total cost of this Agreement, including all reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Ninety Thousand and Sixty-Four Dollars ($90,064.00) plus applicable Minnesota sales tax, when appropriate. 2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED The CITY wishes to utilize the services of the STS Program participants to perform labor intensive forestry, park maintenance, street maintenance, utility maintenance, and janitorial services (the "Work"). The COUNTY through its DEPARTMENT agrees to the following with respect to the Work requested: A. Provide one (1) STS work crew, five (5) days per week, for the period January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. Provide work crews for a minimum of six (6) hours per day, excluding paid breaks. A work crew will consist of an average of six (6) participants per day. Page 1 of 6 B. Provide COUNTY employed crew leader who will be responsible for the transportation, instruction, and supervision of the STS Program work crew. C. Provide required personal safety equipment and clothing needed for specific work. D. Provide basic landscaping tools and equipment needed for specific work. E. Train each STS Program work crew in necessary safety principles and techniques. F. Provide quarterly reports to the CITY that show the number of days worked and total hours of service received. G. Assume all medical and other liability for the STS Program participants. 3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY The CITY agrees to the following: A. Obtain all necessary permits or licenses or special authority for all Work. B. Assign all work and coordinate material purchases and delivery for projects to be performed. 4. COST AND PAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. The CITY shall pay the COUNTY an amount: 1. Not to exceed Ninety Thousand and Sixty-Four Dollars ($90,064.00) in 2015 for the services described in this Agreement. B. The COUNTY shall bill the CITY for all applicable Minnesota sales tax, when appropriate. C. Payment for services performed by the COUNTY shall be paid by the CITY within thirty (30) days from the date of invoice. The COUNTY will invoice for services only at the end of each calendar quarter an amount of Twenty-Two Thousand Five Hundred and Sixteen Dollars ($22,516.00) plus applicable Minnesota sales tax, when appropriate. 5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Nothing is intended or should be construed as creating or establishing the relationship of co- partners between the parties or as constituting either party as the agent, representative, or employee of the other party for any purpose. Each party is and shall remain an independent contractor for all services performed under this Agreement. Each party shall secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any personnel or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services required by a party will have no contractual relationship with the other party and will not be considered employees of the other party. Page 2 of 6 6. INDEMNIFICATION Each party agrees that it will be responsible and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other party, its officials, officers, agents, and employees for its own errors, acts, and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by the law and shall not be responsible for the errors, acts, and omissions of the other party and the results thereof. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section 6, neither the COUNTY nor the CITY shall have any liability to each other for any cause under or related to this Agreement for any consequential, special, incidental, punitive, or indirect damages (including without limitation loss of profit, revenue, business opportunity, or business advantage), whether based upon a claim or action of tort, contract, warranty, negligence, strict liability, contribution, or any other legal theory or cause of action. Each party's liability shall be governed by and limited in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. 7. DATA PRACTICES Both parties shall abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 (MGDPA), and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations, and orders relating to data privacy and confidentiality. 8. SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS Neither party shall assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this Agreement, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party. 9. MERGER AND MODIFICATION A. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter. All items that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. B. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties. 10. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION A. If either party fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, it shall be in default. Unless the default is excused by the nondefaulting party, the nondefaulting party may upon written notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its entirety. Additionally, failure of the CITY to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall be just cause for the COUNTY to immediately cease providing services under this Agreement until the CITY's compliance. B. The above remedies shall be in addition to any other right or remedy available to the parties under this Agreement, law, statute, rule, and/or equity. Page 3 of 6 C. Either party's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of this Agreement. D. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice. 11. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION In order to coordinate the services of the CITY with the activities of the DEPARTMENT, so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, John Ekholm, Corrections Program Manager, Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections & Rehabilitation, Community Offender Management Division, 3000 North Second Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411, or his successor (Contract Administrator), shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY and serve as liaison between the COUNTY and the CITY. CITY Project Contact: Al Lundstrom Park Maintenance Supervisor City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 763-593-8046 (Direct) alundstrom(c�goldenvalleymn ov CITY Billing Contact: Bert Tracy Public Works Maintenance Manager City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 763-593-3981 (Direct) btracyngoldenvalleymn.gov 12. NOTICES Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party under this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator with a copy to the originating DEPARTMENT at the address given in the opening paragraph of this Agreement. Notice to the CITY shall be sent to the address stated in the opening paragraph of this Agreement. Page 4 of 6 13. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the parties and their performance. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation will be those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected. THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 5 of 6 Contract No. A142284 COUNTY BOARD AUTHORIZATION Reviewed by the County COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Attorney's Office STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chair of Its County Board Date: Date: ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of County Board Date: And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Date: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY The CITY warrants that the person who executed this Agreement is authorized to do so as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances.* By: Its. Date: And: Its. Date: *The CITY shall submit applicable documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances) that confirms the signatory's delegation of authority. This documentation shall be submitted at the same time this Agreement is returned to the COUNTY. Page 6 of 6 t:`1 tyC) golden'ivalley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. M. Authorize Contract Extension with North American Cleaning Services Prepared By Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor Summary The City's contract for professional cleaning services with North American Cleaning ends December 31, 2014. The contract provisions allow for an extension to the contract term if desired by both parties. Furthermore, the provisions allow for an increase in an amount equal to the United States Consumer Price Index. North American Cleaning Services has requested a one-year extension with no increase in the original bid price. Staff has prepared a contract amendment, which extends the contract to December 31, 2015, for a total payment of services of$71,984 per year. The budget amount for 2015 is $85,000. Attachments • Letter from North American Cleaning Corporation, dated December 4, 2014 (1 page) • Amendment to Contract 04-01 between City of Golden Valley and North American Cleaning Services (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to authorize City Manager to sign the Amendment to Contract 04-01 between the City of Golden Valley and North American Cleaning Services. P.o. Box,7277 %inneapofis, III9V55407 Office; (612)728-1906 'Fa.r,- (612)722-8216 Ceff (612)27.5-31.36 December 4, 2014 Al Lundstrom City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Mr. Lundstrom: We would like to extend our contract for one year with the City of Golden Valley under the same contract and pricing. Thank you Sincerely, Noe Arreguin President AMENDMENT Contract 04-01 between City of Golden Valley and North American Cleaning Services This amendment to Contract 04-01 is made this day of 2013, by and between the City of Golden Valley ("City") and North American Cleaning Services ("North American") to perform certain cleaning services for the City of Golden Valley. The original contract was for a period of two years from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2005. The original contract was extended for a two-year period of January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2007 and it was extended a second, third and fourth time for a two-year period of January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009; January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011; and January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013. The original contract was extended for an additional one year from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. The parties wish to extend the original contract for an additional one year from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, with no change in compensation. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Except to the extent modified by this Amendment, the contract between the City and North American for cleaning services (the "Contract") is hereby ratified in all respects. 2. The Contract is extended for an additional one-year period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. 3. The total yearly payment for contract services shall be in the amount of $71,984.00 each year. 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is the original contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties sign below. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY NORTH AMERICAN CLEANING SERVICES By By Thomas D. Burt Its: Its: City Manager City of go I 'd e, n MEMORANDUM valley Public r ti c Wi ks Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. N. Twin Lake Water Quality Improvements Project 1. Authorize Cooperative Agreement with Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission 2. Authorize Agreement for Professional Engineering Services with Barr Engineering Co. Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer Summary Twin Lake, located immediately east of Sweeney Lake in the City of Golden Valley and partially within Theodore Wirth Park, has a history of excellent water quality and is likely one of the cleanest lake in the Twin City metropolitan area. As such, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) Watershed Management Plan includes a policy to protect its high water quality, in addition to improving the water quality of other water bodies in the watershed. During recent years, the phosphorus levels measured within Twin Lake spiked to high levels that have historically not been present. These measured phosphorus levels raised concerns regarding the water quality in the lake and resulted in the BCWMC performing additional studies to determine the cause of the increase in nutrient levels. These studies determined that drought conditions and above average temperatures resulted in a water inversion within Twin Lake that resulted in release of phosphorus contained in the bottom sediment of the lake. Furthermore, it was determined that the high phosphorus levels were likely to reoccur should similar conditions develop in the future. Based upon these study results, the BCWMC directed its engineer to prepare a feasibility report to determine methods to control phosphorus levels in the future. This feasibility report determined that an alum treatment of Twin Lake would be effective in controlling the phosphorus contained in the lake sediment, which would minimize the threat of phosphorus release from the sediments in the future. Following consideration of the feasibility report, the BCWMC authorized an alum treatment of the lake, and approved a cooperative agreement with the City of Golden Valley for implementation. This cooperative agreement is attached to this memorandum for City Council consideration. City staff requested a proposal from Barr Engineering Co. for professional engineering services to implement the alum treatment of Twin Lake on behalf of the BCWMC. This proposal, dated December 5, 2014 (attached), includes determination of the alum dosing based upon conditions in the lake, participation in a public outreach and education program for property owners on Twin and Sweeney Lakes, coordination with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, permitting, and construction contract administration. The not to exceed cost for these services totals $34,000. The BCWMC has budgeted $163,000 for this treatment during the spring of 2015 in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The City had previously included the proposed alum treatment in its CIP in 2014 and removed for 2015 due to the BCWMC's delayed decision to proceed with the project. However, as with all BCWMC projects within Golden Valley, the entire project will be funded by the Commission and all costs incurred by the City will be reimbursed. Attachments • Cooperative Agreement with the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission for water quality improvements in Twin Lake (5 pages) • Agreement with Barr Engineering Co. for Design, Outreach, Permitting and Implementation of Phase 1 of the Twin Lake Alum Treatment, dated December 5, 2014 (5 pages) Recommended Action 1. Motion to authorize the Cooperative Agreement for Water Quality Improvements in Twin Lake with the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission. 2. Motion to authorize professional services agreement with Barr Engineering Co. for design, outreach, permitting and implementation of Phase 1 of the Twin Lake Alum Treatment in the amount not to exceed $34,000. COOPERATIVE AC,REEMENT This Agreement is made as of this y of , 2014, by and between the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, a joint powers watershed management organization(hereinafter the"Commission"),and the City of Golden Valley,a Minnesota municipal corporation(hereinafter the"City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Commission adopted the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Watershed Management Plan on September 16, 2004 (the "Plan"), a watershed management plan within the meaning of Minn.Stat., § 1038.231;and WHEREAS, the Plan, as amended, includes a capital improvement program ("CIP") that lists a number of water quality project capital improvements;and WHEREAS, one of the water quality projects identified in the CIP is a water quality improvement project described as the Twin Lake In-Lake Alum-Treatment Project (BCWMC Project TW-2)in the City of Golden Valley,as more fully described in the feasibility report for the Project prepared by Barr Engineering on behalf of the Commission , entitled Feasibility Report for Water Quality Improvements in Twin Lake, Golden Valley MN dated February 2013, which is attached and made a part hereof(the"Project");and WHEREAS,the amended cost estimate for the Project is$163,000;and WHEREAS, the Plan specifies that the Project will be funded by a County tax levy under Minn. Stat., § 103B.251;and WHEREAS, on September 19, 2013, the Commission adopted a resolution ordering the Project;and WHEREAS,on November 19, 2014,the Commission approved a resolution directing that it be implemented by the City; and WHEREAS,project costs were certified to Iiennepin County,which levied taxes throughout the watershed for the Project costs in 2013 for collection and settlement in 2014;and WHEREAS, the City is willing to implement the Project on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE PREMISES AND MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH,THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. The Project will consist of the in-lake alum-treatment of Twin Lake, as described in the Feasibility Report for the Project. 1 452204v CLLBA295-40 2. The City will design the Project and prepare plans and specifications for implementing the Project. These plans and specifications, and any changes to such plans and specifications, shall be submitted to the Commission for approval. Minor change orders that do not materially change either the effectiveness of the Project to meet its intended purposes or the environmental impacts of the Project may be approved by the City. 3. The City will advertise for bids and award contracts in accordance with the requirements of law. The City will award the contract and supervise and administer the implementation of the Project to assure that it is completed in accordance with plans and specifications. The City will require the contractor to provide all payment and performance bonds required by law. The City will require that the Commission be named as additional insured on all liability policies required by the City of the contractor and be given the same notification of cancellation or non-renewal as is given to the City. The City will require that the contractor defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the Commission and the City, their agents, officers, and employees, from all claims or actions arising from negligent acts,errors or omissions of the contractor. The City will supervise the work of the contractor. However, the Commission may observe and review the work of the Project until it is completed. The City will display a sign at Twin Lake stating "Paid for by the Taxpayers of the Bassett Creek Watershed", 4. The City will pay the contractor and all other expenses related to the implementation of the Project and keep and maintain complete records of such costs incurred. 5. The Commission will reimburse Twenty Thousand Fight Hundred Dollars($20,800) of Project expenses from its Capital Improvement Program Closed Project Account. The Commission will use its best efforts to secure payment from the County in accordance with Minn. Stat., § 103B.251 in the amount of One Hundred Forty-Two Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($142,200) by tax levy in 2013 for collection in 2014. The total reimbursement will not exceed One Hundred Sixty-Three Thousand Dollars($163,000), less Commission expenses. Out-of-pocket costs related to the Project, incurred and paid by the Commission including, but not limited to, feasibility studies, publication of notices, securing County tax levy, preparation of contracts, review of proposed contract documents, administration of this contract and a 2.5%administrative charge shall be repaid from the amount specified above from the Commission's Capital Improvement Program. Closed Project Account and from funds received in the tax settlement from Hennepin County. All such funds in excess of such expenses are available for reimbursement to the City for costs incurred by the City in the design and construction of the Project. Reimbursement to the City will be made as soon as funds are available provided a request for payment has been received from the City 2 452204v1 CLLBA295.40 providing such detailed information as may be requested by the Commission to substantiate costs and expenses. 6. Reimbursement to the City will not exceed the amount specified above from the Capital Improvement Program Closed Project Account and the amount received from the County for the Project less any amounts retained by the Commission for Commission expenses. Reimbursement will not be increased by grants or other revenues received by the Commission for the Project. Reimbursement will not exceed the costs and expenses incurred by the City for the Project,less any amounts the City receives for the Project as grants from other sources. All costs of the Project incurred by the City in excess of such reimbursement shall be borne by the City or secured by the City from other sources. 7. All City books, records,documents,and accounting procedures related to the Project are subject to examination by the Commission. 8. The City will secure all necessary local, state, or federal permits required for the implementation of the Project and will not proceed with the Project until any required environmental review is approved by appropriate regulatory agencies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers on behalf of the parties as of the day and date first above written. BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION By: r+ ' s Chair And by: �� Its Se etary t 3 452204vl CLL BA29544D CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: Its Mayor And by: Its Manager 4 452204y1 CLL BA295-40 BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING MEMBER RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF TWIN LAKE IN-LAKE ALUM-TREATMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT WHEREAS, on September 16, 2004, the Commission adopted the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, Water Management Plan,July 2004(the"Plan");and WHEREAS,the Plan includes a Capital Improvement Program("CIP")listing capital projects in Table 12-2 of the Plan;and WHEREAS,the CIP,as amended,includes the following capital project for the year 2014: The Twin Lake In-Lake Alum-Treatment Project (BCWMC Project TW-2) in the City of Golden Valley(the"Twin Lake Project') WHEREAS, on September 19, 2013, following published and mailed notice in accordance with the Commission's Joint Power Agreement and Minn. Stat., § 103B.251, the Commission conducted a public hearing and ordered the Twin Lake Project. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission as follows: I. The Commission has received, accepted and approved the feasibility reports for the Twin Lake Project. 2. The City of Golden Valley is designated as the member responsible for contracting for theimplmentation of the Twin Lake Project, and the engineer designated for preparation of plans and specifications is the Golden Valley City Engineer, or other engineers selected and retained by the City of Golden Valley. Contracts for implementation shall be let in accordance with the requirements of law applicable to the City of Golden Valley. The Cooperative Agreement with the City of Golden Valley for the implementation of the Twin Lake Project is approved,and the Chair and Secretary are authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Adopted by the Board of Commission of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission the 190'day of November,2014. , Chair ATT Sec tart' 452201vt CI.L BA295-40 resourceful. naturally. BARR engineering and environmental consultants December 5, 2014 Mr,Jeff Oliver, P.E. City Engineer City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Agreement for Design, Outreach, Permitting and Implementation of Phase I of the Twin Lake Alum Treatment Dear Mr. Oliver: Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal to provide engineering services to the City for an in-lake aluminum sulfate (alum)treatment to Twin Lake to improve the lake water quality. The project is based on the September 10, 2014 memorandum prepared by Barr Engineering Co. for the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) that recommended proceeding with the first phase of an in-lake alum treatment of Twin Lake. This engineering estimate includes determination of an alum dosage plan, participation in public outreach, developing Engineer's estimate of costs, preparing contract documents, permitting, contract administration and treatment oversight.Table 1 summarizes the work items and the estimated cost. Project Scope The project includes the following work tasks. 1. Development of an alum dosage and application plan Our previous analysis of sediment cores provided the areal data needed to calculate the optimal alum dose for each part of Twin Lake to reduce internal phosphorus loading. Based on the amount of mobile phosphorus (the pool that contributes to internal loading) in the sediment, an alum dose will be calculated that will reduce internal loading to the desired goal.Another factor that will be considered in calculating the alum dose is the amount of labile (easily broken down) organic phosphorus in the sediment, This form of phosphorus is not immediately available for use by algae but will break down over time and increase the mobile phosphorus pool in the sediment.The addition of this phosphorus pool into the dosing calculation will ensure that an alum dose is added to Twin Lake that will effectively control internal phosphorus loading for an extended period of time. Lake water chemistry will also need to be considered when developing the application plan.If the alum dose is high enough, it is possible that there will be insufficient alkalinity in the lake to buffer the Barr Engineering Co, 4700 West 77th Street, Suite 200, Minneapolis, Mtn! 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Mr.Jeff Oliver,P.E. City Engineer December 5,2014 Page 2 treatment and prevent pH depression below 6.0. Historical data, along with water chemistry data collected before treatment will be used to model the maximum allowed alum dose to prevent pH depression in the lake. This information, along with the information on morphometry,will be used to develop a safe and effective application plan that will achieve maximum phosphorus inactivation.If necessary,the recommended alum dosing procedure will indicate whether the treatment should be done in conjunction with a buffering agent. For this task Barr will produce mapping of the mobile and organic phosphorus fractions across the lake. Once a dose has been developed, morphometric information for the lake (mean depth and lake area)will be used to determine if the alum dose should be applied over a number of treatments as opposed to a one-time treatment. Lake morphometry and the alum dose required to reduce internal phosphorus loading can help determine if splitting a treatment is needed at Twin Lake. All of the results of this task will be summarized in a technical memorandum and submitted for review and comment. This memorandum will include all calculations used to derive the bid quantities that can be supplied to alum application contractors, as well as a map that indicates the alum dosing rates that should be applied to the various areas of the lake. Barr will respond to questions and comments and finalize the technical memorandum. 2. Participation in public outreach planning After finalizing the technical memorandum containing the recommended alum dosage and treatment approach, Barr will prepare factsheet and presentation materials that will be given by BCWMC, City and/or Barr staff at one public outreach meeting that may also be made available to the public or other stakeholders through other avenues. We will submit a draft of the factsheet and presentation materials to City staff for review and comment in advance of meetings or other distribution.We assume that outreach materials will include a primer on lake ecology and pertinent information about in-lake alum treatments. Our assumptions for this task are based on Barr providing assistance with factsheet development, participating in a presentation for an open house, and one additional follow-up meeting in coordination with City and BCWMC staff before proceeding to the next task. 3. Permitting This project will require letter notification to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), including submission of the technical memorandum (from Task 1) and background documentation. This project will also require approval from the BCWMC.We will present the dosage plan, technical memorandum, and Engineer's estimate of costs to the BCWMC at a Commission meeting and respond to questions and comments. 4. Preparation of Engineer's estimate of costs and bidding documents After we develop the alum dose and application plan, Barr will prepare project specifications, bid sheets and an engineer's estimate for the first phase of alum treatment to assist with contractor bidding.This information will include the total alum quantity to be applied,the total acreage to be treated and estimates for the quantity and price of the bid items. Mr.Jeff Oliver,P.E. City Engineer December 5,2014 Page 3 We will prepare bidding documents for competitive bidding and subsequent implementation of the project. This task includes preparing technical specifications and incorporating front-end documents for project implementation. Front-end documents will consist of Instructions to Bidders, Bid Form, Agreement, General Conditions, and Supplementary Conditions. The front-end documents will be based on Golden Valley's standard construction documents and will be provided by the City.Technical specifications will be prepared using the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) standard format.The Contract Documents will provide potential contractors with the necessary information to bid on the project and also to perform the work. 5. Bid administration and treatment oversight Bid administration will consist of reproduction and distribution of contract documents (2 copies assumed) including uploading onto QuestCDN, preparation of advertisement for bids, preparation of addenda, assistance during contract offering period including answering bidder questions and review of bidder qualifications and submitted bid forms, as well as recommendations for contract award. Our scope includes treatment oversight and contract administration tasks.The costs for this work are dependent on the contractor's schedule, changes in the work and the amount of observation required to ensure that state water quality standards are met during the alum application. Barr will provide ongoing on-site observation during treatment activities to ensure that the selected contractor is performing the work in accordance with the Contract Documents.Our proposed treatment oversight services include: • Attendance at a treatment planning meeting in Golden Valley • Review of chemical supplier and results of alum lot testing • Review and comment on contractor's spill prevention and contingency plan • Oversight of the alum treatment contractor, including documentation of field measurements (pH, Secchi disc transparency, alkalinity), observations (weather, staging area, alum floc formation, aquatic life stress and photographs) and compilation and evaluation of contractor's daily records.This scope assumes 10 hours per day of observation by two people for one week. One observer will be a Barr staff person and the other observer will be someone appointed by the City) • Clarifying of the Contract Documents to the contractor during the construction process • Issuing field orders and change orders as necessary for the completion of the project • Reviewing payment applications (our scope assumes one submittal) • Project close-out, including compilation of project records and submittal to City Estimated Cost and Schedule The following table summarizes the estimated costs associated with each task described in the scope of services and list of assumptions. Mr.Jeff Oliver,P.E. City Engineer December 5,2014 Page 4 The table also shows the estimated schedule for the completion of the project tasks.The schedule assumes authorization to proceed by the City no later than December 17, 2014. The actual schedule will be coordinated with Golden Valley staff and will accommodate public outreach planning with the BCWMC. Task Description of Task Amount Estimated Completion 1 Development of alum dosage and application plan $ 9,000 January 2015 2 Participation in public outreach $ 5,000 February 2015 3 Permitting $ 3,000 March 2015 4 Engineer's cost estimate and bidding documents $ 6,000 March 2015 5 Bid administration and treatment oversight $ 11,000 May 2015 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 34,000 This Agreement will be effective for the duration of the services, unless earlier terminated by either the City or us.We will commence work on Task 1 upon receipt of a copy of this letter signed by your authorized City representative. We will inform you of our progress through periodic (e.g., bi-weekly) e-mail updates, telephone calls, invoice details, and other communications. For the services provided, you will pay us according to the attached Standard Terms. We will bill the city approximately monthly.The cost of the services will not exceed $34,000 without prior approval by the city. Work beyond the scope outlined above will be billed on a time-and-expense basis in accordance with our fee schedule, following your written permission or otherwise negotiated with you. We understand you or your designees have the authority to direct us.We will direct communications to you at the City of Golden Valley, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Direction should be provided to me at the letterhead address. During the term of this Agreement,we will maintain the following insurance coverages: WorkerCompensation......................................................................................................................................Statutory Employer Liability..............................................................................................$500K per claim/$500k aggregate Commercial General Liability.................................$1M per claim/$2M aggregate, combined single limit Automobile.........................................................................................................................$1M combined single limit Umbrella/excess policy as to above coverages.......................................................................$10M aggregate Professional Liability (claims-made)..................................................$5M per claim/$5M annual aggregate If this Agreement is satisfactory, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided, and return it to us. Mr.Jeff Oliver,P.E. City Engineer December 5,2014 Page 5 Sincerely yours, Barr Engineering Co. By Jim Herbert, RE, Vice President Accepted this_day of 2014 Golden Valley By Thomas D. Burt Its City Manager Attachments Standard Terms—Professional Services citi, ol �mm 901de'vi MEMORANDUM vjalleY Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. 0. Receipt of November 2014 Financial Reports Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary The monthly financial report provides a progress report of the following funds: General Fund Operations Conservation/Recycling Fund (Enterprise Fund) Water and Sewer Utility Fund (Enterprise Fund) Brookview Golf Course (Enterprise Fund) Motor Vehicle Licensing (Enterprise Fund) Storm Utility Fund (Enterprise Fund) Equipment Replacement Fund (Capital Projects Fund) General Fund Operations: As of November 2014, the City is using $3,952,924 of fund balance to balance the General Fund Budget. Attachments • November 2014 General Fund Financial Reports (2 pages) • November 2014 Conservation/Recycling Fund (1 page) • November 2014 Water and Sewer Utility Fund (1 page) • November 2014 Brookview Golf Course (1 page) • November 2014 Motor Vehicle Licensing (1 page) • November 2014 Storm Utility Fund (1 page) • November 2014 Equipment Replacement Fund (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the November 2014 Financial Reports. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report- General Fund Expenditures November, 2014 (unaudited) Over % 2014 November YTD (Under) Of Budget Division Budget Actual Actual Budget Expend 001 Council $294,840 34,185 224,835 ($70,005) 76.26% 003 City Manager 762,980 74,539 639,896 (123,084) 83.87% 004 Transfers Out 294,710 0 294,710 0 100.00% (1) 005 Admin. Services 1,676,280 150,546 1,540,008 (136,272) 91.87% 006 Legal 135,000 11,679 110,083 (24,917) 81.54% (2) 007 Risk Management 300,000 6,975 274,457 (25,543) 91.49% oil General Gov't. Bldgs. 556,990 44,560 512,730 (44,260) 92.05% 016 Planning 346,195 30,904 278,830 (67,365) 80.54% 018 Inspections 651,545 65,642 603,908 (47,637) 92.69% 022 Police 5,202,175 556,345 4,586,825 (615,350) 88.17% 023 Fire 1,200,190 81,830 956,570 (243,620) 79.70% 035 Physical Dev Admin 334,315 42,043 332,089 (2,226) 99.33% 036 Engineering 691,880 61,761 466,822 (225,058) 67.47% 037 Streets 1,429,410 159,369 1,382,059 (47,351) 96.69% 065 Community Center 74,100 5,891 51,328 (22,772) 69.27% 066 Park & Rec.Admin. 679,345 63,891 601,923 (77,422) 88.60% 067 Park Maintenance 1,051,490 88,286 955,269 (96,221) 90.85% 068 Recreation Programs 502,830 18,085 263,883 (238,947) 52.48% (3) TOTAL Expenditures $16,184,275 $1,496,531 $14,076,225 ($2,108,050) 86.97% (1)This transfer was made in June, 2014. (2) Legal services are through October. (3)Tennis program expenditures are lower due to contractual arrangement. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-General Fund Revenues November, 2014 Percentage Of Year Completed 92.00% Over % 2014 November YTD (Under) of Budget Type Budget Actual Actual Budget Received Ad Valorem Taxes $12,358,005 0 6,427,082 ($5,930,923) 52.01% (1) Licenses 210,785 2,395 260,196 $49,411 123.44% Permits 725,000 62,881 1,156,436 $431,436 159.51% Federal Grants 0 0 15,930 $15,930 State Aid 255,390 197 151,172 ($104,218) 59.19% (2) Hennepin County Aid 31,205 0 31,758 $553 (3) Charges For Services: General Government 45,050 6,783 48,878 $3,828 108.50% Public Safety 163,870 7,530 151,490 ($12,380) 92.45% Public Works 141,000 11,482 142,830 $1,830 101.30% Park & Rec 525,270 10,699 354,730 ($170,540) 67.53% (4) Other Funds 981,500 62,094 840,370 ($141,130) 85.62% Fines & Forfeitures 320,000 21,596 265,414 ($54,586) 82.94% (5) Interest On Investments 100,000 0 0 ($100,000) 0.00% (6) Miscellaneous Revenue 227,200 15,819 185,348 ($41,852) 81.58% Transfers In 100,000 8,333 91,667 ($8,333) 91.67% (7) TOTAL Revenue $16,184,275 $209,809 $10,123,301 _L$6,060,974) 62.55% Notes: (1) Payments are received in July, December, and January(delinquencies). (2) Police Training was be paid in August. Safe and Sober is billed on time spent. (3)Violent Offenders Task Force is run by Hennepin County. (4) Tennis progam was changed after budget was approved. (5) Fines/Forfeitures are through October 2014. (6) Investment income is allocated at year end. (7)Transfers are monthly. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-Conservation/Recycling Enterprise Fund November 2014 (unaudited) Over 2014 November YTD (Under) Budget Actual Actual Budget Current Revenue Hennepin County Recycling Grant 56,500 0 56,955 455 100.81% Recycling Charges 332,400 28,477 268,795 (63,605) 80.86% (3) Miscellaneous Revenues 9,000 0 7,328 (1,672) Interest on Investments 5,000 0 0 (5,000) 0.00% (1) Total Revenue 402,900 28,477 333,078 (69,822) 82.67% Expenses: Recycling 447,135 31,868 334,622 (112,513) 74,84% (2) Total Expenses 447,135 31,868 334,622 (112,513) 74.84% (1) Interest Earnings are allocated at year-end. (2) Recycling Services are through October. (3) Quarterly charges for recycling went from $10 to$12 after April. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-Water and Sewer Utility Enterprise Fund November, 2014(unaudited) Over 2014 November YTD (Under) Budget Actual Actual Budget Current Revenue Water Charges 4,251,750 312,224 3,481,551 (770,199) 81.89% Emergency Water Supply 0 12,549 33,429 33,429 Sewer Charges 3,300,970 287,081 2,834,755 (466,215) 85.88% Meter Sales 5,000 789 18,728 13,728 374.56% MCES Grant Program 118,730 0 0 (118,730) Penalties 110,000 15,986 142,875 32,875 129.89% Charges for Other Services 230,000 13,836 608,522 378,522 264.57% (1) State Water Testing Fee Pass Through 45,000 3,969 38,675 (6,325) 85.94% Certificate of Compliance 70,000 4,800 88,025 18,025 125.75% Interest Earnings 35,000 0 0 (35,000) 0.00% Total Revenue 8,166,450 651,234 7,246,560 (919,890) 88.74% Expenses: Utility Administration 1,377,255 243,670 1,449,120 71,865 105.22% Sewer Maintenance 2,488,530 210,295 2,267,326 (221,204) 91.11% Water Maintenance 4,363,650 294,779 3,539,485 (824,165) 81.11% Total Expenses 8,229,435 748,744 7,255,931 (973,504) 88.17% (1)This includes MCES Grant Program for residential reimbursements of$339,787. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report- Brookview Golf Course Enterprise Fund (3)(4) November, 2014(unaudited) Over 2014 November YTD (Under) % Budget Actual Actual Budget Current Revenue Green Fees 880,780 3,466 721,416 (159,364) 81.91% Driving Range Fees 105,000 139 100,963 (4,037) 96.16% Par 3 Fees 173,200 423 112,080 (61,120) 64.71% Lawn Bowling 18,730 0 14,905 (3,825) 79.58% Pro Shop Sales 78,500 1,722 76,167 (2,333) 97.03% Pro Shop Rentals 227,800 746 227,268 (532) 99.77% Concession Sales 215,200 923 259,320 44,120 120.50% Other Revenue 70,155 407 79,584 9,429 113.44% Interest Earnings 6,000 0 0 (6,000) 0.00% (1) Less:Credit Card Charges/Sales Tax (35,000) (4,178) (29,621) 5,379 84.63% Total Revenue 1,740,365 3,648 1,562,082 (178,283) 89.76% Expenses: Golf Operations 655,995 53,428 609,023 (46,972) 92.84% (2) Course Maintenance 778,840 43,290 584,048 (194,792) 74,99% Pro Shop 105,705 3,180 104,079 (1,626) 98.46% Grill 177,910 5,837 201,602 23,692 113.32% Driving Range 48,075 1,680 40,204 (7,871) 83.63% Par 3 Course 3,500 590 20,618 17,118 589.09% Lawn Bowling 141,965 60 171,792 29,827 121.01% (5) Total Expenses 1,911,990 108,065 1,731,366 (180,624) 90.55% (1) Interest Earnings are allocated at year-end. (2) Depreciation is allocated at year-end. (3) Course opened April 9 and closed November 6. (4) Course closed on June 19 due to flooding. Reopened partially on June 25. (5) Lawn Bowling opened August 15. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-Motor Vehicle Licensing Enterprise Fund November 2014(unaudited) Over 2014 November YTD (Under) % Budget Actual Actual Budget Current Revenue Interest Earnings 3,800 0 0 (3,800) 0.00% (1) Charges for Services 396,410 19,742 320,853 (75,557) 80.94% Total Revenue 400,210 19,742 320,853 (79,357) 80.17% Expenses:. Motor Vehicle Licensing 400,210 40,894 339,225 (60,985) 84.76% Total Expenses 400,210 40,894 339,225 (60,985) 84.76% (1) Interest Earnings are allocated at year-end. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-Storm Utility Enterprise Fund November, 2014(unaudited) Over 2014 November YTD (Under) % Budget Actual Actual Budget Current Revenue Interest Earnings 45,000 0 0 (45,000) 0.00% (1) Storm Sewer Charges 2,226,920 191,916 2,030,098 (196,822) 91.16% Bassett Creek Watershed 998,800 0 0 (998,800) 0.00% Miscellaneous Receipts 200,000 0 99,234 (100,766) 49.62% State Grant-Other 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue 3,470,720 191,916 2,129,332 (1,341,388) 61.35% Expenses: Storm Utility 2,474,535 103,690 1,164,974 (1,309,561) 47.08% (2) Street Cleaning 124,690 33,442 131,092 6,402 105.13% Environmental Control 309,225 6,143 207,647 (101,578) 67.15% Debt Service Payments 433,510 0 1,604,967 1,171,457 370.23% (3) Total Expenses 3,341,960 143,275 3,108,680 (233,280) 93.02% (1) Interest Earnings are allocated at year-end. (2) Depreciation is allocated at year-end and. (3) Refunded 2004C Issuance 5 years early. 2014 Equipment Replacement Fund(CIP)-Fund 5700 2014 Nov YTD Budget Total Actual Remaining Revenues: Proceeds-Certificate of Indebtedness 750,000 0 747,600 (2,400) Sale of Assets 35,000 20,490 86,804 51,804 Miscellaneous 0 1,940 2,089 2,089 Interest Earnings(allocated at year end) 17,394 0 0 (17,394) Total Revenues 802,394 22,430 836,493 34,099 Expenditures: Program# Project Number Project Name 5700 Bond Expenditures 0 0 15,240 (15,240) 5701 V&E-001 Marked Squad Cars(Police) 35,000 0 34,270 730 (1) 5702 V&E-002 Computers and Printers(Finance) 60,000 0 49,666 10,334 5703 V&E-003 Imaging System(Finance) 26,000 0 7,676 18,324 5712 V&E-012 Asphalt Paver(Street) 100,000 0 86,800 13,200 5733 V&E-019 Computer Servers 40,000 0 3,492 36,508 5742 V&E-069 Utility Tractor/Mower(Park) 25,000 0 31,303 (6,303) 5795 V&E-071 Pickup Truck(Park) 45,000 0 27,883 17,117 5800 V&E-084 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus(Fire) 300,000 0 264,781 35,219 5786 V&E-089 Sidewalk/Maintenance Tractor(Street) 158,000 0 138,093 19,908 5783 V&E-101 Unmarked Police Vehicle(Police) 30,000 0 35,189 (5,189) 5797 V&E-111 Dump Truck(Street) 80,000 0 70,120 9,880 Total Expenditures 899,000 0 764,513 134,488- (1)Computers are replaced every 4-5 years and purchased throughout the year based on available time. Citgolden , ,"O'y == MEMORANDUP-A vaney Public uti c Wirks Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. P. Appointments to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission and its Technical Advisory Committee Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) is a joint powers organization made up of the nine cities that contribute storm water runoff to Bassett Creek. Each of these communities appoints one commissioner and one alternate commissioner to provide representation at the BCMWC. Furthermore, the BCWMC has a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) consisting of member cities' staff members. Each of these appointments is for a three-year term. The City Council, as a member of the BCWMC, is charged with making the appointments to the BCWMC and its Technical Advisory Committee. The current appointments are as follows: Commissioner: Stacy Hoschka Alternate Commissioner: Jane McDonald-Black TAC Member: Jeff Oliver, City Engineer Alternate TAC Member: Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Commissioner Hoschka and Alternate Commissioner McDonald-Black wish to continue representing Golden Valley at the BCWMC. Attachments • Resolution Appointing Commissioner and Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, and its Technical Advisory Committee (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Appointing Stacy Hoschka as Commissioner and Jane McDonald Black as Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, and Jeff Oliver as Member and Eric Eckman as Alternate Member to its Technical Advisory Committee. Resolution 14-101 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPOINTING STACY HOSCHKA AS COMMISSIONER AND JANE MCDONALD BLACK AS ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER TO THE BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION, AND JEFF OLIVER, MEMBER, AND ERIC ECKMAN, ALTERNATE MEMBER, TO ITS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the City Council of Golden Valley is a member of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission; and WHEREAS, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission has been organized under State of Minnesota Statutes to manage the storm waters of cities whose boundaries fall within the water management area; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley has adopted a Joint Powers Agreement joining the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission; and WHEREAS, the City has advertised for Commissioner and Alternate Commissioner in accordance with M.S. 103B.227; and WHEREAS, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission has a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of its member cities' staff members; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Golden Valley appoint Stacy Hoschka as its Commissioner and Jane McDonald Black as its Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission for a term ending January 31, 2018, and Jeff Oliver as Member and Eric Eckman as Alternate Member to its Technical Advisory Committee. 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. City o goldenit, v�r MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. Q. Authorize Agreement Amendment with Patchin Messner Dodd and Brumm for Real Estate Appraisal Services for the Douglas Drive Reconstruction Project Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer Summary At its April 1, 2014, meeting, the Council authorized a joint contract with Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm and Ruppert Appraisal and Consultation, Inc. for real estate appraisal services in connection with temporary and permanent easements acquisition required for the Douglas Drive Reconstruction Project. At the time of original contract authorization, staff anticipated the need to have 58 properties appraised, each with specific real estate appraisal needs based on the intended acquisitions. Since that time, the scope of appraisal services has changed at a number of parcels due to changes in design and negotiation progress. As a result, a number of parcels have required a higher level of appraisal work while other parcels have needed multiple appraisals due to unique homeowner association bylaw situations. Also, through the final design process, the need to acquire right-of-way from the Canadian Pacific Railroad was identified in order to accommodate the planned pedestrian facilities. The original joint contract with Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm and Ruppert Appraisal and Consultation, Inc. was in the amount of$126,000. Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm has submitted to the City a request for an amendment to the contract for the additional services. Compensation for these services is in the amount of$23,000, as outlined in the attached contract amendment request dated December 1, 2014. Staff has thoroughly reviewed the request by Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm and has found the additional compensation requested to be reasonable and appropriate. Funding for the additional work is provided in the Douglas Drive CIP account and will be at a 50 percent cost share with Hennepin County. Attachments • Letter from Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm, dated December 1, 2014, regarding Amendment Request to Contract No. 10-04 for Douglas Drive Appraisal Work (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the contract amendment request with Patchin Messner Dodd and Brumm for real estate appraisal services for the Douglas Drive reconstruction project in the amount not to exceed $23,000. PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & $RUMM VALUATION COUNSELORS � December 1, 2014 I p ,. 1¢ City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Attn: Jeff Oliver City Engineer RE: Amendment Request to Contract No. 10-04 for Douglas Drive Appraisal Work Dear Mr. Oliver: On April 22, 2014, the City of Golden Valley and Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm entered into a contract for appraisal services in connection with the Douglas Drive Reconstruction project. At that time, it was assumed, based on preliminary right-of-way plans, that 58'properties would be impacted by the proposed project, including a certain make-up of property types and required appraisal services. The purpose of this letter is to uest additional compensation for supplemental services beyond the scope of work anticipated in the original contract. The requested increase includes additional services already provided . and remainingg time to complete appraisals of the properties that were. added to our scope of work. l he total increase we are requesting is $23,000. The information below describes in more detail the additional services that we have and/or are proposed to be completed for this project. Revisions to appraisals in Group A due to modifications of certain parcel sketches $ 2,500.00 Appraised four properties within Bassett Creek Townhomes, as improved, due to the extent of the acquisition $ 7,000.00 Revised Parcel 7 due to variance allowing for two lots in the after condition $ 500.00 Appraised two additional single-family homes, as improved, due to the extent of the acquisition $ 4,500.00 Appraised three additional apartment sites instead of duplex land $ 1,500.00 Sunset Pond Executive Offices ■ 13967 West Preserve Boulevard ■ Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone: (952) 895-1205 Fax: (952)895-1521 Prepared an Addendum to Parcel 1 for the acquisition of an additional trail, drainage; utility and retaining wall easement $ 2,000.00 Added acquisition of Parcel 24 owned by Canadian Pacific Soo Line $ 500000 2� As such, Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm requests additional compensation and a proposed amendment to the contract as follows: Original contract amount $ g7,000 Extra services to finish $ 23,000 Total revised contract amount Total Amendment Requested $ 23,000 This contract amendment is an understanding of the project to date. If this document satisfactorily sets forth your understanding of the contract amendment, please sign in the space below and return one copy to our office. We look forward to continuing our work with you and your staff on this project. Thank you in advance for consideration of this request. Respectfully submitted, PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM Jason L. Messner, MAI President Approved this day of ,2014 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Thomas D. Burt, City Manager JLM:mm PATCHIN MESSNER IMDD&BRumm " ° o golden jrY,aPt" Val Police Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. R. Authorization to Sign Towing Contract with North Suburban Towing for Vehicle Impound Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Summary The current towing contract with North Suburban Towing ended on November 14, 2014. The contract rates have been revised to reflect a $10 increase in tow fees and a $5/day increase in storage. The contract has also been revised to reflect a $60 fee for vehicles that are released to owner at a scene after the vehicle has already been hooked by the towing company. These rate increases are the same as in agreements with the cities of Brooklyn Center, New Hope, Robbinsdale, the Minnesota State Patrol and the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. Attachments • Towing Contract with North Suburban Towing (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Towing Contract with North Suburban Towing for Vehicle Impound. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY CAR IMPOUNDING CONTRACT Agreement made this day of November, 2014, between North Suburban Towing Inc. (hereinafter "Contractor"), and the City of Golden Valley, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter "City"). The City and the Contractor hereby agree as follows: 1. Services to be Performed. Pursuant to the terms and conditions specified below, the contractor shall, whenever requested by the City Manager, any Police Officer or other duly authorized person of the City; remove, impound, transport or tow to storage all stolen, abandoned, damaged or illegally parked vehicles found upon the public streets or elsewhere within the City, on a 24 hour per day basis, and shall further, when requested by the Police Department, care for and store all such vehicles and shall preserve and deliver them to the owners or persons entitled to the possession thereof upon payment by such persons of towing and storage fees, all in accordance with the provisions of the City ordinances and this contract. The Contractor further agrees to tow and store vehicles involved in forfeiture/seizure proceedings for the cost of a tow and one day's storage. Contractor's storage facilities shall be large enough to accommodate at least 75 vehicles and shall be located at 5170 West Broadway, Crystal, Minnesota. In all cases where the Contractor shall fail to respond to any call by the City for towing services within 30 minutes following the making thereof, the City shall have the right to call upon other parties to perform such services, and the Contractor shall reimburse the City for any additional costs incurred by it over and above the contract price as provided herein. 2. Effective Date. This agreement shall take effect November 15, 2014 and shall continue through November 15, 2017, subject to earlier termination as provided below. 3. Towing Charges. Towing charges shall be divided into six types as follows: Type I, all daylight tows which involve a vehicle which is on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which can be secured for towing with the usual type of winching. Type II, all daylight tows which involve a vehicle which is not on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which requires an unusual amount of winching and/or the use of a dolly to secure it for towing by one tow truck. Type III, all daylight tows which involve a vehicle that requires and, for which a specific request has been made, two or more tow trucks. Type IV, all evening tows which involve a vehicle which is on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which can be secured for towing with the usual type of winching. Page 2 Type V, all evening tows which involve a vehicle which is not on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which requires an unusual amount of winching and/or the use of a dolly to secure it for towing by one tow truck. Type VI, all evening tows which involve a vehicle that requires and, for which a specific request has been made, two or more tow trucks. The designation as to the type of tow performed will be made by the duly authorized agent of the City. Any disagreement with the designation shall be made in writing to the City Manager within 24 hours. 4. Charges. The following flat charge shall be made for each tow: a) Type I Tow - per hour or fraction thereof $120.00 b) Type II Tow— per hour or fraction thereof $155.00 c) Type III Tow - per hour or fraction thereof $190.00 d) Type IV Tow - per hour or fraction thereof $120.00 e) Type V Tow— per hour or fraction thereof $155.00 f) Type VI Tow - per hour or fraction thereof $190.00 g) A charge of$35.00 shall be made for the first 24 hours or less of storage and an additional $35.00 shall be charged for each of the next 24 hour periods, or fraction thereof, and thereafter $35.00 for each additional 24 hour period or fraction thereof. The applicable rates for each tow shall be based upon the time the tow is requested by the City and shall apply only to passenger cars and light trucks with a capacity not exceeding one ton. 5. Duties of the Contractor. The Contractor agrees to pay all persons furnishing labor, supplies, equipment, space, or material to the Contractor in and about the performance of this contract, those persons to be paid first out of the amount due to the contractor, its agents or assigns. The Contractor shall take immediate possession of any vehicle duly ordered impounded and shall tow such vehicle to the impounding place. No such vehicle shall be released without authorization by the City Manager or Chief of Police, any Police Officer or other duly authorized person of the City. Where a Police Officer has tagged a vehicle to be impounded on account of a parking violation and, where the owner or operator appears before the tagged vehicle has been hooked to the tow truck and the wheels raised from the ground, the tow truck operator shall release the vehicle without the payment of any fee or towing charge. Page 3 Where the tow truck operator has a tagged vehicle on the tow truck hoist and the wheels raised from the ground before the owner or operator appears, he shall release the vehicle upon the payment of a service fee not to exceed $60.00, and give a receipt for the payment. Where a request has been made by the Police Department for a tow truck at a specified location, and the make and license number of the vehicle to be removed has been designated, and the owner or operator appears at any time after the wheels of the towed vehicle have been raised off the ground and requests permission to remove the vehicle before it is towed away, the operator shall release the vehicle upon payment of service fee of $60.00, and give a receipt for such payment. The Contractor agrees to keep safely all impounded cars, accessories, and personal property, and to reimburse the City and the owners for loss. 6. Storage of Impounded Vehicles. Any vehicle directed to be impounded, from the time it is taken possession of by the Contractor and during the time it is impounded, and until it is reclaimed, shall be considered to be in custody of the law, and no work shall be done on it by the Contractor, nor shall he permit anyone to do any work on it until the car has been reclaimed. All cars, when ordered released by the City Manager or Police Department, shall be released to the owner without other charge than the impounding and storage fees. The Contractor during the time the vehicle is impounded shall not permit the owner or any other person to take or remove from the vehicle any parts or change or repair any parts. All vehicles, which have been involved in criminal proceedings and which are designated by the Police Department as being held for that reason, shall be held and stored in inside garages. Vehicles impounded for other reasons may be stored in inside garages or designated parking lots. 7. Nondiscriminatory Practices. The Contractor shall agree, during the life of this contract, not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, sex, creed, national origin, or ancestry. The Contractor shall include a similar provision in all subcontracts entered into for the performance of this contract. This contract may be canceled or terminated by the City, and all money due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited for a second or subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this paragraph. This paragraph is inserted in this contract to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59, Minnesota Department of Human Rights, Minnesota Statute 363.00 inclusive of Section 363.073 Certificate of Compliance for Public Contracts applicable Federal Civil Rights Acts. 8. Performance Bond. This contract shall not be in effect until the Contractor shall have executed and delivered to the City Clerk a performance bond executed by a corporate surety company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota in the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) to secure the faithful performance of this contract by said Contractor conditioned that the Contractor shall well and truly perform and carry out the convenants, terms and conditions of this agreement to termination by the City at any time if said bond shall be canceled or the surety thereon relieved from liability because of failure to pay the premium or termination of the period of the bond without renewal thereof. Page 4 9. Insurance. The following insurance shall be taken out and maintained by the Contractor: a) Comprehensive general liability insurance insuring against liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death, in the sum of $200,000 any one person and in the sum of $500,000 for two or more persons for the same occurrence, and for damages to property in the sum of $100,000. b) Worker's compensation insurance and employer's liability insurance as required by law. c) Automobile liability and property damage insurance and basic economic loss benefits or a Personal Injury Protection Endorsement (PIP), including coverage for non-owned and hired vehicles, in limits as for comprehensive general liability coverage above. d) Fire, theft, and other loss coverage of at least $100,000 and garagekeeper's liability coverage of at least $50,000. The City shall be named as an additional insured in these policies, which shall provide that the coverage may not be terminated or changed by the insurer except upon ten days' written notice to the City Clerk. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall automatically suspend the contract until the insurance has been reinstated. All endorsements shall apply to both bodily injury or death and property damage coverages. Prior to the commencement of the contract, the Contractor shall furnish the City certificates or copies of these policies of insurance, approved by the City Clerk, showing that such insurance is in force. No policy shall contain any provisions for exclusions from liability forming part of the standard basic unamended and unendorsed form of policy, except that no exclusion will be permitted in any event if it conflicts with a coverage expressly required in this contract and, in addition, no policy shall contain any exclusion from bodily injury to or sickness, disease or death of any employee of the Contractor which would conflict with or in any way impair coverage under the contractual liability endorsement of the contractor under this agreement. Compliance by the Contractor with the foregoing requirements to carry insurance and furnish certificates shall not relieve the Contractor from liability assumed under any provision of this contract. 10. Indemnification. The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which may be suffered or for which they may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the performance of this agreement by the Contractor, his employees, agents or subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. Page 5 11. Termination. The contract shall terminate on November 15, 2017 unless earlier terminated as specified in this Section 13. a) Either party may terminate this contract effective March 1st of any year by giving sixty (60) days written notice of its intent to so terminate to the other party. b) In the event that the City Council shall determine that Contractor's services are inadequate or unsatisfactory, the City may terminate this contract at any time by giving to Contractor sixty (60) days written notice of its intent to so terminate. C) In the event this contract or any significant portion thereof shall become invalid for any reason, the contract shall terminate forthwith. 12. Adverse Conditions. The work to be performed by Contractor hereunder shall be done with equipment, personnel, and means which are adequate to insure the satisfactory towing of all vehicles under all conditions of weather, breakdowns, or similar hindrances which might otherwise be regarded as "acts of providence." Any such matters, including "acts of providence" shall not apply to relieve the Contractor of responsibility for carrying out the terms of this contract. 13. Successors and Assigns. The Contractor binds him/herself jointly and severally, his/her successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to the City in respect to all covenants of this agreement, except that the Contractor shall not assign, or transfer any part of his/her interest in this agreement, or sublet as a whole, nor shall the Contractor assign any moneys due, or to become due, without the City's written consent. 14. Whole Agreement. This agreement embodies the entire agreement between the parties including all prior understandings and agreements and may not be modified except in writing signed by all the parties. Page 6 Executed by the City this day of December, 2014. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Executed by the Contractor this day of 2014 CONTRACTOR By Its Cit 1 goldwn MEMORANDUM valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. S. Acceptance of Donations for Ongoing Donations Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary This resolution is for acceptance of donations received from throughout the year for ongoing programs that are approved at year end. Attachments • Resolution Accepting Donations for the Ongoing Programs (5 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Accepting Donations for the Ongoing Programs. Resolution 14-102 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR ONGOING PROGRAMS AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS DONATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 04-20 on March 16, 2004 which amended the Donation/Gift policy; and WHEREAS, the Resolution states that a gift of real or personal property must be accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Council; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council accepts the following donations: Ongoing Programs: GOLDEN VALLEY HUMAN SERVICES FUND American Legion 7,102 Anonymous 1,000 Bassett Creek Dental 550 Best & Flanagan 2,000 BNC Bank 500 Central Bank 500 Gurstel Chargo PA 500 Herring Legal PLLC 500 JJ's Clubhouse 13,506 Liberty Carton Company/LDI 2,000 Preferred One 1,000 Rudy Luther Toyota 500 Schuller's 2,348 Short Elliott Henderson, Inc 500 TruStone Financial 500 WSB & Associates 500 VFW 10,300 In-Kind Donations AI's Coffee, Best Wishes Floral, Brookview Golf Course, Byerly's of Golden Valley, Caribou Coffee - Golden Valley, Chiquita Banana, Channel 12/NWCT, City Looks Salon, Crossroads Deli, Culver's, Davanni's of Golden Valley, Doolittle's of Golden Valley, Einstein Brothers Bagels, Finken Great Glacier Water, Gigi's Cupcakes, Go Health Chiropractic, Good Day Cafe, Holiday Inn Express, Kreative Acrylics, Massage Envy, MGM Liquors, Mort's Delicatessen, Old Fashioned Donut Shoppe, Orange Theory, Perkins Family Restaurant— Highway 55 and 394 locations, Pilgrim Cleaners, Pracna on Main, Road ID, Salon Halo, Yugg's Restaurant, Valley Pastries, Vic's Restaurant, Yoplait USA Resolution 14-102 - Continued December 16, 2014 Solicitation Letters Hilmer Erickson 10 Alice Hinnenkamp 20 Amy & Michael Stern 20 Nora Trombley 10 Derald Greenland 20 Rev. Judith Hoover 100 Susan Marvin 30 Martin & Alice Cooney 20 Donna Godejohn 30 Glen &Ardith Eiden 30 S. Catherine McIntire 20 John & Leni Broadhurst 20 Shep Harris 30 Steven Savitt 100 Eugene Smoleroff 50 Donna Wolff 25 Bruce Anderson 10 Perry & Nicole Wells 50 Elissa Heilicher 100 Anonymous 30 Pat Helin 50 Anonymous 30 Scott & Stephanie Landmark 20 Stephanie Robinson 30 Sheva & Thomas Sanders 50 Linda Woessner 30 Douglas & Patricia Spaulding 100 Deborah Ruf 30 Doug & Mar Diedrich 50 Manfredo & Silvia Barrios 30 Paula Pentel 500 Judy Kauffman 20 Robert & Jennifer Astolfi 50 James Mornes 20 Carolyn Fiterman 250 James & Carol Turbenson 25 Rebecca Schmieg 30 Dennis & Marge Anderson 15 Charlie Myers 30 Steve Collin 25 Robert Tronnier 20 Michelle Banta 10 Rita Hillenbrand 10 Resolution 14-102 - Continued December 16, 2014 Solicitation Letters - continued Barbara Bach 20 John Miller-Stepany 50 M. Edward Patton 100 Laurie Freier 40 Louis Millman 100 Richard Beck, M.D. 100 Samuel Dardick 100 Jim & Jan Pearson 50 Julie & Tom Theiringer 75 Susan & Joe Forster 100 John Wetzel 50 Sally Hobbs 30 Doris Thomas 100 Charlotte Tripet 20 Alan Ingber 25 Paula Patton 40 Larry & Margaret Fonnest 50 Martin Kleinbaum 50 Thomas & Virginia Harn 100 Susan Gallimore 50 Barbara Braun 100 Suzanne Herberg 50 Tom & Kathy Skalitzky 100 Don & Grace Grussing 30 Melvin & Lillian Weiss 50 Kathy Thorsell 20 Grace Hammond 10 Lorne & JoAnn Bettenga 20 Elizabeth Aldrich 100 Dennis Johnson 10 Steven Schmidgall 50 Jean Sorenson 20 Helen Heath 20 Cynthia Malinowski 80 Lynn Johnson 20 Louise Carpentier 30 Robert Roth 25 Earl & Barb Hoffman 20 Jeff Pribyl 50 Emmett Carpel 50 Jack & Sylvia Zouber 25 Karen Anderson 20 Mark & Lynn Hochhauser 20 Resolution 14-102 - Continued December 16, 2014 Solicitation Letters - continued Chun Wong 20 Rosa Stein 100 Steven & Janet Streff 50 Frederick Manton 20 Harriet Betzold 20 Julie Jensen 20 Alliant Tech 100 Patricia Greenlees 25 Muriel Sterne 35 Anonymous 20 Earl & Trudy Lerner 10 Richard & Phyllis Waggoner 20 Allison & Adam Buttress 30 Patrick & Beth Lilja 100 William Norman 50 Wayne Keplinger 200 John &Arlene Bergseth 10 John & Joan Colwell 100 Shirley Gustner 20 Anonymous 30 Eda & Suzanne Kelly (In memory of Gloria Johnson) 100 Thomas Akin 100 John Colwell 100 Mary Kay Arthur 500 Anthony & Nina DiAngelis 100 Susan AI-Rifai 50 Clair & Janice Hetland 30 Gail Larson 20 Janice & Lowell Kleven 75 Norma Ruths 20 Anonymous 30 James Johnson 200 Kay Garbizo 30 Barbara Braun 100 Bernie Vrona 20 Ruriko Matsuyama 20 Thomas Roach/Timothy Nix 30 Kathy A. Davis 30 Gordon S. Beavers 20 Edward Berquist 25 Harriet Anderson 20 Perry & Nicole Wells 50 Dan & Mary Larkin 100 Resolution 14-102 - Continued December 16, 2014 Solicitation Letters - continued Faye Segal 20 Robert & Lucile Carman 20 Jon & Linda Ketokoski 10 Mary Jane Koehler 10 Anonymous 25 ENVISION PROGRAMS Lilac Planting TruStone Financial 150 WSB 50 In-Kind Donations Golden Valley Garden Club (evening) General Mills Starbucks at Winnetka Byerlys Park Programs Minnesota/Wisconsin Playground 5 benches (value $16,250) Reader Board Golden Valley Community Foundation $250 PUBLIC EDUCATION (FIRE) In-Kind Donations Byerlys 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. city c golde" MEMORANDUM 1 "" lley va Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. T. Engagement Letter-Auditing Services for 2014 Fiscal Year Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Each year the City is required to have a State Legal Compliance Audit performed in accordance with auditing standards established by the Auditing Standards Board and Minnesota Statutes. Staff recommends the authorization for services with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich and Co for 2014 audit services for$44,600; the first increase in two years for a total of$700. This amount is also for reviewing the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Funds. Preliminary fieldwork will begin in January with final fieldwork starting on February 2. Attachments i Engagement Letter With MMKR - City Audit, For The Year 2014 (8 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize City Manager to sign Engagement Letters with the firm of Malloy, Montaque, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co. for the 2014 audit of the City. PRINCIPALS Thomas M.Montague,CPA Thomas A.Karnowski,CPA R Paul A.Radosevich,CPA William].Lauer,CPA C E RT IFPUB LIC James H.Eichtcn,CPA ACCOUNTAN T S Aaron J.Nielsen,CPA Victoria L.Holinka,CPA December 9,2014 To the City Council and Management of the City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley,MN 55427 Dear Couneilmembers and Management: We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide for the City of Golden Valley (the City) for the year ended December 31, 2014. We will audit the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, the aggregate remaining fund information, and the budgetary comparison for the General Fund, including the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the basic financial statements of the City as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014. Accounting standards generally accepted in the United States of America provide for certain required supplementary information(RSI),such as Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A),to supplement the City's basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to the City's RSI in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. These limited procedures will consist of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements.We will not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. The following RSI is required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and will be subjected to certain limited procedures,but will not be audited: 1) MD&A 2) GASB-required supplementary pension and other post-employment benefits information We have also been engaged to report on supplementary information other than RSI that accompanies the City's financial statements. We will subject the following supplementary information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America,and will provide an opinion on it in relation to the financial statements as a whole, in a separate written report accompanying our auditor's report on the financial statements OR in a report combined with our auditor's report on the financial statements: 1) Combining and individual fund statements and schedules,presented as supplemental information Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., RA, 5353 Wayzata Boulevard , Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 - Telephone: 952-545-0424 • Telefax: 952-545-0569 • www,mmkt.com City of Golden Valley Page 2 December 9,2014 The following other information accompanying the financial statements will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements, and our auditor's report will not provide an opinion or any assurance on that other information; 1) Introductory information 2) Statistical section We will perform the required State Legal Compliance Audit conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the provisions of the Legal Compliance Audit Guide, promulgated by the State.Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute § 6.65, and will include such tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to conclude that, for the items tested, the City has complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal provisions. We will also prepare a management report for the City Council and administration. This report will communicate such things as our concerns regarding accounting procedures or policies brought to our attention during our audit, along with recommendations for improvements. The report will also contain certain financial comparisons and analysis,and other information of interest. Our services will not include an audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, which would only be required if the City expended $500,000 or more in federal assistance funds during the year. If the City is required to have a Single Audit of federal assistance funds,this engagement letter would need to be modified. Audit Objectives The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your basic financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and to report on the fairness of the supplementary information referred to in the second paragraph when considered in relation to the financial statements as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and will include tests of the accounting records of the City and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express such opinions. We will issue a written report upon completion of our audit of the City's financial statements. Our report will be addressed to maiiagement and the City Council of the City. We cannot provide assurance that unmodified opinions will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it is necessary for us to modify our opinions or add emphasis-of-matter or other-matter paragraphs. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unmodified, we will discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed opinions,we may decline to express opinions or issue reports,or may withdraw from this engagement. City of Golden Valley Page 3 December 9,2014 We will also provide a report(that does not include an opinion)on internal control related to the financial statements and compliance with the provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a material effect on the financial statements as required by Government Auditing Standards.The report on internal,control and on compliance and other matters will include a paragraph that states (1)that the purpose of the report is solely to describe the scope of testing of internal control and compliance, and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control on compliance, and(2)that the report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City's internal control and compliance.The paragraph will also state that the report is not suitable for any other purpose. If during our audit we become aware that the City is subject to an audit requirement that is not encompassed in the terms of this engagement, we will communicate to management and those charged with governance that an audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards may not satisfy the relevant legal,regulatory,or contractual requirements. Management Responsibilities Management is responsible for the financial statements and all accompanying information as well as all representations contained therein. As part of the audit, we will assist with preparation of your financial statements and related notes. These nonaudit services do not constitute an audit under Government Auditing Standards and such services will not be conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. You agree to assume all management responsibilities relating to the financial statements and related notes and any other nonaudit services we provide. You will be required to acknowledge in the management representation letter our assistance with preparation of the financial statements and related notes and that you have reviewed and approved the financial statements and related notes prior to their issuance and have accepted responsibility for them.Further,you agree to oversee the nonaudit services by designating an individual, preferably from senior management, who possesses suitable skill, knowledge, or experience; evaluate the adequacy and results of those services; and accept responsibility for them. Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls, including evaluating and monitoring ongoing activities,to help ensure that appropriate goals and objectives are met; following laws and regulations; and ensuring that management is reliable and financial information is reliable and properly reported. Management is also responsible for implementing systems designed to achieve compliance with applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. You are also responsible for the selection and application of accounting principles, for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in conformity with accounting principles general accepted in the United States of America, and for compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements. Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us and for the accuracy and completeness of that information. You are also responsible for providing us with (1) access to all information of which you are aware that is relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements, (2)additional information that we may request for the purpose of the audit, and (3)unrestricted access to persons within the City from whom we determine it necessary to obtain audit evidence. Your responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the written representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial,both individually and in the aggregate,to the financial statements taken as a whole. City of Golden Valley Page 4 December 9,2014 You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting the City involving (1)management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your responsibilities include informing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the City received in communications from employees, former employees, grantors, regulators, or others. In addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the City complies with applicable laws, regulations, _. contracts, agreements, and grants and for taking timely and appropriate steps to remedy fraud and noncompliance with provisions 'of laws, regulations, contracts or grant agreements, or abuse that we report. You are responsible for the preparation of the supplementary information in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. You agree to include our report on the supplementary information in any document that contains and indicates that we have reported on the supplementary information. You also agree to include the audited financial statements with any presentation of the supplementary information that includes our report thereon OR make the audited financial statements readily available to users of the supplementary information no later than the date the supplementary information is issued with our report thereon.Your responsibilities include acknowledging to us in the written representation letter that(1)you are responsible for presentation of the supplementary information in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; (2) you believe the supplementary information, including its form and content, is fairly presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; (3) the methods of measurement or presentation have not changed from those used in the prior period(or,if they have changed,the reasons for such changes); and(4)you have disclosed to us any significant assumptions or interpretations underlying the measurement or presentation of the supplementary information. Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a process for tracking the status of audit findings and recommendations. Management is also responsible for identifying for us previous financial audits, attestation engagements,performance audits or other studies related to the objectives discussed in the Audit Objectives section of this letter. This responsibility includes relaying to us corrective actions taken to address significant findings and recommendations resulting from those audits, attestation engagements,performance audits,or other studies.You are also responsible for providing management's views on our current findings, conclusions, and recommendations, as well as your planned corrective actions, for the report,and for the timing and format for providing that information. Audit Procedures—General An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management,as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from(1)errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3) misappropriation of assets, or(4) violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the City or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the City.Because the determination of abuse is subjective, Government Auditing Standards do not expect auditors to provide reasonable assurance of detecting abuse. City of Golden Valley Page 5 December 9,2014 Because of the inherent limitations of an audit,combined with the inherent limitations of internal control, and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing Standards. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However,we will inform the appropriate level of management of any material errors, -. any fraudulent financial reporting, or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform the appropriate level of management of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential, and of any material abuse that comes to our attention. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. Our procedures will include tests of documentary,evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, funding sources, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit,we will require certain written representations from you about your responsibilities for the financial statements; compliance with laws,regulations, contracts, and grant agreements; and other responsibilities required by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Audit Procedures—Internal Controls Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the City and its environment, including internal control,sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and to design the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures. Tests of controls may be performed to test the effectiveness of certain controls that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud that are material to the financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from illegal acts and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. Our tests, if performed,will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal control issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.However, during the audit, we will communicate to management and those charged with governance internal control related matters that are required to be communicated under AICPA professional standards and Government Auditing Standards. Audit Procedures—Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with the provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, agreements, and grants. However,the objective of our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion in our report on compliance issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards. City of Golden Valley Page 6 December 9,2014 Engagement Administration,Fees,and Other We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will locate any documents selected by us for testing. The assistance to be supplied by your personnel, including the preparation of schedules and analysis of accounts, typing all cash or other confirmations we request, and locating any invoices selected by us for _. testing, will be discussed and coordinated with you. We will provide copies of our reports to the City;however,management is responsible for distribution of the reports and the financial statements. Unless restricted by law or regulation, or containing privileged and confidential information,copies of our reports are to be made available for public inspection. The audit documentation for this engagement is the property of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR) and constitutes confidential information. However, subject to applicable laws and regulations, audit documentation and appropriate individuals will be made available upon request and in a timely manner to a regulatory agency or its designee, a federal agency providing direct or indirect funding, or the U.S. Government Accountability Office for purposes of a quality review of the audit,to resolve audit findings, or to carryout oversight responsibilities. We will notify you of any such request. If requested, access to such audit documentation will be provided under the supervision of MMKR personnel.Furthermore,upon request,we may provide copies of selected audit documentation to the aforementioned parties. These parties may intend, or decide, to distribute the copies or information contained therein to others,including other governmental agencies. The audit documentation for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of five years after the report release date or for any additional period requested by the regulatory agency.If we are aware that a federal awarding agency or auditee is contesting an audit finding, we will contact the party(ies) contesting the audit finding for guidance prior to destroying the audit documentation. We expect to begin our audit shortly after the end of your fiscal year and to issue our reports prior to June 30, 2014, William J. Lauer, CPA is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the engagement and signing the reports. Our fee for these services with be at our standard hourly rates plus out-of-pocket costs (such as report reproduction,word processing,postage,travel, copies,telephone, etc,)except that we agree that our gross fee, including expenses, will not exceed$44,600. Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 60 days or more overdue and may not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement will be deemed to have been completed upon written notification of termination, even if we have not completed our report. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket costs through the date of termination.The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary,we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. City of Golden Valley Page 7 December 9,2014 These fees are based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If we find that additional audit procedures are required, or if additional services are requested by the City, those services will be billed at our standard hourly rates. Additional audit procedures might be required for certain accounting issues or events, such as new contractual agreements,transactions and legal requirements of new bond issues,new funds, major capital projects, new tax increment districts, if there is an indication of misappropriation or misuse of public funds, or if significant difficulties are encountered due to the lack of accounting records, incomplete records,or turnover in the City's staff, With regard to the electronic dissemination of audited financial statements,including financial statements published electronically on your website, you understand that electronic sites are a means to distribute information and, therefore, we are not required to read the information contained in these sites or to consider the consistency of other information in the electronic site with the original document. If you intend to publish or otherwise reproduce the financial statements, such as in a bond statement,and make reference to our firm name,you agree to provide us with printers'proofs or masters for our review and approval before printing. You also agree to provide us with a copy of the final reproduced material for our approval before it is distributed. During the year, you might request additional services such as routine advice,assistance in implementing audit recommendations, review of your projections or budgets, and other similar projects. Independence standards allow us to perform these routine services;however,it is important that you understand that we are not allowed to make management decisions, performmanagement functions, nor can we audit our own work or provide nonaudit services that are significant to the subject matter of the audit. Please be aware that e-mail is not a secure method of transmitting data. It can be intercepted, read, and possibly changed. Due to the large volume of e-mails sent daily, the likelihood of someone intercepting your e-mail is relatively small, but it does exist. We will communicate with you via e-mail, if you are willing to accept this risk. To ensure that MMKR's independence is not impaired under the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct, you agree to inform the engagement partner before entering into any substantive employment discussions with any of our personnel. If a dispute occurs related in any way to our services, our firm and the City agree to discuss the dispute and,if necessary,to promptly mediate in a good faith effort to resolve it.We will agree on a mediator,but if we cannot, either of us may apply to a court having personal jurisdiction over the parties for appointment of a mediator. We will share the mediator's fees and expenses equally, but otherwise will bear our own attorney fees and costs of the mediation.Participation in such mediation shall be a condition to either of us initiating litigation. To allow time for the mediation, any applicable statute of limitations shall be tolled for a period not to exceed 120 days from the date either of us first requests in writing to mediate the dispute. The mediation shall be confidential in all respects, as allowed or required by law, except that our final settlement positions at mediation shall be admissible in litigation solely to determine the identity of the prevailing party for purposes of the awarding of attorney fees. City of Golden Valley Page S December 9,2014 We both recognize the importance of performing our obligations under this agreement in a timely way and fully cooperating with the other. In the event that either of us fails to timely perform or fully cooperate, the other party may, in its sole discretion, elect to suspend performance or terminate the agreement regardless of the prejudice to the other person. We agree we will give 10 days' written notice of an intent to suspend or terminate, specifying the grounds for our decision, and will give the other an opportunity to cure the circumstances cited as grounds for that decision. In the event of suspension or termination,all fees and costs are immediately due on billing. We agree that it is important that disputes be discussed and resolved promptly. For that reason,we agree that, notwithstanding any other statutes of limitations or court decisions concerning them,all claims either of us may have will be barred unless brought within one year of the date the complaining party first incurs any damage of any kind, whether discovered or not,related in any way to acts or omissions of the other party, whether or not the complaining party seeks recovery for that first damage and whether or not we have continued to maintain a business relationship after the first damage occurred. Notwithstanding anything in this letter to the contrary we agree that regardless of where the City is located, or where this agreement is physically signed, this agreement shall have been deemed to have been entered into at our office in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and Hennepin County shall be the exclusive venue and jurisdiction for resolving disputes related to this agreement. This agreement shall be interpreted and governed under the laws of Minnesota. When requested, Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent external peer review report and any letter of comment, and any subsequent peer review reports and letters of comment received during the period of the contract. Our most recent peer review report accompanies this letter. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions,please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter,please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Sincerely, MALLOY,MONTAGUE,KARNOWSKI,RADOSEVICH&CO.,P.A. William J. Lauer, PA Principal WJL:kch Response: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Golden Valley. By: Title: Date: citli (�`va�'Ar golden -. MEMORANDUM valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-80131763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. U. Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments - 2014(A) City-Wide Sewer Repairs Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Agreements have been signed with the property owners regarding total costs for sanitary sewer repairs and waiving the public hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statues 429.031. This work has been done by the city contractor for sewer repairs. This program is offered to those property owners interested that are outside the current Pavement Management Area and so wish to have their sanitary repairs paid with property taxes. The City needs to have a contract setup with the property owner before this option is available. Attachments • List of City-Wide Sanitary Sewer Improvements Assessed in 2014 (1 page) • Resolution Waiving the Public Hearing Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.031 and Ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Private Sanitary Sewer Repairs in 2014 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve Resolution Waiving the Public Hearing and Ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Private Sanitary Sewer Repairs in 2014. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY 2014 CITY-WIDE SANITARY SEWER-A LEVY 19040 PID Address Assessment 30-118-21-14-0074 2250 WISCONSIN AVE N 6,520.00 19-029-24-24-0014 4821 KILLARNEY DR 4,795.00 07-029-24-33-0017 5125 DAWNVIEW TER 13,780.00 30-118-21-11-0065 2335 ORKLA DR 6,946.00 32,041.00 Resolution 14-103 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WAIVING THE PUBLIC HEARING PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 429.031 AND ORDERING CERTIFICATION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER REPAIRS IN 2014 Project Years Interest Rate First Year Levy Total Assessed 2014 City-Wide Sanitary Sewer 5 6% 2016 $32,041.00 Repairs-A 1. Each individual address (lots) will be assessed the full value of the signed contract with the homeowner for the various sanitary sewer repair(s). 2. The proposed assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments for each of said property respectively together with interest at the rate of six (6) percent per annum accruing on the full amount thereof unpaid, shall be a lien concurrent with general taxes upon parcel and all thereof. The total amount of each such assessment not prepaid shall be payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 5 years, as indicated in each case. 3. The first of said installments, together with interest on the entire assessment for the period of March 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016, will be payable with general taxes for the year of 2015, collectible in 2016, and one of each of the remaining installments, together with one year's interest on that and all other unpaid installments, will be paid with general taxes for each consecutive year thereafter unless the entire assessment is paid in full by February 27, 2015. 4. The owner may pay off the assessment in full after February 27, 2015 with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 5. The City Clerk shall, as soon as may be, prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a certified duplicate of the assessment roll, with each installment and interest on each unpaid assessment set forth separately, to be extended upon the proper tax lists of the County and the County Auditor shall thereafter collect said assessment in the manner provided by law. Shepard 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. ify� 0 9 Wen MEMORANDUM 0 valley Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. V. Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments - 2014(A) Driveways Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary Agreements have been signed with the property owners regarding total costs and waiving the public hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.031. By adopting the resolution it allows the property owner to pay for their driveway improvement over time with their property taxes. This work was done by the contractor for the PMP and was billed at the time of completion of the project. Terms are the same as the 2014 project. Attachments • List of Driveways Assessed in 2014 for 2014 PMP (1 page) • Resolution Waiving the Public Hearing Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.031 and Ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Driveways that Involve 2014 City Street Improvements (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Waiving the Public Hearing and Ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Driveways that Involve 2014(A) City Street Improvements. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY 2014 PMP DRIVEWAYS-A LEVY 19041 PID Address Assessment 32-118-21-43-0046 110 IDAHO AVE N 10,108.88 05-117-21-11-0013 110 EDGEWOOD AVE S 3,263.96 05-117-21-11-0011 130 EDGEWOOD AVE S 5,644.49 05-117-21-11-0027 6490 CORTLAWN CIR N 5,797.59 05-117-21-11-0028 6500 CORTLAWN CIR N 1,378.91 05-117-21-11-0016 6630 CORTLAWN CIR N 6,791.81 05-117-21-11-0030 6475 CORTLAWN CIR S 5,726.85 05-117-21-11-0035 6615 CORTLAWN CIR S 4,709.15 05-117-21-11-0029 6455 CIRTKAWB CUR S 3,264.82 05-117-21-11-0001 6401 GLENWOOD AVE 1,860.55 48,547.01 Resolution 14-104 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WAIVING THE PUBLIC HEARING PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 429.031 AND ORDERING CERTIFICATION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS THAT INVOLVE 2014 CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS Project Years Interest Rate First Year Levy Total Assessed 2014 PMP Driveways-A 10 6% 2016 $48,547.01 1. Each individual address (lots) will be assessed the full value of the signed contract with the homeowner for the various driveway improvement(s). 2. The proposed assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments for each of said property respectively together with interest at the rate of six (6) percent per annum accruing on the full amount thereof unpaid, shall be a lien concurrent with general taxes upon parcel and all thereof. The total amount of each such assessment not prepaid shall be payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 10 years, as indicated in each case. 3. The first of said installments, together with interest on the entire assessment for the period of March 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016, will be payable with general taxes for the year of 2015, collectible in 2016, and one of each of the remaining installments, together with one year's interest on that and all other unpaid installments, will be paid with general taxes for each consecutive year thereafter unless the entire assessment is paid in full by February 27, 2015. 4. The owner may pay off the assessment in full after February 27, 2015 with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 5. The City Clerk shall, as soon as may be, prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a certified duplicate of the assessment roll, with each installment and interest on each unpaid assessment set forth separately, to be extended upon the proper tax lists of the County and the County Auditor shall thereafter collect said assessment in the manner provided by law. Shepard 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. City 0 M E M 0 R A N D U M valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) .:iPN�ll�a�i� 4 '`k'�sR; h Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 3. W. Authorization to Amend FY2013 Community Development Block Grant Agreement with Hennepin County and Jewish Housing and Programming (J-HAP) Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary In early 2013, the City entered into an agreement with Hennepin County in support of the J-HAP project located at 9300 and 9310 Golden Valley Road through the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Hennepin County has asked for an amendment to the agreement in order to extend the termination date from December 31, 2014, to April 1, 2015. This would cover the additional time necessary for 1-HAP to finalize the purchase of the properties for their project. No other terms in the existing agreement would change. Attachments • Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amendment To Subrecipient Agreement With Urban Hennepin County and any Third Party Agreements For Jewish Housing And Programming (1 page) • Amendment to Subrecipient Agreement Urban Hennepin County FY2013 CDBG Program (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amendment to Subrecipient Agreement with Urban Hennepin County and any Third Party Agreements for Jewish Housing and Programming. Resolution 14-105 December 16, 2014 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY AND ANY THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS FOR JEWISH HOUSING AND PROGRAMMING WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley has previously approved Jewish Housing and Programming (J-HAP) for funding from the 2013 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the termination date of the Subrecipient Agreement was December 31, 2014; and WHEREAS, J-HAP and Hennepin County have agreed to extend the termination date to April 1, 2015. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Manager to execute the Amendment to the Subrecipient Agreement and any required Third Party Agreements on behalf of the City to extend the termination date to April 1, 2015. 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. Resolution #13-0161 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. A130606 CITY SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY FY2013 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "RECIPIENT," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, hereinafter referred to as "SUBRECIPIENT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,Section 471.59: IT IS HEREBY AGREED that Contract No. A130606 between the herein-named parties is hereby amended in accordance with the provisions set forth below: 1. Section 2, TERM OF AGREEMENT, shall be amended to read as follows: The effective date of this Agreement is July 1, 2013. The termination date of this Agreement is April 1, 2015, or at such time as the Activity constituting this Agreement is satisfactorily completed prior thereto. Upon expiration, the SUBRECIPENT shall relinquish to the RECIPIENT all program funds unexpended and uncommitted, and all accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds described in Exhibit 1, as may be amended. 2. Exhibit 1, Completion Date, shall be amended to 4/1/2015. Except a s herein amended, the terms, conditions and provisions of said Contract No. A130606 shall remain in full force and effect. THIS SECTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK I Resolution #13-0161 SUBRECIPIENT, having signed this amendment, and the COUNTY having duly approved this amendment on the day of 2014, and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this amendment, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Approved as to form STATE OF MINNESOTA and execution By: Assistant County Attorney Chair of Its County Board Date: Date: ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of County Board Date: And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Date: And: Assistant County Administrator Public Works Date: Recommended for Approval: Department Director,Housing, Community Works and Transit Date: 2 Resolution#13-0161 SUBRECIPIENT: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY (Place city seal here) By: Its: And: Its: Attest: Title: Date: 3 Clay o � g0ldc"11111 MEMCIANDUM valley- Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 120 day deadline: January 10, 2015 Agenda Item 4. A. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Brunswick Estates - 108 Brunswick Avenue North Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary At the November 24, 2014, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of a minor subdivision of the property located at 108 Brunswick Avenue North (Brunswick Estates). 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 be demolished. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated November 24, 2014 (6 pages) • Planning Commission Minutes dated October 13, 2014 (3 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission, dated November 24, 2014 (3 pages) • Memo from the Engineering Division, dated October 7, 2014 (3 pages) • Site Plans (5 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Brunswick Estates, 108 Brunswick Avenue North, 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$3,080 shall be paid prior to final plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. 24s � 250 324 308 300 240 • 235 t 230 1,\\ 220 309 227. 209. / 211 216 210 Subject Property: pro 108 Brunswick Ave N 217 as�4 los zao 221' / 208 V,205 /211 204 117 125 124 / / 125 124 108 I116 109 112 y� 75 t 15 CSN 70 0 25 31 26 26 S5 u 50 m 15 6324 m—... 6320 =. 6030 6140 6100 ? 6010 5924 5910 6237 100 6145 6101 vi .105 120 111 110. v. •' �..+� a � a �. 6015 � 120 ? 125 120 Y 125 140 ro 3 _ 131 130 135 i c Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 3 said the City doesn't use TIF very o en and he would like to see it used mor en. Zi erman said there are specific thin s the funds can be used for such asK11 correc ' n, street improvements, site cl aring, and improved access. Waldhauser sked about the downside to the developer of using She questioned why a develop wouldn't automaticall ask to use TIF. Virni id each developer is different. She sta d that the developerof the Golden Villa roject has used TIF in the past in other cities, d that the City h 3 to see a bene ' in using TIF. She clarified that this TIF plan is the fina ing plan for s en parcels ' he area. She added that any proposal has to pass the t for" test hich me that a development would not happen "but for" the use of TIF. Baker asked if there are affordable h units included in the proposed development. Zimmerman explained that if this wer using TIF they would have to have an affordable housing component to th r Ian , owever this is a renewal district so they do not. Baker questioned if the Plan g rmiss should require there to be an affordable housing component imme an said i ay have been an HRA decision to not have this be a housing d' rict. Wal hauser said t re are clearly benefits to the City in what will be covered by is TIF dist r t including side k connections and infrastructure improver ts. Kluchka a reed and said he t ' ks this is the right place for TIF to be used. Johnson referred the estimated proje t costs in the TIF plan and stioned why half of the costs are a inistration and interes Virnig explained that the City uld pay over a period of time nd that the final terms h en't been negotiated yet. MOVED b luchka, seconded by Sege aur and motion carried unanimously dopt Resoluti 14-01 finding that Modificatio No. 2 of the Redevelopment Plan for the Highw 55 West Redevelopment Proje t Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax crement Financing (Renewal and enovation) District No. 1 Conform to the G eral Plan for the Development and development of the City, as Amended mended 2008 Comprehensive Plan U ate) 4. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 108 Brunswick Ave N — Brunswick Estates — SU12-17 Applicant: Wooddale Edina LLC Address: 108 Brunswick Avenue North Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single family residential lot into two new single family residential lots. Kluchka stated that the Planning Commission has already reviewed this proposal. However, due to an administrative issue, they have to review it again. Zimmerman explained that the software used to generate mailing labels for the hearing notices did Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 4 not produce the correct information and many of the neighboring property owners were not informed of the first public hearing held for this item at the October 13 Planning Commission meeting. As a result, the developer is being required to go through Planning Commission and City Council consideration a second time. Zimmerman explained the applicant's request to subdivide the property at 108 Brunswick Avenue North into two new lots. The existing single family home would be demolished, and two new single family homes would be constructed. Zimmerman referred to a site plan of the property and explained that Lot 1 would be 19,100 square feet in size with 113.62 feet of width at the front setback line, and Lot 2 would be 19,510 square feet in size with 126.75 feet of width at the front setback line. He added that the minimum lot size requirement is 10,000 square feet and the minimum required width at the front setback line is 80 feet. He stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed subdivision as it meets all of the requirements outlined in the City Code. Baker asked Zimmerman to clarify where the front setback line is located on this property and added that the street really only touches a portion of this property, the rest of the property touches other lots. Zimmerman agreed that the frontage on this property is unusual. However, the width of a lot is measured at the front setback line, which is 35 feet away from the front property line, not right at the front property line abutting the street right-of-way. Blum asked if this proposal has been modified at all from the previous proposal they reviewed. Zimmerman said no, it is the same application, the City Attorney advised the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the proposal again since the mailing labels for the first hearing notice were incorrect. Kluchka opened the public hearing. Diane Richard, 217 Paisley Lane, said no one in the neighborhood received hearing notices and they did not have a neighborhood meeting. She said she would appreciate the applicant showing her what he wants to build, and that more information would be appreciated. Jennifer Berg, 70 Brunswick Avenue North, said she hasn't received any mailings and questioned why she hasn't. She said the only reason she knew anything about this proposal is that she is friends with the property owner. Zimmerman explained that it wasn't until it was brought to his attention that he realized the mailing labels weren't generated properly. Once the issue was realized, the proposal was scheduled for the next available Planning Commission meeting and new public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. Shauna Crowe, 55 Brunswick Avenue North, stated that the property across the street from her was already subdivided and two large homes were built. She said she has Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 5 endured construction for the last four years and her soundtrack has been beeping, pounding, etc. that seems like it will never end. She said this neighborhood was a key factor in her choosing where to live because coming from south Minneapolis the homes were crowded. She said this area seemed like a haven but she is not as optimistic as she was. She said the Tralee neighborhood is being split up, there are no sidewalks, and there will be more traffic in the area. She said she is concerned about dust, debris, and noise, and added that she is not a morning person and people in the neighborhood are retired or work from home. She said the street was new when they first moved in and has since been torn up for utilities and more traffic will cause more wear and tear on the street. She said clay and mud get tracked all over, and traffic uses her driveway to turn around in, covering her driveway with mud and tire tracks and wearing it down. She said in the winter she doesn't get the full benefit of plowing and it is important that utility vehicles have access because there is not a lot of room on this cul-de-sac. She said her front yard was torn up twice without notice and she can't get grass to grow in the area so she grew a garden instead. She said she is also concerned about the environment and the disruption of neighborhood homes. Parking is overflowing when someone has an event and she is not sure how two more driveways will fit on the end of the cul-de-sac. She said her brick rambler house will no longer fit in with the neighborhood and she feels her curb appeal will be lackluster and out of place where it once fit it. She said she fears other neighbors will be moving on and their lots will also be developed. She said she is concerned about the renovations she's done to her home and feels like she is being taken over and has lost enthusiasm to update her home, because it will be seen as a tear down. She asked if developers have plans to develop in the future, how long it will take to build the proposed new homes, and if they will be built simultaneously. She said she was surprised to not get notice of the original public hearing for this items because she has received notices in the past. Donna Fredkove, 26 Paisley Lane, said she is concerned about drainage because some homes on Meander Road are having drainage problems they've never had before. She said it is important that she has all of the information and that this is an issue of due process, and she should have full due process. Kathy Watkins, 112 Paisley Lane, said she did not receive a hearing notice. She said she is also speaking for her neighbor Ruth Hetman at 124 Paisley Lane. She said she is concerned about the size of the new homes and if they will block the view. She said she is also concerned about destroying the land and the constant noise. She stated that people buying these houses will find that they are too big and will sell them again, so it is not a stable neighborhood. She said "millenials" these days are not properly employed, and not saving money so she questions who is going to buy these houses. She referred to plans she saw on the internet and stated that they referred to the homes proximity to Breck School, when these homes are located in the Hopkins school district which should be cited on the developer's web site as well. Tom Berscheid, 120 King Hill Road, questioned where the City is in the moratorium process. He said he understands the emotional aspects and the commerce aspects, He said he wants to preserve green space and the pastoral setting particularly in this area and losing this negates the livability of Golden Valley. He said he wants the City to keep Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 6 this in mind when considering subdivisions. He said he also wants the City to think of their grandchildren and what attracts people to the City. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Kluchka reiterated that there was a notification issue and stated that staff will continue to work on the problem. Cera said he is concerned because one of the people who spoke said they did not get a hearing notice for this meeting either. Zimmerman stated that the mailing list for this meeting was double checked, but he would look into what happened. Waldhauser asked if a neighborhood meeting with the developer was held for this proposal. Zimmerman said yes, and added that the same, incorrect, mailing labels were used for that meeting as well. Kluchka asked about the approach the City takes regarding construction management controls. Zimmerman said that construction issues are handled on a complaint basis. He added that the City Council has asked staff to create a list of construction issues that developers would be required to sign stating that they are aware of the requirements. Kluchka asked if a parking plan would be included in that document. Zimmerman said a parking plan would be required at the building stage, not at the subdivision stage of a proposal. Kluchka stated that this is a tight area and there should be a plan in place. Waldhauser said she doesn't know where else construction parking could occur, because this is a cul-de-sac. Cera added that a developer might know the City's rules, but all the contractors and subcontractors won't necessarily know them. Segelbaum suggesting posting the document at the job site. Kluchka asked if the City has construction management staff. Zimmerman said no and added that any issues are handled on a complaint basis. Segelbaum asked if there are limits regarding the number of years construction can span, or the times of day construction can occur. Zimmerman stated that the City Code requires that "progress is being made" if there is an open building permit. Kluchka stated that the Planning Commission is really only considering the subdivision itself. He stated that they have a history of reviewing and researching "McMansions" regarding setbacks and other issues, and that Golden Valley has many more restrictions than other communities. Segelbaum added that they don't approve house plans or designs, just the envelope area where a house could be built. Baker said there has been a process violation and that the full presentation hasn't been presented at this meeting. Kluchka stated that the full presentation has been presented. Baker said he doesn't like the idea that the presentation was shortened and didn't include all of the details they normally see. Kluchka reiterated that they have seen all the details and he wants to be careful about saying there has been a process violation. Kluchka asked about the status of the subdivision moratorium. Zimmerman said no new subdivision applications were received after September 25 and that this proposal was Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 7 submitted on September 16. He stated that the City has hired a consultant and there will be a community listening session on December 11. Segelbaum referred to the comments regarding sidewalks in this area and asked if neighbors can get together and ask for sidewalks to be built. Zimmerman said that neighbors can petition the City to have sidewalks installed. Segelbaum asked if there are other subdivisions proposed in this area. Zimmerman said there is a subdivision proposal pending for the property at 250 Paisley Lane. Segelbaum asked if it is possible that the neighbor's lawn could be torn up and not repaired as was mentioned in the public hearing. Zimmerman said he doesn't think that is the normal process. Segelbaum asked if the streets will be torn up. Zimmerman said there will be some work done in the cul-de-sac in order to add utilities for the second home. Johnson said he has heard concerns about drainage, noise, dust and access. He referred to the criteria regarding the approval of subdivisions and asked if there is an opportunity to review the requirements in the Single Family zoning district. Kluchka said that the rules that are currently in place are the only ones the Planning Commission is allowed to consider by statute. He added that the other issues discussed can be evaluated as part of the subdivision moratorium. Johnson asked about the neighbor's recourse. Kluchka said developers need to work with the City and the contractors to help them understand. Baker encouraged residents to speak at the subdivision moratorium listening session and added that concerns should also be addressed as part of the future Comprehensive Plan update process. Blum asked about the minimum lot size requirements. Zimmerman said the minimum lot size requirement is 10,000 square feet, and these proposed lots will be approximately 19,000 square feet in size. Segelbaum noted that there are eight criteria required to be met when subdividing property and one of the criteria is that if they are all met, the subdivision cannot be denied, so the Planning Commission should not deny this application. Cera said he is still concerned that the neighbor next door to this proposal hasn't received any of the City's notifications. Waldhauser also questioned how there could people who didn't know about this meeting. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera to recommend approval of the Brunswick Estates Subdivision proposal subject to the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. Both of the 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. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 8 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 $3,080 shall be paid prior to Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. Segelbaum asked if they figured out any parking limitations during construction. Kluchka said the parking was worth commenting on, but he doesn't know if it can be added as a condition of approval. He stated there was a motion on the table. The motion carried unanimously. \S, c Hearing — Min r Subdivision — 250 Paisley Lane — Paisley 19 drew Dornbusch 0 Paisley Lane reconfigure the isting single family resjntial lot into three new le family reside ial lots. Zimmerman explained the plicant's p posal to subdivide the lot at 250 Paisley Lane into three new lots. He state hat the e sting sincaf6 family home would be demolished and three new single family hoes woul be cofistructed. He referred to a site plan and stated that this subdivision also r vires Iq#line adjustment with the neighboring property at 245 Paisley Lane in ord to fiminate an existing driveway encroachment. He stated that the minimum lot size re i ment in the R-1 Single Family zoning district is 10,000 square feet. Lot 1 (245 Paley ill be 52,262 square feet, Lot 2 will be 19,510 square feet, Lot 3 will be. 756 s e feet, and Lot 4 will be 20,714 square feet. All of the proposed new Igts will hav 80'fet of width at the front setback line. He noted that there are a numbOf of trees on e ex1''sting lot and six will be removed, four of which are significant tree e stated that tall is ommending approval of the subdivision proposal as. meets all of the quireme S of the City Code. /Dornbusch, a said it is i resting that all of the roposed new F is are exactly 80 feet in width estioned i odifying the property lin for the neighb 'ng driveway encroachment I ffected e ability to get 80 feet of wi th. Zimmerman s ted that the property line ent owed the lots to have 80 feet f width. Kluchka sar ,he is concerned that a has een established because of the ocation of the driveAy on the neighboring y immerman explained a different p n the Applicant had c �idered which had age of the proposed new lots on the ' outh end of the property. owever, that not ideal as the south end of the prop y is adjacent to a park are ornbusch, Applicant, reiterated that his riginal proposal had the frontage along rk area, but that the preference of the neighbors was to not put the front of a house Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2014 egular meeting of the Planning C mission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Co 'I Chambers, 7800 Golden Va y Road, Golden Valley nnesota, on Monday, Octobe 2014. Chair Kluchka cal d the meeting to or r' ' at 7 pm. Those present w*,;,Planning Com issioners, But'n; Cera, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbaum and Wuser. Also esent wag Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate Planner/Granf'V�(ter Emi Golner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman, Commissioner Bake`Kas sent. 1. Approval of Minutes ro September 22, 4, Regul Planninmission Meeting Waldhauser ref 'fid to the second aragraph on page T'an said she would like to make a clari 'tion after the fact th t the homes referred to 6`11- .., ode Island Avenue sold for $ b,000 to $450,000, not 350,000 to $400,000 as discuss„ MO D by Waldhauser, seconded y Cera and motion carried unanimously approve t September 22, 2014, minutes h the above noted clarification. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 108 Brunswick Ave N — Brunswick Estates — SU12-17 Applicant: Wooddale Edina LLC Address: 108 Brunswick Avenue North Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single family residential lot into two new single family residential lots. Zimmerman explained the applicant's request to subdivide the lot at 108 Brunswick Avenue North into two new lots in order to construct two new single family homes. He referred to a site plan and stated that Lot 1 will be 19,100 square feet in size with 113.62 feet of width at the front setback line, and Lot 2 will be 19,510 square feet with 126.75 feet of width at the front setback line. He stated that the proposed subdivision meets all of the requirements outlined in the City Code, therefore staff is recommending approval of the proposal. Cera asked how many subdivisions have occurred in this neighborhood. Zimmerman said there have been four or five subdivisions in this area over the past few years because the lots are large enough to divide. Cera asked how many of those subdivisions have torn down the existing house versus keeping it. Zimmerman said that is something that can be reviewed as part of the moratorium study. He stated that Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2014 Page 2 existing houses are typically torn down because they are located centrally on the lot and added that in this case the existing house was in need of significant remodeling. Segelbaum referred to an existing shed located on the property and asked if it is in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements. Zimmerman said he would verity that it is located 5 feet from the side and rear yard property lines. Waldhauser referred to item six in the City Engineer's memo which reads in part that the developer must ensure that existing drainage patterns are maintained or improved and that stormwater runoff is accommodated within the property to the extent practicable. She said to her "drainage patterns" means the direction of flow wouldn't change, but if more impervious surface is added, the amount of water will change. She said it doesn't protect the neighbors at all if the patterns or direction can stay the same, but the amount of water can increase. She added that her concern does not apply in this case, but in the overall subdivision process. Zimmerman said that a number of grading and stormwater techniques are used to accommodate stormwater runoff within the property. Kluchka suggested the language be made clearer. Cera suggested that language regarding stormwater be added to the conditions of approval listed in the Subdivision Code because he has seen the problems runoff can cause. Kluchka said it is alarming if there are significant drainage impacts that aren't being accounted for. Johnson referred to the applicant's plans and noted that they were received after the moratorium effective date. Zimmerman stated that the initial submission occurred prior to the moratorium effective date, but the applicant submitted some additional information later. Kluchka asked about the time line of the project. Steven Schwieters, Wooddale Edina, LLC, Applicant, said he hopes to start the project in December, with completion in June or July. He added that he is very familiar with this street and said that the homes will be approximately 4,500 to 5,500 square feet in size. Cera asked about the price of the proposed homes. Schwieters said they will cost approximately $1 ,150,000 to $1,350,000. Kluchka opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to speak, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Blum said it is refreshing to see lots that aren't the minimum size and he thinks this proposal will fit in with the neighborhood. Cera agreed and said the proposed lots meet all of the City Code requirements. He said the City generally strives to see more moderately priced homes, but he understands the prices in this situation. Segelbaum said he agrees that the homes will fit with the neighborhood even after the subdivision. Kluchka said all the findings are met and that this is a pretty straightforward proposal. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Blum and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Brunswick Estates Minor Subdivision subject to the following findings and conditions: Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 13, 2014 Page 3 Findings: 1. Both of the 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. 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 $3,080 shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. Discussion Regarding Recyc 'ng Centers Go er explained that a moratorium as adopted by the City Council on July 1, 2014 to prohib the establishment of any new cycling centers for six months to alto staff time to resea the possible need to upda both the definition of Recyclin nters in the Zoning Co , and the reconsideratio 'of the appropriateness of RppY&ng Centers as permitted us within the Light Indus ial and Industrial zoningd'ittricts. Goellner discusse staff's recomme ations including-- creating two definitions, one for major recycling fad ' s and one for inor recyclin"facilities, removing metal shredding and car crushing from ,e current de ,inition, addfhg definitions for compostable waste and yard waste, requiring a ` nditional L se Permit for minor recycling facilities in the Light Industrial zoning district, al ing mi or,,;recycling facilities as a permitted use and major recycling facilities as a conditi`' al u In the Industrial zoning district, and prohibiting outdoor storage. She added tha t"a' is also recommending that the existing distance requirements for recycling cen�e'rs ain. Kluchka asked about noi�o"issues cc�nsi Bred in staff's research. Goellner stated that truck traffic, and the picking up and dtoppir off of materials, among others were considered. Kluchka el'sked what "ind: ors" mns and if the City would allow recycling in a covered space op-With windows opo "n, both of hich may cause noise issues. I Segelbaum q 'stioned if collection, orting, and disp sing should also be restricted along with outdoo torage. He questioned sf the proposed ordQance captures what these facilities :Cera questioned what is Irying to be accompiii�hed. Cera id he has dealt with recyclin ;Jn his job for many years,,tie discussed various typ of recycling facilities, scrap me al facilities, drop-off facilitieknd hazardous waste fa ,ities. He stated that Golden Vall does not need a drop-off faci „ because of how e recycling is picked up. He said th t Golden Valley also doesn't want to have a hazardous waste facility or a typical cycling facility. He stated that permits may need to i Ohl o goiam MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department artment 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: November 24, 2014 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Plan for Minor Subdivision of 108 Brunswick Avenue North —Brunswick Estates—Wooddale Edina, LLC, Applicant Summary of Request Wooddale Edina, LLC, represented by Steven Schwieters, is proposing to subdivide the property located at 108 Brunswick Avenue North into two lots. There is one existing single family home on this lot which would be demolished and replaced with two new single family homes. The existing lot is 38,610 square feet. City Code requires that each new lot be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. The proposed Lot 1, to the west, would be 19,100 square feet and the proposed Lot 2, to the east, would be 19,510 square feet. City Code also requires that each lot have a minimum of 80 feet of width at the front setback line. Lot 1 would have 113.62 feet of width and Lot 2 would have 126.75 feet of width. The dimensions of both of the newly created lots provide a sufficient building envelope for development. Qualification as a Minor Subdivision The proposed two lot subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision because the property located at 108 Brunswick Avenue North 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. 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 to 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. Both lots would have access off of the cul-de-sac at the end of Brunswick Avenue North. 1 City Engineer Jeff Oliver has submitted a memorandum dated October 7, 2014, regarding recommendations from the Engineering Division concerning this request. 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 of the 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. As discussed in the Engineering memo, new utility easements must be dedicated and shown on the Final Plat. 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 $3,080 (2% of the estimated land value) is required for this subdivision. 8. The conditions spelled out shall provide the only basis for denial of a minor subdivision. Approval will be granted to any application that meets the established conditions. All conditions have been met. Recommended Action Staff 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$3,080 shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 2 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. Attachments: Location Map (1 page) October 13, 2014, Planning Commission Minutes (3 pages) Memo from Engineering Division, dated October 7, 2014 (3 pages) Site Plans (5 pages) 3 City ®f goldenivvVv *� MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Date: October 7, 2014 To: Mason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Enginee0ecialist Eric Eckman, Public Works S Subject: Subdivision Review for Brunswick Estates Engineering staff has reviewed the plans for a proposed minor subdivision of property located at 108 Brunswick Avenue North. The Developer proposes to demolish the existing home and subdivide the parcel into two single-family lots. The comments contained in this review are based upon plans submitted to the City on September 25, 2014. Engineering staff recommends approval of the proposed minor subdivision of property located at 108 Brunswick Avenue North, called Brunswick Estates, subject to the following comments: 1. A City demolition permit, stormwater management permit, and utility permits are required for the demolition of the existing home. 2. The Developer has submitted a preliminary plat which appears to meet the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The final plat for this development must include public easements on all property lines consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 3. A City Right-of-Way Management permit is required for each parcel for any proposed excavations and obstructions within public right-of-way or easements. a. Each lot will have its own concrete driveway apron. It appears the driveway apron for Lot 1 has been moved to the northeast to eliminate the existing driveway encroachment onto Lot 14, Block 5 of Tralee. This modification and the construction of a new driveway for Lot 2 will require City Right-of-Way permits and the concrete aprons must meet City standards. 4. The Developer has shown on the plans that utilities can be extended to serve the proposed dwellings. The Developer or Contractor will be required to obtain the appropriate sewer and water permits from the City for the removal, rehabilitation, or G:\Developments-Private\Brunswick Estates-108 Brunswick N\Subdivision Review brunswick estates.docx installation of utility services. Staff has the following comments regarding the proposed utility construction: a. A Right-of-Way Permit is required for all excavations and obstructions within City right-of-way. Based on the plans submitted, it appears Brunswick Avenue will need to be excavated in order to install new utilities. Brunswick Avenue was constructed by the City in 2005 and therefore must be restored according to the applicable City standard detail, available in the Engineering office. b. Records show that there is an existing storm sewer drain the located in front of the property and a service is stubbed to the existing home at 108 Brunswick Avenue North. Staff recommends that the Developer extend the drain tile and install an additional service to ensure that each parcel has a service stub available for connection. If a sump pump is installed in each home, the discharge pipe must be connected to this drain the system. 5. Sanitary Sewer Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Reduction a. The existing sanitary sewer service to 108 Brunswick Avenue North is in the process of being inspected for compliance with the 1/1 ordinance. Depending on the results of the inspection, the Developer may need to enter into an 1/1 Deposit Agreement with the City to guarantee that the service becomes compliant with the 1/1 ordinance. b. The two new parcels must obtain compliance with the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance, prior to occupancy of the homes. 6. A preliminary grading plan was submitted by the Developer. The new lots will be custom- graded at the time of home construction, and therefore a City Stormwater Management Permit will be required for each parcel before the start of home construction. A stormwater management plan that meets City standards is required as part of each permit submittal. The Developer and its Contractors must ensure that existing drainage patterns are maintained or improved and that stormwater runoff is accommodated within the property to the extent practicable. 7. This development is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. Because each lot will be custom-graded, a separate Tree Preservation Permit will be required for each lot prior to the start of home construction. The City Forester will review the tree inventory, tabulations, and plans in detail at the time of permitting. 8. There is a deferred assessment of$3,200 for the reconstruction of streets adjacent to this property as part of the City's 2005 Pavement Management Program. The assessment must be paid prior to final plat approval. 9. The developer and/or contractor must obtain the appropriate permits prior to development of this site. G:\Developments-Private\Brunswick Estates-108 Brunswick N\Subdivision Review_brunswick estates.docx 2 Approval of this minor subdivision is also subject to the review and comment of the City Attorney and other City staff. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. C: Tom Burt, City Manager Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager/Interim Physical Development Director John Crelly, Fire Chief Eric Seaburg, Engineer Kelley Janes, Utility Maintenance Supervisor Jerry Frevel, Building Official Sue Virnig, Director of Finance G:\Developments-Private\Brunswick Estates-108 Brunswick N\Subdivision Review_brunswick estates.docx 3 / /, � r 1 1 NS-Ix GLENWOOD AVE SECTION33, TWP. 118, RGE. 21 LOCATION ON MAP SCALE NO >>9j�8j83 ca"lle, 0 io__ Pon ondsc PM9 __Z� 3 / 'o // SO- 20 10 0 20 Z,.j CO 28.0 Scale in Feet LA 'iyDose L.'dcap LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PRELIMINARY PURPOSES ONLY ing M Lot 10, Block 5, "TRALEE", according to the recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 40" & Denotes concrete 0 Denotes bituminous Denotes Ire,line t j > Denotes storm sewer line ----->—Derotes sanitary sewer line 0� S_ —————I—Denotes water line 70 —oh—Denotes overhead utility lines / r+ T X—Denotes fence(barbed ire) —#—Denotes fence(chain link) 91 E5 Denotes catch basin House 0 Denotes catch basin beehive iF 'a Denotes hydrant 0 Denotes found iron pipe / / 'z ECEIVE Denotes light pole Denotes utility pole 0� .4 f house 0 Denotes sonitary or storm manhole .-.I.s deciduous Ire. SEP 2 5 2014 Q Der-..s coniferous tree BY.- PItNEERenginee7ing 9/24/14 E- WOODDALE BUILDERS BRUNSWICK ESTATES 9489 91WI2114 EXISTING CONDITI NS 6109 Blue Circle Dr#2000 -1914 Designed 2422 Enterprise Ihive 6811- alder my di—mpmkm and thet I snad I OF 2 Mendota Heights,MN 55120 duly U—d Praf..i.W S—ya� wa a p GOLI)EN VAT I Y,MINNESOTA .p—creng-ccarn .dh.�-of du S—.fM— R,No 42299 D..9/12/14 D.— xp Minnewk..MN 55343 (651)68 b—by—ify——plan was prep—d by F-: 0 � I 1 T IF--T--d 10 r-- <- r_ > SIX e a. / \\ 3 C / GLENWOOD AVE r// SECTION 33, TWP. 118, RGE. 21 LOCATION MAP NO SCALE / Is / I as / I I / I I / I I 10 191 oosf / 0.4385ac I I / ! I T 99 / I BLOCK 1 2 20 ° ° 20 I ! aaayscc I - Scale in Feet / I I 10 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PRELIMINARY PURPOSES ONLY / I N Lot 10, Block 5, "TRALEE", according to the recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. I I ` vv1 I o I I I I I I I I I 1zs \ I6 I I I 61 1 `J I 1 I o _ 1 TOTAL GROSS AREA 0.8864 ACRES 1 TOTAL LOT AREA 0.8864 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS 2 / 10 T 730 ^` �� I " –' " 1 " LARGEST LOT 19,510 SO. FT. 1 10 SMALLEST LOT 19,100 SO. FT. AVERAGE LOT 19,305 SO. FT. / J _. DENSITY 2.26 LOTS/ACRE ZONING R-1 UTILITIES XXXXX /J J / (J PIONEERengineering (651)681-1914 t y��Jy �L9�'�s��°A�y D- 9/12/10 WOODALE EDINA LLC 2422 Enterprise Drive or oader my d�t.saper�,voa oad d,at l 9/24114-Eone . BRUNSWICK ESTATES Fax 681-9488 as arae PRELIMINARY PLAT 6109 Blue Circle Dr#2000 2 of 2 Mendota Heights,MN 55120 mn ddy r-1rsed Prot k W sorvrnyar —pioncereng.com .._,,_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,e,w-„,u_.... . a..u” 42299 n"..9/12/14 ti-..– ow„ nn1.,.,.r,,.,r"—t"- GOLDEN VALLEY.MINNESOTA LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED FUTURE DESCRIPTION BRUNSWICK E S TATE S ., • ® SANITARYTARY MANHOLE -----.---- — EXISTING SANITARY SEWER , PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN —> >— FUTURE SANITARY SEWER •tA HYDRANT m N X GATE VALVE v D ► ► REDUCER -- EXISTING DATE MA GOLDEN VALLEY MINNESOTA CLUB RO 102 55 1 I PROPOSED WATERMAIN ' _ —I I— FUTURE WATERMAIN i \ "�+ < o—, HIGHWAY ® ® CATCH BASIN / / wr,VALE C ✓2 ® 0 BEEHIVE • ® STORM MANHOLE / `L 0 Cl l w 0 "C= ► ® FLARED END SECTION MEMOR ~ w •WOOD�� b ¢ py ` \ K GSTON pC- CGr 11 Y WOODSTOGK • ® • CONTROL STRUCTURE ------- -- LORING EXISTING STORM SEWER J —��►)— PROPOSED STORM SEWER \ _ a U YpS�� IW —» »— FUTURE STORM SEWER / -� z i o< `• TE SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER / �•� < x t,iOAi; w a g o O B-STYLE CURB & GUTTER RIBBON CURB & GUTTER ; (......, ?�� \ N "•'N• C Rr( c '" s 40 GLENWppp am ars a w ■w■ aWw■ mm PHASE LINE / �� / \ � � CIR. /I,y i vi D`to rc ------------ EASEMENT LINE / •• •• •• �I _ < w S 2' CONTOUR LINE 0CIR.—— EXISTING EXISTING 10CONTOUR LINE L RD. W owW oa a ¢ CO a PROPOSED 2' CONTOUR LINE / .,I C) c . -� LAUREL o AVE. PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR LINE / �� "� M�zk Bcr_aer.o POND OUTLET LINE l 1 •••• i`` T. o ; o'c x4O, 7UPOND HIGH WATER LINE _ l I I �� yt w�i = R LE38XPROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION 906I I io'a dpEN HILLS OR. ♦�►♦ EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ' t / 1 �.�` i — — DELINEATED WETLAND LINE / 1 I •••• \ LOCATION MAP • FEMA FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARY 1 1 • ••••••••••••••• STANDARD EROSION CONTROL - ___ I I •�� (� �� ••••• ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ HEAVY-DUTY EROSION CONTROL TREE FENCE00 RETAINING WALL C V CONSERVATION AREA SIGN /•• I O -� \. .> I LF_ 1 1 W WETLAND BUFFER SIGN 00.5 EX. CULVERT I ' on on EX. OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES t. tv— EX. UNDERGROUND TELEVISION LINE /•• —t—t— EX. UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINE / 1 } I •••' v .`Y' to to EX. UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC LINE —e—e— EX. UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE I LF=O0. ` —9-9— EX. UNDERGROUND GAS LINE /• 1 0 —x x EX. FENCE (BARBED WIRE) / N N EX. FENCE(CHAIN LINK) �' [] EX. FENCE (WOOD) - -- / EX. CAST IRON MONUMENT ■ EX. ELECTRIC BOX O 9•0(� c9- EX. FLAG POLE ••.•� 1 I j • EX. NATURAL GAS METER I ® EX. HAND HOLE •'• 9 0 p� Q 0 I • EX. FOUND IRON PIPE / C� 1 C14 EX. JUDICIAL LAND MARK 1 _ }� �.•�•� EX. LIGHT POLE g` I �, � � I5 OLo.•vy�. ® EX. PK NAIL I (p E`N: EX. UTILITY POLE I O EX. LAWN SPRINKLER VALVE 1 0 10 20 40 8. v EX. LAWN SPRINKLER HEAD �� 1 / 5 N I P 2 5 2014 EX. SEMAPHORE �� IGRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET m EX. SERVICE •$A BE EX. TELEPHONE BOX 0 EX. TEST HOLE ® EX. TELEVISION BOX R` EX. WATER WELL /INSTALL EX. MONITORING WELLIn EX. MAILBOX NEW SERVICES 29.D_______ _ 2B.D • EX. CONTROL POINT / ! :, I DRAINAGE & UTILITY rte- • EX. SPIKE STA: 3+35 // •``\�� I EASEMENT O I BLOCK NO. EX. SIGN / / /� !• - `��J I FINISHED GROUND EX. CLEANOUT / '/ s ELEVATIONCO 7 LOT N0. CS: 906.2 EX. SIGNIFICANT TREE / INV: 896.6 / '! LOWEST FLOOR-----,, I I LLLJJJ / / P / E X. HYDRANT . ELEVATION I HOUSE TYPES �, / ^ Q I GARAGE ELEVATIONRAMBLER OR SPLIT ENTRY (WWV1 EX. TREE LINE TN H—9 07.`'1'U I LO —RAMBLER LOOKOUT OR SPLIT ! — I ENTRY WALKOUT OEX. GRAVEL SURFACE / v 4'� - NUMBER OF STEPS I `O I WO —RAMBLER WALKOUT RECOMMENDED I P I SLO—SIDE LOOKOUT EX. SERVICE TO B E I GARAGE SIDE I I SWO—SIDE WALKOUT BITUMINOUS CE € / i•y -// / % I • 37 SUR ( SLOPE LABELED FROM / INSTALL ROCK' ��, UTILIZED IF C 0 N D I TI N FINISHED ELEVATION I FRONT OF PAD TO ROW RETE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE ��,. �...; ' LOCATION ARE A CEPTABLE. ®`OT CORNER 35.5 - _-_--J 34.5 SURFACE 'J SELECT BACKFILL FOR EACH LOT. EX. SAN MH --- -- MATERIAL /� /` --�STREET - GRAVEL CONST. //v^' ! ENTRANCE / :KIM=9 0 5.2 8 INV-895.0 LOT INFORMATION PIONEERp�p�neen �Q� / %l (TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE) v'�' n 0t4ENC�tl4maS%HMET GRAD a•aaran� uonwtunas uemsw.eto� w,w�weeaaamern (fi51)681-1914 ,nmbY"'tYu tm,pimww�� Nme R`""'""" °°" ��2�14 WOODDALE EDINA LLC.2422 E>rtetprise Drive oua�mY�� . "ttGRADING AND UTILITY PLAN6117 BLUE CIRCLE DRIVE,SUITE 101BRUNSWICK ESTATES7T Fax:681-9488 ®o Prd�w ,Mendota Htdghts,MN 55120 www.piweeteng.00ta a.�Smed'Mmresa• xca.xa. 198ti0D.ts v 2r t4 Dn n MINNETONKA,MINNESOTA 55343 GOLDEN VALLEY,MINNESOTA BRUNSWICK ESTATES 1C.R. DOC. NO. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Wooddale Edina LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, owner, of the following described property. / Lot 10, Block 5, "TRALEE", according to the recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. T V /Has caused the some to be surveyed and platted as BRUNSWICK ESTATES and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the public ways and the o I ^ drainage and utility easements as created by this plat. N63 In witness whereof said Wooddale Edina LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this _day Wooddale Edina LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company 8 C 9,> as 0 STATE OFMINNESOTAINNESOTA COUNT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this by as Po / I I of Wooddole Edina LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, on behalf of the company. / / I I I I I op \\1 Notary Public, My Commission Expires SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE / I CO I I I Peter J. Hawkinson 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 9 9 -7 / ) n 1 of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey, that all mathematical data and labels ore correctly designated on this plat; that /—� j 1 N 9 9 all monuments depicted on this plot hove been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota L L L_ L— i A Statutes, Section 50.07, Subd. 3, as of the dote of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. B L 0 C K I I 2 I O I Doted this da of 20_. I 1 0 / I 1 rri Peter J. Hawkinson, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 42299 10 1 I STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF r'r \y�1` This instrument was acknowledged before me on this by Peter J. Hawkinson. PS 1-0 I J f 12o.l7 \\ �:s'`��\ I I `lay I N 00 Notary Public, L rya. I m y m y My Commission Expires $7343.47,e/ a `\`\`�`� •� CITY COUNCIL, Golden Valley, Minnesota 70 135.07 1 This plat of BRUNSWICK ESTATES was approved and accepted by the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, at a regular meeting thereof, held this day of 10 20_. If applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been =sj /25524 (,N fqs received by the City or the prescribed 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, / _ TRAM f f"� Section j- 505.03, Subdivision 2. / By. By l Mayor Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota " I I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20_and prior years have been paid for land described on this Plat, dated this _day of 20 Mark V. Chopin, County Auditor By. CJ Deputy �! SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to MINN. STAT. Sec. 3838.565 (7969) this plat has been approved this _day of 20ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE . SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, TRALEE HILLS, WHICH IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF NORTH 63°52'34" WEST. Christ F. Mavis , County Surveyor 8y E IVE O DENOTES FOUND 1/2 BY 14 INCH INCH IRON PIPE COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota MONUMENT MARKED BY LICENSE NUMBER 42299, OR WILL I hereby certify that the within plat of BRUNSWICK ESTATES was recorded in this office this _day of 20_, at _o'clock BE SET IN ACCORDANCE WITH MS 505.021, SUBD. 10. N M. 20 10 0 20 • DENOTES FOUND 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT MARKED BY SEP L ®14 LICENSE NUMBER 42299 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. Martin McCormick, County Recorder By: �— Scale in Feet BY. Deputy PI$NEERneerin,P.A. BRUNSWICK ESTATES AREA SKETCH 1 19100st 04385- BLOCK 1 192,, 0. 79- 20 10 0 20 Scole m Feet AREA SUMMARY BLOCK 1 = 38,610 SF. 0.8864 AC. TOTAL LOT AREA = 38,610 SF. 0.8864 AC, TOTAL AREA = 38,610 SF. 0.8864 AC. PISNEERmgineering,P.A. Al Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 120 day deadline: January 14, 2015 Agenda Item 4. B. Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat Approval - Paisley Fields - 250 Paisley Lane Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary At the November 24, 2014, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of a minor subdivision of the property located at 250 Paisley Lane. The proposal would create three 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 be demolished. The existing lot at 250 Paisley Lane is 59,964 square feet. As part of this subdivision, the westernmost lot line would be adjusted to allow the existing driveway at 245 Paisley Lane to be located entirely on that property (shown as Lot 1 on the submitted plans). City Code requires that each new lot be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. The proposed Lot 2 would be 19,510 square feet. Lot 3 would be 21,756 square feet. Lot 4 would be 20,714 square feet. City Code also requires that each lot have a minimum of 80 feet of width at the front setback line. Each of the three news lots would have 80 feet of width. The dimensions of the newly created lots provide a sufficient building envelope for development. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated November 24, 2014 (4 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission, dated November 24, 2014 (3 pages) • Memo from the Fire Department, dated November 17, 2014 (1 page) • Memo from the Engineering Division, dated November 19, 2014 (3 pages) • Stormwater Report (5 pages) • Rendering of Proposed Project (1 page) • Site Survey (1 page) • Site Plans dated November 17, 2014 (10 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Paisley Fields, 250 Paisley Lane, 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$2,146.67 shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated November 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. ,420 1, 410 Subject Property:61.35 250 Paisley Lane 401 329 320 316 - 245 319 316 250 324 300 308 • 309 I 300 �� 240 \ ` • 235 \\ ,.230 -- 301 240 � ~ �� 220 309 227 yr 1 231 /� \ 209 Q a\9211 216 227 G y 210 220 - i 217 ��^ 11-r` 221 ✓` 5 217 Ossa \ / 208 v 200 1 210 208 215 221 205 211 / !f 204 LL 146 t 203 1209 � 165 117 125 / f 124 124 130 / 145 125 j 108 124 / 116 119 709 112 120 � 75 115 6410 J 70 110 25 0 31 26 26 SS C 50 637 46140 1 5 o— L 6320I 6100 m0 6010 5924 5910 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 8 Conditions: The City Attorney will determin if a title review is r pces dry prior to approval of the Final P Ia . ,,.e. 2. A park de 'on fee of $3,08 shall ke "aid prior to Final Plat approval. 3. The City Enginee emoran dated October 7, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City Pits sha btained prior to the development of the new lots. Segelbaum d if they figured t any parking lid ' ns during construction. Kluchka said the ing was worth comm nting on, but he doesn't know if it can be added as a con 'n of approval. He stated t ere was a motion on the table. The motion carried nimously. 5. Informal Public Hearing — Minor Subdivision — 250 Paisley Lane — Paisley Fields — SU12-19 Applicant: Andrew Dornbusch Address: 250 Paisley Lane Purpose: To reconfigure the existing single family residential lot into three new single family residential lots. Zimmerman explained the applicant's proposal to subdivide the lot at 250 Paisley Lane into three new lots. He stated that the existing single family home would be demolished and three new single family homes would be constructed. He referred to a site plan and stated that this subdivision also requires a lot line adjustment with the neighboring property at 245 Paisley Lane in order to eliminate an existing driveway encroachment. He stated that the minimum lot size requirement in the R-1 Single Family zoning district is 10,000 square feet. Lot 1 (245 Paisley) will be 52,262 square feet, Lot 2 will be 19,510 square feet, Lot 3 will be 21,756 square feet, and Lot 4 will be 20,714 square feet. All of the proposed new lots will have 80 feet of width at the front setback line. He noted that there are a number of trees on the existing lot and six will be removed, four of which are significant trees. He stated that Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision proposal as it meets all of the requirements of the City Code. Kluchka said it is interesting that all of the proposed new lots are exactly 80 feet in width and questioned if modifying the property line for the neighboring driveway encroachment issue affected the ability to get 80 feet of width. Zimmerman stated that the property line adjustment allowed the lots to have 80 feet of width. Kluchka said he is concerned that a lot line has been established because of the location of the driveway on the neighboring property. Zimmerman explained a different plan the Applicant had considered which had the frontage of the proposed new lots on the south end of the property. However, that plan is not ideal as the south end of the property is adjacent to a park area. Drew Dornbusch, Applicant, reiterated that his original proposal had the frontage along the park area, but that the preference of the neighbors was to not put the front of a house Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 9 along the park because they consider that park area a gathering place. He referred to a site plan of the property and stated that the existing home is 6,200 square feet with a 1 ,700 square foot foundation, on 1.45 acres of land. He showed photos of the existing house and stated that the proposed new homes will reflect a decrease in overall impervious surface and will increase the amount of green space. He stated that the average lot size of the new lots will be more than 20,000 square feet in size and that he will be saving 88% of the significant trees on the property. Johnson asked if the amount of impervious surface includes the existing driveway. Dornbusch said yes. Segelbaum asked about issues discussed at the neighborhood meeting. Dornbusch said that the issues discussed included traffic control, the installation of speed bumps or stop signs, and the design of the new homes. Segelbaum asked about the timing of the project. Dornbusch said he would like to start this year. Baker stated that the site plans suggest there is a wetland on the southeast corner of the property, but said it is not obvious to him when he looked at the property on an aerial photo. Zimmerman stated that the map isn't indicating a wetland, it is referring to a rain garden that was installed to help control run-off. Matt Pavek, Engineer for the project, stated that the rain garden is off site and was installed during the street reconstruction. Kluchka opened the public hearing. Diane Richard, 217 Paisley Lane, said the idea of a speed bump was brought forward at the neighborhood meeting in order to protect children riding their bikes. She stated that the placement of the driveway on Lot 3 is due to the location of an oak tree and she appreciates that, but she is concerned that the driveway might be too close to the bike path and might cause traffic confusion with the park. She said she appreciates the trees the applicant is keeping, but she is concerned about buckthorn and would appreciate if the developer could remove it as part of this plan. She said she wants to know more about the timing of the construction, and she would like to see all three homes constructed at once. She said there are 36 homes in the Tralee neighborhood and there are six LDK homes so she would like to know who the builder will be. She stated that the neighborhood park is a gathering spot and she wants assurance that the homes will complement the park and aesthetically blend in. She said she wants to hear about the developers obligations to carry forward with what he has agreed to. She said she is disappointed that the applicant isn't splitting the property into two lots instead of three, but she appreciates the applicant's sensitivity. Jennifer Berg, 70 Brunswick Avenue North, said she was concerned about building her home to look timeless and not building a "McMansion." She said the City is delusional about how water moves around this city and stated that these new homes will have irrigation systems that will have a huge impact on the water, sewer and street. She said the City is also delusional about tree preservation. She said she was required to raise Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 10 her home a foot, an elm tree had to be removed, and she only had to replace two trees. She added that she would have replaced more trees but there are ugly power lines in her yard so she can't. She said she called the City and begged for a plow and a street sweeper and she spent $15,000 in permits that were worthless because she now has to spend thousands of dollars on code violations that were missed during inspections and she wasn't protected by the City. She said parking is a major menace and the City does nothing about it. She said that the developer hasn't mentioned if the proposed homes will be lookouts or walkouts because that will make a difference in how the water flows. She said LDK is making Golden Valley look like Maple Grove. She said this area is extremely special and rare and there are plenty of other areas to build tract homes. She said nobody wants to look at tract homes, they want something beautiful that will stand the test of time and make Golden Valley special. She said they want something better and they deserve something better. Shauna Crowe, 55 Brunswick Avenue North, asked how many homes can be constructed simultaneously because there are 10 in their area of 36 homes. She said she agrees that speed bumps would help with the traffic. Chris Gaspard, 6125 Wynnwood Road, said the City just approved a proposal to put 27 homes on a really small lot so this proposal is good compared to that. He said this proposal looks like it is being done right with beautiful homes and large sized lots and the neighbors should be happy with the renewed interest in their neighborhood. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Kluchka referred to the question regarding construction limits in a neighborhood and said that is an interesting idea worth consideration. Zimmerman agreed it is worth consideration, but said it would be hard to administer and to decide who would get a building permit and who wouldn't. Kluchka asked if the impact of irrigation systems is relevant. Zimmerman said he didn't know, but he would check with the City Engineer. Waldhauser stated that new irrigation systems have to be based on rain fall and moisture in the ground. She added that there needs to be more education of homeowners. Kluchka asked if the developer has an obligation to build anything, or if there is only a timeline associated with a building permit. Zimmerman stated that developers aren't required to build anything by a certain time. Kluchka asked if the building envelope on the lot adjacent to the park was required to be moved further to the north. Dornbusch said placing the house further away from park was preferable by the neighbors so that the rain garden and park area wouldn't act like the home's front yard. Waldhauser questioned how the home placement would be enforced if a future property owner wants to build in a different location, but still within the allowed buildable area. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 11 Kluchka asked if there has been an agreement regarding the style or design of the homes. Segelbaum asked about the developer's obligations regarding style or design. Zimmerman stated that the subdivision process considers lot size, lot width, setbacks, etc. but not style or design. Kluchka asked about the traffic controls mentioned by the neighbors. Zimmerman said he would talk to the City Engineer about the traffic control concerns. Kluchka referred to the neighbor's suggestion that buckthorn be removed from the property and said he doesn't think developers are obligated to remove buckthorn. Johnson asked what other cities do in regard to construction management issues. Waldhauser said Edina has hired someone to make sure construction management issues are dealt with correctly. MOVED by Blum, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Paisley Fields Minor Subdivision subject to the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. All three of the 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. 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 $2,146.67 shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated November 19, 2014, shall become part of this approval. 4. All applicable City permits shall be obtained prior to the development of the new lots. 6. Informal Public Hearing — Pre minary PUD Plan — Central Park West— outhwest Quadrant of 1-394 nd Highway 100 — PU-121 Applica DLC Residential, C Address: Sout t Quadr t of 1-394 a way 100 Purpose: To allow two si ultiple family residential buildings, a six-story hotel, t -sto I office ' dings, a parking ramp and a linear park i St. Louis ark and Go Valley. Goellne ained the applicant's pr 'posal to develop in bo Louis Park and Golden V two 6-story residential buildin two 11-story office buildings, one 6-story hotel, citv of goldbi.. ME iNPlanning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: November 24, 2014 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Plan for Minor Subdivision of 250 Paisley Lane—Paisley Fields—Andrew Dornbusch, Applicant Summary of Request Andrew Dornbusch is proposing to subdivide the property located at 250 Paisley Lane into three lots. There is one existing single family home on this lot which would be demolished and replaced with three new single family homes. The existing lot at 250 Paisley Lane is 59,964 square feet. As part of this subdivision, the westernmost lot line would be adjusted to allow the existing driveway at 245 Paisley Lane to be located entirely on that property (shown as Lot 1 on the submitted plans). City Code requires that each new lot be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. The proposed Lot 2 would be 19,510 square feet. Lot 3 would be 21,756 square feet. Lot 4 would be 20,714 square feet. City Code also requires that each lot have a minimum of 80 feet of width at the front setback line. Each of the three news lots would have 80 feet of width. The dimensions of the newly created lots provide a sufficient building envelope for development. Qualification as a Minor Subdivision The proposed subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision because the property located at 250 Paisley Lane is an existing platted lot of record, it will produce four or fewer lots, and it will not create need for public improvements. The Applicant has submitted all required information to the City to allow for review and evaluation. Staff Review The Applicant has submitted a survey of the existing lots prior to the proposed lot line adjustment and subdivision, as well as a preliminary plat displaying the adjacent lot and the three new lots after the 1 subdivision. In addition, he has submitted a preliminary grading plan, a preliminary utility plan, a preliminary tree preservation plan, and a storm water pollution prevention plan. The lot at 245 Paisley Lane, as well as two of the new lots, would have access off of the cul-de-sac at the end of Paisley Lane. Lot 3 would have access further to the southeast. This would result in the addition of two driveways to this branch of Paisley Lane. The demolition and removal of the existing structure will drastically reduce the large amount of impervious surfaces on the property. The Applicant has estimated that the final impervious surface coverage once the three lots are fully developed will be similar to, if not less than, what is there today. City Engineer Jeff Oliver has submitted a memorandum dated November 19, 2014, regarding recommendations from the Engineering Division concerning this request. 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 Ordinance, 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. All of the 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. As discussed in the Engineering memo, new utility easements must be dedicated and shown on the Final Plat. 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. 2 7. The minor subdivision may be subject to park dedication requirements. A park dedication fee of $2,146.67 (2% of the estimated land value with credit for one unit) is required for this subdivision. 8. The conditions spelled out shall provide the only basis for denial of a minor subdivision. Approval will be granted to any application that meets the established conditions. All conditions have been met. Recommended Action Staff 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$2,146.67 shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. The City Engineer's memorandum, dated November 19, 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 the Fire Department, dated November 17, 2014 (1 page) Memo from Engineering Division, dated November 19, 2014 (3 pages) Stormwater Report (5 pages) Site Survey (1 page) Site Plans dated November 14, 2014 (11 pages) 3 ao �' <� valley Fire Department 763-593-8079 /763-593-8098 (fax) Date: November 16, 2014 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: John Crelly, Fire Chief Subject: Minor Subdivision —250 Paisley Lane North —Paisley Hill The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the minor subdivision plans submitted on September 24, 2014 for 250 Paisley Lane North — Paisley Hill. The fire department does not have any comments pertaining to this minor subdivision. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065 or by e-mail, crelly@goldenvalleymn.gov city of . olden 0' MEMORANDUM va„ %'y Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Date: November 19, 2014 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer /n Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Subject: Subdivision Review for Paisley Fields—250 Paisley Lane Engineering staff has reviewed the plans for a proposed minor subdivision of property located at 250 Paisley Lane. The Developer proposes demolition of the existing home and subdividing the parcel into three single-family lots. The comments contained in this review are based upon plans submitted to the City on November 14, 2014. Engineering staff recommends approval of the proposed minor subdivision of property located at 250 Paisley Lane, called Paisley Fields, subject to the following comments: 1. City Demolition, Stormwater Management, and Utility permits are required for the demolition of the existing home. 2. The Developer has submitted a preliminary plat. The preliminary plat also includes Lot 3, Block 2 of the Tralee plat of record (245 Paisley Lane). The property at 245 Paisley Lane is included in the plat because the driveway lies across the parcel being subdivided at 250 Paisley Lane. This plat is an opportunity to reconfigure the lot lines and eliminate the existing driveway encroachment. Staff supports this effort. a. The final plat for this development must include public drainage and utility easements on all property lines consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. b. The street adjacent to the development is called Paisley Lane. Ski Hill Road is the historic name of the street on the Tralee plat of record. However, Ski Hill Road is not currently used for addressing purposes nor is it reflected on City street name signs. Therefore, the plans must label this street as Paisley Lane. The final plat for this development may need to reference Ski Hill Road or potentially both street names for historical purposes. The surveyor should consult with City staff before submitting the final plat for review. G:\Developments-Private\Paisley Fields\Subdivision Review_250 Paisley.dou 3. A City Right-of-Way Management Permit is required for each parcel for any proposed excavations and obstructions within public rights-of-way or easements. a. Each parcel will require its own concrete driveway apron. According to the plans, it appears the existing driveway apron for 250 Paisley will be utilized for Lot 2. The concrete aprons must meet City standards. Right-of-Way Management Permits are required for the construction of each driveway. 4. The Developer has shown on the plans that utilities can be extended to serve the proposed dwellings. The Developer or Contractor will be required to obtain the appropriate sewer and water permits from the City for the removal, rehabilitation, or installation of utility services. Staff has the following comments regarding the proposed utility construction: a. Based on the plans submitted, it appears Paisley Lane will need to be excavated in order to install new utilities. Paisley Lane was constructed by the City in 2010 and therefore must be restored according to the applicable City standard detail, available in the Engineering office. For pavements less than five years old, the restoration typically includes a mill and overlay from curb to curb for a length determined by the City Engineer. This can be discussed more at the time of application for a Right-of-Way Management Permit. 5. Sanitary Sewer Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Reduction a. 250 Paisley Lane has received a Certificate of Compliance with the 1/1 Ordinance. b. The three new parcels must obtain compliance with the City's 1/1 Ordinance, prior to occupancy of the homes. 6. A preliminary Grading Plan was submitted by the Developer. Staff has the following comments regarding the grading plan: a. It is assumed that the new lots will be custom-graded at the time of home construction, and therefore a City Stormwater Management Permit will be required for each parcel before the start of home construction. A Stormwater Management Plan that meets City standards is required as part of each permit submittal. The Developer and its Contractors must ensure that existing drainage patterns are maintained and that stormwater runoff is accommodated within the property to the extent possible. b. The grades of the proposed driveways for Lots 3 and 4 are shown as being 13%. Typically, driveway grades between 2%and 10% are desirable. The Developer and Contractors are encouraged to explore designs that achieve more desirable driveway grades. c. If disturbing more than one acre, a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Construc- tion Stormwater Permit may be required. A copy of this permit must be submitted to the City before work can begin. 7. This development is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Developer submitted a preliminary Tree Preservation Plan and tree inventory for review. Because G:\Developments-Private\Paisley Fields\Subdivision Review_250 Paisley.dou each lot will be custom-graded and the final design is not yet known, a separate Tree Preservation Permit may be required for each lot prior to the start of home construction. The City Forester will review the tree inventory, tabulations, and plans in detail at the time of permitting. 8. There is a deferred assessment of$9,800 for the reconstruction of streets adjacent to this property as part of the City's 2010 Pavement Management Program. The assessment must be paid prior to final plat approval. 9. The Developer and/or Contractor must obtain all appropriate permits prior to development of this site. Approval of this minor subdivision is also subject to the review and comment of the City Attorney and other City staff. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. C: Tom Burt, City Manager Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director John Crelly, Fire Chief Jerry Frevel, Building Official Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor Al Lundstrom, City Forester and Park Maintenance Supervisor Sue Virnig, Finance Director RJ Kakach, Engineer G:\Developments-Private\Paisley Fields\Subdivision Review_250 Paisley.docx r i " v r r t G R O U P Storm Water Report Summary Project: `V Paisley Fields Storm Water Management NOV j � 2014250 Paisley Lane Golden Valley, MN 55422 ,' Prepared for: Andrew Dornbusch 250 Paisley Lane Golden Valley, MN 55422 All plans and supporting Documentation contained in this report have been reviewed and approved by the Registered Engineer listed below and it is hereby certified that the plans comply with the requirements of the ordinance. I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 1k;?e . Matthew R. Pavek P.E. Registration Number: 44263 Date: 11/14/2014 www,CivilSiteGroup.com 4931 West 35th Street Suite 200 St. Louis Park Minnesota- 55416 (612)615-0060 *i :1' `1 G R C> U P Table of Contents: Cover Sheet Summary Narrative Tables Drainage Area Information Existing Drainage Area Map Proposed Drainage Area Map www.CivilSiteGrouD.com 4931 West 35th Street° Suite 200 St. Louis Park Minnesota 55416 (612)615-0060 C R C� U V Summary Narrative: Existing Site Conditions: The existing site area is approximately 61,485 square feet (1.41 acres) in total made up of an existing home, garage and driveway. Proposed Site: The proposed use for this site is the demolition of the existing home, garage and driveway, construction of three new single family homes and driveways, and miscellaneous site improvements. Grading will occur to improve drainage conditions on the entire site. The new site will have approximately 1,577 fewer square feet of impervious surface when compared to the existing condition. Table 1: Stormwater Information Stormwater Running Stormwater Running Stormwater Running off to Street(DA1) off to Rain Garden off to Adjacent (DA2) Properties (DA3) Total Area 18,931ft2 4,598ft2 37,956ft2 EXISTING Impervious 2 2 Area 5,170ft 12ft2 6,156ft Total Area 19,292ft2 5,628ft2 36,565ft2 PROPOSED Impervious 2 2 Area 6,498ft 790ftz 2,473ft As shown in Table 1 above, the total area and impervious area draining to adjacent properties are decreasing in the proposed scenario. This will result in more runoff to the street and rain garden, and less to adjacent properties. www.QvilSiteGrouDcom 4931 West 35th Street Suite 200 St. Louis Park Minnesota 55416 (612)615-0060 i r � EXISTING DA 3 `-- TOTAL AREA=37,956 SIF IMPERVIOUS=6,156 SF f PERVIOUS=31,800S —��\ \ DRAINS TOADJAC \_t.)v 1 #k !1 ` \ O 'TOTALAREA= 1 SFAir S\�\\\�\ PERVIOUS=5,170 SF �PE�VJOUS=13,761 SF V�dSY9STREET INGD TOTAL AREA=4, 98 SF IMPERVIOUS=12 SF PERVIOUS=4,586 SF Z" DRAINS TO RAIN GARDEN \ ., All k 1"=50'-0" M ANDREW DORNBUSCH EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA MAP 4931 W.T.LOUIS PARK,,8200 Project Name: MEANDER HILL Revision Number: 61 LOUIS PARK,MN 55416 DA 1 .0 612-615-0060 Issue Date: Revision Date: F ww�,v.CivilSiteGroup.com i rMsa � r4 PROPOSED DA 3 TOTAL AREA=36,565 SF IMPERVIOUS=2,473-0 PERVIO — 2S �� N DRAINS TO ADJ ROPERTIES 4" PROPOSED D 1 �v A 'x; t # a a TOTAL AREA= 9,29 _ IMPERVIOUS= SF \ + PERVIOUS=12, SF DRAIN TO T `r 1 uj \\\ \\ OSED DA 2 \ \\\ AREA=5,628 \ _ �\ �\ IMPERVIO F _ �- RVIOUS=4,838 SF �s \ DRAINS TO RAIN GARDEN aw _ 4 ' _ : a ANDREW DORNBUSCH PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA MAP COV*lSite 4931W.35THST., N 55416 Project Name: MEANDERHILL RevisionNumber: 61 LOUIS PARK,MN 5C2 R ® U612 615-0060 Issue Date: Revision Date: DA 2.0 P www.CivilSiteGroup.com • I l ' t i I ' a \ � f a i i a \ � \ i �; s M Boundary and Topographic Survey for: ANDREW DORNBUSCH at 250 Paisley Lane — Golden Valley, Minnesota North\vesterly cprner of Lot 2,Block 2,'TRALEE" S8939' 9"E \ \\�\\ \�\ \\ 469.46 ------------- i gag \\ \\ \ \ \\\ sP ��\ I \I !1 \ \ \ \\ \\ \ iw �/ \— \\ MP NOTES \ J r \\ H \I 1 1 \ \\\It, \\\ \\y- \\\ * Bearings shown are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System. �1 1 1 \\ \ \ \\\ \ _O� R C. g D v ,e>w_- o0I` y'� \\I *Utilities shown are from Information furnished by the City of Golden ---------- \� moi' \l\ S Valle and are verlff1mem re possible. \\ Y 2 { 9 E p \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\ � �i �� \ Ir\ *Contact Gopher State 1 for utility locations before any construction v, -- 18• c c \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ""25" \\ `\ 0•I' \ \ shall begin. Phone 651-454-0002. " rr" ��, ow Iry \ \ \ \ \ \ Ab \ `\\ Areas: Total=113square feet(2.61 acres Parcel A 2,4 e s� \ \ I I \\\ \\\ \\\\ \�\\\/�\\ /l---�\\ \` \\\ \\ \\ Parcel B=61,255 square feett(1.41 0cres). ` y _ __-� 17 C� \\ zs•I a \\\ \V`7\\\T\ \s \ ` \ \ \ \\ \\ *Zoning:R-1(Single Family). °vRl S JT4'10 \ \\` \ \7IWO, I �— s t I ,�• \�\` \`\ ---' 1 ok pD0N \\\1 ! 11 \ \\ N 1 I LEGEND 4 _ 1 Ayy,, \ 1 � '/��' I V - I}5 ^�_._._/_._ \ - \ \ \ �____ 1 I tri 1 11 \\ 11 I • Iron Monument Found O Imn Monument Set —S—Sanitary Sewer IPP —ST—Storm sewer _ /�' r \ i:,;.•.�-7f.• i,�. Oc, 1 I I I I 11 1 � � —w—Watermaln 'l gt5b'7s c�1NV o \ \ - _ ..f.f..;• r.:.t>i; 'w: f,(- 1 1 1 I I I 1 I dl' Hyd. Hydrant Aevl• EJ17 - "':s 1 1 1 1 I I I `/� s \ }Jj'" y'i•_.<. l\ / OV- Gate Valve �� 0� SIE Y o -\ \ -'1.+•:.'hZ..'_ S:t'= I I I 1 1 1 I \i \ MHO Manhole I I I I I I od< � � 15L 5 I '•9 \ s :5 ! >'� \ I '� CBO Catch Basin 24I � '` I I I I i.. Coo Cleanout G Inv. Invert Ekvanon 4'° ,Y...`c. .> \\ l\ .r L' \ I I 1 I I I I Ppp Power Pole /16'I \''4 ,\\\\\\ `\ a' 2S0'o,1/14, 7-, \ I t I I l I I I I I =Concrete Surface 44V, SF \ I HI ( I I I I =Bituminous Surface on I I 1 I I I I I ACCT Alr Conditioner q� �j� - -rnr� --\ `\\\\\\ 1 1 1 r(L1ry1�J'\ 1 Ll PP m°Bap7Ti:o I \\\\\\\ 7✓I I I !\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \ n_ MH '0•.\ I 1 \\ 1 tri IIII I� I I I U) / I \ i Dml I I , to Z ak p // 1 \ `\ -- _ 26- LLJ \ _ / 1 k -----—----- -- - �✓3+• ___ a -_---- -- - _ it* ---- Mew. '1000 • 0 to 20 40 60 — � eq Scale in Feet k -- - ��e — 5p _ OP 9RAIN APPW \\�\ 48-_ Bd��fz\ Ok z Inx.W4. ak 895:1° - l�� PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS --�---- —S89°0T5O"W PP \ CB '\ PARCEL A rop eea.fi \ Ine.Baa.ez Top W,25 ,Al \C� _ rop 888 51 In, B8 5 49 Lot 3,Block 2,"Tralee',together with that part of Lo[2,Bock 2,"Trelee",described as follows: \ `\ MH 'r, 878.91 H \ Commencing at the Northwesterly comer of said Lot 2;thence South along the line dividing Lot _ 2 from Lot 3 a the of 156.15 feet to Ski HIII Road;thence Easterly along the line dividing rOP x'20 Ski Hili Road from said Lot 2 a distance of 10 feet;thence Northwesterly in a straight line to \ mv.88010 the point of beginning. GY If, GV PARCEL B P g / i CV ce S Top 887.74 Lot 2,Block 2,"Tralee',except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at the \ i4 mv.683.64 ' Northwesterly comer of said Lot 2;thence South along the line dividing Lot 2 from Let 3 a distance of 156.15 feet to Ski HIII Road;thence Easterly along the line dividing Ski HIII Road GV - fmm said Lot 2 a distance of 10 feet;thence Northwesterly in a straight line to the point of v MH \ beginning. \ Top 690.37 ^'•' (; `KpK \Mv.87987 I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direction and that 1 am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. / NOV 17 2014 r. Dated this 13th day of November,2014 RENDER&ASSOCIATES,INC. / ! BY. Rehder and Associates, Inc. Thomas 3.Adalli,Land Surveyor CIVIL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS Minnesota License No.43414 / 3110 Federal DrWe Suite 110•Eagan.Minnesota Plwne(651)452-5051 JOB: 144-2776.010 4931 W.35TH ST.SURE 2. ST.LOUIS PARK,MN S541S CivilSiteGroup.wm MaM Pavek PMSarver PAISLEY Fl LDS 763-213J944 852-250-2003 GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA SHEET INDEX SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE ISSUED FOR: C-1.0 TITLE SHEET L _ Lo � ,,,.�au `'N°i°5`' C 2.0PRELIMINARY 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT OVERALL PLAN SITE PLAN '^ V/ g N g J PRELIMINARY PLAT C-3.0 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLANLLI Lu C-4.0 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN 1 m J C-5.0 I PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN W Q Q C-5.0'PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN > Z > SW1.0 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN LL W W SW1.1 STORM WATER CITY SUBMITTAL POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN NOTES O 0 �•"`'"`4� �.�'♦ '� � SW1.2 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN NOTES r O� Q 0 C7 J LLI LLI a W ui DEVELOPER: MASTER LEGEND: a -j Z ANDREW DORNSUSCH ---932 ------ EX.2'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL gooe250 PAISLEY LANE N i I GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 55422 .K EXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATION O-_ Q O_ a' " —419 PROPOSED 2'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL GkIwOOE Ave e °O N Ryzen;v o SPOT GRADE ELEVATKNI(GUTTERIFLOW UNE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) PROPERTY OWNER' az2-1 azzorc CURB SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BACK OF CURB(TOP OF l ANDREW DORNBUSCH F # = 250 PAISLEY LANE N nzz oTw SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALL O t •3 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 55422 az— SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALL 0 R . DRAINAGE ARROW a EMERGENCY OVERFLOW I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, E� SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS IRECT SITE LOCATION ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: PREPARED BV MAND EDRUNTER MYDULY SITE LOCATION MAP N ----�--,--"' SIT FENCE LIMIT SUPERVISIONFESSIO AAMANEER CIVIL SITE GROUP --� LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 4931 W 35TH STREET ��-_� INLET PROTECTION UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF _ MI ESOTA SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARK,MN 55416 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 763-213-3944 Ma ew R.Pavek SURVEYOR: SOI BORING LOCATION o'k 11-1Z-- L--- 44263 RENDER AND ASSOCIATES INC. _----TA--------- CURB AND GUTTER(T.O=TIP OUT) ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY 3440 FEDERAL DRIVE 0 PROPOSED MANHOLE STORM DATE DESCRIPTION SUITE 110 11-1a14 PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL EAGAN,MN 55122 PROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORM - - - (651)452-5051 . PROPOSED GATE VALVE - WETLAND DELINEATOR: b PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT N/A Qa PROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARY PROPOSED SIGN --�---►— PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER -- - —�---w— PROPOSED STORM SEWER —��— PROPOSED WATER MAIN REVISION SUMMARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: EXISTING SANITARY SEWER DATE DESCRIPTION TBD r r EXISTING STORM SEWER —��— EXISTING WATER MAIN 8� —G EXISTING GAS MAIN T F`- -EE— EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC —C EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE _ TITLE SHEET rK Q EXISTING MANHOLE m EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX zu ❑ EXISTING CATCH BASIN 3 E EXISTING LIGHT * EXISTING HYDRANT 0 EXISTING GAS METER 1 O \/\I/�- /� r O EXISTING STOPBOX 0 EXISTING GAS VALVE N EXISTING GATE VALVE ZZb99 NW'1311VA N3a10J'3NV1,131SIVd 09ZVL HosnSNH0a M32idNH 3oa=< of9 Z. m Z a a z N n O LU J ZZb99 NW'.1311V/\N3alOJ'3NV1.131SIVd 09Z o�o 2 N ; k z' i ° � Q U �O=dB rgmo6W� j ff y a s Gml MSN �� N � a u h > ot� mass w 0 VM4 �uri �� rc u7 a s K o • Sa�31� A3-ISIVd ° N lo3road jE a 4 A� \ 'c 1� .p I / k155� \ems IIaWF- 'r\ V6 �U t CL om \ \\ a 1 I \ \ Q N \ \ \ \\;Q\ \\ o $m I y Egg ,z \\ I 6t � ♦ \ \ \\ ao �� Lu o / ate• N Ij I I , /•EPs�g/ I ' � �� 00'01 S n ' , 1 = £7°I woal Z iol 6uiPlnip auil % (I \`% O %% �II M11 m II `mss. 1 1 d II li 1 Z� II 77- u-) "N % U) C-) n V o % / IIN IIL, 'i 1. f 1 1 I li I 1 — -. 99 '6F7 it M..5b.9b.ON a I C7 'ori NOISIAiaens s,sol ions €o ZZ499 NW'A3llVn N3alOJ'3NVl l31SIVd 09ZJ w J J A HOSf19N210a M3uaNV2 9E 3 =a �Jd v 0 L+ €ag i ! z h3lSIVd 09ZZZti99 NW'h311Vn N34100'3NVy `V ® LLJ ao O0914 � � g Sa-au k3lSlVd =NDN 103road b U b 4 G W F U J W Q rz r�/i J s a �LL8 z y ® a y U s S w moo z ZLu ~q n U a`.. O g 8 Lld-r-- - CLO y U Z z , 3 ci x 08 9,R8 rk z z a s Q, z w W w w..4w rs Y zO F S �_+ 0O� N Cw7 p W 1 ¢ ppKNO ¢� wL O 1 2 ~ 6 W S qLL z N Z RZ F- o >� 0 o O = H O Sw Z o Zgol � s •� N N ire +r / , z 1y 55 m� g5 99'9SZ __3„09.69.OS____�-_.__ 10.-D 5 gSZEA — —UT ! — 7 — 1 '00 00 s -1 l 2 3 's o co \\ \ \ ♦ 1p I 1 �N , 0 col (3)i i ( N � �o \♦ \ \ \ '� s� /SGP' ,�+ .�, O \9uj I '! \ 'h4 h I► �II / I� i gig, 1! I -Q/O&JSP d a ” 0f-75 IaJI � WI \� GENERAL GRADING NOTES: (CMMoie 1. EE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT 8 GENERAL GRADING 12. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE,A TEST ROLL ��1) NOTES. WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET ANDIOR PARKING AREA Irm (i8 <0 w P E M 469.46 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING SUBGRADE.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALOADED TANDEM 493 W.LOUIS PA ST.MN 5W6 --.:e =__�� ST.LWIS PARN.MN55416 _- - AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS.THE TEST civuSirecrouP.com PP - CONSTRUCTION(INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITE ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND Man P-1, Pei server �---------- ..----- PP 763-213-3944 95]-250-2003 PREPARATION,SOIL CORRECTION,EXCAVATION,EMBANKMENT, 10'1)&u EASE PP 10'D&U FA$E. 1 SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BV THE SOILS 0' 11 - - - - -- - - - -� / - - -- 1 ETC.)IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S ENGINEER.THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH °dd wiry / / ' j I dY;YLS ENGINEER.ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. OWNERSSU'71LS ENGINEER.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOLS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ' I i RESPONSIBLE TOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. INSPECTIONS WITH THE£OIif ENGINEER 13. TOLERANCES F 3. GRADING AND EXCAVATION NATIONAL O SHALL DISCHARGE D-IN VWiI I �5 892.L10 /J ,1 ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE 13.1. THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION U) �� / / /� ELIMINATION SYSTEM(NPDES)PERMIT REQUIREMENTS B PERMIT SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE,OR 0.30 I RP: 92.00 4 / REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. FOOT BELOW,THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT S ~ / I I/ WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. o� I Do LOT 2 �' i ' i I ' 4. PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE 13.2. THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATIONS,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OI I i/, 0 SQUARE FEET(0.45 AC ) / / I OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW,THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY 92. GILT F I 5. GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5%MAX. .9 64 / E/GR 1G LIMIT G9Y LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1%MIN.AND 27,MAX.CROSS SLOPE, POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. slur FENCEIGRACING LIMIT/ ® �. 13.3. AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO 1 9 I(OL 4g� / /S j / I� UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED SILT FENCFJORAt71)1G LIR 6 IA I GGD I / / / � I ; I � 6. PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOTE%GEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED ELEVATION,UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER. h OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS.MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED 13.4. TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 112INCH OF j ( A 00 ; ,�c��/�/ // // j ; ) N AREAS 4:1 THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS. l\ I 901.00 901. / Q'^+ / / / ® I / 7. PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS,FREESTANDING WALLS,OR 14. MAINTENANCE O / / .� / COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4-IN HEIGHT SHALL lop / / BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL 14.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS I ll7 / 895.00 OT FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION,AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH ENGINEER.DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND DEBRIS. 21,756 SQ U FEET(O.SOAC / / I PP AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. / J 14.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN /\�� / $ t/ /' 1 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF SETTLED,ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TO SPECIFIED / GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TOLERANCES,DURING THE CONSTRUCTION,IF REQUIRED,AND � / / / ..\\ TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ES BE DURING THE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL ERODED RESEEDED AND WHERE RESPONSIBLE FOR AFlNAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES MULCHED. ON ON ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEERAANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO p TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES. 14.3. WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY LO _ � 895'00 // // // ; II I I \, SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OR ADVERSE f894.0Y/ / \I I j �.\ 9. IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS.THE WEATHER,CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY,SURFACE,RESHAPE, v' CONTRACTOR SMALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER co) THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR,OR IMPORT CONSTRUCTION. SILT FENCEGRADIJ LIAR W W SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE. J J 10. EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR W Q Q 35.00 • / �' REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. Z � Z �� ( / v� .00 I I 1 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR W W S y •• �.• I JpIO y01.00 / // �A ( 'W RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED.EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL ♦ Q-.. BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS,OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, }. O O 0 / Hyd. S♦� 1 L%O ( 9 .000 / / / // 00 ; I I ILD ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL � �^ , \ / // / 901 / C 61, O py SUBCU7 CUT AREAS.WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED.TO � O �QQ /1/�� I:n DEPTH OF 61NCHEs.RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS /�//�� Z Z 'a M �'``��a - ,Lr / / •�O Y6" TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. WJ'O00 895. W I 11FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPETED.TME CONTRACTORO SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMBS OF GRADING. Q J 0 J 1 ♦ / / 1 \ / to I 1 INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS.PROVIDE A SMOOTH CL (n Z fn 11 k'• ♦ \ / / q % ( I ' FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES.WITH UNIFORM Q Q p 10 - I LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE IL Q d - SILT FbNCF2f}DiNG LIMRX 0 O O 'Gs%• / I 1 SHOWN.OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES.AREAS uD i() p 9M LOT I I THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL PROTECTED FROM N N -�'" L 1 SUBSECUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.TRAFFIC AND �� ♦ 52®,714 SQUARE FEFT(0 ACRE:) 1 EROSION,REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME RUTTED BY 4�\ TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE / I CORRECT GRADE.ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S ♦♦ \ /./ ` } ) I i OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN w \ YYY ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW 0 �s, ♦ Q�\ �$ - _ � i - - - - _ 1 I WORK. ♦ G a / �� • HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, _ ^ SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS % `K_ PREPARED SY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT 0 96�� DING IMI R=136.89 6729 ' ``// ^ �o.09,C9 O SUPERVISION AND SIONAL MADULY LY O J _ \ LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ♦♦ S8D g'02r W P CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY GRADING NOTES: UNDER THE LAWS of THE STATE OF r �O MI IOTA. rn (G 1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES. �O ♦♦ �g�2 56 2g X� • �O o>n> `_ EROSION CONTROL NOTES: Me eWRNO �� SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SWt.3 on.e 11-7414 LICENSE No.44283 a• ?• 7S ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY O 7T s GRADING PLAN LEGEND: DATE DEscRIPnoN 1 Z• ______ 11-14-.14 PRELIMINARYPLAT SUBM IAI._. ff 891-------- EX.1'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL - CB� /MH 819 1.0'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL SPOT GRADE ELEVATION(FLOW LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) MH MH •' 891.0 G SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTER \\ , 891.0 BC SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BACK OF CURB(TOP OF CURB) CV _�-. -- - 7P. y GV• 891• y 0 BS/TS SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRSlTOP OF STAIRS l,. 9 GV C9 •�, TIP OUT(T.O.)CURB AND GUTTER WHERE REVISION SUMMARY L�------------- APPLICABLE-TAPER GUTTERS 70 DRAIN AS SHOWN DATE DESCRIPTON AL �3'• •�' GV EXISTING AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE ARROWS �� • IL MH H0 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL PRELIMINARY www .GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG (800)252-1168 TOLL FREE ^ GRADING PLAN (651)454-0002 LOCAL A& 5 \ A 1a® ZZb99 NW'l3llVA N3a109'3NVl l31SIVd 09Z <�>w� of Q¢ O H'JSf18N2�04 M321aNb� "3 0H I CII r z a • � � a� <�a z¢5�� a i m a j ljJ J ZZh99 NW'A3llVA N30lO9'3NVl.l3lSlVd 09Z ;o o w 3 k o> ! I Z a r , 3wl N � �� a � �wrc�rc ul ow K o S0131-A Jl3lSlVd ��ato iOWO�ld �o - N, o N o rm roil O - 4 w a 5 w- Hqq o wLL F 4 8 =5 § N IR w�-.�p �y a0OZ X0 mwmg LLl �F o mwwr o� o0o Ow fw0 <� z u z zN owwW�zw<Fm oIzo > asg oa y�N O F w p r z Y)w ZZO a-> a 2 m m a xx 3 y m z 0 D w m V U 1 0 0�O m w 4 K m O w Z x g g F w K Z F }Z} zz m�waLLoc4iY� w pm-- $ �yN zqo w z F- K I w a S �nLL w� N N �K �mS 201LLi.Y' r=�FQ O zw V ��U Vi J w m J Kw p a o wo >��--{a �u9 ren¢ Oma — WI-w f ¢o c'�g oZ ��e zNwzo 03� Oz � �a �' >- a -. Lu w°o ai o zcoi n��z Qmo�`q$wW <��F o zQ{o0, i� FtE 3- J � Ju � r � O ��a =O 0 0 ~ s 3 Fq U <=O S Z U m 0 O "W Y N K ?2¢H � U = W o w a N 3op�=Q..am w u? ~ a3 c4Qos Z vi z 3 f'No zi c_ zF wF zdFo rn� yams m mFN zoo paw W L Z F w$ z <Q z w ¢z-'ooa wx Q. rr' oy pw Fa !2;" u w I N av oQw ?w� F as3 m�m "wNaw uo D-A. J A 0� OSw zu zw �� zu jm �cc7 i uwzn m O o O I pw w� —�' � �wpz �°' �u> a 4,rm'S 0 11J LLI � �w }qgj yr �7 Obi Z w gZ F Oz>< Z� ZC w Z 2� ~ v w J azo 3u 8 c5r g5 �"¢�raii coif guo—i�.� �aoa3 goo 8-.. 0.88 �c��c� 0 N � O i a 'w rU z� <00 V _ ( O � O u8 oz U�Ua d z K" oo Boz o �w ww¢� p F_-+ 'OZ9Zw W w p¢ to a D w N �m_ w0 U 00� ¢R-Z j0 whoa Z¢waNNNw �¢ p OJ ¢ O my m?a m az v� > al� X:wd w a iy u x w F03 y$; p �a �z�N So wo.o. anw Ozsw� _. a o w oww'i ma m wi >m z a `w" � a ii 3� & w o zri� �i= w 4 a o Q�Q g aoo 2pw S'Q u z ri-$ rnw ¢a F-W CUI K �� p U W W Vu, W K O p m6 c�aJJw ��7 Zww gw a UO¢ > Z W d3 t/1 S O j,p M w 5i o j W Z W O q O w U, �y 7� i 1.Z 8 Z J (� O - N Y w v"C m w f0 8 W O w� Z_`n O H ~ �OU�i p�O6O rjO Kp�N us S m m Ns OQ wm Zo w V 2 > > Z 0 o$zp LS F�4igg�o zair o� aa m w ��mw QQmF> ad pZy -c. } O LLQU UmwO K QO Na J � p Z~'0 3_ jt/j Z ;. Oz LLO V- `r' ¢� spa-. we gi ''ik ate+ a �O'-zQ p0 pzp �wx r'w'w�z OFaO ozo grad< muq " m� N mw �� umQw ww mwz¢ oa Sr$K z �aF Nwoo" ro z zr- ha�� rF �a 0-aw ti Q F �Zzwoz Foggo z aw aum o aJo F� 'LL'Wa H xaa " �z��" w N'r' 3'_n y w rn z w u'uSBw x''09 go �r�nzz cai� �0 So 5g a n'TA ze i3 a0�4-n Y / U U ga -- - — — - - - - - -14'D&51E�- - - - - � i — — — — Lu j^c II of \\ \ Nt v I ,�� \ l CN ° w I 1M� �ul It 1 C14 0 14 \ \ \ \ w \ � 1 .14 a \ \ \\ aLj \ = i ---- h 1 1 ♦ rn I� ♦ "s ZZV99 NW'h3llVA N3MOO'3NVl A3lSIVd 09Z af O¢ 0 �R g� HosngNNOa M3NaN�d wavey a N i i z LO s� �«.< i w "1 m ZZt99 NW'.l3llVA N3MO9'3NVl k3lSIVd 09Z o z o 0,6 w ( f z o d W U 4�mNow d �> > rc w w W w Sa131- A31SlVd to3r°ad b s a4 ip s E i b J A W Q g o z E Ow e �o 0 p ® ®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®® ®® ®® ®®®® ®®®®®® ! w $ hHE ��p m NNN W uJ u1NU1 NNNOI uSNSi Si S1NNNV1RNu) NuS r/iO KNNNaJ1 W N €2/�j ££iy ¢ O t R l6 S e � � 911 o O LL U _ V ' 0 i i ti / • s r� / � 5 SS'SSZ / 3„OS,6S.OS �6�bh --�-----�---tea--� i rn o 1Oo OC) (6 10 40\ opi c 1 CD II \ • 1 xz5 \ ♦ ♦, / \ 14 44 ,�� i 'j ----------—-- \ ♦ 1 �� 416 / 1 . / i' cr W it m a ZZb99 NW'A3llVA N34100'3NVl l3lSIVd 09Z G, Y O g� a� HosnSNN0a mamaNV a sl Z w ZZ799 NW'h3llVA N30100'3NVl A31SIVd 09Z z o o w 3 K o g'g Z ® a go-aog m t3 O d g`a>m m f m 386 >LLmW 0?4 Sa- 3A��Slb�d w MR 1� N W g 103road E y DNO1 'OW nV NV IV SS31 S3ON935 NO 03dU 39 TVA 5181d ON'RIND N Wd V N3ddD0 3NIl 38'n09d O Z '310035 3ZN098 NO 133L5 553'INItl15 V O Z W 301 1V d330,0'B d0 0',)Ad V 39 TVHS O W W 391D039"IL3 10 3Vl�B-S'k 14IdIldSd O1N1 O W W 308935'N ZS 10 9D"JNd OY 311103H0S p A1103910 3D 13 38 AtlW Sd31 o-SdVl 0 '0Nd 9Z 905 39 TVHS 3dld 308935 11V 3108 JO Q 3131dW00 X09 99fq U t7] ,Z 9 BZ90 OIVNDO-N'A'V-d016 99!10 U U J '30N1CiS 9310 93100 40 N001B 31390800 ,S'L JD WpWINIW tl NIVINIVW W W 30V1d NI (3AM�IYHHW U ,Z•.B x,B '1N3W3L13S U J 03810 dVO 90 amd 90d MOTV O1 dtll 3A09tl S F M091W .B NO3N35000 W90d 3108 W U W p^ O p Z dols �z 3 V) 3�0 } 09 09 J v 0 S'L 1SOd 30N31 13315 U(O_ '308 L- a Z -935 d0 ON3 00MOWN W 0 308935 OOOM09VH Q 1 ,Z1 9„Z•,Z V1 o I 1 m 1 'NIW T. 30V90 051811 30390 HSINH 30390 051811 1333 S 933tlM a rc 0 0 g � v ZZ499 NW'A311Vn N30100'3NVl.131SIVd 09Z G, w o Z z IL �� HosngNNoa M3MGNV 3�a� S 1 > >JZ ■ ZZt499 NW',13llVA N3alOEJ'3NV1 X3lSIVd 09Z �)p 03 .M.l � � a a ', j I � I �t{ � � >a>> ® < L+ �iw3� u F K6 i I z W> O� � �F� S� a y �s i I � � m � a� ��3�0 ��LLmNaw w U) r 0 Poo Sa-au kg-lSlVd 103road .2z m ± s b W o O z a v U '? o 0 F Z z �wF. > z O z �4 ¢ J = Z o ,_ U b v o w A J s w UaU of Z �� O N z w i z rcw > j z z z z < ow O wr7i, �Wwi o<c�Gi gi o pc �cu crk tqr7S wa cN7 U' zO z L) C�7 � �oc=7 h w N W W> a wo0 O Oa=a -Joto g zW z W w • H z zzz z Q .O W p OO88NhNNNzaWp w f Ig if : w - w p z< ' ¢ oa _ Z m > W c? a z w z0 W , ( H p 0 d W p S zm U 2 h 0U' 0 0 N a Cal W Z 0 `i j 1 • 2 Z Z Z Z Z wzo pZ aZ LL 0 1 O•� ` ( a N m _T W CL N a qa o qa o 0 W i -! w u� u� u� u� • ¢ ¢ zv q fn �o N° oi3 U U U' •B .y L(i � • s r,� ir6°85�~ 94'962 --------------3-04_6S.OS__.--- ------- �6 `ti % o ko �I $ �I� �♦♦; ♦� 0 W 1 �II �� \ , ,�♦ o w 1 IOr Q ro O I D C->< �Ya $ � \ � 092•.�\)'� s \\ i `♦♦ �' ,� �� / , \fie. `�O g�1� p ♦ ♦ `� lu � d r iol 60% � 5 H ♦ ;• �` ru 1 0 ♦ �� 5 3_' 1 , •h� O i M z -v \ 0 w '- - GENERAL SWPPP REQUIREMENTS AND NOTES: TRAINING(PART III.A.2) OWNER INFORMATION �q°Qpil0lt® DESIGN ENGINEER:MATTHEW R PAVEX P.E. 1'gyp' i• MEASURE OWNER: I E CONTRACTOR ST O ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED PLN(SWPPP) ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL EAON DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN.THESE ® P IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN(SWPPP)MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE ESTABLISHED ON ALL GOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND MSN TRAINING COURSE:DESIGN OF SWPPP ANDREW DORNBUSCH W. SYSTEM(NPDES)GENERAL PERMIT(DATED AUGUST 1,2013 Y MNRIOD001 PAGES I-35)AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND PRACTICES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN ACCO RDANCEWRH PART IV.G. TRAINING ENTITY:UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ST.LO35THST.MN 55416 SEDIMENTATION CONTROL INSTRUCTOR JOHN CHAPMAN GO PAISLEY LANE N ST.LOUIS PARK,P. 55416 THE TIMING OF THE INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MAY BE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, DATES OF TRAINING COURSE:511512011-511512D11 GOLDEN VALLEY,MN 55422 CIviISleGrouP�rN PART III STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS PASSAC£OF VEHICLES.AVIV SHORT-TERM ACTIVffY MUST BE COMPLETED AS QUICK YAS POSSIBLE ANO THE SEDIMENTGONtRO PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED Men 13-3 P,,_ at-2W3 IM MEDIATELY AFTER THE ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED.HOWEVER SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE NE%?PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE TOTAL TRAININGHWRS:12 763-21}3944 952-250-2003 ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE. RE-CERTIFICATION:1113/141/13/14 IS HOURS),EXP.573112017 SWPPP(PART III.A) ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED BY APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL ALL SOURCES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET HAVE AREAS AND QUANTITIES(PART THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS BEENSTABILIZED.INLET PROTECTION MAYBE REMOVEDFORA PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPEGFIC SAFETY CONCERN(STREET FLOODINGIFREELNG)HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AND AND SWPPP NARRATIVE(ATTACHMENT A:CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION.THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES THE PERMIITEE(S)HAVE RECEIVED WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY(E.G.CITY)COUNTYROWNSHIP/MNDOT ENGINEER)VERIFYING THE III.AA.B&C): SWPPP CONTACT PERSON OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SMP'S.STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT. NEED FOR REMOVAL.THE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP OR AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST.WHEN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE CAN NOT BE OBTAINED IN A TIMELY MANNER,THE SPECIFIC INLET PROTECTION CAN BE REMOVED TO ALLEVIATE THE IMMEDIATE SAFETY CONCERN. SITE AREA 1.41 ACRES CONTRACTOR: THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS: HOWEVER,EFFORTS TO OBTAIN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP AND AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST,PERMISSION TO ON SITE DISTURBED AREA 0.54 ACRES XXX 1. VERIFY THAT ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AND/OR OBTAIN THE REMOVE INLET PROTECTION BASED ON A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN MUST STILL BE OBTAINED FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF REMOVAL OFF SITE DISTURBED AREA O ACRES XXX NECESSARY PERMITS XXX 2. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS,AND TOTAL D19TURBED AREA 0.54 ACRES 3. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE CANNOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS,OR CONDUITS AND DITCHES UNLESS THERE IS A EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 2.B ACRES XXX 4. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS BYPASS IN PLACE FOR THE STORMWATER PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.22 ACRES S. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN/POND INSTALL NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA -O.Od ACRES SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING: S. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN/POND(PART BIB) VEHICLE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE(OR ONTO STREETS WITHIN THE SITE)MUST BE MINIMIZED BY BMPS SUCH AS STONE PADS,CONCRETE OR ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY A 7. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE STEEL WASH RACKS,OR EQUIVALENT SYSTEMS.STREET SWEEPING MUST BE USED IF SUCH BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM BONG TRACKED ONTO QUANTITY OF SOIL TO BE MOVED ON SITE C.Y. PERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS B. DEMOUSH AND REMOVE ALL EXISTING PAVEMENTS AND STRUCTURES PER THE STREET(SEE PART MEA.D.). SILT FENCE 10881F OF THE NP DES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT. REMOVALS PUN. INLET PROTECTION DEVICES 15 EACH TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE 9. STRIPANDSTOCKPILE TOPSOIL THE PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND,UNLESS INFEASIBLE,PRESERVE TOPSOIL.MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF EROSION CONTROL BLANKET IV SF CONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPP 10. ROUGH GRADE THE SITE THE SPECIFIC AREA OF THE SITE DICTATES THAT R BE COMPACTED.METHODS FOR MINIMIZING COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT AND STAYING OFF OF 11. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES AREAS TO BE LEFT UN-COMPACTED.METHODS TO PRESERVE TOPSOIL INCLUDE STRIPPING AND STOCKPILING TOPSOIL PRIOR TO GRADING OR EXCAVATION OPERATIONS. TEMPORMYSEED 6 MULCH 10 ACRES 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT,MONITOR AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY AND ROCK CHECK DAMS OEACH PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL BMPS AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND IN CONFORMANCE THE PERMITTEE MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS REQUIRED IN PART IIIB.OF THIS PERMIT. WITH NPDES PERMIT,CONTINUOUSLY DURING THE WORK.CONTRACTOR SHALL DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING(PART IV.D): PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENT STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOILS NO LATER THAN 7 DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITYIN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING(E.G.,PUMPED DISCHARGES,TRENCH4OITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE)RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT MAY HAVE TURBID OR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CEASED. SEDIMENT LADEN DISCHARGE WATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE WHENEVER POSSIBLE.IF THE 13. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES WATER CANNOT BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING THE SURFACE WATER,R MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMP'S SUCH THAT THE XXX 14. INSTALL SILT FENCE/INLET PROTECTION AROUND CBS DISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER,DOWNSTREAM LANDOWNERS OR WETLANDS-THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE THAT DISCHARGE POINTS XXX 15. INSTALL STREET SECTION ARE ADEQUATELY PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND SCOUR.THE DISCHARGE MUST BE DISPERSED OVER NATURAL ROCK RIPRAP.SAND SAGS,PLASTIC SHEATHING OR OTHER XXX 16. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER ACCEPTED ENERGY DISSIPATION MEASURES.ADEQUATE SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES ARE REQUIRED FOR DISCHARGE WATER THAT CONTAINS SUSPENDED SOLIDS. IT INSTALL BITUMINOUS ON STREETS 111 FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD,INSTALL SEED AND MULCH FILTER BACKWASH WATERS MUST BE HAULED AWAY FOR DISPOSAL RETURNED TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS,OR INCORPORATE INTO THE SITE IN A 19. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN/POND MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.DISCHARGE OF THE BACKWASH WATER TO SANITARY SEWER IS ALLOWED WITH PERMISSION OF THE SANITARY SEWER AUTHORITY. 20. FINAL GRADE POND I INFILTRATION BASINS(DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)(PART III.C) SWPPP ATTACHMENTS(ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER): 21. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE(PART IV.E): ON c\J EITHER SEED OR SODILANDSCAPING,REMOVE BMPS AND RESEED ANY AREAS REMOVAL THE SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE: DISTURBED BY THE THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE AT ALL TIMES FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PROPER OPERATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ATTACHMENT A.CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE-SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENT Lo T' AT A MINIMUM,INSPECT,MAINTAIN AND REPAIR ALL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES AND SOIL STABILIZATION MEASURES ONCE ATTACHMENT S.CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST i• In RECORDS RETENTION(PART IILE): EVERY SEVEN(7)DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A RAINFALL OF 0.5 INCHES OR GREATER AND WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER THAT.CONTINUE ATTACHMENT C.MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS //� z U z THE SWPPP(ORIGINAL OR COFIES)INCLUDING,ALL CHANGES TO IT,ANDINSPECTIONSAND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY INSPECTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL IAND.DISTURBING ACTIVITY HAS CEASED.THEREAFTER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM THESE RESPONSIBILITIES AT LEAST WEEKLY UNTIL ATTACHMENT D:STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT-ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. V/ THE PERMITTEEWHOHAS OOPIES)INLUDIAL N,ALLCHANGE OF THAT TOT,ADINSPEN OF THE ITIONSE. AN MAINTEPPP NNCEBE E RE-CORDS MUSTER BE KEPT IELD OFFICE ERIN AN IN SCONSTRUCTIONITE VEHICLE LNG VEGETATIVE COVER IS ESTABLISHED.INSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS,EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND INFILTRATION AREAS. ATTACHMENT E:GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT-ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. Q VI Uj NORMAL WORKING HOURS. BASED ON INSPECTION RESULTS THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY THE SWPPP IN ORDER TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM LEAVING THE SITE VIA STORM WATER RUNOFF.THIS J J LU cm/I/� J MODIFICATION MUST BE MADE WITHIN 7 CALENDAR DAYS OF THE INSPECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY THE TERMS OF THE PERMIT,LEGAL,REGULATORY,OR W ALL OWNER(S)MUST KEEP THE SWPPP,ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS,ON FILE FOR THREE(3)YEARS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN PMRnI.c.THIS DOES NonNcIUDEANY RECORDS AFTER suBMInA oFTHENOT. PHrslcuAccesscoes CONSTRAINTS. SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES: W U.1 LLI INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE RECORDED WITHIN 24 HOURS IN WRITING AND KEPT ON FILE BY THE CONTRACTOR AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SWPPP ON SITE AND THEN THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES. > > 1. THE FINAL SWPPP; FOR AT LEAST 3 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT. 2. ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT; ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED,REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1R OF THE HEIGHT PROJECT NARRATIVE: `} } OF THE DEVICE.THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY,OR THEREAFTER AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING HOME,GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY,AND CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW HOMES, / O In O 3. RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING Lu 0 0 CONSTRUCTION(SEE PART IV.E.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE); REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS,CATCH BASINS,AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABIUZE THE SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC(IF REQUIRED): ui W 4. ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE SEEN AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED TOPSOIL THIS REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PUCE WRHIN7DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED J IMPLEMENTED,INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY,CONTRACTS,COVENANTS AND OTHER BY LEGAL,REGULATORY,OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. NOT REQUIRED-NO SPECIAL OR IMPAIRED WATERS NEAR SITE /A Q W Q BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE;AND SEE(ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR SITE SPECIFIC INSPECTIONS ANO MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC: /�/ W Q W 5. ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT PERMANENTSEEOMd \� _j _J STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT THE FOLLOWING POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES ON THE SITE; ••.FORTREASINSUFFELAREASDJATAE NOTOR I BE SODDEDO NDOTS SEED MIX SHALL ECEIVEANATIVEUTH AN W SEED 35 PART IV.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTS AREASINBUFFERSANDAOJACENTTOORINWETAREASMNDOTSEEDMIX33261(STORMWATERSOUDANDWEST)AT35LSSPER 0- a ACRE. SOLID WASTE:COLLECTED SEDIMENT,ASPHALT AND CONCRETE MILLINGS,FLOATING DEBRIS,PAPER,PLASTIC,FABRIC,CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS AND OTHER DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED Md 35-721(DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL)AT/0 LBS PER ACRE. EROSION PREVENTION(PART N.B): WASTES MUST SE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY(MPGA)DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS. .••MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL L17 � N N THECONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANING FOR AND IMPLEMENTING APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION PHASING,VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS,HORIZONTAL SLOPE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:OIL GASOLINE,PAINT AND ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED.INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT,TO PREVENT SPILLS, GRADING,AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES THAT MINIMIZE EROSION,SO THAT THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS OF PART N.E.ARE COMPLIED WITH. LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE.RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM,STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE DELINEATED(EG.WITH FLAGS,STAKES,SIGNS,SILT FENCE ETC.)ON THE DEVELOPMENT SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS, BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS. ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT NO LATER THAN THE END OF THE NEXT WORK DAY WHEN EXTERNAL WASHING OF TRUCKS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE.RUNOFF MUST BE CONTAJNED AND WASTEWATER EARTH-DIS ARTH-D TURBING ACTIVITIES WILL CEASE FOR AT LEAST 14 DAYS.TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT,CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS(E.G..CLEAN PROPERLY DISPOSED OF.NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE. ~ w AGGREGATE STOCKPILES,DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES,SAND STOCKPILES)AND THE CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS,PARIGNG LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT BUT MUST COMPLY WITH PART N.GS. CONCRETE WASHOUT:ALL LIQUID LIQUID AND D AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS MUST BE CONTAINED IN A LEAK PROOF CONTAINMENT FACILITY OR O IMPERMEABLE LINER A COMPACTED CLAY UNER THAT DOES NOT ALLOW WASHOUT LIQUIDS TO ENTER THE GROUND IS CONSIDERED AN IMPERMEABLE UNER w EL SOILS WITHIN 200 FEET OF A PUBLIC WATER(AS DESIGNATED BY THE MINNESOTA DNR)MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMES. SOLID WASTES MUST NOT CONTACT THE GROUND,AND THERE MUST NOT BE RUNOFF FROM THE CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS.LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH NWCA REGULATIONS.A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TO INFORM CONCRETE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PUN, THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE THAT DRAINS WATER FROM ANY PORTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE,OR EQUIPMENT OPERATORS TO UTILIZE THE PROPER FACILITIES.CONCRETE WASHOUT MAY ALSO OCCUR OFF SITE ACCORDING TO THE APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS. SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT DIVERTS WATER AROUND THE SITE,MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE,OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE INTO ANY SURFACE WATER. SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY STABILIZATION OF THE LAST 200 LINEAL FEET MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER FUELING OPERATION PLMl:ALL FUELING SHALL TAKE PLACE AT THE DESIGNATED FUELING LOCATION AND ACCORDING TO BEST PRACTICES FOR SITE FUELING OPERATIONS AS TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR SPILLS. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY EROSION CONTROL NOTES: UNDERTOHERIAWWSOFT ESTATE OF STABILIZATION OF THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES MUST BE COMPLETE WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TOA OTA SURFACE WATER AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. SPILL PREVENTION PLAN:ALL SPILLS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY CLEANED UP AFTER DISCOVERY.THE SITE SUPERINTENDENT,WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DAY-TO-DAY ONSITE MI 5 CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS WILL BE THE SPILL PREVENTION COORDINATOR AND WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING CLEAN UP PROCEDURES,POSTING CLEAN UP 1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES. TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES THAT ARE BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM(WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK DITCH CHECKS,BIO ROLLS, RECOMMENDATIONS,AND ENSURING PROPER CLEAN UP TRAINING OF APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL SILT DIKES ETC.)DO NOT NEED TO BE STABILIZED.THESE AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER NO LONGER BEING USED ASA SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM. SANITARY AND SEPTIC WASTE:SANITARYISEPTIC FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED IN A NEAT AND SANITARY CONDITION,FOR THE USE OF THE CONTRACTOR'S Ma ew R.Pava EMPLOYEES.A LICENSED SANITARY WASTE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR AS REQUIRED BY STATE REGULATIONS WILL COLLECT SANITARY WASTE FROM PORTABLE UNITS. wE 11-1414 LICENSE NO.44263 PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER FINAL STABILIZATION(PART IV.G): IssuElsuBMITTAL SUMMARY SEED NOTES(PART III.A.4.A): DATE DESCRIPTION THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE ACCORDING THE DEFINITIONS IN THE NPOES GENERAL PERMIT PART N SECTION G.THE CONTRACTOR ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION(N.O.T.)WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL STABILIZATION IS COMPLETE OR WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER SELLING THE SITE OR PORTION OF THE 11.1414 PRELIMINARY SUBM AL SITE(THAT HAS NOT UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION I TO ANOTHER PARTY.A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF TERMINATION I PERMIT MODIFICATION FORM MUST GO TO THE NEW GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS: OWNER.THE ORIGINAL CURRENT OWNER MUST PROVIDE A SWPPP TO THE NEW OWNER THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES THE REMAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.SEE THE IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3INCHES. SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE(ATTACHMENT A:CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)AND SWPPP PIAN SHEETS FOR FINAL STABILIZATION MEASURES TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING,MULCHING&BLANKET. SEED • TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112(WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP)FOR WINTER AND 21-111(OATS COVER CROP)FOR SPRINGISUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT A SEEDING RATE OF 100 LBSIACRE. MULCH • IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING,WITHIN 24 HOURS,MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEED GERMINATION.MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED REVISION SUMMARY AT 9D%COVERAGE(2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH) DATE DESCRIPTION SLOPES • 3:1(HORVMRT.)OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH • SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET. • SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS. SEDIMENT CONTROL(PART IV.C): STORM WATER SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST MINIMIZE SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS AND STORM SEWER INLETS. POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN a TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS THAT ARE DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM(E.G.,DITCHES WITH ROCK CHECK DAMS)REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS. (SWPPP)NOTES b.IF THE DOWN GRADIENT TREATMENT SYSTEM IS OVERLOADED,ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES OR REDUNDANTDUNDANT BMPS MUST BE INSTALLED TO CA . ELIMINATE THE AND D THE SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN PART IIIA4,A.THROUGH C. -Vl c IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES,THEE SHALL BE NO UNBROKEN SLOPE LENGTH OF GREATER THAN 75 FEET FOR SLOPES WITH A GRADE OF 3:1 OR STEEPER. ZZ749 NW'h3lltln N30100'3Nt/l A31SIVd 09Z G, W Z Z J ^' �yILXaa . a r HosngNMO(3 M3maNV a°„ p Q. W: ZZti55 NW'.l3llVA N34100'3Ndl A31SIVd 09Z Z 0?14 6Fl@D. wl a Zb N @W Sa-mu k3-ISIVd j lowoad N N J 00 1,2 o >i W QQ N O K u LL OZ OK o _ ear v -z FLL iQ s rr 5 u cy y z w "'ao Oulz Q + Z U / v U~ U U(45 U tr NH Jw Fin zOa ow HwFW W ol czioS Iat �� Q W >o� �� '� �iF` N2^ ° 6�X °� •� Nz w_ZQ • O�� < O O BWrz Z ;y oa ow` _o *� To N ., o z yoF >aWq� oogoi VYN U) n�� zo '� °' moa w'maN Soa r w��wr 3ijc�aQmy O W z WUtj U Z OOa� S UQFmo Ox ,n I 1P13AC31113 ISO, C', Jn=3Q N a �u 4�✓: to Jia/1Wa�� }G VUa xFQ ON iEx Fz � �ZJ J. Z HO-z GJ.Z U l � Z ` ` N vid U4mW FZ "W g�mm Fm i JN aoHN �r�-----1H913N W!1NIN IW.Of �'! oax l 0omF R X111 a PffiU)DW / oamW� ate. • W UZUZ� I 0 WC< � `�If O Q<Z N JVo I d ell MEMORANDUM M. Planning Department 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 60 day deadline: December 19, 2014 Agenda Item 4. C. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan Central Park West - 1400 and 1500 State Highway 100 South, 5075 Wayzata Boulevard, 1511 Utica Avenue South - DLC Residential, LLC, Applicant Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Summary DLC Residential, LLC, is seeking approval of a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit to develop several buildings and a parking ramp at the southwest quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100. This PUD proposal is unique in that it is located in both Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. The site is also unique because two large highways limit the site to the north and east and a retaining wall borders the site to the east. In order to promote high quality site planning, staff at both cities have analyzed the same site plan set simultaneously. The Preliminary PUD application was heard and unanimously approved with conditions at the St. Louis Park Planning Commission meeting on November 19, 2014, and the Golden Valley Planning Commission on November 24, 2014. The property is zoned for Business and Professional Offices in Golden Valley and it is guided for long- term office use on the General Land Use Plan map. The total area of site is 13.48 acres with 6 acres in Golden Valley. The proposed PUD would allow the applicant to construct two 6-story multi-family residential buildings, one 6-story limited service hotel, a 7-story parking ramp, two 11-story office buildings, and a park. Currently, the site is primarily covered by impervious surface. This site plan was influenced by Duke Realty's Towers at West End plan. Duke received preliminary approval in 2009 from Golden Valley and St. Louis Park for the PUD plan, which included four office towers and two parking ramps. However, Duke did not apply for final approval. Both cities granted several extensions to allow more time to submit the final PUD application. Joint Powers Agreement Staff proposes that Golden Valley enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with St. Louis Park to address issues that arise with a shared PUD site. Since the parking ramp, park, and one residential building cross the municipal boundary, agreements must be made between the two cities with respect to inspections, permitting, emergency response, assessing, utilities, addressing, fee schedules, and future amendments to the PUD. Planning staff and the City Managers in both cities will meet with key points of contact in each of the affected departments to discuss options. The goal is to create a Joint Powers Agreement vetted by Golden Valley and St. Louis Park City Attorneys as well as by the League of Minnesota Cities, who offer free contract consulting services. The Agreement would ideally be brought to Golden Valley and St. Louis Park City Councils on or before the public hearings for the final PUD plan (if preliminary permission is granted). The Joint Powers Agreement drafted for Duke Realty's previous PUD plan for the site will be used as a starting point. Traffic Analysis At the Planning Commission hearing, residents to the east were concerned that this development would increase congestion and traffic speeds along Wayzata Boulevard. As a condition of approval, Planning Commission required that an updated traffic study be performed to further understand the impacts. A traffic study for Duke Realty's initial proposal for this area was completed in 2007 and it was updated for DLC Residential's proposal in 2014. The 2014 report projects a reduction in traffic levels in comparison with Duke Realty's previous proposal for the Towers at West End. Although the projections showed reductions from the original proposal, residents and Planning Commissioners are concerned that the study does not adequately take into account the current traffic situation. Staff and DLC Residential are currently investigating how best to complete an additional traffic study as soon as possible. The study would inform a decision of whether to require the developer to complete intersection and road improvements along Wayzata Boulevard. This issue must be resolved before final PUD plan review. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated November 24, 2014 (11 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 2014 (11 pages) • Memo from the Public Works Division dated November 17, 2014 (6 pages) • Memo from the Fire Department dated November 17, 2014 (3 pages) • Site Plans dated December 3, 2014 and December 9, 2014 (44 pages) Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Central Park West PUD No. 121, subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans prepared by DLC Residential, LLC, submitted with the application on October 20, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 5. A park dedication fee of$70,568 (2% of the estimated land value) shall be paid prior to approval of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 121" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 8. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include continuous pedestrian connections between the hotel and parking ramp as well as around the north and east sides of the residential phase 1 building. 9. The developer shall submit a plan before the City council meeting that shows the private driveway access point shifted north on Wayzata Boulevard, as discussed in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014. 10. The Developer shall address concerns and comments from the Fire Department regarding fire hydrant locations, fire truck access on Lilac Drive, and fire suppression water sources and reflect changes in the final PUD submittal. 11. The City of St. Louis Park approves that portion of the preliminary planned unit development within its jurisdiction 12. Prior to City Council preliminary review, the Developer shall present strategies to meet parking requirements for the Lot 3 hotel use, which could include additional underground hotel parking and/or a shared parking agreement with the nearby parking ramp. 13. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include bicycle parking counts and locations. 14. The property owners of any parcel in the Central Park West PUD shall follow the travel demand management plans approved for the West End Redevelopment, which will serve to reduce traffic congestion. The owner shall be required to update the plan or submit a new plan to the Golden Valley and St. Louis Park 1-394 Joint Task Force prior to Final PUD approval. The Plan shall also include bicycle and pedestrian traffic data. 15. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Golden Valley for public use of the park outlot. 16. The Final PUD plan submitted shall include a detailed Lighting Plan in accordance with the City's Outdoor Lighting requirements (Section 11.73). 17. The Applicant shall submit a snow storage plan. 18. A neighborhood meeting with the developer shall be held after an updated traffic study has been completed, but before Final PUD Plan review. The notification area for this meeting shall be expanded to include the entire South Tyrol/Kennedy area. 19. A final design plan shall be reviewed by the City prior to Final Plan approval. In addition the Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 5(E): 1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site, such as the proximity to highway traffic and a high retaining wall to the north and east and high-density development to the south and west. With flexibility under a PUD in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements, number of buildings on a lot, and similar requirements, the quality of site planning and design is of higher quality than if each parcel was designed individually under conventional provisions. By allowing a mix of land uses, the site plan offers the opportunity to live, work, visit, and enjoy outdoor gathering space. The PUD encourages creativity and flexibility in land development. 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. The site is currently used for surface parking and is mostly impervious. Even though 36 existing trees will be removed, the proposed plan adds about 37,897 square feet of public gathering space, roughly 245 trees, and 19,742 square feet of shrubs and perennial beds to the site. 3. Efficient & Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use of the land. The PUD plan provides an appropriate area of the city for high-density office, residential, and hotel uses. The PUD plan encourages development that is sustainable and has a high degree of energy efficiency. 4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. High-density office, commercial, and residential uses surround the site to the south and west. Low-density residential uses are separated from this proposed PUD site by significant highway development. The PUD plan increases housing options, jobs, lodging options, and gathering space to the area. 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. By encouraging the use of contemporary land planning principles, the PUD plan offers the ability to live, work, shop, and spend time outdoors without reliability on the automobile. The PUD plan promotes pedestrian activity and provides high-quality landscaping additions to the site. 6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. The PUD provision permits flexibility from other provisions in Chapter 11 of the City Code. This flexibility is permitted in order to promote the intent and purpose of the PUD section of the City Code. J n os ........... o L in[ei;Lr4e Y1wy d94^^•^^—._._.._.....>.W -...:—�__,_... _._ .._.. ,. .er..c.•��ao•e�.�e.�..�rywo t 1 I `TE Subject properties f 1 -ST.-LOUIS PARK ►" l/p Av6•w�yrco Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 11 Kluchka asked if there has been an agre ent regarding the style or design of the omes. Segelbaum asked about the dev oper's obligations regarding style or sign. merman stated that the subdivision p cess considers lot size, lot widt ,, etbacks, etc. ut not style or design. dr Kluchka ed about the traffic controls entioned by the neige b6rs.!Zimmerman said he would to o the City Engineer about he traffic control concerns. Kluchka referred to e neighbor's sugg stion that buckiorn be removed from the property and said he d n't think dev pers are 9, gated to remove buckthorn. fr Johnson asked what other cite do in gard'.1, construction management issues. Waldhauser said Edina has hired m nevto make sure construction management issues are dealt with correctly. t `' MOVED by Blum, seconded by Jol)ris n and tion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Paisley Fields M(gor S bdivision ect to the following findings and conditions.- Findings: onditions:Findings: 1. All three of the lots ofthe propose subdivision meet the rem';cements of the R-1 Single Family Zone District. 2. The City Engine, Hinds that the I is are buildable. 3. The addition o the new lots will t place an undue strain on City utilit stems. Conditions: V 1 . The City Itttorney will determine a title review is necessary prior to approval o e Final P t. 2. A p dedication fee of $2,146. shall be paid before Final Plat approval. 3. T City Engineer's memorandu , dated November 19, 2014, shall become part of is approval. All applicable City permits shall obtained prior to the development of the new lots. 6. Informal Public Hearing — Preliminary PUD Plan — Central Park West— Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 — PU-121 Applicant: DLC Residential, LLC Address: Southwest Quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100 Purpose: To allow two six-story multiple family residential buildings, a six-story hotel, two 11-story office buildings, a parking ramp and a linear park in both St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. Goellner explained the applicant's proposal to develop in both St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, two 6-story residential buildings, two 11-story office buildings, one 6-story hotel, Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 12 one 7-story parking ramp, and a public park that would be privately owned and maintained. She stated that the properties located in Golden Valley are zoned Business and Professional Offices and guided for office use. She explained that this is the same site as the 2009 Towers at West End proposal for 4 office buildings and a parking ramp which received preliminary approval, but was never built. She showed the Commissioners several renderings of the proposed site and explained where the park and the phase one residential portion of the proposal would be located. She explained that generally, traffic circulates around the site on the soon to be reconstructed Utica Avenue South and the Wayzata Boulevard frontage road. Goellner referred to the residential buildings and stated that they will both be six stories in height with 550 to 1 ,500 square foot units that will rent for $1,000 to $2,800 per month. The phase 1 residential building will have approximately 200 units and 299 parking spaces and the phase 2 building will have approximately 164 units and 252 parking spaces. Goellner referred to the proposed hotel and explained that it will be a limited services hotel which means there won't be a restaurant or a pool. It will have approximately 150 rooms in a six story building with 93 parking spaces. She stated that the hotel use is required to have 1 .5 spaces per room so it doesn't meet the number of required spaces. She added that staff has been talking with the Applicant regarding additional parking. Goellner referred to the proposed office buildings and the parking ramp and explained that there will two, 11 story buildings totaling approximately 700,000 square feet with 100 parking spaces. The parking ramp will have 2,534 spaces. Zimmerman stated that because this proposal crosses city boundaries there will be a Joint Powers Agreement between the two cities that will address issues such as inspections, permitting, emergency response, assessing, utilities, addressing, etc. He stated that there was a Joint Powers Agreement that was drafted for the previous proposal by Duke that will be revisited as a part of this proposal. He discussed the traffic impacts and reviewed the Alternative Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) completed in 2007 and updated in 2013 and 2014. He stated that additional review is underway regarding traffic impacts on the neighborhood to the east of Highway 100 and that the previous project had called for the some improvements to the Quentin/Wayzata Boulevard intersection to help regulate the flow of traffic potentially coming from this project and some traffic calming along Wayzata Boulevard. At that point it was asked that the developer pay for those improvements. He stated that the preliminary review of the updated AUAR indicated the traffic impacts will be less given the mix of the uses in this current proposal. Zimmerman referred to the stormwater and impervious surface on the site and stated that this proposal is located in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed and as phased development occurs, individual properties within Golden Valley will be required to obtain Stormwater Management permits from the City. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 13 Zimmerman referred to the parking on the properties and stated that 3,597.5 spaces are required and that that applicant is proposing 3,278 parking spaces, a difference of 319.5 spaces. He added that applicant has agreed to provide bicycle parking spaces as well. Zimmerman discussed the landscaping plan and stated that the applicant is proposing to remove approximately 36 trees and to plant 245 new trees and 19,742 square feet of shrubs and perennials. Zimmerman stated that the Applicant is proposing 79% overall impervious surface and that PVDs of this type are allowed up to 90% impervious surface. He added that there will also be underground stormwater storage as a part of this proposal as well. Zimmerman referred a site plan and discussed the access and circulation. He stated that the woonerf, which is the shared parking area for the residential buildings, also provides a service for the hotel. He stated that staff has also asked the developer to have one garbage hauler. He referred to the two access points for the hotel and stated that the Applicant has agreed to shift one access further north away from the Lilac Drive intersection. Kluchka referred to the site plan and asked if the hotel access could be limited to business use only. Zimmerman stated that the idea it to make that area difficult for cut- through traffic. Cera questioned if the connection service access is needed. Kluchka said he has seen renderings of the proposal that show public art being installed. He questioned if that is a PUD requirement. Zimmerman said that St. Louis Park requires public art. Johnson questioned how voting would be handled. Goellner said there will probably be a St. Louis Park address assigned to each of the residential buildings since that is where the front doors will be located. Blum questioned how the tax benefits would be handled between the two cities. Goellner said the value of the residential phase 1, lot 1 would be split into a percentage between the two cities. Segelbaum said the parking seems limited and asked how St. Louis Park responded. Goellner stated that the proposal meets St. Louis Park's requirements which are less stringent than Golden Valley's. Segelbaum asked what issues are being reviewed at a later date. Zimmerman stated that the woonerf area, the resolution of the hotel access point would need to be resolved before the Final PUD Plans are submitted. The offices, and the parking ramps will be developed in phase 2 and will probably require a PUD amendment. He added that the traffic flow to the east and the traffic on Wayzata Boulevard are still being reviewed and there will be more elevations along with building materials reviewed in the future. Goellner stated that Staff has also asked the Applicant for a lighting plan and for more detailed plans regarding the sidewalk connections. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 14 Baker asked if the parking is phased to meet the needs of construction. Goellner said for the hotel, yes. Blum referred to the easement along the linear park and asked if it completely bisects the site. Zimmerman said there will be sidewalk connections all the way through the park. Blum asked how the intersecting pathways for pedestrians and bicyclists would work. Goellner said the sidewalk layout would change. Blum questioned where snow would be stored. Goellner said the snow could stay on site until the office buildings are constructed, after that it would have to be removed off site. Kluchka suggested making that a condition of approval. Blum questioned how much snow from the current West End development ends up in this location. Johnson asked if people will be looking at blacktop until phases 2 and 3 are built. Zimmerman stated that the park is included in phase 1. Johnson said this proposal will have a big impact for little revenue. He asked about the trade-off for the increase in traffic congestion. Baker asked if improvements could be made to Wayzata Boulevard. Zimmerman stated that the traffic engineers are reviewing the plans to determine what improvements are necessary. Baker asked if the Joint Powers Agreement could include sharing the tax benefits if there is a disproportionate impact on Golden Valley. David Graham, ESG Architects, said this proposal completes the extension of the Shops at West End. He stated that this proposal lowers the density of office space from Duke's previous proposal of 1.1 million square feet to 700,000 square feet. He discussed the park, the sidewalks, the hotel access points, and the bicycle and pedestrian traffic. He stated that this proposal is also much more green and permeable and provides a well- connected parking ramp. He stated that it made sense to locate the parking ramp, rather than the residential use, against the freeway. He said he would like to have green screens on buildings to make them look like "living buildings." He stated that the units in the residential buildings will be luxury rental condominiums and aside from the 3% affordable units, will cost $1,000 to $2,500 per month. Forty percent of the units will have 2 or 3 bedrooms to attract a wide variety of users. He stated that another key element in this project is the re-building of Utica. He showed several renderings and stated that the vision is to create a beautiful tree lined environment with residential that wraps around the parking to make it less of a suburban place and more of an integrated, pedestrian, mixed use environment. Segelbaum stated that there was a different design shown at the neighborhood meeting and asked about the reconfiguration to this current design. Graham stated that they did consider flipping the office and residential buildings, but it made more sense to create a village effect and they didn't want to have parking on the corner, they wanted that to be more of an office campus. Blum asked about the fagade of the parking structure. Graham said the parking structure will be cast concrete with scrim walls and green screening to be more artful where Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 15 pedestrians will see it. Kluchka said he wants to make sure that the parking ramp doesn't look like the back of the house. He asked if the intent is to make the entire structure have some visual interest. Graham said yes. He added that they will probably focus the green walls on the west facing sides and use other strategies on the side facing the freeway. Kluchka reiterated that he wants that side to matter too. Blum referred to the site plan and asked about the small area shown between Lilac Dr. and Highway 100. Graham said that is a retaining wall and there will also be some landscaping done in that area. Luke Payne, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Civil Engineer representing DLC Residential, discussed the access points. He referred to a site plan and noted that there is an existing curb cut on Wayzata and the intent of that access point is to serve as a hotel exit and a service entrance. He said there will be underground parking, but through traffic will be discouraged. Baker asked how people would walk from the parking ramp to the hotel. Payne stated that there would most likely be a valet parking service. Kluchka said he doesn't understand how a valet would work in a low-service type of hotel. Payne said using the parking ramp is not their desirable solution as it relates to the parking shortage, it is just one option. He said that Golden Valley's parking requirement of 1.5 parking spaces per hotel room is high, one parking space per room is more typical. Waldhauser stated that there could be a street level corridor through the residential building. Segelbaum added that the goal as far as traffic flow is to stay away from the developed West End area and to channel traffic onto Utica and around onto Wayzata Boulevard. Payne said yes, Utica has been designed as the primary access point for this entire segment of the development. He discussed some of the mitigation factors mentioned in the AUAR and explained that the original AUAR assumed 1.1 million square feet of office space which is the biggest trip generator, and that this proposal is for less than that. Cera stated that the concern of the residents to the east is with traffic going through their neighborhood. He asked if there is any agreement regarding traffic calming along Wayzata Boulevard and the Highway 100 frontage road and what the applicant's thoughts are about paying for traffic calming measures. Payne said they will continue to work with staff and that they will be responsible for the improvements necessary to make this development function properly. He stated that the traffic issues and improvements brought up in the original AUAR may or may not be necessary in this development as they were in Duke's previous proposal. Cera stated that traffic is difficult in the area now, and that he would really like the Applicant to seriously consider additional traffic calming measures. Baker added that that piece of Wayzata Boulevard needs to be redesigned to accommodate bike traffic. Kluchka asked what type of hotel could be in this proposal. Graham said that the hotel will be a high quality, low-service hotel such as a Radisson Red for example. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 16 Kluchka asked if the office space will be multi-tenant or single use. Graham said it could go either way. Cera asked about the timing and the phasing schedule. Graham stated that they would like to break ground on the phase 1 residential building in spring/summer of 2015, following right away with phase 2. Richard Kauffman, DLC Residential, added that the hotel construction could overlap with the phase 1 or 2 residential and that there has been strong interest in the office proposal which could begin as early as fall of 2015, or more likely 2016. Kluchka said a lot of design work has gone into the residential portion of the proposal and asked if it would be fair to say that the hotel and office plans are more conceptual at this point. Graham said they are conceptual plans, but they represent the general direction they are going with high quality, contemporary materials. Segelbaum questioned if the design of the office buildings could change if a single user wants a different design. Graham said the design could possibly change, but it would still be made of high quality materials. Kluchka opened the public hearing. Margaret Macneale, 4530 Douglas Avenue, said she and her husband became aware of this proposal through an article in the newspaper and that surprised them because the last time there was a proposal for this site the South Tyrol and Kennedy neighborhoods received several meeting notices. She said there is a great deal about DLC's plans that she likes and parts of the plans are superior to previous proposals, but her concern is traffic. She said east bound traffic on the frontage road stacks up during the evening rush hour. She said the traffic is not coming home to her neighborhood they are just trying to avoid 1-394. She said the neighborhood's input in 2007 and 2008 helped identify several traffic calming strategies including a 3-way stop at Quentin and the frontage road and the narrowing of the frontage road as it passes Natchez and Fairlawn. She said she knows the AUAR has been updated and it states that the lower density proposal may make some of the traffic improvements unnecessary. She said if more of her neighbors had an opportunity to know about this proposal and had opportunity for input she is confident that they would all want to keep every possible traffic calming strategy identified and more. She said she likes this proposal, she just wants to be sure it is a win-win for everybody. She said she fears this is flying through the process without any input from their neighborhood. Robert Lazear, 1519 Natchez Avenue South, said this is phase 2 to the whole West End project. He said there has been no attempt at communication and people haven't had a lot of time to study the proposal. He said the reduced office density is appreciated, but it is a real "rocket docket" to say they are going to build in the spring and he thinks it needs to slow down. He asked if there has been an independent traffic study done showing the impact of the current West End site because an intelligent decision can't be made without that information. He said they only have two ways out of their neighborhood and people come around the curves at 50 miles per hour. He said he likes the straight line park idea, but he thinks the parking ramp is mammoth, and he is going to be looking at Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 17 and ugly ramp looming over the highway. He said pulling onto Wayzata Boulevard is tough now and emergency vehicles and accidents need to be considered as well. Dan Steinberg, 1033 Sumter Avenue South, said he was the chairman of the Cedarhurst neighborhood when the original proposal from Duke was considered. He said he is concerned he had to read about this proposal in the newspaper. He said we should be getting revenue into this area and should be looking at other needs such as a data center underneath the parking lot. He said one of the reasons the project collapsed last time is because of the sewer system and that the Environmental Commission should be addressing the watershed issues. He asked that this proposal be tabled to study the notes from the last proposal. Gary Cohen, 4530 Douglas Avenue, said he is concerned about the voting issue and it will make life really hard if people live in one city and vote in another. He said he read about this proposal in the Star Tribune and that this is a better proposal than the Duke proposal, but he is extremely frustrated to have learned about this from the newspaper. He said the 500 foot notification area is not sufficient and he has seen little or no commentary from the neighborhood. He said it would be simple to have a meeting scheduled with the neighborhood and he would be happy to help facilitate. He said the Planning Commission needs to discuss traffic calming and it is very important to him. He urged the Planning Commission to slow down and the City to do a better job of communicating because this could be a win-win for everyone if they all have a discussion. Chris Gaspard, 6125 Wynnwood Road, said 3/5 of the project is in St. Louis Park and 2/5 is in Golden Valley. He questioned why Golden Valley doesn't get 2/5 of the tax revenue of the entire site. He said we need to share everything or not because there is not much in this for Golden Valley. He said he thinks this is the most valuable land in the City and we are giving everything away for a parking ramp. He said this is a bad time of year with the holidays to be going through this process. He proposed a development called Diamond in the Valley with more residential units because this area needs more density. He questioned what is in this proposal for Golden Valley. Donna Huber, 1420 Alpine Pass, said she wants to emphasize the need for a traffic study, especially this time of year. She said snow removal in the morning is horrible, there are ice slicks on the frontage road, and she is concerned about additional traffic. Daon Karpan, 1400 Natchez Avenue South, said she wants to reinforce the need to do a traffic study. She said she wants the neighborhood voices heard. She said they need access and they need safety. Lori Komoto, 1505 Natchez Avenue South, said her main concern is traffic. She said she had to fight with the school district to get a bus stop removed from Wayzata Boulevard because of the high traffic flow in the morning. She said she feels the area is already at capacity and it is quite dangerous with the speed and the icy roads. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 18 Kluchka asked if a neighborhood meeting can be scheduled. Zimmerman said another neighborhood meeting can be held. He explained that hearing notices were sent to property owners within 500 feet of the subject properties, but that distance could be increased. Segelbaum said they need to discuss how far to expand that distance and if doing that would set a precedent going forward. Cera said he thinks the developer can hold a neighborhood meeting that includes all of South Tyrol. Baker said he thinks this kind of project is a category of its own and calls for a larger area to be notified. He added that it is the traffic issue that begs the need for a neighborhood meeting. Kluchka said he takes the idea of a pause seriously. He questioned the need for a neighborhood meeting and what type of conditions to put in their recommendation. Segelbaum asked about the status of the traffic study. Zimmerman stated that an AUAR was done in 2007, was updated in 2013 still using the information from the previous proposal, and was updated again for this proposal in 2014. Baker questioned to what extent the study focused on Wayzata Boulevard. Waldhauser stated that the traffic study should start from a new baseline. Kluchka said there is a re-study situation, and a winter situation that he would like to hear more about. John Crawford, Kimley Horn, explained that the 2007 study projected future background traffic and added in to that traffic the site generated which included the 1 million square feet of office space originally proposed. In 2013 the plan was updated for the reduced use of the site and the trip generation for the site was compared to the original AUAR and showed that the trip generation was less than what was originally planned. Now in 2014 this new plan has less traffic than what was in the original plan except in the morning there are more people leaving the site because of the residential use. There has not been a new traffic study since 2007 because it predicted what would happen under this development scenario. Baker said there is a new baseline now that should be taken into consideration because there has been development that wasn't predicted in 2007. Crawford said the study did predict future baseline traffic growth. Segelbaum said he thinks they need a presentation on the traffic study to determine if it is adequate for today's proposal. Baker stated that he would also like to see if there was any consideration for bicycle and pedestrian traffic in the study as well. Kluchka agreed that whatever was predicted in 2007 is not adequate today. Johnson said he left the neighborhood meeting with the understanding that the traffic in the area was at a level D, all the changes that were going to be made have been made, and there was a contingency to do something if traffic got worse, but a D is not an F. Segelbaum said he was at the same meeting and that there were some positive things about this plan, but he doesn't feel they've addressed the issues along Wayzata Boulevard. Waldhauser stated that the traffic issues along Wayzata Boulevard aren't necessarily caused by this development, but this proposal could make it worse. Kluchka stated that they need to see some better elevations of the parking ramp. Specifically, what the neighbors will see. Segelbaum said he doesn't know how the applicant will be able to provide that considering the developer will be selling it and letting someone else develop that portion. Kluchka asked if the water and sewer work has been done. Zimmerman stated that the last part of that work will be done in the spring. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 19 Kluchka said he would like conditions added regarding a snow removal plan, and a design review process. Baker said they need to encourage a different revenue plan and suggested Golden Valley share the TIF revenue. Goellner said the two cities have been talking about cost and revenue sharing. Cera said he thinks the underground parking can be expanded. He said he likes the proposal and thinks it is a vast improvement over the previous proposal, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. He questioned if the proposal should be tabled or if the outstanding issues can be addressed during the Final PUD Plan process. Zimmerman said it seems that the majority of the concerns are the off-site concerns about traffic which are separate from the site concerns. Baker said he is not ready to move forward. He said he likes the proposal but he doesn't have enough information. Segelbaum agreed that he would like to see additional information, but he wants the proposal to proceed. He suggested adding conditions to allow the proposal to move forward, but still be able preserve their ability to review these issues. Waldhauser said she is wondering if more of the site could be residential. Baker said the market will drive that. Cera stated that they could vote on this Preliminary Plan with some added conditions and ask the Applicant to come back for an interim meeting. He reiterated that he thinks the proposal is good and he doesn't know if they should table it. Segelbaum asked about the impacts to the schedule if the proposal is tabled. Zimmerman stated that Staff has worked with St. Louis Park to try and align meetings so one city doesn't get too far ahead of the other. Goellner added that the cities also need time to put together the Joint Powers Agreement. Kauffman stated there are some details in the nature of the deal with Duke that requires them to move forward. He stated the previous Duke Preliminary PUD Plan proposal was approved with the same information. He added that he doesn't want to overlook the traffic concerns, but it is important to them to get a positive recommendation at this meeting. Cera said one thing that would help is if DLC would commit to a traffic calming discussion and agree to what Duke had previously agreed to do. Wa►dhauser said this proposal may have different needs. She suggested that the Commission recommend approval contingent on a plan that demonstrates no increase in traffic in the South Tyrol area. That way they would allow the proposal to move forward while that issue gets worked on. Baker said he would like to know whether a new traffic study is needed. If it is not needed, then this proposal can move ahead, but he is leaning toward tabling the proposal at this point. Kluchka reviewed the items he sees as potential conditions including: a snow storage plan, an updated traffic design plan, a completed neighborhood meeting, a design review for all elements, a hotel parking plan, and limiting, or not allowing any impact to the South Tyrol area. Cera asked that condition number 14 in the staff report regarding the traffic plan be changed to state that the owner shall, instead of may, submit an updated traffic plan. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 20 Segelbaum suggested adding a condition number 19 stating that there shall be a neighborhood meeting, with an expanded hearing notice area, after an updated traffic study is provided, prior to the Final PUD proposal. Kluchka suggested adding a condition number 20 stating that the final design of all the elements shall be reviewed by the City prior to Final Plan approval. Cera stated that condition number 12 should be modified to state that the plans shall, instead of could, require additional underground parking. Waldhauser said she doesn't think condition number 12 needs to change because an increase in parking doesn't have to occur underground, there just needs to be additional parking. The Commissioners agreed. Segelbaum questioned if they should state that the issues they've heard about have to be addressed. Cera said there should be options to alleviate the neighbors' concerns. Segelbaum said there should be language added regarding traffic mitigation steps. Baker said there should be bicycle and pedestrian language added to the traffic mitigation steps as well. Kluchka suggested that condition 14 should be amended to include neighborhood traffic including bicycle and pedestrian traffic. Baker said this is with the understanding that the Planning Commission won't hear this proposal again until the Final PUD plan process. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Central Park West Preliminary PUD Plan 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. 6, The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by DLC Residential, LLC, submitted with the application on October 20, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 24, 2014 Page 21 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 5. A park dedication fee of $70,568 (2% of the estimated land value) shall be paid prior to approval of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 121" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 8. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include continuous pedestrian connections between the hotel and parking ramp as well as around the north and east sides of the residential phase 1 building. 9. The developer shall submit a plan before the City council meeting that shows the private driveway access point shifted north on Wayzata Boulevard, as discussed in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014. 10. The Developer shall address concerns and comments from the Fire Department regarding fire hydrant locations, fire truck access on Lilac Drive, and fire suppression water sources and reflect changes in the final PUD submittal. 11. The City of St. Louis Park approves that portion of the preliminary planned unit development within its jurisdiction 12. Prior to City Council preliminary review, the Developer shall present strategies to meet parking requirements for the Lot 3 hotel use, which could include additional underground hotel parking and/or a shared parking agreement with the nearby parking ramp. 13. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include bicycle parking counts and locations. 14. The property owners of any parcel in the Central Park West PUD shall follow the travel demand management plans approved for the West End Redevelopment, which will serve to reduce traffic congestion. The owner shall be required to update the plan or submit a new plan to the Golden Valley and St. Louis Park 1-394 Joint Task Force prior to Final PUD approval. The Plan shall also include bicycle and pedestrian traffic data. 15. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Golden Valley for public use of the park outlot. 16. The Final PUD plan submitted shall include a detailed Lighting Plan in accordance with the City's Outdoor Lighting requirements (Section 11 .73). 17. The Applicant shall submit a snow storage plan. 18. A neighborhood meeting with the developer shall be held after an updated traffic study has been completed, but before Final PUD Plan review. The notification area for this meeting shall be expanded to include the entire South Tyrol area. 19. A final design plan shall be reviewed by the City prior to Final Plan approval. --Short Recess-- city 0JV d �'-o �. . alley, PlanningDepartment 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: November 24, 2014 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Subject: Informal Public Hearing— Preliminary PUD Plan for Central Park West PUD No. 121 — 1400 and 1500 State Highway 100 South, 5075 Wayzata Blvd, 1511 Utica Ave South —DLC Residential, LLC, Applicant Summary DLC Residential, LLC, is seeking approval of a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit to develop several buildings and a parking ramp at the southwest quadrant of 1-394 and Highway 100. This PUD proposal is unique in that it is located in both the City of Golden Valley and the City of St. Louis Park. In order to promote high quality site planning, staff at both cities have analyzed the same site plan set simultaneously. ,gid The Preliminary PUD application was heard and approved at the City of St. - `' I-394 Louis Park Planning Commission meeting on November 19. The property is zoned for Business and Professional > Offices in Golden Valley and it is guided for long-term office use on the General Land Use Plan map. The total area of 16th 5tre t ;.� site is 13.48 acres with 6 acres in Golden Valley. The proposed PUD a would allow the applicant to construct -� `< '° `:°"%i(' two 6-story multi-family residential buildings, one 6-story limited service o North hotel, a 7-story parking ramp, two 11- y$� story office buildings, and a park. Currently, the site is primarily covered by impervious surface. T 4.` Page 1 Site Map 1_394 ,• > 6 , 6th Etre caQ L) a U —J N. e Nort M PUD Site Boundary Site Background w. City Boundary This is a unique PUD site because it is located in two cities. The portion of the site in St. Louis Park is located in the city's West End Redevelopment Area and Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district. The TIF district was approved in 2007 to pay for street and infrastructure improvements for the West End development, owned by Duke Realty. Duke received preliminary approval in 2009 from City of Golden Valley and City of St. Louis Park for the Towers at West End preliminary plan, which included four office towers and a parking ramp. However, Duke has not applied for final approval. Both cities have granted several extensions to allow more time to submit the final PUD application. The applicant for PUD No. 121, DLC Residential, LLC, intends to purchase the land from Duke Realty. The site plan in review today was influenced by Duke Realty's Towers at West End plan and by other site conditions. Two key conditions include the border of the TIF district in St. Louis Park and the proximity of the large retaining walls bordering the two major highways. DLC recently developed the Millennium at West End apartments and if final PUD approval is granted, they plan to own and operate the two residential buildings, the park, and the hotel. DLC intends to sell the land slated for office and parking ramp to a developer that specializes in that type of development. An amendment to this PUD would be required by both Cities prior to construction. Page 2 Site Plan Summary and Analysis Lot 1: Residential Phase 1 The first phase of multi-family residential development would ° include 199 units, consisting primarily of one-bedroom and f two-bedroom units. Three-bedroom units, alcoves, and units ` with dens would also be provided. The majority of parking I� ►� � A / spaces, 164 spaces, would be provided underground. On the first floor of the building, 71 spaces would be provided, but , would not be visible from the street. To reach the minimum parking requirement, 33 spaces would be tandem parking 'i� ,� RESIDE NTIAkPHASE I WO 71407 MLSTAUS p spaces. There would also be 25 parking spaces provided on the W-LINUNDnMU east side of the building in a small surface lot. The lobby would be located off of Utica Avenue and 6 guest parking spaces would be designated in the "woonerf," which is a Dutch term ! if ,. for a living street in which all modes of traffic move at walking pace, guided by design elements that calm traffic. The rooms would range in size from 550 square feet to 1,500 square feet. -- ' Rents would range from approximately$1,000/month to $2,800/month depending on the size and location of the unit. y North Some units would be made affordable with rent at 60% of the area median income. Lot 1 comparison to R-4 Zoning District Regulations* Note:Many requirements within the underlying zoning district are flexible in a PUD approval Factor Required Proposed Use Multiple-Family Residential permitted Multiple-Family Residential Height -- 6 stories Density 12 units/acre minimum 85.4 units/acre Floor Area Ratio -- 2.09 Ground Floor Area Ratio .45 .51 Structure Coverage 45% maximum 51% Impervious Surface 60%maximum 82.83% Setbacks Front: 25' Side: 20' Front: 15' Side: 0' Rear: 20' Side: 20' Rear: 60' Side: 0' Lot Area 20,000 square feet minimum 101,495 square feet Car Parking 1.5 spaces per dwelling 266 spaces+33 tandem = 299 1.5 spaces x 199 dwellings= 298.5 spaces spaces *The site is zoned for Office,but this is a comparison of the proposed residential building to its comparable zoning district in Golden Valley,which is R-4 High Density Residential. Outlot A: Park On the site plan, the public gathering space is identified as a linear park. A linear park is a park that is substantially longer than it is wide. The park would act as a connection for pedestrians and bicyclists between the west and east side of the site. The 37,897 square foot park would be Page 3 privately owned by the applicant and a public access easement would be established to ensure perpetual public use. The specific design of the park will be informed by discussions with Parks and Planning staff at City of Golden Valley and City of St. Louis Park. The park will be privately maintained. In response to staff's request, the applicant has agreed to provide pavement markings on one of the paths in the park to distinguish between bike traffic and pedestrian traffic. Lot 2: Residential Phase 2: The second phase of residential development, located entirely in St. Louis Park, is identified as Lot 2/Residential Phase 2 on the site plan. There are 164 units proposed for this building, which would consist primarily of one-bedroom and two-bedroom units with some three-bedroom units, alcove units, and units with dens. Like the residential building on Lot 1, the majority of parking spaces would be provided underground, totaling 169 spaces. On the first floor, 79 spaces would be provided, but would not be visible from the street. No tandem parking is proposed. The lobby would be located off of Utica Avenue and the woonerf, where 4 guest parking spaces would also be designated. Very similar to the LOT 2-RESIDENTIAI]PHASE 2 first phase of residential ' MORO-WUNITS development, the rooms would PAMM ' 'g'inL $TAM range in size from 550 square feet to wM pe�neuna 169-WDENROUNDSTAUS g �I "Re"FM pw1w 1,500 square feet. Rents would W ii range from approximately VANWO ►rr�,irao� $1,000/month to $2,800/month IMMm n,.,oemrA�neA .pro depending on the size and location ,&T W&. IST L"L of the unit. Some units would be y North made affordable with rent at 60%of the area median income. Lot 2 comparison to R-4 Zoning District Regulations* Note:Many requirements within the underlying zoning district are flexible in a PUD approval Factor Required Proposed Use Multiple-Family Residential permitted Multiple-Family Residential Height -- 6 stories Density 12 units/acre minimum 98.8 units/acre Floor Area Ratio -- 2.39 Ground Floor Area Ratio .45 .66 Structure Coverage 45%maximum 66% Impervious Surface 60%maximum 86.14% Setbacks Front: 25' Side: 20' Front: 10' Side: 0' Rear: 20' Side: 20' Rear:0' Side:0' Lot Area 20,000 square feet minimum 72,310 square feet Car Parking 1.5 spaces per dwelling 252 spaces 1.5 spaces x 164 dwellings= 246 spaces *The site is zoned for Office, but this is a comparison of the proposed residential building to its comparable zoning district in Golden Valley,which is R-4 High Density Residential. Page 4 Lot 3: Hotel The 6-story hotel would provide up to 150 rooms. The LOT 3-HOTEL entrance and surface parking would be located off of 65TORIEs-150l1"S Wayzata Boulevard. Underground parking would also 27-UNDEWROUND$TAUS be provided. In both St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, _ ,e hotels must provide at least 1.5 parking spaces per ; room, which requires a total of 225 spaces for this [ 1 � development. With 66 surface lot spaces and 27 (Y- underground spaces totaling 93 spaces, there is not an �„� adequate amount of parking provided. The applicant is a � r3' , X exploring ways to provide additional underground _ ' e.11 parking, a shared parking agreement with the office ramp, or a combination of the two. The hotel would be limited-service, so a restaurant, pool, and other such amenities would not be provided. Limited-service hotels are typically more budget-friendly, employ a smaller staff, and are less costly to operate than full-service hotels. Lot 3 comparison to Commercial Zoning District Regulations* Note: Many requirements within the underlying zoning district are flexible in a PUD approval Factor Required Proposed Use Hotel permitted Hotel &surface parking lot Height 3 stories(more permitted with 6 stories Conditional Use Permit) Floor Area Ratio -- 1.21 Ground Floor Area Ratio -- .2 Structure Coverage 50% maximum 20% Impervious Surface -- 75.78% Setbacks Front: 35' Front: 15' Side: 30' Side: 0' Side: 30' Side: 0' Rear: 30' Rear: 10' Lot Area -- 1.61 acres Car Parking 1.5 spaces/unit 93 spaces 1.5 spaces x 150 units=225 spaces *The site is zoned for Office, but this is a comparison of the proposed hotel building to its comparable zoning district in Golden Valley,which is Commercial zoning. Page 5 Outlot B: Offices & Parking Ramp: Two 11-story office buildings and a 7-story parking ramp are proposed for Outlot B on the south side of the PUD site. The ramp was placed close to the large retaining wall bordering Highway 100 and the offices were placed near existing offices to the west and south. The largest and most visible access point to the parking ramp would be off a � I Utica Avenue and parking ramp entrances would also be provided along Lilac Drive on OuTLOTa- , ` OUTLOT 9- MNA the south and east sides of SOUTH OFFICE NORTH OFFICE 11510111Ef•32.i]i fF/S1FAT DRY I� 13 STDRIFf- TOTALM335SSF �•✓ 31AUSF/'MRY the ramp. In each office W-U,DUMDUMSTAMS WYAL353.SSSSF I 50-UNDEWKWNDSTALIS L building, 50 underground stalls would be provided. A o '� ""f 0 I ,r large drop-off area would be �� located at the entrance to CITY.OF ST.LOUIS.P K' each building. The applicant G5,LD ( I intends to sell Outlot B to an o _ " !�! r`?i '' ++r office developer for further �" i + :, ! !1 1 � 111I I I I I I 1 I I design, construction, and � + management. The parking ��r r(J+ +r_+ , ramp would cross the �� __ municipal boundary with the �� + +� �111 11_X majority located in Golden t~~ Valley. Outlot B comparison to Business&Professional Offices Zoning District Regulations Note:Many requirements within the underlying zoning district are flexible in a PUD approval Factor Required Proposed Use Office and structured parking 2 office buildings&1 parking ramp permitted Height 3 stories(more permitted with 11 stories—offices Conditional Use Permit) 7 stories—parking ramp Floor Area Ratio -- 2.31 Ground Floor Area Ratio .40 .21 (for offices only) Structure Coverage 40% maximum 21% (for offices only) Impervious Surface 60% maximum 82.31% Setbacks Front: 75' Front:varies Side: 60' Side:varies Side: 60' Side:varies Rear: 60' Rear:varies Lot Area Minimum 1 acre 7.01 acres Car Parking 1 space per 250 square 2,634 spaces 353,353 square feet_250= 1,413.4= 1,414 spaces required x 2 buildings= 2,828 spaces required Page 6 Parking Of the 3,597.5 spaces required, the site plan provides 3,278 spaces, which is equivalent to roughly 91% of the total required parking. The site plan is lacking a total of 319.5 spaces according to Golden Valley regulations. St. Louis Park requires less parking than Golden Valley for office and residential uses, so the total parking required by St. Louis Park standards is 2,959 spaces, which is less than what is proposed. However, staffs at both Cities have asked the applicant to address parking shortages for the hotel. Bike Parking The City of Golden Valley requires bike parking calculated as at least 5%of the required car parking. The City of St. Louis Park requires 10%. The applicant has agreed to comply with the 10% requirement and reflect that in the final PUD plans. Bike parking will be provided in the residential building parking ramps, the woonerf area, in the park, and near (and possible inside) the office parking ramp. Staff has expressed interest in seeing as much covered bike parking as possible. To incentivize office users to bike to work, staff is investigating the opportunity to require showers and locker rooms in office buildings through an updated travel demand management plan (TDM plan). Affordable Housing DLC has proposed providing 3% affordable units at 60% of the area median income (based on 2014 AMI rates). The affordable units would consist of eight (8) alcove units, one (1) 1-bedroom, and two (2) 1-bedroom units with a den. This would provide a total of eleven (11) affordable units. Joint Powers Agreement Golden Valley staff proposes that Golden Valley enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of St. Louis Park to address issues that arise with a shared PUD site. Since the parking ramp, park, and one residential building cross the municipal boundary, agreements must be made between the two cities in regards to inspections, permitting, emergency response, assessing, utilities, addressing, fee schedules, and future amendments to the PUD. Planning staff and the City Managers in both cities will meet with key points of contact in each of the affected departments to discuss options. The goal is to create a Joint Powers Agreement vetted by Golden Valley and St. Louis Park City Attorneys as well as by the League of Minnesota Cities, who offer free contract consulting services. The Agreement would ideally be brought to Golden Valley and St. Louis Park City Councils on or before the public hearings for the final PUD plan (if preliminary permission is granted). The Joint Powers Agreement drafted for Duke Realty's previous PUD plan for the site will be used as a starting point. Site Access & Circulation The site is bisected by an east-west liner park that provides a major pedestrian and bicycle link between the West End and the underpass to Highway 100. Additional sidewalks internal to the site connect the proposed uses and a new sidewalk is planned along Utica Avenue. An existing sidewalk along Wayzata Boulevard will remain. Page 7 Automobile access to the office towers is from the Utica to the west, as it the primary access to the parking structure. Additional, secondary, access to the parking structure is from Wayzata Boulevard to the east. The residential buildings and the hotel would have multiple access points along Utica and Wayzata Boulevard. The combined service area for Lots 1, 2, and 3 (hotel and two apartment buildings) would be tucked into the woonerf between the three buildings. Pavement treatments and design elements would slow vehicles and allow for the mixing of pedestrians and automobiles. The applicant has agreed to limit garbage pick-up to one servicer, reducing the number of trucks that would have to enter the area. The site is currently served by transit routes 9, 604, and 649. West 16th Street at its intersection with Utica has already been constructed to accommodate bus service. Metro Transit has indicated they are examining options for incorporating the new development into their existing routes. Landscaping &Tree Preservation The applicant has submitted landscaping plans which indicate a significant concentration of trees and landscaping around the perimeter of the site, as well as within the central park. As outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division, the City Forester will review the plans in more detail and work to alleviate concerns regarding potential corner visibility issues. A Tree Preservation Permit will be required before construction begins. Financial securities will be required to cover the cost of any landscaping replacement during the two-year warranty period. Easements & Utilities An existing 20 foot wide watermain easement exists along the eastern boundary of the PUD. This easement will remain in place as the project is constructed. There is an existing shared operation and access agreement in place over the privately owned Lilac Drive which will also remain. Dedication of additional drainage and utility easements along all streets, property lines, and plat boundaries will be required as part of the final plat. An Alternate Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) analysis was completed in 2007 and updated in 2013 based on previous proposals for the West End and for this site. A new update was conducted in October of 2014 to compare the impacts of the current proposal to those identified previously. Sanitary sewer and water usage under the revised scenario both remained below the limits of what can be accommodated, though the water system capacity rose above the preferred 90%total system use for St. Louis Park. Current plans indicate all sanitary sewer and water services will be provided by St. Louis Park. Long term capacity concerns regarding water may suggest that one or more properties could receive water service from Golden Valley. Page 8 Stormwater& Impervious Surface The entire development drains into the Minnehaha Creek Watershed and the two cities have agreed that St. Louis Park will coordinate the review of the Stormwater Management Plan for the entire PUD with the developer and the watershed. As phased development occurs, individual properties within Golden Valley must obtain Stormwater Management Permits from the City. The amount of impervious surface for the entire PUD is estimated to be 79%. Our PUD standards require the amount to remain under 90%for Mixed Use projects that include housing, retail, and office. Traffic Generally, traffic circulates around the site on a soon-to-be reconstructed Utica Avenue South and the Wayzata Boulevard south frontage road. The 2014 AUAR update projects a reduction of traffic levels in the PM peak and a slight increase in the AM peak. Previous traffic projections prompted Golden Valley to recommend intersection and road improvements to the east of the site at the intersection with Quentin Avenue and east along Wayzata Boulevard. Additional review is underway to determine if these improvements are still necessary under the revised proposal. Fire Safety The Fire Department reviewed this proposal to ensure that all buildings are equipped with fire protection systems and that adequate emergency vehicle access is achieved on the site. A memorandum from the Fire Department that addresses fire access, water supply, and fire hydrants is attached. Signs and Lighting A detailed lighting plan will be required with the final PUD plan submittal. The lighting plan must comply with the outdoor lighting requirements in the City Code. At this point in the planning process, it is understood that sign permitting will be separated by city boundaries. It is possible that signs could be permitted and inspected by only one city, but that is not the current plan. Such an arrangement would require language in a joint powers agreement between the two cities. Findings for Approval In order to be approved as a PUD, the City must be able to make the following findings: 1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site, such as the proximity to high retaining walls and highway traffic to the north and east and high-density development to the south and west. With flexibility under a PUD in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements, number of buildings on a lot, and similar requirements,the quality of site planning and design is of higher quality than if each parcel was designed individually under conventional provisions. By allowing a mix of land uses, the site plan offers the opportunity to live, work, visit, and enjoy outdoor gathering space. The PUD encourages creativity and flexibility in land development. 2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep Page 9 slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands, and open waters. The site is currently used for surface parking and is mostly impervious. Even though 36 existing trees will be removed, the proposed plan adds about 37,897 square feet of public gathering space, roughly 245 trees, and 19,742 square feet of shrubs and perennial beds to the site. 3. Efficient & Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use of the land. The PUD plan provides an appropriate area of the city for high-density office, residential, and hotel uses. The PUD plan encourages development that is sustainable and has a high degree of energy efficiency. 4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. High-density office, commercial, and residential uses surround the site to the south and west. Low- density residential uses are separated from this proposed PUD site by significant highway development. The PUD plan increases housing options,jobs, lodging options, and gathering space to the area. 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. By encouraging the use of contemporary land planning principles, the PUD plan offers the ability to live, work, shop, and spend time outdoors without reliability on the automobile. The PUD plan promotes pedestrian activity and provides high-quality landscaping additions to the site. 6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. The PUD provision permits flexibility from other provisions in Chapter 11 of the City Code. This flexibility is permitted in order to promote the intent and purpose of the PUD section of the City Code. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plan for Central Park West PUD No. 121, subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans prepared by DLC Residential, LLC, submitted with the application on October 20, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014, shall become a part of this approval. 4. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 5. A park dedication fee of$70,568 (2% of the estimated land value) shall be paid prior to approval of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 121" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Page 10 8. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include continuous pedestrian connections between the hotel and parking ramp as well as around the north and east sides of the residential phase 1 building. 9. The developer shall submit a plan before the City council meeting that shows the private driveway access point shifted north on Wayzata Boulevard, as discussed in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated November 17, 2014. 10. The Developer shall address concerns and comments from the Fire Department regarding fire hydrant locations, fire truck access on Lilac Drive, and fire suppression water sources and reflect changes in the final PUD submittal. 11. The City of St. Louis Park approves that portion of the preliminary planned unit development within its jurisdiction 12. Prior to City Council preliminary review, the Developer shall present strategies to meet parking requirements for the Lot 3 hotel use, which could include additional underground hotel parking and/or a shared parking agreement with the nearby parking ramp. 13. The Final PUD plan submittal shall include bicycle parking counts and locations. 14. The property owners of any parcel in the Central Park West PUD shall follow the travel demand management plans approved for the West End Redevelopment, which will serve to reduce traffic congestion. The owner may be required to update the plan or submit a new plan to the Golden Valley and St. Louis Park 1-394 Joint Task Force prior to the final PUD approval. 15. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Golden Valley for public use of the park outlot. 16. The Final PUD plan submitted shall include a detailed Lighting Plan in accordance with the City's Outdoor Lighting requirements (Section 11.73). Attachments Location Map (1 page) Memo from the Public Works Division dated November 17, 2014 (6 pages) Memo from the Fire Department dated November 17, 2014 (3 pages) Site Plans submitted October 20, 2014 (39 pages) Page 11 City of golden!'.40' MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) ark.- Date: November 17, 2014 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Subject: Central Park West— Preliminary PUD Review Engineering staff has reviewed the plans for the proposed Central Park West development, submitted by DLC Residential (Developer). The proposed development is located in the southwest corner of Interstate 394 and Trunk Highway 100 and replaces a previously approved proposal from Duke Realty for construction of four office towers and a parking ramp. The proposed development consists of a mix of residential apartments, office, hotel, and public open space uses.The majority of this site is located within the City of St. Louis Park. However, the eastern portion of the site is located within the City of Golden Valley, immediately adjacent to Highway 100 and Wayzata Boulevard (the south frontage road for 1-394). This memorandum focuses on the portion of the project located in Golden Valley and discusses issues identified during the Engineering review that must be addressed prior to final PUD plan submittal. The comments contained within this review are based on the plans submitted to the City on October 17, 2014. Site Plan The portion of the proposed PUD within the City of Golden Valley includes the construction of the following: • an eight-level parking ramp adjacent to the proposed offices (shown on Outlot B) • part of a six-story apartment building which extends across the city limit line (Lot 1, Block 1) • a portion of the linear park public open space (Outlot A) • a surface parking lot for the hotel (Lot 3, Block 1) The Developer must provide a plan showing the anticipated phasing of construction of the parcels above, as part of the final PUD plan submittal. This plan must also show and describe the temporary parking, staging, and access plan related to construction. G:\Developments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)\Preliminary PUD review_111714_ee.docx The Developer proposes three permanent access points onto Wayzata Boulevard in Golden Valley. One of these access points is an existing private street serving several properties on the west side of Highway 100, south of this PUD. This street intersects Wayzata Boulevard in the middle of a sharp curve just west of Highway 100. The other two proposed access points are north of this intersection and will serve the new uses described above. In order to minimize potential conflicts on Wayzata Boulevard near the intersection with the existing private street, the Developer is encouraged to move the center driveway access to the north to provide additional separation and to discourage cut-through movements to Utica Avenue.Through further discussions, the Developer has indicated that the center access will be shifted north to address these concerns. The development includes the removal of existing driveway entrances and the construction of new entrances. Therefore, a City Right-of-Way Management Permit is required. All driveway entrances must meet the City standards for commercial driveway aprons. Plans submitted by the Developer show the construction of pedestrian facilities through the linear park open space to promote east-west movements between Utica Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard. The plans also show pedestrian facilities connecting all new structures and parking lots to the City's existing sidewalk along Wayzata Boulevard. All new pedestrian facilities must meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility standards. The City of Golden Valley owns and maintains the existing concrete sidewalk on the south and west side of Wayzata Boulevard adjacent to this PUD. This existing sidewalk extends to the east under Highway 100 to connect with the existing sidewalk on Wayzata Boulevard/Quentin Avenue on the east side of the highway. The plans indicate that the existing sidewalk on Wayzata will remain in place during and after construction. The City will need to inspect this sidewalk to determine its current condition and compliance with ADA accessibility standards and City engineering standards. The Developer will need to reconstruct portions of the sidewalk as part of the development if not meeting current standards. At a minimum, the Developer must install curb ramps meeting ADA accessibility standards and City standards at all street and driveway crossings, as directed by the City Engineer. The Developer will also be responsible for replacing any portions of the existing sidewalk that is damaged as part of the construction. Staff recommends that the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park and the Developer discuss the options for long-term maintenance of the sidewalk on Wayzata Boulevard adjacent to this PUD. All public sidewalk parallel to Wayzata Boulevard must be located within platted right-of-way or dedicated walkway easements. If easements are required, the Developer must submit legal descriptions and exhibits with the final PUD. A City Right-of-Way Management Permit is required for all excavations and obstructions within public right-of-way including sidewalk construction. GADevelopments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)\Preliminary PUD review_111714_ee.docx Traffic Management In 2007, the City of St. Louis Park prepared an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the PUD that was proposed at that time. The purpose of an AUAR is to determine potential impacts from the development to adjacent facilities and to evaluate potential environmental impacts. The AUAR included a traffic analysis of the development. As part of the previous PUD proposal,the City of Golden Valley's consulting Traffic Engineer, Mike Kotila of SEH, Inc., reviewed the AUAR in 2009 for potential traffic impacts in Golden Valley. One of the recommendations at that time was to modify the intersection of Wayzata Boulevard and Quentin Avenue on the east side of Highway 100 by making it an all way stop condition and providing additional turn lanes to better accommodate the increased traffic and vehicle stacking in this area. The Developer's engineer has updated the AUAR Analysis to reflect the change of uses and traffic projections in the Central Park West PUD (attached to this memo). The updated AUAR Analysis and PUD plans have been forwarded to the City's Traffic Engineer for review. This review will determine if the traffic calming measures deemed necessary in 2009 are still applicable, given the land use changes included in this PUD. The Developer may be required to enter into a deposit agreement to finance the review. Preliminary Plat As discussed earlier in this review, portions of this PUD are located in both Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. The three existing parcels in Golden Valley are comprised of both platted and unplatted properties. The south two parcels contain portions of the Kavlis Cedardale plat of record. City records indicate that the streets and alleys within Kavlis Cedardale have been vacated. The City of Golden Valley has an eight inch ductile iron watermain within a 20-foot wide watermain easement (Document No. 2491260) along the eastern boundary of the PUD. The Developer has shown and labeled this easement on the preliminary plat. This watermain easement must remain in place and therefore will not be vacated. The preliminary plat submitted by the Developer did not include the dedication of drainage and utility easements. The final plat for this development must include easements along all streets, property lines, and plat boundaries consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. This PUD is adjacent to Trunk Highway 100 and therefore, the plans must be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)for review and comment. Utilities (Water and Sanitary Sewer) The plans submitted show that all uses in the PUD will receive sanitary sewer and water service from the City of St. Louis Park. The updated AUAR Analysis identifies water use as a potential limiting factor to development in the revised development scenario. As a potential solution to long term capacity concerns in GADevelopments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)\Preliminary PUD review-1 1 1714—ee.docx St. Louis Park, Golden Valley could serve one or more properties with water. Staff recommends that the two cities discuss this further with the Developer. In the original AUAR prepared by the City of St. Louis Park, Golden Valley identified a capacity issue with MCES Interceptor 1-GV-461. The Golden Valley concern was that additional sewer flows would be generated from the PUD before the completion of the MCES Forcemain Reliever project. However, the delay in construction of the PUD has allowed MCES to complete several phases of construction. It appears now that the MCES Lift Station and final phase of the Reliever project will be constructed in 2015 and should be completed and operational before completion of the PUD. The Developer must show and label the planned location of the MCES forcemain on the final PUD plans. In order to help reduce the amount of inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system,the City has an Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Ordinance. All buildings in the PUD located within or partially within the City of Golden Valley must comply with the City's 1/1 Ordinance.Therefore, each sewer service must be inspected by Golden Valley and found to be compliant prior to the occupancy of the buildings. Stormwater Management The proposed development is located within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. As such, the project will require plan review and permitting by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Because most of the stormwater improvements are within the City of St. Louis Park, St. Louis Park staff has agreed to coordinate the review of the Stormwater Management Plan for the entire PUD with the Developer and MCWD to ensure the plan meets MCWD, St. Louis Park, and Golden Valley requirements. This coordination includes the drafting and recording of all maintenance agreements necessary to ensure the permanent stormwater facilities are adequately inspected and maintained into the future. Coordination by St. Louis Park may also include permitting and inspection of the temporary erosion and sediment control measures associated with the initial phases of development, if not specific to any one parcel. The Developer must submit a construction phasing plan with the final PUD plan submittal to assist the cities in coordinating this effort. In addition to a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit, the City of Golden Valley will require that the Developer obtain a City Stormwater Management Permit for each parcel within the City of Golden Valley, as phased development occurs. This PUD is also subject to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Construction Stormwater Permit. A copy of this permit and the corresponding Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be submitted to the City before work can begin. GADevelopments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)\Preliminary PUD review_111714_ee.docx Tree Preservation/Landscape Plan The portion of the PUD in Golden Valley is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance and Minimum landscape Standards, unless otherwise agreed to by the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. A Landscape Plan and an inventory of significant trees were submitted by the Developer. A Tree Preservation Permit will be required before construction can begin. The City Forester will review the plans in more detail and work with the Developer on tree and shrub selection and location, and alleviating potential corner visibility issues, before submittal of final PUD plans. The Developer must submit an estimate of the cost to furnish and install the landscape plant materials shown within the Golden Valley portion of the PUD. This cost estimate will be used to determine the financial security which is held as a guarantee that the landscaping will survive the two-year warranty period. Staff recommends that the City Foresters and other staff from St. Louis Park and Golden Valley consider discussing tree and landscape requirements and the responsibilities for plan review, collection of financial securities, and inspections. Summary and Recommendations Engineering staff recommends approval of the preliminary PUD plans for Central Park West subject to the review of the City's Traffic Engineer, Mike Kotila of SEH, and the comments contained in this review, which are summarized as follows: 1. The Developer must provide a Construction Phasing Plan for the PUD that shows and describes the temporary parking, staging, and access plan related to construction, as discussed in this review. 2. A City Right-of-Way Management Permit is required for all proposed excavations and obstructions within public rights-of-way and easements, including driveway and sidewalk construction, as discussed in this review. 3. The Developer must install ADA curb ramps at all street and driveway crossings, and replace/reconstruct any portions of the City's sidewalk on Wayzata Boulevard that are damaged during construction or do not currently meet ADA or City standards, as discussed in this review. 4. Staff recommends that the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park and the Developer discuss the options for long-term maintenance of the sidewalk on Wayzata Boulevard adjacent to this PUD. 5. The updated AUAR Analysis and PUD plans have been forwarded to the City's Traffic Engineer for review. The Developer may be required to enter into a deposit agreement to finance the review. 6. The final plat for this development must include drainage and utility easements along all streets, property lines, and plat boundaries consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 7. Staff recommends that the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park and the Developer discuss water service to the properties in the PUD, as discussed in this review. GADevelopments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)\Preliminary PUD review_111714_ee.docx 8. The Developer must show and label the planned location of the MCES Forcemain Reliever on the final PUD plans. 9. Sewer services to buildings in Golden Valley must be inspected by Golden Valley and found to be compliant with the City's 1/1 Ordinance prior to occupancy of the buildings. 10. The Developer must obtain a City Stormwater Management Permit for each parcel within the City of Golden Valley, as phased development occurs. 11. The City Forester will review the Landscape Plans in more detail and work with the Developer to alleviate potential corner visibility issues, before submittal of final PUD Plans. 12. The Developer must submit an estimate of the cost to furnish and install the landscape plant materials shown within the Golden Valley portion of the PUD, as discussed in this review. 13. Staff recommends that the City Foresters and other staff from St. Louis Park and Golden Valley consider discussing tree and landscape requirements and the responsibilities for plan review, financial securities, and inspections. 14. Subject to the review and comments by the City of St. Louis Park, MCWD, MnDOT, MCES, and MPCA. Approval is also subject to the comments of the City Attorney, other City staff, and other agencies. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Attachment C: Tom Burt, City Manager Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director John Crelly, Fire Chief Jerry Frevel, Building Official Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor and City Forester Mark Ray, Street Maintenance Supervisor Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor RJ Kakach, Engineer GADevelopments-Private\Central Park West(former Duke)1Preliminary PUD review_111714_ee.docx o l d , val ley Fire Department 763-593-8079/ 763-593-8098 (fax) Date: November 17, 2014 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: John Crelly, Fire Chief Subject: Preliminary PUD—Central Park West, Southwest quadrant of 1-394 & Hwy 100 I have reviewed the preliminary PUD application for Central Park West located at the Southwest quadrant of 1-394 & Hwy 100, This PUD is unique due to how this project overlays the City boundary lines of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. This review is written as if the whole project is located in Golden Valley. Moving forward it will be necessary to have discussions with St. Louis Park to coordinate code items and concerns pertaining to fire department site/building access, water supply and fire protection systems. Site Plan, Sheet 6040 Site access: Minnesota State Fire Code (MSFC) section 503 provides details on "Fire Apparatus Access Roads" and appendix D details dead-end fire apparatus access road turnaround configurations. This proposed development is bounded by Utica Avenue South (west side), I- 394/ Hwy 100 service (north/northeast side), Lilac Drive (east side) and a private road connecting Lilac Drive and Utica Avenue South (south side) of the property. All of the perimeter roads are a minimum of 24 feet in width. These roads provide good access to the area. Proposed on the site are a total of six structures. There is a private drive off of Utica Avenue South that provides access to the south office building, north office building and a parking ramp. The width of the road is 24 feet and is provided with what appears to be a compliant "hammer head" turn around, large enough to accommodate fire apparatus,just as you reach the parking ramp. This configuration is acceptable. There is a private drive off of Utica Avenue South that provides access to the residential phase 1 and phase 2 buildings. This private drive does continue to the east and it connects to the 1- 394/ Hwy 100 service drive. This road varies in width from 20 to 24 feet and has several turning movements in the area between the three buildings. On the plan, "Note 5" indicates this is intended for service vehicles only. Where the private drive jogs, the turning radiuses combined with the width of the road makes it impossible to maneuver fire apparatus through Page 1 of 3 this area thus creating two very long dead ends with no compliant turn around. Use of this private drive will be required to come closer to meeting the requirements of MSFC section 503.1.1 of providing access to within 150 feet of all portions of the buildings. This area should be reviewed and adjusted to provide adequate road width and proper turning radiuses to allow fire apparatus to drive through this area. In reviewing the requirements of MSFC section 503.1.1 of providing access to within 150 feet of all portions of the buildings there are three buildings that are compliant. They are the south office building, the residential building phase 2 and the hotel. The other buildings have varying degrees of not meeting this code requirement. It should be noted that the Fire Code Official is authorized to increase this dimension if the building is protected throughout with a fire sprinkler system. In reviewing both the parking ramp and the north office tower there is about 150 feet of building exterior that does not meet code. The Residential phase 2 building has about 200 feet of building exterior that exceeds the 150 feet requirement. Utility Plan, Sheet 6060 Water Supply and Fire Protection Systems: This site has six proposed structures ranging from 6 to 11 stories above grade and several have underground parking. There is no indication of the proposed type of construction. Minnesota State Fire Code (MSFC) section 508 provides details on "Fire Protection Water Supplies" and appendix B and C detail "Fire-Flow Requirements for Buildings" and "Fire Hydrant Locations and Distribution". Based on assumptions on the type of construction and approximate square footages of the buildings, the MSFC requires a fire flow of approximately 6750 gallon per minute (gpm) to the site for any particular building. Assuming the buildings are protected with full NFPA 13 fire sprinkler systems, the MSFC allows the code official to reduce the required fire flow. For discussion purposes, it appears that the required fire flow could be reduced to 2000 gpm with an average spacing between fire hydrants of 450 feet. This plan shows adding one fire hydrant between the two office buildings and parking ramp. This appears to be in a good location. This location appears to be approximately 100 feet from where a fire department connection might be located on each of the three buildings. Other existing fire hydrants are shown on the plan. However, the plan does NOT clearly indicate the location of fire hydrants along Lilac Drive, so it appears that the average spacing is exceeded. Along the connecting road between Lilac Drive and Utica Avenue South the average spacing is exceeded and would require an additional fire hydrant. Along Utica Avenue South where it intersects with 16th Avenue South it appears that the 450 feet average spacing of fire hydrants along Utica Avenue South is exceeded. Is there a fire hydrant located at this location? The last area that appears to exceed the average fire hydrant spacing is along the private driveway that runs between Utica Avenue South and the 1-394/ Hwy 100 service drive. A fire Page 2 of 3 hydrant needs to be added somewhere on site between the two residential buildings and the hotel. The proposed fire water services to the five proposed buildings appears to be adequate. It is not clear as to how fire suppression water will be provided to the 7 level parking garage. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065, or e-mail jcrelly@goldenvalleymn.gov Page 3 of 3 I V E DEC 0 9 2014 BY:— St Y:Central Park West St Louis Park City Council - Dec. 15, 2014 at the West End Golden Valley City Council - Dec. 16, 2014 L�AW-,.. .. ,�•2 ":,. .. , ..:" ,YspY S s.:.:-,h .x> .,:.,,. , ,y,..x l , , ,r ,.r, z ,.� ,.. @. � rsr•,.:.,,.., .t ... t.° .<�a rt ... �,�, ,., .., u' 3 ., , ,.'r ,. r ,. .. s •,,,u" x, ,.. ,,. .:, a -,,: ,.. ...-,. z.... { :.rt„�.rL ,.. -. ., 'il,.:. "' d ,,, t -. :.;:.,,.�. : ._ ,. ,. rsZ.:,:.,... ..... .. .r�r, ,,.. ". ,pro. ,r,. „«::.r�w• ., ,,, ... ,. .,. .x:t,. ..'.t "... �. 4i, #a* b tt" n.... , r _-,r.,..x - z. .x .., r r•'.,.fi,, k .P r.. t ,,.. ros"x , .. w�� ru:,,,�.� it -«.- �, .�" .,., ,,, ,. ,,,.,..,. -x. •. ,,._. : ,,.. `�'.. , 5 , < ..;.,..,,,; y, # , \. ,,.... ;< >.a�m r;„c;.. § s -r� ¢° .,,.,, �.Y��.., v ,-.�;,• � r, ,t«x k;..., s, '�'” ,w;,,tr �,t, _. �. ,,,_.:, h� Y ,,:u�<• : '�,- «,,xrr;'".fry r",, �bm .+" 4-+.. bn, .:, .,>.-,i•` RJ.r:<, r o' '� if tr *ono- :� t f 3t+ 1�£� t. � .,"+. } t -s .,4k ,.� t r, E+"': m',L"�';. a�,4• x' „ r �' s `."�1 "fa ' i a, •,S4 �, � e,','�w ::..4,. 'pb:,'r,r rt�.:si" ;; �' r~ �",:, r `t� i'`'�u�t•; a r "r i'�'} T •M's t, � zr§- y �:.:x:�' +_ '�*r'�a:,.ss*4 &,?`"?R4„�z"r r, � :: wrtz x.,: "trt ��'! r t 'h; a: ,$ ,F•. .,,1 a ::a�+� a�,. >y t+^nr3s „Te* 'z t .. , xY , ? n�3,.. ,� ...,: 'w9 s.2:. r `ti , ...,:., x..s:fr.Y t`w� Y, ,x ,, s,P,t.-,... '�, < k.4y:k r.,«}:< •a+3#«,y MRyy#T» haft 7 .. :.« ,. ! „>,, ,:.. r- } �✓4 . .,,: ✓ ,..{.¥ ,";o-,r „ :{` i ,«: ry ryr „' ,r,e, ,tzk e.:i � ..Ts' ) i". ` : ,_ :. . , , , •�;:. x<. P-,� Y; 4 .,v:, t p„J � z.. 'xt , r G »p 4Y'S, �'{F � yL M 5 r v 111 I » I x , , : a s u, r , x ,v m ! s.Y," r:1.. "3. �""N,.. } .,r f/">:� j _ M"'.�, � '3c "x,Y'�„�{"''a b�•Rro'a<'r r �q r x- i .:. : #:v�'a ...,.xS4 `..y.. e,`., r *,x..'+{+ t •a+ 3, .k.,<;y $"6 k�ay-' r '.+v`+ar .a a ! d' ,#g ,e, vim,:y a tir r , a , Y .ar z ! +z h } x��yy fi 4 F y rm j a # ( + c :r. „ I ! 1 t .5 �n Central Park West - Preliminary PUD St. Louis Park/Golden Valley, MN ra L C imlev)Horn loft k 00 `V , f � tp AL 7 IN ♦ y �. srrsrrs ♦ ffi1r:s y�r��r" rr r.r r s-� ♦ �//II�� 'tom�tle'�E��!*�`� ♦ � '. !\t\l11 1 h f � u It ♦ � � Y / S g .`• 1J cn r-r rDD N $ w, rn � ' OVERALL KEY SITE DESIGN PRINCIPLES FFFv: Work closely with St Louis Park r r fr J- Golden Valley Staff ME Complete the extension of the P - sho sat West End Mixed Use Redevelopment u o office from i IRR J ° Reduce the amount o m 1 1 Million SF (as is currently approved) to `'�-�� ~" �� 70 00 SF, thus re traffic/trips reducing trac/trip r, -� and greatly reducing the parking ramp size I Provide high-quality Site and Public Realm features including r � r - Central Park Public Amenity Utica Boulevard Extension � - - Network of pedestrian/bike - t friendly streets, courtyards, gardens and amenity terraces > Create a sustainable model for redevelopment including 706,000 square f Office space, 363 Residential units and 150 Hotel rooms Provide 3% affordable residential at ` ..:., JV, Y J' ti Y.: Central Park West - Preliminary PUD St. Louis Park/Golden Valley, MN �R ` Birdseye View- Developed Site w, : 4 t I w- r, v. w i a � ti z' is AW f -- Woonerf: Auto/Pedestrian court Central Park: Program of active/passive uses being developed with Staff Rirrlcaua\/ia�ni- I nnkinn Fact 12/15/2014 SLP City Council - 12/16/2014 GV City Council GATEWAY TO GOLDEN VALLEY Create a pedestrian/bike gateway link to Golden Valley through a major extension of the Central Parkg reen and trail connections. Featuring: p � Extended Trails __. Extensive Greening z , Entry Kiosk r- � Innovative green screens and Architectural facades at proposed parking and buildings f _ - � Buffer new development from the -Li A: - visual and acoustic blight casued b g y the massive (+/ 30' high and +/- 400' wide) Highway 100 concrete freeway through careful placement of the S� proposed parking facility and heavily RE91DEN71AL ed tree buffer along _ - landscaped he east t edge south of the Gateway Elimination of the parking ramp "wall" l no r he gateway to Golden Valley x: th of t -..' from previously approved Preliminary ,.� PUD PF 0.1 a. w w f1 Central Park West - Preliminary PUD St. Louis Park/Golden Valley, MN ° L C , ; `-) E N T I A L Kim1ey,,*Horn , 5 Gateway to Golden Park Gateway Monument Gathering Area Valley Kiosk Open Recreation "Green" Children's Play Area Bike Service Area � t , �4 t � � v4�}� Y ,t..��R,:y �"' �y 1''4rxl'✓ ,f R .Sr'ST^ Yy4 � J"Y+y' � �„ �, s y f \ i u u I Y � Y. ,E� 4+ . N i I ls _ g r, tti 1 Y � Sustainable stormwater management/ Native prairie Area Y 0' 10' 25' 40' Central Park West Plan Pedestrian/Bike Path a, GRANT* D WAY` z i , Y* : GRAND"L WAY t »rte M .m w Excelsior & Grand - Comparative Plan for Scale ('antral Parr Plan rmmnarativa Plan 12/15/2014 SLP City Council - 12/16/2014 GV City Council gf k I t^J Ym # y Y t r X � _ r v IT aearrnrn � i nnrgy A iea� N co � v r errnnreeerree� i f , r I j I , ` Z 111 c � v 1 1 1 ! I 0 l I t 1 11� v I 76 1 U x : �ta17 ; e` ,t CL y, cu c s _ � 1 � I+ � 1 a. N L 1 I I _ i �M L 1'I -3+ o N : M ZA ' Ln I y i t a fi ,rte r s N Ql N O N A Cl) - n 0 C— :3 4 � w v fA Ae w //_ #, ------------- NOW, P , t z d A ' +it ,a :n ./IIlRdl�e +i s. ti M #y e. + AX AV ----------------- ------------ 41 a 0 m a a m it M It I yea i, �' a°• ', 3 srQ wo o n e rf Dutch term for "living street" or "living yard" g — All modes of traffic move at a walking pace -- automobiles, bicyclists, pedestrians Curbs, which encourage speed, are removed Designed elements pattern a safe environment -- bollards, paving patterns, benches, trees, planters, lighting NNS\v Scale:1'-0"=40' \1J 0' 10' 25' 40' t r 5 , p f t Y yk r, > 5 , n RESIDENTIAL P j , 12/15/2014 SLP City Council - 12/16/2014 GV City Council 1A/nnnarf `t7 a�a_`'i rr�rPr#aW/PGin/PoX,,,t'r'1;k I'W r � � � P � , r r P cu ^a�o,�0b CL f� 3 45 t41 its' f_ d. A, k,4 I" w vt � g , z s� x pp a�,t } ` x,... r {/;f" rlkf•f- ti"{�' Mme' r Tl- * 1 i 1 F f } { vP. — r } i 111 _0 O RIO I / ! Ir Vn JAA d' R wwnar ►rw fr P u Row 0 BUS UTICA '?V Ilk- TURNAROUND AVE Park Gateway _. x Monument _ i RESIDENTIAL I pen Recreation „Green" _ - SOUTH E NORTH p LINEAR OFFICE EE PARK I OFFICE �WOONERF— D� LN , Gathering `p - ?-- Area EXISTING tBike Service Area HOTEL HEALTH PARTNERS E - - . . : PARKING . 17 q STRUCTURE �JO r RESIDENTIAL ' Q•�P LI�A� Gateway to Golden i DR 1VE Valley Kiosk �. LEGEND '�► ` fir```- �' , ,,.,,_ - - -__. � -- -, ----- � : t DECIDUOUS TREES HIGH STAT E _ —J sq wAY ADO ORNAMENTAL TREES g Property r �� EVERGREEN TREES Aft SHRUB BEDS y WEST END DEVELOPMENT Kimley >>MornaSt. Louis Park, MN / Golden Valley, MN December 2014 architects 0 25' 50' I40O'NNOH-A31WIN'MMM '3144 L611-949-I99:3NOHd ��/ZQ/� N9CZ 3LIOS 1199 NM'InVd iS'1S3M 3W AL5N3AINO OGGZ 99/9ti WOML$NO3HO 1S3M IHIINTIIS32J Ola Z O f aBmnN 3SN33n NN SlW tf N I- ] O A9 NMVNO NNW IVNIN30 Nw ,311dn N3a-loon+add slnoi -is oo'", uaoH {<�a �� 3rutld Stl�nl MW�03NJ530 w •� 3,VOS idld ANVNIWIMd 1S3M�12ibd�b'2i1N3� N N �N33NION3 NOI530 O r O W Z J NORTH N — ——� aC g a I I a-I;o z I I L -: WAYZATA BLVD i i 0 Li Caw x — — _ .ZbM805S8h.88 !I �oLull =w 1 -- ------- -- T'�y 00 p w w w w x woo q, I sA I I I \1 � A M ¢ wLLon " w h ~ O o g o> � s kk� I ° I I ♦ zc W g o a co z 8^ 61 O' OOD4S I$ I o Y I/� \V \\ \\ 00000 IM. a o $ _j m N00 \ \ m xo ' I \ a _.I haw yaaow\ u�oauo MM 9.0000.00.06N i gi a I I \ 1 I lg; _ I 0 1 I I I I n � i l�rtil�as §R I / yowl SYE�3.00'00.00.66N —I— �. —— _'_ n� g 1 -•I I.:� 11 I ))) I�x /I L � 1 .K EBI M.0000.00 OB� Wlm.00'Ioo.Brl—� I/ 3 a b I bcfiL I N" I I > I • Imo@ ! I. —, _ s '�— — II—� -I ' ' �� -- ----------------- �— I I II w - Ir--- --------------------I—,�I 4t-"/ �1 W '� I I lx� X111 m I !ilii I II j// ' I f II 11 `/ i ail �O ' 411 ;L II " �i-i i �� '`� -- —�ry .I�—�y i/1 i �! I H -,J IN I 1 Z (/.�/ x ? 198 I '1/ 1• I I� es.aa _� a� I III .qx •�� \eL I VI— I � // �� —1Jl' ._ m'j al — _—`y 'IPI_ i�� `_---- --_--- --!__'J.I- —14-it:\, >Y �� ' i� I I wa f�F'� I�/I; R$_ I-1_• ';1� ��1IIle �— J g J .J i g I —7 -----� --� a 1 `gip I auk•.aWf�.mV poi WOH�.wM.1 Fi III9.11 ino411w P�6.W'aul'.aoloo y B R4.,11.1do Bw ualV.zP.41n.wANM IM411x. ledma p..1..rnN Gvotlatl. .»{1.N Vu./1�.6inQ'aUf.a..VI,oJ erye B uqu. o luawnnsu u sa,tl sus sap D a41 4 4ta6o1 . — Central Park West St Louis Park MN Mech DLC Residential 1414110 Wit WWWWW Mech $ u.r$.. f�-....... 30 ❑ Bike ❑ Spaces 1 I \ 1 •` I A V I ( cro a 1 ❑ o ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ i r 156 Spaces PI 1 r------------------ --� I I \1 I 1 I i I Hotel elness Swenson graham architects ❑ ❑ ❑ Area ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 14,136 SF ❑ 500 Washington avenue south s6.>szsF I minneapolis minnesota 55415 p. 6 1 2 3 3 9 5 5 0 8 \ f. 6 1 2 3 3 9 5 3 8 2 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i ❑ ❑ ° www e s g a r c h c o m I I I nereby unuy chat tms tlocvment was pcepama by me or unser my alma su pereismn I I I and that I..a tlulY licensed arch nett I ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ antler I1he laws of the State of Minnesota 1 Bi n g a � I tore I I I Typed or IrintGd Name license ate I r D 1 I I ' I n i I ° 0 0Outline of Level 1 Above I I I I I ' I Mech i Up MUA PRELIMINARY PUD ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBMITTAL 'I aoil 0 i DRI C INAL ISSUE: 12/02/14 n a V v REVISIONS V V V No. Description Da Area 71,605 SF I 1 V V V V ___� __� _______ _______ I 214521.00 PROJECT NUMBER n O I n n I BLC DLG I � DRAWN BY CN EC[ED BY Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C C ❑ C C C ❑ e 71 .aq GB '�'(1� Cy' M I I eGF n 198 Standard Spaces and 16 Tandem Spaces P1 I o N I I I I ° DEC 0 3 2014 tea: ❑ c c e ❑ ¢ ❑ 'I ❑ ❑ j ° ech P1 LEVEL PLAN J 11]I __I]—N— ❑ ... Preliminary PUD ❑ ❑ Q N i BP-P1 I A1 .0 A1.0 1"=50'-O" � Central Park West \ M19p.c.s St Louis Park MN 2BR DLC Residential 996 SF -- Outline of P1 BelowTrashMech ❑ ❑1 BR 1 � I I I ` o ❑ ❑ F O U 1 p 2BR 978 SF O o I O U p ❑ i U � ❑ I I I o n I I 2 B i n n W 978 SF 1 o n n n DOG RUN k n n 2 BR n o I HOTEL k 9780SF ❑ ° I 14,136 SF elness Swenson graham architects n o I 1 500 washington avenue south n n 1 minneapolis minnesota 55415 n n I 1 p. 6 1 2 3 3 9 5 5 0 8 2 BR ❑ ❑ I f. 6 1 2 3 3 9 5 3 8 2 978 SF Q n n I w w w . e s g a r c h c o m n n I _ 1 hereby certlYY that this tlocument waf .q I n n I I Prepared by me or under mY direct fupe rvizian ❑ ❑ ❑ I and that I am a duly licensetl architect 2 BR 'Q I - antler the laws of IM1e State of Mln nesota I Area 978 SF I 1 — 33.957 SF 170 Bike Q [Spaces signature ❑ ❑ I TyDetl or Printetl N I ame 2 B �- - - ----- ------------ 978 SF — I ElcensI a Dal. ❑ ❑ Lobby r r 2 BR 978 SF Service I I 1 I I I >z I Y -El I ` \ \ S i o Service �� I 0 Ramp Down Mech PRELIMINARY PUD -- I 1-44- SUBMITTAL t— 6 F SBikes PARKING pace34,347 SF oD ORIGINAL ISSUE: SEPTEMBER 22,2014 Lj I � __ I ---___I_--�—� FF— 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 REVISIONS Trash No. Description Date ElL-j ss ---- \.'l - --------------------------—-------— ---❑I I 214521.00 I 78 Parking Spaces 1 PROJECTNUMBER I I Alc 2 BR 3 BR AIC BLC DLG L ❑ ❑ 586 SF ❑ 1,132 5F ❑ 11b56 SF 51$6 SF p Q ❑ F 9r ❑ fa--------b I ❑ oanwN eY checRED er t I Pool I I , Lobby i Above I 3,066 SF I 40 N 2,BR 2 R I I Bike ° 1,132 SF ❑ [,132 SF 1,132 SF .132 SF ❑ Z BR ° i ° 2BR I 1 BR 1 BR 1 BR i Spaces 1,085 SF 1,085 SF 706 SF 730 SF 730 SF FIRST LEVEL PLAN ry Preliminary PUD N 1 LEVEL 1 1-100 A1 .1 A1.1 1"=50'-0" Central Park West St Louis Park MN DLC Residential 3 BR Roof Below 1,447 IF \ 1 BR 1 BR Alc 607 SF F 2BR - ��`"Y-•«:.� AIC 728 IF 743 SF 607 IF 1,109 SIF I � I I \ I Alc 607 SF 3 BR Alc 2BR I ❑ 1,417 IF 507 IF 1,109 SF EBR, t I � 2 BR 1,053 IF U - 1 7zR sF \ ' It I \ j I 1 BR 2 BR 776 SF 1 t\ 1,092 SIF 1` \ elness Swenson graham architects ttl Hotel 1 BR DEN , 4.136 sF \ 500 washington avenue south \ j I minneapolis minnesota 55415 924 SIF \ f. 6 1 2 3 3 9 5 3 8 2 2 BR % w w Vv e s g a r c h . c o m 1,092 IF 1 BR DEN T I 924 IF j i\ \ I hereby cemd rnat mH mcpment was \ ,p ,d by me or antler my direct-p-10- ana mat I am a dRly utenPed-0-It 7z6 5F 1 BR 776 SIF i \ underthelawaofthe Stat—fMinnesota \ \ Signature 1 BR I � 7285E 2 B \ 1,053 IF Typed or P,I—d Name License R Date 1 BR 735 SF �� 1 BR DEN 1 BR 2 B 835 IF 728 SF 1•109 SF Alc sol IF u 2 BR 1 BR 1 811 1 SR 2 BR 1,088 SF 743 SF 743 SF 743 IF 1,109 IF I I I I I I PRELIMINARY PUD SUBMITTAL I I 2 BR I 1,083 IF 1 BR 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 2 BR 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR ORIGINAL ISSUE: 09/22/14 728 SF 728 IF 743 5F 1,092 SF 1,092 IF 743 SF 743 SF 1,092 IF I I REVISIONS I 1 BR — No. Description Date 728 SF Tr ❑ I I 1 BR DEN Alc 2 B 2BR BR DEN I 908 SF 586 SF 2 B 1,062 SF 1,062 IF 902 IF 1,092 SF I 1 BR 728 SF 2 BR DEN 214521.00 1,262 SF PROJECT NUMBER 2 BR DEN 6Lc DLG 1,264 SIF 1 BR DRAWN BY CHECKED BY Q 2 BR Alc Alc 2 BR 1 BR 1 BR Alc LD 1,100 SF 586 SF 586 SF 1,132 IF 728 5F 728 SF 586 SF A�}11.eaitySDaces Level 2 / ---"- N — F,� IF r menityTerrace / 3 BR 2BR TYPICAL UPPER LEVEL 2 BR C Z BR i BR 1 BR 1 BR i73Bit Alc 3 BR // 1,428 SIF 1.100 IF PLAN 1,100 SF 1,132 SF 743 SF 743 SF 728 SF 9 SIF 586 SF 1,421 IF / Preliminary PUD N 1 LEVEL 21-166 A1 .2 A1.2 1"=50'-0" Residential Phase I Metrics Lobby Level Use Total GSF I Parking Apt GSF I Amenity R Units Parking Level P1 Parking 71,605 71,605 198 Level Parking/Res 52,938 34,347 18,591 12,624 13 78 Level residential 38,981 38,981 30,850 35 Level residential 38,981 38,981 34,119 38 Level residential 38,981 38,981 34,119 38 Level residential 38,981 38,981 34,119 38 Level residential 37,881 37,881 33,019 37 318,348 1 105,952 212,396 178,850 199 276 Tandem Parking 16 292 Unit Distribution Summary Level Alcove 1 BR 1 BR DEN 2 BR 2 BR DEN 3 BR Beds Units Level P1 Level 2 3 7 1 22 13 Level 5 14 2 12 1 1 50 35 Level 6 14 2 12 2 2 56 38 Level 6 14 2 12 2 2 56 38 Level 6 14 2 12 2 2 56 38 Level 6 14 2 11 2 2 54 37 Total 31 73 10 66 9 10 294 199 % 16% 37% 5% 33% 5% 5% Residential Phase 2 Metrics Lobby Level Use Total GSF Parking Apt GSF Amenity R Units Parking Level P1 Parking 56,752 56,752 156 Level Parking/Res 47,667 33,957 13,710 8,612 9 79 Level residential 31,997 31,997 24,353 28 Level residential 31,997 31,997 28,030 32 Level residential 31,997 31,997 28,030 32 Level residential 31,997 31,997 28,030 32 Level residential 30,888 30,888 26,921 31 263,295 90,709 172,586 143,976 164 235 Tandem Parking 0 235 Unit Distribution Summary Level Alcove 1 BR 1 BR DEN 2 BR 2 BR DEN 3 BR Beds Units Level P1 Level 1 1 8 17 9 Level 5 12 1 8 2 40 28 Level 5 13 3 9 2 45 32 Level 5 13 3 9 2 45 32 Level 5 13 3 9 2 45 32 Level 5 13 3 8 2 43 31 Total 25 64 13 51 10 235 164 % 16% 39% 8% 31% 6% December 01, 2014 ESG CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR. HHH CENTRAL PARK WEST ST LOUIS PARK/GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA PREPARED FOR: o E - a x U _ DLC - oY 3 s 5 u P� 5.,Rrc CrIIlTLA j GIX.aN[A�L >ly}USLY,�CIR. ' aeM-RDS 3u M U >Q a L. �\ NE STVm L0.aLEltgSTR6 a_ N 00 ; REL AVE.i 4],rLat,DA CT.u LAUREL V AVE.u >t Pi20riCT LOCA11ON INDEX OF SHEETS N =�o j YEY ST. W J ` y�y> G0.DEN HILLS d2. pD •�I'� a f 3 a wO< On E ➢aV wAYZA,A a=FWD �f<= �n 6010 TITLE SHEET - IT. < ase^, <iRDL ER,ST. . 6020 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN I I < N p� qua 5T 6030 EXISTING CONDITIONS REMOVALS PLAN I m I F W. 16th ST. aV R TR m l I m I w. 16th T>a. 6040 SITE PLAN , /. 16 th � o i i •� � sT _ swI wLA. 6050 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN w. IB N TT S IS GAMHLE OR. w i56LA. 6060 UTILITY PLAN a a FR ANL[ N� U j I6 �d�N < pARK➢� PAR( 6080 LIGHTING PLAN i 3 2 TT < � 6100 LANDSCAPE PLAN w RD. J 6101 LANDSCAPE DETAILS w $ S' S CEDARWaaD t d ST."' S• STEPxENS< OR. S war TW 6102 LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION PLAN `` BATSWa00 R 2YdAtn>S, $ "•u d V. 251/2 ST. = 59.r/.EN"ST PPL. r5 V.251h a 6103 LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION PLAN v V. Z6tM1 ST V V. 26 th S,, V,23 1.13 `u >c f a `c l w 2]tM1 IT V 27 th ST. i i g UTILITIES: > > a W. z e Qwest: th <Sr. Sv. a ¢aTTAVA K.as, YT T. 1 6244 Cedar Ave S. x Richfield, MN 55423 sr. - 2 Phone: (612) 861.8118 Y o 5 v. es th ST.'^� vT 2e'c,EDalq 3 Contact: Gary Roberson, (gary.robersonOgwest.com) Z CONTACTS: Center Point Energy. 's 700 Linden Ave W. 3 - PO Box 1165 Developer/Owner. LU DLC Residential, LLC LU 5245 Wayzata Blvd. J Minneapolis, MN 55401 NORTH St Louis Park, MN 55416 I- -t Phone: (612) 321.5299 Q ' Contact: Tom Dolan (thomos.dolon®centerpointenergy.com) Phone: (612) 325.9767 Cn > r Contact: Rich Kauffman >W ,J E Xcel Energy. > W Q i 3 1518 Chestnut Ave N.-First Floor Y �" Minneapolis, MN 55403 Civil Engineering Consultant Z S Phone: (612) 630.4549 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 238N d KlmleHorn O WO Contact: Kevin Jones(kevin.m.jones®,Icelenergycom) U St. Paul, MN 55114 co Phone: (651) 645.4197 LLli Comcast Cable: 9705 Data Park Contact: Lucas C. Payne. PE I- < x Minnetonka, MN 55343 ~ 0- U e Municipality. �, 0- Phone: J Phone: (651) 493.5132 �+ •• City of Saint Louis Park LU in 0 Contacts: Rick Mlake(richardlrliske®cobie.comcast.com) C IV5005 Minnetonka Boulevard () a Kelly Doonon (kelly_doonanOcable.comcest.com) St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Time Warner Telecom: DECPhone: (952) 924.2574 0 5480 Feltl Rd. ` O 20% (952) 924.2687 S MlnnetoiTko, MN 55343 - Contact: Sean Walther, Senior Planner E- Phone: (952) 351.2353- Office Scott Brink, City Engineer Cn DATE E (612)805.6827- Mobile City of Golden Valley 12/02/2014 Contact: Bob Strong (bob.strong®twtelecom.com) SY• 7800 Golden Valley Road $ Golden Valley. MN 55427 PROJECT NO. Phone: (763) 893.8000 160755001 Contact: Jeff Oliver, City Engineer SHEET NUMBER 5 RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: DATE: _ Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager 3 _ CITY ENGINEER. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK V,G01 0 MOO'NNOH-A31MINMMM 'add 4lOZ/ZO/Zl L6L1-5p9-158 3NOHd >ILSS NM'lMd'IS 9SL90 AS 03M03HO IA{�V�../Id �O�JiNOO 1dIlN�QIS3?J� Q \O O NBf2 3Ln5 13M 3Y Aiismmmn OSSL minN 3SN01 NN -- Ip j N%VNGiNEMI®�S NW ),TYlVA N3a10J> Md Sinn1S NW 0.L" z p 3WVd'0 SUM -AS 03NOIS3a I M 71�IMd 1M?j1NdJ N UaOH a° N (tt a�tpUl}� ®Nb NOOSMJ3 1S3 a :833NION3 NOIS30 31VOS FN- N U O a F F �O U w 2 w O 5i p ol g Z' � z rn s� i w \ t fnMO 0 LLIZ a a n F O o r I III ill -. 31 — §. II � rn did � n " W o tis A 1 'U 1 16 g o --A \ j III ;IIi A i ' i I d Ia1 i A L/ { III i, l�j �- � � �---- � O �,•�� 6_0 oo6600000 °o °0 ° ° 0 I1I N \ ° °Q °o° XOd 0 Opo0 00o0;c o0°0b 0000CO 000° °0 0000° p0Oo00 00000000 \ \ 00 00 ) ..I 0°°p°0000°0° 1• \\ \ ``c.1 y� r C).-O ob00oo�0 i 1 ) j STM PLE �I�\ \ — } z I§§ i p 1 at 1 I v NORTH N o I 1 11 \ \ } V N i. 5• 7 A IIxu° A• N V r __ J 0 1 II •,.II ..II II:, -may �:.'•"� / � __ -� g-e t li III 11 n � s �II) I I ,1 K, z d l %OWO o I l a Ii 1 I r 11 U, I iso. II I • t( Q N REab =ait I\ •Il � .mg '� o LU p ` 1 til 11 e11 11 II --- ---- 9 / I In U r o� o f r Z I U E'r, w I m II! 1 11 it - 1 r� I LJ jl� n n F7 ff lj ';II a�� II• a, - ILJ 9f y,,11 w ° oS 3 Iy dI(lJl 1 na •` _I �'; - -a ,` Iff R� (,1'(+• m$ tx X w ff f j � w w dtl a I � 1 �� _ \ f II l ° we �� ° _ - ftOe, ^I 1r ------�_.� w w w I' [ i I � • i W " Q om W LL U w Y, i s'l�I II I N z JI 111 J O r ww ° z �� U - �w °a�w o F o >; , tOfa o a w a x o r_= w� � owl, m, —� Z - ozYa ° 0 ° Fw �o u.� ' ZOw oa "_ <0 w ma w ro M a m w - 1 L 61 O f Yi o U ,� n �'n....nn......... p• "....N �. I�. ...... . r� ., 1\IJ'.�, , i $ z . •";' .- �. i 1 a $ z z r. ..�iJ 7 n "T7 7 I I f �: w w w 1 I I h:I _. � LU H I pe ( I w I I xl A O ❑ U- LU I I .oH-1• f.p.n.)ePP.p'' n r, aw 4P aa4Pua rom, ]n aocsV P1 utlH—(alw I , ; n � I r )Po4lly vq IIOW'a vv V P Pxlroy{ro uv)Yw)ro4lw)wwruop (Vy Prre Iv..na•p.ro0.p.w it I +vl puo M aYp.... 4W flw p.Gwi4 F mWvv!o lwwu)cM ue o'up,vV WI au0 cuO�saP puo v)Gvauw ay;Viln,v4lvEP)'iwwrrny c141 fi.....nn.+.. ..��r nn,rr,rnn .rninn.rn r m-�ri r nn+n\e.aerrar,ni.li n..ni..crean n\n............... rn,.rranrvar vin\. rn,r r\..r rrrrrr+r-r-r nn �rn�rnn ,aniro�an .rv�r�n.rr.rnn i,rr�.,n�n n,ry .�nr�n..�..rr.fm nn r r.rv.r,wm.r r n.r� in�u van.aa��r iin,rn•rrn,r.an,n...Fn na..nr r , t ` 313 -"� 77� - - r I I T`, 1 , SEE UTICA AVENUE APROVEt1ENT ...» •�.r - ... �j PLAf-6 FOR OFF SITE REMOVALS, e ^� _l i II V t ! :.. .. a -�-1.- .. -_� ' - — " - — ,..- ! ----' c:.i � �•rss-• -mlrei- �' r:-.r: ..mss-•--��.1�..�.�+:._ _ -�__ .-'�-�-�""'� ". r r r_s r",. '• � 362 —NI s r _ s � s '1 � {i 65. .v �~-�° 0187 l 88 is 153 1s \ + \\ X x-X its Y \ 2 10 j I 'I:,'-`_� TO 89 v'9T 1 '173 \'1178 i '�- e EXI RY�RANT REMAIN 84 / I REMOV0 LIGHTED BOU-ARDS �Q3 M 14 PARKING AREA(TTP) j _ - - - - l-- -- --+ - fi-- / rm• v\. ., - -X� -x-�x-�t-�t-- j j > * Ol76 0177 01 I I _52, _ ► . f a — - -- -- -- - -- —� i ,rte (. ✓_A\ _ .._.___ 080i81 / 18 0186 TYR — 1 yy x I - - = t___1-_- - ' -._._p --L.� - -, -- -�-- �•� � i f� /f!lrflHllrr��'-K-,` r Y I ;m SERVATION PIAN FOR TREE REMOVALS ` 128 3 ; YI \ ' I Ff ftff tt fff/f/f/t� rf �7/oo/ ttff�rff/fff/ff/ffffff/� 1�h�itz7 720 O ♦ 1 _ --•, �\, I t1 B 0121 0119 0113 ;`� !, s i,�i / 126 1130 l `✓`- '1 9 �23 118 115 17 ` , U 3 I J ..-1• �. -_... _ r 2 / - —II (� i o 3r-3r�l-+c `1-�tiyJIE-';! -M-�`-3E-3F- a O 176117 e \ >� •x * t�es(c Baa xs f l AFS /X's1�{YX4�Xc� 9��F iffii^� "-x X,rixoA ' sxgs-x-x-x-> p ��X-x,a 4X--3F r;.•/ a / e 3 400 0 400 r a SEE VACS PLANS FOR - �' \ '- -- -F--._ T ~. I - � REMOVALS/IMPROVEMENTS --�,---� ,.x1641/,1 �. 06 dtiQ -014 -+, a _ - O6- I� 103 / 1 - 0 /,y � , (n OL fr o P/'� Qxi f� `} t— ' LEGEND ". �`� _ / NERAL NOT £ __ PROPERTY LINEIRON ! ---- --' 1 r �!! 1. ALL WO.LOUIS LBEPERFORMED INACCORDAIICEVMTHTHEEGUIREGOLDENVALLEY -- �_ /,_- ��—� r ..; _• AND T.LOUIS PARKBPECIFICATIO REOUI BUI NINDOTROW'UEOUIREMENT,VuVRK CITU LIMIT LINE � _ � WTH IN WAYZATA BOULEVARD WILL REQUIREAMNDOT ROWM1RILT'PERMIT. • ` L' - -"--� I CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE ALL UNDERGROUND PUSLIC ANO PRNATE UTILITtE3 C ^, LIMITS OF DISNRNBPNCE F J LOCATED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, G B EXISTING CURBNIDGUTTER 1 REFERENCE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR REMOVALSOF EXISTING TREES. r 3 { f/fff/flrfr EXISTING CURB AND GUTTERTO BEREMOVED \ 1 .� -� W _� .— 1, CON TRACTOR SHALLFIELDVERIFYTI-E LOCATIONSANDEUWATIONSOFEXISTING J u , / -'_7_7� EXISTING B111LDING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES,SUCH AS EXISTING GUTTER GRADEL ATTHE •A-1 /I PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS,PRIOR TO THESTARTOFSREWORK (n Q EXISTING STORLI SEWER `- / 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OFANYDISCREPANCiES OR w / J - E 0 EXISTING STORM CATCH BASIN I MANHOLE VARIATIONS FROM THE PLAINS. LZ 1J Q EXISTING SANITARYSEWER 6. ALL PAVEMENT,CURB S GU TT ER TO DE REMOVE D CHALL BE SAWCUT AT REMOVAL Y 0 Z = - LIMITS OR NEARESTJOINT. J 0.1 EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE Q O 7. UTILITIES NOT MARKED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WRING -'- '•- EXISTING WATERMNN CONSTRUCTION.THIS WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO CONTRACT. J V EXISTI NG FIR E HYDRANT KEYNOTE LEGEND S. STREET SHALL BE SWEPT IN ACCORDANCEVVTi)/CITY REQUIREMENTS. Q W EXISTING GATEVALVE 0 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT . 9. COORDINATE REMOVALS OF PRIVATE UTILITIE.:WITH UTIUTYCOMPANIES, f- a L"L ` LL+�. :0 10. CO17FNAOTOHSHALL PROVIDE ATRAFFIC CONTROLPIANAPPROJEDBYTHECITY -L J EXISTING GAS UNE c�i REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT �.. '�!- PRIORTOCOMMENCINGAWWORKWITHNTHECRYROW. U Q EYISTING CHAIN LINKFENCE O REMOVE CURB ANDGUTTER e 11, ALLTRU NKLINESORSERVICELINESTO8EREMOVEDSHALLWE UGGEDATMNN, 5 X EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE TO BE REMOVED q0 EXISTING SIGN TOM REMOVED 11. CONTRACTOR TO SEAL AND GROUT OPENIt.GS pDANf%XVED AT EASING OJ B DISCONNECTS EXISTING LIGHT POLE O EX ISTINGWATERM7.INTOBEREMOVED6 T.. E RELOCATED.REFERENCE UTILTTYP AN. $ rya EXISTING LIGHT POLE TO BE REMOVED 1S. CONCRETE CRUSHING OF BUILDING MATERIALS IS ALLOWED ON.SRE.HOURS OF 0 (n O 'AWCUT PAVEMENT OPERATION SHALL BE LIMITED TO 7.ODAMTO 7'.WRA CONCRETE TO BE REUSED AS 3 5 -� EXISTING SIGN AGGRECATE BASE SHALL CONFORM TO THE MNDOTEPECIFlCATIOI FOR WHICH DATE 5 O E%IST INS LIGHT POLE TO US REMOVED MATERIALWILLBEUSED. 12/02/2014 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TO BE RENIOVED i 1 E%1 STING HYDRANT TO BE RVACIVEDB 14. CONSTRUCTION LII.!ITS TO BE THE PROPERTY LINE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE PROJECT NO. 8 j CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE ITEMS WITHIN CONSTRUCTION OMITS AS SHCWM ON THE a CONCRETE PAVEMENT TO BEREMC',ED O RELOCATED.COORDINATEWRHOWMiER. 180755001 _ o PIANS AND DIRECTED PER THE OWHERLREPRESENTATNE. UTILITY TO BE ABANDONED O9 EXISTING GAS MAIN TO BE RE.'.IOWD GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET SHEET NUMBER 6 15, E:ISTING WATE0.MAIN TO BE pBAtlDONED IS TO BE CAPPED AT THE MAIN AND BULK O 25 50 100 X•X-X-X-X-X- UTILITY TO BE REMOVED ,0 EXISTING STOCK FU TO BE REMOVED HEADED. L 'R (tfw1T`Y 16. REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASINS AND STORMSEWERCON',ECTICNSTOCITYTRUNK I� 6030 EXVIN TG TREE uNEB 1 1 2 3 1 4 15 16 1 7 1 8 1 9 110 111 1 12 113 1 14 1 15 116 1 A UTICA AVENUE SOUTH -: - - - - ROW VACATION COORDINATE PEDESTRIAN R W Q- TURNAROUND ..._... -;;:'-:. _.:•_. --- - .c::. AREA - F13O.16F 001 AG BUS 1ACCESS TO IST - _ ROW DEDICATION 1 z — I 3 UNDERLIMITS OF GROUND ❑I LOT 2-RESIDENTIAl PHASE 2 r- PROVIDE BOLLARDS f 24.0 +3 PARING FOR, iN.P- - I B fi ' I `_ _ BEGIN I RESIDENTIAL I `w RKIRG.00 FOR 6 STORIES-164 UNITS WITH G.COORDINATE ' I %' �� wrnl wrvoscaPE 79-!ST LEVEL STALLS I T n 1 0°'yAq ma. UNDERGROUND GF 156-UNDERGROUND STALLS i I OUTLOTA /�� F^I , PAfWPoG FOR PHASE I 1 r UNEARPARK- GUMP�G -�" p �� 2RESIDENTIAL I 3 - PRIVATELYOWNED ENTRYro ° si OUTLOT R- 5 OUTLOT B- PUBLIC OPEN SPACE �) %'' UNDERGROUTo >V SOUTH OFFICE NORT H OFFICE +D / ' EKTRYTO I a ❑ PARIOPoG RESIDENTIAL POOL 11 STORIES-32,1235F/STORY i ziT 115TORIES- AMENRYAR C 32,123 SF/STORY is � TOTAL 353,353 Sio iST_L 2 O TOTAL353,3535F PARKINGa50-UNDERGROUND STALLS E2Tarro I q f' a 50-UNDERGROUND STALLS PAPoONo _ UMITS OF UN OE E PARKING FORESIDENTIAL ° 1 I_, I ____..___-1 _ ' I ' V u ❑ o- (y R PHASE 2 T RESI RESIDENTIALOT LINE N d 13 LOT 1- 3 is ? i RESIDENTIAL PHASE 1 SIMMONS EXISTING 6STORIES99 I - LOT 3-HOTEL D HEALT 7LLS 199UNDERGROUND 6STORIES-150 ROOMS PARTNERS 30-UNDERGROUND STALLS o a / ft _ a i CITY-OF ST.LOUIS PARK _ _ ®® __ I p. -_ - GO `I E T CITY GOLDEN VALLEY U ^ N - 16 BUILOWG SETBACK a - J ED lz .. 3 o I I tab I tz o N E a I dQ (Tia . RESIDENTIALPOOL AMENITYAREA 3I Fa DUSTING ACCESS b_ ..... 13 (r ( I +L� PARKING GARAGE 7lEVElSA DE1 BELOW BEGIN 2,534 SPACES TOTAL I m I m _ I F n z� r ---- �* a — — — I J _ MAINTAIN EXISTING m..,. 'B\ MVECONNECTK ` N a e Vll g TO HEALTH PARTNERS ' - I ll _._,_- I l� I L� EASEMENT E I i I I I I i_I I• ''w LAC _ - _ 4 U) s tMTCH4N EXISTING ST TO��WAY7ATABWOCURBI W�V'I 91DEWALK }- LL LU H 3 -NG-11-1 Cn Q KEYNOTE LEGEND LEGEND HIGHWAY 100 SYOERPasa W > J Z Q 2 1 SERVICE AREA(DELIVERIES.REFUSE,AND __ CITYPROPERTYLINEIROW Y W F- O MOVE-IN:TAGING) ,y cl Z O FULL ACCESS DRIVEWAY - - LOT LINE a< PROPOSEDCURSANDGUR WEST END SITE DATA TABLE _� TTE Oy 6'SIOEWALK O PARKING RAMP ENTRYlEXIT EXISTING CURB ANOGUTTER LOT TOTAL AREA PERVIOUSAREA IMPERVIOUSAREA 66TLOTO 6.90 ACRES 1.20 ACRES 5.77 ACRES ,v ,W EXISTING WILDING 1 _ - LA- i. O5 SERVICE VEHICLES ONLY - OUTLOT A-P/RKAREA 067ACRES 0.57 ACRES 0.30 ACRES 1 O LIMITS SIDEWALK( - - MITS OF UNDERGROUNDPARKING LOT 1-PHASE I RESIDEKTML 2.58 ACRES 0.55 ACRES 2.03 ACRES Z 0_ V J O L OVERFLOW PARING STALL COUNT STOP BAR LOT 2-PHASE 2 RESIDENTIAL 1.53 ACRES 0.10ACRES 1.43 ACRES RESIDENTIAGUEST PARWNGIHOTEL U W U) Q O LOT 3.HOTEL 1.B/ACRES 0.39 ACRES 1.22 ACRES TOTAL 13 49 ACRES 2.9d ACRES 10.65 ACRES O OELEVATOR ACCESS TO OFFICE BUILDING DIRECTIONALN,ROW i J OPROPOSED MCESLIF STATIN F ROWDEDICATION WEST END PARKING DATA TABLE ~ O REFER E NCEHARDSCAPEFLANSFOR r J ROW VACATION W'OONERFAREA LOT USE IIZE REQUIRED PARKING O'ER SLP CODE) ITANDARD PARI(ING COMPACT PARKING ADA PARtUNO TOTAL PARI:ING BICYCLE PARKING DATE 11 8812 CURBANDGUTTER OUTLOTB SOUTH OFFICE 353,353 SF 3SSPACESI1.000SF(tpiSPACES) 1,3025PACES OSPACES 24 SPACES 3.75SPACES•1,MSF(1ZSSPACEF) 135 SPACES(10':.OFTOTAL PARKING) 12/02/2014 OUTLOTB NORTH OFFICE 353.353 SF 3.SSPACESI1.000SF(tp7SPACES) 1,2"SPACES 10SPACES 24 SPACES 3.i0-,PAC ESf1,093 SF(I=SPACES) 130 SPACES(10%OF TOTA'_PARKING) PROJECT NO. 12 SURMOUNTABLE CURB LOT PHA'E I RESIDENTIAL /99 UNITF1294 ROOMS 15 PACE_SIBEDROOM(29i._AACES) 255 SPACES 152 SPACES 9SP:,CES 1."SFACESIBEDROOM(317 SPACES) 112 SPACES(35%OF TOTAL PIlKNG) GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 160755001 K 13 FIRE LANE STRIPING LOT2 PXASE2 RESIOENTIPL 164 UNIT5'225 ROOMS 1-PACESIBEDROOM(YSS SPACES) 19]SPACES 3d SPACES 8SPACES 1A23PACESIBEDROOM-SPACES) I-SPACES IQ-OF TOTAL PARING) Q ZS SQ jDQ SHEETNUMBER i LCT3 HOTEL 150 ROCMG 1.SSPACES;ROOM D25SPACES) i95PACES OSPACES 6SPACES 10 5]SPACESIROOM(M SP,N) a SPACE S M%OF TOTAL PARKING) E 14 BIKE RACK TOTAL NIA NIA 9,228 SPACES 3.125 SPACES I86 SPACES 21 SPACES 3,282 SPACES 477.'PACES(15%OF TOTAL PARKING) 15 6040 RAISED LAIJDSCAPE 11111111 J J y T@CA AVENUE t � CON NAE AVENUE STORM REFERENCE UTICA AVENUE _ o V UTIC / ` I SEWER PROYENENL PLANS PUBLIC STORM SEWER - PUBLIC SMR f 8@0 Y - _ 888 1' MH-3 :IHd �A. �.a CBS. I 1 i / -'_---_ c.;- _.•- •" �-mf\ V 379 � ESID NTIAL PH LB.,6 1 3118 R E ASE 2 PRIVATE STORM SEWER FFE=881.00 P - / MH-7 [ 8 4 I I J r:H-s 59Iq 52� I ROOF DRAIN S 7 PUBLIC STORM SEWER IINV:8 N74,G0 1!. I I ce< I I I SEWER SOUTH OFFICE r 3_4.3% PRIVATE STORM I I' FFE=888s0 NORTH OFFICE j II Lm O x FFE=885.50 g3PROPOSED UNDERGROUND N / OOF DRA STORMWATER TREATMENT CONNECTIO RESERVE AREA INV876.0 0OCTION 1.]1% N $5CO PROPOSED UNDERGROUN 1 kF =v >. z _ ROOF DRAIN 1 STORMWATER TREATMENT INV:876.00 i E -I INV 884 25 - - - PRIVATE STORM SEWER CONNECT TO EXISTING I CONNECTION �--�x � PRIVATE STORM SEWQ2 \ I 7, RESERVE AREA cB7 1 Ir WAYZA A BOULEVARD I / I I I .fila 11 STORM SEWER <m a n t I I I / MH-2 ROOF DRAIN J.OaR\ ,�, / B ] - -- cB, 0� 11 CONNECTION ?el, MH-e t it` I a MH1 ,p INV:880.74 ESID 7 J �N gT 6` CONNECT o RESIDENTIAL PHASE 1 UNDERGROUND 54R I " s " sraRAc ^/ FFE=881.00 MHS i .871.68 D� m/ / �" ■i� " � HOTEL •I I ry h'H-13 / _-""---_8g7 Cea CONNECTION RFFE=880.00 r ] .. gA.✓' - CONNECT TO- INV:875.00 UNDERGROUND _ S ROOF D AI ] i.. TORAGE:....,_ 's �.. -_ I I WVNEC6 ., INV:87.9aO�e a s ® k. w i r .� ERS ,C¢ !// i ao / -_- AGE ° 1 ! \ INV(S):871.{4 ca-21 / rv�',J U N E19 ..IN N}.871.38 ce-n r t !; a I. V i^ 7 ,.�J7BIBB .2 7 I e'19 /,-', ,PUBUC.STORM SERER I I I ° 884 �� 11 _.. 1x CONNECT TO EXISTING m .•.... - - WAYZATA BOULEVARD 'U I I STORM SEWER � ] a - • PROPOSED UNDERGROUND PUBLIC � STORM SEWER '- i _ I -J .. STORMWATER TREATMENT ce-1a .\_ . i ¢ _ _ RESERVE MEA 4.8� a _ r _ ��f 1] 1 _ .... m J 882-- I C818 - 1 - �. 880 I I � /="� _ I - I I � I .., _ e \ �_„ -"- \��\ - -�', x•^ -� _ "`^?•�.:.,..�. � ' /% ii j/ � I -M1 4 PUeycSfogM"R- _ \ i1 s GRADING NOTES __ ,� =� f `1"�s�' _ __.„ _--� _----'. � I Ir�= r J ] E 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMEDIN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OFGOLDEN VAU:EY AND ST.LOUIS PARK SPECIFICATIONS AND BUILDING PERMITREOUIREMENTS.WORK WITHIN WAYZATA BOULEVARD WILL REQUIRE A MNOOT ROWUTIUIY PEWIT. ' 2. CONTRACT OR TOCALL-GOPHER STATE ONE LALUATLEASTTWOWYDRNNGDAYSDRAINAGE SCHEDULE DRAINAGE SCHEDULE a PRIOR TO EXCAVATIONICONSTRUCTION FOR UTILITYLOCATIONS.TWINCIPESMETRO ' AREA OR TOLL FREE:1-BII024-,1% INVERT PIPE INVERT PIPE INVERT PIPE INVERT PIPE " - STRUCTURE STRUCTURE RIMIGRATE STRUCTURE STRUCTURE ELEVATION ' s ELEVATION SLOPE ELEVATION SLOPE ELEVATION SLOPE ELEVATION SLOPE } 3 e 3. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFYTHELOCATIONSANOEUNATIONSOREXISTING NO. TYPE ELEVATION ,N IN OUT OUT N`� TYPE ELEVATION IN IN OUT OUT LEGEND" UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO THE START OF SITE GRADING.THE W 4 CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIPYTHE PROJECTENGINEEROFANV LB-1 CATCH BASIN 88].68 N8841M 06]1 CB-n CATCH BASIN 580.. E879.25 7.50% _ J ] p DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS. PROF'ERiVLvIE J j CB-3 CATCH BASIN 884.34 .879.70 1.00% 5anm 1.00% MH-1 MANHOLE 888.12 1,488341 4.19% NBB2.81 0.6T% CITY LIMRLNE 4. SUBGRADEEXCAVATION_'HALLBEBACKFILLEDIMMEgATELYAFTEREXCAVATIONTO E879.70 1.00% W > J HELP OFFSET ANY STABILITY PROBLEMS DUE TO WATER SEEPAGE OR STEEP SLOPES. - WHENPLACINGNEWSURFACE MATERIAL ADJACENTTO EXISTING PAVEMENT,THE CBd CATCH BASIN 884.85 E061.25 1.00% MH-2 MAN HONE 884.94 WW-1 1.00°6 Ea8041 100% - - ^, LZLI N 880.41 1.00% "' EXISTINGCaJTWR A EXCAVATION SMALL BE BACKFILLEDPROMPTLY TO AVOID UNDERMINING OF EXISPflG -"" Y I- s PAVEMENT. CBS CATCH BASIN 885.38 E 878.7 14- NW 578.91 1.4T% rNv MH-3 MANHOLE 884.2] SE 87817 1d7% .880.10 7.5095 XX.X PROPOSEDCONTOVR 1.1. LI_I ° CB4i CATCH BASIN 881.40 N872.61 0.5d% E8]281 046% %10(% i 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HORVANTALANDVERTICALCONTROL MH< MANHOLE 882.88 HE 8]1.55 0.86% WB7tg5 1.0096 a- O Q E 871.. 0.45% EXIST4•GCU+BA GUTTER Z 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE DRAINAGE TRENCHES TO FOLLOW PROPOSED STORM CB-7 CATCH BASIN FA1.94 W871.]I 046% 5871.72 1246736% MH-5 MANHOLE 883.91 E871.84 1.00% SW 871.54 0.86% ""' r SEWER ALIGNMENTS. NVS.75 -Y;q.6Ta E873.97 0.8096 y Q w 8 7. GRADES SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADES.CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH GRADE TO CBS CATCH BASIN 881.94 E72.61 0.69% WB]2 hY 0.96% NIH-7 MANHCE 880.89 N.3. 0.80% 5873.92 0.48% - 7 EXISTBJGBULOk3 Q 3 SUBGRADE ELEVATION,LEAVE STREET READY FOR SUBBASE. N87584 1.00% - MH-e MANHOLE 680.16 W 87554 1.00'; N 875.54 1.00W ~ a, J B d. ALLEXCESS MATERIAL,MTUMINOUSSVRFACING•CONCRETEITEMS,ANYABANDONED CBS CATCH BASIN .1.65 E873.41 0.69% W873A1 0.6M PRCPO:EJ ST'AMSEWE�vPE Z UTILITY ITEMS,AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIALS SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTYOF MH-9 MANHOLE 577.48 5874.21 1.00% W Q THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFFTHE CONSTRUCTION SITE. CB-10 CATCH BASIN 881.55 N874.13 0.64% .874.1369% .67435 100%7% - '-"�'•--i' E>!IStNGSTCRM Kv.BR PIPE C� E5 MH-10 MANHOLE 878.2d N 871 S 1.OPi P--N- O v CB-11 CATCH DASIN 878.49 S 873.3) 064% E 871.% 1.0 9. REFER TO THE UTILITY PLAN FOR SANITARY SEWERMAIN,WATER MAIN CERVN;E n LAYOUT AND ELEVATIONS AND CASTING/'.TRUCNRE3CHEDUIE. CB-14 CATCH BASIN 879.95 N-.R 0.48% 5873.42 0.56Y.. MH-11 MANHOE 878.57 587138 1.00% HE 871.38 1.00% . PP.OPOaEDCURB'RFA NIET Z J 1 10. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PAVEMENTS AND CURB AND CB-16 CATCH BASIN 880.. 5875.50 0.6096 MH-12 61A.HORE 372.0 SW 8703] 1U0% PROPO6ED:+PHMIC MN,HOLE ° GUTTER WITH SMOOTH UNIFORM SLOPES WITH PROWOE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. CB-17 CATCH BASIN a.71 NW 873.7 1.04% BE 873.07 0.86% 5882.13--r.8]96 $ MH-13 MANHOLE :85.63 Wb7808 ,.GPA %.% FRCFOSEDrl[R: DATE $ 11. INSTALL M!NIMUM OF 4'MNDOT CLASS 5 AGGREGATE EASE UNDER CURDAND N879D8 00% GUTTER. CB-18 CATCH BASIN 876 Cl NW873d5 0.86% 587345 1.06% 12/02/2014 .Bs 12. HA UL ROUTE SHALL Be WAYZAYTA BOULEVARD ANOGAMBLE DRIVE TOPARK RACE c&19 CATCH-14 870.19 N872.52 1.06'R W87252 0.87% c0 FR'1N-�:DaTORM tEv,ER TRL•-TIrttEL:BEL PROJECT NO. ] o BOULEVARD TOHIGHWAY394. EMERGENC:'JERFLOWELEVAT"IN 160755001 o CB." CATCH BASIN 976.63 E872.28 o.e;% wa7z. 1.oT% X GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 13. UPON COMPLETION OF EXCAVATION AND FILLING.CONTRACTOR SHAURESTOP.EA11 C&21 CATCH BASIN 875.05 SE 875.30 10096 Q ZS SO IOD SHEET NUMBER j E STREETS AND DISTURBED AREAS ON',ITE,ALLDISTURBEDAREASSHAUBE FFE F`:'6HED FI O:'R FLEVnTV.4 RE-VEGETATED WITH CITY APPROVED GROUND COVER. C&n CATCH BASIN anW NW 875.28 1.OPb SE 81526 1.04ti !� " td. CONTRACTOR 13 TO PUCE ALL MANHOLES OUTSIDE OF CRNING W4E8. PRS+'C-11 UNL'_R...-.:R.STgRMNgiEP TP.E.t1e.Nl PFSERIE.RFA. I403'NNOH-A31RJN'M -�.tld L6Lt-999-199 13NOHd I�Z�Za�Z --- Y IlS9 NN'If d IS AB 03N33N3 p 0 w NN9CZ awns'is3N 3%vv AAAirN3AINn oS9z y�n93sN33n r+N --- `�_7, epye WUNd41S3'd��0 o z o U.IDH K<I\�� A9 NNVNo N V �d A��1 tl Nw 'J 3��t1n N3a�o�JM2jHd Sfno� 15 oN w� CD 3NAtld'�Stl�fll A9 03N3Is30 \ w CCS 1SE]AA XdVd�d2ilN3� w a N :d33NON3 NOIS30 �y3s O O W W l� z 0. vil P Ka TaLLJ Iz } U I• Q p j \)1 \\ ° w N u \\\1 w Ao 1^1 i; 11l 1`1, x b � \v\`\ t ttt;. ,i® o 'Nie - s>Y O r� m 171 I t pl aLU P ;, 12a w _--NNW ` , I� — _ 761, . I I I '6 0 S > a 3 Y I l i _ w o o z. o o P n 0 w . w w 1 w N i Uqs4--; l d ALL O LL N l'��1 f Wo� ail o rl, l crz WNw os Z 9 j 11 rr ro m m ^m N tll t WFC a o 11 Lu Z J z 3 3 rn z 3 3s z j r ? W 4- 0 l6 Z oez < � t ' w Q z Nannn/E]TFFFFFWzJw zlnl.w w w 3 zw vl w 1.w w wzairco a o a mO OAd.9 d0 dl i9tWWf } �z W LL S !uU- v ) ( Ozo N 3c 11 (/7lam /Ln O U f7 ! d R" "°'c : I } I L'( b =Np ; � po ° r~ o 5 auoarcox��° = ° 0005��o � �< g� � � �°fHH.iHIM-HUM .—H91 ; G Ku—_ . I\w —___ �___ s� i( � Iw-iuw � zo� ` 0: 'M. oe� a «: w' t? ¢o, o`-moaO m�ooa�u>r mz n��w wzow�o•E oaz3�f Roza .mw�o� " Z �O a�¢u�u=�� w�j~ �azo�Www ;w0�r �u o �9 isxamww o°�xzu �ouwmmo�o�LL=�1J� ( I aOTHO O=a �x�irmX��Fozwo�'� &=°"4"�o°,aLLir�io>iia=xdp<; a�$o� a�oxo��"-"``-'o °uw oie� aw'o�ow'-z °_ / sa9u.o.a a3uoo.m o._°m3wmmsaa wuw°fauo.�_au'0 `orc5u ` Pue w n+N o=,Doom.ot l{Vtiv» r q !e iwwMcul ule+cV 6nY Pue 6 VI wNeP NY Pu0i unH w N a o.l^aVl!a IPV% aul'c upN-•leluXM AV;uolloi4eP0 Pu'�IPNexlFoylne w1N•^)ro4ilw lue�aop c c'augPu w¢foutlup �}JryP P�o:�nO aYl>oec aVi+W Fryo y I '»yae w Peivawu0 cu clEeauaa e41 411w+eVle M'1 '+W c Vl r...,..,n:+•. ....� :.....n nn,n\e+aecn iH\n..n�..wean n\nye.ea:nnm.nn\innianean.n\.nn-r�n••\ .• iiinin nnn �:n� nn :an: vvn •vn nin •r.lm nn i.v un-.. n•� .cam.••a..aa::n :nn nianin••(n nen: NOONaOH-A31MINMMM -V[OZ/ZO/ZL'31V0 L6 L9-569-159 3NOHd --- _ sllss NW'lnVd'1S 9BL9t AS 03N33HO0 O m NM mins'1S3M 3AV 411SM3AINn osSZ -IVUN301S323 0l0 o tl39WNN 35N3Jn NW --- H� d/[� AS NMtlH° N`d-Icl JNIIHEA� NN`�3-nVA N30100/NHVd slnw '.is E UJOH(�\(\�� 3NAVd Stl�3 111111 1S3M)i21t/d�b'�IlN30 � �tl33NI0N3 N0153° 31YOS N p W INOTM U N v a� 1 w i \�`e CL LLI W uj F , I `\ Q LLJ 0 1 LU 0 0N w Y >wui0di dza� _ I �Qm co I m U- d O z 00 - 1 ' t m � 9 1' w i 1 � f LO Q I m QOJ p O Q / LW l 00 oJ1� F. o o i M 1 r / , _1 N Z W J4 to I CD LJ Z W J CD j H vul'¢ aov¢y Duo unH—Felw!N o vll)vo411x a9 IPSP'aul'c vvvV Duo uivH—IaIwIM R uoI1v10vPv Puv u VOVIno ualil�x)wv411x�uawnaoP a uvl P�n W Pue H'Pa�vEatl x 11 V+14x iv!)V aUla¢0¢a 1�W Flua P¢Pu¢>W cl'vaN�¢v Jv ivawMvul uWa�a4 Dalua¢a,E vu a41 V11w�aVia6v1'1 Q m U ❑ w U- CD S — Y 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ._ .__....._.. - aSFEriroaFF-SriE - - PUM FMUnui - .. .., IMPROVEMEM' -.. .__._..-.. _ _ UTI Atl/ENUE SO . SITE TRIANGLE(EYP.) € SITE TRIANGLE BUS SHELTER BUS TURNAROUND - ,,......-�- L - _ AREA SITE TRLM IT LOT 4—RESIDENTIAL PHASE 2 B I ! 6 STORIES-164 UNITS .. .'. . . _ A BEo _ s• 79-1ST LEVEL STALLS " P�'" 169-UNDERGROUND STALLS I im I. ENTLAIL RESIDE ENTRY III LOT S -SOUTH OFFICE LOT 2— IRESIDENTIALPOOL/! UN GROIND i L s I ns NORTH OFFICE UNEARPARK- AM EA I PARK/Nc 3 O N TOTAL 353,353 SF PRIVATELY0 NED DOLLARD f o _....__._. S15TORIES- 1 +^ ENITYAR C ___ SO-UNDERGROUND STALLS PUBUCOPENSPACP y - I EMM TO r i i 32,123 SF/STORY +sr EVEL ENraY ro _ TOTAL 353,353 SF € PAT1a40 PARKINa 1� ^ !> r j 50-UNDERGROUND STALLS BIKE RACKS g a 4 ENiRt'TO _ PARKING - fOIRPWVSE2- DEIQULARaHO N= Uie rrs LOT 3 SEATING AREA, EXISTING I — RESIDENTIAL PHASE 1 ! F 33 HEALTH I ! 6sroRlEs-199uNITs a LOT 5—HOTEL D o I - 71-1ST LEVEL STALLS PARTNERS •�.��.: 164-UNDERGROUND STALLS 6STORIES-150 ROOMS J 1 I 27 UNDERGROUND STALLS z ' I CITY OF ST.LOUIS PARK_ cl CITYSZF GOLDEN VALLEY — — — — — _ _ — — —— — I — / { 6 aN p I o \ i E AMENITY AREA arBTwAHaERYP1 o I � � II —''—._PARKING GARAGE YG N _ SITE TRIANGLE TM.) AOVEGMADE_7LVELS1 BELOW _- 2,534 SPACES TOTAL I Qi Lli $ � DIE 17 Lf I I I ! I — /.. - TRUNOLE(fYP.) c+ N a MAINTAIN EXISTING -- DRIVE CONNECTIONm — - —(q DR HEALTH PARTfEtBV ' _ — ATEA -__ — Z � s WEST END PRELIMINARY PLANT SCHEDULE vvnY 1 SYMBOL QTY COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT SYMBOL CITY COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT 0 r - VIBURNUM #5 CONT. -- '- W SWAMP WHITE OAK 3°CAL BAB _ HYDRANGEA #6 CONT. J 11 L COMMON HACKBERRY W CAL BAB �---- J T H e DOGWOOD #5 CONT. COSTING WAYZATA BLVD I (J� Q SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST 3'CAL BAB \ HIGHWAY Too IAtDfJ3PA99 W € SIENNA GLEN MAPLE 3•CAL BAB ROSE #5 CONT. W Q _ 91 PRINCETON FIM W CAL B d B 3PIREA 1A5 CONT. \NOTES: Y OVERSTORY CRIMSON SPIRE OAK 3*CAL Bd8 POTENTILLA #5 CONT 7. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULGHSHALL BEAMINIMUM OF4"IN DEPTH,FREE OF Z DECIDUOUS NORTHERN RED OAK W CAL B d B YEW '#,+` COM. \ 1• VERIFY ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WITH REMOVALS AND SITEWORK ALL DELETERIOUS MATERIAL AND LOCATED IN ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS. a- O Q JUNIPER #5 CONT. 2. ALL DISTURBED LANDSCAPED AREAS,NOT INDICATED AS PLANTING BEDS,ARE TO S. EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAIN THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY SHALL -3 BOULEVARD LINDEN 3'CAL B A 8 Q BE SODDED.SOD IS TO BE PRIMARILY KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS,FREE OF LAWN BE PRUNED TO REMOVE DEAD OR UNDESIRABLE LIMBS AND TO SHAPE PLANT FOR W - DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE #5 CONT. BLUE BEECH 3•CAL BAB 18,476 GRASS AND WEEDS.REPLACE DAMAGED LAWN GRASS WITH SOD AS DIRECTED DESIRABLE APPEARANCE.PROTECT EXISTIPoG TREES. L SO.F7. DAYLILY #1 CONT. BY ON-SITE REPRESENTATIVE.MATCH ALL PROPOSED LANDSCAPED AREAS INTO I— Q SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE 2°CAL. B A B i I 6 SHRUB ANDKARL FOERSTER #1 CONT. EXISTING. 9. CONTRACTOR TO DISPOSE OF ALL REMOVALS OFFSITE.SEE EXISTING Z W J RED SPLEAIBOR CRABAPPLE 2°CAL. B d B PERENkL4L CONDITIONS A REMOVALS PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION. W ❑ DAKOTA PINNACLE BIRCH Z°CAL. B A e BEDS BLACK-EYED SUSAN #1 CONT. 3. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PLANTS REQUIRED AS REFLECTED ON PLAN. () ' O CATMINT #1 CONT. 10. CONTRACTOR TO WATER PLANT MATERIAL DURING INSTALLATION AND FOR A 60 ❑ JAPANESE TREE LILAC 2°CAL.. BAB 4. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL HAVE TOPSOIL PLACED AT MINIMUM DEPTH OF 4" DAY ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD.VOLUME OF WATER TO BE PER PLANT 0 _ 98 LITTLE BLUESTEAA #1 CONT. J 1 ORNAMENTAL FOR SOD AREAS.12"FOR SHRUE)/PFRENNL4LlANNUAL BEDS,AND 24"FOR TREE Z HAWTHORNE 2°CAL. BAB B REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT AND NORMAL GROWTH. 5 DECIDUOUS GARDEN PHLOX #1 CONT. AREAS. u y AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY 2°CAL. BAB 11. CONTRACTOR TO WARRANTY NEW SOD FOR 60 DAYS AND NEW PLANTINGS FOR (n CONEFLOWER #1 CONT. 5. ALL PLANTING BEDS TO BE EDGED WITH COMMERCIAL GRADE VINYL EDGER, 5 3 WHITESPIRE BIRCH 2°CAL. BAB ONE YEAR UPON PROJECT COMPLETION. DATE $ HOSTA #1 CONT. ANCHORED 4'-W O.C.WITH METAL SPIKES,COLOR BLACK. 12/02/2014 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 8'HT BAB BOXWOOD #1 GOVT. 12. IRRIGATE WITH AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM AT ALL 8. SINGLE TREE AND SHRUB PLANTINGS SHALL HAVE A 4'DEPTH SHREDDED AUSTRIAN PINE 6'HT B A 8 PLANTED AREAS.SYSTEM SHALL BE COMPLETE,VAL.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP PROJECT N0. K DOUGLAS FIR 6'HT BAB B HARDWOOD MULCH RING AROUND EACH BASE TREES SHALL HAVE TO THE DR 3' DRAWINGS FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS APPROVAL. GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 160755001 i METER RING,EVERGREEN PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A RING TO THE DRIP 40 --- 0 25 50 100 SHEET NUMBER LINE. E EVERGREEN COLORADO SPRUCE 6'HT B d B SOD 13. THEREFERUNIVERSITY NI TO"THREE ST MINNESOTA PLANTING TREE OF FOREST RES U RCES ABY HOOPSI BLUE SPRUCE 6'HT BABL:l THE MB ER10,2 13 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF FOREST RESOURCES DATED 6100 PONDEROSA PINE 6'HT BAB DECEMBER 10,2013 FOR PROPER PLANTING METHODS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 81 9 10 111 112 113 14 15 16 CUT AREA '4 ° EXISTING GRADE - 2 WI IES -GE GENERAL NOTES: 3 i PLANT ACCORDING 6 ALL PLANT STOCK MUST BE ACCEPTABLE WTHIN ACCORDANCE OF Mn/CGT 3861 PRIOR TO FOLLOWING THE STANDARD TO INSTALLATION PLANTING DETAILS. BACKFiL SOIL IS A COMBINATION OF EXISTING SOIL AND COMPOST MIX. OF PLANTS _- Mn/DOT 2571.5) ,� `' a' m_ a`• q,� 1, 7" i E A A i BACKFILL SOIL 11)"'/ 4,-,--r. r..•. .r I ' iT, i t -r.; s MULCH FINISHED NOTE: Tf�_ 11 I-�` B a GRADE 1.ON 1:2 SLOPES OR GREATER,DO NOT CONSTRUCT THEy�� 2 _ UPHILLHALF OF THE WATERING BASIN. PLANTER ISLAND NOTES: 2.ON 1:2 SLOPES OR GREATER,DO NOT CONSTRUCT i B B B WATERING BASIN. { 1. CROWN ISLANDS la 5:1 SLOPES(OR AS SPECIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS). ZONF36"MIN. ROM BACK` CURB TO CENR OF PLANTING ON HILLSIDES 2 ZONERSHALL CONTAIN 4F CONTINUOUSFMULCH OR TURF,F,SEE PLANSST SHRUB.CLEAR 3 "s BALLED& BURLAPPED STOCK CONTAINER y "R 3. 2"MIN VERTICAL CLEARANCE,TOP OF CURB TO TOP OF MULCH. STOCK NOTES' 0 ° 1.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF 1.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF BEST FACE OF SHRUB/ } } y m o GROUNOCOVER TO FACE 1. EXCAVATE A CONTINUOUS 24"DEEP PIT(FROM TOP OF CURB)FOR ENTIRE LENGTH AND _ HOLE. HOLE. FRONT OF PLANTING BED. 1. TOP OF SHRUB ROOTBALLS TO BE PLANTED 1'-2' WIDTH OF ISLAND&BACKFILL'NTH APPROVED PLANTING MIX. �+ > } } T' HIGH WITH SOIL MOUNDING UP TO THE TOP OR a a 2.PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING 2.PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING ROOTBALL. 2. PROTECT AND RETAIN ALL CURBS AND BASE.COMPACTED SUBRADE TO REMAIN FOR /\ E REFER TO PLANT + + + + AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. STRUCTURAL SUPPORT OF CURB SYSTEM(TYP). SCHEDULE FOR SPACING 2. WHEN USED IN MASSES-PRUNE ALL SHRUBS 70 J m w 3 ACHIEVE A UNIFORM MASS/HEIGHT. 3. ALL ISLANDS SHALL UTILIZE POOR DRAINAGE TECHNIQUES PER MNDOT SPECS WHEN n�i 3.SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE 3.REMOVE CONTAINER AND SCBE - 1 3 4 5 PERCOLATION RATES ARE 2"PER HCUR R LESS. ' o BAC OR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED OUTSIDE VE SOIL MASS TO REDIRECT m 3. 4"MINIMUM OF HARDWOOD BARK MULCH. a BACKFILL SOIL INSTALL PLANT SO AND PREVENT CIRCLING FIBROUS = THE ROOT FLARE IS AT OR UP TO ROOTS,AS NECESSARY. G PLANTED PARKING LOT ISLANDS I MEDIANS 6 2"ABOVE THE FINISHED RADE. BED 4 EXCAVATE ENTIRE BED SPECIFIED FOR GROUNDCOVER `0 NIS 4.SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE n a 4.PLACE PLANT IN PLANTING HOLE SOIL OR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED 5. 4"MINIMUM OF TOPSOIL TO BRING TO FINISHED GRACE •�� " NTH BURLAP AND MARE BASKET,(IF BACKFILL SOIL INSTALL PLANT SD - -Tg;,Y,:....: s USED),INTACT. BACKFILL TO THE TOP OF THE ROOT FLARE IS AT - •'' e,'ti:;•q�.; .;.,-=I 1 (SEE GRADING PLAN), D a OR UP TO 2'ABOVE THE FINISHED _ _I' WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12"OF THE I _I I I I 16. PREPARED PLANTING SOL AS SPECIFIED. NOTE; WHEN GRADE. 5 TOP OF THE ROOTBALL,THEN _ `4 _ GROUND-COVERS AND SHRUBS USED IN MASSES WATER PLAINT. REMOVE THE TOP - _ - •`•• ENTIRE BED TO BE AMENDED Vd TH PLANTING SOIL MIX DECIDUOUS TREE z 5.WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL -III-III-I I ,- 6 7 AS SPECIFIED. z TWO H THE BASKET R THE TOP VOIDS a TWO HORIZONTAL RINGS WHICHEVER IS BEATER. ALSO REMOVE ALL _ ¢ O N 5 _ 12� TIP. 7. SCARIFY ROOTBALL SIDES AND BOTTOM. J BURLAP AND NAILS FROM THE TOP SHRUBS/PERENNIALS O _ _ i N � 1/3 R THE BALL REMOVE ALL HOURS. THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 __ � TWINE. D SHRUB lGROUNDCOVER PLANTING N o - 7.PLACE MULCH WITHIN 46 HOURS OF - LEL N 5.PLUMB AND BACKFILL NTH THE THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL - v I. BACKFILL SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 1. TOP OF SHRUB ROOTBALLS TO BE PLANTED 1'-2'HIGH WITH _ E SOIL MOUNDING UP TO THE TOP OF RGOTBALL. _ - 6.WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL 2. WHEN USED IN MASSES-PRUNE ALL SHRUBS TO ACHIEVE A v VOIDS UNIFORM MASS/HEIGHT. v 7.WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 3. 4'MINIMUM OF HARDWOOD BARK MULCH. � c > HOURS. 4. EXCAVATE EN71RE BED SPECIFIED FOR GROUNDCOVER BED. 8.PLACE MULCH WITHIN HOURS OF BEST FACE OF SHRUB/ w _ THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS GROUNDCOVER TO FACE S. 4'MINIMUM OF TOPSOIL TO BRING TO FINISHED GRADE(SEE SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. FRONT OF PLANTING BED. } } GRADING PLAN). TYPICAL TRIANGULATED LAYOUT m 9.STAKE AND GUY TO PROVIDE REFER TO PLANT + + T B. SOUNDED COVERS AND PLANTING ISHRLESL AS�USED�N MASSES ENTIRE BED jSCHEDULE FOR SPACING ADDITIONAL SUPPORT BETWEEN THE } } } } TO BE AMENDED W11H PLANTING SOIL MIX AS SPECIFIED. F ° STEM AND ROOT BALL AS 24`CLEARANCE FROMui NECESSARY. 7. SCARIFY ROOTBALL SIDES AND BOTTOM. LANDSCAPE ALS' BACK OF CURB I_ 8. CUT BACK SLOPE TO PROVIDE A FLAT SURFACE FOR PLANTING. LANDSCAPE ISLAND PLANTING PLAN PLANTING DETAILS FOR ISOLATED PLANTING LOCATIONS H y� ' A6 1 2 3 4 5 i SECIXKtl NTE - i 0 I I'i l I-I / ✓"ll CAR DOOR LJ o t3'-0'To 13.-0. G Y II I - _ ',..P' T"�^-- NEAR EST T SHRUB R OF `4.,1 r:_, JL70 CENTER OF 2 ° - V NEAREST SHRUB 1.STEEL POSTS TO BE NOTCHED OR DRILLED TO I-ILII•, 1. 1..-- 1 RETAIN GUY WIRES.PLACE OUTSIDE OF ROOT i BALL. DRIVE PLUMB REGARDLESS OF GROUND o NOTES: 7'ROLLED STEEL - I III-III- 7 6 1 -, fir \I` •r 0� e. g ' 2 0 ';n" 1 ' Z E S 3403 2.REQUESTS TO SUBSTITUTE RUBBER HOSE AND ORSAPPROMli�iEDOTEOUAL. a 12° TYP. (_ {-- -.MIN. CLE J MIN CLE 5 WIRE GUYING SYSTEMS WILL NOT BE APPROVED. 3 " 3.TREE STAKING IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS 16"LONG SHRUB I GROUNDCOVER PLANTING ON A SLOPE - Lu - j SPECIFIED R NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN TREESe_ -{� H IN A PLUMB CONDITION WHERE VANDALISM, POLYPROPYLENE x15 2 POLYETHYLENE 40 MIL, 1 SOIL,R WIND CONDITIONS AREA PROBLEM, 1.5"WIDE STRAPS. PARKING ISIJd2D.NOSE-IN DETAIL PARKING la wa 90E OETILL. OR AS REQUESTED BY THE ENGINEER. TWICE ROOT13ALL £ ATTACH WITH 10 q. 1. FINISH GRADE Q WIRE. 1. INSTALL CONTINUOUS MULCH BED ADJACENT TO PARKING SPACES AS SHOWN.MULCH SHALL BE MIN.4" 1 2. BACKFILL PATH PREPARED PLANTING SOIL MIX AS W = a 4.REMOVE AFTER ONE YEAR. DIAMETER SPECIFIED. NO POP-UP IRRIGATION HEADS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN 24'OF A PARKING SPACE ON ANY SIDE. `� 1 2. CURB OR PARKING LOT EDGE. J Z - - M -III "''_" `'' f 2 3. 12',CLEAN SAND,COMPACTED.T13ADJUST LAYER PARKING SPACE/CURB PLANTING aa. 0 _ _ THICKNESS SO TDF'OFFROOTBALL IS AT LEAST 1' MULCH io I -III •:"`_::�` �'i:'�y. I I- I 3 ABOVE FINISHED RADE. ui I �Dq Aly J (n 7 FINISHED GRADE 4. FILTER CLOTH _III- . .a. ............ - I �- Q / 4 9 - 5. SLOPE BOTTOM TO DRAIN W C S 40 �IIIIIII - - -III- 5 6. LAYERUTORED WATERLTABLEE ORTE THROUGH TODEPTH OF OCCLUDING OUTO G UJ co u E -III- B ASSURE PROPER PERCOLATION. 7 7. BACKFILL WITH 1/2"-3/4'GRAVEL O `g - -III-SII 8. WATER TABLE U) 5 3 B FOR A PARKING ISLAND PLANTING SITUATION, DATE 5 CONTRACTOR TO BACKFILL ENTIRE LENGTH OF B SSTTAKINGIGUYING DETAIL FOR TREES SECTION EDGE OF PAREA AVE TO WTHIN 5"OF BACK OF CURB OR 12/02/2014 PROJECT NO. !�ION NIS K POOR DRAINAGE CONDITION 180725001 5 F ..Cflml N18 SHEET NUMBER 3E 6101 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 110 111 1 12 113 14 115 116 q a REFER TO OFF-SITE PLANS 3 FOR UTICA AVENUE UTICA AVENUE SOUTH 6 LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION _.,. "i l a Flj�, , L ITS 17 - -- — — — — — n EXISTING13s a. I'_ ° — _ _._ _ _.._. _ — HEALTH — — — ® f s PARTNERS ,I 3 12 `034 � - - 181 E_ - .�,® � — �. cn CI F ST.LOUIS PARK .� _ _. — io — — — — — — — ,zs CITY OF GOLDEN Y 3%T g Q N\ , E i u � c 10 2M a — 10 --,139 140 - - t i - - L � - _ - QRIVE I-- ui--- CL. sT - - a w -,. , a , a — AY Lu H — a _ I LU Z _Q E DRIP LINE y f CONSTRUCTION LIMITS G_ , Z LEGEND TREE PROTECTION Q p U SIGNP y D- C ••�• SITE BOUNDARY TPee - r®l Ctl®P� Ari < LU " ### S TREE TO REMAIN WITH d DECIDUOUS i CORRESPONDING TAG NUMBER FROM - z Q J TREE INVENTORY m U c i ### CONIFEROUS TREE TO REMAIN WITH DOEJOY EP9TER FgP`18ED AREA - O CORRESPONDING TAG NUMBER FROM J TREE INVENTORY : We protect thesetrees coaduring nto Z ## DECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVED ::. ci construction WITH CORRESPONDING TAG NUMBER R0.75'TEE INVENTORY t2" DATE FROM 12/02/2014 ### CONIFEROUS TREE TO BE REMOVED WITH CORRESPONDING TAG NUMBER FURNISH AND INSTALL TEMPORARY FENCE AT THE TREE'S DRIPLINE FABRICATE 12" X 9"X 3/8" SIGN WITH 0.75" RADIUS CORNERS. PROJECT N0. I( - FROM TREE INVENTORY OR CONSTRUCTION LIMITS AS SPECIFlED, PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 51GN SHALL BE WHITE WITH BLACK LETTERING. ATTACH SIGN GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 160755001 WHEN POSSIBLE PLACE FENCE 25 FEET BEYOND THE DRIP LINE, TO POST USING 1" LENGTH WOOD SCREWS, PLACED AT 2.5" 50 SHEET NUMBER NOSEE SHEET 6103 FOR TREE INVENTORY PLACE PROTECTION SIGNS ALONG FENCE AT 20' INTERVALS. AND 7.3" RESPECTIVELY FROM THE BOTTOM EDGE OF THE SIGN. TE: 'y INFORMATION 6102 _ TEMPORARY PROTECTION FENCE PLACEMENT DETAIL TREE PROTECTION SIGN DETAIL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A fi 3 i E i l = B a 3 a s o h C s TREE INVENTORY TAG# TREE DBH/HEIGHT(FT) SPECIES NOTES SIGNIFICANT? SAVE/REMOVE 1 12 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R KEY D o 2 10 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R • DBH = DIAMETER BREAST HEIGHT(MEASURED 3 12 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R FOR EVERY DECIDUOUS TREE AT A HEIGHT OF 4.5" FROM THE GROUND LEVEL) w d z 4 10 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R S = TREE TO BE SAVED zcl o i E 5 10 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R R = TREE TO BE REMOVED ti N o _ 6 10 DBH CRAB APPLE YES R o N = YER E SIGNIFICANT TREES c a 7 10 DBH CRABAPPLE S 8 10 DBH CRABAPPLE YES R ANY DECIDUOUS TREE THAT IS AT LEAST FIVE x a _ CALIPER INCHES AND ANY CONIFEROUS TREE THAT 9 10' JUNIPERTREE 4.15 Cal.Inches NO R IS AT SIGN FlCANTT SIX CALIPER INCHES IS CONSIDERED m ~ i 10 11' JUNIPERTREE 4.57 Cal.Inches NO R 2 g NOTE: ASPEN, COTTONWOOD, AND SILVER MAPLE I. 11 11' JUNIPERTREE 4.57 Cal.Inches NO R ARE ONLY CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT IF THEY ARE AT LEAST 12 DBH _ 9 12 12' JUNIPERTREE 4.98 Ca I.Inches NO R NOTE: SALIX, BOXELDER, SIBERIAN ELM, AND BLACK Lu 0 F 13 11' JUNIPERTREE 4.57 Cal.Inches NO R LOCUST ARE NEVER SIGNIFICANT A 14 10' JUNIPERTREE 4.15 Cal.Inches NO R 1' EVERGREEN HEIGHT= 0.415 CALIPER INCHES WQ 15 12' JUNIPERTREE 4.98 Cal.Inches NO R Q > Q 111 18 DBH NORWAY MAPLE YES R ® —� 125 26 DBH GREEN ASH ves R TREE REPLACEMENT SUMMARY 130 14 DBH APPLE TREE MULTISTEM YES R w G a ((A/e)-0.20) . c x A = o 131 15 DBH GREEN ASH YES R �y/ 1 TOTAL DIAMETER INCHES OF SIGNIFICANT TREES LOST AS A D— - P 132 21 DBH CHOKE CHERRY YES R FA RESULT OF LAND ALTERATION OR REMOVAL 133 19 DBH HONEY LOCUST YES R TOTAL DIAMETER INCHES OF SIGNIFlCANT TREES SITUATEDZON THE LAND134 21 DBH GREEN ASH YES R >w 135 31 DBH BLACK LOCUST NEVER SIGNIFICANT NO R TREE REPLACEMENT CONSTANT(1.5) J J Hcf)6 DBH CRAB APPLE MULTISTEM YES R w j 139 30' SCOTCH FINE 12.45 Cal.Inches YES R D REPLACEMENT TREES(NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES) Y W 140 35' RED PINE 14.53 Cal.Inches YES R w TOTAL SIGNIFICANT CALIPER INCHES REMOVED: 318.81" Q O 141 35' RED PINE 14.53 Cal.Inches YES R a TOTAL CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED TO BE REPLACED: —I � W a 142 20' RED PINE 8.3 Cal.Inches YES R ((318.81"/318.81')-0.20) x 1.5 x 318.81" = 382" rr of 143 12 DBH ELM YES R z n a 144 12' SPRUCE 4.98 Cal.Inches NO R PROPOSED TREES 0 o 146 7 DBH WHITE OAK YES R 90 3" CALIPER DECIDUOUS TREES = 270" J 159 7 DBH BLACK ASH YES R ~ 118 2" CALIPER ORNAMENTAL TREES = 236" 165 7 DBH BLACK ASH YES R 12/02/2014 c 166 8 DBH BLACKASH YES R 37 6 FOOT CONIFEROUS TREES = 92" PROJECT NO. K s 160755001 175 11 DBH GREEN ASH YES R SHEET NUMBER 1A2 F f1Rbd GRFFPI Ark IkAl II TICTPRA VFC R TOTAL PROPOSED TREES(CALIPER INCHES): 598" s 6103 d CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR CRAL PARK WEST UTICA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS 11 IL j ST. LOUIS PARK GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA o PREPARED FOR: s ON DLC R E ID E NT IAL r � 'I Ln GN Ra Do A ER. 411 INDEX OF SHEETS 0 1E A,.'La, A E'. PROJECT LOCATION 0 uD LEEN HILLSx DR R C. LET 4. 6310 TITLE SHEET HLWD 6320 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN > 8116 6330 EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS PLAN > W. 6340 SITE PLAN w. t6tR> > > 6350 STREET PROFILE & STORM SEWER PLAN i. IA. 1.111 DR, LA ST CEDAR Lqf 6351 STREET PROFILE & STORM SEWER PLAN FR 6360 UTILITY PLAN & PROFILE PAR—N-1p, Lj --N" pDP w Ij 6361 UTILITY PLAN & PROFILE wk, q -2 W 6400 LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING PLAN W v E CEDARWDBD d ST. S. 6401 LANDSCAPE DETAILS T— W1 ASW.0D 'A'i, ST V. 25 112 $T, L a 6402 LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION PLAN 5D.ELEW'�V�L. r5 w. 5th ii, $T. W. 26 h $T. w.25 6403 LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION PLAN ST. > 11 CED AR LA KE > PL 2BthJ S T.. Di TAA�VA UTILITIES, 5; th IT, DA Qwest: 29 th 0 ST 6244 Ceder Ave S. LU Richfield MN 554-23 31 d Phone: i,612)861.8118 W Contact: Gary Roberson, (gary.robersonCqwest.com) —'7N�TH CONTACTS: Center Point Energy. > 700 Linden Ave W. Z - PO Box 1165 Developer/Owner; W :5 Minneapolis, MN 55401 DLC Residential. LLC a- 9 I-- �< Phone: (612) 321.5299 5245 Wayzata Blvd.5 Z St Louis Park, MN 55416 Contact; Tom Dolan (thomos.dolon0centerpointenergy.com) ZW 'CO9 50)Wo Phone: (612) 325.9767 Xcel Energy. Contact: Rich Kauffman 1518 Chestnut Ave N.—First Floor MW WZVW ' 5 Minneapolis MN 55403 Z Phone: (612)630.4549 Civil Engineering Consultant: Contact: Kevin Jones(kevin.m.jonesOxcelenergy.com) Kimley—Horn fL :D a Comcast Cable; 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 238N 2 Cl)— St. Pau 1. MN 55114 —j — 9705 Data Pork Phone: (651)545.4197 0 Contact: Lucas C. Payne, PE Minnetonka. MN 55343LL Phone: (651) 4915132 conn) Municipality -9 Z Contacts: Rick Miske(richard—miske@cable.comcast W U) E E IV Kelly Doonan (kelly—doonan0coble.comcast.com) City of Saint Louis Pork 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard Time Warner Telecom: St. Louis Park, MN 5 1 5416 DATE 5480 Feltl Rd. RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:---- DATE: Phone: (952) 924�2574 12/02/2014 Minnetonka, MN 55343 CITY ENGINEER. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK (952)924.2687 Planner DECO 3 2014 PROJECT NO. Office e 160755001 Phone: (952) 35 534 Contact: Sean Walther, Senior n (612) 805.6827 Mobile Scott Brink, City Engineer SHEET NUMBER DATE: Contact: Bob Strong (bob.stronggtwtelecom.com) RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:_____—_— DATE:— — �yy J __ U IA SHEET NUMBER E CITY PPROVAL:--- CITY ENGINEER, CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY 6310 ;B Z6 —199 V4M*N"GH—KMV4N -v 1oz/zo/z L:3LV(l --- WiN301831d 010 --3WHd f .— ffi N*lfWd US 92/9t, VIOS3NNIVY .0 0 M NKz aunSI�I`S`31AN 3NV klIS83AINn mcz uonN 3SN33fl NA NV�d �O�JiNOO Ln :) C:) Ae wy8a A311VA N�10109\>RAVd SIC101'iS W,�C�-4 t8 Lcn) �z CN --- 00 3NIVd'0 SVOM AB 03NOMO NOISMJD SNVId iN3VY3AO'dcJVYI (D u Jo H At, w rA :kMMN3 NOMO EjnN3AVvoun-ISBM NWd 1"IN3O X -77 <,o NORTH < i � 1�,_ r 1,� .�`�-__. �' l\\ f.�1 ----------- 0 + [ $ A 4, < + us CS Ep v < + 0 -11 tI �74111 I Ili I + 7'T /17 EM8 ,0 ,02r 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 k LLJ 11 1 ITI 11-11.1-1 X �p -E —>> I g !o -9� Lu V z -0 F- --o io i i 0� 25,Z,- 0 Z 0 0., of 2. ;o I —IZw6 z 0 'AMW o u r-j ri :E NHS—1-pp—P.--1- q.........p-, "W J'd"04 PW W OMW V"A—i V WIW Ai WRP P- S'P-14 n V—I--wM'4 W-M'Mu•4 plw"'-Imp P. t'� LL'ti�, ..,,,.. ♦.....♦. ♦ �'.s� 1 u uC q tle(��I 1`IpI 'I II .� SAWCUrN ROUND REE. NWSw Vis -`:: F� 11 �Ip � �"$ �•' �:I I i �.'. X115 TURNAROUND AREA.EXISTING ♦ '•`y'a "` ��;'' ♦ :_ I I 14 B II L c ♦♦y`I VALLEY GUTTER TO REMAIN '<��`-"'j y ♦ ♦....l 2 EXISTING HYDRANT \T C•i-j �'- T ♦•••••\\•••• py )'•. �, ' ♦ ♦ �♦♦ y EXISTING HYDRANT T 2 e p .i� N50 RRee B 6� V fl -,-. r �• �rD REMaN f _ I • —;�; TTP — -,�._ xMm m a N/sIxv.eTs.2T /•�-'.:•=L♦ .§�# .4d*A — nx nv e6Tx x.s�Is H W X� II r T yq a 351 �X II C q f F:e EYY4E-�E-iF-X-iKX—)C--XiF GA5 ��LLL\\\ u ; EXISTING PARKING AREA TO REMAIN L, '-• # - I \ » » » I I ° @ OPEN DURING CONSTRUCTION OF REMOVE ALL EM 2 II I `EXISTING SANITARY gW42 QIT90E TREES WITHIN MEDIAN UTICA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS OF RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE REMOVED i 3 I TLm I B _ it IEE NN D SANITARY SEWER IS ��1 II � o _>>_>>—>>—>> E u e I EXISTING SR1AMI WER TO BE a REMOVED TIER NEW_CONNECTION IS _— RETE--RFYS1REEi PR J C) arm.STORM I Z G) g W iI SEE ON-SITE PLANS FOR SITE REMOVALS _ p n l II rccrn♦♦ �` f 77 I SANITARY SEWER TO BE 5 I.;-• P °� r'.� (•v7 vi I I�j ABANDONED FOLIOWINC CONSIRUC110N / �>� Ln N -f" `- I CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL BUUWEan�;� lI I 6 RE-ROUTER SANITARY TO / ;> o- aN-SITE UTILITY PUN r p F?t T L o L n o ^ i ---- ocAnox qLID 'I ♦.� ._ ['..y10 .;s •:'.':—. � .- _ .�.,Wa, — W �.-�®I'��'�® FYT OF . IS PARK �.�..� ?TY GO VALLEY — _ J GAS GAS � GAS GA5 GAS. ,b GA KEYNOTE LEGEND GENERAL NOTES ° 1O REMOVEBITUMINWSPAVEMENT h u c 2O REM OVE CON CR ETE PAVEMENT 1 ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WRHTHECITYOFST,LOUIS PARK z e GOLDEN VALLEY SPECIFICATIONS AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.WORK eWITHIN WAYATA BOULEVARD WILL REQUIRE A MNOOT ROWV UTY PERMIT. 06 $p O REMOVE CURBANDGUTTER Q EXISTING SIGN TO BE REMOVED 2. CONTRACT SHALL HAVE ALL UNDERGROUND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES LOCATED '� PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. �/�/) OE3 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL LANDSCAPINGWITRN REMOVALAREA. PLAN FOR REMOVAL OF EXISTING TRE 5 CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING VEGETATION ANDSITE FEATURES,WITI Z BO SAWCUT PAVEMENT APPROVED METHODS AND MATERIALS,WHICH ARETO REMAIN.ALLSITE FEATURES _z O DAM AGED BY CONTRACTOR THAT ARE NOT DESIGNATED REMOVAL SHALL BE - lO EXISTING LIGHT POLE TO BE REMOVED REPAIREDIR EPLACE D BY CONTRACTOR AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. J 1 9 E 1.11N.HYDRANT T.BE R f:\ 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL FI ELD VERIFY TH E LOCATION S AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING Q v LJ RELOCATED.DOOR DINAIEWITH OWNER. UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES.SUCH AS EXISTINGGUTTERGRPDESATTHE c PR OPOSED DRIVEWAYS,PRIOR TO THE START OF SITE GRADING. Q / i Q REMOVE.SALVAGE ANDRSIGON TE 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OFANY DISCREPANCIESOR O IA VARIATIONS FROM THEPNS, W Z 6. ALL PAVEMENT.CURB a GUTTER TO BE REMOVEDSHALLBES UTAT REMOVAL O G� 3 LEGEND LIMITS OR NEAREST.IOINT. 1 1 1 • T. UTILITIES NOT MARKED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTEDFROM DAMAGEDURING 1�� PROPERTY LINEIRON - CONSTRUCTION.THIS WORN SHALL BEINCIDENTALTOCONTRACT. CITY LIMIT LINE e e. STREETSHALL BE SWEPT IN ACCORDANCEWITHCITYREOUIREMENTS. _ '••^•^'�•••� ''-"'. EXISTING CURBANDGU TM W - ^ e. COORDINATE REMOVALS OF PRIVATE UTILITESWITH UTUTYCOMPANIES � _.� f{�ff EXISTING CURB AN D GUTTER TO BE REMOVED Z 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PRDADEATRAFFIC CONTROLPLAN APPROVEDBYTHE CITY W W 7--/ ' EXISTING BUILONG PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK WITHIN THE CRY ROW. »— EXISTING STORM SEWER 11. ALL TR UN K LINES OR SERVICE LIN ES TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE PLUGGED AT MAIN. J / C3 EXISTIN G STORM CATCH BASIN I MANHOLE 12. CONTRACTOR TO SEAL AND GROUT OPENINGSABANDONEDAT EXISTING U J DISCONNECTS Lu Q EXISTING SANITARY SEWER 55 13. CONCRETE CRUSHING OF BUILDING MATERIALS ISA[LdNED ONSITE.HOURS OF = � � � Z 4 EXISTING SANITARYMANHOLE OPERATION SHALL BE LIMITED TO T:WAMTO TDOPM,CONCRETE TO BE REUSED AS AGGREGATE BASE SHALL CONFORM TO THE MNDOT SPECIFICATION FOR VMICH Z ♦O♦ll11 O W 5 -----W EXISTING WATERMAIN MATERIAL WILL BE USED. (n w V )o Lu V5 EXISTING FIREHYDRANT 14. CONS TR UCTION LIMITS TO BE THE PROPERTY LINE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE W Y Z W C CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE ITEMS WITHIN CONSTRUCTKJN UMITS AS SHOWN ON TIE • �Q EXISTING GATEVALVE PLANS AND DIRECTED PEA TME OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. Y O C '�` J Y EX ISTINGWATERMAIN TO BE ABANDONED ISTOBECAPPEDATTNEMAINANDBULK C v ----vA -- EXISTING GAS UNE 15. HEADED. Q a Q 5 ...._......._<;__......._ EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE a J � � 0 X EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCETO BEREMOVED 1 O EXISTING LIGHT PQIE J EXISTING LIGHT POLE TOM REMOVED 1'- Z = W -II- EXISTING SIGN p U 5 r`"--- —'--1 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TOM REMOVED DATE L,�_. —J 12/02/2014 CONCRETE PAVEMENT TOM REMOVED PROJECT NO. UTILITY TO BEABANDONED 160755001 X-X•XX.X•X-X- uTLITY TO BE REMOVED GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET SHEET NUMBER EXISTING TREE TO BEFEMOV'ED 0 25 50 100 ■ 6330 1 12 3 4 5 6 7 18 9 10 111 1 12 1 13 114 115 116 A - 6 L NOTE BUS TURNOUT SHALL BE S- i��1,�....�L�.Y>,..�.>.��u�-�.:-�\ - }-"' F .1.CROSS-WALK 24'160E BY MA MH INTO E�Tfn RB 8'REINFORCED CONCRETE ON 10' • .,.T f .� [ �I �- 72'LONG SPACED 24'APART. B s GLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE(1001L _ _.� _'-2 PAVF?1FNT MARKINGS(iW) 6'CONCRETE r (t i - �CYCIED) 3 MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB \ ,a ! - L�].1.aa,.��aS�.I.Y•.��.:.:+a1�aa+.1'.-�� t ADA RAMP SIDEWALK ---.-.• j 3 `r--� �= �-•-`' &PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS _ 6'CONCRETE TAR P -_ T 2 (Z h PAVEMENT ELEVA710N5 1 ARAM /: V \ AD P w fi ♦yi.aa3•a"' ,ro 4:,.�.y„'... �� .a.-w - m , SIDEWALK TRARSTKIN FROM EXISTING �` "Rin�NS i, ! _ 8IA _ '9DLWALI(TO PROPOSED R ':.... ME.DSI:LA.ON_.P.N:O:'.S'E 4+00- MEDIAN NOSES A . ..... _ _ •SOUPED .�. . CA AVENUE UE SO�'_ TF L � , TVP.) G' — —� �— - 10+00 1+001 , -:• _ i2N�ou 13+o0 t4+o0 1s+00 16+00 7+aD� 17+44 n. _ .. _ ., _ PROPOSED 81TIR48NOU5 6 SLOPED — _ _ 6 8+00 0 — — _ ',. MEDIAN NED OSE MEDIAN NOSE_ 1 ' `+ x STA:4+9548 ... — +00 '�--2 _ _ — — 8 9 — z y _ 7+00 (T�.) (Tm.) er ^ -— .; `r T E ... N 9 4 _ h MATCH INTO EMSIING CURB n _ — — — v,•'.: `- .. - T N u e &PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS a DIRECTIONAL _ -._. _"..,- :o x I ARROWS - ADA RAMP .. .. <'' > a a 6'CONCRETE .. - 4'DASHED WHITE SIDEWALK 4"GASHED WHITE n ' 6DROP CURB 6'CONCRETE UNE(TTP) NO1E BUS LINE(TVP)TURNAROUND SHALL- 1 B'CONCRETE - �i a I FOR FUTUf� 9DEWAU( ....... __..... ....... _. BE B'REINFORCED CONCRETE ON .' SIDEWALK WHITE CROSS-WALL(24'WIDE BY - Q� • ADA RAMP _ - _..... __._.. .. _ 10"CUSS 5 AGGREGATE BASE i 72'UDNG SPACED 24'APART, f r _ - - s (100%RECYCLED) - PAVEMENT MARKINGS(TYP) _ r D " " a -- MATCH INTO EXISTING CURB &PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS i. SEE CENTRAL PARK WEST u $ ' DEVELOPMENT PLANS 00 Li r- E 3 � a u UTICA m 8 AVENUE i CE R EMSL EXIST. Rnl39.67' 39.67' Rw I e F n 5' 67' 12' 12' 12' 12' 67* 4' 6' z ` KEYNOTE LEGEND SITE PLAN NOTES t 1 STOP SIGN RI-1(3P X 30) 1. ALL PAVEME NT STRIPIN G SHALL BE EPDXY WITH BEADS AND ADHERE TO THE CITY OF ' u �' O I ST.LOUIS PARK STANDARDS.ALL PAVEMENT ARROWSAND CROSSVA SSHALL$ POLY PREFORMED PAVE-MARK.STA-MAR OR APPROVED EQUAL K 2 STOP ALL WAY Rt-412 � NAL XS) O O NO PARKING FIRE LANE R]42(12X1 2. _ a PRECONSTRUCTION EGMUST BE HELDBYTHE CONTRACTOR,DEVELOPER, ANDTHE CIN TO ENSURE ALLCONCERNSMEADDRESSED, E O THRU-LEFT R}61.0=36-) UTICA AVENUE _ - 3. THECOUNITED TR ACTORURS OFADHERE TO ALL 9:00PMCITY N WEKDWfSANCES.VJOT09. 8E PROFILE GRADE _ � O THRU-RIGHT R36R(30-X9S) UNITED TO THE HOURS OF]:OMM T09:OOPM ON WEEI(DAYS ANDBCMM T09.WRA ON CONCRETE CURB & `C 3 WEEKENDS, EXISTING GUTTER TYPE 8618 UTICA AVENUE Gu OB LEFT ONLY 0.J-5L(30'X36% - N. THE SITE SHALL BE KEPT FREE OF DUST AND DEBRISTHATCOULD BUMOMO CONCRETE TIP-OUT #Y O RIGHT ONLY R}5R(3D'X%T NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. SIDEWALK STA. 0+00 TO STA. 8+39 3 O ONE WAY RIGHTR62L(1SX24) 5. CONTRACTORSHALL MONITOR DUST AND NOISE LEVELSATTNEPERIMETMOFTHE CONCRETE CURB & SCALE. 1 rr 5r E SITE AND SHALL REPORT THE RESULTS TOTHE OWNER ANDTHECITY. GUTTER TYPE 6616 �g MEDIAN R47(24XXn UTICA W AVENUE Z r "s DST. EXIST, W W R/W Q J ft 3 h 39.67' 39.67' Q LEGEND Q > 3 H PROPERTY LINE/ROH/ 6' 4, •67, 12' 12' 12' 12' •67' 6' )-- W Q E CITY LIMIT LINE a. C3 Q F- < 3 PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER _ Z (.9Q W EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER 2x x u' W LLI V n C LIJ EXISTING BUILDING G W Y W Z_ i 11 SIGN - - C (� O C V T X 4" CONCRETE UTICA AVENUE a CLri) 0 (i PROFILE GRADE SIDEWALK UTICA AVENUE BASE AGGREGATE STA. 8+39 TO STA. 17+09 H T s CONCRETE CURB & SCALE: 1 p = 5' Z W C/) y , . GUTTER TYPE 8618 O 0 0 N E ' 12/02%2014 y WAY N� PROJECT NO. K PARKING R1.1 160755001 0 N LY 0 N LY LANE GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET SHEET NUMBER i E ALL WAY 0 25 50 100 R R3-6L R3 SIR R3-SL R3-5R RS-2L R7-22 R4-7 R14 6340 w00 Na0N-A3iwlr 3WQ y �1 IIL�-1 It-9 -199 3NONd LOZ�ZO�ZL -__ N`d� 1VUN3QIS3a V IQ TILLS NW'lf1Vd'15 V I W _Z Suns'- 3'l A16a3AINn ossa S8L94 AS 03NO3W d o O _ HlOS3NNIW o z m 1 !/L� a39WON 35N30 NW AB NmvN0 �3M3 S W�I OiS L1.311`dA N30100\NNVd SU101.1S w-U N Z Ln UJB (\I\�'� LJ ¢N mr M C 3NAVd'0 SYDIll Aa 03N,s39 SNVId 1N3W3A02idWl o\ W H ` R03MM N91930 3WOS 31 I J OBJ d 13 3? 1S am3A`d` oun-1S3M N-dVd WHIN30 � a 0 Ld 00 z o � � 000 00 00 000 0 NORTH ¢o Y .._._--- '------- x o OLS'LLS 713 N DO'L +Lt Ind O 8LTV L L – – _ _–_.'�-. .___.._ tom. – ..�� M •`'' I LL W of l00 M N 3 6' W00 "L�00 =CN 000 'P° �r`Oi a_n_ IiI oC-4 mI 04a 00 Do 10 00 �'� a, I $ ululullll + W r� z? N p0'i W O N -i Z Z O t W O `t – Z6'BLS VIr O'6L8 �4! I � 7 N va~i v� •– S III Z"5.;g ago LC I n 10 1 III 9[I �rcGb Srl.` Ii"j n® LO I : T �$p I N o 1 1 gmg a�� I L£'6L8 # 11 I a + 0 0 '088 :30n 0'068 i' oa OS' 8+14 :SCU (N 6L'692 110 31 )a0 �> ) SZ'9L8 NI 31 o LO C. _ S) 68'698 NI 31 00.mow III I I ,� 18 ,Z*'8Z 'LL•££+4L II l W I- BO£ Y WBO I1I C= Ca�� s> L 'Das :30n 3 o A o a OS' L+4L ;S0 9 6B'sG8 0 III � 6'0Be ")- �d I_ !I aec a'0'io L _v m,ti� r +o u V rcwo a:`^o I T I!I I NLp -DR �i5 I I II ✓ 4-m mdN�� O ^ 1 6 o —1 166'N 4 0M'I I S I0 I ^ �•LBB O I N METEl i l zc O tr +o + /� (N) 8 'OL8 1f10 31 I 2 imz n I 'a� AHI I aNg a7� (S) LL•OLB NI48il' � g o *L'19a C�: " — �� 1 z4 ez '� sl+zL o 9 rxE+z l H cos H r£'L99 + •�1 III $m i 01 90'Z8 :30n3 I a 0799 N I / n O N 09'L8+ L 50n3 I — x H N I n — : OWO O N / r'O7 LSD m Y -- --W— 1 10 rcz ¢wo,•Lfl I Lam® o -... ..Y* +►•r<„ty,.a .?LT.ITl?t.L'E4igSA�. - I ac �W Q Y I J N ms`s u Cur �v�s'xx�sa��u'aa FMF Zo SS 88'Z88 :30n8 I N O °- OS'zL+ll :SDn8 I setae O y s"" W -I- __ „± J I N ',ANitlW._ N 00 O cT C I `o 00 N I'J N y �2 b V Nm�c 00 CC) to 2 G poJ ? n CD 0 c0 wWOo OBOWS till, orn n O – C4B8 0 r Lo • 1f I n N II :n g Sn n N +C”^00 Ln I d' r f 8311 M`t H I I 11rc� DD x QOOZ0 V) I A L£' L+6 •1 g w w a O r£'seB O N oI Z'9ea + gnol � aK� (S) 6 •L88 1f10 I 0 (M) 8'198 NI I z�•s9a a i 1 L= $moo06E)*,622 p 113 OO•54+8 :Ind ZO£ HNEO 0- Of Z-1 I I pp O 0 60'[88 O i .•..'mm m O I•II Ja L t I N® sao o o i 00'54+ SOn3 J IV �xo5 �I W 0/�� -ees 0 L'aB9 + ld a N I U CSOr ' ISL 1 v Of Ln ai O g +000 00 I _ OS 1..ze ,.I � w5$na gC°as i (MS) 09'9L8 inn 31 ZQd� ' Wmfo I t e 14�SSd �WOY (N) LC'6 8 NI 31 ,ro L a 99' 88 321 ''o O N6. + G� +�� Sa a 121 Z4' Z 'S4'SO 9 V1S n®L £S'seB O ¢ d 1i 3 o I �mh §, 00'94+s WAG 2 W o F – – K_ O I p_pi 96'688 O b '� I tb' b h 2 rn 90.� O o 0'069 + 0 10 a � �. . . w�� NCD EEn In Sri. S I x L(j 00 O V W o n' Do zZ> Li8$ � W x $m Lr) W z i ■ Ei k + =d a O W Ej ® IG v( 1 II �G OZ4'O68 �3 u~i I 11'068 O w I I a II. �I a I fl O 00'00+4 Ind O O O O O + 4'068 f I(01 t 0) 000 00 00 00 IL II 1 v41•pppeeq Pb woMbN+p W 4119w1 L^P41W.y IPV'ePl SIe ^ 1191 -q( )daps Pia.09o:1<Vlro l+iu+.i�PVIW yuu.oW SIN m m4pM wae.ew Pr io..I.y le+Pdeq ee.LI VIW+w 1wP P.e.wwntl�9Pea.ep pi<w PgWN q mow•!.L4..<WeM u w'eiue4 wu.wd eWP.P yuo gdeauoa.N MN.Vl.l.i 7wwnxq.141 NVId l 31 1111M ONtl 3�130ad 1332115-OSa9\PLIS-ll0\syaaysuPld\OtlJ\u61sa0 f\pua ysaM 100SSL09l\Iolyuaplsai aIP\A361 JM1\:N wda4:04:40 410a 's0 ua9wa-®0 NV�d 39VNIVaO ONV 9NIOtlaO:L oI Of1d AaVNlwll3ad-ON3 153M:1a5 1aay5 o118 'uowap�nM B PaylPld rM"NaON-)XV01 to 'It 91,11-M:3NDHd t�ao�z toy�awc N`d1 d "lVl.LN301S3M 010 (list NA'nVd'AS W wz Suns'ISW 3AV kM83AINn ossz S8L9i All 03WJ31q VIOS3NNIW o °z o r 830NnN 35N30n N% As WAVaO �1 u E MD S W�J OlS 'R 'A3l1dA N30100\NZPdd SM01'1S U u z uJOl� 3NAVd'3 StlD - AM D3NDWO SMdld 1N3W3AO*ddW1 �� w '0 H `( l��y/� �tIDNgN3lNDIS30 3lVDS 31I�OSId l33�JlS 3m3A`d` oun-1S3M)INVdIVRUN30 N a � O 0) 00 O 0) 00 00 0000 O O 04 0 (M) 09'0L8 NI 31 ro (S) LL'OLB NI 31 0`OW �l'l88 321 1 Zb'SZ ',v '9t+Zl 1S --� �z Zi'l88 O a rtes .� U ~ � CL0 c x _ .0 W aItT OOJ m O ry W O U O O z 6-Z813 + O '~n J 0 W X07 00 00 OD 00 W LO O O 00 rO (O O 00 00 00 00 U (N) tiZ' L8 if10 31 N O (S) t LL8 NI 31 I o O IL11 hl v (M) 0 '8L8 NI 31 £S'Z88 32! � 121 i,-HZ Z6,9 +01 Ns O So£ HW90 _ (3) 08'8 8 1f10 31 EL v a 8'Z98 321 U R O m 11 ,L '8Z 'Z9'8 +0L :V1S 0-10 56'Z86 O U so£ ao o oes + O I V ODD O 11 O 1 IO Z 0 O O O O tt) 14) O 0) 00 I- ED m O 00 00 00 00 U 0) 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 W O a 00 N 9L'399 if10 3 Q) O + (M) l 'ZLB NI 3 0i + (S) 9 '898 NI 3 o ro 6Z'LL8 3 0 N o O id -VRZ 'SZ' 6+91 :ViE Z t•7 I'7 OW HKEK J^ _ (N) 98'lL9 Ir 0 31 = 3) 8Z'£L9 1f10 31 �o ro ( ) 96'ILO 131 � tit LLB 321 X� N O m 96'b8 32J O m 11 9'8Z '62+91. :ViS in^ tr 49'LLB O U 121 ,L9'K '9L'0V+6 :Vis r 96'498 O U LL£ 80 in V) l'BL9 + ti0£ W80 L'4B6 + I U O 0 O 0 ^ a� OCn O mD 0 0000 0OI� t0 0o0 O O O 0 r 0 m 00 00 Oo 00 U O O O O O 0) 000 -O � O O 00 t` O 00 00 00 00 0) 00 00 00 0 rn O (Ni 6L'698 1 0 31 to O a p + N (S) 61'L29 im I � ) SZ'SLB NI 31 o � a� S) 68'698 NI 31 �w p (M) 591138 NI 1 ;� o � Z8"6 8 321 � Z£'99B 8 Cs O 121 ,Zb'8Z Lt'££+til :Vis vZ 121 ,Zb'SZ 'S 'Sti+8 =V S 10 r ZOO 14019'2C L J� m �© _ (3 ZB'SLH 1 0 31 U (3) 9ti Z88 inn 1 Z8'6 8 321 �o O L£'998 3 O m 11 ,Z*'SZ 'L l'££+til :VIS in^ L6-6L9 O O ll ,L9'SZ 'S 'St+B :Vi94'969 O U 5C£ 80 Lose + £0£ 8D 5-99e O O O J LO O O) O O 1^ ry0 ryO� ryO e+JJ O 0) 00 O 00 00 00 00 m rn 00 00 00 U U amu!-WT l•W Pw u+eH�eNPIM P>1111Vg1 inP411e W IPM'nl'°iPPeeeV Pw umN-.t�1u91 F9 w11o1mPo P. Pw le.s,>•tl it W14w ioy iuMP Wo eaG,M aYPa Yyl w,y f,e PPwi4 q yMw !o iwwyq w se'yu4 PIw�A uENP Puu 90cauw aye yIN a,q�Eo]7wwrvap�lyl IN '�d0 L6LY-9YB-199 3MAO'NNOH-A31MNOHd ti Loz/zo/z 1 -__ l`dllN3a1S3b 010 �, W PILLS NN'lO d IS A9 O3MO3HO O 3 sscsti �-1I O�d VIOUNNIW o Z m 0 N92Z 3LIn 'IS3N 31V ALISH3AINn OSSZ H39NnN Mon NVI --- I N F O j j A9 N«vuO .l3llldA N3a10°J\NZNd SI(lbl'1S <ry uaoH(ttlCa��u�� 3NlVd s"o�, -Ae D3N0mD '8 N`d�d Jlll�Ilfl SNb�'Id 1N3W3AObdW1 oN :MMDN3 NOWO 31VOS 3nN3A`d` oun-1S3M>INVd'IV2UN30 O O O O In W O 00 r tD In Z 00 00 00 00 00 W NORTH u ---'- -�'�-- 9Z HOS OAd.O£ '098 �1ITO ANI v o9S'LL9 :NIH IHMLL'1O.9Z+Ly :VIS HW VI0 9 901 HW ' O S O u � z s'b6LL 9 9 i N h � � � iP�° jxO g 'LLIy __ 1 52 w� ° z LU II I ;, ; 'b�� n.2�� 3> I a i R —�I I O IIS � 1 � 86'6L8 C 0.088 + I I>•. :��b � � z j Lr) I IIS wF n$...Fx fow X, '�� w NN> aF i w g e oo 9Z NOS OA ,Of 9 09'9 :1 1 ANI f SfH05 d.B 09'LL9 NI ANI 9Z HOSO d,O£19'099 NI ANI I O ,�qaL °ate Si'08 :NIH 1 1 0•Ll'89'99+£ :VIS 1 BL'OB80 OI HW BOBS T 'r. d o u r, r- w C•. .. w qct s I �w • tea �3 o moi; Z �� 6s'�es w' Q w1— II; 5-V12 F a I I• 1 0 o-z : W 3 u 66199 W O'Z88 I a N 92;80S OAd Df M99 anO A I w�� t £HOS OAd.0 f6'998:NIA I ( m� Z HOS OAd, Sf'098:NIA YOL HI I 7 WEN �'F•'-a o i o 7 } a 0 + o G�� r- ri 9Z HOS OAd.O£6VD98 If 0 ANI i zW=� ; Bl'0 O z w o N n 9L HOS d"Ld, 98 Of I o o 99'9NIH I;• • 1 £'R'OZ'LZ+ V15 1-s n g 7 HN NOLL33S dOHO 10 S O w 5 I ,?3 f L HN ZZ-999 O Z'999 + t 1 o it • a sb m ,j[ BS•L99 O 'ti b! Z 7' 0 9'L9B -+- ��,. 0o O t R I ss'Be9 O L•988 -+- f 7 .::ris c 11f w � oRw g .• I - O 94'698 O -{- CD L. ; u, I I I .= DD+D DD+L :tai ~� �I � u=.Ni ,I/, f -3 xo.l�bb I oar "�11=j I.r _ . <° _n I j ° :say O 1• 'ten i �b Y as 96'698 O I'M13b h 1 ;RP0 0'069 �$ ti '.i grmw ylf N >B o n lo 38bp I 1 dvs ^ � a I 1 "wSa3s 1 yI �i_ f B ° II 11 i _� O O O O In ( �I I 1- 00 00 il- to In I R 1 1 1 1 1-i I 00 00 00 00 00 I 'auI•.goPosy V'n,�,u-.�.iwiN.�gnaws}.. w Idw>wl o�:'�+.=+�wa ka .wpv. �.9 ro..+u,.T..vx»�ww.a.n.Iw M41MA&Udm rw w...w V. .M L wl"+ imp AN.P.PWM 4 14—N NM .4,o w',M4 Pquw.aU.uEMN Vw q--.y!y11.wyNbq J-.-,.I,A 6mp 2BBU - NV"Id Ainun-O9Z9\ally-};p\ayc.yeuold\pyO\u6laeO f\p.•)sew Lpp55LO9L\j-1;-Plee1-1P\A3p1-0M1\:N wd£L:LY:40 YIOZ'ZD •Qw•,00 3lUGHd V NV-1d ALllllm7^Knl 0nd AHVNIYII136d- ON3 IS3M:I-S 1-6 oug'uowep,rvA As P-11-1d N00'NNOH-A31KX •31V0 - LBN-SY9-159:3NOHd 4ioa/zo/zi _ lt/I1N3O1S321O1a E i *ast NW'irWd'15 W MWZ 3La1S'153N 3+V ALIS93AINn ossa WN 3 - m�a3H� `},L d o 3 N39NnN 35N30n NW --- ��I�O U� , dlOS3NNIW O �� m r' A9 N«�Np '8 N d1 d Jll I i l f l .l3IIdA N3alOJ\112�d SIf1Ol'1S a N w z � UaOH/�(�"�'�� 3Nnd 3 snm ___ SNVId 1N3W3AONdWI w 'Q^ n\ V A9 p3N763p ¢Cp W lY • :NMN10N3 N01S30 31Y� 3nN3A`d` oun-1S3M XNVd IHZIlN3O N 0 O O O O IO 03 00 tl- CD LO 00 00 00 00 co 0 O � N6 + -I K c 0'in B og m )) 0 K Y9'09 1 1nO ANI OS'L9:NI ANI I f 19.99 NI ANI I O (/7 s'099 :NIN 54'088 O SOL HW 6'6L6 + 0 Q z rn oo co LO Q 00 00 00 00 00 rn 00 CD LO 00 00 00 00 00 0 0 + t aw . c SC'099'1n0 A I ago ( 1O C6,999:N A ( cp ( { O SC'099:NI A ( 1 U7 LZ+99:WI LZ L88 O IL*10L H o aee -} O Q LO 0)i 000 P c0O z Q 00 00 00 00 00 w` cn Z O O O O Ln Z = 00 00 00 00 00 O N Q 0 0_ K coo S �F N u m a :in0 A DO' AN s s F a a v 00'L9INI ANI i .. o a el' 99 ANI O - o o w y 3 � � (n 'SB9 WIN 9SSBB 0 w w w w CDL HW 6'486 -I- w o o _ _ o - o o Z o o _ _ o _ o _ _ - - m O Q I I w n w w a w i i w w w z 0 O 0rl- 0 LLo . ❑ I a00 OD 00, 00 00 Z I I h (/7 W �� I � i � IIIi � . J •-m.e _.._�-�: ate..;_^.^ -'._ :: e I - o� I a �a I � DO a CD LO N 00 00 00 00 00 0 + j r7 r � aw wb I € o I Q i a i 0 + + I � N I n O szsee O ��--- �. c'666 + 0 O O O O rrm-t�ce�-r c- .(��.-e-z-'^�—�'� 00 oo00 00 co 00 I � \\ .S \.1J"�----- -1'..WMW pw woH-R X M JIIIgNI I—.q IPV.'>I+!7 p. pw weN- ja <q..9.1..P.Pw wa—W. ). iwwrupp Nq w.-,nd .pw'...ny P.md.tl.p.M—--p p....gd1M a9 ..q+ loo F.pw3M W p pw.dro .q q -0. I..-..IV! 5MP'9899 - NV'1d Airlun V\pue I,,M LOoSSL09 L\lelaueP!a -IP\A30TOM1\:N wdDZ=1190 /LOZ 'ZO Iagwe-ep S311108d Ainlin:o-Apl 0nd ANVNIWI136d - ON3 1S3M:1.S I-IS wag•uoweP'nM AO Pallold J d 3 � 6 j i ^ L �. � ILI Il 7 tiaY 0 d UTICA AVENUE m s I j �� i i \-— —__i— uMITs of IrsKicAnory I t" t— O ❑ i 0 W^ ^J^ ° 5 LL LL g Q U` NOTES: LEGEND: z S s Q e 1. ALL BRANCHES LOWER THAN 8'ON PROPOSED TREES SHALL BE PRUNED ROW/PROPERTY LINE � o 2. ALL MEDIAN PLANTINGS SHALL BE A MAXIMUM 7 HEIGHT 9 ------ LIMITS OF IRRIGATION 3. VERIFY ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WITH REMOVALS AND SITEWORK J J � y 4. ALL DISTURBED LANDSCAPED AREAS,NOT INDICATED AS PLANING BEDS,ME a PROPOSED STREET/PARKING LIGHT ON 25'HIGH TO BE SODDED.SOD IS TO BE PRIMARILY KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS,FREE OF POLE-400 W HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM i LAWN GRASS AND WEEDS.REPLACE DAMAGED LAWN GRASS WITH SOD AS W DIRECTED BY ON-SITE REPRESENTATIVE.MATCH ALL PROPOSED LANDSCAPED (/ AREAS INTO EXISTING. \ " ) C 1 EXISTINGTREES Z W i W J ' 5. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PLANTS REQUIRED AS REFLECTED ON PLAN. ¢ Q ^ 6. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL HAVE TOPSOIL PLACED AT MINIMUM DEPTH OF Q E) > 4"FOR SOD AREAS,17'FOR SHRUB/PERENNIAUANNUAL BEDS,AND 24"FOR U TREE AREAS. WEST END PRELIMINARY PLANT SCHEDULE Z _ F=. w t 3 7. SINGLE TREE AND SHRUB PLANTINGS SHALL HAVE A 4"DEPTH SHREDDED F, -J Z HARDWOOD MULCH RING AROUND EACH BASE.TREES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM SYMBOL QTY COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT Z Q o w 3'DIAMETER RING. SWAMPWHITEOAK 3"CAL. B&B U)W (9 Q LLI 8. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4"IN DEPTH,FREE OF COMMON HACKBERRY 3"CAL. B&B ?Lu Y Z W ALL DELETERIOUS MATERIAL AND LOCATED IN ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS. SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST 3'CAL. B&B '(L'> Q U 9. EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAIN,THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY, SIENNA GLEN MAPLE 31 CAL. B&B Q SHALL BE PRUNED TO REMOVE DEAD OR UNDESIRABLE LIMBS AND TO SHAPE 0 77 NEW HORIZON ElJ^1 3"CAL. B&B a 4. ((J [] PLANT FOR DESIRABLE APPEARANCE.PROTECT EXISTING TREES. OVERSTORY CRIMSON SPIRE OAK 3°CAL. 8&B J 5 • 8 10. CONTRACTOR TO DISPOSE OF ALL REMOVALS OFFSNORTHERN RED OAK 3"CAI.. 8&B ITE.SEE EXISTING DECIDUOUS d CONDITIONS&REMOVALS PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION. 'u AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE 3"CAL. B&B 2 7 q 11. CONTRACTOR TO WATER PLAN MATERIAL DURING INSTALLATION AND FOR A SPIREA #5 CO (� 60 DAY ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD.VOLUME OF WATER TO BE PER PLANT L�"f M REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT AND NORMAL GROWTH. POTEN�LA GON. 9 3 JUNIPER #6 CONT. DAIS = 12. CONTRACTOR TO WARRANTY NEW SOD FOR 60 DAYS AND NEW PLANTINGS b FOR ONE YEAR UPON PROJECT COMPLETION. 7 279 BLACK-EYED SUSAN #1 CONT' 1 P OOj CT ryo04 13. IRRIGATE WITH AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM AT ALL SQ.FT. CATMINT #7 CONT• RUBAND 160755001 '^ PLANED AREAS WITHIN LIMITS AS SHOWN.SYSTEM SHALL BE COMPLETE. PEPERENNIAL GARDEN PHLOX #7 CON. GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS BEDS CONEFLOWER #1 CONT. 0 25 50 100 SHEET NUMBER E APPROVAL DAYLILY #1 CON. 6400 1 2 13 4 15 6 17 8 1 9 1 10 111 1 12 13 114 15 16 A GENERAL NOTES: fi ALL PLANT STOCK MUST BE ACCEPTABLE WITHIN ACCORDANCE OF Mn/DOT 3861 PRIOR TO FOLLOWING THE STANDARD BEST FACE OF SHRUB/ H. } PLANTING DETAILS. BACKFILL SOIL IS A COMBINATION OF EXISTING SOIL AND COMPOST MIX. GROUNDCOVE2 TO FACE 1. TOP OF SHt%JB ROOTBALLS TO BE PLANTED 1'-2 FRONT OF PLANTING BED. + + T' HIGH WITH SOIL MOUNDING UP TO THE TOP OF 1 LREFER TO PLANT + } } } ROOTBALL. E A A SCHEDULE FOR SPACING 2. WHEN USED IN MASSES-PRUNE ALL SHRUBS TO BACKFILL SOIL ACHIEVE A UNIFORM MASS EIGHT. t i 2 3 4 5 j - 3. 4"MINIMUM OF HARDWOOD BARK MULCH. MULCH FINISHED + B GRADE 4. EXCAVATE ENTIRE BED SPECIFIED FOR GROUNDCOVER BED. i n _ B B `t,' B 5. 4"MINIMUM OF TOPSOIL TO BRING TO FINISHED GRADE i ' (SEE GRADING PLAN), PREPARED PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED. NOTE: NTDO IREWHEN 7 _ _ •+• EENOBED COVERS 70 BE AMENDED WITH PLANTING SOIL MIX BALLED&BURLAPPED STOCK CONTAINER B 7 AS SPEC FIED, L 5 STOCK < 12" TYP. 7. SCARIFY ROOTBALL SIDES AND BOTTOM. O ' 1.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF 1.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF c HOLE' HOLE' >Zt7nN SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER PLANTING Y-' x 2.PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING 2.PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING Nm AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. 3 _ 3.SET PLANT CN UNDISTURBED NATIVE 3.REMOVE CONTAINER AND SCORE _ SOIL OR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED OUTSIDE OF SOIL MASS TO REDIRECT rj BACKFILL SOIL INSTALL PLANT SO AND PREVENT CIRCLING FIBROUS r� - THE ROOT FLARE 15 AT OR UP TO ROOTS, AS NECESSARY. E ROOTBALL 2"ABOVE THE FINISHED GRADE. TN1 DIAMETER 1 1. FINISH GRADE x° 4.PLACE PLANT IN PLANTING HOLE 4.SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE 2. BACKFILL WITH PREPARED PLANTING SOIL MIX AS WITH BURLAP AND WIRE BASKET,(IF SOIL OR THOROUGHLY COMPACTED SPECIFIED. cam° USED),INTACT. BACKFILL TO BACKFILL SOIL INSTALL PLANT SO D 'o WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12"OF THE THE 70P OF THE ROOT FLARE IS AT 3. 12",CLEAN SAND,COMPACTED.ADJUST LAYER ORUP TO 2"ABOVE THE FINISHED n TOP OF THE ROOTBALL.THEN OR THICKNESS SO TOP OF ROOTBALL IS AT LEAST 1" _ WATER PLANT. REMOVE THE TOP ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. I 1/3 OF THE BASKET OR THE TOP ;; = c =.a• 2 w d z TWO HORIZONTAL RINGS NIHICHEVER 5.WATER 70 SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL - 4. FILTER CLOTH z + IS GREATER. ALSO REMOVE ALL VOIDS. IO I I K I I I I 3 w N BURLAP AND NAILS FROM THE TOP ;�.; ,,- _ 5. SLOPE BOTTOM TO DRAIN i 0 \ E 1/3 OF THE BALL REMOVE ALL 6.WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 -III- ^"/ -./�1 'µ 4 6. 18".AUGERED HOLE PENETRATE THROUGH OCCLUDING a a N TWINE. HOURS. -I I i N O LAYER TO WATER TABLE OR TO A DEPTH OF 7'TO % 5.PLUMB AND BACKFILL MATH THE " - I w - - 7.PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF -III-I T++ - -I I 5 ASSURE PROPER PERCOLATION. N A BACKFILL SOIL THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 7. BACKFILL VATH 1/2"- 3/4"GRAVEL. 7A 4 E 6.WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL -I((- '• -III- 6 VOIDS. * B. WATER TABLE '_ - 7 b 7.WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 FOR A PARKING ISLAND PLANTING SITUATION, Y a-III- CONTRACTOR TO BACKFILL ENTIRE LENGTH OF HOURS. PLANTING AREA TO WITHIN 6.OF BACK OF CURB OR I E EDGE OF PAVEMENT. o m m 'g 8.PLACE MULCH WITHIN HOURS OF - SECTION THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS - - ' _ SOL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 9.rc STAKE AND GUY TO PROVIDE D POOR DRAINAGE CONDITION ADDITIONAL SUPPORT BETWEEN THE A STEM AND ROOT BALL AS ''I F NECESSARY. (L��-t t PLANTING DETAILS FOR ISOLATED PLANTING LOCATIONS U -i WIDTH VARIES - SEE PLANS + 2 1 3 UJ L Z Cj YNOTES - I 1 r j - e 1.STEEL POSTS TO BE NOTCHED ORDRILLED TO _ T + s RETAIN GUY MARES.PLACE OUTSIDE OF ROOT BALL. DRIVE PLUMB REGARDLESS OF GROUND SLOPE. + 5 7'ROLLED STETS. PLANTER ISLAND NOTES z POST(Mn/DOT 3403 2.REQUESTS TO SUBSTITUTE RUBBER HOSE AND OR APPROVED EQUAL. 1. CROWN ISLANDS®5:1 SLOPES(OR AS SPECIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS). WIRE GUYING SYSTEMS MALL NOT BE APPROVED. 3 A2. CLEAR ZONE: 36"MIN.FROM BACK OF CURB TO CENTER OF NEAREST SHRUB.CLEAR 3.TREE STAKING IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS W SPECIFIED NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN TREES 16"LONG ZONE SHALL CONTAIN 4"CONTINUOUS MULCH OR TURF,SEE PLANS. -i+ POLYPROPYLENE OR -i IN A PLUMB CONDITION WHERE VANDALISM, I- H POLYETHYLENE 40 MIL, 3. 2"MIN VERTICAL CLEARANCE,TOP OF CURB TO TO+OF MULCH. b SOIL.OR WIND CONDITIONS ARE A PROBLEM, 1.5"WOE STRAPS. Q OR AS REQUESTED BY THE ENGINEER. ATTAd1 N1TH 10 ga NOTES: LL] > J WIRE. 1. EXCAVATE A CONTINUOUS 24"DEEP PIT(FROM TOP OF CURB)FOR ENTIRE LENGTH AND LLI 4.REMOVE AFTER ONE YEAR. WIDTH OF 15LAND&BACKFILL MATH APPROVED PLANTING MIX. Z 2. PROTECT AND RETAIN ALL CURBS AND BASE.COMPACTED SUBGRADE TO REMAIN FOR QJ W STRUCTURAL SUPPORT OF CURB SYSTEM(TYP). 13- 0 - 7 MULCH 3, ALL ISLANDS SHALL UTILIZE POOR DRAINAGE TECHNIQUES PER MNDOT SPECS WHEN J PERCOLATION RATES ARE 2"PER HOUR OR LESS. i - FINISHED GRADE �' Q � z PLA14TED MEDIANS w � � g E sEcna wrs () � � O STAKING/GUYING DETAIL FOR TREES `n 5 B DATE sECIroN NTS 12/02/2014 a PROJECT NO. K g 160755001 SHEET NUMBER T E u 6401 wo,NxoH-A31P11N ti LOZ/L L/O l'3Lda Hdl N�/�d 1VIIN341S321014 _ LB t1-S•fB-159 3NOHd vv K 11159 Nry'VWd US As mWJ3H7 o O NBFt Suns'Ls3H 31v ulsa3nlxn ossz 006bZ W083NNIW o z O N a3BrvnN 3sx3on Nry rvae Ae Nvvao N O I. VAd 13 S 3�I d '�1311VA N3010�J\)INdd SIf10l'1S <n w" z _ j d ua� <(<l�a ��V/� N3NnIVH'd 0401 N AS 03NOIS30 SNVId 1NMOAOUMI o a° � H ' ■�■ :Mmm N0�0 SOS 3 dVO SO NV I anN3A�J t oun-1S3M NHVd IVNIN30 r, LU IN �J � 'II / A it 1i S1 lllti 0 W g u Z LIJ I \ A U_ AH H, N 1 f Ed z , r ] l 7 ih .j t wo v � �.; 1 ; .�; J � � t �� Z In tv K W ill O I W 00~F Q ao OQ80 N J o w LAI I- 1 1?1 _rJ' W j�tl iV �JUm �i i i I +t , I� 1�i� �+ �t �V �j v � u . `-"-ter ; r 1W . N 7. 14: ° CL I r�Y—Y R i t i I j 41 � -„lL': itEL {I o I ! I I l i I I t ' f r /( / z o a s 1� - g s I1tf1 i1 I r(71iilvP �1 ✓ W2oz f5 t fir f t// WV)it jr �I 111 f; t It j! / /Y' #1 i✓ ( I 1J /� r %I z 7p�I'i� kJ , j I I i I 1 , I t / /� 1 / RNZ j- I !,�:`� '� ( F F I�f M I I ! r'' rt / 1.J� MM 1 t tioz N�1 I � r �� / � f �( f�' t i '7~ �� / / / z1-u wwwo 1n S LTST l Il` Oil MI � 't' I J �% � N �w�� S �� / 1J/I / + / f O =UIN WE )-4 �/ � � i J Z ' (� Z O F 5 / t ! rn mu n I I I I I i i Movo6- A/ - r 3� � r I � I�s 1 9 xrd I I J$t �r ( Moo o a � � r ( I I I I i I { I I �g i,,, r- � � lr`r �o 'L !! . -� � - \_ alt 1 ' m o i ZdZ} LI � �11 j 4� s EL --F_ Z O I ,. `t t �i � om 021 Y Via# J g am <m �'. �� z — 1 11 II 0 (A I ii ttt j(f l t / I 11z ¢z 'rr mr r z W I ! !� {(. 1�! J / J 2O 0z mU'K OZ- w _ t I LLJ Q, ! --i I! O oC I rt I 1 1 l 0 w''" z Z W,8Z I? ! Llli = 7 I t W N W Y LL a I-I ! ! Z J W fr tt t t l J W rc Wz� Irzp Kr 'iz Kyz o I, IJJ �. –1 { y Q 1– 1 1/ l 11 l o �zz Nzz n� 'z W W OG t /i/ ! / ui z oa� �oyl ��" (' J m �Wz WWz outs g am w� o mz woW oo w� o� USW ZR aII U O z WF tf li fJ . x� rnz f I FYI 1.lopo�y Pw—H-1.1.q 14114gl j--9 IP4._1'i i,,.p ry I.woll..{.IYq„R9 wNolmPo P.wpeilA4lro Ynl4w iroVIW iwwnaoP.141 w-p,—i Pw to s.n.9--A N wl" I yw HOtlJM a9pwtl..Vl iW liw P.Pw3W el flays.!0 3u.u+nq.W w.o'WuaV P.1wa.+E..D,p Puo�E.auea ayl yllw sVleEoi'iwwmap qY1 Q m U w F.. . .. .............. ...... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 TREE INVENTORY A TAG# TREE DBH/HEIGHT(FT) SPECIES NOTES SAVE/REMOVE b 150 25' WHITE SPRUCE 10.38 Cal.Inches R ? 151 11 DBH BLACK ASH R x 152 11 DBH BLACK ASH R = a 153 11 DBH BLACK ASH R B 5 154 it DBH BLACK ASH R 155 11 DBH BLACK ASH R 156 13 DBH BLACK ASH R ! 157 13 DBH BLACK ASH R L 158 12 DBH BLACK ASH R TO i a 160 11 DBH BLACK ASH R "==3 C 161 12 DBH BLACK ASH R ^ z o s162 12 DBH BLACK ASH R R 3 163 13 DBH BLACK ASH R € 6 164 13 DBH BLACK ASH R 167 11 DBH BLACK ASH RME i D a 168 13 DBH WEEPING WILLOW R " 169 14 DBH BLACK ASH R w `I 170 12 DBH BLACK ASH R TREE INVENTORY 10 I E 171 12 DBH BLACK ASH R ---•• --•• •-•�••_ a 172 16 DBH WHITE ASH R 304 _^'^ 10 DBH WHITE ASH S- b W N 0 0 o e 194 6DBH CRABAPPLE MULTISTEM S 305 9DBH WHITEASH S ° o E 195 8 DBH CRAB APPLE MULTISTEM S 338 6 DBH CRAB APPLE R Y I 200 13 DBH GREEN ASH R 339 7 DBH CRAB APPLE R 'I 201 20' SPRUCE 8.3 Cal.Inches R 340 4 DBH CRAB APPLE R 202 25` SPRUCE 10.38 Cal.Inches R 341 4 DBH CRAB APPLE MULTISTEM R c 203 1Q DBH GREEN ASH R 342 8 DBH CRAB APPLE R z F a 204 11 DBH GREEN ASH R 343 9 DBH LINDEN R w O 205 12 DBH GREEN ASH R 344 10 DBH LINDEN R Q ~ s Q z 206 11 DBH GREEN ASH R 345 10 DBH LINDEN R (� > 207 20' WHITE SPRUCE 8.3 Cal.Inches R 346 8 DBH LINDEN POOR HEALTH R U) Q 208 7 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 347 10 DBH LINDEN R z co 209 4 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 348 9 DBH LINDEN R Q W G a 211 4 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 349 8 DBH LINDEN R J 241 4 DBH HONEY LOCUST S 350 6 DBH CRAB APPLE R n— 242 4 DBH HONEY LOCUST S 351 4 DBH CRAB APPLE R KEY ul s 281 6 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 352 4 DBH CRAB APPLE R Z }wJ 3 i DBH = DIAMETER BREAST HEIGHT(MEASURED Q J 282 7 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 353 6 DBH CRAB APPLE R FOR EVERY DECIDUOUS TREE AT A H 283 6 DBH CHOKE CHERRY S 354 5 DBH CRAB APPLE R HEIGHT OF 4.5'FROM THE GROUND LEVEL) 4 m j S - TREE TO BE SAVED V Z Q e 284 15 DBH GREEN ASH R 355 5 DBH CRAB APPLE R a 0 z R = TREE TO BE REMOVED e 285 15 DBH GREEN ASH R 356 6 DBH CRAB APPLE R w0 N 0 287 16 DBH GREEN ASH R 359 35' SPRUCE 14.53 Cal.Inches R 1' EVERGREEN HEIGHT= 0.415 CALIPER INCHES 3 W Y Z w 289 12 DBH BLACK CHERRY POOR HEALTH S 360 12 DBH ASH R Ya, U 290 15 DBH BLACK CHERRY 5 500 2 DBH ORNAMENTAL S TREE REPLACEMENT SUMMARY ¢CL a —1 i aa � 291 14.5 DBH BLACK CHERRY S 501 2 DBH ORNAMENTAL S TOTAL CALIPER INCHES REMOVED 527.89" 6 292 11 DBH LINDEN S 502 2 DBH ORNAMENTAL SF- TOTAL CALIPER INCHES REQUIRED 293 13 DBH NORWAY SPRUCE S 503 2DBH ORNAMENTAL S TO BE REPLACED 528' W ri s 294 14 DBH WHITE ASH S 504 4 DBH GINKGO S PROPOSED TREES 1 DATE 0/17/2014 w 295 16 DBH WHITE ASH S 505 4 D$H GINKGO SPROJECT NO. g r7T71" CALIPER DECIDUOUS TREES = 231" K 302 16 DBH WHITE ASH S 506 6 DBH MALUS S 1so755o01 SHEET NUMBER --- -- -- - Sn7 F,nRI4 MGI IK � 6403 INOD'NNOH-A31mlm MM L31d4 L6 Li-S49-1S9 :3NOHd tLOZ/ZO/Zl 41155 NN'lflVd'15 92L917 A6 03NO3HO -MIN301SD21 0l0 o NBfZ 3LIf1S'1S3M 3AV ALISa3AWl1 05SZ N 838NnN 36N3J N% --- 1 1 81 H X8 J N I N� 1 �\w LO r,/ L A9 Ln NMvaa NW'A311V�NDOIOE)5QJVd SMO- '1S ¢�+ r �. UJOH�/\A��i l� 3NAdd Sb�� A9 03N�IS3o ��fl�il �Jb'8�1`dJ �\ O w W H \ /7 .M 1S3MJi2iHd lb?J1N3O N a N :633NION3 NOIS30 31YOS 0 w Z � ¢o tdORTH V CL N Q V CZ L Cl C,, e ❑ L. .❑ Off,\ \� 1 ! 410 ❑ ID o m g p k , .Yw'�:y�.••'....,.:2 • i 'I If it � I i '!i:u:i',. I ••• I. i I 1 . :,• I I ` I II I I I�I I ( 1 O p <° LO 1 1 . 1 i I I 1 1 a ,• I I 1 1 I 1 I '' . \ ` .. 1--- \----------� \ — ---1 U co cli Lnd 03 Q U cD O Q O Q O O p IL3CD CJ 'S H J(n f I I — puvlu a'aha eu6lsa cltlaauva a 4 6v1 luawnaa sallvlavcry P wvH—evlwlN v}F11119011 tro4}IM a9 IPVa iul..........p wvH�elwlN F uol}altivDv puv u groylrw u 1roVlIM 1Vawnavp a uv Pu—.1d.p v*tl PaivCauA c ualP P C:ntl aUla tl a41 0 o Pe I e,0 3uawMeu a 'ulaua4 p D puv 3 11.ue la P c141 Q m U D e LU LL (D 2 — Y NDO'NtlOH—A3lWIN'MMM -Vmz/ZO/Z 1:31V0 L614-549-159:3NOHd -- ¢ _ 4I'll NW'lf1Vd'15 A8 03N73H] O O NBfZ 3LIo5'1S3M 3AV AlISOAINn OSSZ S8L9� ��"'yp II '' [[��p� {��J ry I IVU.N3GIS32i�l4 a z o N38WNN 3SN30n NW J-I a I H X3 O C\4 I I\1 O I i W4"U I- Z j j 3NAtld'�Stl�fll A8As Vua03N�1S30 NW'A3llVA N9MOJ/NI Wd sinoi '1S go X Ua�H((tllal1WI� S(18 1S3M�i Wci IV/ UN30 &o W W N a / :633NION3 NDIS30 31VDS O �O W LL Z N� ao _ NORTH _� �N EO III 0 ET i f I I :..., co — I 1 I { — I. I R r II { I --—�----_�---�_----� 00 Ot 11 \\ I w 1 0 o� a s jj 10 Ln � I n s I i I I I ' ulplpp.W Pup unH—�aIwIN o3 Ri1119p11 iro411w a IIpY'aul'a.lplaw.Y pY u+pH-•�aluMN A4 ualipi4...Pup u ua11Vx iro .luawnapp c ao.dwl vw M."W-Pl+ a•�11 4 +al J-1p p a41+pJ F I^l4.1'.aN:aa Ip lwwngtul w e•W.4 Mluwaatl au6lwp pw.ld.aupa ayl 4iiw+a41.6q iwwmpp al4L Q m V p4,O p ,p LL CD _ — Y MY MOH-A31WINMMM �31V0 4611-M-ISR 3NOHd toz/Zo/zi I. --- hI15S NW'lnVd'15 AS MM33H7 p W M NWZ 31m'1S3N 3AV A11S83AIN0 OLSZ S8L9� Sn' p��`'(� lt/I1N3aIS3�l Old o O -! N39WfIN 35N3:1f7 NW --- lI�I I�X� �1 V I I d C7 I I� �+1�V-If1 m AS N«dNa NW'A311VA NBCA`!/NUVd sino-i '1S oN w� U.l0H��Aa I w3hUVd SUMAB03N01530 �� I� 1S3MNHVdIV2UN30 N a1O = f :d33NION3 N063CI31VOS LL7 �O - W LL _ J S aN f \\ p I LE 0 ON .: O� it tMw,L'.j"}.fy},.''f:f':)>;:•�iF� 'I I. 1 , ii II �� hl�_ t: I I II I; I I m h 1 ID r r• 1 1 1• 1.. a 1 1 1 j I M ' L---� /�1 /f r �r \�----------41 11 i -- C OD 00 m O NLO E ifIf cl- U 1 I .' I I I k' � p 01 IJ LLI z U Y N N O LL 3:Ft J V I I u " I Iri -Al / aul•e .oN—IalugN of Ai119g1 InoVIW e9 IPw'aul'e oseV Puo—H— 1-IN F I,oylro u +yroVllx luewmop a wl Pw rotl-p—d.ld e n 11 w4x aoy 1—puo..—d aUP9M e41,91 APo PWw34 q'hMa^1. Paluaea,d eu6icap Puo cltlaauaa 11a41a6o1'1 ci41 a,Qoea m U Q W LL. 0 S — Y NOD HOH-A31AIN'MMM I�Z�Z��Z(31V4 L614-569-159 '3NOHd --- 0IlS9 NN'lnVd is 99Lgb A9 03NO3H0 p N9eL am'1S3M 3AV AtISNWNn ossz Q A' (�� n 1b11N3GIS32i 014 o z o V N3BYINN 3SN3Of1 NM --- i 18 I H X3 O 1�d 11 V�I 1 i N I-to A9 NMVtlO NI 'A33 WA N3a�0E)NHVd sino� 'is oN = yC UaOH�� 3NAtld l Stl� --"o a3NOIs30 yiof12�111N(1 JIJNIS wUJ 1S3M Ji2iHd�d2�1N30 N a � :2133NIO N3 NOI530 3ltlOs 0 w w w Z Q o N�RTM N to d U c M I \' r �a ? C-51 vv`v El \ , r< ❑ 41 � ❑ m ❑ m 1 g,l�{ '� 4 "' � �• „h� t I �: � ' I1 III 11 1 1: I; I , I j t { II I I { L. - co Il�i 11 J II` II I 1 to ' '` III J Fell 1 • I i _ _ I , k _ I III 11 / p I Ir r' I �,•F �--------------------- 1b \----------{.• 111 •'. CD C CD CD cc Do Lo 04 t I \ 0 '.A O 3H= °min i I I J •calpPpcey Puo-H-fvlwlN py Flllt-I 1ro4iW aq - lu1•evlp ppcey Pup 11..,p dp Pup uellpzlroYlpp ualll+'a iroN11M ld wnppP%!41 up uolP++a.-1 Puo 1.v rey p-d.,d...31 4N4-apt Iua!P Puo ec.Untl pulp d eVl i 1.pvPu v ulvuv4-.—d-61-p p clyy Q I m 0 1D LU I LL 1C7 2 - 1 Y old'ol, MEMORANDUM valley Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting December 16, 2014 Agenda Item 6. A. METRO Blue Line Extension Update Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary The City's Bottineau Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) met on December 4, 2014, to discuss ways to improve communication with residents about the station area planning process. It was decided that a neighborhood meeting will be held from 6 to 8 pm on January 7, 2015, at the Courage Kenny Rehabilitation Institute to clarify the role of the PAC and explain in more detail the various ongoing LRT planning efforts. A flyer containing similar information is being mailed City-wide in advance of this neighborhood meeting and the January 29, 2015, open house. At the December 9, 2014, Council/Manager meeting, Hennepin County reviewed a preliminary Parking Management Strategies Assessment that outlines a range of possible methods to address parking at the Golden Valley Road LRT station. The PAC will be considering these options as part of the station area planning process. The first Issue Resolution Team meeting was held on December 10, 2014; additional meetings will be held at the Bottineau Project Office in Crystal on the first and third Wednesdays each month. The first technical issue to be addressed will be the question of the Golden Valley Road/Plymouth Avenue station location. The second Corridor Management Committee meeting will be held on December 17, 2014, at the Brooklyn Center Community Center from 12:30 to 2 pm. A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and a Business Advisory Committee will be formed early in 2015. Golden Valley will be asked to appoint members to each. Recommended Action Receive and file METRO Blue Line Extension Update.