The URL can be used to link to this page

01-20-09 agenda packet entire AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber January 20, 2009 6:30 p.m. The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call 8. Fire Department Retirements: Firefighter Larry Bourne and Battalion Chief Eric Sherman C. Oath of Office - Firefighters Christopher Ferris, Anthony O'Donahue, Paul Peterson and Brian Schiebe 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 - January 6, 2009 and Council/Manager Meeting - January 13, 2009 B. Approval of Check Register C. Licenses: 1 . General Business Licenses 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance D. Bids and Quotes: 1. Skid Loader and Asphalt Cold Planer - Quotes 2. Unmarked Police Vehicle - Quotes 3. Squad Cars - Quotes E. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission - December 8, 2008 2. Envision Connection Project Board of Directors - December 18, 2008 3. Bassett Creek Water Management Commission - November 19, 2008 F. Appointment of Commissioners to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission 09-3 G. Amendments to Pavement Management Policy 09-4 H. Amendments to Special Assessment Policy 09-5 I. Council Liaisons and Other Assignments J. Adoption of Policies: 1. Snow Plowing and Ice Control 09-6 2. Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance 09-7 K. Authorization to Sign Engagement Letter with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. for 2008 Audit Services 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM A. Continued Public Hearing - First Consideration - Ordinance #412 - Electric Franchise - Northern States Power d/b/a Xcel Energy 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Issuance of On Sale Wine, Strong Beer and Sunday Sale Liquor License for Hastings Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Martini's Graffiti Grille B. First Consideration - Ordinance #413 - Amendment to 2009 Fee Schedule - Residential and Commercial Utility Rates C. Announcements of Meetings . 1. Set Date for City Council Annual Workshop D. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT ~lley Me orandum Fire Department 763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary for Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 1. B. Fire Department Retirements: Firefighter Larry Bourne and Battalion Chief Eric Sherman Prepared By Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections Summary On February 1, 2008, Firefighter Larry Bourne retired from the Fire Department with 21 years of service. Battalion Chief Eric Sherman retired on December 31,2008 with 26 years of service. Recommended Action Recognize retired Firefighter Larry Bourne and Battalion Chief Eric Sherman for their years of dedicated service to the community. M orandu Fire Department 763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary for Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 1. C. Oath of Offic~ - Firefighters Christopher Ferris, Anthony O'Donahue, Paul Peterson and Brian Schiebe Prepared By Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections Summary Firefighters Christopher Ferris, Anthony O'Donahue, Paul Peterson and Brian Schi~be will be present to take their Oath of Office as a Golden Valley firefighter. Recommended Action Mayor Loomis administer the Oath of Office to Firefighters Ferris, O'Donahue, Peterson and Schiebe. I hlley M morandum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. B. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments Loose in agenda packet. Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. Hey M orandum Inspections 763-593-8090 I 763-593-3997 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. General Business Licenses Prepared By Kathryn Pepin, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, some businesses are required to be licensed by the City. Listed below are the License Number, Applicant, License Type and Fee of those who have submitted an application for approval. #3525 Omar Jama d/b/a Tobacco Sales Valley Grocery & Tobacco 7722 Olson Memorial Highway $200.00 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff. alley M morandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8006 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance 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) Letterfrom Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance requesting waiver of 30 day waiting period (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance. Minnesota LaWful Gambling LG220 Application for Exempt Permit An exempt permit m~y be Issued to a nonprofit organization that . ~ conductsJ8wru1 gambling on five or fewer..days, end . - awards: less than $50,000' In prizes during'. calendar year. . i I I i I I I Page 1 of 2 9108 Fee is $5Q for each event . I For,~rd Use1nIV CI'!(!ck # . $ pRGANiZAnOH INFORMATtON ... '" : ,:..;, ',' I : 0rganlzatiQn name Previous galhbBng pennit number . . . 1 Tuberous Sclerosis AlJit\nce X-36068 _ t._ _ _ .-.._- Type of nonprofit organization. Chec:kone.. I rD1 Fraternal .1Dl ReDglOUEi I1.]Veterans ~ Other:nonprofit CJrgSrlizatloi1 ! Mailing address CitY State ZiP Code. COUfltY 801 R<*Ier Road #150 SUver Spring 1m ~910 I 1 .. OutoUIlI1l~es~ Name of chlefell:ee.Utivaoffieer (CEQ) naY$ne.~.~' i E~ ad~ Kal'i Luther CarlSon ~1-6.6~ I . . . .'riuc-Ofthe..fouQWi. fOr"" of~,,;, 'ria:'," .~. l .' :... . Atta<;.n a.CQPYofJilWUi. .'". .. .,f". ng ~. . . Q..,., _' ,s~OJ;~~. ... '. ..'. ... . . '. ','. '. .: .:~;:.:.' ...:.:..... ".:.' :-::. ;;~:. _'..:_:: .,:0:.::":. -;'. t . . 00 oot i3ttad1 a sales tax elCeItlptstatUs or~ lQ ~~aS~arenot ~ (jf.00npi0fitstatus. I at fik)nprofttAttJclesoflncol'pondfonORaCUl'NOt~.~~~Ing. ~ Don't have a copy1 Thls ~mustbe oD~.8ech'.~~~. _ .... SecretaJy of state; Bu$inessseMces DIv., 180.State.':omc:e-:~~~~'p~j!l!lf1f .' .1$6 Phone; 651-296-2803 ..' .... .,.. I [gj IRSlncome_exemptiOn[601(c)).....In:_~~~s:..... .. . I . . Don't "have 1l copy? To _m a .copy.'bfYQ.~r:~lh~~~~lethtt. J!8Vj' 'Il/') organizslion Qff1eer contact.theIRS8t871-1J29-5500. .' .... .' ';:. ..... .. . . . . .. I . . i 1Ql1R8.J\m_ofmrtlonll..~otllltea.......~.~,~~lzatfcfp ~rter) .. If.yQUroiganl'zatiOn~-tinder-a.~~.~i~r#~-Qf..~.~: a. IRS lettel'showing roor parent orga~tkmJ~'fa nQhprcifit;$01(c)..~PJ:i'tJith a{;JrOUp ruling...and b. the ~or~fromyourp.arent~iZation'~~y.~;~n~a~ ~}I8IIIR$.IH9Of~~Ul.~~'-.~.'. ..~:> I '. . '.' If' '." '~...lu .s.......-...~. of. .........-~............-....."JR.&;. -...--..... ."-- ..dH!ulred.. yol.I-pre."".....f~'- .......... .~.......... . . L~..~.'J ~l..?~: ..:.-' ~~~:~~~.~ '.T~ . . . ~~~~\,~~~.p.~.,.~~~.~~!f(j~L .)::~,.:':.,..::..~~'.:.:~:\:.?~?~;;<':..':::::.::::,I< :,' " ..' ....<..,'.:.:::.. ..... .... '~me'6f'~S8!I~ g_{ng~;Wllf;bfi:_~~~jjst:-~~:~.ilj~d~Wifii:J'.."~~) 'M~itan" m":" .... I . . .. .. .., j :Acklr.ess (doliotuse PObox) . '.'CifN'f~'. -~ ", _ ~::.' ."-ZW'Cade' 54'B~BlVd .~.,:..;,:.,.' ....".:- ":.:U4i.$\ ~s)of~~{for~.~~d..Qf.jhe~g}, ......'... ! '. 1129/09'w . '. . ..: I Ch~i:;k the bQ)( orbQxestha1l11t\1E(ate the type of pnbIing8divj~Y9i:iTt:l~I1..wIl.l cor' ilu(;t: "0 Bll'!go~ . I&l~' D~". DP\ill~:r~~~.. Jj~~i'ds1! Couffl;Y" Hennepin * GamblingecjliJpntent f'orptd/-tabs" bii19o.~~~arid' ':. paddIewheeIs must be obIai~ from is distrJbtitDr.~:bv ~ '. ..... ~ 0mtr0I Board. E)(CEPTION: BIngo hard -f;'arEIS ai;ldbingo number seledIoo dev.Ices may be .~1i'Omanottier Qr9a.IJ.Ol1. authorized to a,;nduct blng()." . . .... ',,' To' find a liamseddistribufxJr# go to.www.,g(:b:.~~ at'llidjc;k ~ !.:1st or~~oi'~~1~Ci.:..: H .r I f 'f~=omLf I Pnrit ~:l .~H .-.:.....,. '. .,:~ I~~:~l:i;.:::i . . ~:.:.~:~~~.. 1 .:.~ LG~20 Application for Exempt Permit OCA UNlTOf'GOVE NT 0 If the gambli!'l9 premises is within city Umits, a city official must check (X) the action u.t the city is taking on this application and sign the _J[~~ .4.:The applicatlon is ~Iedged with no waiting period. _The application Is ~ed wIth:a 30 day~ng periQd, and allows the Board t,o issue a permit ~ 30 days (.so daysfGf Ii 1ste18SS CitY). _The applica1lonJs.denied. :~~},~:!~ I ,fb ,J:L Page 2 012' 9108 NT , ,. If the Qambllna pi'emises Is I in a township, 11 ~ offtclalmust check m the action that the ~ is 1Bking on this ,pplic8tiQn aJ.d sign the application. A fDwn8hip offlcfaf must alSo sign the appllc8tion. ---,The-~ is ad<nowl~ed with no waiting period. _TheappRcatiOn is~wfth 8 3Oday~. perlQd. a!ld .aIIOW$.the ~rd to issue a permit after 30 d.ay.S . . i ...:.-~ ~tation is denied. I . .'. f . . Print OOtJn~ name i .Qi't~d/he.cd.uRt.Y.1 BCki1~ this~ ~ !if (l9unty,offltjaI Rl~ 8J;lI:lIlca1ion . I I i T1t!e '.! Dats---1---1_ ~~;':Oribeh8ifoithe t.4wmmip, I acknowledge that . the~ is appJyIn9for~ pnbIins ae1ivlly =:'w~~~1~~~~2)] Print. ....,;..;.;y.lft. .' . I ......,.,,~..,.. name f . I . - . I . .~~re' ~ toymship offlcrat.a~OlNIedging appIk;ation :...:.... . i ~". 1~---1---1. 1'0: ($ambling ~.8Qard 1711 :W'eatCou!11Y ROlid 8, &Ute 300 SouIb Roseville.'MN5511'3 .' :t;~:!i~f#>J:j I,:'::'~~~:.:>I' . <- .. .:" .... - . .... 08taprlvi!cy.1'hiafonnwlllbemade~ theBoardwllbe"tQ'~ytfUr '.:eo8rd. V4hoseworkrequil'uaccesato. in .1t~fom&(I... Wgeprfut. BraIlle) ~ Yournameendancl~.. . . . . ..informaII MInne8oIa'a Oepel1mlll'ltofPublic upon requll8l. :rtie inUmetfon requested on orgai1fzallon's name SI'!d !Idclres& Will be~. :Safe.ty;Altqrney 0ener8I; ConlmIssIoner$ of .tills fpr,n (end any~willbeueed byl~.wben A!iCEIlvedl;!ythe ~.:'~ . .~~ Fm8I1!>>.and~; '~~=~~m ::.~~~==:~==:*'-=- tawfuf.lJ8Iribllngaclivlllea'm.Mlnnesata. You 1tIe Board --yqur:1*"\1t, ~ tJfth8 .. -', tac:.aurto..qer;.Q\lJerlndivldualund agen.cie$ heye lhe.i:ilIIit tQ,~ to s.upply1he . 'Intomla1Ion provided 10 tti4 ~.wilI ~e that _ ~ aulhorized by stale or .. .infil/1n-mqiJested;..--. If you ~\i) 'Pl,lblIc;. 1f1ha'Boasd does.ntiti~~'. J*!1'1t;~.. fedefellIIWitoh8vo~1D'\heIl""","'i, . lIil.PPiY lhiJ~. ~ Boar4 may not.belnformallon~. rem~:i:!Iivatii,o~ Ute. lndlviduals~' .agencles forlNhlch law or legal able ta,deleli'riirte,~qtlaRfJc:al!on. ~d; ... excejl.I/on of~ ~ 8nd;y,our.~lZ8tIon~.. q,,- . . <<-new UlIe or8hilriJtg of . CQl1SI!lqU.ente. J118Y.~to ~ue you. a.permlt l18IlIe end ~ v.tiI<:bwiB ~Il'i ~c;" .... ". 'inform ~tlIi$ NofIce was given; emf . 1~'YPU,~the.~~ P/MIledalallieav8lelile.'to: ~:m~~.~one I. yOutCOnsent. ." . -. . i j I I I JAN 16,2009 02:36P Dee Triemer 678-114-5703 page 1 Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance January 16,2009 Judy Nally VIA FACSIMILE., 763-593-8109 Dear Ms. Nally: The Tuberaus Sclerosis Alliance of the Upper Midwest would like to request a waiver on Ihe thirty (30) day waiting period for our Gambling Permit to be processed. We so appreciate your support in expediting the application. We wish to hold a rafIIe for our fundraising event, Tate of file Twin CitIes. This El\Ient is scheduled for January 29, 2009 at the MeIropafiIan in Golden VaJJey and aU prcceeds go to the Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance. We have a great event planned with liVe entertainment. a live and silent auction and several of the area's top chefs attending. Our raIIle winner will receive court side fleats and a suite for several TlIl'Ibetwolve$ games. We hope to be very successful in raising funds for research and family services for aU of those individuals suffering with Tuberous SeIerosis Complex. We thank you for your support and assistance in this important event If I can be of assistance in any way, please contact me. Sincerely, ~AJJu:~ DeeTriemer Community OUtreach Manager 801 Roeder J.lo..d. Suite I~O, Silvef $p~inll. Mllryl"nrl ?,",Ql0 teI301.:,62.9U90 rClx 301,56:.1.9870 1.800.2:>5.6872 www.lsillliance.org Hey Me orand m Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. D. 1. Purchase One Bobcat Compact Track Loader and One Asphalt Cold Planer Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Summary The 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program includes $45,000 for one Bobcat Skid Loader (V&E #50) and $20,000 for one asphalt cold planer (V&E #52) for a total of $65,000. The skid loader replaces a single use 1995 John Deere tractor. The asphalt cold planer replaces a 1998 asphalt cold planer. Staff will utilize the skid loader for brush and tree trimming cleanup and removals, dirt work, landscaping, grading, truck loading of dirt and equipment, snow plowing, etc. The asphalt cold planer and skid loader equipment will be utilized for milling asphalt for proper street patching and repair. The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded the following contracts: Contract No. Item Vendor Amount 439156 Bobcat T190 Compact Tri State Bobcat, Inc. $41,632.83 Track Loader Tax $2,706.13 Subtotal $44,338.96 439156 18" Asphalt Cold Planer Tri State Bobcat, Inc. $9,888.56 Tax $642.76 Subtotal $10,531.32 TOTAL PURCHASE $54,870.28 Attachments Tri State Bobcat, Inc. quotation for the T190 Bobcat Compact Track Loader (1 page) Tri State Bobcat, Inc. quotation for the 18-inch Planer High Flow and 18-inch Fast Cut All Purpose Drum (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of one 2009 Bobcat T190 Compact Track Loader in theamount of $44,338.96 and a Cold Planer and Drum in the amount of $10,531.32 from Tri State Bobcat, Inc. ~. Bobcal. Product Quotation Quotation Number: WM-O 1323 Date: 01/12/2009 Ship to City of Golden Valley PW Attn: Bert Tracy 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Phone: 763-593-3981 Fax: 763-593-8024 Bobcat Dealer Tri State Bobcat Inc 1800 West Highway 13 Burnsville MN 55337-2214 Phone: 651-407-3727 Fax: 651-407-7345 Contact: Bill Miller Cellular: 612-919-1840 EMail: billm@tristatebobcat.com Description T 190 Bobcat Compact Track Loader A91 Option Package Part No M0023 M0023-poi-A91 Cab enclosure with Heat and AC High Flow Hydraulics Sound Reduction Hydraulic Bucket Positioning Power Bobtach Deluxe Instrument Panel Horn Backup Alarm Engine Block Heater Attachment Control Kit Cab Accessory Harness Factory Installed Advanced Control System 12 Inch Track, Roller Suspension Dealer Installed Strobe Light Kit, Amber Attachments 68." Low Profile Bucket Bolt-On Cutting Edge, 68" 66" Ind, Fork Grapple (WI? Tines) Port Relief Valve, G Series & newer 80" Dozer Blade, 6-Way M0023-ROI-C03 M0023-R09-COS 6719857 6731418 6718006 6714255 6684645 6905884 Total ofItems Quoted Taxes: State of Minnesota Quote Total- US dollars Notes: Minnesota State Contract Number 439156. Bill To Qty Price Ea. I $28,696.00 I $4,400.96 $924.80 $1,028.84 $256.00 $582.76 $225.00 $2,691.44 $27.47 $2,799.56 Total $28,696.00 $4,400.96 $924.80 $1,028.84 $256.00 $582.76 $225.00 $2,691.44 $27.47 $2,799.56 $41,632.83 $2,706.13 $44,338.96 All prices subject to change without prior notice or obligation. This price quote supercedes all preceeding price quotes. Customer must exercise his urchase 0 tion within 30 da s from uote date. Customer Acceptance: Purchase Order: Authorized Signature: Print: Sign: Date: ~ Bobcal. Product Quotation Quotation Number: WM-O] 324 Date: 0]/12/2009 Ship to City of Golden Valley PW Attn: Bert Tracy 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Phone: 763-593-3981 Fax: 763-593-8024 Bobcat Dealer Tri State Bobcat Inc 1800 West Highway 13 Burnsville MN 55337-2214 Phone: 651-407-3727 Fax: 651-407-7345 Bill To Contact: Bill Miller Cellular: 612-919-1840 EMail: billm@tristatebobcat.com Description Attachments ] 8" Planer, High Flow ] 8" Fast Cut All Purpose Drum Part No 6905808 67]5586 Qty Price Ea. ] $8,021.96 ] $],866.60 Total ofItems Quoted Taxes: State of Minnesota Quote Total - US dollars Notes: Minnesota State Contract Number 439]56. Total $8,021.96 $],866.60 $9,888.56 $642.76 $10,531.32 All prices subject to change without prior notice or obligation. This price quote supercedes all preceeding price quotes. Customer must exercise his purchase option within 30 days from uote date. Customer Acceptance: Authorized Signature: Print: Purchase Order: Sign: Date: alley emorandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. D. 2. Purchase One Unmarked Police Vehicle Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Summary The 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) V&E-041 includes $30,000 for one unmarked police vehicle. The vehicle replaces Unit Number 881, a 2001 Ford Crown Victoria, utilized by the City's detectives' unit. The Crown Victoria will be replaced with a 2009 Ford Explorer, which is better suited as a multi-use unmarked police vehicle. Unit Number 881 is an 8-year old vehicle with over 53,000 miles. It meets the police vehicle use requirements for replacement based on years and/or miles and maintenance costs. The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded contract number 440054 to Elk River Ford Dodge Jeep in the amount of $26,102.51, which includes $1,593.11 in sales tax. Please note that an additional $3,800 is set aside for licensing and set up of the vehicle. Contract No. Item Vendor Amount 440054 Ford Explorer Elk River Ford $24,509,.40 Dodge Jeep Tax $1,593.11 TOTAL $26,102.51 Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of one 2009 Ford Explorer from Elk River Ford Dodge Jeep in the amount of $26,102.51. Public ~H~y Me orandum Police Department 763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. D. 3. Quotes - Three 2009 Squad Cars Prepared By Stacy Altonen, Police Chief Mike Meehan, Operations Commander Summary The 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (V&E-001) includes $90,000 for the purchase and replacement equipment for three marked police vehicles. After evaluation of the condition and mileage of the vehicles in our police fleet that are due for replacement, we are recommending the purchase of three new squads this year. The purchase will be made under the State of Minnesota Squad Contract, which is on file in this department. The vendor is Elk River Ford, Inc., Elk River, Minnesota. The three marked vehicles will be Ford Crown Victoria's with a contract price of $22,787 each. The total cost for the three vehicles is $68,361. An additional amount from the budget is reserved for as-needed replacement equipment for the marked squads, including light bars, siren controls, and other squad equipment. Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Police Department to purchase three 2009 Ford Crown Victoria's from Elk River Ford, Inc. of Elk River, Minnesota. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission December 8, 2008 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, December 8,2008. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes November 24, 2008 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Eck referred to his question on the first page regarding the recycling fund and said he would like Virnig's answer clarified. Grimes suggested the sentence be changed as follows: Eck asked about the recycling fund. Virnig discussed a one-time repair scheduled for the Brookview parking lot that will be funded by the recycling fund. MOVED by Eck, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the November 24 minutes with the above noted correction. 2. Informal Public Hearing - Property Lot Consolidation -1425 Rhode Island Avenue North - SU15-04 Applicant: Peter Ralph Address: 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North Purpose: To allow three existing lots to be consolidated into one new lot Grimes referred to a survey of the property and explained that the applicant is requesting to consolidate three existing lots into one new lot. The size of the proposed new lot will be approximately 23,000 square feet. He stated that the existing home was built on the far west edge of the property and has virtually no rear yard setback area. Because of this, the applicant received a variance to allow for the construction of a garage which is not located completely to the rear of the house as the zoning code requires. He added that the existing garage will remain and will continue to be used for the new house being constructed. Grimes explained that the reason the applicant is required to consolidate these lots is because he wants to build a new house on the property but the City does not want the new house to be constructed over the existing property lines. He added that the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission December 8,2008 Page 2 applicant will not be issued a certificate of occupancy for the new house until the existing house is demolished. Grimes referred to the City Engineer's staff report and explained that the City requires that street right-of-ways be 60 feet in width. The existing street right-of-way for Rhode Island Avenue is 40 feet wide so the City is requiring a 10-foot roadway easement be dedicated across the subject property in addition to a 1 O-foot wide drainage and utility easement. Grimes stated that this lot consolidation will eliminate the various property lines on this lot. In the future the property owner will have enough room for an additional lot that would meet current zoning code requirements. However, the applicant has stated that he has no plans to subdivide the property into two lots. Waldhauser referred to the 40 feet of existing right-of-way for Rhode Island Avenue and asked if that is measured from the curb or from the center of the street. Grimes explained that the easement will be measured to the center of the street. He added that there will be 20-feet of additional easement for Rhode Island Avenue shown on the applicant's property. In the future, additional easements would be taken from the other side of the street to get the 60 feet of required right-of-way area. Keysser referred to the new home currently being built and questioned why the applicant was allowed to start construction before the approval of this lot consolidation request. He asked what would happen to the new house if this request was not approved. Grimes agreed that the order is out of sync but said he felt that this proposal is a benefit for the area and staff thought there wouldn't be any issues allowing the applicant to start the construction process. Keysser asked if a second lot were created from this property in the future if the newly built home would still meet setback requirements. Grimes said yes, the applicant is meeting all of the setback requirements. Eck noted that he lived in the house across the street from the subject property until 1990. Keysser asked when the existing home was built. Peter Ralph, applicant stated that the house was built in 1928 and that it is his understanding that it was the original farm house in the area. McCarty asked if the north 1/3 of Lot 2 belongs to the property owner to the north. Grimes said yes. Schmidgall referred to the survey of the property and noted that the house to the north is sitting right on a property line. Grimes stated that if and when that property owner to the north wants to do anything to his property that house will have to be brought into conformance. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission December 8,2008 Page 3 Grimes noted that the applicant could legally build three homes on this property because right now there are three legally platted lots of record. Keysser asked the applicant if he is considering possibly splitting this property into two lots in the future. Ralph said he is building the new house in such a way that the lot could be split into two lots in the future, but that is not in his immediate plans. McCarty asked if there is work space above the existing garage. Ralph said there is just storage space above the garage. McCarty asked if the storage space counts in figuring the total amountof accessory structure space. Grimes said no, only the footprint of the accessory structure is counted. Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing. Kluchka referred to the survey of the property and asked about a chain link fence that appears to go through the house to north. Keysser noted that the property to the north is not included in this request. Waldhauser stated that this request seems pretty straightforward. Schmidgall said he was a little startled to see that construction on the new house has already started. Grimes reiterated that ideally construction would not be allowed. to begin before the proper approvals have been granted but in this case it is very straightforward and almost administrative in nature. Kluchka urged the applicant to recycle the building materials when the existing house is demolished. Ralph said they are planning on recycling and reusing what they can and that the new house will be very "green". MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval to allow three existing lots to be consolidated into one new lot at 1425 Rhode Island Avenue North 3. Consideration of Resolution No. 08-01 Finding that the Redevelopment Plan for the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area Conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan Grimes explained that the Planning Commission considering the Douglas Drive Redevelopment project area is one of the implementation tools in the Douglas Drive Corridor Study process. He added that the HRA has drafted the Plan and now the Planning Commission and the City Council need to review it. Keysser stated that adopting this redevelopment plan opens the door to various types of assistance such as tax increment financing or tax abatement for example. Grimes agreed. He referred to the Applewood Pointe senior housing proposal at the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission December 8, 2008 Page 4 corner of Golden Valley Road and Douglas which is in this proposed redevelopment area and stated that at this point that proposal is on hold per the applicant's request. He explained that one of the ways United Properties (Applewood Pointe) is hoping to finance their project is through Tax Increment Financing and in order to do that this redevelopment plan has to be established. Cera referred to the map of the proposed redevelopment area and asked why it did not go all the way south to Highway 55. Hogeboom stated that the redevelopment area map focused on the most likely areas of redevelopment. Keysser noted that including the area all the way to Highway 55 in the redevelopment plan would then include the former Homesteader restaurant property at the corner of Highway 55 and Douglas. Kluchka asked if the Douglas Drive Corridor Study Committee picked the proposed area. Grimes said that the HRA defined the proposed redevelopment area. He explained that the plan started with the Applewood Pointe project but the City did not limit the plan to just that specific area because there are other opportunities in the Douglas Drive Corridor. He added that the City Council could amend the boundaries of the redevelopment area in the future. McCarty questioned if the proposed redevelopment area should also be expanded further to the north. Kluchka said he would like to see the entire Douglas Drive Corridor Study area included in this redevelopment plan because the goals and principles listed in the redevelopment plan are appropriate for the entire corridor. He asked how TIF districts are defined and if the area was larger if TIF could still be used. Grimes stated that TIF areas have to be in a redevelopment area. Kluchka said he thinks it would be in the City's best interest to include as much of the Douglas Drive Corridor as possible. Cera said it seems like the redevelopment plan was written in reaction to the Applewood Pointe proposal and it makes it look like that project already has all the necessary approvals it needs from the City when it doesn't. He said he agrees that the redevelopment plan map should include the entire Douglas Drive Corridor area. Grimes said it sounds like the Planning Commission agrees with the redevelopment plan, but not the map and that they would like the HRA to consider changing the map to include the entire Douglas Drive Corridor study area. McCarty said he is not comfortable having language regarding Applewood Pointe in the redevelopment plan at all. Grimes explained that the Planning Commission's options are to table the redevelopment plan review and ask for more information from the HRA or recommend approval of the redevelopment plan noting the issues that have been discussed regarding expanding the boundaries of the map and removing the language regarding the Applewood Pointe proposal. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission December 8, 2008 Page 5 Keysser said he would like to recommend approval of the redevelopment plan with the items they've discussed noted. Schmidgall stated that the items they've discussed are significant changes and he would rather vote to table the redevelopment plan review. McCarty agreed and said he would like to see the plan again with the proposed changes. Kluchka agreed that it would send a stronger message to say no to this plan and review it again with the proposed changes. Waldhauser questioned if adding more properties to the redevelopment map would mean that more properties would be eligible for TIF and it might affect the property values. Grimes suggested the Planning Commission table the redevelopment plan review in order to understand better why it was done the way it was. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to table consideration of Resolution No. 08-01 finding that the Redevelopment Plan for the Douglas Drive Redevelopment Project Area conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission would like the language regarding the Applewood Pointe proposal removed and the redevelopment area be expanded to include the full Douglas Drive Corridor Study area. --Short Recess-- 5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Schmidgall stated that he attended the December 2 City Council meeting. He reported that the rezoning request for the property at 3335 Scott Avenue North was tabled to the December 16 City Council meeting because the applicant was not in attendance. 6. Other Business No other business was discussed. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8 pm. Lester Eck, Secretary Envision Connection Project Board of Directors Meeting Minutes December 18,2008 Present: Sharon Glover, Jim Heidelberg, Helene Johnson, Linda Loomis, Philip Lund, Dean Penk, Marshall Tanick, and Blair Tremere Absent: Luke Weisberg (GVCEF Representative) Staff: Jeanne Andre The meeting began at 7:20 pm in the Council Conference Room. Approval of Minutes Penk/Lund moved to approve the minutes of November 13,2008, as presented. Motion carried. Fundraising to support Bridge Builder activities Members reviewed the draft fiscal agency agreement with the Golden Valley Community Events Fund (GVECF). They identified three possible tracks: retain the status quo, enter into the fiscal agency agreement with GVECF and do joint fundraising or create a separate 501 (c) 3 for the Connection Project. There was additional discussion on whether joint fundraising or volunteer recruitment could occur even if there is not a fiscal agency agreement. Dean Penk attended the Minnesota Council on Non-Profits Workshop and registered the Connection Project as a member, which provides. some benefits to the organization. Jim Heidelberg volunteered to secure a list of non-profit agencies registered with Golden Valley addresses with the intent of reviewing mission statements and looking for overlapping missions. The group consensus was to continue working with GVCEF on recruitment of people and funds, but not in the role of fiscal agent. The Board will continue to study setting up a 501 (c) 3 and explore spinning off from the City. Golden Valley Connects Outreach Coordinated Volunteer Recruitment - City staff have discussed development a feature for CityNews that highlights the activities and seeks volunteers for those organizations affiliated with the City: Connection Project, Golden Valley Human Services Foundation and the Golden Valley Community Events Fund. The members supported this approach and suggested that the idea be presented to the other groups. Taste of Golden Valley - Approximately 200 people attended and about $4000 was raised. However the Golden Valley Country Club has indicated that it would not donated space for the event in 2009. Golden Valley Days - Philip Lund will continue involvement with the planning group for this event. GVCEF is also planning a meeting to recruit volunteers for the event on Tuesday, January 13 at the Historical Society. Dean Penk will publicize the meeting on i-neighbors and a number of Board Members plan to attend. Envision Connection Project Board of Directors Meeting Minutes December 18, 2008 - Page 2 Bridge Builder Activities Spring Bridge Builder Training - Helene Johnson volunteered to coordinate Bridge Builder training this spring. She would like to involve the Bridge Builder Coaches and suggested an organizational meeting date of Saturday, January 24, from 10 am to noon at Brookview Community Center. The coaches are: Gary Cohen, Bruce Peterson, Blaire Tremere, Dean Penk and Philip Lund. The goal is to have a kick off evening meeting followed by a half-day Saturday session. Marshall Tanick suggested that the Golden Valley Country Club would be a good venue. Bridge Builder Quarterlv Meeting- The Calvary Coop has been established as the venue for the next meeting on Saturday, February 28. Buckthorn Busting - Blair Tremere indicated that he would like to work with the City Environmental Coordinator to put on an educational seminar about buckthorn eradication. The session could educate residents about how to remove buckthorn from their own property and encourage them to work in groups to tackle buckthorn removal from public property. 2009 Lilac Planting - Dwight Townes has set up a January 12 planning meeting with Todd Carroll at the Minnesota Department of Transportation to kick-off planning for 2009. Residents interested in daffodil planting and highway cleanup will also be attending. Dog Park - City staff is working on identifying possible sites fora dog park and will work with the Bridge Builder group on possible approaches. Demographics Forum - Philip Lund reintroduced the idea of having a public forum to discuss changing demographics in Golden Valley. Envision (Visi) Award A draft certificate for award winners was included in the agenda packet. Staff recommends that the certificate be part of what is given to the award winner and also be displayed at City Hall. It is additionally recommended that a plaque with the names of <<;III award winners be kept at City Hall. Staff is still exploring some sort of award trophy suitable for this award. Recruitment of Members to the Executive Board Members commented on the draft posting for Board Members to be posted on the General Mills Intranet. Jeanne Andre will make the changes and submit the request. Future Meetings The next meeting will be on January 15. Blair Tremere asked that exploring options for a volunteer coordinator be included as an agenda item. The meeting ended at 9:13 pm. Jeanne Andre Assistant City Manager 1.' Ca The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) was called to order at ]] :40 a.m., on Wednesday, November 19, 2008, at Golden Valley City Hall by Chair Welch. Ms. Herbert conducted roll call. Roll Call Crystal Golden Valley Medicine Lake Minneapolis Minnetonka New Hope Plymouth Robbinsdale St. Louis Park Commissioner Pauline Langsdorf Commissioner Linda Loomis, Treasurer Not represented Commissioner Michael Welch, Chair Commissioner Kris Sundberg Alternate Commissioner Jason Quisberg Commissioner Ginny Black, Vice Chair Commissioner Karla Peterson Commissioner Manuel Jordan Counsel Engineer Recorder Charlie LeFevere Len Kremer Amy Herbert Note: Medicine Lake Commissioner Cheri Templeman arrived after roll call Also present: Laura Adler, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of St. Louis Park Derek Asche, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Plymouth Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Scott Fuhs, Dundee Nursery Dave Hanson, Alternate Commissioner, City of Golden Valley Ron Leaf, SEH, Inc. Jeff Oliver, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley Duane Russ, New Hope resident Mary Jo Russ, New Hope resident Stuart Stockhaus, Alternate Commissioner, City of Crystal Liz Stout, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minnetonka Elizabeth Thornton, Alternate Commissioner, City of Plymouth ~,.,.",t1rld.~~n~~ntJNg.@n~~i.....'.': Chair Welch announced the addition of agenda item 6Ai - Medicine Lake TMDL Update. Ms. Black moved the agenda as amended. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [City of Medicine Lake absent from the vote]. Chair Welch removed the financial statement from the Consent Agenda. Ms. Loomis moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3~ Citi~~Ollip~~.c).....Nc>...~A,9'enda,.,'lte,rnS No citizen input. #249088 vI Page 1 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting MinutesA 4. Adl11i td$tratiolj:!; A. Presentation of the October 16,2008, BCWMC meeting minutes. October 16, 2008, BCWMC Meeting Minutes were approved as part of the Consent Agenda. B. Presentation of the Financial Statement. Chair Welch stated that he had pulled the rmancial report from the Consent Agenda for a brief review since the BCWMC is three-quarters of the way through its fiscal year. Chair Welch asked if anyone had any questions or concerns about the budget status. No one indicated any questions or concer~s. Chair Welch commented that the BCWMC continues to not spend its Web site funds and stated that the BCWMC needs to untangle the issue of getting Web site updates completed. Chair Welch asked Ms. Herbert to check on whether there have been any public communications costs since none have been billed this year. Chair Welch asked Ms. Langsdorf to check on the watershed education partnerships to see that they get their invoices in before the end of the fiscal year. Ms. Black moved to receive and me the financial report. Ms. Peterson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [City of Medicine Lake absent from the vote]. The general and construction account balances reported in the November 2008 Financial Report are as follows: Checking Account Balance TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE 438,635.06 438,635.06 Construction Account Balance (cash) Investment Balance TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BALANCE -Less: Reserved for CIP projects Construction cash! investments available for projects 2,506,793.64 0.00 2,506,793.64 3,715,445.22 (1,208,651.58) C. Presentation of Invoices for Payment Approval. Invoices: i. Kennedy & Graven - Legal Services through September 30, 2008 - invoice for the amount of$l, 687.35. ii. Barr Engineering Company - Engineering Services through October 31, 2008 - invoice for the amount of $25,108.27. iii. Barr Engineering Company - Sweeney Lake TMDL Services September 27 - October 31,2008 - invoice for the amount of $862.50. iv. Amy Herbert - October Recording Administrator Services - invoice for the amount of $4,090.80. v. SEH, Inc. - Sweeney Lake TMDL Study Phase 2 Work September 1, 2008 - September 30, 2008 - invoice for the amount of $2,550.00. Ms. Loomis moved to approve payment of all invoices. Ms. Black seconded the motion. By call of roll, the motion carried unanimously [City of Medicine Lake absent from the vote]. D. Reimbursement Request to MPCA for Sweeney Lake TMDL Phase 2 Work through September 30, 2008. Ms. Black moved to approve sending to the MPCA the request for reimbursement in the amount #249088 vI Page 2 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes.. of $3,614.80. Ms. Langsdorf seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (City of Medicine Lake absent from vote]. A. 920940 Yz Avenue North: New Hope. Chair WeIch asked New Hope alternate commissioner Jason Quisberg, representing New Hope at the meeting, to clarify his role in this project. Mr. Quisberg replied that in his capacity as the City of New Hope's consulting city engineer he was asked by the City to review the project mostly from a drainage aspect to ensure no issues would be caused to adjacent properties but not specifically as a watershed review. He said he did talk to Jim ofthe watershed (Jim Herbert, Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Engineering staft] and alerted him to the project and put him in direct contact with the project contractor to review the requirements of the watershed. Mr. LeFevere said there is no personal financial interest that he knows of that would cause Mr. Quisberg to be legally disqualified from participating in the discussion of or vote on this project. Mr. LeFevere said Mr. Quisberg could abstain from participating because of his dual roles but there is no legal requirement for him to abstain. Chair Welch said the issue in front of the Bassett Creek Watershed Commission (BCWMCI Commission) is a variance request. Mr. LeFevere said this variance is not the same as a city variance, which is constrained by the Municipal Land Planning Act and its statutory requirements. The variance in front ofthe Commission requires the Commission look at its adopted requirements in its Watershed Management Plan. Mr. LeFevere said the Commission will consider the information provided by the variance applicant and then will decide to grant the variance, grant the variance with conditions, or deny the variance. He said it is a good idea to direct staff to prepare findings because the Commission is required to state reasons for its decision - especially important in the case of a denial. He said if the Commission approves the variance with conditions then a resolution should be prepared so the action and conditions are clearly stated. Mr. LeFevere said if the Commission grants the variance it is implicit that the applicant has met the Commission's Watershed Management Plan Requirements. He said the benefit of preparing a resolution in the case of granting the variance is that it could provide the Commission guidance in future variance decisions. Mr. LeFevere said the November 12, 2008, Engineer's Memo lists the Commission's five standards from the Commission's Requirements that need to be met in order for the Commission to grant a variance. Mr. LeFevere reminded the Commission that all five standards need to be met in order for a variance to be granted: 1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property such that the strict application of the provisions of these standards and criteria would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of its land. 2. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property in the territory in which the property is situated. 4. In applications relating to a use in the 100-year floodplain set for in Table 5-3 of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission's Watershed Management Plan, the variance shall not allow a lower degree of flood protection than the existing flood protection. 5. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the intent of taking all reasonable and practical steps to improve water quality within the watershed. Mr. Kremer passed out a photo of the project and stated that the project received a permit from the City of New Hope [grading permit] and that the BCWMC received an after-the-fact application for a variance after the work had already taken place. He explained that the project is on the shoreline of Northwood Lake in New Hope. He said area in the backyard of the property has been filled and the existing wall has been raised to accommodate the fill. He said approximately 21 cubic yards of #249088 vI Page 3 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting MinuteSA material was placed below the floodplain elevation, which is 889.5. Mr. Kremer said the impact of this rill would be an increase in floodplain elevation of 0.0018 inches, which, is very minimal; however, he said, floodplain requirements including the City of New Hope's ordinance state that the BCWMC needs to consider the flood impact if all properties on the lake's shoreline added the same amount of fill below the floodplain. Mr. Kremer said if each of the approximately 60 properties on the lake added 21 cubic yards of fill there would be a ~ inch increase in flood stage. He explained that there are already several properties around Northwood Lake that are flooded at the 100-year flood level and that whenever there are serious rain forecasts the City of New Hope provides sandbags for those homes. Mr. Kremer said there is the potential for an increase in flood damage as a result in any increase in flood stage, even though ~ inch is a minor increase in flood damage. He said that historically on projects like this where there is a loss of flood storage as a result of the project, the Commission requires that compensating storage volume be provided. Mr. Kremer said that for this project, the compensating storage volume could be anywhere around Nortbwood Lake below the 100~ year flood level. Ms. Black asked if the City of New Hope was aware that the project needed a permit from the watershed and asked if the City informed the applicant. Mr. Quisberg said he reviewed the project from a drainage aspect with the City's building official and recommended that there were no impacts as far as drainage was concerned and contacted Jim Herbert [Commission Engineering staff] of the watershed and put him in contact with the project contractor. Ms. Black asked if it is the City's standard operating procedure to issue a building permit without all the permits in hand for the other issues. Mr. Quisberg said it is his understanding that the building permit was issued by the City with the understanding that all permits would be required before the work was begun but that he did not see the building permit and does not know if there was any specific language regarding that issue. Chair Welch said he thought it was a grading permit that the City issued. Mr. Fuhs [project designer with Dundee Nursery} said a grading permit was issued. Ms. Black asked about the slope on the property prior to the project. Mr. Fuhs said there was a considerable slope. He said Mr. Russ had a tough time walking across his back property prior to the project due to Mr. Russ's physical condition. Mr. Fuhs said he involved Mr. Quisberg and Roger Axel of the City of New Hope in the project prior to the start of the project. Mr. Fuhs said he wanted their opinion on the project. Mr. Fuhs said no construction was started until he received the grading permit. He said he thought that this type of problem could be avoided if cities in which projects are located know that the construction is being done in a watershed district and the cities contact the watershed district to make sure the paperwork is completed before the city permit is issued. Mr. Fuhs said he thought the City of New Hope had made that contact with the watershed [BCWMC}. He said the paperwork [BCWMC permit application} had been issued twice to the watershed [BCWMC}. He said he felt this project is a victim of a policy that has loopholes. He said construction would not have been started if the grading permit had not been granted. Mr. Welch asked Mr. Quisberg ifthere are any pending City reviews or approvals and asked what the status of this project is per the City of New Hope. Mr. Quisberg said he had a very limited involvement in this project. He said his understanding is that the permit was issued (whether approval was verbal or written he is not sure) and as far as meeting all watershed requirements it was his understanding that the City felt that all the requirements would be met as before any work was done. Mr. Quisberg said the work was completed and is now subject to review from the City to close out the permit. Ms. Sundberg clarified that Mr. Fuhs was the contractor on the project. Mr. Fuhs stated that he is the designer ofthe project for Dundee Landscaping and that he did the sales work and the elevations and everything required on any project. Ms. Sundberg asked if he received a written permit. Mr. Fuhs said it was a written permit from the City and it is hanging on the homeowners' door. #249088 v 1 Page 4 BCWMC November 19. 2008, Meeting Minutes" Mr. Fuhs commented that in regard to the ~ inch rise in flood stage throughout the watershed, he agreed that if everybody brought in 21 cub"ic yards of soil there would be cause for concern; however, in this case the homeowners' quality of life is directly affected. Chair Welch stated that according to the BCWMC's requirements and the City of New Hope's ordinance, the BCWMC must consider the impact of the project in terms of the impact if all the Northwood Lake lakeshore properties added 21 cubic yards of soil in the floodplain. Mr. Fuhs stated that the reason the project was put in was because of the quality life for Mr. Russ (property owner]. Mr. Fuhs explained to the BCWMC that Mr. Russ had suffered a stroke and likes to get outside to do what he can do such as mow the lawn to contribute to the household maintenance without sustaining any injury and that the project was done in order to improve that. Ms. Peterson asked if the project meets shoreland regulations. Mr. Kremer said the City of New Hope doesn't currently have such regulations and Northwood Lake is not subject to shoreland regulations set by the Department of Natural Resources. Ms. Black said that from the photo presented of the project and from comparing the terrain of the Russ' yard to the neighboring property, she wouldn't view the project being justified as necessary due to hardship because the terrain appears fairly flat. She asked if anyone would speak to the grade of the property and the previously existing slope and why the rill and wall extension was the solution chosen. Mr. Fuhs stated that the neighbors aren't handicapped. He also referred to the photo and pointed out the slope of the yard in comparison to a neighbor's fence. Mr. Fuhs said the Russ property had a steeper slope than the neighboring property to the west. He said he did not have any before photos of the property because they had accidentally been deleted by the work crew. Mr. Jordan asked if the landscape design includes placing turf all the way to the edge of the retaining wall. Mr. Fuhs said yes. Chair Welch asked the status of erosion protection ofthe exposed soil. Mr. Fuhs said the soil level sits below the retaining wall and is stable from erosion problems until the turf can be placed in the growing season. Ms. Sundberg said she is still not sure how this situation arose. She said it appears the permit from the City was given with the assumption that all of the other requirements were met. Ms. Sundberg asked if it was clearly stated what the requirements were? Mr. Quisberg said contact was definitely made between the contractor and the watershed staff because he had heard back from both of them stating that they had spoken to each other. He said it was his understanding that the requirements were made clear; however, he said he had no input on the issuing of the permit so he can't speak to what was behind the permitting. Mr. Kremer reported that contact was made with Jim Herbert, Commission Engineering staff who does the project reviews for the watershed. He said Mr. Herbert outlined for the landscape designer the watershed requirements and the initial information the contractor needs to collect for the watershed for a permit application. Ms. Sundberg asked if part of Mr. Herbert's communication was that the project needed watershed approval. Mr. Kremer said yes, Mr. Herbert communicated that watershed approval was required ifthe project included rIlling below the flood level and that Mr. Herbert communicated the flood level at the property. Ms. Sundberg asked Mr. Fuhs why he thought he was ok to go forward with the project. Mr. Fuhs indicated that the project information was submitted to the watershed before he received the permit from the City of New Hope and when he received the permit he assumed that the City of New Hope had received the go ahead from the watershed. Chair Welch asked Mr. Fuhs to clarify what paperwork information he had submitted. Mr. Fuhs said he submitted an application to the city and design drawings and that he also submitted two copies of the Commission's watershed permit application - one before the City's permit was issued and one after. Chair Welch asked where he had submitted the watershed permit applications. #249088 vI Page 5 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes" Mr. Fuhs said he believed he submitted the two watershed permit applications to Jim Herbert at the watershed address listed on the permit application. Mr. Kremer said if an application was sent prior to constrnction, Mr. Jim Herbert never received it. Mr. Kremer explained that Mr. Herbert was contacted by the City of New Hope after the project's construction was done. Mr. Kremer said the City asked Mr. Herbert for a copy of the BCWMC's comments on the project; however, Mr. Herbert had not received a permit application and therefore had not reviewed the project. Mr. Kremer stated that following the City's inquiry post-construction, Mr. Herbert received the project submission and permit application around the end of September. Ms. Sundberg asked if there is anything that can be done with the design to address water quantity issues, such as a construction of a rain garden. Chair Welch said it is the homeowners' right to use their property and to have it be a comfortable and appropriate place. He said the BCWMC does not wish to restrict the homeowners' use of their property. Chair Welch said the BCWMC has no restrictions on what the Russ' have done to their property as long as compensatory storage is provided. He said the foundation of the compensatory storage regulation is the idea that whatever one does on his or her property doesn't hurt the neighbor's property. Chair Welch said the idea is not to have the Russ' property anything less than safe or not appropriate for Mr. Russ' use. Chair Welch asked Mr. Kremer the status of the compensatory storage issue of the project. Mr. Kremer said the Commission Engineer has contacted the landscape designer about compensatory storage but has not received a response on the issue and instead the property owner decided to submit a variance request. Chair Welch said that if compensatory storage is provided then the need for a variance is eliminated. Mr. Kremer said the project could have been built without the need for Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) review if there was no fill in the floodplain. Chair Welch asked if there is anything that can be done to the project design at this point. Mr. Kremer responded that the compensatory volume could be provided by moving the wall that is along the shoreline away from the shoreline. He said another solution is to see if there is someplace else where the City of New Hope owns property around the lake where 21 cubic feet of storage could be provided. Mr. Quisberg responded that there is City property along the lake. Ms. Peterson asked if there are any upcoming projects along the lake. Mr. Quisberg said some have been proposed but none have been moved forward by the City Council. Ms. Peterson commented that she thinks the Commission needs more information on the communication that occurred about the project and also needs the perspective ofthe City of New Hope on what occurred. Mr. Jordan said the Commission needs to hear some alternatives for mitigation. Ms. Loomis said she doesn't think the Commission needs more information on the communication but that the Commission may need to delay making a variance decision. She said she is a little disappointed that other than Mr. Quisberg no one from the City of New Hope is at today's meeting and said she is also disappointed that the City allowed this type of project to come to the Commission for a permit. She said there is a designer designing projects on shoreland but he doesn't seem to be knowledgeable about shoreland BMPs and then the City allowed this project to be approved when the Commission's member-cities have been trying to educate its residents on how to treat shoreland. Mr. LeFevere said whatever communication breakdown occurred, it will be useful to identify so it doesn't happen again but it isn't pertinent to the Commission's consideration of the variance request. He said even ifthe permit had been granted by the City in error and in violation to the Commission's standards, the staff who issued the permit don't have the authority to change the Commission's rules. Mr. LeFevere said any communication breakdown that occurred doesn't have a legal bearing on the hardship issue. #249088 vI Page 6 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes. Ms. Black said that for her, reading the Commission's variance standards and the Engineer's comments in the November 12,2008, Engineer's Memo on the project, she can't say she thinks the project meets the variance requirements. She said the only other way to solve the issue other than the variance is for the project to provide compensatory storage. Ms. Black suggested to table the issue of the variance request, send the project design back to the City of New Hope and have the City work to see if it can find compensatory storage even in an upcoming project, or for the variance request to come back to the Commission with details showing how the project meets the five variance requirements. Ms. Sundberg asked if the City would have to provide the compensatory storage. Ms. Loomis said the City and the homeowners would need to work it out. Ms. Loomis said she hears Ms. Black saying that instead of denying the variance today, the Commission could give the property owners the opportunity to work with the City of New Hope on the issue of compensatory storage. She said then if the City and property owners come back saying no compensatory storage is available, the Commission would at that time proceed to grant or deny the variance request. Chair Welch said the Commission can make the Commission Engineer available to work on the issue with the City and the homeowners as a way to extend goodwill toward the homeowners in this situation. Mr. Kremer agreed. [Commissioner Templeman arrives.] Mr. LeFevere said the need for compensatory storage could also be reduced by changing the design. Chair Welch said the Commission Engineer could help the City and the landscape designer to come up with ideas. Mr. Quisberg clarified that the entire wall is not a new structure. He said the shoreline has not been altered it's just that the wall was raised. Mr. Fuhs commented that the middle of the wall was raised by two courses and an additional third course was added to either side. Ms. Black moved to continue the variance request and to have staff put the issue back on the agenda when it is ready for Commission review and to allow Commission staff to work with the City and the property owner and landscape designer to explore opportunities to either eliminate the need for the variance or to figure out more appropriate reasons for the variance. Mr. Jordan seconded the motion with the friendly amendment of exploring opportunities off site [for providing compensatory storage]. Ms. Black approved the friendly amendment. The motion carried unanimously [City of Medicine Lake abstained from vote]. A. Sweeney Lake TMDL Update: Mr. Leaf passed out a handout entitled "BCWMC Project Progress Update - November 19, 2008." He said this update is to let the Commission know where the project is at in regard to the process, the next steps, the modeling results to date, and where SEH, Inc. is at with regard to the data analysis from the second year of collection. Mr. Leaf reported that the second year of data still is preliminary data and hasn't been validated by the Three Rivers Park District so the data hasn't been entered into the model yet. Mr. Leaf pointed out on a map the locations of the monitoring stations in and around the lake. Mr. Leaf said that year-two monitoring has been completed and that it was a good year of monitoring data. He said that the Three Rivers Park District should be providing the rmalized data to SEH, Inc. shortly. Mr. Leaf reported that the bathtub model has been calibrated to the 2007 data and hasn't been run with the preliminary 2008 data but that things are looking how SED was expecting. Mr. Leaf showed a graph of data points from the north and south stations on Sweeney Lake from the sediment core sample from 2007. He said the graph shows a high concentration of internal loading of phosphorus - as was known going into the Sweeney Lake TMDL study. He said the load amount is about two to three times the internal load seen in general lakes throughout the area. Mr. Leaf said the goal through modeling and calibrating the second- Page 7 #249088 v 1 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes. year data is to better quantify what portion of the load is internal versus external sources. [Commissioner Peterson departs meeting] Mr. Leaf said the data show that the release rate of phosphorus from the sediments is high and is higher in anoxic conditions (i.e., when there is not oxygen at the bottom ofthe lake). Mr. Leaf said it will become important to determine the difference in the phosphorus loading in the lake between when the aerators are operating and when they are not. He said the data from the last two years show that when the aerators are off there is a higher release rate into the lake at the bottom of the water column. Mr. Leaf stated that the data show that when the aerators were operating, the temperature was mixed throughout the water column. He said when the aerators weren't operating, the temperature stayed colder at the bottom and warmer at the surface. He said a thermocline developed that kept the cooler water at the bottom and the warmer water at the top. Mr. Leaf said the dissolved oxygen data in both 2007 and 2008 showed that when there was a thermocline, there was essentially no dissolved oxygen at the bottom of lake. Mr. Leaf said water clarity in 2008 was slightly better than in 2007 based on observations by Brian Vlach and the Three Rivers Park District (TRPD), who did the lake sampling. He said according to Mr. Vlach, the data from the TRPD should be ready in early to mid-December. He said Mr. Dave Hanson and some of the other residents saw different weeds this year than in other years. Mr. Hanson said the weeds at the bottom were worse than usual. Mr. Leaf reported on some of the study's preliminary findings. He said that with aeration, the lake remains mixed and bottom sediments contribute to phosphorus loading and there is a lower release rate of phosphorus from the bottom, although that rate is still high (about three times higher than other lakes in the area). Mr. Leaf stated that without aeration the lake stratifies and phosphorus is contained below the thermocline until the turnover in the fall at which time the phosphorus is released to the rest of the lake. He also explained that without aeration there are higher release rates of phosphorus from the bottom. Mr. Leaf reported that the preliminary findings show that internal phosphorus loading contributes approximately 45% to the lake's total phosphorus. He said SEH needs to run through the model and recalibrate but that the figure is probably a pretty good preliminary estimate. Mr. Leaf said the next steps will be to validate the model after the validated data is received from the TRPD, to compare the 2007 and 2008 data, and to adjust the model as necessary to reach the final calibrated model. He said then the model will be used to base the external load models from Barr after which SEH will look at what loads are coming in from what sources. He said then SEH will begin to look at an implementation program on how to get the loads down to an acceptable level. Mr. Leaf said it is time to get the three technical meetings and the public stakeholder meeting scheduled. He said he could talk with Mr. Kremer and Chair Welch to start identifying who should be contacted to be on the technical team and to identify a time for the technical team to meet as early as December and to plan for a second meeting in January. Mr. Leaf said he would like the meeting schedule to be set so there are two technical meetings before the public meeting and one technical meeting after the public meeting. Mr. Hanson stated he would like to be part of the stakeholder group. Chair Welch mentioned he would likely be representing Sweeney Lake's lake association. Chair Welch said the city-MS4s for this TMDL study are Golden Valley and St. Louis Park and asked if any non-MS4 commissioner was interested in being the BCWMC representative on the stakeholder group. No commissioners indicated interest and Chair Welch said he would volunteer his time for the role the best he could. Ms. Black asked if the BCWMC needed to select a representative for the technical group. Chair Welch said it would be nice for the Commission to have Commission representation beyond staff #249088 vI Page 8 BCWMC November 19,2008, Meeting Minutes.. on the technical group because participating is a great way to really learn and understand the technical side ofthe TMDL but that it is up to the commissioners to decide whether they are interested in participating. A. 1. Medicine Lake TMDL Update. Chair Welch stated that he and Commissioner Peterson had discussed and agreed that they could switch their roles on the Medicine Lake Steering Committee. Chair Welch moved for Commissioner Peterson to be the BCWMC representative for the Medicine Lake TMDL study and for Chair Welch to serve as the alternate representative. Chair Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [City of Robbinsdale absent from the vote). Chair Welch said the second Medicine Lake Steering Committee meeting took place last night. He said much of the material was background information on the data collection, the nature of the TMDL study process, and the ground rules for the Steering Committee. Chair Welch reported that the next meeting will be held in January 2009. B. TAC Recommendations: i. Resource Management Plan. Mr. Kremer reported that the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed all the information previously submitted to the BCWMC about the Resource Management Plan (RMP) concept. He reiterated that the theory behind the preparation of the RMP is to expedite the permitting process for future projects that are to be approved by the BCWMC. Mr. Kremer said there were problems encountered in late 2007 and early 2008 in regard to getting projects permitted. He said these problems were the impetus for preparing the RMP because the BCWMC asked the Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) how the permitting problems could be avoided in the future and the Army Corps responded by suggesting the RMP process. Mr. Kremer said the proposal would be to permit the water quality improvement projects associated with lakes and streams in the watershed and the channel improvement projects that are part of the CIP for the next five years. He said the cost estimate prepared earlier this year by the Commission Engineer was that the RMP would cost $45,000 to prepare. Mr. Kremer said the T AC asked what the savings would be by doing the RMP versus having the projects permitted individually. He stated that his estimate is the savings would be approximately 50% by going through the RMP process. Mr. Kremer explained that he estimates it would cost $10,000 - $15,000 a piece to go through the permitting process on a project by project basis. He said there would be some additional costs beyond the $45,000 to get through the final permit authorization process through the Army Corps because the BCWMC would have to submit final plans, which would require some preparation and may entail answering final questions about the projects. #249088 vI He said through the RMP process the BCWMC would receive conditional permits for the projects included in the RMP, conditioned on submitting the final plans for Army Corps review. Mr. Kremer said another advantage of the RMP is that the Army Corps is being encouraged by its administration to use a watershed management approach to its permitting. He said there would also be a considerable time savings in the permitting process by using the RMP approach. Mr. Kremer reminded the BCWMC that in the fall of 2007 when the BCWMC submitted the Golden Valley Sweeney Branch channel improvement project to the Army Corps for the permitting process, the Army Corps responded that it may be mid-2009 before the project could receive a permit even though it was desirable in terms of the project to start construction as soon as possible. Mr. Kremer said Page 9 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes" another advantage to the RMP process is that the BCWMC would give public notice of the RMP and public notice of the permits that would be submitted as part of the RMP and then the BCWMC would not have to give public notice of the individual projects as they proceeded in the future. Chair Welch said his big question is the degree to which the BCWMC is confident that the components of the projects, such as impacts to wetlands, are known well enough now for all the projects that designs of the project plans can be created and the BCWMC won't need to go through the permitting process again two years down the road because of changes in the design of the project. Chair Welch asked Mr. Kremer for his professional opinion on how well the BCWMC understands what it's going to do on the projects being recommended for inclusion in the RMP. Mr. Kremer said there are several channel restoration projects that have gone forward and he feels the concept plans accurately reflect the projects. He said the proposed RMP projects other than the channel improvement projects are BMP (Best Management Practices) water quality improvement projects. Mr. Kremer said those concept plans passed through the BCWMC. He said when that process was being carried out, there were meetings with the cities and with the Department of Natural Resources to identify any potential issues with the projects. He said that the final concept plans reflected what was learned from that review process. Mr. Kremer said he is fairly confident there will not be significant changes to those plans. However, he said, rules can change in the future that could dictate that the projects go through another process. He mentioned that such a possibility of rule changes is a disadvantage of the RMP process. [Commissioner Sundberg departs meeting] Ms. Langsdorf asked if the BCWMC would need to go through the permitting process again if the BCWMC decided to delay a project included in the RMP. Mr. Kremer said it would depend on the extent of the modification the BCWMC makes. He said if it is a significant modification, one that the public would be concerned about or one that had a major impact, then the BCWMC may have to do supplemental permit applications and a public notice process. He said that as far as the CIP projects identified to be included in the RMP, he doesn't see that happening. Mr. Kremer said the BCWMC also asked for information on conducting Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EA Ws) in relation to the RMP process. Mr. Kremer said the TAC felt that an EA W for the overall project should not be done at this time and that EA Ws for individual projects should only be done if needed. Chair Welch asked why the TAC recommended this. Mr. Kremer said the TAC discussed that if an EA W is needed then the RMP process should help identify the need for the EA W since the public and other agencies will be looking at the projects and will have the opportunity to raise issues and then the BCWMC can determine whether or not it needs to conduct an EA W. Ms. Sundberg said she doesn't consider the EA W perspective explained by Mr. Kremer as a disadvantage and asked ifhe saw it as a disadvantage. Mr. Kremer said he did not. #249088 v1 Ms. Black said in regard to the $45,000 cost of the RMP, the cost would bring the projects within the RMP to a preliminary design stage and then as the project comes up the BCWMC would need to prepare the final projectand would have to submit that to the Army Corps, which would require additional costs. She asked if the previous estimate that permitting the projects individually at a cost of $10,000 Page 10 BCWMC November 19. 2008. Meeting Minutes.. to $15,000 included the costs of the final project design and submittal to the Army Corps. Mr. Kremer said no, that cost included the concept plan, preliminary design, and permit application. Ms. Black clarified that there would be additional costs to the $10,000 - $15,000 as well. Mr. Kremer responded yes. He said it is not unusual for the final design to be 15% of the project cost. Ms. Templeman asked if Mr. Kremer foresees additional expenses due to possible rule changes. Mr. Kremer said he can't predict rule changes but said that about ten years ago he was involved in a project that obtained a conditional permit through the Army Corps and then a subsequent rule change required the project to still go through jurisdictional review. Mr. LeFevere remarked that as he understands the process, it will involve an earlier effort to define a project not to the point of final plans but to the point where the project can be evaluated. He said it seems to him that even if there is a rule change, a lot of the effort in defining those projects won't be wasted because that effort will need to be done sooner or later. Mr. LeFevere said rule changes may require further analysis or work on the part of the BCWMC, but the work that was completed won't be a wasted effort. Ms. Black moved the staff's recommendation that the BCWMC complete the RMP for the BCWMC's CIP projects proposed for the next five years and that an EAW not be completed at this time and that the cost for completing the RMP is not to exceed $45,000 without further consideration by the BCWMC. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [City of Robbinsdale absent from the vote].Mr. Kremer mentioned that the costs would have to be billed against the CIP projects. ii. Channel Maintenance Fund Requests. Chair Welch said the TAC's recommendations are listed in the November 12, 2008, TAC memo to the BCWMC. Ms. Loomis moved approval of the TAC's recommendation in the memo to approve $45,000 for the Plymouth Creek channel maintenance project, $50,000 for Golden Valley's Main Stem Bassett Creek channel restoration project, and $18,100 for the North Branch channel excavation project in New Hope to be funded from the channel maintenance funds available in 2009. Ms. Black seconded the motion. Chair Welch said he is not ready to vote in favor ofthe New Hope project. He asked how the project provides Commission benefits versus City benefits and how the project qualifies per the BCWMC's channel maintenance policy. Mr. Kremer said he believes the TAC felt that item B ofthe BCWMC's Stream Restoration Policies [in the Watershed Management Plan] applies to the project [7.2.2 Stream Restoration Policies item B. The BCWMC will use the Creek and Streambank Trunk System Maintenance, Repair and Sediment Removal Fund to finance maintenance and repairs needed to restore a creek or stream bank area to the designed flow rate]. #249088 vI Mr. Kremer said there is an area downstream of Northwood Lake where a large amount of sedimentation has occurred. He said it doesn't necessarily affect the capability of this channel in this area to convey flood flows, but it affects the ability of that area of channel to convey normal flows. Mr. Kremer explained that due to the sedimentation, the lake stays up at higher levels for longer periods of time. He said if the channel was excavated so it provides its normal capacity, then the lake Page 11 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes. would drain down quicker, which is a benefit to the property owners around the lake. Mr. Kremer said this is the information the T AC discussed and is the aspect of the BCWMC's stream restoration policy it felt applied to this project. Mr. Kremer said this project restores channel capacity that was previously available. Chair Welch asked if the City of New Hope has committed funds to this project. Mr. Quisberg said funds for the project's balance would come from the City's stormwater utility fund, unless the City seeks reimbursement from the BCWMC's channel maintenance funds in future years, but that to-date the City hasn't set those funds aside for that purpose. The motion carried with six votes in favor [Cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, Medicine Lake, New Hope, Plymouth, and St. Louis Park] and one vote against [City of Minneapolis] [Cities of Medicine Lake and Robbinsdale absent from the vote]. iii. Parkers Lake Phosphorus Goal and Recommendations for Revisions to Water Quality Goals for Lakes and Waterbodies. Mr. Kremer said the BCWMC originally adopted its goal for lakes in 1994 when the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) requirements were 30 ppb (parts per billion) for phosphorous. He explained that in 2007 the MPCA changed its requirements for lakes to 40 ppb and that the City of Plymouth set its goal for Parker's Lake to be consistent with the MPCA's requirement. Mr. Kremer said that in 2004 when the next generation Watershed Management Plan was completed, the BCWMC decided it would look at all its goals for waterbodies at some point in the future. Ms. Loomis moved to approve the TAC's recommendation that the BCWMC adopt the 38 ppb phosphorus goal for Parkers Lake. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka and Robbinsdale absent from the vote]. Chair Welch moved to have the TAC review the BCWMC's water quality goals for waterbodies. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka and Robbinsdale absent from the vote]. iv. Recommendation for Preparation of T AC Review of CIP Projects. Chair Welch said the TAC has requested that the Commission Engineer prepare some information that would help the T AC in its review of the CIP. Ms. Loomis asked how much the preparation ofthe materials would cost. Mr. Kremer said the bulk of the work would be performed by Ms. Herbert to pull together the previous information about the prioritization process the BCWMC used for the CIP and then it would also take up to two hours of his time. Chair Welch said it sounds like the cost would be up to $1,000 and moved to approve staff preparing the information for the T AC's CIP review. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka and Robbinsdale were absent from the vote]. C. City of Plymouth's Surface Water Management Plan and Resolution 08-09 approving the surface water management plan of the City of Plymouth. Ms. Black moved the adoption of Resolution 08-09 approving the City of Plymouth's surface water managemeut plan. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (Cities of Minnetonka and Robbinsdale were absent from the vote). #249088 vl Page 12 BCWMC November 19. 2008, Meeting Minutes. D. Discussion on BCWMC Organizational Analysis. Item deferred to December BCWMC meeting. Ms. Black said she would like the commissioners to review the memo from the Administrator Committee included in the packet and to give serious consideration to the issues raised in the memo for discussion at the next BCWMC meeting. unicafio,l'IS . A. Chair: i. Chair Welch announced that the BCWMC received letters of interest proposals in response to the BCWMC's notice in the State Register for consultants. Ms. Loomis said she would check with Ms. Virnig to see if she can create PDF files of the submissions and suggested the Administrative Services Committee schedule a meeting to discuss the letters before the December BCWMC meeting. B. Commissioners: No Commissioner Communications. C. Committees: i. Education and Public Outreach Committee: Ms. Langsdorf announced that the Joint Education and Public Outreach meeting will be on Tuesday, December 9, 2008, at 8:30 a.m. in the Medicine Lake Room at Plymouth City Hall. D. Counsel* E. Engineer: i. Mr. Kremer reported that the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) will hold a listening session on December 19, 2008, from 9:30 a.m. - noon at the Capital Region Watershed District [1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, Saint Paul] to hear from watershed management organizations, watershed districts, soil and water conservation districts, metro local governments, and county water planners on their ideas of how to use the clean water portion of the money that will be available from the recently passed constitutional amendment. Ms. Bl~ck moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m. Michael Welch, Chair Date Amy Herbert, Recorder Date Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary Date #249088 v1 Page 13 BCWMC November 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes-, Hey M orandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20,2009 Agenda Item 3. F. Appointment of Commissioners to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary In accordance with Minnesota State Statutes the City has advertised for the office of Commissioner and Alternate on the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC). The City Council as a member of the Commission is charged with making the appointments. Attachments Resolution Appointing Linda R. Loomis as Commissioner and David W. Hanson as Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Appointing Linda R. Loomis as Commissioner and David W. Hanson as Alternate Commissioner to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission. Resolution 09-3 January 20,2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPOINTING LINDA R. LOOMIS AS COMMISSIONER AND DAVID W. HANSON AS ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER TO THE BASSETT CREEK WATER MANAGEMENT COMMISSION WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is a member of the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission; and, WHEREAS, the Bassett Creek Water 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 Water Management Commission; and, WHEREAS, the City has advertised for Commissioner in accordance with M.S. 1 03B.227. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Golden Valley appoints Linda R. Loomis as its Commissioner, and David W. Hanson as its Alternate Commissioner, to the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission for a term ending January 31,2012. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. Hey emorandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. G. Adoption of Proposed Revisions to the Pavement Management Policy Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The City adopted its Pavement Management Policy in 1995 to provide an outline for the management of its transportation infrastructure. The policy has been modified periodically in order to stay current with project development, management, and procedural issues. Based upon discussions during development of the 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management projects, the City Council directed staff to make modifications to the policy in 2008. The Council discussed the proposed changes to the Pavement Management Policy at its December 9,2008 Council/Manager meeting. Two versions of the proposed Pavement Management Policy are attached to this memorandum for reference. The first version has the proposed additions to the policy underlined, and the proposed deletions to the policy struck through. The second version of the policy is the new proposed policy without editing. The following changes to the Pavement Management Policy are proposed at this time: 1. Establish the B-618 concrete curb and gutter constructed to industry standards as the City standard. 2. Include the sanitary sewer service repair and rehabilitation program in street reconstruction projects. 3. Consider alternative styles of concrete curb and gutter, such as drive-over curb (0412), if 100 percent of the property owners on a street petition for the alternate style ot curb, and agree that the City will no longer repair damage done to lawns and obstructions in the right-ot-way that are caused by snow and ice control. 4. Include language to formalize the City's practice of rejecting participation in the driveway reconstruction program in high liability cases. 5. Remove the option of reconstructing streets with concrete pavement, thus establishing streets with asphalt pavement and concrete curb and gutter as the City standard roadway. 6. Delete the typical schedule for Pavement Management Projects due to changes in project development practices. 7. Delete the Appendix A, Petition Process, from the policy. Attachments Resolution Amending the City's Pavement Management Policy (1 page) Proposed Pavement Management Policy, edited version (9 pages) Proposed Pavement Management Policy, clean version (6 pages) Resolution 09~4 January 20, 2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT POLICY WHEREAS, Resolution 95-5, adopting a Pavement Management Program ("Program") was approved by the Golden Valley City Council ("Council") on January 17, 1995; and amended by Resolution 96-96, on October 15, 1996; amended by Resolution 97-88 on December 9, 1997; and amended by Resolution 05-42 on June 7,2005; WHEREAS, it is recommended the staff amend the Pavement Management Program by amending the policy including the following elements: 1. Establish the B-618 concrete curb and gutter constructed to industry standards as the City standard. 2. Include the sanitary sewer service repair and rehabilitation program in street reconstruction projects. 3. Consider alternative styles of concrete curb and gutter, such as drive-over curb (D412), if 100 percent of the property owners on a street petition for the alternate style of curb, and agree that the City will no longer repair damage done to lawns and obstructions in the right-of-way that are caused by snow and ice control. 4. Include language to formalize the City's practice of rejecting participation in the driveway reconstruction program in situations, which may create liability for the City. 5. Remove the option of reconstructing streets with concrete pavement, thus establishing streets with asphalt pavement and concrete curb and gutter as the City standard roadway. 6. Delete the typical schedule for Pavement Management Projects due to changes in project development practices. 7. Delete the Appendix A, Petition Process, from the policy. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. Pavement Management Policy for The City of Golden Valley. January 17, 1995 Amended October 15, 1996 Amended December 9,1997 Amended June 7, 2005 Amended XXX X. 2009 Purpose There are approximately 119 miles of street to be main Valley. Of this total, 23 miles are designated as Mu and the remaining 96 miles are local streets. Ke condition is necessary to provide safe and re the City, to maintain property values and to place to live and do business. The goal of the Pavement Manage Program (PMP) that systematically e pavement lifespan, at minimum long-t measure at the proper time. h a Pavement Management maximize the proper rehabilitation Many of Golden Valley's streets are newer, having been constructed to City standards within the last 20 years. Although the pavement on these streets also exhibits some distress, the Pavement ManaQement ProQram will include maintenance and rehabilitation of these streets in order to maximize their functional lifespan. methods such as sealcoating and bituminous o'.'erlays are usually appropriate for prolonging their usual life. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 1 The Pavement Management Program (PMP) The entire street system under the jurisdiction of the City of Golden Valley has been broken into segments which are evaluated by staff and consultants to determine the type of pavement distresses present. Staff then records the severity and extent of each pavement distress as well as the quality of the ride, traffic volumes and structural capacity on each street segment. Using a pavement management computer program, staff analyzes the recorded information and assigns a Pavement Quality Index (POI) to each street segment. For example, a POI of 10.0 represents a newly constructed street with little or no distress evident; and a POI of 2.0 represents a s t pavement that has completely failed. The POI of each street segment is then inv .' and streets are selected for rehabilitation strategies me3sures based on st ion and the recommendations analysis of the computer software. Th the City is to maintain a street system with an average POI of 6.0 to 7.0. Resi s shall be designated for an axle loading of 7 ton. At- used to extend the life of a d aggregate are applied to help seal out xistl ace, increase skid resistance and help . g out and prematurely deteriorating. A properly ately 6 to 10 years. those streets in the system that have been constructed to and do not exhibit distresses indicative of poor . . The clude crack sealing, routine patching and limited repair of r. Bituminous Milling and Overlay Bituminous milling and overlay consists of mechanically removing a portion of the existing bituminous pavement surface, usually up to one and one half inches (1.5"), and placing new pavement. After placement of a bituminous overlay, properly timed sealcoating can extend the life of a street for an estimated 20 to 25 years before another overlay is required. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 2 Bituminous overlays will be performed GRty-on those streets that have been constructed to City standards and do not have distresses indicative of a poor subgrade. The streets receiving overlays also will be subject to crack sealing, curb repair, and patching before the placement of the overlays. The pal of these streets 'NiII vary betv:een 6.0 and 8.0, depending on the types of distress present. Reconstruction Reconstruction is defined as any major rehabilitation involving the removal or relaying of all surface material for a particular segment of street. Recons ction will be performed on streets that have deteriorated to the point wher truction is the only cost-effective method of rehabilitation. Sanitary sewer, wat , and storm sewer systems on streets subject to reconstruction will also be . ed as part of the PMP. Those utilities that exhibit inadequate capacity, roblems, and tRat- do not meet specific state or federal requirements f epaired or replaced as part.of the street reconstruction proj g stree width and parking arrangements on to change. Variation from existing th, will be considered in the following Aid streets where MSA standards apply. must be rand al streets where traffic volumes exceed 500 day. . are existing safety issues unsafe conditions. intaining existing conditions street widths and parking create undue hardship on adjacent properties or elsewhere project. 5. To void environmental impacts such as wetland filling and removal of significant trees. Drainaoe Improvements The City will attempt to improve drainage conditions during reconstruction wherever possible and feasible. Drainaoe improvements for areas outside of public rioht~of-way will be implemented where feasible and in accordance with the Special Assessment Policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 3 Landscaping Impacts The City will endeavor to minimize landscaping disturbances whenever possible, and shall consider reasonable replacements when disturbances are necessary. The Environmental Coordinator shall comment on tree and landscapinq impacts due to proposed proiects and will include this review in proiect feasibilitv reports. Concrete Curb and Gutter Concrete curb and gutter provides structural support for the edge of the paved roadway, aids in snow removal and facilitates drainage of orm water for water quality treatment and minimizing damage to adjacent p '. s. Therefore, preliminary design of streets subject to reconstructio include concrete curb and gutter. The Cit 's standard for concrete curb r is the Minnesota De artment of Trans ortation's 8-618 desi n c ordin to indust standards. Property Owner Involvement During the preliminary design phase of any reconstruction project, the City will hold twe open houses for affected property owners. Property owners will be consulted and provided the opportunity to have input in the preliminary project design prooess durinq the open houses. One shall be held early on in the. process and one tm\'ard oompletion of the process. However, this is not intended to exclude ~:my other meetings with individU4i1 or groups of property O'Nners during the design and construotion process. The City will also endeavor to keep G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 4 property owners informed during lRe-construction phase. through the use of- construction newsletters. daily construction. notices. tarQeted correspondence and other means of communication deemed appropriate. Driveway Reconstruction The City 'I/ill work with property o':mers to improve drive'....ay conditions 'Nhere possible. Contracts for street reconstruction '::i11 include contraot unit prices for bituminous and concrete drive'....ay pavement. Residents along streets being .. . . .. Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Pavement mana~ement street reconstruction proiects will include an opportunity for property owners affected by the street reconstruction to. reconstruct their private sanitary sewer services. This voluntary prOQram will allow property owners to become compliant with Chapter 3 of Golden Valley City Code. and helps the community reduce the inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system. If a property owner wishes to participate in the sewer service rehabilitation proQram. the City will prepare estimates for the work. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 5 determine eligibility and liability for participation, determine the indirect costs for the work, prepare a contract and manage the rehabilitation work. FollowinQ completion of the sewer service rehabilitation the property owner may choose to pay for the work as outlined in the Special Assessment Policv. Petitions for Reconstruction Petitions for street reconstruction will continue to be accepted under the PMP. However, priority will be given to petitions on streets projected f-or reconstruction .. .. Iy and cost- including . n also need ated for each street in keeping with Committee. Sidewalk construction will Ropair Repair of concrete pavement consists of crack sawing, routing and sealing, shaIlO'.\' depth patching, full depth patching and panel replacement. In general, if more than one third of a block of concrete street requires panel replacement, repair is not cost effective and the street must be reconstructed. Rooonstruction The cost of reconstructing a concrete street is approximately 019% higher than the cost of a bituminous street. In addition, maintenance and rehabilitation of concrete streets is G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 6 also considerably more expensive than bituminous streets. Therefore, residents on concrete streets will be given two options: Option 1 is to reconstruct the street as a bituminous road'Nay, with an assessment consistent with the Special Assessment Policy. Option 2 is to reconstruct the street as a concrete roadway, with an assessment following the base unit assessment for a bituminous roadway, plus 100% of the increased c<?sts resulting from constructing the stroet 'Nith concrete. form 'Nil! be accepted. e financed through nds, be repaid through tax d completely through the t prope s. Bituminous overlays may n of the program and will be financed ments will only be levied against ructed. The amount of the special resolution based on the Special G:\Policies and Procedures\pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions,doc 7 Typical Yearly Project Schedule and Process The following schedule and process is typical for a specific project under the Pavement Management Program:street reconstruction proiect. JW1e 1. City staff makes recommendations to the City Council regarding proposed reconstruction projects for the following each year. The City Council reviews the recommendations and orders feasibility reports for projects. sanitary sewer. 2. Soptember through Decomber . . 3. 4. 5. FollowinQ P lect authorization the final plans. specifications and contract documents are prepared. the proiect is bid and a contract is awarded. 6. Proiect construction occurs begins in the spring and is completed in the fall. March Advertiso for bids. ApFiJ G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 8 Bids are roceived and a contract is awarded by the City Council. May though Sept-omber Construction begins in May, with oompletion dates no later than September 30 on each contract. Appendix A Pa'.'oment Management Policy removed from a project: of ourb and gutter for it to be removed from the project. 6. Staff will tally the responses and present the information at the public hearing. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 9 Pavement Management Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Purpose There are approximately 119 miles of street to be main Valley. Of this total, 23 miles are designated as Mu and the remaining 96 miles are local streets. Ke condition is necessary to provide safe and re the City, to maintain property values and to place to live and do business. Amended October 15,1996 Amended December 9,1997 Amended June 7,2005 Amended January 20, 2009 the City of Golden A) roadways, good . . ens of irable The goal of the Pavement Manage Program (PMP) that systematically e pavement lifespan, at minimum long-t measure at the proper time. to have an average effective lifespan of ack sealing, sealcoating, and times. M~my of the streets in Golden 0, and did not receive the subgrade toda tandards. Many were constructed without treet subgrade, which causes the street to crack, IC loading. This breakup of the pavement allows rther accelerates deterioration. Many of Gol within the last distress, the Pave rehabilitation of the ts are newer, having been constructed to City standards ough the pavement on these streets also exhibits some nagement Program will include maintenance and reets in order to maximize their functional lifespan. The Pavement Management Program (PMP) The entire street system under the jurisdiction of the City of Golden Valley has been broken into segments which are evaluated by staff and consultants to determine the type of pavement distresses present. Staff then records the severity and extent of each pavement distress as well as the quality of the ride, traffic volumes and structural capacity on each street segment. Using a pavement management computer program, staff analyzes the recorded information and assigns a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) to each 'Street segment. For example, a PQI of 10.0 represents a newly constructed street G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_Clean.doc 1 with little or no distress evident; and a pal of 2.0 represents a street pavement that has completely failed. The pal of each street segment is then inventoried, and streets are selected for rehabilitation strategies based on staff opinion and the analysis of the computer software. The goal of the City is to maintain a street system with an average pal of 6.0 to 7.0. Residential streets shall be designated for an axle loading of 7 ton. Because streets decay at different rates depending on subgrade and pavement conditions, staff will periodically evaluate the pavement and assign pals. Approximately every fifth year, a consulting engineering firm will conduct a com evaluation of the street system. This will ensure that the baser decision making is current and that each street in the syste rehabilitation measures when the need for maintenance . measures will include sealcoating, edge and full-width degrees of in-place reclamation, total street recons that may become available as new technology d te inventory and being used for ives appropriate s. Rehabilitation rlays, varying otential methods Bituminous City standards receiving overlay the placement of th is echanically removing a portion of the ce, and placing new pavement. After placement of a coating can extend the life of a street for an her overlay is required. erformed on those streets that have been constructed to ve distresses indicative of a poor subgrade. The streets be subject to crack sealing, curb repair, and patching before erlays. Reconstruction Reconstruction is defined as any major rehabilitation involving the removal or relaying of all surface material for a particular segment of street. Reconstruction will be performed on streets that have deteriorated to the point where reconstruction is the only cost-effective method of rehabilitation. Sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer systems on streets subject to reconstruction will also be investigated as part of the PMP. Those utilities that exhibit inadequate capacity, maintenance problems, and do G:\Policies and Procedures\pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_ Clean.doc 2 not meet specific state or federal requirements for the utility will be repaired or replaced as part of the street reconstruction project. Construction Standard"s The City will strive to maintain the existing street width and parking arrangements unless there is an over-riding safety reason to change. Variation from existing conditions, including parking and street width, will be considered in the following situations: 1. On Municipal State Aid streets where MSA s 2. On collector and local streets where traffic vehicles per day. 3. Where there are existing safety issue 4. Where maintaining existing street undue hardship on adjacent pro 5. To avoid environmental impa significant trees. conditions create the project. re oval of DrainaQe Improvements The City will attempt to impro wherever possible and feasibl public right-of-way will be imple the Special Assessment Policy. during reconstruction s for areas outside of "in accordance with caping isturbances whenever possible, s when disturbances are necessary. ent on tree and landscaping impacts this review in project feasibility reports. qu desig TheCi Transporta Gu utter . s structural support for the edge of the paved rem I and facilitates drainage of storm water for water ini izing damage to adjacent properties. Therefore, ct to reconstruction will include concrete curb and gutter. r concrete curb and gutter is the Minnesota Department of 18 design constructed according to industry standards. Concrete cur and gutter designs other than the City's standard, such as D type, may be considered based upon neighborhood input. In order for alternate styles to be installed, 100 percent of the property owners abutting a street must sign a petition prepared by the Public Works Department requesting the alternate curb style. This petition will state that the Citywill no longer repair damages to turf, landscaping, sprinkler systems, mailboxes or other items placed within the public right-of-way by property owners resulting from the City's snow and ice control measures. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_Cleimdoc 3 Property Owner Involvement During the preliminary design phase of any reconstruction project, the City will hold open houses for affected property owners. Property owners will be consulted and provided the opportunity to have input in the preliminary project design during the open houses. The City will also endeavor to keep property owners informed during construction through the use of construction newsletters, daily construction notices, targeted correspondence and other means of communication deemed appropriate. Drivewav Reconstruction Pavement Management street reconstructi.on projec for residents in the project area to reconstruct thei project. If property owners wish to participate in program the City will prepare an estimate for liability for participation, determine the indi contract and manage reconstruction of the property owner may choose to p two methods as outlined in the Special As The City of Golden Valley will driveway that is removed due that was removed (asphalt or c driveway reconstructed in a mat concrete when asphalt was remov differential be aterials. s for private driveway reconstruction res that the City and/or its contractors .. during construct than a normal driveway, ve uired quality is not possible. Such or minimal slopes, landscaping impacts, structural e determination of eligibility to participate in the m is at the discretion of the Public Works Sanita ce Re air Pavement ent street reconstruction projects will include an opportunity for property rs affected by the street reconstruction to reconstruct their private sanit sewer services. This voluntary program will allow property owners to become compliant with Chapter 3 of Golden Valley City Code, and helps the community reduce the inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system. If a property owner wishes to participate in the sewer service rehabilitation program, the City will prepare estimates for the work, determine eligibility and liability for participation, determine the indirect costs for the work, prepare a contract and manage the rehabilitation work. Following completion of the sewer service rehabilitation the property owner may choose to pay for the work as outlined in the Special Assessment Policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_Clean.doc 4 Maintenance The City will perform major maintenance procedures in a timely and cost- effective manner to maintain condition over the life ofthe street, including overlays and sealcoating. However, streets that need reconstruction also need maintenance measures beyond what is required for streets built to City standards. These maintenance measures mustalso be performed more frequently on poor quality streets, resulting in an increasing burden on General Fund street maintenance and the need for more taxes to . ance them. Therefore, those streets recommended for reconstructi istent with the Pavement Management Policy but denied by the Cit ncil because of resident opposition will no longer be subject to m e measures beyond those deemed necessary for public safety. Main sures required for public safety will include, but are not limited t tholes in the driving lanes and patching of utility open in Sidewalks The construction of sidewalks will be eval the goals of the Golden Valley Sidewalk Co be financed by the City. ram' 0 be financed through will be repaid through tax ill be fin,." ced completely through the t properties. Bituminous overlays may t program and will be financed sments will only be levied against structed. The amount of the special ee resolution based on the Special Type The folio reconstructio nd ess rocess is typical for a Pavement Management street 1. City staff ommendations to the City Council regarding proposed reconstructi ojects for each year. The City Council reviews the recommend ons and orders feasibility reports for projects. 2. Preliminary project data gathering, including surveying, soil borings and review of maintenance records ;s performed. 3. Preliminary project design and public participation occurs. 4. Project design continues with preparation of the feasibility report, and public hearings for project authorization and special assessments are held. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_Clean.doc 5 5. Following project authorization the final plans, specifications and contract documents are prepared, the project is bid and a contract is awarded. 6. Project construction occurs begins in the spring and is completed in the fall. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions_Clean.doc 6 alley Mem randum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. H. Proposed Revisions to the Special Assessment Policy Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The City adopted its Special Assessment Policy in 1995 to provide an outline for special assessments associated with public improvement projects. The policy has been modified periodically in order to address changes in practice and procedural issues. Based upon discussions during development of the 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management projects, the City Council directed staff to make modifications to the policy in 2008. The proposed policy amendments were discussed by the City Council at its December 9, 2008 Council/Manager meeting. Two versions of the proposed Special Assessment Policy are attached to this memorandum for reference. The first version has the proposed additions to the policy underlined and the proposed deletions to the policy struck through. The second version of the policy is the new proposed policy without editing. The following changes to the Special Assessment Policy are proposed at this time: 1. Include a discussion on the sanitary sewer service rehabilitation program offered as part of street reconstruction projects. 2. Clarify the discussion on public improvement projects for installation of streets and utilities for private developments. 3. Remove specific percentages of construction costs to be assessed for each land use from the policy. 4. Remove the discussion of special assessments for reconstruction of streets with existing concrete pavement, consistent with the proposed Pavement Management Policy revisions. Attachments Resolution Amending the City's Special Assessment Policy (1 page) Proposed Special Assessment Policy, edited version (8 pages) Proposed Special Assessment Policy, clean version (7 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt the Resolution Amending the City's Special Assessment Policy Resolution 09-5 January 20,2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY WHEREAS, Resolution 95-6, adopting a Special Assessment Policy ("Policy") was approved by the Golden Valley City Council ("Council") on January 17, 1995; and amended by Resolution 95-20, on February 21,1995; amended by Resolution 05-41 on June 7, 2005; and amended 06-27 on July 18, 2006, WHEREAS, it is recommended the staff amend the Special Assessment Policy by amending the policy including the following elements: 1. Include a discussion on the sanitary sewer service rehabilitation program offered as part of street reconstruction projects. 2. Clarify the discussion on public improvement projects for installation of streets and utilities for private developments. 3. Remove specific percentages of construction costs to be assessed for each land use from the policy. 4. Remove the discussion of special assessments for reconstruction of streets with existing concrete pavement, consistent with the proposed Pavement Management Policy revisions. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. Exhibit A Special Assessment Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Th Special c under this p will be determ Amended February 21 J 1995 Amended June 7, 2005 Amended July 18, 2006 Amended XXX X, 2009 General Minnesota State Law, Chapters 429.010 to 429.1 make public improvements such as installation sidewalks, and street improvements (includi lighting). The procedures that Cities must folio hearings, are well defined within the laws. 'es the ability to rm sewer, ng,and nd public The Statute allows municipalities to improvements to property owners bas Statute is not specific regarding the det apportion the costs to the benefiting pro responsible for developi quitable m property owners. he costs of any rom the project. The benefit a property, or how to aw makes the municipality aring among the benefiting provide a guide, to be used by City I by the City Council. This policy is ent to all properties within the City as cover all possible assessment situations. of st ndard cases that are not specifically discussed ated during preliminary project studies, and assessments t violate the benefit principles as required by Statute. will be levied against designated floodplains, municipal storm water ponds or wetl d areas on private property as determined by criteria in the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The limits of wetlands will be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis at the time of preliminary project design and feasibility report preparation. No special assessments will be levied against railroad, county highway or state highway rights-of-way. Properties fronting County,Roads and County Highways will be subject to special assessments for reconstruction projects based upon this policy. G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessmenl Policy\2008ProposedRevisions,doc 1 Special assessments levied by the City will include an administrative fee, to be established annually by ordinance, to finance indirect costs associated with the assessment that are incurred by the City. Special assessment rates for propertios '....ith zoning classifications other than residential will be determinea on a project specific basis based on the surrounding . zoning, land uses, and development potential. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Assessments Reconstruction and Repairs No special assessments will be levied for repair an sanitary sewer and water main systems, except previously assessed for'these utilities. For properties not previously assessed t water main reconstruction projects, th calculated on a case-by-case basis a th feasibility report preparation. enanc epair and replacement of water er main up to and including the curb stop The property owner is responsible for maintenance, ter service from the connection of the service o the building being served. NewC In certain here property is developing or redeveloping, public sanitary sewer and ain ffH:I6t may need to be installed. The construction of City sanita sew water mains and storm sewer to serve these ro erties will be constructed as public improvement proiects. unless the City opts to have the developer design and construct the improvements. The developer of such properties will be responsible for the entire cost of public utilities, including construction. administration and other indirect costs, whether construction is performed as a City Improvement Project or by the developer. At the time such a development project is proposed, the City Engineer Public Works Department will determine if the project is to be constructed publicly or privately. If the utility installation is to be constructed privately, the developer will be responsible for preparing construction plans and specifications consistent with G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 2 City standards. These construction plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Public Works Department. The utility installation must also be inspected by the Engineering Public Works Department during construction. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the costs of City construction observation and plan review, which will be billed directly to the developer. Any unpaid costs incurred for these services will be assessed against the developing properties. An irrevocable letter of credit must be posted by the developer in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated construction costs to ensure timely completion of the project. Storm Water Drainage If a public sanitary sewer or water main project is to b Improvement Project, the developer will be respons' and indirect costs incurred by the City. These c limited to: feasibility report preparation, prelim' final design, construction staking, construct" and drafting, and admil')istrative and leg sts. The develop have these costs assessed against th. rty b . g develope costs directly to the City. 4fi% r torm sewer is necessary in rear yard areas to correct blems. City staff will visit such problem areas at the request evaluate the situation and provide engineering assistance to erty owners to remedy the drainage problems without City If a property owner or owners cannot remedy the rear yard drainage problems, they may petition the City for installation of storm sewer. Upon receiving a request for petition for rear yard storm sewer, engineering staff will determine the properties that contribute storm water runoff to the problem area. The petitioner must then circulate the petition to the contributing property owners for signatures. Each contributing property owner must be made aware that special assessments will be levied against their property for the corrective storm sewer work. A minimum of 35% of the contributing property owners must sign the petition for G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 3 the City Council to consider the project. Upon receipt of the petition and after a public hearing, the City Council may either deny the request or order the storm sewer improvements. If the improvements are ordered, the contributing property owners will be assessed for 100% of the construction and indirect costs for the storm sewer installation. The method of assessment and the pro-ration of costs will be determined on a project-specific basis. Affected property owners in rear yard drainage projects will also be required to dedicate all drainage and utility easements for the installation of the storm sewer at no cost to the City. If the City must purchase or cond in order to obtain the easements, the entire acquisition costs will be incl i he project costs for assessment or the City may decline to undertak oject. Street Improvements s street fronta truction, the, velopment abilitation.'The escrow nd uses contained in this effect at the time the . the development will occurs. Sidewalks No special as accordance Sidewalk Street Li Street lighti accord ing to ailable to the residents of Golden Valley on a petition basis Street Lighting Policy. New Street Construction As property within the City develops or redevelops, it may be necessary to install public streets. The City Engineer Public Works Department will determine if the project is to be installed publicly or privately. The procedures, policies, and requirements for street construction will be the same as discussed for new sanitary sewer installations. Sealcoatinq No special assessments will be levied for street sealcoating. G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment PoJicy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 4 Bituminous Millinq and Overlavs No special assessments will be levied for bituminous milling and overlays. Street Reconstruction Special assessments for street reconstruction proiects will be in accordance with this policv and Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 429: The total amount of the special assessments will be a minimum of 20% of the street reconstruction costs not to exceed the benefit received by each property. Special assessment ra!~rallland uses and street classifications will be determined annuall b ordiriancil)f "*\~ 2. Special asses on a front-fo assess me 4. 5. Properties adjacent to oxisting concrete streets subject to reconstruction will be given the option of having the street reconstructed as a concrete roadv:ay or as a bituminous road'l:ay as discussed in the Pavement Management Policy. If a concrete road'Nay is selected, the special assessment rate '::ill be a standard residential unit assessment plus 100% of the cost difference between bituminous and concrete pavement. This cost difference ,,",ill include construction and indirect costs. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions,doc 5 To reconstruct an existing concrete street as a ne~N concrete street, 100% of the abutting property o~l.'ners must sign a petition requesting the concrete pavement, including the addition:]1 special assessment for the concrete pavement as outlined in the Pavement Mnn:]gement Policy. In addition, 100% of the property O'.vners subject to the additional assessment must sign a \Naiver of Spe'cial Assessment Appeal for the concrete street construction. 6. Residential properties adjacent to local streets being reconstructed will be given the option of having may participate in voluntary proqrams to have their driveways reconstructed and san ita sewer service re .. or reconstructed at contract unit prices. Residents will be notified of thes p grams at informational meetings for each street project. If a t participates in these tf:Hs programs, staff will coordinate construction tractor and will measure the quantities of pavement installed. . . . 8. 7. a local reet and a state or county sessments by the City for state highway se properties will be assessed the or the entire frontage along the local he local street. nt frontage roads of state highways will be nicipal State Aid streets and will be assessed 10. Specia cases wi report. for properties not specifically covered in any of the above ed on a parcel-specific basis at the time of the feasibility State Aid Streets 1. Properties with residential and duplex residential land uses that have frontage on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed on a per-unit basis. The per-unit assessment rate will be approximately 25% of the standard residential rate for properties on local streets. Assessments for oversized parcels with the potential for subdivision are to be consistent with the previously discussed policy for local streets. 2. Properties with Multiple Dwelling land use that front on a Munic.ipal State Aid, Street will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the frontage being improved. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions,doc 6 The assessment rate represents 37% of the oosts of construoting the St3te Aid Stroet. ~ Properties with church, school, and other tax-exempt land uses that front on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the frontage being improved. The 3ssessment rate represents 45% of the costs of constructing the State /\id Street. 2. ~ All other land uses, including commercial, industrial, business and offices that front on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed 0 ont-foot basis for the frontage being improved. construoting the State /\id Street. 5. Special assessments for properties not specifi cases will be addressed on a parcel-specifi report. 6. Residential properties adjacent to St given the option of having their driveways a QLreconstructed under the same terms discus reconstruction portion of this ses adjacent to county IS cussed methods for local streets, ich will be assessed in full at constructed. Special assessments to et rates. ai, industrial, business, and tax-exempt ront-foo basis, with 100% of the frontage being n . The assessment rate shall be the rates used ed by ordinance. Low Inco As required b low income sem and Disability Deferments atute, the City has a special assessment deferral policy for nd disabled persons meeting all of the following criteria: 1. The property up which the assessment is deferred must be homesteaded; 2. The property is owned by a person at least 65 years of age on January 1 st of the year in which payment of the first installment of the subject assessment is due; or is owned by a person who is retired due to permanent and total disability. 3. The applicant must have a "financial hardship" defined as: a) An annual income at or below a level established annually by ordinance and; b) The aggregate total of all special assessments levies will exceed one and one-' half percent (1-1/2%) of the applicant's annual income. More information is available at General Services Office (763.593.8020). G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 7 Street Reconstruction Special Assessment Rates Special assessment rates as discussed in this policy will be established yearly with the Annual Fee Resolution. The rates will be based on the percentages of construction and indirect costs as discussed above. Indirect costs are estimated to be 30% of the construction costs and include administration, engineering, construction observation, and legal fees. These rates will be subject to revision each year based on the actual construction costs in the City from the previous year and for inflation based upon the ENR Index for construction costs. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 8 Exhibit A Th Special c under this p will be determ Special Assessment Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Amended February 21, 1995 Amended June 7,2005 Amended July 18, 2006 Amended January 20. 2009 General Minnesota State Law, Chapters 429.010 to 429.1 make public improvements such as installation sidewalks, and street improvements (includilJ.. lighting). The procedures that Cities must folio hearings, are well defined within the laws. 'es the ability to rm sewer, ng,and nd public The Statute allows municipalities to improvements to property owners bas Statute is not specific regarding the det apportion the costs to the benefiting pro responsible for developi quitable m property owners. he costs of any wfrqm the project. The benefit a property, or how to aw makes the municipality aring among the benefiting provide a guide, to be used by City I by the City Council. This policy is ent to all properties within the City as cover all possible assessment situations. of s ndard cases that are not specifically discussed ated during preliminary project studies, and assessments t violate the benefit principles as required by Statute. will be levied against designated floodplains, municipal storm water ponds or wet! d areas on private property as determined by criteria in the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The limits of wetlands will be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis at the time of preliminary project design and feasibility report preparation. No special assessments will be levied against railroad, county highway or state highway rights-of-way. Properties fronting County Roads and County Highways will be subject to special assessments for reconstruction projects based upon this policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean.doc 1 Special assessments levied by the City will include an administrative fee, to be established annually by ordinance, to finance indirect costs associated with the assessment that are incurred by the City. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Assessments Reconstruction and Repairs No special assessments will be levied for repair and reconstruction of existing sanitary sewer and water main systems, except for properties that have not been previously assessed for these utilities. . For properties not previously assessed that are adj water main reconstruction projects, the amount calculated on a case-by-case basis at the tim feasibility report preparation. The City is respo services from or valve on repair and pipe to the valve replacement of water r main to and including the curb stop owner is responsible for maintenance, from the connection of the service ng being served. s con develo propertie construction, performed a veloping or redeveloping, public sanitary sewer installed. The construction of City sanitary d st sewer to serve these properties will be mprovement projects, unless the City opts to have the construct the improvements. The developer of such ponsible forthe entire cost of public utilities, including nistration and other indirect costs, whether construction is City Improvement Project or by the developer. At the time such a development project is proposed, the Public Works Department will determine if the project is to be constructed publicly or privately. If the utility installation is to be constructed privately, the developer will be responsible for preparing construction plans and specifications consistent with City standards. These construction plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The utility installation must also be inspected by the Public Works Department during construction. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the costs of City construction observation and plan review, which will be billed directly to the developer. Any G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean.doc 2 unpaid costs incurred for these services will be assessed against the developing properties. An irrevocable letter of credit must be posted by the developer in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated construction costs to ensure timely completion of the project. If a public sanitary sewer or water main project is to be installed as a City Improvement Project, the developer will be responsible for 100% of the direct and indirect costs incurred by the City, These costs may include, but are not limited to: feasibility report preparation, preliminary survey, preliminary design, final design, construction staking, construction observati s-built surveying and drafting, and administrative and legal costs. The r may elect to have these costs assessed against the property be' eloped or pay the costs directly to the City. Storm Water Drainage In instances wher redevelopmen developed a section of I wer is necessary in rear yard areas to correct . staff will visit such problem areas at the request situation and provide engineering assistance to o remedy the drainage problems without City If a prope owners cannot remedy the rear yard drainage problems, they may p e City for installation of storm sewer. Upon receiving a request for p on for rear yard storm sewer, engineering staff will determine the properties that contribute storm water runoff to the problem area. The petitioner must then circulate the petition to the contributing property owners for signatures. Each contributing property owner must be made aware that special assessments will be levied against their property for the corrective storm sewer work. A minimum of 35% of the contributing property owners must sign the petition for the City Council to consider the project. Upon receipt of the petition and after a public hearing, the City Council may either deny the request or order the storm sewer improvements. .If the improvements are ordered, the contributing property owners will be assessed for 100% of the construction and indirect costs for the G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean.doc 3 storm sewer installation. The method of assessment and the pro-ration of costs will be determined on a project-specific basis. Affected property owners in rear yard drainage projects will also be required to dedicate all drainage and utility easements for the installation of the storm sewer at no cost to the City. If the City must purchase or condemn in order to obtain the easements, the entire acquisition costs will be included in the project costs for assessment or the City may decline to undertake the project. Street Improvements Development/Redevelopment Proiects When property is developed or redeveloped that roadways that are scheduled for construction will be required to pay an escrow for the fut shall be based upon the assessment me policy, and shall be based on the asse development is approved. The prope not be specially assessed at the time street rontage on the development . The escrow 'ned in this he pment will tion that is in ity of Golden Valley not on the current walk Committee for will fo rd its recommendations for the which will determine if the proposal As P public installed street const installations. 'on City develops or redevelops, it may be necessary to install blic Works Department will determine if the project is to be rivately. The procedures, policies, and requirements for will be the same as discussed for new sanitary sewer Sealcoatina. No special assessments will be levied for street sealcoating. Bituminous Millina and Overlays No special assessments will be levied for bituminous milling and overlays. G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean,doc 4 Street Reconstruction Special assessments for street reconstruction projects will be in accordance with this policy and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. The total amount of the special assessments will be a minimum of 20% of the street reconstruction costs not to exceed the benefit received by each property. Special assessment rates for all land uses and street classifications will be determined annually by ordinance. 4. Local Streets 1. Properties with residential and duplex residential land us owned properties subject to reconstruction will be ass with one unit assessed to each property unless the be further subdivided into two or more lots that e ordinance requirements. Such lots that may b for the number of units that equals the num be subdivided into. However, residential unit assessments will have all but one time of the initial assessment. Such . time as the property is subdivided. At that t shall be due. 2. Special assessments against p on,a front-foot basis, with 100% assessment. ing land use will be roved subject to 3, Properties with on a front-fo assess me ai, industrial, business and offices will be is, with 100% of the frontage being improved subject R adj nt to local streets being reconstructed may partl programs to have their driveways reconstructed and sanita repaired or reconstructed at contract unit prices. Resident 'fied of these programs at informational meetings for each street proje resident participates in these programs, staff will coordinate construction the contractor and will measure the quantities installed. The construction costs, along with an administrative fee, established annually by ordinance, will be assessed to the property owner. 6. When a corner resideiltiallot has frontage on two local streets, it will be assessed for one-half unit assessment for each street subject to reconstruction. No more than one total unit assessment will be charged against a parcel for street reconstruction. Corner properties adjacent to State Aid and local streets will be charged one-half of the appropriate unit assessment at the time of reconstruction of each street. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_ Clean.doc 5 7. Corner residential properties adjacent to a local street and a state or county roadway will not be subject to special assessments by the City for state highway or county road reconstruction. However, these properties will be assessed the appropriate number of unit assessments for the entire frontage along the local streets when reconstruction occurs on the local street. 8. Residential properties adjacent to frontage roads of state highways will be considered to be on local or Municipal State Aid streets and will be assessed consistent with this policy. 9. Special Assessments for properties not specifically co cases will be addressed on a parcel-specific basis report. State Aid Streets 1. Properties with residential and duplex re . a Municipal State Aid Street will be as assessment rate will be approximate properties on local streets. Assessments f for subdivision are to be consistent with the p streets. 2. Properties with Multiple Dwellin Street will be assessed on a front unicipal State Aid tage being improved. Properties with Municipal S being impr ai, industrial, business and offices that 'd Stree will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the for p erties not specifically covered in any of the above d on a parcel-specific basis at the time of the feasibility 4. ies adjacent to State Aid streets being reconstructed will be given the opt~? of having their driveways and sanitary sewer services repaired or reconstructed under the same terms discussed in the local street reconstruction portion of this policy. County Roads 1. Properties with residential and duplex residential land uses adjacent to county roads will be assessed according to the previously discussed methods for local streets, except for corner lots with local streets, which will be assessed in full at the time the intersecting local street is reconstructed. Special assessments to residential properties will be at State Aid street rates. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean.doc 6 2. All other land uses, including commercial, industrial, business, and tax-exempt uses will be assessed on a front-foot basis, with 100% of the frontage being improved subject to assessment. The assessment rate shall be the rates used for State Aid streets as established by ordinance. Low Income Senior Citizen and Disability Deferments As required by Minnesota Statute, the City has a special assessment deferral policy for low income senior citizens and disabled persons meeting all of the following criteria: 1. The property upon which the assessment is deferred must 2. The property is owned by a person at least 65 years of a year in which payment of the first installment of the su owned by a person who is retired due to permanent 3. The applicant must have a "financial hardship" d n a) An annual income at or below a Jevel estab'a nually b b) The aggregate total of all special assess ts levies will exce half percent (1-1/2%) of the applicant' al inc e. More information is available at General Services ished yearly with the ges of construction and d to be.30% of the I construction observation, VISion ch year based on the actual year and for inflation based upon the G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions_Clean.doc 7 alley Me 0 ndum City Administration/Council 763~593-3990 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. I. Council Liai"sons and Other Assignments Prepared By Linda R. Loomis, Mayor Summary Each year the Council assigns Council Members to serve as representatives on various Committees and Subcommittees. These appointments are for a one year term. Council Liaisons Board of Zoning Appeals Building Board of Review Civil Service Commission Environmental Commission Human Rights Commission Human Services Foundation Open Space and Recreation Commission Planning Commission Shaffer, Pentel Pentel Freiberg Pentel, Loomis Loomis, Scanlon Scanlon, Freiberg Scanlon, Shaffer Freiberg, Shaffer Other Assiqnments Douglas Drive Task Force Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Executive Board Northwest Metro Transit Study Task Force Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission Robbinsdale School District 281 Government Advisory Committee Freiberg, Scanlon & Shaffer Freiberg Loomis Pentel, Loomis Loomis, Shaffer Loomis Shaffer, Delegate Loomis, Alternate Pentel Scanlon Shaffer Scanlon Golden Valley Historical Society Board Member Hopkins School District 270 Cities Joint Monthly Meetings 1-394 Joint Task Force Joint Water Planning and Governance Task Force Legislative Liaison and Spokesperson Metro Cities Recommended Action Motion to make the appointments as listed above. alley emora dum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 3. J. Authorize Approval of the Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy and the Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Summary The Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy and the Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy were discussed at the January 13, 2009 Council/Manager meeting. After review, staff was directed to place both policies on a City Council meeting for approval. Attachments Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy (5 pages) Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy (3 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy. Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy. Resolution 09-6 January 20, 2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THE SNOW PLOWING AND ICE CONTROL POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley finds that it is in the best interest of the residents of the City to assume basic responsibility for control of snow and ice on City streets; and WHEREAS, reasonable ice and snow control is necessary for routine travel and emergency services; and WHEREAS. the City will provide such snow and ice control in a safe and cost- effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and environmental concerns; and WHEREAS, this policy does not relieve the snowplow operator of private vehicles, pedestrians, property owners, residents and all others that may be using public streets, of their responsibility to act in a reasonable, prudent and cautious manner, given the prevailing street conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy dated January 20, 2009, attached as Exhibit A. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. Resolution 09-6 - Continued January 20,2009 EXHIBIT A Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy January 20, 2009 1. Introduction The City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, finds that it is in the best interest of the residents of the City to assume basic responsibility for control of snow and ice on City streets. Reasonable ice and snow control is necessary for routine travel and emergency services. The City will attempt to provide such control in a safe and cost-effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and environmental concerns. The City will use City employees and equipment. This policy does not relieve the operator of private vehicles, pedestrians, property owners, residents and all others that may be using public streets, of their responsibility to act in a reasonable, prudent and cautious manner, given the prevailing street conditions. 2. Initiation of Snow and Ice Control Operations The Public Works Maintenance Manager, or his designee, will decide when to begin snow or ice control operations. The criteria for that decision are: a. New accumulation of two (2) inches or more; b. Drifting of snow that causes problems for travel; c. Icy conditions which seriously affect travel; and d. Time of snowfall in relationship to heavy use of streets. Snow and ice control operations are expensive and involve the use of limited personnel and equipment. Consequently, snow plowing operations will not generally be conducted for snowfall of less than two (2) inches. However, an accumulation of consecutive snowfall events of less than two (2) inches may constitute initiation of snow plowing operations. 3. Plowing Method Snow will be plowed in a manner so as to minimize traffic obstructions. The center of the roadway will be plowed first. The snow shall then be pushed from left to right. When a plow goes on a bridge, the driver shall slow down so snow does not go over the bridge, if possible. In times of extreme snowfall, streets will not always immediately be able to be completely cleared of snow. These procedures will be adapted to address field conditions. 4. Snow Removal The Public Works Maintenance Manager, or designee, will determine if and when snow will be removed from the area by truck. Such snow removal will occur in areas where there is no room on the boulevard for snow storage and in areas where accumulated piles of snow create a hazardous condition. Snow removal operations will not commence until other snow plowing operations have been completed. Snow removal operations may also be delayed depending on weather conditions, personnel and budget availability. The snow will be removed and hauled to a snow storage area. The snow storage area will be located so as to minimize environmental impact. Resolution 09-6 - Continued January 20, 2009 5. Priorities and Schedule of Streets to be Plowed The City has classified city streets based on the street function, traffic volume and importance to the welfare of the community. Those streets classified as minor arterials and collectors will be plowed first. These are high volume routes, which connect major sections of the City and provide access for emergency, fire, police and medical services. The second priority streets are those streets providing access to schools and commercial businesses. The third priority streets are low volume residential streets. The fourth priority areas are alleys and City parking lots. Each year the Public Works Department prepares a map of the City showing the City maintained street system. The City is divided into routes, in which ice control and snow removal will be performed. The routes are periodically revised to correspond to budgetary, equipment and personnel resources. Within each route, the major streets are designated as well as areas of steep grades (hazardous areas) that require extra care. Equipment is assigned for the control of snow and ice. The start of snow and ice control operations for any' storm is dependent upon immediate and forecasted weather conditions. The most critical time periods are weekday mornings and evening rush hours. When feasible, the City will attempt to remove snow and ice from the City's collector and arterial streets prior to the rush hour periods. Collector and arterial streets under the City's jurisdictional authority are the first priority. Once the priority areas are plowed and opened, the remaining streets and cul-de-sacs in the residential, commercial and industrial areas will be plowed and de-iced. During significant and severe storms, the City must be prepared to move personnel and equipment to maintain priority routes first. In fulfilling the need to have all priority streets safe and passable, when resources are limited, plowing of all other streets may be stopped at any time so resources can be shifted to priority routes. Unforeseeable circumstances may cause delays in completing assigned plow routes. Such circumstances may include weather conditions that endanger the safety of snowplow operators and/or safe and effective operation of equipment, commuter traffic, disabled vehicles, poor visibility conditions, parked cars along streets, assistance to emergency response vehicles, equipment breakdown, and personnel shortages. 6. Work Schedule for Snowplow Operators In severe snow emergencies, operators may have to work in excess of 12-hour shifts. Operators are allowed a 10-minute break every 2 hours with a 20-minute meal break after 4 hours. Except for special emergency situations, the operators will be replaced after a 12-hour shift if additional qualified personnel are available. Ideally, snow removal operations should be conducted during early morning hours to avoid interfering with traffic, and allow property owners the time to clear their driveway approaches before heading to work. Resolution 09-6 - Continued January 20, 2009 7. Traffic Regulations The City recognizes that snowplow operators are exempt from traffic regulations set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 169, while actually engaged in work on streets, except for regulations related to driving while impaired and the safety of school children. Pursuant to this authority, snowplow operators engaged in snow removal or ice control on City streets have discretion to disregard traffic laws set forth in Chapter 169, except for laws relating to impaired driving and school children safety, when in their judgment, it is safe to disregard such laws. The privileges granted herein to operators of snow removal and ice control vehicles shall apply only if the vehicle is equipped with one lighted lamp displaying a flashing, oscillating, or rotating amber light placed in such a position on the vehicle as to be visible throughout an arc of 360 degrees. 8. Weather Conditions Snow and ice control operations will be conducted only when weather conditions do not endanger the safety of snowplow operators and equipment. Factors that may delay snow and ice control operations include: severe cold, significant winds, and limited visibility. 9. Use of Sand, Salt, and Other Chemicals The City will use sand, salt, and other chemicals when there are hazardous ice or slippery conditions. The City is concerned about the effect of such chemicals on the environment and will limit its use for that reason. With the exception of Winnetka Avenue, south of TH 55, the City of Golden Valley does not strive to achieve bare pavement. Sand, salt, and other chemicals are not placed on City trails and sidewalks, except for those which immediately service a City building that is programmed for use during the winter. 10. Sidewalks The City will maintain some of the sidewalks and trails in the City. A map of the trails and sidewalks is prepared annually. As there are a limited number of personnel available, the City will only maintain these sidewalks after the streets have been plowed. 11. Mailboxes Coming into contact with a mailbox is a common obstacle snowplow operators face during storm activities. The City will conduct a review of each mailbox incident to determine whether the City will replace or provide reimbursement for the mailbox. Only mailboxes actually hit by a snowplow will be the responsibility of the City. The City will not be responsible for damage to mailboxes or support posts caused by snow or ice coming into contact with the mailbox. At the mailbox owner's request, the City will replace the mailbox with a standard size, non-decorative metal mailbox and replace the support post as necessary with a 4" x 4", decay resistance wood support post, both installed by the City. Resolution 09-6 - Continued January 20, 2009 12. Complaint Procedure Complaints will be recorded on telephone logs. Calls requiring service will be transferred to a work request and forwarded to the appropriate supervisor for scheduling. Emergency complaints will be handled in an expeditious manner as resources are available. 13. Completion Goals It is the Public Works Department goal to have all streets and cul-de-sacs plowed within eight hours of the end of the snow event. Trails and sidewalks are cleared in priority order: priority ones the first day, priority twos the second day and priority threes by the third day. City-owned parking lots should be cleared prior to regular business hours. 14.Suspension of Snow Removal OperationslWeather Conditions The Public Works Director, or designee, may suspend plowing operations. Generally, suspension of plowing operations will be considered only when weather conditions endanger the safety of City staff and equipment. Factors that may suspend snow and ice control operations include: severe cold, significant winds and limited visibility, or the weather forecast calls for temperatures of 40 degrees within 12 hours. Resolution 09-7 January 20, 2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THE SIDEWALK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE SNOW REMOVAL POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley finds that it is in the best interest of the residents of the City to assume basic responsibility for control of snow removal and maintenance specific on City trails and sidewalks in the community; and WHEREAS, reasonable snow removal and maintenance is necessary for routine pedestrian traffic; and WHEREAS, the City will provide such snow removal and maintenance in a safe and cost-effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel and equipment; and WHEREAS, this policy does not relieve the operator of private vehicles, pedestrians, property owners, residents and all others that may be using public trails and sidewalks, of their responsibility to act in a reasonable, prudent and cautious manner, given the prevailing trail and sidewalk conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy dated January 20, 2009, attached as Exhibit A. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and her signature attested by the City Clerk. Resolution 09-7 - Continued January 20,2009 EXHIBIT A Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Snow Removal Policy January 20, 2009 1. Introduction The City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, finds that it is in the best interest of the residents of the City to assume basic responsibility for control of snow removal and maintenance specific on City trails and sidewalks in the community. Reasonable snow removal and maintenance is necessary for routine pedestrian traffic. The City will attempt to provide such snow removal and maintenance in a safe and cost-effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel and equipment. The City will use City employees and equipment. This policy does not relieve the operator of private vehicles, pedestrians, property owners, residents and all others that may be using public trails and sidewalks, of their responsibility to act in a reasonable, prudent and cautious manner, given the prevailing trail and sidewalk conditions. 2. Initiation of Snow Removal Operations The Public Works Maintenance Manager, or his designee, will decide when to begin trail and sidewalk snow removal operations. The criteria for that decision are: a. New accumulation two (2) inches or more; b. Two to four (2 to 4) hours after initiating plowing of City streets; c. Drifting of snow that causes problems for pedestrian traffic; and d. Time of snowfall in relationship to heavy use of sidewalks and trails. A map of the trails and sidewalks is prepared annually. As there are a limited number of personnel available, the City will only maintain these trails and sidewalks after the streets have been plowed. Not all trails and sidewalks are maintained. 3. Snow Plowing Method The Public Works Maintenance Manager, or designee, will determine if and when snow will be removed from trails and sidewalks. Trails and sidewalks are cleared in priority order: Priority 1 and 2 are typically plowed within 24 hours after it has stopped snowing and Priority 3 trails are plowed between 48 and 72 hours after a 2-inch snow event and it has stopped snowing. In times of extreme snowfall, trails and sidewalks will not always immediately be able to be completely cleared of snow. These procedures will be adapted to address field conditions. 4. Work Schedule for Trail and Sidewalk Snow Removal Operators In severe snow emergencies, operators may have to work in excess of 12-hour shifts. Operators are allowed a 10-minute break for every 2 hours with a 20-minute meal break after 4 hours. Except for special emergency situations, the operators will be replaced after a 12-hour shift if additional qualified personnel are available. Ideally, snow removal operations should be conducted during early morning hours to avoid interfering with pedestrian traffic. Resolution 09-7 - Continued January 20,2009 5. Weather Conditions Snow removal operations will be conducted only when weather conditions do not endanger the safety of trail and sidewalk snow removal operators and equipment. Factors that may delay snow removal operations include: severe cold, significant winds, and limited visibility. 6. The City does not utilize salt and sand or other chemical de-icers on its sidewalks or trails, except in the City Hall Campus. alley Memo ndum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 22, 2008 Agenda Item 3. K. Authorization to Sign Engagement Letter with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co. for 2008 Audit Services Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Staff recommends the authorization for services with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co. for 2008 audit services for $39,450 and $4,000 for the Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) portion of the of the audit for a total of $43,450. The SAS suite was an audit requirement added in 2007. Attachments Engagement Letter with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. (6 pages) Peer Review (2 pages) - Recommended Action Motion to authorize the City Manager to sign the Engagement Letter with Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. for the 2008 audit services for $43,450. .M KR PRINCIPALS Kenneth W Malloy, CPA Thomas M. Montague, CPA Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA Paul A. Radosevich, CPA William J. Lauer, CPA James H. Eichten, CPA Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA Victoria L. Holinka, CPA -CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS January 14,2009 To the City Council of the City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Weare pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide the City of Golden Valley (the City) for the year ended December 31,2008. We will audit the financial statements of governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, the aggregate remaining fund information, and the budgetary comparison for the General Fund and major special revenue funds, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008. 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 accompany the City's basic financial statements. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to the City's RSI. These limited procedures will consist principally of inquires of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation, which management is responsible for affirming to us in its representation letter. Unless we encounter problems with the presentation of the RSI or with procedures relating to it, we will disclaim an opinion on it. 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. Management's Discussion and Analysis 2. Governmental Accounting Standards Board required other post-employment benefits information (as needed) Supplementary information other than RSI also accompanies the City's basic financial statements. We will subject the following supplementary information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial statements and will provide an opinion on it in relation to the basic financial statements: 1. Combining and individual fund statements and schedules The following additional information accompanying the basic financial statements will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements, and for which our auditor's report will disclaim an opinion: 1. Introductory section 2. Statistical tables Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard - Suite 410 . Minneapolis, MN 55416 . Telephone: 952-545-0424 . Telefax: 952-545-0569 . www.mmkr.com City of Golden Valley January 14,2009 Page 2 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 S 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-B3, 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 additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America established by the Auditing Standards Board (United States) 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. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unqualified, we will fully 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 to issue a report as a result of this engagement. We will also provide a report (that does not include an opinion) on internal control related to the financial statements and compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts, agreements, or grants noncompliance with which could have a material effect on the financial statements as required by Government Auditing Standards. The report on internal control and compliance will include a statement that the report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the body or individuals charged with governance, others within the entity, and specific legislative or regulatory bodies and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. 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. City of Golden Valley January 14, 2009 Page 3 Management Responsibilities Management is responsible for the basic financial statements and all accompanying information as well as all representations contained therein. As part of the audit we will prepare a draft of your financial statements and related notes. You are responsible for making all management decisions and performing all management functions relating to the financial statements and related notes and for accepting full responsibility for such decisions. You will be required to acknowledge in the management representation letter that you have reviewed and approved the financial statements, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal A wards, and related notes prior to their issuance and have accepted responsibility for them. Further, you are required to designate an individual with suitable skill, knowledge, or experience to oversee any nonaudit services we provide and for evaluating the adequacy and results of those services and accepting responsibility for them. Management is responsible for establishing and maintammg internal controls, including monitoring ongoing activities; for the selection and application of accounting principles; and for the fair presentation in the financial statements of the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City and the respective changes in financial position and cash flows, where applicable, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us and for the accuracy and completeness of that information. Your responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the 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. 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 or illegal acts 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 any fraud, illegal acts, violations of contracts or grant agreements, or abuse that we may report. Management is responsible for the establishing and maintaining of a process for tracking the status of audit findings and recommendations. Management is also responsible for identifYing for us previous audits or other engagements or 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 or other engagements or studies. You are also responsible for providing management's views on our current findings, conclusions, and recommendations, as well as your planned corrective actions. . City of Golden Valley January 14, 2009 Page 4 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. 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 errors, fraudulent financial reporting, misappropriation of assets, or 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 does not expect auditors to provide reasonable assurance of detecting abuse. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance 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. 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 you of any material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. 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 engages 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 the financial statements and related matters. 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. 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 professional standards and Government Auditing Standards. . City of Golden Valley January 14, 2009 Page 5 , 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 applicable laws and regulations and the provisions 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. Audit Administration, Fees, and Other 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, pursuant to authority given by law or regulation, we may be requested to make certain audit documentation available to a regulatory agency pursuant to authority given to it by law or regulation. 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 regulatory agency. The regulatory agency 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. William J. Lauer, CPA is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the engagement and signing the report. Our fees for these services will be based on the actual time spent at our standard hourly rates. We will also bill you for travel and other out-of-pocket costs such as report production, typing, and postage. 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 upon presentation. Unless additional work is requested, or circumstances require additional work, we estimate. that the basic audit fees [excluding fees related the additional audit procedures required by Statement on Auditing Standards Nos. 104 to 111 (SAS Suite)] will be $39,450. We estimate the additional fees related to the audit procedures required by the SAS Suite to be $3,000 to $4,000. 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. . City of Golden Valley January 14,2009 Page 6 '~~ . 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. Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent external peer review report and 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 and letter of comment 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. wjJ;~~ d~ William Lauer, CPA Principal WJL:lmb Response: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Golden Valley. By: Title: Date: WIPFLiLLP To the Principals Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. (the "Firm") in effect for the year ended May 31, 2007. A system of quality control encompasses the firm's organizational structure, the policies adopted and procedures established to provide it with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. The elements of quality control are described in the Statements on Quality Control Standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (the AICPA). The Firm is responsible for designing a system of quality control and complying with it to provide the Firm reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards in all material respects. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the system of quality control and the Firm's compliance with its system of quality control based on our review. Our review was conducted in accordance with standards established by the Peer Review Board of the AICPA. During our review, we read required representations from the Firm, interviewed Firm personnel, and obtained an understanding of the nature of the Firm's accounting and auditing practice and the design of the Firm's system of quality control sufficient to access the risks implicit in its practice. Based on our assessments, we selected engagements and administrative files to test for conformity with professional standards and compliance with the Firm's system of quality control. The engagements selected represented a reasonable cross-section of the Firm's accounting and auditing practice with emphasis on higher-risk engagements. The engagements selected included among others, audits of Employee Benefit Plans and engagements performed under Government Auditing Standards. Prior to concluding the review, we reassessed the adequacy of the scope of the peer review procedures and met with Firm management to discuss the results of the review. We believe that the procedures we performed provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In performing our review, we obtained an understanding of the system of quality control for the Firm's accounting and auditing practice. In addition, we tested compliance with the Firm's quality control policies and procedures to the extent we considered appropriate. These tests covered the application of the Firm's policies and procedures on selected engagements. Our review was based on selected tests, therefore it would not necessarily detect all weaknesses in the system of quality control or all instances of noncompliance with it. There are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system of quality control and therefore noncompliance with the system of quality control may occur and not be detected. Projection of any evaluation of a system of quality control to future periods is subject to the risk that the system of quality control may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or because the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. In our opinion, the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. in effect for the year ended May 31, 2007, has been designed to meet the requirements of the quality control standards for an accounting and auditing practice established by the AICPA and was complied with during the year then ended to provide the Firm with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. As is customary in a system review, we have issued a letter under this date that sets forth comments that were not considered to be of sufficient significance to affect the opinion expressed in this report. w~~ LLP Wipfli LLP November 9, 2007 Eau Claire, Wisconsin 2 alley Memorandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary for Action Golden Valley Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 4. A. Ordinance Requiring a Franchise Fee with Northern States Power, d/b/a, Xcel Energy, First Consideration Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Summary At the November 10 and December 9, 2008 Council/Manager meetings, the Council directed staff to start the process to develop an ordinance that would impose a franchise fee for services provided by Northern States Power, d/b/a Xcel Energy. Revenue generated by the franchise fee could be used to assist with the cost of placing overhead power utilities underground, replacing streetlights in pavement management project areas, and funding other infrastructure projects. The list of infrastructure projects includes, but is not limited to, Douglas Drive, completion of the sidewalk plan, completion of the City's trail plan, replacement of sidewalks and trails, Zane Avenue, Lindsay Avenue and other street lighting p~ects. . Xcel Energy recommends that the franchise fee, if imposed, be assessed as an account- based fee. The rate schedule, if adopted, would provide the City with approximately $485,000 in annual revenue. The rate schedule proposed is as follows: Customer Class Equivalent Monthly Flat Fee Residential $2.50 Small C&I - Non-Demand $7.00 Small C&I - Demand $13.50 Large C&I (< 1 Mw) $80.00 The first consideration of this ordinance was continued from the January 6, 2009 meeting. If approved, a second consideration is necessary at the February 3,2009 Council meeting. If approved on February 3, the ordinance would be effective upon publication. However, collection of the franchise fee would not take place until the debt associated with the TH55/Boone Avenue/General Mills Boulevard Project is satisfied. Attachments Ordinance No. 412, An Ordinance Requiring an Electric Franchise Fee from Northern States Power, d/b/a Xcel Energy, for Providing Electric Service Within the City of Golden Valley (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 412, An Ordinance Requiring an Electric Franchise Fee from Northern States Power, d/b/a Xcel Energy, for Providing Electric Service Within the City of Golden Valley. . ORDINANCE NO. 412, 2NO SERIES ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE FROM NORTHERN STATES POWER D/B/A XCEL ENERGY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Golden Valley Municipal Code is hereby adopted as follows: Subd. 1. Purpose. The Golden Valley City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Golden Valley. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 394, 2nd Series, a Franchise Agreement between the City and Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy ("Company"), the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on the Company in amount and fee design pursuant to Section 9.1 of Ordinance 394, 2nd Series. It provides, among other things, that the City and Company shall negotiate a separate franchise fee ordinance. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. This ordinance sets forth the terms and conditions under which Xcel shall collect an electric franchise fee from customers located within the City. The fee and payment schedule is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance and will commence the month following the expiration of that certain City Requested Facilities Surcharge being collected by Company from its customers within the City as of the date of this Ordinance, and expected to terminate in 2009. Except as modified in this Ordinance, the City reaffirms the provisions of Ordinance 394, 2nd Series. Subd. 3. Payment and Fee Desiqn. The franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the schedule attached as Exhibit A. This is an account-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company's manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the City will control. Subd. 4. Surcharqe. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission allows the utility company to add a surcharge to customer rates to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee and that Company will surcharge its customers in the City the amount of the fee. Subd. 5. Ri~ht of Way Permit Fees Waiver. Beginning the date the Company begins collecting franchise fees from customers in the City until the City gives notice to Company of City's desire to impose both franchise fe'es and require permit fees pursuant to chapter 7 of the City Code ("Permit Fees"), City waives any and all Permit Fees the City would otherwise have the right to impose on Company. If the City intends to require both Permit Fees and franchise fees from the Company, the City shall give the Company thirty (30) days written notice of such intent before charging Permit Fees. Company does not hereby waive its right to object to a City withdrawal of this waiver of Permit Fees, and reserves all rights under law. Notwithstanding the above Permit Fee waiver, Company shall remain subject to all other requirements of chapter 7 of the City Code not superseded by the a specific term of Ordinance 394, 2nd Series. Subd. 6. Record Support for Payment. Company shall make each payment when due and, if requested by the City, shall provide at the time of each payment a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total surcharge billed in the period for which the payment is being made to account for any uncollectibles, refunds or error corrections. Subd. 7. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance, will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of Ordinance 394, 2nd Series. Subd. 8. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. Notwithstanding the effective date of this ordinance and notwithstanding any contrary provisions in the Franchise, the effective date of the fee collected under subdivision 2 of this ordinance is the later of ten (10) days after the publication or after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted ordinance upon Company by certified mail. Fee collection under this ordinance will commence in accordance with the terms set forth in subdivision 2. Subd. 9. City Use of Franchise Fees Collected by the Company. If the City is imposing a franchise fee on the Company and not imposing a same or similar franchise fee on CenterPoint Energy, the City shall use the fees collected by Company only for infrastructure projects within the City. For purposes of this ordinance, infrastructure projects shall include expenditures for any and all construction, maintenance, repair, improvement to, or replacement of rights-of-way and other public ground, including City or public utility facilities, City buildings or other City structures. This limitation on the use of fees collected by Company shall terminate immediately upon City's requirement of CenterPoint to collect a franchise fee that is reasonably the same or similar, among similar classes of customers, as those fees imposed on Company. Upon the City's requirement that CenterPoint collect franchise fees the City shall have no restriction on the use of the franchises fees collected by Company, except as otherwise required by law. . SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect as provided herein. Adopted by the City Council this day of January, 2009. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk (This ordinance will be uncodified and referenced in Chapter 25 of the City Code). EXHIBIT A XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE SCHEDULE Class Residential Small Commercial & Industrial - Non-Demand Small Commercial & Industrial - Demand Large Commercial & Industrial Fee Per Meter, Monthlv $ 2.50 $ 7.00 $13.50 $80.00 Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company in the amounts set forth in the above schedule, and submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January - March collections due by April 30. April- June collections due by July 31. July - September collections due by October 31. October - December collections due by January 31. Public ~J1~y M morandum Police Department 763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 6. A. Issuance of On Sale Wine, Strong Beer and Sunday Sale Liquor Licenses for Hastings Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Martini's Graffiti Grille Prepared By Stacy A. Altonen, Chief of Police Jim Roberts, Sergeant Summary Hastings Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Martini's Graffiti Grille, has applied for an On Sale Wine, Strong Beer and Sunday Sale Liquor License. The restaurant is located at 2520 Hillsboro Avenue North. Documents submitted by the applicant indicate that the applicant Patrick Martini has worked as a general manager for Applebee's at various locations in the metro area the past eleven years. The City Attorney has reviewed the application and has found the application documents are in order and complete. The applicant meets all State and City requirements for consideration of the issuance of an On Sale Wine, Strong Beer and Sunday Sale Liquor License. Recommended Action Motion to approve the issuance of an On Sale Wine, Strong Beer and Sunday Sale Liquor License to Hastings Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Martini's Graffiti Grille located at 2520 Hillsboro Avenue North. alley Memorandum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 6. B. First Consideration - Ordinance #413 - Amendments to the 2009 Master Fee Schedule for Residential and Commercial Utility Rates Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Staff reviewed at the January 2009 Council/Manager meeting the current master fee schedule for the City and is recommending the Council adopt the amended changes to the 2009 Master Fee Schedule. The schedule shows both 2008 and 2009 fees. The utility rates will be effective for any billing after April 1 , 2009. Attachments Ordinance #413, Amendments to the 2009 Master Fee Schedule for Residential and Commercial Utility Rates (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt on First Consideration, Ordinance #413, Amendments to the 2009 Master Fee Schedule for Residential and Commercial Utility Rates. ORDINANCE NO. 413, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amendments to the 2009 Master Fee Schedule for Residential and Commercial Utility Rates The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. The 2009 Master Fee Schedule was adopted by Ordinance No. 411, on December 16, 2008 and can be amended as needed reflecting 2009 fee increases. Section 2. The 2009 Master Fee Schedule is being amended to include residential and commercial utility rates effective April 1, 2009 as outlined on Exhibit A. Section 3. The Master Fee Schedule, as amended is hereby adopted as the city's fee schedule and shall be added to Chapter 25 of the City Code. The fee schedule is on file in the City Manager's Office during business hours. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this day of ,2009. Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk City of Golden Valley 2009 Master Fee Schedule - Exhibit A 2008 Fee 2009 Fee IlJtilityBillir1gR~dE!$ ."EffE!c::ti,,~ April.1,2009. I f{esidelltial. Utility. Rates .~qlJarterlybilling.... (includes apartments and all residential classes) ACH Payment Credit Inspection Fee for Fire lines Penalties (for late payment) Sanitary Sewer (in 1000 gallons Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate)- 5 and under units-winter qtr consumption Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate) - 6-15 units-winter qtr consumption Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate) - 16-19 units-winter qtr consumption Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate) - 20-25 units-winter qtr consumption Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate) - 26-99 units-winter qtr consumption Residential (per dwelling unit) (Flat Rate) - 100 and over units-winter qtr consumption Recycling Residential curbside (per unit) Storm Sewer Utility Rate Charge for a Residential Equivalent Factor of 1.00 Each single family residential property is considered to be 1/3 of an acre. Street Lights Ornamental (per unit) Overhead (per unit) Water Minimum fee, includes up to 5,000 gallons of flow Water meters up to and including 1" Water meters over 1" and including 2" Water meters over 2" and including 4" Water meters over 4" Above 5,000 gallons of flow per quarter (per 1,000 gallons) Water Connection Fee (State Charge for each water hookup) I I (1.00) (1.00) 6.00 6.00 10% 10% 56.10 56.10 56.10 62.00 62.00 62.00 52.00 56.10 62.00 65.00 68.00 72.00 8.00 8.00 66.00 66.00 8.25 5.00 8.50 5.25 19.15 20.25 44.55 47.10 62.21 65.78 80.03 84.63 3.83 4.05 1.59 1.59 City of Golden Valley 2009 Master Fee Schedule - Exhibit A 2008 2009 Fee Fee .................... ..................... ..................... .. ................ . ...-. ---.-... .., ..... . ... .... ... . .................................................,. ........... ... .........:. ~:::::::::::::~:::~:~:~:~::ii~ttiiiitt??ii//?iiiiiiitii?iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittiiiiiit:::::', . ...... I ........... .. . .. .... . . . . . . . . , . . . ........, ;.::: ;:::::::;:;:::::;:::;:::::;:::::::::::;:; .......;:.:.;.:.;.:.;.;.;:;:;:;:;:;::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;::;:......:.:.. :.:.:::::::::.::~.:::.:.::~:::::;. ": l.c6~th~tti~I..&.I~d~~t;i~rM6fith.I~/Biiiiri~ .................. ....................... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,..................... ....................... ...... ACH Payment Credit Inspection Fee for Fire lines Penalties (for late payment on monthly billings) Sanitary Sewer Water meters up to and including 1" Water meters over 1" and including 2" Water meters over 2" and including 4" Water meters over 4" Based on per 1,000 gallons read over minimum of 2,000 gallons Note: Water Meter Flow is used to establish sewer flow unless a separate sewer flow meter has been established. Stonn Sewer Utility Rate Charge per acre for property with a Residential Equivalent Factor of 1.00 Street Lights Ornamental (per unit) Overhead (per unit) Water Connection Fee (State Charge for each water hookup) Water Usage: Minimum fee, includes up to 2,000 gallons of flow Water meters up to and including 1" Water meters over 1" and including 2" Water meters over 2" and including 4" Water meters over 4" Water rate per 1,000 gallons All Sprinkler Accounts: Water rate per 1,000 gallons 2 (1.00) (1.00) 2.00 2.00 5% 5% 18.70 6.50 37.40 13.00 56.10 19.50 74.80 26.00 3.10 3.25 22.00 22.00 2.75 1.67 2.84 1.75 0.53 0.53 7.66 14.87 20.76 26.72 3.83 8.10 15.72 21.95 28.25 4.05 3.83 4.05 alley em randum City Administration/Council 763-593-8014/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary for Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting January 20, 2009 Agenda Item 6. C. 1. Set Date for City Council Annual Workshop Prepared By Jeanne Andre, Assistant City Manager Summary The City Council has identified Saturday, February 7, as the best date for its Annual Workshop. The Council should formally set the meeting. Staff has reserved the Brookview Grill for the workshop, and recommends a starting time of 9 am. Recommended Action Motion to set the date for the Council Annual Workshop for Saturday, February 7 at 9 am at the Brookview Grill.